OGRE. Good?

Ogre: Good. For 3D in 2D (as all current monitor-rendered graphics are ). It doesn''t do 2D at all.

Ogre is good, realiable, and fast(enough). I haven''t used it enough to be sure of "bug-free", but it has been well-written.

As for encapsulating it... Ogre? How much friggin'' encapsulation do you need? Ogre is extremely encapsulated, already hides the API, hardware, and video device from the programmer, and handles most scene management already. If you
need to encapsulate it further, you apparently need to use it for things it currently isn''t designed to do. Like, for instance, a 2D scroller.

I downloaded it once and found it to be a slow engine. Since then I haven''t cared much cause it is funnier to write your own (except the darn sound part!)


I am a signature virus. Please add me to your signature so that I may multiply.

alnite I started using OGRE recently, for pretty much the same reasons you gave, and I have to say I like it. Keep in mind it is just a graphics engine - there is no sound, and collision detection is still in the works (although it''s going to be more than just collision detection - they''re releasing a "spatial query" interface along with a collision detection implementation, but the spatial queries could also be used to implement line of sight, 3d sound, etc.).

I''ve found OGRE to be reliable and bug-free so far (I can''t remember seeing any posts in the OGRE forums about bugs other than memory leaks), and plenty fast for my needs. The support for scriptable materials, GUIs, and particle systems is also very nice.

The OGRE development community is also quite active. There are a number of nice 3rd party addons available such as scene description loaders and terrain plugins (with some nice features like paging and spline-based terrain).