Back at some time, I heard Allegro was very good for game programming. Is it so? Thanks, Arthur(rockslave)

Allegro is VERY good for game programming.........if your going to program in DOS.......DJGPP and ALLEGRO are great for game programming. But as they say.......DOS is DEAD.
It is great as a start to learn to program as that is where I started learning to program games.........but if you are thinking of making something that you intend to sell......beter make it Windows and DirectX


"Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time"
- Monty Python and the Holy Grail
themGames Productions

Just thought I should add this bit. Allegro is now ported to Windows. This means that the code you wrote wirh Allegro for DOS will recompile rather easily for Windows using MSVC or Mingw32. There are supposed to be ports being made to BeOS as well. There alrady exists Linux support. So I think, yeah, Allegro is rather nice

FYI, the Windows version of allegro uses DirectX as well, so it''s speed is not much of a problem



========================================================
If something sounds stupid but works, it's not stupid

True, but, after reviewing the allegro library in its directx form I''ve found it rather slow. And a little bit buggy... for instance the direct input portion of the library seems lose exclusive mode access for no reason,... Other than those slight flaws, it''s an excellent library, with enough to teach the user about low level game library programming.


----
Windows and Unix suck, I''m going back to CP/M.

Tape_Worm

um, actually the DOS (djgpp) version of Allegro isn''t very good at all. (performance wise) It is the easiest library to learn I think I''ve ever seen. I have messed around with their Windows port a little. It isn''t bad, but you can do a whole lot more with writing your own DirectX code. One major letdown of Allegro is their pathetic 3d support. I just about fell out of my chair laughing when I was going through the documentation. BUT, there is a port of OpenGL that can be accessed through Allegro. AllegGL I think.
It''s pretty good. A lot faster than Allegro functions using DirectX. Oh well, that''s enough ranting for one day.

JoeMont001@aol.com

But for Allegro''s defense, they say in the doc that they (and i qoute)

"Allegro contains some 3d helper functions for manipulating vectors, constructing and using transformation matrices, and doing perspective projections from 3d space onto the screen. It is not, and never will be, a fully fledged 3d library (my goal is to supply generic support routines, not shrink-wrapped graphics code :-) but these functions may be useful for developing your own 3d code."

So, they do not claim to be a 3d lib...
The only drawback (that i''ve noticed) is that the .exe''s gets quite large.

========================
Game project(s):
www.fiend.cjb.net

But "Allegro" (with the soon coming version 4.0) will be portable to Windows, Unix (and Linux) and DOS WITHOUT CHANGING ONE SINGLE LINE OF CODE!!!
WINallegro consists of macros using DirectX...

Yours,

Indeterminatus

--consuetudo est quasi altera natura hominum...

THANX for you all guys! But, when we´ll this version 4.0 be released? Would it be good to start game programming?

Thanks, Arthur(rockslave)

Allegro already has a windows version ready to rock and roll, i''m using it at this moment.

Just in case anyone''s reading this and thinking ''but where is it?'', Allegro''s homepage can be found here.

TheTwistedOne
http://www.angrycake.com