Slashdot Mirror
Port DirectX Games to the Mac
tassii writes "MacCentral reports that Coderus' MacDX provides PC game developers with a way of moving that DirectX code to the Mac without having to rewrite it from scratch. Coderus claims that most code which uses DirectX can simply be recompiled and linked to the MacDX libraries. Maybe I can finally play the full Command and Conquer series."
I don't see why they don't make a LinuxDX library for doing the same thing. for linux/PPC, it should only require recompiling the libraries (unless MacDX utilises mac-specific services such as DrawSprockets, Quickdraw, or Quartz).
Why don't some of you OSS fanatics start a LinuxDX project over at sf? Seems that all you'd really need to do is create OpenGL equivilants of the DirectX functions. right?
I guess it's simple, in theory, but complex in practice. oh well. too bad I'm so damned lazy or I'd do it.
...spike
Ewwwwww, coconut...
This is pure genius folks... it's like using Microsoft's own stuff against them.
I know at least ten Mac users who have said that they keep a Winblows box around to "play games."
VirtualPC is handy, but it just plain sucks when it comes to doing high-end graphics (or, better said, just plain doesn't do high-end graphics).
Everyone is saying its endorsing a Microsoft "standard," but if you think about it it could take people off the Windows desktop, which is really our goal anyway.
So Microsoft gets to license a high-speed graphics library. So it sorta endorses the XBox. Who cares... they don't have monopolies in these areas.
All opinions presented here aren't mine.
while this seems like it has the potential to slow adoption of opengl, i doubt that all the big-name mac porting companies will suddenly go out of business. there are often multiple versions of games, and it is quite conceivable that these repackaged 'deluxe' editions will be full opengl ports as opposed to just recompiling directx code. this just means we'll see more simultaneous releases, and also that many directx developers will get a taste of opengl... they'll have to keep a mac around to test it on you know ;)
i think it will work more for opengls benefit. it in effect extends mac-pc compatibility in a very striking way.
I thought that there was an effort to 'port' directX to linux as well. Which would be a great win for linux...
Why is adapting a Windows standard a "great win for linux?"
Leading is not done by following.
You're right. But standing still is even worse than following (as MacOS proved for years and years). It seems clear to me that linux is not leading in many respects - gaming APIs being one, market position being another. Even if they had the best damn gaming APIs in the world, unless those APIs were ported to Windows, it would still be a losing proposition.
Providing software compatability is a great win for linux. OpenOffice is a great example of that. SAMBA is another.
I've read posts from some major Mac game programmers/porters on this topic. This won't have a major effect on their work, as Westlake and Contraband and other Mac porting houses have their own methods of converting from DirectX already. What this will do is help some PC-centric game developers make a Mac version in-house. Whether or not they'll do a good job isn't a given, of course. Personally, I doubt this will have a major effect on Mac game publishing.
"Common Sense Ain't" -Unknown
When it came time to pick an API to develop our new game my project team picked SDL + OpenGL hands-down. We never even considered DirectX. Now that there's a company offering a DirectX-compatible library our answer is the same: No thanks, DirectX! We like SDL. We love OpenGL. We like sharing our work.
But for existing games that were written to the DirectX APIs this should be a great boon. I'd definitely like to see Mac OS X versions of all those games that would otherwise never appear on the Mac.
Incidentally, there's an SDL version of Abuse out there. Has anyone been able to get it to compile and run on Mac OS X yet??
-- thinkyhead software and media
"the programmers would have a more elegant, and less restricted API."
These less restricted APIs would also be less robust and most likely suffer from performance problems. Part of the reason that Microsoft extends it's APIs and meta formats is not only to raise the cost of exit (smart move, not matter what industry)...It also allows them to add features whenever the hell they feel like it without waiting for some standards body to confer and agree on it. This is part of the reason OpenGL is currently lagging behind DX.