EVE Search - Replace DirectX with OpenGL

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Replace DirectX with OpenGL

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Loki Angrboda Deus lo Vult 2	Posted - 2014.02.05 13:48:00 - [1] - Quote And here it is, again, the request to replace this whole DirectX fuckup with OpenGL. We had this in this forum a while ago. The topic was closed. Without any information why. So here are the reasons why CCP should do this: DirectX is dead AMD told us so last year: http://news.techeye.net/software/forget-directx-12-says-amd There was no major updates to DirectX in the near past. It is just dead. The full power of modern graphic cards could only be used if you use OpenGL. DirectX is Windows-Only We know, Linux is currently not supported, but what is with OSX? I don't know how the OSX Client is implemented, but i think its one of the crappy DirectX wrappers out there. Using OpenGL would solve one big issue here. OpenGL is faster Not from me, Valve claimed that: http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/linux/faster-zombies/ nvidia proofed it again at the Steam Dev Days: http://de.slideshare.net/CassEveritt/beyond-porting (slide 20) And if you know about Modeswitching and broken Windows driver implementations, you could understand why. OpenGL is the future Don't need to explain that, or should i? It's compatible with the SteamBox And as we all know, that is a Linux system. And: it will support Valve's VR. It will become cheaper to develop Why? Because Valve is implementing a opensource solution for developing and debugging OpenGL: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTU3NTA What do you pay to M$ for the licenses? There is no instand need for a linux client. We are all happy if it works in WINE. But it should be in CCP's interrest to starting porting to OpenGL ASAP. Even if the release is coming in two or three years. It is time. And if you don't have a clue how, just ask Ryan Gordon: https://icculus.org/SteamDevDays/ That's why, the rest is up to CCP. And if you close this thread: please tell us why you don't want to port it. Just to show us: we are not ignored.
Electrique Wizard Mutually Lucrative Business Proposals Market and Contract PVP 312	Posted - 2014.02.05 13:53:00 - [2] - Quote 1. EVE runs on ancient code and parts of Black Magic 2. Fixing EVE for OpenGL instead of DirectX wouldt take forever and launch a fuckton of bugs 3. Precious time wasted that could be poured into stuff like creating tophats or even stupid stuff nobody cares about like rewriting POS code. I am the Zodiac, I am the stars, You are the sorceress, my priestess of Mars, Queen of the night, swathed in satin black, Your ivory flesh upon my torture rack.
Loki Angrboda Deus lo Vult 2	Posted - 2014.02.05 13:57:00 - [3] - Quote Electrique Wizard wrote: 1. EVE runs on ancient code and parts of Black Magic 2. Fixing EVE for OpenGL instead of DirectX wouldt take forever and launch a fuckton of bugs 3. Precious time wasted that could be poured into stuff like creating tophats or even stupid stuff nobody cares about like rewriting POS code . You may be right. But: As only the client is DirectX bound, there is no reason to develop a OpenGL in a parallel process. I would think, that there are developers for graphics and developers for other stuff. So, there should not be so much time "waste". If this game is made for the future, it must be able to use new graphics hardware even in 5 years. And this wont work with DirectX11
Swiftstrike1 Swiftstrike Incorporated 464	Posted - 2014.02.05 14:08:00 - [4] - Quote Mantle API. Also, this is the wrong forum for this. Fleet Bookmarks New Gravimetric Sites Med Clones 2.0
Loki Angrboda Deus lo Vult 2	Posted - 2014.02.05 14:16:00 - [5] - Quote Swiftstrike1 wrote: Mantle API. Also, this is the wrong forum for this. Mantle? Would be fine too. If it is stable and tested. What forum should i use? If it is the wrong, the mod's could move the post.
Lephia DeGrande Luxembourg Space Union 220	Posted - 2014.02.05 14:35:00 - [6] - Quote OpenGL > the other crap +1 from the bottom of my Heart!
Dav Varan Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis 150	Posted - 2014.02.05 16:32:00 - [7] - Quote forum ate my post :(
Dav Varan Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis 150	Posted - 2014.02.05 16:49:00 - [8] - Quote Dav Varan wrote: forum ate my post :( I don't trust the Open GL business model. Not for profit organisation dont have enough on the line or resources at there disposal to be trusted to keep there eye on the ball. In fact I belive past releases of GL have been met with varying level of enthusiasm or contempt by the then dev communities. I think DX is the reliable future bet being backed by a very well resourced multinational with a substantial investment in the Tech. You sources are a bit dubious being as they are from corporations that are in effect in competition with MS. Quoting ADM execs saying DX is dying is funny as they are in fact making there own propriatory DX competitor, mantle iirc. ADM don't get to tell the world when DX is dead they are a second rate procducer of second rate budget processors who brought out an ailing Card company ( ATI ) to continue to make second rate video cards. If Nvidia removed backing for DX then it would be time to act. and Valve are invested in GL as you point out. Not that I think there lying about the numbers maybe the current release of GL is 5% faster than DX. How ever is that situation likelly to remain ? Jumping to GL as an only framework would be a massive gamble. As a secondary framework is fine.
Dr0000 Maulerant Union Nanide and Tooling 147	Posted - 2014.02.05 17:34:00 - [9] - Quote DX9 wasn't used to its full potential, and most games barely scratch the surface of what DX11 is capable of. If EVE took advantage of half the capability of DX11, it would be the most visually appealing MMO on the market. Transitioning to opengl would be just as much of a bug-hunt. If not more. Tell me again about how every playstyle you dont engage in "doesn't require any effort" and everyone who does it needs to die in a fire. Be sure to mention about how you tried it once but it was too easy/boring/ethnic-homophobic slur.-á
Seranova Farreach Biomass Negative 634	Posted - 2014.02.05 17:40:00 - [10] - Quote every one knows Nvidia and directX is better then AMD trollface _______________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg
Seranova Farreach Biomass Negative 634	Posted - 2014.02.05 17:43:00 - [11] - Quote Dav Varan wrote: Dav Varan wrote: forum ate my post :( I don't trust the Open GL business model. Not for profit organisation dont have enough on the line or resources at there disposal to be trusted to keep there eye on the ball. In fact I belive past releases of GL have been met with varying level of enthusiasm or contempt by the then dev communities. I think DX is the reliable future bet being backed by a very well resourced multinational with a substantial investment in the Tech. You sources are a bit dubious being as they are from corporations that are in effect in competition with MS. Quoting ADM execs saying DX is dying is funny as they are in fact making there own propriatory DX competitor, mantle iirc. ADM don't get to tell the world when DX is dead they are a second rate procducer of second rate budget processors who brought out an ailing Card company ( ATI ) to continue to make second rate video cards. If Nvidia removed backing for DX then it would be time to act. and Valve are invested in GL as you point out. Not that I think there lying about the numbers maybe the current release of GL is 5% faster than DX. How ever is that situation likelly to remain ? Jumping to GL as an only framework would be a massive gamble. As a secondary framework is fine. i believe they were more invested in GL due to their games being for mac and linux too and probably just helps the porting to mac and linux easier while also useing dx tech i think as i recal they sued to be heavy on nvidia's D at one time _______________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg
Mournful Conciousness Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate 504	Posted - 2014.02.05 18:13:00 - [12] - Quote Electrique Wizard wrote: 1. EVE runs on ancient code and parts of Black Magic 2. Fixing EVE for OpenGL instead of DirectX wouldt take forever and launch a fuckton of bugs 3. Precious time wasted that could be poured into stuff like creating tophats or even stupid stuff nobody cares about like rewriting POS code. I've written both directx and OpenGL code. I don't see any major difficulties in porting. Libraries such as ogre3d allow one codebase to choose directx or OpenGL at run time. The major difference is the orientation of the matrix representations, which can be translated automatically in code if necessary. Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Loki Angrboda Deus lo Vult 8	Posted - 2014.02.05 23:32:00 - [13] - Quote Dav Varan wrote: I don't trust the Open GL business model. Not for profit organisation dont have enough on the line or resources at there disposal to be trusted to keep there eye on the ball. In fact I belive past releases of GL have been met with varying level of enthusiasm or contempt by the then dev communities. Oh my god. Please inform yourself a little bit, before posting garbage. First of all, there are so many Non-Profit-Orgs delivering the best software you can get. No other webserver could beat the one from apache for example. PHP is non profit, the most pages on the web are build with it. OpenGL is part of Khronos. Have a look at the member list. http://www.khronos.org/members/ You will find many academic instiutions there, AMD, Intel, NVidia, ARM, Apple,VMware and much more companies. Guess how is missing ... righ ... Microsoft is the only one. Dav Varan wrote: I think DX is the reliable future bet being backed by a very well resourced multinational with a substantial investment in the Tech. Did you ever learned something about the Windows driver ecosystem? Modeswitching and the bad implenetation of DirectX? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_OpenGL_and_Direct3D#Mode_switching_.28on_Microsoft_Windows.29 Dav Varan wrote: You sources are a bit dubious being as they are from corporations that are in effect in competition with MS. Quoting ADM execs saying DX is dying is funny as they are in fact making there own propriatory DX competitor, mantle iirc. ADM don't get to tell the world when DX is dead they are a second rate procducer of second rate budget processors who brought out an ailing Card company ( ATI ) to continue to make second rate video cards. What was the last Update for DX with new features? August 1, 2012 ... Dav Varan wrote: If Nvidia removed backing for DX then it would be time to act. Why should they do? It does not waste any ressources, as DirectX sees no updates, so no changes needed ... instead Nvidia did major work on OpenGL 4.4. AMD too btw ... Dav Varan wrote: and Valve are invested in GL as you point out. Not that I think there lying about the numbers maybe the current release of GL is 5% faster than DX. How ever is that situation likelly to remain ? Jumping to GL as an only framework would be a massive gamble. As a secondary framework is fine. [/quote] there are no "realeses" of OpenGL. Only Hardware-Support. If a new GFX Card has newer Features, they could be used without waiting for some release of $something. And yes, it will stay until Microsoft fixes there Kernel and driver handling. Maintaing two codeparts is just much more work and more error prone. And if you could get the same or better results, with only one technology (it is not a Framework ... SDL is one for example) why should you maintain two?
Fronkfurter McSheebleton The Graduates RAZOR Alliance 271	Posted - 2014.02.06 00:07:00 - [14] - Quote Dav Varan wrote: ADM don't get to tell the world when DX is dead they are a second rate procducer of second rate budget processors who brought out an ailing Card company ( ATI ) to continue to make second rate video cards. First, it's AMD, not ADM Second, I don't understand how they're second rate, when they've competed very well per-dollar for years and were a pioneer in modern CPUs. You're using some of their tech right now, even if you have an intel CPU. ATI (now branded AMD as well) as a company was ailing when they were bought, but their designs were not...their gpus have been trading blows with nvidia for quite some time. There is a very good reason all current and last-gen consoles use some of their hardware...the XBone and PS4 even use AMD exclusively, both processor and GPU in one unit. thhief ghabmoef
Bjor Talvanen State War Academy Caldari State 0	Posted - 2014.02.06 00:33:00 - [15] - Quote +1 for this. DirectX is dead; Microsoft doesn't even seem that invested in the gaming market anymore. Sure they've got the Xbone, but by their own admission it's a home media center before it's a gaming machine. Also they haven't updated the DirectX API for nearly 18 months. The next 5-10 years will see the cutting edge gaming tech move away from Windows and to open platforms like SteamOS and other *nix alternatives. OpenGL right now can do more than DirectX, with similar or better performance, and runs on more platforms. So unless Microsoft is going to 'sponsor' you, why even bother developing your game in DirectX?
Dart Aurel Space Roar Babylon 5.. 0	Posted - 2014.02.06 00:34:00 - [16] - Quote Two teas (+1) to OP author. The change requires major rewriting of client code. But... it's only client code. And even more, most of the client code should be UI logic, not the actual renderer. That's not so huge task as it appears at the first sight (IMHO, of course, but yes, i'm a software developer). So, +1. CCP, if u changing DX9 to DX11, please, make 1 more step forward, switch to OpenGL. It will give you a great community relation boost and will make your karma lighter ;)
Petrus Blackshell Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 2901	Posted - 2014.02.06 00:41:00 - [17] - Quote To have full cross-platform compatibility you need more than OpenGL. AFAIK, Eve still depends on DirectSound, and likely a good number of Windows tech that only work in Mac because they're shoehorned. Also, keep in mind that the original Eve was apparently an unmaintainable code mess. Don't expect nice abstract code structure via OGRE, or SDL. Instead expect a hard-coded jungle of junk. To replace something as core as DirectX is would require a code refactor probably unprecedented in Eve's development. If a refactor to make a "Switch Character" button is too much effort for too little reward, why would replacing DirectX with OpenGL (which at best will go unnoticed, and at worst would cause mass quitting because of bugs) be any more likely to happen? Aaaand a pet peeve: Electrique Wizard wrote: 3. Precious time wasted that could be poured into stuff like creating tophats or even stupid stuff nobody cares about like rewriting POS code. Just as you wouldn't tell an architect to do an art installation, or an electrician to do the plumbing, you cannot ask database and business code engineers to write graphics code, same as you can't ask graphics programmers to improve the forum software. Additionally, development "inertia" -- keeping developers for a long time until the codebase is second nature -- is how you get people who do stuff efficiently. You can't simply fire all the web developers, hire a bunch of graphics engineers, and expect there to suddenly be tons of productivity in the graphics dept. tl;dr: Efficient software engineers are very specialized and not at all hotswappable. Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com
Petrus Blackshell Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 2901	Posted - 2014.02.06 00:46:00 - [18] - Quote Not that I hate OpenGL. If Eve were being coded from scratch now and they used DX instead of OGL I would be very disappointed. But, things being where they are, they're not going to change. Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com
Skuyou Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers. 5	Posted - 2014.02.06 02:37:00 - [19] - Quote I would agree with pretrus but one can hope. They just got done revamping the char select so hopefully its clean code beyond that who knows. My hopes is that after the orig 7 ish devs who created eve became supervisors and started assigning things to there underlings that they would be cleaning up the rats nest that is scratch code that works but isnt optimal. they have had 10 years of a successful game one would hope most of it is clean now. If not we have there first task. After that how hard would it be to port? Anyone here a market analyst and capable of putting forward a proposal with fill in the blanks? x amount of employees hours spent so on... I would do it but this is not my area of expertise.
Miracle Chipmunk Otsito Poor Man Inc 3	Posted - 2014.02.06 02:49:00 - [20] - Quote Direct3D 9 works in Linux with the FOSS drivers. CCP can make a Linux port and keep D3D9, although the rest of DirectX would have to be stripped out/replaced.
Zan Shiro Alternative Enterprises 372	Posted - 2014.02.06 03:45:00 - [21] - Quote Bjor Talvanen wrote: OpenGL right now can do more than DirectX, with similar or better performance, and runs on more platforms. So unless Microsoft is going to 'sponsor' you, why even bother developing your game in DirectX? Its a guaranteed market. Mac gaming is iffy. Only transplants like me do it really. And to be honest I do it either bootcamp or parallels. edit: Some steam games however are very decent wrapped ports, I like them at any rate. I used to make fun of mac idiots....oops...fanatics but of late I am picking up one of their oddities myself. Something open gl won't solve. That being while graphically compatible it would barring massive rewrite still be a windows app ported over to mac. Put another way...it still be as crappy as having eve in a wrapper like we do now for mac. The oddity I am picking up is if I see 2 apps that do the same thing but one bothered to be built 100% for mac os (i.e. cocoa development) I will buy that one. Barring it being a lackluster pos anyway. I will and have paid more for this in fact. So a game dev knows with some mac users its not jsut the graphics...its the whole damn package, Gonna give us a mac app...well then cocoa that pig. The more reasonable side to me understands this is not practical however. Why I don't mind the DX. Wrapper suits me fine as I know I have a snow balls chance in hell of ccp flooding the cubicles with pure mac os programmers. Linux brings in lack of standardization. Put me in a corner for it and I would cut off some peeps if a game dev. I'd either focus in redhat/centos or I might go ubuntu/debian. Or I'd do both but not devote time/money getting optimal product out to the other flavors.
Loki Angrboda Deus lo Vult 13	Posted - 2014.02.06 10:12:00 - [22] - Quote Zan Shiro wrote: Bjor Talvanen wrote: OpenGL right now can do more than DirectX, with similar or better performance, and runs on more platforms. So unless Microsoft is going to 'sponsor' you, why even bother developing your game in DirectX? Its a guaranteed market. OpenGL is running on Windows and other Plattforms. This thread is not about porting to linux. It is about porting to OpenGL based Frameworks like SDL and Qt! Zan Shiro wrote: Linux brings in lack of standardization. Put me in a corner for it and I would cut off some peeps if a game dev. I'd either focus in redhat/centos or I might go ubuntu/debian. Or I'd do both but not devote time/money getting optimal product out to the other flavors. That is not a problem at all. Valve and Gordon proved that. The current Steam Client runs on every single distribution i have tested. Why? Because they bundle all dependencies they need, and that is not so much.
Greg Arosa Love for You 2	Posted - 2014.02.06 21:14:00 - [23] - Quote Loki Angrboda wrote: Dav Varan wrote: I think DX is the reliable future bet being backed by a very well resourced multinational with a substantial investment in the Tech. Did you ever learned something about the Windows driver ecosystem? Modeswitching and the bad implenetation of DirectX? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_OpenGL_and_Direct3D#Mode_switching_.28on_Microsoft_Windows.29 While I could agree that switching to OpenGL itself is a good thing, I must say that the linux graphics stack is even a bigger mess. In fact, its a total disaster compared to windows. Sucks that we can't have all the good things from both platforms, while leaving the utter crap behind.
Loki Angrboda Deus lo Vult 14	Posted - 2014.02.06 21:16:00 - [24] - Quote Greg Arosa wrote: I must say that the linux graphics stack is even a bigger mess. In fact, its a total disaster compared to windows. Sucks that we can't have all the good things from both platforms, while leaving the utter crap behind. Could you explain what you mean? X.org Server? Yeah, it's not the best. But there are new alterantives coming. The kernel and graphics are well designed and functional.
Greg Arosa Love for You 2	Posted - 2014.02.06 21:48:00 - [25] - Quote Loki Angrboda wrote: Greg Arosa wrote: I must say that the linux graphics stack is even a bigger mess. In fact, its a total disaster compared to windows. Sucks that we can't have all the good things from both platforms, while leaving the utter crap behind. Could you explain what you mean? X.org Server? Yeah, it's not the best. But there are new alterantives coming. The kernel and graphics are well designed and functional. X.org is crap now, but the original design wasn't that bad. Its a shame that it evolved into what it is now. Wayland, as an alternative, might be better, I haven't seen it in action and haven't looked at its source code, so I can't really tell. The kernel on the other hand is quite a mess. Open source video drivers do not support all the features hardware provides, while the proprietary ones get broken now and then by the kernel devs changing api. TL;DR linux stack is a different kind of mess with nobody to carry the responsibility for it.
Loki Angrboda Deus lo Vult 14	Posted - 2014.02.06 22:26:00 - [26] - Quote Greg Arosa wrote: The kernel on the other hand is quite a mess. Open source video drivers do not support all the features hardware provides, while the proprietary ones get broken now and then by the kernel devs changing api. Ah, ok. The main issue is, that the opensource drivers are build without any spec by hand. Just by reversing the properitary drivers in most cases. I hope AMD and nvidia will release open source drivers for the kernel, as intel did. The problem with the broken ABI bindings is the biggest one for properitary drivers. But this is an issue only hitting advanced users. And patches are out fast. But again: this is not about portiing to linux ;)
Greg Arosa Love for You 2	Posted - 2014.02.06 22:45:00 - [27] - Quote Loki Angrboda wrote: Ah, ok. The main issue is, that the opensource drivers are build without any spec by hand. Just by reversing the properitary drivers in most cases. I hope AMD and nvidia will release open source drivers for the kernel, as intel did. Not true, actually. Intel and AMD publish specs for all the chips they release. A huge part of opensource drivers is written by intel/amd employees. Loki Angrboda wrote: The problem with the broken ABI bindings is the biggest one for properitary drivers. But this is an issue only hitting advanced users. And patches are out fast. But again: this is not about portiing to linux ;) API, not ABI. But this is not the point, I agree. OpenGL port will mostly benefit linux folks, so linux port is somewhat implied here.
Loki Angrboda Deus lo Vult 14	Posted - 2014.02.07 00:23:00 - [28] - Quote Greg Arosa wrote: Not true, actually. Intel and AMD publish specs for all the chips they release. Oh, i missed that one ... the last time i was looking for it, there was only the old cards availible. But after a quick search if have found that they released all missing docs at once in october last year. Greg Arosa wrote: A huge part of opensource drivers is written by intel/amd employees. Right, told so. Greg Arosa wrote: Loki Angrboda wrote: The problem with the broken ABI bindings is the biggest one for properitary drivers. But this is an issue only hitting advanced users. And patches are out fast. But again: this is not about portiing to linux ;) API, not ABI. But this is not the point, I agree. OpenGL port will mostly benefit linux folks, so linux port is somewhat implied here. thx, too tired ... just thought about the binary blobs of nvidia, and writing about ABI ... omg ... Yeah, linux folks would benefit from it. It would improve the performance with wine even more. But also all windows and OSX users. they could unleach the full power of there expensive GFX cards. Use all the shiny features, released in the time since the last dx update.
Herzog Wolfhammer Sigma Special Tactics Group 4293	Posted - 2014.02.09 09:44:00 - [29] - Quote I think a day will come when the Eve client will be based in a Virtual Machine. Then it won't matter.
Lephia DeGrande Luxembourg Space Union 226	Posted - 2014.02.09 11:02:00 - [30] - Quote I am mac User myself and i dont care if they support OSX or Linux, i simply Support OpenGL because its the better Engine (sure it DOES have some serious flaws) but Overall its much better then DX is. And its the Future hands down.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.