View Full Version : undelphix, asphyre or xcess?

04-01-2005, 02:37 PM
What should i use, what are their advantages/disadvantages?

I want to do something like the old raptor-game.


04-01-2005, 03:08 PM
It all depends on your list of demands. Delphix is probably the most easiest to learn. However, it's not the fastest of the three though. If you're looking for advanced rendering features like alphablending, you're better of with asphyre or xcess. As for as collisions go, I'm not entirely sure about asphyre, but undelphix and xcess both have inbuild routines, so you don't have to write those yourself. A disadvantage of asphyre or xcess might be the requirement of additional dll files. They also require you to credit the 'engine' in the endproduct.

For a game like Raptor, all three are quite capable of producing the game.

04-01-2005, 07:05 PM
I like simplicity & clariry of Undelphix, and i like the alpha blending too ;)... But my first demand is correct timing, and it seems better asphyre... .mmmm... but i think i could start from undelphix.

Speed is not a matter in my decision. It's timing and clarity.

And what about omega gdk?


05-01-2005, 07:37 AM
i havent got undelphix to compile/work so i stuck to delphix because it worked (and so far has been fine) ... but, i would like to know if undelphix is a drop in replacement or i need to change my code for it? is alphablending better? (how cant it be ;)

05-01-2005, 08:27 AM
i would like to know if undelphix is a drop in replacement or i need to change my code for it? is alphablending better? (how cant it be

UndelphiX is a replacement for delphix. (I believe you have to deinstall delphiX first) I haven't yet experienced any troubles with code that couldn't be compiled or needed code changes.

As for alphablending. I dont know for sure, but I don't think these procedures have changed or become faster. There is in any case no mention about faster alphablending on the undelphix site over at Turbo.

The advantages of Omega are pretty much the same as asphyre or xcess. It's faster (due to the hardware based rendering), but also requires an extra dll to run.

In any case I recommend browsing through [this] (http://www.pgd.netstarweb.com/forum_index.php?c=7) section of PGDev as it has lots of info about these and other packages

05-01-2005, 09:14 AM
Welcome to PGD guys! :)

Both versions of UnDelphiX for Delphi 7 and Delphi 2005 can be installed as stand-alone. I think even the D6 version too(unsure).

UnDelphiX is a replacement, but you can also think of it as the Unofficial Update to DelphiX(which was seemingly abandoned by Hori, it's creator and original developer).

I think the last version of DelphiX was created for Delphi 5, but has since, with the efforts of others, has been updated for all the newer versions of Delphi under the label UnDelphiX.

The major changes were a coniderable seed-up in some graphics memory usage routeens and the switch from the DirectX 7 headers to the DirectX 8.1 headers. But such effects as rotation, zooming and alphablending still use only DirectDraw and not Direct3D for the rendering. Meaning that it relies on software to do the redrawing of the effects not the hardware(Optimized Program golden rule #1: Hardware is faster than software) Also they have not really used any real type of optimized software techniques to speed up the rendering of such effects so it still runs slow.

If you wish to use any of these 3 special effects I have mentioned before, don't use DelphiX or UnDelphiX as it will be quite slow. Baring that, it's a great tool to start with.

27-01-2005, 04:24 PM
How come all DirectX wrappers for DirectX9 (and 8) usually using additional DLL, cant they use the DLL provided by MS-DirectX Runtime Package? or is that additional DLL for their 'Software' routines?

13-03-2005, 10:53 AM
Which of the 3 engines is best to use for 2D? Our game only uses Directdraw and sprites. Alpha blending would be really nice to have.
Currently we use the original Dephix, it works, but alpha blending is very slow.