What is the current stance of Nvidia and Intel on implementing Mantle support? And what are the chances of mobile GPU makers doing the same? Is it easier to make a better OpenGL 5, or to adopt Mantle across all GPU manufacturers?
Back when I worked in Windows/console games, my market demanded D3D (+ sony/nintendo's wacky custom APIs). Now I work in mobile and my customers demand GLES. GL advocates used to cry "GL has the better tech! D3D only wins because of politics! Boo!" It will be quite a turn if they switch tunes to "D3D has better tech, but GL still wins because of politics! Yay!"
DX12 API Preview vid http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Build/2014/3-564
DX12 API Preview slides http://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=http%3a%2f%...
What are you actually comparing? Yet to be released DirectX12 v.s. OpenGL 4.4? Or v.s. what will actually "compete" against it, once it is actually released and used, OpenGL 4.5 or 5.0? Are you just assuming future versions will be worse than Direct3D? "used to cry"? That sounds all very fair and objective.
And even then, this attitude AMD has had for the last two years since announcing it certainly dooms it to a death of irrelevance. If they were serious about it being an open API, they would have opened up proposals for modifications and considerations from other vendors before having it deployed in games.
They could still do a heel face turn of course, but I would never expect it. OpenGL5 is more likely the answer, but that requires Khronos to accept that even the Core Profile shift in 3.2 was not enough, they need to rewrite the entire shader language and standardize a modern pipeline without all this redundant backwards oldschool bullcrap that makes the implementations so slow due to state nonsense.
That kind of defeats the purpose then. If AMD wanted any kind of chances for adoption they had to open it from the start.
> But that requires Khronos to accept that even the Core Profile shift in 3.2 was not enough, they need to rewrite the entire shader language and standardize a modern pipeline without all this redundant backwards oldschool bullcrap that makes the implementations so slow due to state nonsense.
How exactly is Khronos managed? Is there someone with decisive power, or it's simply by consensus of all participants? For example can Valve or any other interested party come tomorrow with a serious overhaul of OpenGL and expect that such changes will be accepted?