Well, I don't really what else to add to the question, since I don't really know what competitors have that OGRE doesn't.

Of course I'm talking game rendering quality here, I don't really think there are very complicated programming stuff left, maybe AI...

Since torchlight is the best game done with OGRE (I think), is it still a good solution for future games, whatever the 3D graphics technologies will be ?

What prevents OGRE3D from not being the best engine ? (consoles excluded, since they used some specific graphic library, except the xbox360 maybe...)

  • \$\begingroup\$ What did they change ? The structure of the engine ? \$\endgroup\$
    – jokoon
    Sep 28 '10 at 11:15
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ For Torchlight only very little was changed. See here: ogre3d.org/forums/… \$\endgroup\$
    – haffax
    Sep 30 '10 at 9:30

Whether Ogre3d is the best or viable depends entirely on the type of game. In the industry, what often happens is you use something like Ogre3d (or IdTech, or Source, or Unreal) as a starting point and build on it from there depending on your needs and requirements.

For instance, compare a game like GTA IV to Modern Warfare 2. The rendering requirements are completely different.

GTA IV has a day-night cycle, a weather system, fast moving vehicles, tons of light sources from cars to street lamps, a lot of animated actors on the screen, and it's an huge open world. GTA IV runs around 30hz and the gameplay is such that some input lag is tolerable.

MW2 is an fps with few vehicles, lots of explosions and screen effects, relatively few actors on screen, textures that your camera can go right up against, and a mostly predictable path through a pretty small world. MW2 runs at 60hz and input lag severely impacts gameplay.

It's impossible to make a rendering engine that's optimal for both kinds of games.

Ogre3d could be a good starting point for what you're trying to do, but as Ranieri said, don't be afraid to get your hands dirty.


You need to define what you mean by best engine. Ogre3D is strictly a Rendering Engine. That point alone scares off a lot of would be game developers.

Ogre3D does not have integrated collision, physics, networking, sound, scripting, etc. Ogre3d is only the graphics part of a game engine.

Ogre allows for easy integration with things like Nvidia Physx or Havok, etc but it is still up the developers to integrate the products.

Another disadvantage to using Ogre is when you look at fully integrated game engines, Unity, Unreal, etc. They have very nice in world editors designed for map makers, scripters, etc.

It's a lot more upfront work to design something like that on top of everything else you will need to integrate to have a usable game engine to create something from.

Ogre works well when the developer wants to be able to fully customize how they want their game engine. What components they will have, which libraries they will use, etc. This was the main idea behind why Ogre is and will always be a Rendering Engine.

  • \$\begingroup\$ All those features depend on what the game is planned to be, of course sound and collision are necessary, but even for a game that requires a lot of stuff, OGRE does a big part of the job: aren't graphics the heaviest work charge for a developper ? that's what I meant... \$\endgroup\$
    – jokoon
    Sep 25 '10 at 12:48
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ Don't think graphics are hardest part of game development any more. At one time it was, It now the hardest part is pulling all the aspects (graphocs, sound, networking, pgysics, etc) together in an elegant and pleasant way that makes your game stable and fun.. \$\endgroup\$
    – Nate
    Sep 26 '10 at 13:28

As has been mentioned, OGRE is a rendering engine only. However, there are systems such as Python-OGRE which include other libraries and wrappers that are needed for a real game engine, of course using OGRE as a rendering engine.


Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.