Khronos Publishes Its Slides About OpenGL-Next

[blackout23]

Especially since there are a few gaming focused businesses involved, like Valve, Epic Games and Unity. Those guys will certainly strive for a easy-to-use API.

Electronic Arts and Blizzard, too. Blizzard isn't really known for pushing the graphics envelope, though.

[berillions]

Especially since there are a few gaming focused businesses involved, like Valve, Epic Games and Unity. Those guys will certainly strive for a easy-to-use API.

It's beautiful to see Blizzard and EA to help for OpenGL-Next but if they will not release their futures games with it, it will be disappointing.

[justmy2cents]

It's beautiful to see Blizzard and EA to help for OpenGL-Next but if they will not release their futures games with it, it will be disappointing.

that is not even a question. off course they will. the real question is if yours OpenGL target and theirs are the same. one would think they will 100% target mobile with it. linux? good question, really

[smitty3268]

That's my concern too, that there is now going to be an "old" OpenGL and a "new" OpenGL, which is going to be a hell of a mess.

Developers won't have to deal with that kind of mess in DX; score another point for DX.

Huh? D3D9 vs 10 broke compatibility too, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

[MartinN]

That's my concern too, that there is now going to be an "old" OpenGL and a "new" OpenGL, which is going to be a hell of a mess.

Developers won't have to deal with that kind of mess in DX; score another point for DX.

And it's not really obvious what benefits it's actually going to bring, other than chasing meaningless marketing buzzwords like "low-level" or the mythical "everything is better when you start over from scratch".

Boy, aren't you the optimist? Maybe we should scrap Wayland in lieu of continuous X patching?

[johnc]

Boy, aren't you the optimist? Maybe we should scrap Wayland in lieu of continuous X patching?

I'm listening...

[gamerk2]

That's my concern too, that there is now going to be an "old" OpenGL and a "new" OpenGL, which is going to be a hell of a mess.

Developers won't have to deal with that kind of mess in DX; score another point for DX.

And it's not really obvious what benefits it's actually going to bring, other than chasing meaningless marketing buzzwords like "low-level" or the mythical "everything is better when you start over from scratch".

Linux is simply going to have to support multiple graphic APIs, so programs compiled against OGL still run without regression. Applications compiled against OGL shouldn't need to adjust a single SLOC to remain running.

The idea that every program needs to be re-compiled against the absolute latest version of an API is just silly. If it works, leave it be.

[gamerk2]

It's beautiful to see Blizzard and EA to help for OpenGL-Next but if they will not release their futures games with it, it will be disappointing.

They won't release a single game on it, not after all the work they did on Frostbite 3. That's the problem: This is coming out after every major next-gen game engine has already been completed. Too late by 18 months.

[TheSoulz]

They won't release a single game on it, not after all the work they did on Frostbite 3. That's the problem: This is coming out after every major next-gen game engine has already been completed. Too late by 18 months.

And why is that?
Is there any reason why the new OpenGL cant be added to the renderer???
i dont think so.

[justmy2cents]

I'm listening...

well, even if they go ballistic and remove any support for "old", which they said they won't and they will still UPDATE and SUPPORT for quite some time.

worst case scenario is people implement "old" api on "new" one like wine or galium nine do it for dx9. question is if that worst case is really worst case. suddenly you ended up with singular full featured OpenGL that removes a lot of compatibility concerns that "old" one had since it is only one implementation.

in case of Mesa, it is probably easier to implement low level api (just look how fast nine was implemented) especially since "new" standard removes one of the most painful topics they had... shaders.

if you look at this slide

common shader IR and common shader compiler. now, i'm not Mesa developer, but just looking at their remaining tasks, i'd say this is significant. not needing to provide their own test framework... another significant feature

but, as i said... i'm not Mesa developer and all this is just my guessing. so, please feel free to debunk my wild imagination