- Forum
- Lounge
- making a game...
- Page 2
making a game...
That's right. We hug Apple trees. >.>
AND WE LOVE IT!
@Duoas: As of yet I have had no need to program any piece of software in an fairly organized environment. And... he says that he "tend[s] to lean" toward DirectX, not has to use it because of a requirement that he cannot change... did he?
-Albatross
AND WE LOVE IT!
@Duoas: As of yet I have had no need to program any piece of software in an fairly organized environment. And... he says that he "tend[s] to lean" toward DirectX, not has to use it because of a requirement that he cannot change... did he?
-Albatross
Last edited on
Actually they are correct. The API I use is constrained by the project requirements. In an ideal project you would always use cross platform tools... but that's not always the case. It just depends on the target audience. The reason I tend to lean toward Direct X is it means I only deal with supporting 1 platform and it's issues rather than 2 or 3. It's also easier to find Direct X guys than it is OpenGL... although that is very slowly changing.
In that case, I'm sorry that you're limited to an otherwise identical yet more convoluted and single-platform API. Hopefully, the situation will improve much faster.
-Albatross
-Albatross
Oh, the horrors of Direct3D!
His quality of life must be stunted!
Perhaps the more sensitive among us could call him programmatically challenged in three dimensions.
Really now, what is to improve? Your commentary betrays your ignorance of the APIs and their relative worth.
His quality of life must be stunted!
Perhaps the more sensitive among us could call him programmatically challenged in three dimensions.
Really now, what is to improve? Your commentary betrays your ignorance of the APIs and their relative worth.
You cannot know how much I know, Duoas.
Also, I never said Direct3D is very poor compared to OpenGL and I never said that DirectX is was very poor compared to the software maintained by the Khronos Group.
EDIT: On a side note this is not a good day for me... maybe I should pause for a few hours and write some GAS Assembly.
-Albatross
Also, I never said Direct3D is very poor compared to OpenGL and I never said that DirectX is was very poor compared to the software maintained by the Khronos Group.
EDIT: On a side note this is not a good day for me... maybe I should pause for a few hours and write some GAS Assembly.
-Albatross
Last edited on
I knew that would get a reaction. ;)
I'm no masochist, but GAS is the most ported assembler that I know of (and it's included with binutils, NASM is not), and sometimes I like writing assembly code. I don't care too much about the absence of macros and the AT&T syntax can be overridden with one directive if need be.
-Albatross
I'm no masochist, but GAS is the most ported assembler that I know of (and it's included with binutils, NASM is not), and sometimes I like writing assembly code. I don't care too much about the absence of macros and the AT&T syntax can be overridden with one directive if need be.
-Albatross
NASM > GNU as. I used to use GNU as but I like NASM more; it's much faster, much simpler and I find it produces better object code.
closed account (z05DSL3A)
"My tools better than yours!" said the Neo-Luddite to the technophile.
"No, mine is better than your!", said the technophile in responce.
meanwhile the workers just got on with it.
"No, mine is better than your!", said the technophile in responce.
meanwhile the workers just got on with it.
That brings an interesting question... do any of us consider ourselves to be technophiles? I can't see many Neo-Luddites attending this forum, as you need a computer to visit us.
-Albatross
-Albatross
Yes I have done 2D. I've already started learning Direct x and I like it. I just can't wait until I get to the good stuff. At this point I'm not worried about cross platform. Since I'm 16 I wont really be doing any major projects. But when the time comes i need to make my games cross platform compatible, I'll learn any API that is necessary.
Last edited on
| shadowvillian wrote: |
|---|
| At this point I'm not worried about cross platform. |
I never understood this.
I see this a lot:
A: "Which API should I learn? I'm thinking about DirectX?"
B: "Use OpenGL. It's more portable"
A: "I'm not worried about portability. I'll just use DirectX."
It makes me facepalm every time I see it.
Even more baffling is this:
| shadowvillian wrote: |
|---|
| But when the time comes i need to make my games cross platform compatible, I'll learn any API that is necessary. |
So you're opting to learn an API you are admitting you will eventually abandon.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are valid reasons to use DirectX over OpenGL. It's just...
blah nevermind.
Last edited on
He's simply got the common view of DirectX being better supported and more powerful than OpenGL :) - Atleast that's what i guess.
Are you saying the problem is that A is ignoring portability, or that he's asking for advice and then ignoring it?
I don't think learning something that you'll only use a few times is a waste. Knowing is always better than not knowing.
I don't think learning something that you'll only use a few times is a waste. Knowing is always better than not knowing.
I disagree that "knowing is always better than not knowing". If my entire family was brutally mass murdered for some reason I'd rather not know the details.
I think a lot of forum members need to spend some time researching logical fallacies - because arguments are often predicated on them.
Direct3D is a perfectly good, moral, useful technology. There is no good reason not to learn and use it.
Likewise, OpenGL is a perfectly good, moral, useful technology. There is no good reason not to learn and use it.
I also think a lot of forum members ought to read the links people give when an argument is made. It sure would help avoid two pages of rehash on nonsense that would have been easily dismissed had the link been read. The idea is that once the links are read, the discussion can then move on to more interesting points of topic.
For example, the Wikipedia article comparing OpenGL and Direct3D make it very clear that the two were designed with completely different ideologies in mind. Perhaps a more interesting discussion would have focused on this...
...Instead of the stupid "X is better than Y cause U drool" nonsense.
Direct3D is a perfectly good, moral, useful technology. There is no good reason not to learn and use it.
Likewise, OpenGL is a perfectly good, moral, useful technology. There is no good reason not to learn and use it.
I also think a lot of forum members ought to read the links people give when an argument is made. It sure would help avoid two pages of rehash on nonsense that would have been easily dismissed had the link been read. The idea is that once the links are read, the discussion can then move on to more interesting points of topic.
For example, the Wikipedia article comparing OpenGL and Direct3D make it very clear that the two were designed with completely different ideologies in mind. Perhaps a more interesting discussion would have focused on this...
...Instead of the stupid "X is better than Y cause U drool" nonsense.
Exactly what nonsense are you referring to? We all have our preferences, and so do you.
And logical fallacies... which ones in this thread are you referring to?
Aren't we exaggerating a bit?
-Albatross
And logical fallacies... which ones in this thread are you referring to?
| Duoas wrote: |
|---|
| ...Instead of the stupid "X is better than Y cause U drool" nonsense. |
Aren't we exaggerating a bit?
-Albatross