7 ms·

This is from July 2022. Now that Stadia is shutting down [1], does that mean anything bad for Vulkan, I’m curious? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33

This is from July 2022. Now that Stadia is shutting down [1], does that mean anything bad for Vulkan, I’m curious? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33022768 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33022768

danielvaughn 4y ago
I'm not super familiar with the space, but from what I know, I'd say it would have almost no impact. The industry seems to have been moving towards Vulkan for a while now. Stadia may indeed have accelerated it, but the shutdown isn't going to halt its progress. (IMO)
- pjmlp 4y ago
  Other than Linux, specially Android, very few game developers would bother with Vulkan per se. PlayStation and XBox were never found of Khronos APIs (other than GL ES 1.0 + Cg on the PS 1). Nintendo had a GL subset on the Wii, and while Switch supports GL 4.6 and Vulkan, those that want full control need to use NVN. Apple is going with Metal. And if one intents to use Vulkan abstraction layers as a kind of pseudo middleware, they are better of using classical middleware anyway.
  - jonhohle 4y ago
    Is there an industry advantage to divesting from OpenGL and splitting into a device specific APIs with hugely overlapping features, yet I’m sure, an impedance mismatch? Since most devs are targeting Unity or some other batteries included game engine, does it just not matter anymore?
    - morelisp 4y ago
      The total impedance matches of all device specific platforms you might target is often less than the impedance mismatch of just OpenGL vs. the real world.
    - pjmlp 4y ago
      It never mattered outside FOSS circles, in the 8 and 16 bit days every platform was a special snowflake, so the industry grew porting contractors, platform specialized studios and middleware. If you dive into something like Ogre3D, you will see that actual 3D rendering API is a tiny slice of the whole cake, let alone in something like Unreal.
  - Mikeb85 4y ago
    No game developer is using raw Vulkan, Metal or DX12. these APIs aren't the same level of abstraction as OpenGL... Vulkan is AMD's Mantle open-sourced, it's far too low level for devs to waste time with, it's a target for game engines and renderers.
    - dagmx 4y ago
      I think both your sentences are incorrect. Tons of AAA game developers make their own engine and therefore work directly with the APIs while making an abstraction layer for their higher level game developers. Vulkan is also not just Mantle open sourced. It’s a significant deviation from the original Mantle API. Mantle was a starting point but what emerged as Vulkan was quite different.
      - Mikeb85 4y ago
        > Tons of AAA game developers make their own engine Recently a bunch switched to Unreal. Are there THAT many that still maintain their own? Seems like it's just big studios and less than a dozen. Even a massive company like Square Enix is now using Unreal for many projects.
        sk0g 4y ago
        Ubisoft have about 5 engines themselves. When Microsoft acquires Acti-Blizz, they'll have close to a dozen engines under their umbrella as is, I think. UE being picked up by a AAA studio is news, because gamers associate UE with extreme fidelity graphics. A studio using a proprietary engine is boring because it won't matter one bit for 99% of people, and is modus operandi, basically. Edit: remembered SteamDB has a rough breakdown based on manual rules, so a lot of engines aren't picked up, but it's still interesting - https://steamdb.info/tech/ https://steamdb.info/tech/ Proprietary engines tend to be more common on consoles I think - Steam has a lower barrier to entry overall, so it doesn't filter out the smaller projects as much (which are more likely to use an off-the-shelf engine).
        dagmx 4y ago
        Almost all Sony first party studios use custom engines, even when they support PC. Most Nintendo first party games are custom engines. The majority of Microsoft first party games are custom engines. Ubisoft use custom engines, EA use custom engines. Call of Duty is a custom engine (derived from idTech) If you go to the GDC YouTube channel ( https://youtube.com/c/Gdconf https://youtube.com/c/Gdconf ) you can see the range of game specific things that these studios are working on that using an off the shelf engine is limiting I also recommend looking at the presentations on http://advances.realtimerendering.com/ http://advances.realtimerendering.com/
- dagmx 4y ago
  The industry has most definitely not moved towards Vulkan. It’s still quite a small player in terms of market share of games. Most windows games still target DirectX or OpenGL instead of Vulkan. With how well Proton runs, there’s even less incentive for game devs to directly target Vulkan now.
  - danielvaughn 4y ago
    In terms of market share sure, though the Vulkan/Metal/whatever approach is clearly the future, no? AFAIK that isn't in question, it's just a matter of how long it will take for mass adoption.
    - dagmx 4y ago
      Yea going towards low overhead APIs like Metal, Vulkan and DX12 are definitely the way. DX12 has a very significant market share lead and is what most game devs on PC would target. Vulkan being a distant second and Metal being an even more distant third.
- flohofwoe 4y ago
  Vulkan is only really relevant if you also want to publish your game on Linux or Android (targeting Linux is not as laughable as it was a couple of years ago because of Steam Deck - of course there's also Proton, so a native Linux port isn't even needed in most cases). Game consoles don't use Vulkan, Windows is better served with DX12 if you also publish on Xbox, macOS has Metal but macOS is also a fairly tiny market. All in all, Vulkan doesn't actually matter all that much outside of Linux and Android.
  - xani_ 4y ago
    Steam Deck does.
    - flohofwoe 4y ago
      ...which is a regular Linux PC in a handheld format, not a 'traditional' game console (which have highly customized operating systems).
      - xani_ 4y ago
        Distinction without difference. People buy it to use like console
        flohofwoe 4y ago
        This thread is about Vulkan adoption though, which doesn't matter for regular users buying any piece of hardware. For developers the fact that the Steam Deck is "just a Linux PC" matters though.
      - SirMittens 4y ago
        Afaik, - Xbox is basically using Windows Core + the xbox shell and runs the games in virtual machines. - The PS4/5 use FreeBSD with their shell and libraries on top. - The Steam Desk ships Linux and a shell on top of it (Steam Big Picture + Proton). modern consoles are just PCs using PC OSs with custom UIs that fit the control scheme. The only one that I could think of that's heavily modified is the Switch.
tomComb 4y ago
How can it not be bad for Vulkan?

danielvaughn 4y ago

I'm not super familiar with the space, but from what I know, I'd say it would have almost no impact. The industry seems to have been moving towards Vulkan for a while now. Stadia may indeed have accelerated it, but the shutdown isn't going to halt its progress. (IMO)

pjmlp 4y ago
Other than Linux, specially Android, very few game developers would bother with Vulkan per se. PlayStation and XBox were never found of Khronos APIs (other than GL ES 1.0 + Cg on the PS 1). Nintendo had a GL subset on the Wii, and while Switch supports GL 4.6 and Vulkan, those that want full control need to use NVN. Apple is going with Metal. And if one intents to use Vulkan abstraction layers as a kind of pseudo middleware, they are better of using classical middleware anyway.
- jonhohle 4y ago
  Is there an industry advantage to divesting from OpenGL and splitting into a device specific APIs with hugely overlapping features, yet I’m sure, an impedance mismatch? Since most devs are targeting Unity or some other batteries included game engine, does it just not matter anymore?
  - morelisp 4y ago
    The total impedance matches of all device specific platforms you might target is often less than the impedance mismatch of just OpenGL vs. the real world.
  - pjmlp 4y ago
    It never mattered outside FOSS circles, in the 8 and 16 bit days every platform was a special snowflake, so the industry grew porting contractors, platform specialized studios and middleware. If you dive into something like Ogre3D, you will see that actual 3D rendering API is a tiny slice of the whole cake, let alone in something like Unreal.
- Mikeb85 4y ago
  No game developer is using raw Vulkan, Metal or DX12. these APIs aren't the same level of abstraction as OpenGL... Vulkan is AMD's Mantle open-sourced, it's far too low level for devs to waste time with, it's a target for game engines and renderers.
  - dagmx 4y ago
    I think both your sentences are incorrect. Tons of AAA game developers make their own engine and therefore work directly with the APIs while making an abstraction layer for their higher level game developers. Vulkan is also not just Mantle open sourced. It’s a significant deviation from the original Mantle API. Mantle was a starting point but what emerged as Vulkan was quite different.
    - Mikeb85 4y ago
      > Tons of AAA game developers make their own engine Recently a bunch switched to Unreal. Are there THAT many that still maintain their own? Seems like it's just big studios and less than a dozen. Even a massive company like Square Enix is now using Unreal for many projects.
      - sk0g 4y ago
        Ubisoft have about 5 engines themselves. When Microsoft acquires Acti-Blizz, they'll have close to a dozen engines under their umbrella as is, I think. UE being picked up by a AAA studio is news, because gamers associate UE with extreme fidelity graphics. A studio using a proprietary engine is boring because it won't matter one bit for 99% of people, and is modus operandi, basically. Edit: remembered SteamDB has a rough breakdown based on manual rules, so a lot of engines aren't picked up, but it's still interesting - https://steamdb.info/tech/ https://steamdb.info/tech/ Proprietary engines tend to be more common on consoles I think - Steam has a lower barrier to entry overall, so it doesn't filter out the smaller projects as much (which are more likely to use an off-the-shelf engine).
      - dagmx 4y ago
        Almost all Sony first party studios use custom engines, even when they support PC. Most Nintendo first party games are custom engines. The majority of Microsoft first party games are custom engines. Ubisoft use custom engines, EA use custom engines. Call of Duty is a custom engine (derived from idTech) If you go to the GDC YouTube channel ( https://youtube.com/c/Gdconf https://youtube.com/c/Gdconf ) you can see the range of game specific things that these studios are working on that using an off the shelf engine is limiting I also recommend looking at the presentations on http://advances.realtimerendering.com/ http://advances.realtimerendering.com/
dagmx 4y ago
The industry has most definitely not moved towards Vulkan. It’s still quite a small player in terms of market share of games. Most windows games still target DirectX or OpenGL instead of Vulkan. With how well Proton runs, there’s even less incentive for game devs to directly target Vulkan now.
- danielvaughn 4y ago
  In terms of market share sure, though the Vulkan/Metal/whatever approach is clearly the future, no? AFAIK that isn't in question, it's just a matter of how long it will take for mass adoption.
  - dagmx 4y ago
    Yea going towards low overhead APIs like Metal, Vulkan and DX12 are definitely the way. DX12 has a very significant market share lead and is what most game devs on PC would target. Vulkan being a distant second and Metal being an even more distant third.
flohofwoe 4y ago
Vulkan is only really relevant if you also want to publish your game on Linux or Android (targeting Linux is not as laughable as it was a couple of years ago because of Steam Deck - of course there's also Proton, so a native Linux port isn't even needed in most cases). Game consoles don't use Vulkan, Windows is better served with DX12 if you also publish on Xbox, macOS has Metal but macOS is also a fairly tiny market. All in all, Vulkan doesn't actually matter all that much outside of Linux and Android.
- xani_ 4y ago
  Steam Deck does.
  - flohofwoe 4y ago
    ...which is a regular Linux PC in a handheld format, not a 'traditional' game console (which have highly customized operating systems).
    - xani_ 4y ago
      Distinction without difference. People buy it to use like console
      - flohofwoe 4y ago
        This thread is about Vulkan adoption though, which doesn't matter for regular users buying any piece of hardware. For developers the fact that the Steam Deck is "just a Linux PC" matters though.
    - SirMittens 4y ago
      Afaik, - Xbox is basically using Windows Core + the xbox shell and runs the games in virtual machines. - The PS4/5 use FreeBSD with their shell and libraries on top. - The Steam Desk ships Linux and a shell on top of it (Steam Big Picture + Proton). modern consoles are just PCs using PC OSs with custom UIs that fit the control scheme. The only one that I could think of that's heavily modified is the Switch.

tomComb 4y ago

How can it not be bad for Vulkan?