What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
67 Comments
- kevinmtu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+25I see a healthy battle heating up between VM and Parallels....
- GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+22@olliholliday
Firstly OGL is not a direct competitor with DX. OGL is analogous to D3D and is actually better than D3D which is why it is used by high end graphics in modelling and cinema special effects etc.
The reasons DX is used in gaming are:
1. DX is a complete media API while OGL necessitates bringing other things like SDL or OAL in. This is a whole set of differing things to test while you know DX works together.
2. MS used to break their OGL implementation to encourage devs to use D3D. They don't do this anymore but the damage has been done, the number of games using OGL just so they can be ported is increasing and eventually MS will be back to breaking OGL with updates again.
3. As a result of market domination a set of tools for developing games has grown around DX which doesn't exist elsewhere. These would have to be replicated in order to break the domination.
Essentially OGL is better than D3D (though not by as much as it used to be) but other factors (including experience of programmers) make D3D preferable. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -21/+36Very costly PC? You've got to be kidding me. I bet whatever price you payed for your mac can be matched by a pc with superior specs.
- konforce, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17Apple's laptops and higher end workstations are very comparable in price to trusted PC vendors. However, at the $650 range you are stuck with an underpowered mac-mini. And at that price, you can build a far superior PC.
- computerdude33, on 10/12/2007, -7/+20Poor benitojurarez, you haven't been introduced to the Digg General Rules of Comment Conduct:
Xbox = Good
Windows = Bad
Apple = Good
Sony = Bad
Nintendo = Good
RIAA, MPAA = Bad, and should burn in hell.
I agree with all of them. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15Uhh yeah. Both of you, shuttup.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10they're runnign 3dmark2001, so i'd kinda call that late
- coredump0x01, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12"no no, until opengl can match directx you're shafted."
That why my OpenGL games always seem to play smoother with better anti aliasing then their Direct3D counterparts? GLSL will be able to match anything Direct3D can offer, Just look at Quake 4 and Doom 3, those games are from 2005. OpenGL devs aren't going to quit and will continue to keep the pressure on the boys at Redmond for years to come. - sysoprock, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13parallels is pretty nasty. a guy i work with uses it in "coherence mode" where you have a full on start bar sitting at the bottom of your osx screen.
windows apps on osx look like when a large dog ***** onto the front seat of a ferrari. - myheaditches, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9It's almost as if I don't want to carry around two laptops of me. Sorry, but two laptops is not convenient.
- MioTheGreat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10That's not even close to what this means.
- GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10As for the discussion of Parallels/VMware. VMware are a big company that essentially use Server and Player as advertisements for their corporate solutions like ESX Server. Parallels is a largely irrelevant product who's results can be produced by a slew of free beer or OSS solutions across the spectrum. Really you are comparing apples and oranges. Apple could kill off Parallels tomorrow while VMware couldn't be killed by even the combined efforts of MS and Apple since their major product bundles its own OS (Linux based) with it and 95% of corporate virtualisation is handled by their products. A large number of corporations would have to abandon a mountain of legacy work to dump VMware. The only real competitor is Xen Source because they have the best VT support and an interesting paravirtualisation implementation that fits IBM's strategy for running thousands of Linux implementations on one mainframe.
- RichGC, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9This was on the front page just recently:
http://www.digg.com/tech_news/VMWare_s_3D_graphics_acceleration_just_around_the_corner - samadam, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7yeah, i paid $80 for parallels, and I will be rather angry if a free product beats them to market with real 3d. I am not fond of bootcamp just to play cs:s. (and i know crossover may work, but that's not very cool either).
- benitojuarez, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10why are you telling people to get rid of microsoft windows and get a microsoft xbox to fill the gap? you have violated the app£e fanboy code.
- djh816, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5they may have HINTED at it but parallels has flat out said that in the next major beta, they're putting that in.
- helfire, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6samadam: VMware fusion will not be free, the beta is free. I'm still sticking with Parallels, just because they're beta wasnt first doesnt mean it's any less.
- shakestheclown, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6haha...
what you said is almost as retarded as the article, "So, PC gaming fanboys, what are you going to do all day now that your favorite phrase -- "Mac gaming is an oxymoron" -- doesn't cut it on the Mac gaming forums anymore?" - meatmcguffin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5You can set the start bar to auto hide in Parallel's preferences.
...which is the equivalent of putting some sugar on the dog ***** on the front seat of the Ferrari. - mikev, on 10/12/2007, -8/+12Exactly how late *is* hell?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7common sense hints at it not happening
- GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4D3D and OGL are quite close these days though there are still a lot of things you can achieve with OGL that you can't with D3D. Really it's apples and oranges again. D3D has a lot of higher level functions that make coding quicker but can cause inefficiency if it doesn't exactly match what you want to do. OGL performs better when you need to squeeze more out of the machine because it's lower level and allows you to optimise better. Really what is done in D3D could be handled by code generation in OGL but it needs to be set up. It doesn't help that MS practically took over the body pushing OGL and as a result have removed the obvious rally point for such a move.
- Aleks, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5A couple days ago I upgraded my Core 1 Duo Macbook for the new 17" MBP (mom wanted to upgrade her 4yr old powerbook so I gave her the macbook) and today I just plunked $80 for a parallels license to run Lotus Notes..... now I'm regretting it because having this 3D Acceleration would mean I could run my old PC's games from the 90s (C&C: Firestorm, Warcraft 1, etc)
- Aleks, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9How about no.
- darkyoshi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4software doesn't have to make sense.
- olliholliday, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@gmorgan
i agree totally, MS initially used severely underhand tactics to get directx to the forefront but these days it stands on its laurels. lots of games use direct3D for the graphics part and OpenAL for the audio... the only remaining part is the directinput equivalent (which appears unmatched also.... but isn't even slightly as complicated) - there's still a reason they choose directx over opengl and that reason is that it's EASIER to get the same results.
if developers can get the same results for 99%+ (guess:) of their market in less time than it would to develop in a way that suits porting to different platforms then they'll take it.
the opengl guys have let directx get ahead, there's no doubt about it. - MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Its DirectX 8.1.
Which might just be the version that was built into the first releases of XP.
Would be actually relevant if DX9 could be run. Shouldn't be too hard.
DX10 won't be available for a while since nothing is taking advantage of it yet to test it out. - meatmcguffin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Weirdly, and it sounds nuts, but some things are faster under virtualisation than running natively due to how the hypervisor manages system calls on Intel chips. Although it's probably not the case with 3D gaming, the lying gits.
- Tordenflesk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3tbh, I'm sick of people using Propellerhead's "Spybreak" in their videos to seem cool. We're DONE with that tune! Come up wit some other way off invoking exitement ffs! How 'bout some real captures of the screen instead of some crappy camcorder huh?
- darkyoshi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Warcraft 1 runs in DOS. I doubt it needs 3D acceleration. Why don't you try playing it now? Or how about in DOSbox or something?
- threemagic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The overhead is in memory usage and whatever the primary OS takes up in CPU... since virtualization means 2 concurrent OSes. Emulation means a slow down.
- linuxinit, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4You just contradicted yourself. :)
If it is so easy to start/stop the vmware service, then do it yourself? - dbr_onix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2'So, PC gaming fanboys, what are you going to do all day now that your favorite phrase -- "Mac gaming is an oxymoron" -- doesn't cut it on the Mac gaming forums anymore?' - Change it to "Mac gaming at over 5fps is an oxymoron"?
On that subject, they were running 3DMark, but did they put up the results anywhere? I'd be interested to see how well it runs.. - TheRealToma, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2If VMware implements DirectX into its software, that means full-speed gaming on Linux aswell right?
- desistere, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Why do they say full speed if it's virtualized?
Furthermore, who's going to have the GPU to run the latest games? Unless you can afford a Mac Pro, you can't exactly get a high end graphics card for a Mac. - xero9, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You do realize you can get Lotus Notes for OS X, right?
http://www-142.ibm.com/software/sw-lotus/products/product4.nsf/wdocs/macsupport - Avalontor, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I cared so little about your family life. What was it you were trying to say?
- Phil246, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2full speed - probably not. there is overhead to consider when using virtualisation.
- fgsfds, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That's not a contradiction. Handling it's services automatically is part of proper housekeeping, and assuming that the user intends to always have it running shows a lack of foresight. Personally, I was intending to use it for sandboxing risky executables and running legacy software, neither of which are tasks that require always-on virtual machines. When such capability isn't required, the additional resources would be quite useful.
It's not that I *can't* clean up after it, it's that I shouldn't have to. Bloatware is unacceptable. - djh816, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1you must have just missed my comment... parallels WILL have this. Just wait a bit. Also unlike VMware, parallels actualy has a good relationship with apple going so theres more of an incentive to get this and other features going.
- meatmcguffin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@zdiggler
Whoa...you're gonna hurt yourself. Take a step back there moron. Firstly what does "Even Apple is trying to be PC by running Intel chips and MB that were made for PC with Mac ROM's." mean in English? If your implying that IBM couldn't produce chips fast and cool enough to be used in laptops and as such Apple had to look somewhere else for chip vendors and had the foresight to code OS X for x86 for nearly five years prior despite the fact that RISC chips were better than CISC chips when they made the PPC transition then you are right. But something tells me you weren't thinking that.....
"PC are way better, PC can run Linux, windows, run SMS, WAP gateway, a tons of software to hack and customize phones etc."
Macs can run Linux, Windows (via bootcamp) and what the hell are you going on about phones for? Macs as servers can certainly be WAP servers and you can run software to hack phones in OSX and Windows but what the hell does run SMS mean? - Merrick178, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2That dude has da same speakers as me! Err... I mean. Hi.
- NtrmDscrptr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Anybody know the title of the first bit of music they're playing, with all the 8-bit sound effects?
- Zippo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1odd, must have ran into a glitch on digg. When I loaded this page, there were 0 comments.
- jrbrewin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1oh god.
this article should read. "mac users, listen up. If you want to ***** well run windows, run it natively. No matter how clever or big it is to emulate or virtualise, you cannot, ever, beat running something natively. Now, remove your head from steve's anus" - Aleks, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1darkyoshi: I only tried C&C: Firestorm which didn't refresh properly at all
- Aleks, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Damn it! I just plunked down a parallels license for my new 17" MBP :(
- Yashu, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Whoa dupe.
hehe... I say again that it is about time that OSX VMware cought up to the windows and linux versions that can already do this. - threemagic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@ primehifi
"The day I can play the games I want on a mac, is the day my very costly PC goes out the window. "
I played the beta of Vanguard and just picked up the full version. I have a Mac Pro with 2 dual core 5150's and an ati1900 video card. I get no lag, ever, even in beta and those that know of Vanguard will know what a big deal that is.
So out with that PC... - GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4On the OGL v DX debate. The increasing number of games using Java (and just because you can't see it being used doesn't mean it's not there ;) ) and Sun dumping of Java3D in favour of JOGL will mean a lot in the long term. Devs are starting to ignore the 'Java is the suxx0r' arguments just like they started to ignore the old 'C is the suxx0r' arguments when only ASM was fast enough to run games.
The GPU and on board RAM are the biggest factor for gaming. Most games never take up all the system memory (or even get close) and Java performs quite well on the CPU utilisation front anyhow. As a result devs are moving that direction. The fact there are literally hundreds of Windows games with Java used and nobody has noticed speaks volumes to this end (though admittedly we haven't really seen JOGL pushed yet).
Also threading is comparatively easy in Java and like plucking out your eyes with a chop stick in C++. With the rise of dual core Java makes more sense. -
Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is