Just trying the competition...

[Cristian]

Today I decided to take a bite on Ogre3D. It was sour. The OpenGL renderer sucks, and it doesn't pick up D3D 8. However D3D 9 compensates, it's smooth and clean, with no artefacts or problems. There are also some other issues but they're too long to discuss.(eg: it heavily relies on the newest STL, so sometimes it has errors on older OS's).

So as a conclusion Irrlicht could exceed Ogre 3D if it would:
-Fix a few D3D 9 issues (especially the "glossy mesh effect" yes I know it's model related, but is it that really hard to make Irrlicht ignore those material references !?)
-Implement some more overall functionality
-Be better documented
-Have CVS
-Fix a few format problems (especially .ms3d and .x)

No, I do not hate irrlicht. It is a great engine. (no I'm not going to say "but Ogre is better" and the rest instead, i will say this: ahem* I WILL USE BOTH!!! (and the crowd goes wild!!!) )
Actually since it's holiday, I think I might look into the irrlicht sources and see what's what, and a little from here, a little from there... you know...

[Guest]

-Implement some more overall functionality

that's kind of vague. In what areas?

-Have CVS

This site seems like a good workaround until then. http://parsys.informatik.uni-oldenburg. ... index.html

[Cristian]

-Progressive meshes (LOD)
-Skydomes (actually this isn't that important)
-Environmental Mapping (this isn't that important, but looks good)
-More particle affectors

And that's about it. I think. Anyway I'm still sticking to Irrlicht.

[disanti]

Personally, I think the documentation is perfect. :p
http://irrlicht.sf.net/docu
________
ZODIA

[area51]

Irrlicht is one of the better documeted engines I've come across, certainly not an area of concern by any stretch of the imagination
________
TOYOTA VANGUARD SPECIFICATIONS

[Guest]

I've been following both Ogre and Irrlicht for over a year, and I consider both of them to be very good engines. What tips the scales for me in making a choice are three simple facts:

1. Irrlicht has far fewer library dependancies.
2. Irrlicht compiles under Dev-C++/Mingw or Code:Blocks/Mingw.
3. My game plans are based on OpenGL, not DX

I'm not fond of VC++ even though I use it at work. And having "all the cool features in the world" is useless if the learning curve is too steep or it's a PITA to implement..

I'm sure that both engines will continue to evolve their features and be first class but in my book "simple is good" and Irrlicht wins on that point. YMMV.

[afecelis]

Int, don't forget Codeblocks/MSVC VisualToolkit. Compiles beautifully! And you can get DX working.

[Guest]

@afecelis: true enough. I'm just staying away from using M$ compilers. I'd like to go back to the "old days" (read: "When DOS Ruled the Earth") and simplify things. My convictions are summed up very nicely here:

"Microsoft allowed us to change our startup screen, but we don't think we should have to ask permission every time we want to make some minor software modification. Windows is an operating system, not a religion" - Ted Waitt, Gateway Chairman

BTW, I think that the Code:Blocks IDE absolutely rocks!