Quartz or OpenGL for 2d Graphics?

Case
Unregistered
 
Post: #1
I've been looking at OpenGL for graphics for a 2d game I would like to make - But god it's hard.

Now the game I intend on making is a 2d side scrolling game which will have upto 50 sprites moving around at once. Will quartz handle this to a useable level, I don't care if the frame rates arn't huge just as long as the animations look smooth.

Do I need OpenGL? Or will Quartz do the trick?

Thanks
Quote this message in a reply
Luminary
Posts: 5,143
Joined: 2002.04
Post: #2
Quartz is harder than OpenGL Rasp

It should handle those requirements OK, though, I'd think.
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 268
Joined: 2005.04
Post: #3
Quartz can certainly handle that, but if the user doesn't have Quartz Extreme or a really fast computer it'll be unplayably slow. Especially since it's a scrolling game. OpenGL on the other hand can handle this no sweat.

Do you have a reason to use Quartz over OpenGL? OGL really is pretty easy to learn, at least compared to Quartz or Quickdraw.
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 469
Joined: 2002.10
Post: #4
Quartz won't handle that well on low end systems. (like my 450Mhz G3 Rage128) Rasp I'll be getting like 10fps if you do it in quartz.

use opengl.

I probably won't have CocoaBlitz documentation done untill udg2k3 starts. (course that's a big must for me)

---Kelvin--
15.4" MacBook Pro revA
1.83GHz/2GB/250GB
Quote this message in a reply
Patrick
Unregistered
 
Post: #5
Don't bother with Quartz for games, it's too slow ( QE doesn't do anything except composite windows, so don't look for speed from there )

Use QuickDraw, SpriteWorld, or CocoaBlitz if you don't want to learn OpenGL. SpriteWorld is a lot bigger and more mature than CB, but it's really geared towards Carbon usage, so getting it working with Cocoa could take some effort, and it has C / C++ APIs rather than Obj-C.
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 42
Joined: 2002.09
Post: #6
If it's sidescrolling, you'll have to replace every pixel in the window. The more pixels you replace, the bigger OpenGL's advantage. I am working on a game that moves two large sprites and a couple of smaller ones, but not the background, and Quartz is delivering 25 fps on a 500MHz G3 running 10.1.5.

Visit http://www.theDailyGrind.net for your recommended daily intake of embittered satire.
Quote this message in a reply
lillo
Unregistered
 
Post: #7
<shameless plug>
You may also want to have a look at Allegro; under OSX it uses QuickDraw if in windowed mode, or directly draws to the screen if in fullscreen mode. If you don't want to learn QD or OpenGL, have a look at it; it has a really easy to use API...
</shameless plug>

Whatever API you choose, keep in mind that it all depends on what kind of game you're making; a sidescroller updates the whole screen every frame, so maybe OpenGL is better since it gives you hardware acceleration for free. But any 2d API will work great too if your code is smart enough.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Immediate graphics in Quartz? Sparklight 3 3,660 Dec 14, 2010 03:12 PM
Last Post: SethWillits
  converting quartz to openGL ES aerospaceman 2 3,700 Apr 12, 2010 10:57 AM
Last Post: ThemsAllTook
  Quartz Composer macnib 3 3,966 Sep 7, 2009 10:33 AM
Last Post: maximile
  OpenGL vs Quartz Performance for 2D Game lfalin 1 3,645 Apr 25, 2007 09:51 PM
Last Post: OneSadCookie
  Vector versus raster graphics in openGL WhatMeWorry 2 3,879 Dec 29, 2005 01:23 AM
Last Post: WhatMeWorry