Notes from the Slippery Slope, Part 4

Pox · Postby **Pox** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 5:43 am

Indeed, writing for consoles is a smart move for IV, and as much as I hate to say it, the X360 is the best console out at the moment, mostly due to XBL. I do think they'll continue releasing OpenGL versions of their games for a long while though, as they seem to like catering for more than the mainstream gamer - keeps me happy. But they are a company, and they need to make money - and why wouldn't you take an opportunity like getting Darwinia+ on XBLA? We all know how much the Steam store boosted Darwinia and DEFCON sales, and a similar effect will be seen with XBLA, I'm sure.

Wasgood · Postby **Wasgood** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:46 am

shinygerbil · Postby **shinygerbil** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:06 am

Wasgood wrote:PS3?

It's dire. What about it?

Wasgood · Postby **Wasgood** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:24 am

What do you mean by dire?

Any chance of a PSN download.

Pox · Postby **Pox** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:46 am

Probably not, considering IV have actually been working with M$ on this.

ewanm · Postby **ewanm** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 11:18 am

But PS3 already uses OpenGL IIRC.

zach · Postby **zach** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 11:32 am

Yes, I'm fairly sure it uses some implementation of OpenGL, but it's not like you can just say "whoop, we coded this game using OpenGL among other libraries, let us compile it for EVERYTHING!" (It's close, though)

You will need the PS3 SDK. I think Sony released an 'indie-SDK'.
If not, the only available SDK costs around $11,000 if I recall correctly.

Wasgood · Postby **Wasgood** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 12:23 pm

Well I would just get it on PC anyways. Thats even if I buy it i've never been a fan enough of Darwinia to buy the multi.

Postby **NeoThermic** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:36 pm

ewanm wrote:But PS3 already uses OpenGL IIRC.

No, it uses OpenGL ES. The difference is enough to make any porting require a good amount of rewriting. For example, OpenGL ES lacks glBegin/glEnd; you must do everything in OpenGL ES using vertex arrays.

As noted, this is a deal with Microsoft. I'd wager the contract has very little room to allow IV to also go with Sony in making a PS3 version.

NeoThermic

ewanm · Postby **ewanm** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 5:25 pm

Ah, I didn't know exact details.

brog · Postby **brog** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 6:14 pm

_xavieran wrote:OpenGL is much better than DirectX anyway...

DirectX is better. OpenGL hasn't really been keeping up.

I use OpenGL myself.

ewanm · Postby **ewanm** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 6:27 pm

Having used both, I would disagree. But then I'm also a Linux user, so has some bias.

prophile · Postby **prophile** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:26 pm

Having used both APIs extensively, I still firmly believe OpenGL runs rings around Direct3D.

As to OpenGL ES lacking immediate mode: well, you shouldn't really be using immediate mode in production code anyway. It's convenient for prototyping, but shouldn't be used beyond that. Assuming the PS3 has good support for floating-point operations then other than the shader/fullscreen effects like the pixel effect, an OpenGL ES version should be feasable for most OpenGL 3D engines.

Whether or not other APIs are compatible or the control system would be convenient is a different matter.

Postby **NeoThermic** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:33 pm

prophile wrote:As to OpenGL ES lacking immediate mode: well, you shouldn't really be using immediate mode in production code anyway.

One didn't say it lacked immediate mode. Lacking glBegin/glEnd prevents you from doing display lists. Why have the overhead of a vertex array when you're never going to modify the data? Especially if the data is called every frame, or even a few times a frame.

However, I agree, one should never use immediate mode in production code.

NeoThermic

skull13 · Postby **skull13** » Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:19 pm

So, Chris. Does this mean that when Multiwinia comes out, us Mac and Linux and Windows users can play against those 360 users?

That would kick ass...

Notes from the Slippery Slope, Part 4

Who is online