Zandronum

OpenGL is more or less a discontinued hardware renderer, where as DirectX is constantly undergoing changes and updates. So why not make a change?

Because you're horribly, horribly wrong. Just looking at OpenGL's site shows very recent activity (2 days ago), and OpenGL is basically the only option for scientific research, supercomputers, and non-Windows machines. DirectX only has influence in the gaming world, and even then, only on Windows.

You're basically advocating completely scrapping a perfectly serviceable and cross-platform renderer, and replacing it with something that only limits Zandronum, and which would take many hundreds of man-hours to get working, not to mention debug.

It's staying.

Ijon Tichy wrote: DirectX only has influence in the gaming world, and even then, only on Windows.

Another way to put this is that Zandronum is Linux-native, so adding DirectX would be impossible.

HellBlade64 wrote: OpenGL is more or less a discontinued hardware renderer, where as DirectX is constantly undergoing changes and updates. So why not make a change?

I'm assuming that your question has something to do with the fact that your rig sucks. no offense


And as Ijon and Slim have stated before me, OpenGL is the best option for as cross-platform port like Zandronum. If you want DirectX, play Doomsday.

If you want to play Zandronum faster and have it look better, you're going to need to get a better computer, or at the very least buy a better video card.

HellBlade64 wrote: OpenGL is more or less a discontinued hardware renderer

What gave you that impression? OpenGL 4.4 came out this year.

And what exactly would switching the renderer to use the Direct3D API accomplish? It's not going to render any faster.

I thought Zandronum can't use DirectX because of license issues?

Anyway, newer fanceh OpenGL can't be properly working on some low-end, but pretty new computers with GMA (on Windows, on Linux there are official Intel drivers that allow that), this can be a problem as well... But it's of course not the fault of ogl devs, but rather some shenanigans I don't exactly understand. You need to pay MS so they accept your driver? I'm super bitter about it.

Whatever, REAL DOOMERS USE SOFTWARE
/me hides

Edit: AlexMax, on a shitty computers with Windows DirectX works A LOT better than OGL. On a decent ones... Well, I would know if I had one.

someoneelse wrote:I thought Zandronum can't use DirectX because of license issues?

Actually the software renderer on Windows uses DirectX for 2D rendering (like the HUD for instance). I think this actually answers OP's concerns too, if you want DirectX just switch to the software renderer. :)

read all about it here

Dusk wrote: if you want DirectX just switch to the software renderer. :)
read all about it here

And that about sums that up. Use Software if you want to play Zandronum in DirectX. Because the way I see it, all your issues are from playing in OpenGL when your rig cannot handle it well. So my advice, stick with Software.

I'm with the above, A 512/1Gb dedicated Gpu can be picked up on the net for as little as £30 / $50 which would be more than enough to run Zand in OpenGL along with many other games!

"AlexMax, on a shitty computers with Windows DirectX works A LOT better than OGL. On a decent ones... Well, I would know if I had one. "
you mean: computers with amd gpu DirectX works A LOT better than OGL...

idk i have a i7 with intel hd3000 and a hd2000 or 2500 on a Pentium that s used as a media center... Both run zan without problens....

edit: since u use a desktop, why not buy a better gpu? Intel gpus até more for Mobile (still want to ser a notebook with The hd5200 too check id that thing really run bf4 on max without lag)

someoneelse wrote: on some low-end, but pretty new computers with GMA

ibm, I don't know whom and what you refer to, but you quoted me and I have a netbook D: hence GMA (it's Intel's embedded graphics). Well, I prefer Software because it somehow feels better, I don't know why OGL always feels kind of.. blurry to me (I don't mean actual antialiasing, I can't quite explain it) and it matches Doom's mood better for me.

(also, I can't imagine someone in 2014 buying a new graphics for playing Doom)

If your card doesn't support OpenGL well, blame your card's manufacturer, or it's drivers. Games/Applications shouldn't be made to compensate for shitty/poorly designed drivers when it's something that should be fixed on their(the driver creators) end. On a card that fully supports say, OpenGL 2.0.. It should work the same as Direct3D with very little difference in performance.

(also, I can't imagine someone in 2014 buying a new graphics for playing Doom)

Mods, enough said:

* Total Chaos (Very detailed, heavy model use, truecolor textures.)
* Whodunit (Very detailed, truecolor textures.)
* SMMP (High Detail, Heavy model use, truecolor textures.)
* AOW (Models for vehicles and structures)
* DS-Models (Model Pack)

etc.

An NVidia GeForce 9800 is usually enough to get peak performance out of Zandro's OpenGL Implementation... You can buy them for anywhere between $15-$50 USD on EBay. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odkw=Ge ... T&_sacat=0

someoneelse wrote: (also, I can't imagine someone in 2014 buying a new graphics for playing Doom)

I would definitely do that, I would use all the money I had if that was nessesary to be able to play doom :\ (and yes, I got quite a bit, I'm not the big spender, more like the preserver)

Hah, I didn't mean that Doom is not worthy of spending money on. It's just, if one plays Doom, it's most likely not because of its fancy graphic effects.

Should developers ignore people with weaker machines? I can't agree here. Maybe from selfish reasons. But still; if you make a game, I guess the satisfaction comes from people playing that game. If 20 or 30% of people have shitty machines, and you would be able to make your game playable for them, introducing some settings disabling various advanced effects, why not? Of course I'm not talking about Zandro, as software mode is lightweight enough, and you can even have 3D floors in this mode now, not missing much. There's many games that have very low (proportionally to their graphic level) minimal requirements, but still look goddamn amazing on full detail. There's many expensive, short indie 2D games that look shittier than Zelda but have requirements higher than Half Life 2.

Oh, about something someone mentioned, if you would read my post carefully, you would notice I blame Intel and Microsoft for dropping support of fairly new computers/making it expensive to have your drivers accepted.

I mean like amd/ati arent that good for opengl too xd...

"* Whodunit (Very detailed, truecolor textures.)
* SMMP (High Detail, Heavy model use, truecolor textures.)
* AOW (Models for vehicles and structures)
* DS-Models (Model Pack)
"
a Intel hd3000, ati hd5450 passive and a geforce9400 can play this mods in opengl fine, today i think a pendium dual core + Intel hd is enough for play doom + mods

edit: Intel gma sucks, The aceptable gpus from Intel are hd to higher

edit2: its a good idea to buy a new Computer to play doom for The guys with Pentium 3 + nvidia fx5500

@someoneelse: Aside from the quote, I wasn't exclusively responding to you, my post was more of a generalized thing. As far as the whole thing about supporting old hardware, I agree about supporting old hardware (within reasonable limits... if the game/renderer uses heavy use of shaders, and the player is using a card from before 2006... then no.). What I don't support is devs wasting time trying to work around terrible/shitty/broken hardware and drivers.

ibm5155 wrote: a Intel hd3000, ati hd5450 passive and a geforce9400 can play this mods in opengl fine, today i think a pendium dual core + Intel hd is enough for play doom + mods

The Intel HD 3000 isn't enough for some mods I've tried, going from my own experience with a laptop I've used with one.

If you are having trouble running stuff in OpenGL, but fine in DirectX9, try using this: https://code.google.com/p/qindie-gl/
It's made by the same person who made QEffectsGL.

It's a DX9c to OpenGL wrapper. Just put opengl32.dll file in the game directory and run the game.
It may work, it may not.
Note that it's only a wrapper that emulates OpenGL rendering functionality through DirectX 9.0c, so it won't be perfect.

There are other alternatives around, but all I found uses DirectX 7 or 8.

StrikerMan780 wrote: @someoneelse: Aside from the quote, I wasn't exclusively responding to you, my post was more of a generalized thing. As far as the whole thing about supporting old hardware, I agree about supporting old hardware (within reasonable limits... if the game/renderer uses heavy use of shaders, and the player is using a card from before 2006... then no.). What I don't support is devs wasting time trying to work around terrible/shitty/broken hardware and drivers.

ibm5155 wrote: a Intel hd3000, ati hd5450 passive and a geforce9400 can play this mods in opengl fine, today i think a pendium dual core + Intel hd is enough for play doom + mods

The Intel HD 3000 isn't enough for some mods I've tried, going from my own experience with a laptop I've used with one.

my notebook has intel HD3000 it can play allot of the non OGL intensive stuff fine (map63 of jumpmaze aside where the framerates drop in the single digits, and thats with EVERYTHING on low/off and 720p resolution)

-=Dark-Assassin=- wrote: If you are having trouble running stuff in OpenGL, but fine in DirectX9, try using this: https://code.google.com/p/qindie-gl/
It's made by the same person who made QEffectsGL.

This is very illustrative of what OpenGL and Direct3D actually are...they're just an API for talking to your graphics card. It's the same hardware underneath.

Not to say they're completely alike - one huge advantage of OpenGL is that it allows you to unlock every single feature of your graphics card regardless of your operating system. Direct3D is tied to your Windows OS version, so even if your card supports some of the cool new features that D3D10 or D3D11 expose, you can't use them on older operating systems. New features of graphics cards are also generally exposed to OpenGL first through the extensions API. And new API features aren't just fancy schmancy ways of rendering hair or whatever, they can be mundane yet massively useful like ARB_debug_output.

But at the end of the day, all of this is kind of a moot point, since GZDoom uses old school (OpenGL 1.0-2.1 era) immediate mode draw calls and wouldn't really benefit from the newer graphics pipeline features of Modern Direct3D/OpenGL >= 3.0. My original point still stands I think - at the end of the day, they're just API's. OpenGL just so happens to be a massively more portable API, but it's still just an API. Unless you're a developer, you likely have better things to worry about than what graphics API your game uses.

mr fiat wrote: my notebook has intel HD3000 it can play allot of the non OGL intensive stuff fine (map63 of jumpmaze aside where the framerates drop in the single digits, and thats with EVERYTHING on low/off and 720p resolution)

That explain all, I always play on 1024x768 and with fog standart