My only suggestion to OpenGL is to close its doors and sit and relax. It’s time to retire with the advances in DirecX technology there is no place to compete.
Portable? Give me a break, Java is portable but we cannot use it instread of C++ to create Half-Life 2 and Quake 4. LOL! 
Originally posted by glfreak:
Portable? Give me a break, Java is portable but we cannot use it instread of C++ to create Half-Life 2 and Quake 4. LOL!
Why not? Of course you can. Portable platforms are the future of programming. And I don’t see a serious advantage DirectX would have against OpenGL
Well I’m not intending any falme war between the two APIs, and I’m a fan of OpenGL. But lets be practical, why all games around are DirectX?
Direct3D adavntages in summary:
OpenGL advantages:
My only suggestion to OpenGL is to close its doors and sit and relax.
Well I’m not intending any falme war between the two APIs
That’s a pretty brutal lie. There’s no way a reasonable human being can say #1 and not intend for a flamewar. This is nothing more than a troll by a disgruntled OpenGL fan.
You like D3D? Fine. Go away; this forum doesn’t need nonsense like this thread. They’re enough bad suggestions without you adding to them.
I am very sorry, but the advantage of OpenGL is to have extensions. Due to it it has much powerfull support of shaders then DirectX. If only IHVs will make good use of it 
OpenGL has simply better design then DirectX if you like it or not. That is why I prefere it.
OpenGL is design for graphics research from every IHV and even others.
DirectX is design for Microsoft research only. They do HLSL with nVidia, they create geometry shader langage and look the crap it is.
DirectX doesn’t increase the graphics knowledge, OpenGL and it’s promotion process guaranty that this kownledge is well thinking for today and the future.
OpenGL as it stands now is quite delightful compared to D3D9. It’s faster, it’s got the best shading language, it’s got a better more flexible render target mechanism, it’s got a better approach for vertex buffers (negating the need for the concept of streams). And it’s 100% backwards compatible. It’s the wise mans choice of API. God I love OpenGL.
lol, this is probably the most patriotic GL thread ever 
I’m stating objective fact.
I wasn’t ironical about it
OpenGL is great but it cannot copete with something evolving almost every month with new enhancements.
It’s great for research, learning/academic way, experiementing, but not for GAMES.
Games has only one platform and DirectX does the job and more. Direct3D is far more complex and advanced than OpenGL. And Direct3D drivers are more realistinc to implement than OGL. Only one company can do good OGL drivers.
i think there are some games which demonstrate that your arguments against opengl are wrong.
btw, what exactly was your intention when you opened this thread? do you want me to program in directx from now on? sorry to disappoint you, but i don’t think i will ever use an api which is in a single company’s hand. even worse that it is microsoft, who have a long history of making software products incompatible to previous versions.
apart from that, how on earth should i get a direct x running on my linux box…
>> evolving almost every month with new enhancements
Oh yeah right what is the last month(s) enhancement then ?
(almost) from the horse’s mouth :
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=214032&SiteID=1
D3D 10 only available on vista : means no more D3D evolution on every Windows OS currently existing. Not so great to appeal to a large market … and means infinite time between D3D9 updates …
We have heard about Vista/longhorn since so many years promising all sorts of new stuff that will not happen cough WinFS cough
My only intention when I opened this thread is to get an answer as to why all game developers (except quite a few who do FPS like Quake) choose Direct3D over OpenGL which is supposed to be a superior API in several aspects, which is something I agree on.
BTW where’s the pixel buffers from the OGL 2.x specification; it’s not even out yet.
DirectX 10 is coming sooooooon.
maybe because the api is chosen by managers, not by developers.
>> BTW where’s the pixel buffers from the OGL 2.x specification; it’s not even out yet.
Spec:
http://oss.sgi.com/projects/ogl-sample/registry/ARB/pixel_buffer_object.txt
Implementations available :
http://delphi3d.net/hardware/extsupport.php?extension=GL_ARB_pixel_buffer_object
Managers not developers?
Then where is the Geoemtry Shader in OpenGL?
D3D has streams, is not that feature complies with new hardware demands?
Why then Croteam has decided to switch to D3D, and so does EpicGames?
maybe because rumours said that the next windows version would not support opengl.
in that case, switching to direct x would be a management decision.
Then where is the Geoemtry Shader in OpenGL?
There’s no geometry shader in any existing version of D3D either. And there’s no geometry shader hardware, so it doesn’t matter.
Plus, unlike D3D, you have no idea what’s going on behind closed doors at the ARB. They could be sitting on a geometry shader extension spec and they could be just waiting for hardware so that they can release it.
D3D has streams, is not that feature complies with new hardware demands?
Streams are nonsense. They’re nothing. They are a concept that a decent hardware abstraction would abstract. Streams are a hardware concept that does not need to be exposed to the user.
Why then Croteam has decided to switch to D3D, and so does EpicGames?
Because they feel like it?
could someone explain “dx streams” to me? just what’s it good for?