[casual_games] DirectDraw or Direct3D

[Joe Pantuso]

Earlier in the thread GDI+ was being mentioned before GDI.  It is worth
pointing out for people who have not tried it yet that GDI+ is vastly slower
than GDI.  This is very unfortunate given the great features of GDI+, but
the reality is that GDI has hardware acceleration on even the doggiest
hardware out there, while GDI+ is a software renderer.

That said it will always come down to what the game is whether the tech can
handle it.  And in this list the largest feature of variance is the team
size/resources/capabilities.  For a team of 1 that started this thread, my
advice is go with what you know.  If you will be working in C++ but need to
learn a rendering platform, go with something with the most versatility.  If
you want to focus on your game look at Popcap or Torque, if you want to own
your rendering layers look at Direct3D for 2D.


On 2/13/06, Jonas Beckeman <list at jobe.nu> wrote:
>
> > 3. It's not.
>
> When the majority of the gfx operations consist of manually setting
> pixels,
> the difference won't be that big (DD Surface memory ops should even be
> slower than Windows HDC/Bitmap because you have to go over the gfx bus I
> guess) - and the more complex the scene, the closer the two will be.
>
> An example where DD would win hands-down is scrolling a large background,
> so
> there *are* applications for it on non-3D computers. If you need it for a
> specific project - sure, use it - but don't base your engine on it.
>
> /Jonas
>
> _______________________________________________
> Casual_Games mailing list
> Casual_Games at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/casual_games
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/casual_games/attachments/20060213/19de860d/attachment.htm