DirectX vs OpenGL

Feared · 11-01-2009, 03:09 PM

Hello, I've been working on my own engine based off of Quake 3.
I sat down and converted most of the file's to C++ and as I go along I keep doing so. ( icecoldduke was suppose to send me his converted project )

Anyways, I kind of ran into a brick wall.
I'm debating on to use OpenGL or Directx.

Any opinions?

Jeffpiatt · 11-01-2009, 04:01 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...L_and_Direct3D
read this. it's really what method you approve of and if you need the port to run on non windows platforms.

Jokke_r · 11-01-2009, 07:42 PM

I don't see the point in "converting" Q3 to C++, i mean unless you're actually rewriting large portions of the code to take advantage of object oriented programming i don't see the point. The original C code is going to run faster anyway.

Hudson · 11-01-2009, 10:38 PM

Well, Carmack prefers OpenGL over DirectX so if you're going with that engine I would just stick with OpenGL.

It's a matter of preference really. Most of the programmers I have known use OpenGL exclusively.. but it's all about what fits your needs best.

TerminX · 11-01-2009, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feared

( icecoldduke was suppose to send me his converted project )

Yeah, he was supposed to send me some code for implementing room-over-room in BUILD as well, but I ended up having to write my own implementation because he never came through. Rather unreliable, that IceColdDuke.

Jeffpiatt · 11-02-2009, 04:36 PM

i would stick to open gl since that is what the engine uses stock. you really do not need to go and convert it to a d3d engine carmack does like the modern directx version of D3D especially since it managed to surpass the opengl standard in setting the bar for 3d modeling.

IceColdDuke · 11-02-2009, 08:41 PM

Not unreliable just busy

. Anyway I choose DirectX 10 because there were no good OpenGL 3 drivers at the time. Porting Quake 3 to OOP wasn't that difficult. I have been lagging on releasing it because I ported the leaked Prey CM code to it and it load/compiles proc files based on that code.

Feared · 11-03-2009, 03:19 PM

I've chosen DX9 for now.
I may add DX11 and OpenGL support later.

peoplessi · 11-05-2009, 03:38 PM

I'd prefer OpenGL (3) support, since it's more platform agnostic. Although, I don't think it really matters in this case.

IceColdDuke · 11-18-2009, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peoplessi

I'd prefer OpenGL (3) support, since it's more platform agnostic. Although, I don't think it really matters in this case.

Besides the very few examples that there are for OpenGL 3, I've liked DirectX 10 because of the debug output it has.

11-01-2009, 03:09 PM	#1
Feared	DirectX vs OpenGL Hello, I've been working on my own engine based off of Quake 3. I sat down and converted most of the file's to C++ and as I go along I keep doing so. ( icecoldduke was suppose to send me his converted project ) Anyways, I kind of ran into a brick wall. I'm debating on to use OpenGL or Directx. Any opinions?

11-01-2009, 04:01 PM	#2
Jeffpiatt	Re: DirectX vs OpenGL http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...L_and_Direct3D read this. it's really what method you approve of and if you need the port to run on non windows platforms. __________________ junk for sale http://raptr.com/jeffpiatt

11-01-2009, 07:42 PM	#3
Jokke_r	Re: DirectX vs OpenGL I don't see the point in "converting" Q3 to C++, i mean unless you're actually rewriting large portions of the code to take advantage of object oriented programming i don't see the point. The original C code is going to run faster anyway. __________________ I am Jack's smirking revenge.

11-01-2009, 10:38 PM	#4
Hudson	Re: DirectX vs OpenGL Well, Carmack prefers OpenGL over DirectX so if you're going with that engine I would just stick with OpenGL. It's a matter of preference really. Most of the programmers I have known use OpenGL exclusively.. but it's all about what fits your needs best. __________________ Staying Frosty Since 09/06/07 - I love you Katie <3 “Software is like sex; it's better when it's free.” - Linus Torvalds “Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us.” - Calvin & Hobbes [INSERT SYSTEM SPECS THAT NO ONE CARES ABOUT HERE]

11-02-2009, 04:36 PM	#6
Jeffpiatt	Re: DirectX vs OpenGL i would stick to open gl since that is what the engine uses stock. you really do not need to go and convert it to a d3d engine carmack does like the modern directx version of D3D especially since it managed to surpass the opengl standard in setting the bar for 3d modeling. __________________ junk for sale http://raptr.com/jeffpiatt

11-02-2009, 08:41 PM	#7
IceColdDuke	Re: DirectX vs OpenGL Not unreliable just busy . Anyway I choose DirectX 10 because there were no good OpenGL 3 drivers at the time. Porting Quake 3 to OOP wasn't that difficult. I have been lagging on releasing it because I ported the leaked Prey CM code to it and it load/compiles proc files based on that code.

11-03-2009, 03:19 PM	#8
Feared	Re: DirectX vs OpenGL I've chosen DX9 for now. I may add DX11 and OpenGL support later.

11-05-2009, 03:38 PM	#9
peoplessi	Re: DirectX vs OpenGL I'd prefer OpenGL (3) support, since it's more platform agnostic. Although, I don't think it really matters in this case. __________________ Duke Nukem Forever Who am I to judge?