Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Direct3D 10/11 Is Now Natively Implemented On Linux!

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #71
    Originally posted by nanonyme View Post
    They might if it's developers setting targets and then people directing project resources by setting bounties for those targets. It would motivate developers to work on those things that aren't fun but they've scheduled to write when they have too much time too.
    I would easily pre-pay for certain programs if I was guaranteed of getting a good finished program. Many consumers are used to pre-paying for games and other programs now days. If someone came out with pictures and movies and even a demo of some really great program, and upon reaching a certain bounty goal it would be released as open source, but if not after a set period you'd get your money back, I would totally do it.

    I may be biased since I've been asking for such a business model for ages now, but I don't think I'm alone at all in being someone who would do something like that as long as that safety was there. Having a demo before paying, too, would definitely help seal the deal as that would make things very safe.

    IMO, that's how the future of software development should be. There's a demand, everyone contributes either time or money, and it gets created and open sourced.

    Comment


    • #72
      Originally posted by Yfrwlf View Post
      A lot of AAA games use OGL for their Mac version release AFAIK. That's why those games like Starcraft, Diablo, basically everything Blizzard does and id does and others, use OGL. Maybe both OGL and DX both, not sure. That's why those games can run easily through Wine, but perhaps they are actually mostly using DX and they just happen to work well in Wine due to the fact that they sometimes use the Windows binaries running through Cider (Mac version of Wine) in their Mac versions, but I thought it was also because they were using OGL.
      AAA games for Mac = a joke. Maybe this will change now that Steam runs there but that remains to be seen.

      Starcraft 1, Diablo 1+2 don't have OpenGL renderers, they were VESA, DirectDraw, Direct3D and Glide. World of Warcraft and Warcraft 3 run better when using their Direct3D renderers on Wine, rather than OpenGL... Only Starcraft 2 and Portal have been ported to Mac/OpenGL, but people seem to use Wine/D3D there too.

      In any case, OGL4 is supposedly on par with DX now but I would be interested in seeing which one is easier to implement certain things with. As other posters have commented on though, DX is still controlled by Microsoft and because of that it may be possible for them to pull tricks to break cross-platform functionality. Things like tying in certain parts to Windows-specific components which would then need to be reverse-engineered and other crazy crap like that. Khronos is vested in cross-platform compatibility though and is the much safer bet, unless they become corrupted of course.
      OpenGL 4 is useless on Linux, we don't (and probably never will) have open drivers for that, remember? Or do you prefer using a closed-source OpenGL implementation over an open-source Direct3D implementation?

      I certainly find the latter much less evil than binary blobs in my kernel. YMMV.

      Comment


      • #73
        Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
        I'd say lack of games is a much better way to kill an alternative platform, so how about "the monopolistic way that makes alternative platforms viable for the non-geek"?
        In this case I couldn't agree more. If this will work as expected then exciting times are comming! If this will be only limited to Linux then apple guys can probably go home.

        Comment


        • #74
          Originally posted by siride View Post
          Games are *NOT* the number one reason Windows dominates, not by far. Windows dominates because it actually works, because it runs software that people need to get their work done, because the knowledge base about Windows is considerably larger and cheaper than for Linux and because there's a multi-billion dollar corporation behind it with the resources to make it work and to make it work for you (often only if you are willing to pay enough). Games a lot further down the list. Most people aren't gamers, or they just use consoles to play games.
          This talk about "it actually works" is total bull. It's sometimes a pain to set up windows to work as expected. Games are most important and I believe 90%+ of windows users are gamers. Consoles doesn't even count, because many gamers prefer to play on PCs and many great games are only for PCs.

          Comment


          • #75
            Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
            LOL, try harder TrollStar. Look at the latest Mac OS X releases:
            -Starcraft II;
            -Team Fortress 2
            -Brother In Arms; Double Time;
            -Sims 3; Ambitions expension pack #799707070867 (OK, you may hate it, but still AAA selling);
            -Star Wars; The Force Unleashed;
            -Bioshock;
            Lol, *you* try harder: http://uk.pc.ign.com/index/games.html

            How many of those support OpenGL? Yeah.


            And we have been bashing Windows since 1995, but look how relevant that POS still is. BTW OpenGL 2.1 != 4.0. A whole different ballgame, BlackStar.
            Noone is using OpenGL 4.0, *noone*. ID's latest and greatest Rage is D3D + OpenGL 2.1.

            Also, we lack open drivers for it. The GL4 story is as bad as D3D10/11 on Linux (or arguably worse, since we now have the beginnings of an open D3D10/11 driver).

            Edit: kraftman and I finally agree on something. Wow!

            Comment


            • #76
              Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
              Lol, *you* try harder: http://uk.pc.ign.com/index/games.html

              Noone is using OpenGL 4.0, *noone*. ID's latest and greatest Rage is D3D + OpenGL 2.1.
              OpenGL hasn't been out long enough for people to use it.
              Rage uses OpenGL for the graphics, but I recall Carmack mentioning DirectX for other areas (keyboard input, for example). It most certainly can't use both D3D and OpenGL.

              Comment


              • #77
                I of course meant OpenGL 4.....

                Comment


                • #78
                  Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                  What about it? Xbox360 has great exclusive titles. Playstation 3 has great exclusive titles. The Wii has Mario Kart. So should be all buy them?

                  The point here, aside from that I already said Quality > Quantity, you asked for what AAA OpenGL titles were released; I answered, because there are recent AAA OpenGL titles. Sure not as much as Direct3D titles, but then again what percentage of Windows games you see in stores now even come close to StarCraft II and other AAA titles. Many Windows games these days SUCK BALLS.

                  Noone is using OpenGL 4.0, *noone*. ID's latest and greatest Rage is D3D + OpenGL 2.1.
                  If we ignore Duke Nukem Forever (2011), then we have two great Unigene games. Guess what fscking OpenGL version they're using?

                  Also, we lack open drivers for it. The GL4 story is as bad as D3D10/11 on Linux (or arguably worse, since we now have the beginnings of an open D3D10/11 driver).
                  Sadly, yes.

                  Comment


                  • #79
                    Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                    OpenGL 4 is useless on Linux, we don't (and probably never will) have open drivers for that, remember? Or do you prefer using a closed-source OpenGL implementation over an open-source Direct3D implementation?
                    Not exactly... I have that combination sitting in front of me at the moment. I am using proprietary nVidia drivers given but I am working with software that does use OpenGL 4 features.

                    In general though OpenGL 4.0/4.1 has reached feature parity with direct3d 11 but still lags in performance. OpenGL was really designed for Workstation Apps and handles a whole bunch of corner cases and things that were important for older generations of hardware that makers of modern games really don't care about. Also OpenGL's state machine architecture feels a bit out of place in modern programming environment.

                    Ideally Linux would have a 3D graphics API that the community had input on however this is only going to happen if Linux gains a *lot* of marketshare (possibly never). Meanwhile anything that makes it easier to port software to Linux is good in my books.

                    My only reservation is with the IP side of things which I am pretty sure Microsoft will try if this is successful enough for Microsoft to consider it a serious threat. I don't see them doing that anytime in the next year or so however.

                    Comment


                    • #80
                      Originally posted by TemplarGR View Post
                      Games are the no 1 reason Windows dominate.
                      No, fuck no, no fucking way and then some.

                      This is easily the silliest thing ever written on Phoronix.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X