Contrary to earlier reports the current Tech5 code is OpenGL based.
http://www.beyond3d.com/content/news/487
Carmack is open to a port to D3D based on secondary factors just as he is open to a port to OpenGL 3.
Just thought I'd share since false information has been widely circulated on this issue including on these forums.
Doesn't surprise me a bit. If OpenGL 3.0 wasn't on the horizon, i would switch to D3D, too. So he's basically doing the same thing most of us do: Wait and hope for a great new API. BTW, does anyone know, whether the ARB will be able to keep their promise, about having "something" ready until the end of September?
Jan.
GLIM - Immediate Mode Emulation for GL3
They didn't say something; they said the spec.BTW, does anyone know, whether the ARB will be able to keep their promise, about having "something" ready until the end of September?
And no, I think they've been pretty quiet on the subject. But, then again, there's a newsletter due out in 9 days that will shed light on the subject, one way or another.
Note to ARB: we will (happily) accept the GL 3.0 specification in lieu of a vol 5 newsletter.
Will there be a party?
According to the BOF presentation at SIGGRAPH, the ARB should have finalized all open issues by the end of August. Which means at this point, it's all about wording and actually writing the spec.
Jan there's some irony to your post in the context of a situation where people were previously saying he's already committed to D3D. He's not saying he'll switch to D3D, he's saying he's keeping his options open, and secondary factors will influence the final determination.
I've seen Carmack say elsewhere that DX10 doesn't change much from his perspective and Tech 5 will be targeting DX 9 class hardware.
On the spec front I really don't see D3D 10 pressuring a rush to OpenGL 3, especially after recent developments but the sooner the better.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=302231&cid=20671657
The PC version is still OpenGL, but it is possible that could change before release. The actual API code is not very large, and the vertex / fragment code can be easily translated between cg/hlsl/glsl as necessary. I am going to at least consider OpenGL 3.0 as a target, if Nvidia, ATI, and Intel all have decent support. There really won't be any performance difference between GL 2.0 / GL 3.0 / D3D, so the api decision will be based on secondary factors, of which inertia is one.
-* So many things to do, so little time to spend. *-
dorbie: True. I only interpret it this way: "D3D9 is very good, it works well on the PC and the 360. OpenGL 2.x is a mess, but it is currently still good enough. Until release that could change (especially since ATI and nVidia might not work on their OpenGL drivers much, if even an id-Engine might not use it anymore). However, if OpenGL 3.0 is as good as expected AND THERE ARE GOOD ENOUGH DRIVERS, id Tech 5 will most certainly use OpenGL 3.0 (or one might be able to select the render API on the PC)."
I do think, that OpenGL 3.0 needs to be out soon, because it will take some time to get stable and fast drivers. Currently D3D10 is no threat, so we still got some time, but the situation will change. (In this business usually sooner than later.)
Jan.
GLIM - Immediate Mode Emulation for GL3
Jan, in that case I don't think "interpret" means what you think it means. :-)
I can't believe he listed Intel.
Jan, what are you talking about? He is aiming for multiplatform support so ID has no choice to support 3 APIs.
Add to that Linux : GLD3D on the xbox platform, LibGCM on the PS3 and OpenGL on the Mac
On Windows, they will likely just offer GL
------------------------------
Sig: http://glhlib.sourceforge.net
an open source GLU replacement library. Much more modern than GLU.
float matrix[16], inverse_matrix[16];
glhLoadIdentityf2(matrix);
glhTranslatef2(matrix, 0.0, 0.0, 5.0);
glhRotateAboutXf2(matrix, angleInRadians);
glhScalef2(matrix, 1.0, 1.0, -1.0);
glhQuickInvertMatrixf2(matrix, inverse_matrix);
glUniformMatrix4fv(uniformLocation1, 1, FALSE, matrix);
glUniformMatrix4fv(uniformLocation2, 1, FALSE, inverse_matrix);
Posting Permissions
