Quote:
HTML5, JS, and CSS don't have complete support nor do the current implementation's always handle or present web pages the same way. Why do developers continue to use these open standards? The reason is that open and similar beats closed and different.Originally Posted by BizzareRide 
Not at all, I just mean that shared platforms doesn't equate to compatibility in the Open universe. DirectX can exist along side OGL for that very reason because we would still have compatibility issues otherwise.
If you plan to make your game multiplatform, then it should be designed as such from the start.
Developers should use the tools that they are most familiar and comfortable with, and not have to rely on some de facto(as well as de jure) standard. However, if given the choice between a closed standard + support and open standards, I choose the former.
Actually the 360, while having only a 33% market share accounts for 60%, almost 2/3rds, of the overall console gaming revenue. PS3 and Wii split the rest evenly, perhaps with more going towards the PS3.
The situation is the same in the server market where Windows has only a 40% marketshare yet accounts for 80% of server revenue.
This just goes to show that support and usability outweigh the benefits of the "open source" paradigm if you can even call OpenGL/Linux that. You can't just contribute code and have it standardized... There is still a consortium to contend with just as Microsoft controls Windows.
WP8 isn't making any money yet but it will be a huge step in the right direction since Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 will share the same native core. That means application will work out of the box for both platforms; there is no recompiling or porting necessary. I don't mean to come off as a fan boy, but I love technologies that are well supported.
Not at all, I just mean that shared platforms doesn't equate to compatibility in the Open universe. DirectX can exist along side OGL for that very reason because we would still have compatibility issues otherwise.
If you plan to make your game multiplatform, then it should be designed as such from the start.
Developers should use the tools that they are most familiar and comfortable with, and not have to rely on some de facto(as well as de jure) standard. However, if given the choice between a closed standard + support and open standards, I choose the former.
Actually the 360, while having only a 33% market share accounts for 60%, almost 2/3rds, of the overall console gaming revenue. PS3 and Wii split the rest evenly, perhaps with more going towards the PS3.
The situation is the same in the server market where Windows has only a 40% marketshare yet accounts for 80% of server revenue.
This just goes to show that support and usability outweigh the benefits of the "open source" paradigm if you can even call OpenGL/Linux that. You can't just contribute code and have it standardized... There is still a consortium to contend with just as Microsoft controls Windows.
WP8 isn't making any money yet but it will be a huge step in the right direction since Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 will share the same native core. That means application will work out of the box for both platforms; there is no recompiling or porting necessary. I don't mean to come off as a fan boy, but I love technologies that are well supported.
OpenGL is NOT open source. It is an open standard and many of the features are patent protected. A consortium is the only way to get consensus between companies (and for the record, Linux doesn't have a consortium per se as Linus holds the reigns fairly tight). It is to be expected that one company moving solely in its own interest will reach a conclusion faster, but that doesn't mean that the conclusion is better for other companies, developers, or consumers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbCorruption
So I really don't understand what you're arguing. Why should the superior DirectX be done away with if OpenGL plays nicely with Windows platforms? Because it doesn't work on Xbox and WP8? I doubt that would ever happen with the large install base of the 360. Microsoft is having no trouble attracting devs to develop for their console ... multiplatform games included. As for WP8, the solution to me sounds like WP8 should include support for OpenGL, because that is the standard among mobile devices.
So I really don't understand what you're arguing. Why should the superior DirectX be done away with if OpenGL plays nicely with Windows platforms? Because it doesn't work on Xbox and WP8? I doubt that would ever happen with the large install base of the 360. Microsoft is having no trouble attracting devs to develop for their console ... multiplatform games included. As for WP8, the solution to me sounds like WP8 should include support for OpenGL, because that is the standard among mobile devices.
Decent API's that allow a company to write software once (instead of rewriting again for another API) beats a slightly better API which forces a rewrite (rewriting would/does cost millions for AAA titles).
The biggest problem with OpenGL IMHO is still legacy support, but OpenGL ES 2.0 and OpenGL 4.x are moving away from that and the API's will get better.
Also, performance will be better if driver developers spend the development budget on implementing one API set rather than splitting the resources to support different API's.
Edited by hajile - 7/24/12 at 1:31pm
