Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 98

Thread: Direct3D 9 Support Released For Linux Via Gallium3D, Running Games

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    I do fully agree that developing a native interface would be a bad thing, but developing an interface for wine was awesome. I hope that it not only improves performance, but also compatibility,

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peppercats View Post
    WinXP is EOL next year and most game makers do *not* care about the majority. If they did, their recommended specs wouldn't contain $300+ graphics cards.
    Many games released this year are already DX11-only. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ctX_11_support you can sort it by games that are DX11 only.

    I'd honestly be curious how much of a % China makes up of game buyers anyways.
    2%? 3%?
    I'd imagine North America + European markets make up the massive majority.
    You should really check that link you posted There are 30-40 forty games compared to thousands which are for D3D9 not to mention that those DX10-11 games apart from few exceptions suck and most of them support also DX9

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shirudo View Post
    If DirectX is upheld as the standard graphics API for GNU games instead of OpenGL, then we will become dependant on a technology fully under the control of quite the hostile entity. That is the critical difference being OpenGL being the standard and DirectX-- OpenGL is, as it's name suggests, an open standard, and not controllable by any 'enemy' of GNU.
    You don't have to worry about that : the only thing implemented is D3D, directX is a lot more than that, it takes care of input, sound, font rendering and more. That is still only implemented in wine. SDL takes care of most of this under linux.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    112

    Default

    I'm probably not getting the whole picture since getting driver level native D3D (9c) compatibility and the 400000% increase in the # of supported games that it would bring is too huge of a deal to be worth just 7 pages.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Serafean View Post
    You don't have to worry about that : the only thing implemented is D3D, directX is a lot more than that, it takes care of input, sound, font rendering and more. That is still only implemented in wine. SDL takes care of most of this under linux.
    I was referring specifically to D3D, probably should have said that. What my concern is is that, as another poster suggested earlier, developers who might otherwise be inclined to support GNU natively (with OpenGL) will just target D3D and expect it to be crossplatform. If this became commonplace then D3D would be the de-facto graphics API for GNU; the problem then arises that our de-facto graphics API is controlled by an enemy, who could attempt to make later versions of it incompatible with Wine as best they can. In the alternative scenario where some developers began using OpenGL, they (the developers) would be more inclined to continue supporting it as they already have experience with it, whereas if they had been exclusively using D3D it would be less appealing to suddenly make an OpenGL version for the newly disenfranchised GNU users.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,889

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kostas View Post
    I'm probably not getting the whole picture since getting driver level native D3D (9c) compatibility and the 400000% increase in the # of supported games that it would bring is too huge of a deal to be worth just 7 pages.
    Its not that its NOT a big deal...but it has to be merged into Mesa and Wine to be of use to most people (which is questionable since Wine didnt accept the DirectX10/11 code). Also it only helps games that HAVE DirectX9 codepaths. And it DOESNT help any games that didnt work because of other reasons.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shirudo View Post
    If DirectX is upheld as the standard graphics API for GNU games instead of OpenGL, then we will become dependant on a technology fully under the control of quite the hostile entity. That is the critical difference being OpenGL being the standard and DirectX-- OpenGL is, as it's name suggests, an open standard, and not controllable by any 'enemy' of GNU.
    Right now gamers don't use Linux. They don't cause their games are running DirectX 9 minimum and it runs slow. But offer nearly the same performance as Windows and lots of people will switch. Developers will take notice and future games will be made using OpenGL for Linux. But all those old games will never see a native port to Linux.

    As it is I doubt developers are happy to see Directx 11.2 exclusive to Windows 8.1. So eventually we'll see OpenGL replacing DirectX over time anyway. But not all of them will.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Koszalin, Poland
    Posts
    131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shirudo View Post
    I was referring specifically to D3D, probably should have said that. What my concern is is that, as another poster suggested earlier, developers who might otherwise be inclined to support GNU natively (with OpenGL) will just target D3D and expect it to be crossplatform. If this became commonplace then D3D would be the de-facto graphics API for GNU; the problem then arises that our de-facto graphics API is controlled by an enemy, who could attempt to make later versions of it incompatible with Wine as best they can. In the alternative scenario where some developers began using OpenGL, they (the developers) would be more inclined to continue supporting it as they already have experience with it, whereas if they had been exclusively using D3D it would be less appealing to suddenly make an OpenGL version for the newly disenfranchised GNU users.
    I couldn't agree more.

    Compatibility with legacy software is nice, but this should never be used for creating anything new.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    523

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyber Killer View Post
    I couldn't agree more.

    Compatibility with legacy software is nice, but this should never be used for creating anything new.
    Dito. Also a huge problem IMO with Mono-Game, which advertises to "write your next game in XNA and make it work on all
    these wonderful platforms!", when it should really just explain that it's life support for a dying platform, and NOBODY should
    use XNA for new games.

    Sadly the same thing happened with Samba, where the Microsoft protocol only became the de facto standard by means of
    massive install base, and now that it's supported on all platforms there's no incentive to write something from the ground up
    cross platform.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Old Europe
    Posts
    916

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chithanh View Post
    Then I suggest that you start reading
    http://blog.mecheye.net/2012/06/the-...raphics-stack/ (a bit more detailed)
    Thank you - this is such a good article!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •