[osg-users] Why isn't OpenSceneGraph used in games?

[Trajce Nikolov NICK]

I will jump in with an add as well (please don't be mad at me, it is still
about OSG :-) )

Have a look at http://openig.compro.net

It is a very thin and simple Image Generator on top of OSG, opensource as
well, and it does have some features implemented that are common in the
game dev ( I am not a game dev expert though ). Things like Forward+
lighting, env/normal mapping, real physics based sensor support, 3D ocean,
3D clouds, true ephemeris model (some of these rely on commercial toolkits,
used in game dev as well). It also have support for bullet physics
(opensource too), support for large pageable terrain visual databases, even
the whole planet with osgearth. The great thing about this is that OSG is
making it easy to implement such projects in very short term cost effective
by the huge foundation of code and the large community, without the need of
big amount of cash as the others from the game dev will ask you for, like
Havok, Crytek .. It is opensource (oh well, Unreal is opensource too right
:-) )

So, although OSG is general purpose scenegraph, it is widely used in very
high-end simulation programs (I have seen it it Airbus, Williams Formula 1
and many other simulation companies). But, it is possible to narrow it into
more optimized direction and implement very hacky tricks known from the
game dev. Also, you can find here on this list gurus that can do that in
very professional way.

Just a few words

Cheers,
Nick

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:18 PM, Chris Hanson <xenon at alphapixel.com> wrote:

> AAA Games tend to not use ANY off the shelf engine technology, because
> they like to be able to hack up and optimize everything down to the lowest
> level.
>
> A scene graph such as OSG (or any other scene graph, really) tends to be
> setup to work well for a large number of general cases, which means it may
> not be totally optimal for one particular case.
>
> Many games aren't totally free-roaming "sandbox" environments and as such,
> can make optimizations to culling and LOD that a general purpose scene
> graph does not support. I worked on a vis-sim project where the viewpoint
> was literally "on rails". It could only move along certain paths. They
> struggled a little bit with culling in their general-purpose scene graphs
> (like OSG, but others too) that do full general purpose culling on every
> frame. It just wasn't necessary.
>
> Short answer: Scene Graphs of all kinds, including OSG, are often too
> general for the violently performance-competitive realm of AAA game
> development. Titles like those usually get customized tweaks put into the
> actual GRAPHIC DRIVER in order to maximize performance. Long before they
> got to that point, they would have wanted to strip down and redesign the
> entire scene graph to remove ANYTHING they didn't need and optimize the
> rest to one single goal and architecture.
>
> OSG _does_ get used in a variety of independent and lower-tier games where
> development time and cost and efficiency may have a higher importance than
> absolute raw blistering performance.
> ​
> For your project, OSG should be excellent. Look at Virtual Planet Builder
> and possibly osgEarth for large free-roaming environments. osgEarth could
> save you a decade of man-years of development of high-efficiency large
> terrain area roaming algorithms and code, and it utilizes OSG in the most
> high-performance ways available.
>
>
> If you want consulting assistance on your project, that's what I do to put
> bread on the table every week. ;)
>
> _______________________________________________
> osg-users mailing list
> osg-users at lists.openscenegraph.org
> http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
>
>


-- 
trajce nikolov nick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openscenegraph.org/pipermail/osg-users-openscenegraph.org/attachments/20160421/29ab0d6e/attachment-0003.htm>