DirectX vs OpenGL

Well, You should have said : D3d vs OpenGL. Since Direct X has other non 3D gfx related items like Direct sound, Direct play and Direct music.

For me I prefer D3D over OpenGL since it requires less coding experience and still gives nice results compred to OpenGL. But if you really let me choose the perfect API it would be Glide which made it's job perfectly and gave higher frame rates for voodoo cards. And when it was first introduced neither D3D nor OpenGL could compete it.

Just my personal opinion though ^_^ .

I'd say D3D too, the way things stands now D3D have many more functions, and you'll have to write a lot more yourself with openGL, unless you use something like openscene graph, which is mostly a set of functions for openGL already included in D3D.

The only reason to use openGL ( which could be a big one though ) is if you want to devellop for the PS3 in the future.

OpenGL is more portable

OpenGL.. it has to be, some of the best games were made in openGL afterall .. well, the best shooters anyway

This magazine looks Interesting. have any of you read it?

http://www.3dlinks.com/links.cfm?categoryid=3&subcategoryid=22

also this site looks neat.

http://www.3d02.com/

Ofcurse the both
opengl is the best, no match to direct3d.

It's funny how people who say openGL is best has ussualy not even tried D3D.

I have, i do not prefer most games running in D3D.. though i have to say HL2 i do like, that is D3D. They are both good, its just i like OpenGL from games that have been made on it before

LOL, I'm talking from a developers perspective here, I guess from a game perspective is intressing to though, Doom 3 is the only game I've seen that openGL has going for it, and well, to be perfectly honest that's just because Carmack wrote most of the advanved functions for that game himself

OpenGL has fairly simple and efficient portability & is easily modified and changed around by the coder, but function wise, it's limited in comparison to the ever growing D3D. OpenGL, as an API, doesn't determine how good games built around it will be.

CloudVII: You're thinking of the DirectX set as a whole.. this is a D3D (DirectX's 3D API) vs OGL.

Doom III does prove what can be done though, so comparing is pretty useless.

Cooliscool : read my post carefully. I stated It's not right to talk about DirectX as complete set . And asked to compare D3d to OpenGl instead ^_^

I saw you mentioning Glide... it's surpassed by now, but it used to be friggin' cool indeed.
NFS2SE with Glide was so awesome at the time ^^

*I was glad to discover Burnout 3 has a track that looks a lot like Last Resort (giant statue, jungle, beach - sounds familiar? )

The impression I get at the oment is that it is easier to do funky looking stuff in D3D, but OpenGL is more flexible. However, I'm looking at this from the end users perspective given that I'm not a programmer.

I'm really clueless here, since I'm no programmer. But I'd go for OpenGL just because of Pete's plugins

D3D seems to have more going for it but I also prefer OGL, and yes Glide was the best back when there were games for it. It was what made me such a 3dfx fanboy. But yeah, OGL for me!

ive been programming opengl and i can only say i dont like its concept. AT ALL. havent tried direct x yet though, very well possible that its even crappier.

Well, D3D does have more functions, as it's designed as a game-oriented 3D API.

I have to say OpenGL simply because it's cross-platform. With D3D you write for Windows, and maybe the X-Box. With OpenGL, you can write for Windows, Linux, Mac OS, and a bunch of other devices.

As a gamer, I prefer OGL, if I try OGL and D3D in any game that supports both modes,
OGL runs faster, and often, with better image quality.
Too bad HL2 is D3D only

OGL runs faster, and often, with better image quality.

Click to expand...

Out of curiosity what games are you refering to?