1. If you start learning 3d programming use OpenGL and glut, this will bring you to speed faster than Dx7 D3D (perhaps Dx8 will make things easier - let''s wait and see (*sarcastic mode on* and Dx9 will be ... *sarcastic mode off*)).

2. MadKeith is right. Learn the basics of both and decide on your requeriments what to use.

3. Requierements? You want to go multi plattform? OpenGL is the only choice.

4. X-Box is comming, Playstation is there... well reread MadKeiths post and design a 3d API interface which allows you to switch between OpenGL and Dx? and Playstation-specifics on the fly.

5. Back on track: for you 2d problem, design an abstract interface which simpliefies your further programming and fill this interface with whatever suits your needs. Perhaps OpenGL''s 3d is a little overkill...

Bjoern
--
Sportteams, cars, computer processors, graphiccards and 3d APIs - just synonyms for flamewars!

Relly simple selection for me -> Ive got only one comp, and no way im going to install linux or beos on it, because i wanna work and play games from time to time, not spend my time admiring how great and stable my opsys is. So when programming graphics i dont care about cross-platform anyways, as i do it mostly for my own fun. Directx includes all that one would need for interfacing with hardware in game programming -> sound, input and graphics. Its often updated to match advances and features of hardware. There is no piece of harware that wouldnt do dx under windows ( havent seen one anyways ). SDK is a free download and pretty good documentation. Its pretty easy to learn. I know Dx3 was piece of shit, but thats history.
So why would i want to choose OpenGL ?

BTW, both of them fall by far short if we are not talking scanline rendering, but raytracing or voxelz, so theres room for new APIs ( can glide make a resurrection ? 3dfx bought gigapixel and who knows whats coming from there ? )

-kertropp

C:\Projects\rg_clue\ph_opt.c(185) : error C3142: 'PushAll' :bad idea
C:\Projects\rg_clue\ph_opt.c(207) : error C324: 'TryCnt': missing point

I think the fact that the OpenGL people are able to back up their preference with information and the Direct3D people are tending towards the ''short, uninformative, and abusive'' side tells us something...

facts? not exactly facts but heres why i choose DX. Rate each aspect on 10points scale, and multiply it with importance.

______________________OpenGL__DX_GLide_importance
-----------------------------------------
available platforms_______8____4____3___/__5x
supported hware___________6____8____2___/__5x
features up-to-date_______7___10____5___/__8x
game-programming specific_6___10____?(6)/_10x
code cleanness____________9____7____?(7)/__9x
-----------------------------------------
________________________267__303____188

See ? 'importance' is totally subjective, this represents my opinion ONLY. Also, some of the rating numbers are somewhat arguable ( dont know about glide that much ), but not in big range.



-kertropp

C:\Projects\rg_clue\ph_opt.c(185) : error C3142: 'PushAll' :bad idea
C:\Projects\rg_clue\ph_opt.c(207) : error C324: 'TryCnt': missing point

Edited by - kertropp on June 9, 2000 1:28:15 PM

OHHH, why does the board delete all extra spaces ? anyone know how to insert *tabs* here ? anyways, the numbers were meant to be in a table, with sums under them etc.

I have been programming with COM for 7 years now (or OLE, or ActiveX, or DCOM, and now COM+ - not even the name is consistent). I have developed DCOM servers, MTS distributed applications, COM GUI components, E-Commerce sites using COM components on the backend, and I have even built a game engine using the COM interface to DirectX from VB.

Let me sum it up by saying that COM is a bloated disaster. The underlying idea is great, but Microsoft''s implementation of that idea gives one the impression of trying to put jet wings and ballet slippers on a hippopotamus.

I could fill up PAGES of text with all the bugs, inconsistencies, and performance problems I have encountered as my career as a professional developer. If Microsoft did not have such a strangle hold over the OS market COM would have been blown away and replaced with something that works. As it stands (particularly in small businesses) there are no other alternatives, although we have had some recent success getting clients to adopt EJB solutions.

But that''s just my opinion, I could be wrong...

(the last line is plagerized from Dennis Miller, who as far as I know hasn''t applied for a patent on the phrase yet)

How come noone realizes that it''s not the matter of "better" or "worse". It''s not the matter of preference, either. Each API is good for different purposes. Period. In some cases DX is better, in some cases OGL is better. It all depends on your goals. There is nothing to argue about.

Qoy - In response to your question, ID only made a port of Quake III for linux and even that is in the hands of LOKI, a company that ports most of the major games for Windows on Linux.

All - Well, I would just like to put my two cents in there, the best way to go is to make a 3D engine that supports both openGL & DX. For that there are 2 great 3D engine namely: Jet3D ( www.jet3d.com ) & Genesis3D ( www.genesis3d.com ). Although I think they are made using DX but I can''t say for sure.. Never checked the sources.

Cyberdrek
Headhunter Soft
DLC Multimedia
Two Guys Soft

>> Linux, mac? Well. Nobody owns a mac, and linux users got no money so it''s not commercially viable. <<

Not everyone''s in it for the money you know

/. Muzzafarath
Mad House Software

HOw did a question about the 2d capabilities of opengl end up as another api war????
Oh well my turn:-
Who cares, both do the job, both are widely supported, both are good. Some people find COM ok, others don''t get it, that doesn''t nessicarily make them bad coders its just that there Brain might not work ''The Microsoft way''. You have to work with what u got.

Seaman

{Just for the record I like openGL''s way of going about things but thats just -me-)