Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

Lithtech 3D Engine Coming to Linux 70

Posted by emmett from the more-cool-games-for-the-penguin dept.
Phinn writes "Gamecenter is reporting that Monolith Productions is going to be bringing its Lithtech 3D graphics engine to Linux. Lithtech was closely developed with Microsoft and at one time was thought to become Microsoft's DirectEngine. You can get the complete story here."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Lithtech 3D Engine Coming to Linux More

Lithtech 3D Engine Coming to Linux

Comments Filter:
  • Do a search on LithTech, comes up with a story from the 20th, and from last November.

  • Insight (Score:3)

    by neildogg ( 119502 ) on Monday January 24, 2000 @08:33AM (#1342765) Homepage
    "The LithTech engine was, at one time, developed "by Monolith under the supervision of Microsoft." According to Monolith CEO Jason Hall, Monolith is no longer officially associated with Microsoft, and the former alliance does not pose any potential problems now that LithTech is expanding to another operating system."

    Funny that a company has to clarify that their former association with Microsoft will not post a threat. Big Brother Microsoft in action!

  • "The LithTech engine was, at one time, developed "by Monolith under the supervision of Microsoft." According to Monolith CEO Jason Hall, Monolith is no longer officially associated with Microsoft, and the former alliance does not pose any potential problems now that LithTech is expanding to another operating system."

    Funny that a company has to clarify that their former association with Microsoft will not pose a threat. Big Brother Microsoft in action!

  • Ironic (Score:3)

    by 348 ( 124012 ) on Monday January 24, 2000 @08:40AM (#1342767) Homepage
    From the article Monolith CEO Jason Halltated:

    "As part of our business strategy, it is important for Monolith to make the LithTech development system available to as many developers and platforms as possible--so in that vein, we opted to support Linux. It is an interesting platform. We are excited about its future possibilities, with LithTech available as a development system for it."

    The article also states that the Mac port is coming out after they complete the Linux support. This is great news, not being an "Oh yeah, we'll port to Linux also". I really liked the fact that they state clearly that the project was developed under supervision of MS but the ties with Redmond have been severed. I wonder if Ms contracted Monolith to do this, then for whatever reason fell out of favor and not Monolith is using Ms paid for development to support the Linux community. Ironic 'eh?

    Never knock on Death's door:

  • To our programmer friends out there: How tough is this port going to be? If I remember correctly, Lithtech was originally called Direct Engine and was supposed to be 100% Direct X related/compatable. I'm not sure how much that changed before the final release of Shogo, but I don't remember a native glide version so I would assume that it's still very Direct X dependant. How tough would it be to retool the engine with the same functions/features for Linux is it was so Windows dependant? Chris

  • Oh, lord, no, please don't let me lose those karma points

    Seriously, though, who cares about karma? I was just pointing out that this story, even though it's got a new link in it, is just duplicating a story that ran just a few days ago. And as such, I don't really think it was necessary to post it.

  • I was downloading a BeOS update. Thanks for the support though

  • This announcement may or may not improve the image Linux has with the domestic consumer. But as someone with a marketing background, I have to say, it just doesn't "smell right" to me.

    I have been monitoring the whole "open source" phenomenon since its very beginnings, almost 3 years ago, and I am constantly amazed at the lack of marketing-savvy demonstrated by the commercial entities behind the Linux operating system.

    Spare a thought for how the poor consumer must be confused. Linux seems to market itself to what can only be described as the "Rocket Scientist" demographic.

    When I first started dabbling with Linux, I was amazed to find that there was no DirectX compatibility. Instead I had to use something called OpenGL.

    Now I am pretty technical, having installed NT and Windows98 on my PC at home (and am trusted to re-boot the Exchange server when our support guys are not around), but even I was at a loss when confronted with this techno-babble and garbled nonsense.

    Don't the guys behind Linux realise that if they want it to succeed in the marketplace as a consumer platform, they must offer support for the "industry standard" for games (DirectX) rather than the proprietory (and according to many graphics industry experts, technically inferior) OpenGL ?

    I have years of experience in marketing, but the message which comes across from Linux (and to a lesser extent from FreeBSD) seems to be screw the customer, if he can't figure it out.

    Don't get me wrong, I think Linux has potential to equal Microsoft in terms of stability and ease-of-use, but until we get decent support, via Wizards or similar technology, naive consumers will be left, as I was, wondering how the hell they are supposed to modify the registry, and this is where a platform stands or falls. Not by being complex and unstable (like Linux) but rather by giving the consumer an enhanced out-of-the-box experience. Think AOL, or the old-style Microsoft Network

    In conclusion, without DirectX support, Linux is going nowhere, fast.

    Again I offer this "open-source" marketing advice for free.

  • I get the impression that Linux was a bit more of an afterthought that you make it seem.. according to the article, the Mac and Amiga ports "will be ready as soon as possible", while the Linux port won't be out until the second quarter of this year. Closer to the beginning of the article, it mentions that the Mac and Amiga ports have been in the works for a while, and the Linux port was just added to the deal.

    Still, though, I agree that the CEO's tone is a good sign. Sounds like they're excited about the port, rather than just kind of grudgingly allowing it. Very cool.
  • I see what you mean, I've read this a couple of times, then crawled thru their web site looking for a little more definition on release dates but couldn't fined any.

    According to Hall, the Amiga and Macintosh ports will be ready as soon as possible. The Linux port, meanwhile, is scheduled for availability in the second quarter of 2000.

    I guess it could be taken either way, however your right about it's good they're pumped about supporting the Linux community.

    Never knock on Death's door:

  • Re:Linux has a serious problem with its image. (Score:5)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24, 2000 @09:16AM (#1342776)
    1. The "open source" phenomenon has been going on longer than three years. Thanks for tuning in.
    2. OpenGL is more of an industry standard than DirectX, which is a MS-Only technology. OpenGL is used on MS and EVERYWHERE else (mac, linux, beos, etc)
    3. DirectX IS Proprietary, being designed and implemented ONLY by Microsoft.
    4. It's obvious you're a marketing person and have NO technical experience with Linux.
    5. Linux already surpasses MS in stability. Yes, it has work to go on ease of use.
    6. "Support" for wizards? These are simply dialogs. Linux has "support" for these in any UI.
    7. There is NO Registry on Linux and IMHO this is a GOOD thing.
    8. A Registry (and a utility to edit it) is NOT where a "platform stands or falls". The registry only exists on Win32 platforms. A platform's success rides on many things, none of which is the registry or a regedit facility.
    9. Without DirectX support, Linux is going everywhere because it uses OPEN and NON-PROPRIETARY graphics standards which are being supported more and more every day by the gaming community. See Loki's website for the expanding list of titles. Also, id software, epic games, etc.
    10. You're free advice is blatantly wrong and full of unresearched and non-defendable positions.

    I don't have a login to Slashdot (thus the AC), but my name is Mark Zuber and my email address is mark@nospam.zube.com.
  • I suspect that a lot will depend on how well the original code is written. If it was written well in an object-oriented manner, then it'll be MUCH easier to port than it would be if it's written sloppily. But regardless, if it's 100% Direct X then it will probably be a fairly major undertaking to port it to any other OS. As a further complication, the state of 3D graphics in Linux, while it has improved drastically recently, is still pretty abyssmal. I suspect XFree86 4.0 will help out quite a bit with this, though.

    Okay, I just went back ane read the article. They've already at least started (if not finished) an OpenGL renderer for the Mac version. That means that most of the work needed for the linux port is already done. Also, based on the comments in the article about renderers, it sounds like the game is VERY modularly written which means that ports should be relatively easy.

    Good job, Monolith! It's good to hear that at least some companies are still writing good, clean code.

    Cheers,
    Perrin.
  • I think we need a new section for companies coming out of the closet and seeing the light!?

    Everyday, we get a few articles on so-and-so company is now porting to/supporting linux.

    Don't get me wrong, it's very good news, but I think it's so common now that it deserves its own seciton.

    What do you think?
  • Hmmm...I'm not really sure whether this was intended as a troll or not, but I'm going to pretend that it's not because it actually has some really insightful stuff to say.

    I'll start by responding to the errors that make me wonder whether it's a troll. First of all the reference to OpenGL as proprietary while suggesting a Direct X port. OpenGL is not particularly proprietary any more (hence the "Open" part), and it available for most platforms currently in use. Furthermore, Direct X is absolutely proprietary. Second Correction: Linux is way more stable than MS OS's and much harder to use. It definately has the potential to be as easy to use as MS OS's.

    Okay, now to respond to the stuff I liked: You are absolutely right about Linux being next to impossible for the common user. It has improved greatly in the last year or so, but we still have a VERY long way to go. I'm a senior Computer Science major at a well known university (which probably means aproximately dick), so I'm pretty technically inclined. I've been using Linux since my freshman year. Usually when I want to learn something new about Linux I go to the man page or the HOWTO. Sometimes this helps me. Sometimes it's like another language. When somebody as technically inclined as I am can't even understand the documentation, we definately have a problem.

    OTOH, I'm pretty happy with the fact that linux documentation even exists. I love the man system. It's just that we still have quite a ways to go before Linux is ready for the common user's desktop.

    As for a port of Direct X, I think that would be pretty cool. I also think that it's extremely unlikely (if it's even possible). I have a feeling that anybody who even tried would get their asses handed to them by MS's legal department. Too bad, though. I suspect that'd result in a huge number of linux game ports.

    Cheers,
    Perrin.
  • My god! Registry?!? AOL!?! MSN!!!!! My god! You think installing Windows 98 qualifies you as technically inclined? Who cares if Linux is targeted at rocket scientists? We don't want retards who don't know what a mouse is trying to use linux. As for your industry experts, tell them to pick up a book and learn something. I do get you wrong. Linux is already more stable than windows, and ease of use is purely based on your intelligence. We refuse to cater to the stupid! We cater to ourselves. If linux ever ends up like AOL I will start shooting the programmers. You are right.. screw the customer if he cant figure it out. We provide enough information to the customer to kill a large herd of blue whales, if, in all that information, he/she can't figure it out, then screw him/her. We don't brake for idiots who refuse to take the time to learn! Take your free advise and cram it in your windows box.

    ~Jester

  • Re:How difficult would the port be? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Between XiG, Daryll and Carmack, calling 3D support on Linux abysmall is a bit of an overstatement. Furthermore, if a hardware abstraction layer is properly done then building software before the hardware acceleration is fully exploited shouldn't be a problem.
  • End users don't need a 'better marketing perspective'. They need some assurance that they can buy the best thing for their needs. It might occur to them someday that an iMac or BeOS fits their needs.

    Open systems means that they are free to choose what they like and are less likely to be forcibly subjected to crap for no other reason than they can't go elsewhere.

    Just ask them how they would like it if they could only drive chevy's or could only listen to "hair bands".

    Furthermore, this DirectX vs. GL thing is way esoteric for them anyways. All they care about is whether or not it's available and works as expected. They don't care how long a port take; they just care about the end product.

    It's the geek programmers that actually write the games that are relevant in a DirectX vs. GL pissing match.

    As long as they see Quake3 or SimCity3000 available for the target platform, how it got there is rather irrelevant to them.
  • A voice of reason from left field. Nicely written.

    There have been much more difficult ports done in the past. If the acceleration challenge is the hardest part, the port should be fairly straightforward. I would think it would be much easier to port to Linux than it would be to port the same to a Mac.

    Never knock on Death's door:

  • Is it warm under that bridge?

    No goats here.

    Besides my Big Brother Microsoft will be coming along any minute now. He is much fatter than I.
  • screw the customer if he cant figure it out

    Nice one. That's really going to help with bringing Linux to the world, isn't it?

    Developers go where the market is.
    The market is where the non-technical people are.
    Educate these people. If you 'screw' them, you screw Linux.
  • Not sure, since I have never ported anything to Linux from Windows, but I do know that when Monolith released the Shogo Source code (or SDK, something along those lines), it was coded in pure MFC, which is not-portable. I would make the assumption that since they are porting the engine, it's mostly C++ and not MFC. Either way, they have probably had to rewrite quite a bit of it.
  • Just be glad Monolith themselves aren't making the port. They're a really unreliable company. I bought the game--Windows version--last year, and am still awaiting their AMD 3dNow! enhancements patch. They promised this back when they released the game. The latest patch available is v2.2 which states, in the readme:


    - Added support for AMD's 3DNow! technology (thanks to Jayeson Lee-Steere
    at AMD for helping us implement support). If you have an AMD 3DNow!
    compliant CPU, you can enable this feature by selecting d3d3dnow.ren
    under the Display button in the Shogo launcher. Enabling this feature
    should provide about a 5%-15% speed improvement. NOTE: Enabling this
    feature on non-AMD hardware may cause unpredictable results.

    NOTE: We will release the d3d3dnow.ren as a separate upgrade patch
    shortly after the release of the 2.2 patch. Check the Shogo
    website for the most recent info www.shogo-mad.com.



    ..the readme's dated 3-9-1999..

    That was my first and last purchase of a Monolith product; they've proven to me that they don't take their userbase seriously.

    (Another amusing fact about Shogo; the soundtrack is awesome..! But Monolith chopped up the bgm into little eencie weencie .wav files, and named them randomly to keep people from enjoying it outside of the game. THEN they have the nerve to try and sell me a seperate audio cd with the exact same BGM on it..!!)

    *grumble* *grumble* ...


    James
  • True about the abstraction layer. As for the abysmall bit, I was referring to the current state of linux 3D support which IS abysmall. As for XiG, Daryll, and Carmack, I have high hopes. I don't really expect the 3D support to remain abysmall for much longer. I was simply referring to how it is at this moment. Believe me, I have high hopes for the near future. =)

    Cheers,
    Perrin.
  • Okay, now to respond to the stuff I liked: You are absolutely right about Linux being next to impossible for the common user. It has improved greatly in the last year or so, but we still have a VERY long way to go.

    No, we're here now. My wife now uses Linux happily - she's pretty much technically clueless - doesn't even know how to copy a file - but she knows how to start ppp, she knows how to start netscape, kmail, etc, and she knows how to surf. Actually, she knows how to do electronic funds transfer using netscape :-) Anyway, the point is she doesn't need to read man pages, she just needs to know how to click icons. My friends kids use Linux - they know how to run games, get on the internet, mail messages to dad over the family network :-) I guess, soon they'll know how to get root... (suggestion: watch daddy's fingers carefully when he logs in)^H^H^H^H^H^H^H[CENSORED]

    I'm a senior Computer Science major at a well known university (which probably means aproximately dick), so I'm pretty technically inclined. I've been using Linux since my freshman year. Usually when I want to learn something new about Linux I go to the man page or the HOWTO. Sometimes this helps me. Sometimes it's like another language. When somebody as technically inclined as I am can't even understand the documentation, we definately have a problem.

    Not everybody has to read the man pages, but thank goodness they're their, so when I go to troubleshoot somebodies computer, I don't have to keep it all in my head.
  • I wouldn't count on that. Amid the ignorance, there were actually some insightful comments. I still haven't decided for sure whether or not I think it's a troll. In general I'm treating it like it's not.

    Cheers,
    Perrin.
  • You're right.. i phrased it badly.. i was in a flurry of hatred for humanity when i wrote it. I meant screw those people who are unwilling to learn or even try for that matter. I don't hate those who can't figure it out (hell that is me most of the time). I hate those who think that they don't need to know anything and that everything should work for them anyway. I'm a lot more tolerent than I sound. Just not tolerent of the lazy.

    ~Jester

  • Re:At least Monolith isn't doing the port.. (Score:3)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24, 2000 @12:39PM (#1342804)
    Heya, my name's Chris Hedberg, and I work at Monolith. Yes, I'm an anonymous coward. I have too many %#$@ing passwords already; sue me. :) 1) I bought the game--Windows version--last year, and am still awaiting their AMD 3dNow! enhancements patch. -Ugh, sorry. Yeah, we know. We had a lot of trouble with, around, over and under that 3DNow renderer. The simple upshot: We only have so many coders to go around, and they are *always* overworked. Being a small company, we can't just throw more money at the problem, or more people. As a result, AMD tried to write a renderer for us. Naturally, since they were rewriting a very sensitive glob of code without experience (and a glob of code outsiders ain't s'posed to have to much with) it came out as buggy as a compost heap. Since they couldn't fix things and we didn't have the developer to spare to clean it up, we had to let it go by the wayside. We still have a good relationship with AMD, and we still WANT to add support, but it would take a lot of work. Note that there's no SSI optimization for Shogo/Blood 2 either. :( Believe me, if you bring up the subject of 3DNow with anyone from the Lithtech engine team, they're appropriately red-faced. All we can do is try to keep it from happening again. 2) But Monolith chopped up the bgm into little eencie weencie .wav files, and named them randomly to keep people from enjoying it outside of the game. -Er, blame Microsoft IMA for that. That's how Interactive Music Architechture demanded that you lay out your sound clips in order to make interactive music from 'em. You may not notice, but our music plays back in different, changing sequences depending on the action taking place. The "random" names are actually common in Lith engine games for dialog sound clips, string files and other resources. Believe it or not it makes them easier to track 'n' use. :) -Chris H.
  • From other articles I've read on this topic it appears that Monolith had contracted out Mac and Amiga ports of their game Shogo, and has recently expanded the porting contract to include a Linux port of the entire Lithtech engine, not just a specific game.

  • I met Jason Hall at a LAN party where he demo'd a beta of Shogo prior to its release. At that time he explained that Monolith and Microsoft had disolved their relationship over creative differences in the development of Shogo (originally titled "Riot: Mobile Armor"). Monolith paid a large sum of money to Microsoft in order to take full ownership of the game property, so there is definitely no residual MS funding of this port, as ironic and amusing as that might be.
  • I'm not one of the company's founders, but here's a look back in a nutshell:

    The founders at Monolith (before Monolith existed), did a demo CD, showcasing some of the things they could do. It found its way into the hands of Microsoft who hired them to make a game sampler. They invested the money and started Monolith Productions.

    The engine, as far as I know, was jointly developed by Microsoft and Monolith at first. Then Monolith didn't agree with the direction Microsoft wanted to take it. So Monolith bought it back from Microsoft - one of the few times someone has bought out technology from MS and not the other way around.

    I do work at Monolith, but not on the engine team. So this is my own understanding, and may not be the company line :)

    Best regards,

    SEAL

  • This engine handles soundfx, music, and networking, in addition to graphics. Porting it to Linux will involve some work, but as others have pointed out - it has already been ported to other platforms. The code, at least in its latest incarnation, is more-or-less written with portability in mind.

    Best regards,

    SEAL
  • This seems like a very reasonable comment. He says nothing that would make me doubt who he is and his comments make a lot of sense. Yo moderators, ACs have something to say too!
  • Perhaps somebody reminded them of the way MS handled the "joint development" of OS/2 with IBM, and Monolith saw the lack of light at the end...
  • I was astonished by the lack of knowledge that
    oozes from this posting, and it seems as if you
    were in Microsoftmarketing. Were you?

    You seem to have no knowledge of Linux whatsoever,
    which makes me think that you haven't monitored
    anything.
    First of all, Linux is not unstable. Why do you
    think it has a higher market share in webservers
    than Windows NT-server, but not in places that doesn't need that much stability?
    A well maintained Linuxbox can keep up for years without crashing, you can't say that about NT-server.
    You were amazed to find "no DirectX compatibility". Have you seen any platforms apart
    from windows using DirectX? No?
    That's because it is DirectX that is proprietary.
    It is Windows-only, and that is because Microsoft
    doesn't want to release it for any other platform.
    OpenGL however, is open, and ported to a great amount of platforms (Linux, Irix, Solaris, FreeBSD, BeOS, any other Unix..etc.).

    Wizards is very possible, but there are plenty
    of areas that need attention before they come along. I give you one point here. Newbies like wizards.

    But why on earth are you bringing the registry into this? The registry is a very poor idea implemented by Microsoft. It is cryptic, and is impossible to read and understand by human eyes.
    Linux however uses text-files for configuration.
    I agree that graphical-frontends are necessary (and partly there already), but putting everything
    in one big, enormous file, is not the way to go.

    What happenes if a program screws up, and you can't repair the registry using a "wizard". (A wizard can only handly very typical situations).
    You can't possibly edit the registry by hand, it's to cryptic. If the information had been stored in a text-file, readable by humans, you could have just located the file, and fixed it.

    My last point is about DirectX being better than OpenGL. You say that "many experts think that OpenGL is technically inferior to DirectX".
    You submit no proof whatsover. Submit a testimony,
    and the opposite can always be found.
    The truth is that the "experts" do not agree on
    this matter, and hopefully, the open solution will win.
    Your last remark: "without DirectX support, Linux is going nowhere, fast.". This of course translates into: "Linux is never going anywhere, period", because you will never see DirectX for Linux (you would have, but Microsoft cancelled all attemps at it being cross-plattform, when they bought it).
    Does this mean that Linux is screwed?
    Of course not. Linux is making progress both
    in usability and usermass very quickly.
    So I guess your argument must be wrong.
  • Yeah, maybe opengl is included with OS's now, but without a supported (read: more expensive) 3D accelerator, opengl is slow.

    Perhaps as people get more 3d-savvy the lack of opengl support will fade.
    But I have never heard of a 3D card that Direct3D won't run accelerated.
    And most games that have both D3D and GL run faster and more stably on D3D (on all the PC's i've used, at least).

    But then again, you're an AC.
    >but I guess you couldn't be bothered to check facts before making yourself look like an idiot on a public forum.

    (hypocrite!)

    --
    Talon Karrde
  • Can you wife install linux though, and set up the PPP and other tools?

    Anybody can set up windows.....
    well unless you're a carrot.

    And if you're a carrot you're asking to get stewed.
    --
    Talon Karrde
  • You mean /etc/* right?
    That would be the closest equivelent to a registry.

    Perhaps somebody (not me, i know dick-asll about progamming) could make a simple program which shows all the files in /etc in a regedit-like view, and when clicked on in the left pain, opens the file for editing in the right pane.
    Of course it would save backups, etc.

    A nice GNOME/KDE interface and some simple HTML help, and you've got Linux "Regedit". Believe it or not, I think power users would appreciate this as much as "lusers".

    --
    Talon Karrde
  • > you would have, but Microsoft cancelled all attemps at it being cross-plattform, when they bought it

    They bought it? Who made it originally?

    >impossible to read and understand by human eyes

    And you can set up linux? Wow, you're stupid and smart simultaneously! Regedit keys make perfect sense. A bit of help might... help (need a synonym!), but most people don't have to edit the registry to hange program setup values. Program setup values are done with nice "Control Panel" boxes (example, KDE's setup in Linux is similar).

    The average joe shouldn't have to go and use... joe (running out of synonym jokes :) to edit text files to set up his computer.
    The ability should be there but you shouldn't have to use it: read, manual-override if neccesary, auto-pilot for everybody else.

    I know Linux pretty well, and I don't like editing text files. I would like nice graphical config just as much as a newbie. Of course, steps are being made in this direction: and to the authors of these programs, I say: keep at it!

    --
    Talon Karrde
  • A registry is a piss poor idea. Programs should run independently of system level configuration options. A registry is a bad idea in the same way that copying proprietary drivers into the system directory is a bad idea. this thinking put pieces and parts of programs all over your disk and you never have a clear idea how much space your application is taking up.
    also, if your uninstall information is deleted, corrupted, you are unable to uninstall the program completely unless you know exactly where all files are, whether they are shared files, and what registry keys the installer put in.

    The way that Unix has accomplished the task of configuration for many years is the most logical way. It is certainly a bit more complex and having a graphical configuration utility that could assist with configuration of multiple applications from one gui is a good idea, but puttig all configation data into one file is twisted logic.

    maybe the solution is to put all configuration files into one directory or as much as possible..

    oh yeah.. they already do that.. its called /etc/ and anyone who has used unix/linux for mor than an hour can figure out how to cat/more any file in there, figure out where it belongs.. assuming the name of the file is not self explanatory.

    LW

  • Go with OpenGL (Score:3)

    by Animats ( 122034 ) on Monday January 24, 2000 @05:42PM (#1342822) Homepage
    There's a lot to be said for a straight OpenGL implementation. Trying to implement Direct-X for Linux is never going to work well; you'll always be a round behind Microsoft. They're up to what, Direct-X 7, now? And as John Carmack puts it, Direct-X is "broken". It's worth noting that Microsoft's graphics innovations have generally bombed; Talisman and Chrome come to mind.

    OpenGL's time has come. Originally, it was intended for expensive high-end graphics machines with exotic hardware like fast FPUs, 24-bit color, Z-buffers, and matrix multipliers. Now, everybody has that stuff. Direct-X started life as a scheme to export low-level hardware capabilities like page-flipping to Windows apps.

    Other than as part of a compatibility package for Windows apps, why would you want something similar to Direct-X on Linux?

  • OpenGL is called "Open" GL because it's *not* proprietary. SGI released OpenGL many years ago to a standards committee. I really doubt there are any "graphics experts" out there who will agree that Direct3D is technically superior to OpenGL. What OpenGL accomplished in Terminator 2 still blows away anything the PC could hope to offer, now years later. That said, I do agree Linux needs some serious marketing help. But first, it needs some serious desktop help, in both stability and ease of use. SGI & nVIDIA have partnered to develop OpenGL on Linux. Let's just hope OpenGL, Mesa, and related hardware accelerated 3D and media API's remain open source and have some higher level interfaces so that game developers are really tempted to use them!
  • WARNING! Shameless plug ahead.

    I'd like to misuse this oportunity to point people to a 3D engine that is already available for Linux. This is Crystal Space. It is Open Source and very portable. It currently runs on Linux, Windows, OS/2, BeOS, Macintosh, DOS, FreeBSD, SGI, Solaris, NextStep, OpenStep, MacOS/X, ... It can use OpenGL, Direct3D, Glide, or software rendering.

    Some of the features are: volumetric fog, halos, 3D triangle mesh objects with dynamic LOD and frame based or skeletal animation, dynamic colored lights with soft shadows, ROAM landscape engine, portals, octree visibility, general scripting mechanism (Python scripting included), curved bezier surfaces, ...

    URL: http://crystal.linuxgames.com

    Note that Crystal Space is still work in progress. It works reasonably well already but some things are not implemented properly. We are working on it. There is a rather active developers team busy with Crystal Space. You can join too!

    Greetings,
  • According to the Hacker lexicon [tuxedo.org]
    Term coined in March 1998 following the Mozilla release to describe software distributed in source under licenses guaranteeing anybody rights to freely use, modify, and redistribute, the code.
    As for the rest - the directx guy is a pretty lame. Strikes me as someone who's read too many PC magazines.
    .oO0Oo.
  • Aren't these 2 different products?

  • "'industry standard' for games (DirectX) rather than the proprietory (and according to many graphics industry experts, technically inferior) OpenGL"

    Huh?? Sorry, but your sentence makes no sense, OpenGL is far more open than Direct3D. Completely open-source implementations exist for OpenGL (Mesa3D for example.) OpenGL also runs on a much wider variety of platforms than does DirectX.

    I'm sure an 'industry expert' like John Carmack might be inclined to disagree with your assessment.

    Comparing OpenGL to DirectX is like comparing apples to oranges. However, it does make a lot more sense to compare OpenGL to Direct3D. As someone with industry experience in both, OpenGL is in my opinion by far a more well designed API. It has been around much longer (since about 1992, IIRC) and has always been way ahead of Direct3D. Direct3D has only just begin to catch up to OpenGL (and may only now begin to overtake OpenGL if nobody starts working on an OpenGL 2.0.)

    Moreover, the current trend in the games industry is towards OpenGL. Remind me again what Quake3 uses? Many of the newer games on the market support OpenGL. The only reason Direct3D spent a few years as the "industry standard" 3D API was not because Direct3D was better, but because very few cards had working accelerated drivers for OpenGL. This has changed.

    I personally never want to see DirectX on Linux. I would rather see something like SDL (Simple Directmedia Layer) become some sort of cross-platform games API standard (the latest development version of SDL has OpenGL support.)

    As a marketing person, I suggest you learn at least a little bit about the technologies you market. At least that way you might sound like you know what you are talking about. And yes, I do have industry experience doing 3D graphics programming, both in Windows and Linux, and in OpenGL and Direct3D.

    I offer this "open-source" technical advice for free.

  • I pity you for being stuck with so much Micros~1 stuff lying around. I've got a PC here with no direct X on it. It's running Debian woody, and it hasn't even had a DOS partition for months (and it's going to stay that way.)
    #define X(x,y) x##y
  • Oh yeah, and did you notice that the default text for the 3d text screensave is "OpenGL"? This is not a coincidence. Micros~1 has (AFAIK good) support for OpenGL. It is a standard on the Windoze platform and elsewhere. (having grown out of SGI's SGIGL, IIRC).
    #define X(x,y) x##y

Slashdot Top Deals

A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable. -- Thomas Jefferson

Close