4 ms·

Vulkan is great except it doesn't work on anything Apple. Dealbreaker if you want users.

by Hydraulix989 9y ago

smallstepforman 9y ago
https://moltengl.com/moltenvk/ https://moltengl.com/moltenvk/
MattRix 9y ago
Not if you're making desktop games, where the vast majority of the users are on Windows.
- Hydraulix989 9y ago
  Mobile game revenue just surpassed desktop (and it's been on that trajectory for several years now). Vulkan means your users HAVE to run Android -- specifically, Android N (often they do not because of things like slow-moving carrier controlled OS updates). iOS is not supported.
  - animal531 9y ago
    Well, two things. Firstly a generic indie hoping to get a slice of that giant mobile pie of cash is most likely going to end up very disappointed. Secondly, the majority of games on mobile does not need Vulkan performance. Sure, extra performance is always great, but the majority of big sellers are your generic run of the mill 2d games. But having said that, either way I really dislike the in-fighting between the companies, each trying to get their own API/vision to the top of the pile (The same is happening with VR etc). At the end of the day they're just damaging their own ecosystems.
    - Hydraulix989 9y ago
      "Firstly a generic indie hoping to get a slice of that giant mobile pie of cash is most likely going to end up very disappointed." How is this a different situation than with desktop or console? What in particular about mobile makes it worse for the indie developer? For one thing, I contend that you have FAR more eyeballs in front of mobile screens than desktop or console. "Secondly, the majority of games on mobile does not need Vulkan performance." The majority of apps on mobile don't need Vulkan, but the ones that do CAN benefit from it (e.g. mobile VR is SO sensitive to framerate).
      - animal531 9y ago
        Sorry for the late reply. The problem with mobile is that you have more eyeballs, but less investment. The price of mobile games (if bought) are ridiculously low compared to PC/console. As a result, go and look at the top sellers in the mobile market. The big winners are all the f2p games that can sell in-app purchases to whales, netting them a lot of money. Your average developer (because of the giant size of the store) gets sidelined by the store with no exposure, because the store doesn't believe he'll make any money...and as a result he doesn't because no one discovers his game. If you look at a graph of sales its heavily skewed to the front/top where they're making all the money, then there's a rapid drop in profitability. The guys on the bottom consider themselves lucky if they can recoup even the cost to use the store. This of course isn't true for all indies, there are many that are successful (and once you are you can continue based on people knowing your previous games). Sadly in general though odds are much better for you on desktop.
y_u_no_rust 9y ago
Who cares about Apple on anything but mobile?
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
rf15 9y ago
molten vk, also: if you want users... https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0 https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share...
- Hydraulix989 9y ago
  The Vulkan equivalent of WINE really isn't the right solution IMO -- especially given that it means relying on closed source third party software with a non-zero monetary cost.
sharpneli 9y ago
It's not that hard to abstract the Vulkan details away and implement a Metal backend for Apple. Metal is actually less low level.
aras_p 9y ago
* OpenGL is a dealbreaker since modern things in it (compute etc.) don't work on iOS/Mac; and elsewhere has a lot of driver stability problems. Does not work on any consoles. * Metal is a dealbreaker since it does not work anywhere that's _not_ Apple. * Vulkan is a dealbreaker since it only works on Android (mobile) or requires fairly new drivers/GPU (PC). Does not work on consoles. * Direct3D 11 is a dealbreaker since it does not exist outside Microsoft platforms, and does not have some modern stuff (async compute etc.). * Direct3D 12 is a dealbreaker since it does not exist outside Microsoft platforms; and on PC requires Win10. See a common pattern? All of them can be considered "dealbreakers" for one or another reason. The (perhaps sad) reality today is, that you can't cover "all platforms" with a single graphics API. Not that it's a big issue though... making a renderer/engine that works on more than one graphics API is not that big of a deal, compared to challenges everywhere else in game development.

Vulkan is great except it doesn't work on anything Apple. Dealbreaker if you want users.

smallstepforman 9y ago

https://moltengl.com/moltenvk/ https://moltengl.com/moltenvk/

MattRix 9y ago

Not if you're making desktop games, where the vast majority of the users are on Windows.

Hydraulix989 9y ago
Mobile game revenue just surpassed desktop (and it's been on that trajectory for several years now). Vulkan means your users HAVE to run Android -- specifically, Android N (often they do not because of things like slow-moving carrier controlled OS updates). iOS is not supported.
- animal531 9y ago
  Well, two things. Firstly a generic indie hoping to get a slice of that giant mobile pie of cash is most likely going to end up very disappointed. Secondly, the majority of games on mobile does not need Vulkan performance. Sure, extra performance is always great, but the majority of big sellers are your generic run of the mill 2d games. But having said that, either way I really dislike the in-fighting between the companies, each trying to get their own API/vision to the top of the pile (The same is happening with VR etc). At the end of the day they're just damaging their own ecosystems.
  - Hydraulix989 9y ago
    "Firstly a generic indie hoping to get a slice of that giant mobile pie of cash is most likely going to end up very disappointed." How is this a different situation than with desktop or console? What in particular about mobile makes it worse for the indie developer? For one thing, I contend that you have FAR more eyeballs in front of mobile screens than desktop or console. "Secondly, the majority of games on mobile does not need Vulkan performance." The majority of apps on mobile don't need Vulkan, but the ones that do CAN benefit from it (e.g. mobile VR is SO sensitive to framerate).
    - animal531 9y ago
      Sorry for the late reply. The problem with mobile is that you have more eyeballs, but less investment. The price of mobile games (if bought) are ridiculously low compared to PC/console. As a result, go and look at the top sellers in the mobile market. The big winners are all the f2p games that can sell in-app purchases to whales, netting them a lot of money. Your average developer (because of the giant size of the store) gets sidelined by the store with no exposure, because the store doesn't believe he'll make any money...and as a result he doesn't because no one discovers his game. If you look at a graph of sales its heavily skewed to the front/top where they're making all the money, then there's a rapid drop in profitability. The guys on the bottom consider themselves lucky if they can recoup even the cost to use the store. This of course isn't true for all indies, there are many that are successful (and once you are you can continue based on people knowing your previous games). Sadly in general though odds are much better for you on desktop.

y_u_no_rust 9y ago

Who cares about Apple on anything but mobile?

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

rf15 9y ago

molten vk, also: if you want users... https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0 https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share...

Hydraulix989 9y ago
The Vulkan equivalent of WINE really isn't the right solution IMO -- especially given that it means relying on closed source third party software with a non-zero monetary cost.

sharpneli 9y ago

It's not that hard to abstract the Vulkan details away and implement a Metal backend for Apple. Metal is actually less low level.

aras_p 9y ago

* OpenGL is a dealbreaker since modern things in it (compute etc.) don't work on iOS/Mac; and elsewhere has a lot of driver stability problems. Does not work on any consoles. * Metal is a dealbreaker since it does not work anywhere that's _not_ Apple. * Vulkan is a dealbreaker since it only works on Android (mobile) or requires fairly new drivers/GPU (PC). Does not work on consoles. * Direct3D 11 is a dealbreaker since it does not exist outside Microsoft platforms, and does not have some modern stuff (async compute etc.). * Direct3D 12 is a dealbreaker since it does not exist outside Microsoft platforms; and on PC requires Win10. See a common pattern? All of them can be considered "dealbreakers" for one or another reason. The (perhaps sad) reality today is, that you can't cover "all platforms" with a single graphics API. Not that it's a big issue though... making a renderer/engine that works on more than one graphics API is not that big of a deal, compared to challenges everywhere else in game development.