Sun's stance towards immediate mode?

[Captain-Goatse]

Is the Java3D immediate mode going to be supported in future, or would the programmer be better off with openGL as for immediate mode purposes?

Currently, the immediate mode seems to be very "limited" and doesn't have any documentation at all...

So is it going to exist in future?

[Herkules]

The scenegraph is the strongest feature with Java3D. If you need low-level stuff, you'd for sure better be off with LWJGL (if you can live with it's restrictions) or gl4java (if you can live with it's restrictions).

[Captain-Goatse]

Yeah, I kind of scrapped the immediate mode idea. At first things were great, but it kind of crapped out. I have to admit, the retained mode on J3d is a lot better.

Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!

[Herkules]

YES  

Java3D rulez!

[Matzon]

you'd for sure better be off with LWJGL (if you can live with it's restrictions)

Uhm - what limitations are we talking about, compared to j3d?

[gregorypierce]

The one limitation that we have (which we could actually solve if we really wanted to) is that LWJGL cannot be used to rendering into an arbitrary component... not that Java3D is all that adept at doing it... its just easier to build a Swing based GUI around Java3D.

For us to support that (if it is deemed important... and it kinda is), all we need to do is provide a method whereby a component can pass its window handle into LWJGL. Not totally trivial given our plans, but not more than a weekends worth of work either.

[Captain-Goatse]

What the hell... I think I'm installing GL4Java since I have never tried it. I have some experience with openGL on C++, but I doubt its much different. I can figure out where loops are replaced with threads and so on. If it sucks, then I'll get back to J3D.

[Herkules]

Uhm - what limitations are we talking about, compared to j3d?

Yes, what gregorypierce says. E.g. having only a single window is a serious limitation. Some people can live with that, others not.
Only wanted to compare lwjgl with gl4java, where the limitations are missing sound, input ... compared to lwjgl.

Both don't compare with Java3D in any way, which is lightyears ahead featurewise. That would be like comparing an IDE disc driver with Oracle.

Choosing the right thing now depends on wether you need to write a bunch of bytes fast to disc or wether you have to manage complex, gigantic structures. Unfortunately, games are somewhere between, so the right tool might be missing for a wide class of games.

[princec]

Someone's got to come up with a lightweight scene graph for LWJGL some time...

Cas

[Matzon]

Someone's got to come up with a lightweight scene graph for LWJGL some time...

I am a bit confused - was that a *hint* or a *hint* *nudge*

Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!

[Grom]

Here's an idea:

1. modify the Java md3view program to use lwjgl. From this we
obtain an md3 loader package. Maintaining it will be made
relatively easy because of the md3view application (easy to
shake out the md3 loader features).

2. finish porting (to lwjgl) the NeHe examples and other OpenGL/SDL
examples for MD3 Animation, Quake III BSP level rendering,
frustrum culling, etc...

Sitting on the shoulders of QuakeIII models and levels allows Java
developers to fully participate in the enormous (and talented)
base of artists - and to some degree developers. Java game
developers would have access to a grand tool base for creating
and animating worlds and models.

What I think needs to be strongly stated is that I believe the lwjgl
is stable and ready to handle this. As proof, the lwjgl already
runs about 15 of the NeHe/OpenGL tutorial lessons perfectly.
The framework and sample code is there for anyone to simply
port the remaining (small) MD3 Animation and BSP tutorials
to Java/LWJGL.

Here is the first page.
http://www.gametutorials.com/Tutorials/opengl/OpenGL_Pg1.htm

Notice most of these are already ported to LWGJL!
Page 5 has the MD3/BSP code.

Just do it!

[Herkules]

Where should that lead to? All these things are just right in place, just not in Java. Where's the benefit of doing it again?

[Grom]

They may be just in the right place for you, but not for me. I'm interested in writing games in Java not C++. Or, did I miss your point? This is a Java Gaming forum... :-)

[Matzon]

I think Herkules point (and a correct one!) is that one should choose the tool for the right job.

However - this site isn't about the right tool for the job, but how to use Java to create a game. Wheter or not it would be better to do the job in C++ (or other languages) is besides the point. If Java _can_ be used, it will be used.

Although Quake has been done in C, I don't see any wrongdoings in trying to make a Java version using lwjgl.
If it was always the right tool for the job, many languages would never have been developed - nor would we have as much fun ) - and we would all be developing using Visual Basic (!) for all our small programs.

[Abuse]

Has the Quake source been made available yet?

[Matzon]

Has the Quake source been made available yet?

Quake:
http://download.com.com/3000-2222-3152791.html?tag=list

Quake 2:
http://ftp://ftp.idsoftware.com/idstuff/source/quake2.zip

[gregorypierce]

and we would all be developing using Visual Basic (!) for all our small programs.

Dude, don't even say that jokingly  

[Abuse]

Quake:
http://download.com.com/3000-2222-3152791.html?tag=list

Quake 2:
http://ftp://ftp.idsoftware.com/idstuff/source/quake2.zip

I ofcourse meant the Q3 source, honest  
/me is trying not to look too stupid