HappySqurriel said:
I thought his preference of OpenGL died after the Quake 3 engine primarily because the feature set of OpenGL didn't evolve as quickly as DirectX and DirectX was more of a full featured API while OpenGL was primarily a 3D graphics API? Beyond that, I thought he really disliked how low performance Direct3D was in DirectX 7, but that he was happier with DirectX 8 and 9 because they made huge leaps in improving overal performance of the API?
|
Doom 3 / Quake Wars used Id's tech 4 which was still OpenGL based. Tech 5 will have both backends available, apparently, and I remeber Carmack saying in an interview that the actual library used is little more than an implementation detail, easily pluggable. I suppose that the real wizardry in tech 5 happens somewhere else, because I have no idea how the megatexture thing is supposed to work.
And @RAZurrection:
OpenGL is no more "open source" than DirectX, because there's no such thing as "the OpenGL code". OpenGL is a specification, of which many implementations exist. Some are purely software (like the Mesa library), others use hardware acceleration, like any nVidia/ATI drivers. In the same way the DirectX specifications must be implemented by the GPU drivers, or a software layer can even convert DirectX calls to OpenGL calls like in WINE.
Carmack's distaste for Direct3D in the past came simply from the fact that it used to be a horrible API, while OpenGL was always lauded for its clarity and coherence. Sadly, OpenGL got more garbled with time while Direct3D improved.







