[Lynette Wilson]

(Incidentally, Eps, do you know if it is significantly easier to port an Xbox game to PS3? I'm wondering if Sony paid Bethesda to port Oblivion...)

That I don't know. I haven't coded anything for either, I simply know that XBox 360 uses DirectX.

They aren't using DirectX on the PS3. The PS3 uses a custom rendering API, with the option of OpenGL ES. Being that OpenGL is also available on Windows, using that would make cross-platform development easier. There's a lot more to worry about than Direct3D/OpenGL, but since we know they aren't using Windows/DirectX exclusively (due to the PS3), there is always the option of porting it to OSX.

Hmm. Well, I don't know. Sony may have given devs a tool to ease the transition from DirectX to it's native API, who knows? It would definitely make sense as it would reel in more devs to make games for it. And, like I said, if it were portable to OSX, they would have announced it.

???
...
...Aaaaand, it MUST be developed on OpenGL if they're going to port it to PS3 sometime. Unless they plan on foregoing OpenGL entirely for that. It's not like they're going to be using DirectX on the PS3, so they HAVE to port it to OpenGL, so according to you they must be rewriting 70% of the engine for the PS3 port already. :rolleyes:

Your logic works the other way around - XBox 360 doesn't support OpenGL (whoops!). Like I said, I don't know the ins and outs of creating games for the PS3 and can't speculate on whether they're using it's custom API or, as you suggest, OpenGL. Another factor to consider is the fact that they're using quite the number of middleware, which may not be OpenGL compatible. Chances are, one of those middleware components is what allows the port to PS3. http://www.gamedev.net/topic/449529-opengl-on-xbox-360/ GameDev forum thread seems to support the possibility:

[Hayley O'Gara]

And, like I said, if it were portable to OSX, they would have announced it.

Being portable to and being ported to are two very different things. I can almost guarantee you the engine is not only portable to OSX, but also to Linux. However, it all depends on if they're willing to do so, or willing to contract outside help to do the port. Maybe they haven't decided if they're porting to OSX, yet. Or maybe they want to wait to make sure it'll work before announcing OSX support.

Your logic works the other way around - XBox 360 doesn't support OpenGL (whoops!).

I think he means that OpenGL is just one of the APIs it's being developed on. Given that it's on PS3, that's a logical assumption. Just because it's being developed on DirectX doesn't mean it's not also being developed on OpenGL. If you design the engine properly, it's not too difficult to set up your own API that can call to either Direct3D or OpenGL, depending on the system.

[Laura-Lee Gerwing]

The thing that alarmed me was the inability to manually sort the favorites list and absolutely no mention of the PC version at all.

Yeah, I just want PC info dammit!

[Emily Jeffs]

I think he means that OpenGL is just one of the APIs it's being developed on. Given that it's on PS3, that's a logical assumption. Just because it's being developed on DirectX doesn't mean it's not also being developed on OpenGL. If you design the engine properly, it's not too difficult to set up your own API that can call to either Direct3D or OpenGL, depending on the system.

This falls withtin the category of "burning questions" to keep in mind. All we can do is speculate. Can anyone shed some light whether Oblivion was ported to Mac or Linux or if that was even possible? :huh:

[Tanya]

That I don't know. I haven't coded anything for either, I simply know that XBox 360 uses DirectX.Hmm. Well, I don't know. Sony may have given devs a tool to ease the transition from DirectX to it's native API, who knows? It would definitely make sense as it would reel in more devs to make games for it. And, like I said, if it were portable to OSX, they would have announced it.Your logic works the other way around - XBox 360 doesn't support OpenGL (whoops!). Like I said, I don't know the ins and outs of creating games for the PS3 and can't speculate on whether they're using it's custom API or, as you suggest, OpenGL. Another factor to consider is the fact that they're using quite the number of middleware, which may not be OpenGL compatible. Chances are, one of those middleware components is what allows the port to PS3. http://www.gamedev.net/topic/449529-opengl-on-xbox-360/ GameDev forum thread seems to support the possibility:

Well, if you read my post closely this is exactly what I was talking about. I find it odd to call it a "middleware", though. It's just a generic API that they would have substituted in place of any OpenGL/Direct X-specific calls. So my point was that you were making an OpenGL port seem incredibly hard, when they already have to port not once but twice (Xbox isn't quite PC-compatible after all), so they probably have a generic API in place. And if that were the case it wouldn't be as difficult as you were making it out to be for an OpenGL port, it could even be a slight modification of the OpenGL ES stuff they do for PS3, but who knows about that.

I think he means that OpenGL is just one of the APIs it's being developed on. Given that it's on PS3, that's a logical assumption. Just because it's being developed on DirectX doesn't mean it's not also being developed on OpenGL. If you design the engine properly, it's not too difficult to set up your own API that can call to either Direct3D or OpenGL, depending on the system.

Correct.

[BRAD MONTGOMERY]

Well, if you read my post closely this is exactly what I was talking about. I find it odd to call it a "middleware", though. It's just a generic API that they would have substituted in place of any OpenGL/Direct X-specific calls. So my point was that you were making an OpenGL port seem incredibly hard, when they already have to port not once but twice (Xbox isn't quite PC-compatible after all), so they probably have a generic API in place. And if that were the case it wouldn't be as difficult as you were making it out to be for an OpenGL port, it could even be a slight modification of the OpenGL ES stuff they do for PS3, but who knows about that.

Well, from my experience creating a generic API that's portable to any other possible platform usually has big implications on performance (take Java, for example), so I'd doubt they made theirs that way. It's more likely they defined a fixed set of target platforms at the start and optimized the API for that, i.e. they made their renderer keeping only DirectX and PS3's API in mind.

[Jessie Butterfield]

Well, as a potential 360 player (if they have some travel system other than their lazy fast travel implemented, else it's PC for me) I'm glad they moved the hotkeys off the d-pad - solid move that. I also love the idea of down and up showing the land and the heavens, very clever idea, could make for a very atmospheric menu system.

The 3D object thing still sounds gimmicky though, I can't quite believe Todd that it's a "time sink". Oooh, check out the handle on that smithy hammer... but who knows, I am pretty easily amused. :jammasterjay: Radial menus is also good IMO, much more flexible and quicker to navigate.

My only problem; where were the freaking screen shots, eh?

[Nuno Castro]

Well, from my experience creating a generic API that's portable to any other possible platform usually has big implications on performance (take Java, for example), so I'd doubt they made theirs that way.

FWIW, OpenGL is supposed to be such a generic API. It's an open, cross-platform API that can be used on almost any system and hardware. But since Microsoft doesn't want to directly support it, they supply Direct3D instead. So putting another layer right on top isn't that bad. The hardware is still doing all the hard work.

Java is much more than just a "generic API", though. It is aimed to be a programming language and virtual machine, so that you only have to write/build the code once, and it can supposedly work anywhere (in C++, you build it separately for individual platforms, but this is comparitively trivial next to the actual coding). Java then takes care of translating bytecode for the system's CPU in real-time. The language design and features also adds overhead.

[Rusty Billiot]

Java is much more than just a "generic API", though. It is aimed to be a programming language and virtual machine, so that you only have to write/build the code once, and it can supposedly work anywhere (in C++, you build it separately for individual platforms, but this is comparitively trivial next to the actual coding). Java then takes care of translating bytecode for the system's CPU in real-time. The language design and features also adds overhead.

I know what Java is. Too well actually (and I don't like it, for that matter). I only meant to say that it slows apps down because those apps are meant to work everywhere.
EDIT: I'll leave the OpenGL topic alone. It's obvious we're just blowing hot air that won't affect Skyrim. :rolleyes: