Irrlicht .15 / Mac OS X support

whogben · Post by **whogben** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 7:07 pm

Hi, does anyone have an estimates on timing on Irrlicht .15 - or if that might not include the Mac OS X support, estimates on timing for that?

Thanks, Will.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 3:41 am

you'll be lucky to get that info. I imagine the mac port won't make it for a good few releases yet (at least stable) - which is a shame but irrlicht is still great

Maize · Post by **Maize** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:03 pm

Not really. Mostly people use windows or linux so its not a shame. If you must have mac support check out lightfeather. And personally, I wouldnt buy a mac if I wanted to play games anyway.

hybrid · Post by **hybrid** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:19 pm

Now, Irrlicht is no game engine, so there could be other reasons to use it than gaming. And Mac support is a standard feature for 3D engines. Since X11 support makes it rather simple to have Mac support it's really bad to not have it in Irrlicht. But there are some people currently working on this!

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 12:56 am

Maize wrote:Not really. Mostly people use windows or linux so its not a shame. If you must have mac support check out lightfeather. And personally, I wouldnt buy a mac if I wanted to play games anyway.

Maize.. please get yourself informed before posting such misinformation. "boo sucks I don't like Macs so they must be useless"

The object of an engine is not to let devs run it ONLY on their machines, there ARE mac users out there (Im not one) who want games - small games - indie games.. they actually convert better (download > sales) than indie pc games. Linux is hardcore dev country and they don't buy small games.

Basically stop talking out of your arse and proving how wrong you are about everything.

And lightfeather has other problems that make it "Non ideal" for windows shareware so irrlicht is best for windows out of the 2 for now.

And before you say "who gives a stuff about shareware I just wanna make something cool for me and my pals" just remember there are people out there who would LOVE mac support in irrlicht as it is starting to be left behind. Mac support (as hybrid said) is standard now, regardless of whether you would buy a mac to play games - wtf kind of attitude is that? It has nothing to do with the people who happen to own macs and may want to play your game.

every week this topic crops up and still idiots with clues rant on from the perspective of a hardcore PC user. Get over it and stop being a clueless fanboy.

Maize · Post by **Maize** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 4:41 pm

Im curious about how you got all this information about me. That is because none of it is true. I just said a fact, most people dont have macs. And for the record, I do like macs.

so shutup.

luckymutt · Post by **luckymutt** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 8:58 pm

I just said a fact, most people dont have macs.

And most people don't have Linux either, but having a Linux port is a good thing.
What's your point?
I think that yes, it is a shame there is no Mac port yet, and I am very glad that it is something that is in consideration on the roadmap.

And personally, I wouldnt buy a mac if I wanted to play games anyway.

bfd
Most Mac users (as well as any other os users) are not choosing there os for the sake of playing games.

@whogben - It seems that the mac port is on the backburner, just from looking at the roadmap, which I agreee is a shame.
there are several reasons that I would love to see a Mac port, and unfortunately, I am not good enough, experience-wise, to contribute to that end. If you or anyone you know is down with Mac dev, I am sure Niko would be willing to look at anyone's effort to creating a Mac port

mm765 · Post by **mm765** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 9:34 pm

Guest wrote: And lightfeather has other problems that make it "Non ideal" for windows shareware so irrlicht is best for windows out of the 2 for now.

could you elaborate on this please ?

Eternl Knight · Post by **Eternl Knight** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 10:09 pm

A Mac port was one of the major points I had for an engine until recently. Not through any change in the "customer" side of things, but because Macs will soon (in development terms) be coming out using Intel hardware. In other words - the same OS "platform" will be running on two different hardware architectures (with endian differences and everything!).

Macs ARE currently a good market for indie games as the owners of such are hard pressed for big release games (aside from the biggest FPS titles). The LightFeather engine runs on Mac. Given the simialrities between Irrlicht & LightFeather - if you are really interested, port it yourself *shrug*

Open-source is a wonderful thing because it allows you to do this.

--EK

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 11:10 am

mm765 wrote:
Guest wrote: And lightfeather has other problems that make it "Non ideal" for windows shareware so irrlicht is best for windows out of the 2 for now.
could you elaborate on this please ?

Without wanting to string this out - or get involved in an argument about THIS issue as well. I will just say. "NO DIRECTX8".

DX9 (planned?) is too high a sys requirement for general shareware/casual users who do not update (please don't anyone even start to tell me all the obvious poop about winxpsp2 + dx9 or that in their opinion a games player will update to dx9 if they need to - in many many cases they won't/don't and it is the job of the DEVELOPER to make sure that the lowest possible system config and most basic user can play your game out of the box without additional downloads).

Which is why I won't be using lightfeather, it is GOOD for mac don't get me wrong, and it WORKS on pc but there is a reason 99% of ALL games sold on indie-portals are DX and NOT OGL (a very famous example was written in OGL then the team HAD to convert to DX7 just to get a decent conversion ratio :: downloads > sales).

If none of that is important to your development then lightfeather looks great. But for serious indie-devs who make MONEY from their games it is lacking the minimum of DX8 only renderer which forces the user to up to DX9 which many devs have said is like "the kiss of death" for shareware.

Read the above and digest it - don't argue with me about it because I won't reply, you are entitled to think what you want and I understand if you need to use DX9 or want to use OGL and are not thinking about wide compat.. we are in different ball-parks with different uses.

The the guy who posted the question.. I am not having a go at you, I am saying this strongly because EVERY time I post this documented fact on hardcore game dev boards people with no experience in the industry attempt to discredit it without research. If you doubt me then google is your friend

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 11:59 am

Anonymous wrote: Without wanting to string this out - or get involved in an argument about THIS issue as well. I will just say. "NO DIRECTX8".

DX9 (planned?) is too high a sys requirement for general shareware/casual users who do not update (please don't anyone even start to tell me all the obvious poop about winxpsp2 + dx9 or that in their opinion a games player will update to dx9 if they need to - in many many cases they won't/don't and it is the job of the DEVELOPER to make sure that the lowest possible system config and most basic user can play your game out of the box without additional downloads).

Which is why I won't be using lightfeather, it is GOOD for mac don't get me wrong, and it WORKS on pc but there is a reason 99% of ALL games sold on indie-portals are DX and NOT OGL (a very famous example was written in OGL then the team HAD to convert to DX7 just to get a decent conversion ratio :: downloads > sales).

If none of that is important to your development then lightfeather looks great. But for serious indie-devs who make MONEY from their games it is lacking the minimum of DX8 only renderer which forces the user to up to DX9 which many devs have said is like "the kiss of death" for shareware.

Read the above and digest it - don't argue with me about it because I won't reply, you are entitled to think what you want and I understand if you need to use DX9 or want to use OGL and are not thinking about wide compat.. we are in different ball-parks with different uses.

The the guy who posted the question.. I am not having a go at you, I am saying this strongly because EVERY time I post this documented fact on hardcore game dev boards people with no experience in the industry attempt to discredit it without research. If you doubt me then google is your friend

if google is my friend, could you please tell me the keywords which i have to type in to get facts/information about what you just wrote? (the "directx9 is a too high requirement" thingy)

well i tried to let google search with "bullshit" but i did not find anything, so it must be something else

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 3:10 pm

GFXstyLER wrote: well i tried to let google search with "bullshit" but i did not find anything, so it must be something else

That's your problem, you don't know the "keywords" because you simply lack the experience of real world game development.

A tip - don't ever try going into business with your attitude.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 3:20 pm

oh heres one (very mild) link on the matter.

http://forums.indiegamer.com/showthread ... ht=directx

There are even more on there than that pointing out very clearly why you are wrong in your beliefs.

Now if you feel like registering at indiegamer.com and trying to convince everyone from RealArcade / Reflexive and Pop Cap business guys to people make thousands from their game that you are correct then go ahead.

I can't wait to see you get your ass handed to you as the noob you are.

Yes you are smart for a young guy, technically, but you really need to see the big picture if you ever want to grow... that comes from maturity, admiting you are wrong, acceptinig others opinions and ideas... all of those you are incapable of at this current time. Maybe in a couple of years.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 3:27 pm

http://forums.indiegamer.com/showthread ... ht=directx

knock yourself out (if you can be bothered to invest reading time into actual research instead of ignoring anything that doesn't back up your unfounded view of the gamedev world).

Maize · Post by **Maize** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 3:28 pm

That thread doesnt prove anything. Never once does it say anything about using directx8 as opposed to dx9.