On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Jaime <[email protected]> wrote: > > So, I have a question. As I salid in the subject...why is not OSG popular > and used??
I think it depends a lot on the definition of "popular" and "used". OSG can be found as a part of many professional visualization and simulations systems, driving big installations. It maybe just isn't as visible, because it is only one of many parts such installation uses. Also, these are usually not mass-market projects with millions in marketing and advertising budgets, so you are not likely to be aware of them unless you are directly involved, even though the price of such installation can exceed the development budget of an AAA game title several times ... If you are looking at game development, this has been answered before - OSG is not a game engine and while it can be used to build one (e.g. the Delta3D engine or the Worldviz Vizard toolkit), it is not something people looking for an integrated engine like Unity or Unreal will typically want to do. A typical game has a shelf life of 6-12 months, spending months building your own engine on top of OSG with such rapid turnover is not likely going to be worth the investment for most people. Also, dedicated game engines usually come with artwork production pipelines and such - OSG doesn't have that. While it is not horribly complicated, it is a significant time investment which pays off only long term. With Unreal or Unity you get these things as part of the package. On the other hand, if you need flexibility, because you must adapt to things like driving a head-mounted display or a full motion flight simulator, CAVE and such you will want OSG. Many of these things are either very complicated or outright impossible to do with a typical game engine. Ogre3D has been mentioned by others, however, Ogre isn't really in the same ballpark as the big commercial engines like Unreal or even Unity. The documentation is poor (collecting random code snippets buried in their forums is not proper documentation, IMO), the tools are basic at best, the engine itself is fairly dated, with the OpenGL renderer being outright horrible. > If I look for information, there are not so much. Also, all the info is > very very old. > I think the http://www.openscenegraph.com/ has all the documentation you may ever want and it is fairly current, even if it is old. OSG has a pretty stable design and most of the core concepts haven't really changed in years. Some of my old code from 2002-2003 still works even with the current OSG, perhaps with minor fixes - 10 years later. > > What do you think about it? Do you think that OSG has a potential power > future, specially with video games? I think that depends on the game developers. OSG has the bits you would want to build a very good game engine, but it isn't one out of the box. On the other hand, if you need a solid foundation that you can rely on and where you are sure that your middle-ware vendor will not pull the rug from under you in the long term by a sudden license change, royalties hike or even discontinuation of the product you are depending on, OSG could be hard to beat. Regards, Jan
_______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
