Hi, I''ve been programming games for a long time, but I''ve always used someone else''s directX wrappers. I was just starting to learn directX (Direct Draw actually) myself, and I just read that microsoft is ditching DirectDraw, and having everything done through DirectGraphics/Direct3D? So I was wondering if you think it''s still a good idea to learn directdraw, or should I try to just learn DirectGraphics/Direct3D?? TIA

I think you arnt going to get far with DDraw. Face it my friend, if its not 3d -- its nothing. Although if you are aldschool like me, your gona stik wit da'' 13h mode. I miself thoufg, would learn both DDraw and DirectGrafics(D3D), along with everything else. Could this tern into a war about 2D grafics, like gl vs. d3d?

- err, the last signiture sucked bigtime!

btw, this has been posted before, and lead to a decent discussion, search for it if interrested.

basically to sum it up.

microsoft did not ditch directdraw. you will be able to use it even if ppl install dx1723, simply because dx is backwards compatible. video manufacturers are not adding anymore 2d features to their video cards so there is no need to update the interfaces. ms saw this as an oppurtunity to clean up d3d and make things more competitive by making d3d easier to use. ms redesigned d3d and now is MUCH easier to create 3d apps using dx8.

d3d CANT replace directdraw. it simple is not possible. most per pixel effects cannot by done using d3d.

video players have no reason to use d3d, especially since many cards out there cant handle extremly large textures. directdraw also supplies some acceleration as well to video apps. yuv is done in hardware and other things like video ports help ensure the video card does more work and frees up the cpu.

you should learn both. because no matter what ppl say, 3d games are the rage and is what the mainstream public want. d3d can accelerate tile based games very well and help with alpha blending in those apps. while i ussually perfer the 2d look, video cards are getting to the point with cell shading that a 3d game can almost look as good as some older 2d titles.

some specialized 2d apps though are best left to directdraw. these include video players, visual plugins that do per pixel effects, etc.

i learned both, and it helps.

quote: Original post by AfTeRmAtH
I think you arnt going to get far with DDraw. Face it my friend, if its not 3d -- its nothing. Although if you are aldschool like me, your gona stik wit da'' 13h mode

HA HA HA HA HA!

i hope not!!! i''ve loved directdraw very much, although at first i wasn''t... hm... if i learned d3d will i love it too? am just scared to learn it though as of now...

quote: Original post by a person
d3d CANT replace directdraw. it simple is not possible. most per pixel effects cannot by done using d3d.

Im pretty sure thats why Vertex/pixel shaders exist. They will do all of that.


-----------------------------
The sad thing about artificial intelligence is that it lacks artifice and therefore intelligence.

quote: Original post by krez

Original post by AfTeRmAtH
I think you arnt going to get far with DDraw. Face it my friend, if its not 3d – its nothing. Although if you are aldschool like me, your gona stik wit da'' 13h mode

HA HA HA HA HA!
HA HA HA HA HA?



- err, the last signiture sucked bigtime!

quote: Original post by AfTeRmAtH
I think you arnt going to get far with DDraw. Face it my friend, if its not 3d -- its nothing. Although if you are aldschool like me, your gona stik wit da'' 13h mode...
***
me: HA HA HA HA HA!
***
you: HA HA HA HA HA?

yes, i said, "HA HA HA HA HA!"
do i really have to explain? that always ruins the joke...
i''ll just give a hint: are you doing 3D in "da'' 13h mode"? or do you just program nothing?
again, HA HA HA HA HA!
i really shouldn''t be so disrespectful as to make fun of an "aldschooler" like yourself.... heh heh...

--- krez (krezisback@aol.com)

yeh.. OK. Maby your right. I do sound kind of self-centerd there . Just ignore plese.

- err, the last signiture sucked bigtime!

promit, you dont understand what vertex/pixel shaders are for. i like to see you perform some of the oldchool perpixel effects. try the simple translation map with feedback effect. a simple lookup table which translate the pixels in the backbuffer becomes an utter nightmare to do in 3d hardware. using renders to texture, copying to system ram, aplly the translation, sending to vidram again, then blitting to the screen AND the offscreen render surface to do it again does not sound too fun nor fast. btw you could not even use pixel shaders for that and vertex shaders? heh, nope. there are many others, like TRUE radial blurs (none of that recursive crap). true you can do some nift things with pixel shaders, but they are not designed to replace direct access. last i checked you cant get fully random texture access using pixel shaders.

i see the 3d hardware marketing gurus got you pretty good with their naming convention.