Re: Tools

[Pierre Phaneuf <pp@ludusdesign.com>]

"Andrei de A. Formiga" wrote:

> The XWindows system just wasn't designed for games, as windows95 wasn't
> when released (there was a WinG library for games but it was quite awful,
> performance-wise).

I think comparing top-of-the-heap game SDK for X Window on Linux to WinG
would be fair (for performance). (this is also the part where Linux game
SDK developers should start weeping)

I seriously believe that getting at least 90% of Windows DirectX
performance is possible with the X architecture. By that, I mean
"without having to go to the console". This might be through XFree86
improvements, through a gaming-oriented X extensions (like MIT-SHM and
XFree86-DGA) or through a complex system like direct rendering. But it
can do it. Let's do it!

90% would be sufficient to me, even though "as fast as possible" is of
course what I would prefer. But 5% is unbearable!

>         But, in the tools department, I have just to agree with Erik and
> Steve.

I don't think much about the tool department. I think point-click-done
tools are needed for success and I heard of such tools for Linux being
nice, but I don't use them.

> Someone in the list mentioned quake3test was released first for
> linux, and why is that ? As far as I know, John Carmack doesn't
> write his games using windows.

John Carmack admitted not using vi and its command-line ilks (not much
more into emacs either!). He uses Visual C++ on Windows NT to write his
games. When he works on Linux, he uses IDEs like CodeWarrior (I think
that's the one he said he uses). On Mac he also uses CodeWarrior.

Yes, he writes his games using Windows, but not solely.

-- 
Pierre Phaneuf
Ludus Design, http://ludusdesign.com/
"First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you.
Then they fight you. Then you win." -- Gandhi