What's do you want neXt in OGL

590e8bdac8129bd87b188df15e62d0e5
0
CyraX 101 Jan 29, 2003 at 14:12

With nVidia and ATI competing with each other, things have been going smooth for most of the game developers who are being thrown more processing power to use. As usual the developers swallow it whole.
Now the question is what do you think is still missing in OpenGL?
What might be added to it in order to really pack some punch.
Lighting is one of the areas where beter support could be expected.

32 Replies

Please log in or register to post a reply.

0684f9d33f52fa189aad7ac9e8c87510
0
baldurk 101 Jan 29, 2003 at 18:26

High level shading language, better extension system perhaps.

944699b365de3645578c5806f661f2f9
0
godEcho 101 Jan 29, 2003 at 19:58

standarization (and inclusion) of common opengl extensions would be nice.

0684f9d33f52fa189aad7ac9e8c87510
0
baldurk 101 Jan 30, 2003 at 18:28

how about kicking MS off the ARB. What’s up with that??

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Jan 30, 2003 at 20:27

who cares about microsoft in there..

what i want is a programable blending unit with floatingpoint precicion.. and branches in the pixel unit..

then i can finally raytrace..:D

D12838c45a4840e6c05bf94d8bb5e135
0
Morgoth 101 Jan 31, 2003 at 11:17

Some true arithmetic for controlling buffers…perhaps?
Take a look at shadow volume techniques (Doom3 anyone?) and i think you’ll aggree that the stencil buffer is WAY TOO inflexible!

Abecf7e4a0311128d1a193cd0128e070
0
MMU_FOX 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 14:28

I hope can directly to load object to 3d world….like direct x can load object -> .x ……load image….. :blink:

0684f9d33f52fa189aad7ac9e8c87510
0
baldurk 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 14:30

well, as far as I can tell, that is actually isn’t DirectX. It’s the “helper” library.

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 14:35

yes, its d3dx, a (quite handy) helper library..

though, there isn’t a real good helper library to load arbitary meshes in gl yet.. there is devIL, great for textures.. but meshes?..

C24eb7e6aaefba78b94c831ddc7b4d0b
0
donBerto 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 14:39

I hope can directly to load object to 3d world….like direct x can load object -> .x ……load image…..

i think i know where you’re getting at. I don’t know if directx has built-in support for different image types but one can easily make their own. like what baldurk said:

well, as far as I can tell, that is actually isn’t DirectX. It’s the “helper” library.

as far as what I would like to see in the next OGL, if at all possible, an even faster pipeline [hardware issue?] and maybe better handling of some functions if at all possible. for example, initializing display lists requires that there be an active rendering context. i think it would be nice if it didn’t have to but maybe they have their reasons.

0684f9d33f52fa189aad7ac9e8c87510
0
baldurk 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 14:41

I don’t really think you need one. Loading some of the simpler model formats is pretty damn easy. If you can’t manage that, you can always use your own format.

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 14:43

@donBerto

as far as what I would like to see in the next OGL, if at all possible, an even faster pipeline [hardware issue?] and maybe better handling of some functions if at all possible. for example, initializing display lists requires that there be an active rendering context. i think it would be nice if it didn’t have to but maybe they have their reasons.

hm.. the way it is does make sence if you know a bit of hw..

and what about the pipeline, what is slow about it (except some vendors who design some rather bugs into the pipeline, like nvidia did (and possibly still does:D))

0684f9d33f52fa189aad7ac9e8c87510
0
baldurk 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 14:50

I think you need an active rendering context because the data that it compiles is saved with the rendering context. Like texture stuff. Am I wrong?

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 14:51

nope, you’re right. espencially display lists get partially stored into video mem. and only a valid gl context does have access to video mem.

C24eb7e6aaefba78b94c831ddc7b4d0b
0
donBerto 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 14:58

and what about the pipeline, what is slow about it (except some vendors who design some rather bugs into the pipeline, like nvidia did (and possibly still does:D))

i just meant that maybe there’s a way to make it faster. i’m not complaining - it’s pretty fast now. I guess i’m just trying to push the envelope.

and back to helper libraries:

I don’t really think you need one. Loading some of the simpler model formats is pretty damn easy. If you can’t manage that, you can always use your own format.

i think the point baldurk is trying to make is that helper libraries are nice. they make things easy, if not simple [never confuse the two]. but as far as having it built-in, maybe it’s not necessary. the last thing you want to do is be forced to use a built-in mechanism especially if you have something against it. an example is my not-so-favorite .bmp format. if OpenGL made it so that bmp file format was built-in, i’d feel obliged to use it. sure i could use other file formats but keeping in mind that it’s built in, it may have low-level code [getting at close-hardware support, making it possibly faster] and having or using a high-level user-made file format may not be as fast…

i wouldn’t be surprised if directx had built-in support for bmp. after all, wasn’t bmp “founded” by an ms-developer?

anyway, i didn’t mean any flame-mongering comments. and sorry for my heavy use of quotes ;7

0684f9d33f52fa189aad7ac9e8c87510
0
baldurk 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 15:07

I reckon I could probably get better performance by writing my own <whatever> loader than using a helper library. That’s because a helper library is a layer on top of the actual API. Also, because I’d learn a lot more that way

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 15:07

dx doesn’t have builtin support for loading anything.

but there is d3dx, wich comes with the sdk, wich provides helper funcs. it provides funcs to load textures from files, in different formats. mainly i think jpg, tga, bmp, and possibly some others.. don’t really remember..

and yes, worst would be to be forced to something..

C24eb7e6aaefba78b94c831ddc7b4d0b
0
donBerto 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 15:08

and only a valid gl context does have access to video mem.

that makes sense. I still think it would be cool if there was a decent, ethical work-around so you can put things into video memory without the context for faster loading without looking at a blank or still screen. bleh - i don’t even care. :lol:

C24eb7e6aaefba78b94c831ddc7b4d0b
0
donBerto 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 15:10

I reckon I could probably get better performance by writing my own <whatever> loader than using a helper library. That’s because a helper library is a layer on top of the actual API. Also, because I’d learn a lot more that way

the best way to go about it.

‘nuff said.

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 16:14

performance is not important, its the last step..

and you would code the same a library would do for you. you code a layer above gl, too..

and loading meshes does not have to do anything with gl anyways.. its about fileformats and all..

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 16:25

i forgot.. learning expirience is always great, and the reason to try at least for one time everything on your own.. even rendering triangles on your own, without gl/dx at all.. great fun (and the bugs just look funny:D)

0684f9d33f52fa189aad7ac9e8c87510
0
baldurk 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 16:30

lol. I need to try that sometime

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 16:33

the best thing imho is realtime raytracing on your own..

for some comparison, check www.realstorm.com for a great raytracingengine

D491261d0cdbea6f1f04129ba87f4d09
0
void 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 23:39

Guys, having a helper library that loads various picture and mesh formats for opengl would be STUPID. openGL is a graphics library, nothing else, it doesnt even have the ability to open a window on its own. If you want a helper library, download something like DevIL for image loading, and im sure you can easily find some free code for loading any 3D model format. What I want to see next in OpenGL is OpenGL2.0, when the f**k is it coming out??!! :-)

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Feb 02, 2003 at 23:43

the helper library (aka devil in the case of images) is not stupid at all, and the way there should be much more. gl is just another helper library actually.. and they work all together..

about gl2. it will not come as a big release with huge download (like each dx release for example), but step by step. we now have tons of new extensions for newest pixelshading stuff in gl, VAO is comming to ARB, rendertexture is comming to ARB, etc.. thats all because of gl2, it made vendors work together again. and they will bit by bit implement gl2 extensions till we have all components in the way they are designed in gl2.

till gl2, we have gl1.5,1.6,1.7… you get the idea:D

and the shader language is yet there, ati works at a compiler for ARB_fragment_program..

C24eb7e6aaefba78b94c831ddc7b4d0b
0
donBerto 101 Feb 03, 2003 at 10:23

gl is just another helper library actually..

careful…

about gl2. it will not come as a big release with huge download (like each dx release for example), but step by step.

you make it sound like OpenGL is competing for bigger releases and faster release dates. opengl is just a standard that many of the gfx card makers support. the architecture review board only meets ever so often that to get a sensible release plan they split it up in point releases like 1.7, 1.8, etc.

dx may be backed by a huge corporation but i imagine whoever heads the dx department is much smaller than the ARB. what does that mean? less people deciding what to do (with their own agendas), the faster things will get done. people at ms are payed to get do this kind of work. it cost companies money to send a representative to go to a review board. that’s my view on it anyway.

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Feb 03, 2003 at 13:19

gl is just a helper library wich unifies interface to graphics cards. like sdl a helper library wich makes crossplatform 2d coding possible.. etc.. (gl is great, nontheless)

about gl2. there are tons around asking when gl2 is finally there, not realizing that parts of gl2 are yet here, the new extensions wich come out by the arb are all based on fitting gl2 later. there will never be a “now gl2 is there” release date.. vendors will more and more support some features of gl2. and one day, we have all the features of gl2. high level shading language for example is possibly only a month away from its birth on the ati radeon9700pro. sure, with restrictions, but still useable to play first time with it.

0684f9d33f52fa189aad7ac9e8c87510
0
baldurk 101 Feb 03, 2003 at 18:30

I hope I’ll be able to do vertex and fragment programs on my GF4. I’d be very disappointed if I can’t, because it would be a waste of a hell of a lot of money

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Feb 03, 2003 at 18:33

uhm, espencially for pixel programs, a radeon9500 would have been a much bether buy (dunno how long you have your gf4..).. gf4 is quite old in those terms..

anyways, you can do stuff with it..

D491261d0cdbea6f1f04129ba87f4d09
0
void 101 Feb 04, 2003 at 10:34

Actually, i think there will be a time when we will be able to say that GL2.0 is out… I mean, atm we can safely say that GL1.4 is out, right? atm we are at 1.4, soon (hopefully) we will be at gl2.0 (BTW, afaik there wont be anything between 1.4 and 2.0 releases)…
Also, id like to reiterate that loading in models and picture formats is totally out of the question for putting into openGL, its not what it is meant to do, which is draw graphics. Its not meant to do input, sound, even open windows, and lastly, load file formats. And anyway, any decent programmer should be able to write up an image loader in a few hours. Unless its some anally obscure format which uses equally obscure compression.

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Feb 04, 2003 at 10:36

gl1.4 is ratified, yes. does not mean by any chance that gl1.4 is everywhere up to use (and somehow people believe that in gl2.0). rathification is this summer, i think..

D491261d0cdbea6f1f04129ba87f4d09
0
void 101 Feb 04, 2003 at 10:47

Summer? I guess thats winter for us aussies…

590e8bdac8129bd87b188df15e62d0e5
0
CyraX 101 Feb 07, 2003 at 12:34

gl.14 has been adopted by nVidia and ATI.
AFAIK those are hte only two that count :unsure:
However gl2.0 would take a tremendous amount of load and consultations from nVidia and ATI. Basically the problem is that both the vendors do a lot of things in different ways. With OGL 2.0 they would have to converge the processing methods.
Now here comes the catch. Its business that they mean. If there are standards then what is it that ATI or nVidia offers you that is different from the other? I am sure everyone read the John carmack on NV30 and R300
That is the point. Each of the vendors is good @ their stands. NV30 from nVidia beats competition to crap (as usual) @ vendor specific paths. But hey, isnt OGL all about standards? That is where NV30 loses out. So its a conflict within nVidia about the possibility of doing away with their extensions (might be). If their extensions are incorporated, ATI is going down further into the Abyss.
Yet OGL 2.0 promises to be a good neXt step… @least in the white papers.