Source
- URL: https://x.com/rasulseidagul/status/1933526584738103740
- Author: Rasul Seidagul (@rasulseidagul)
- Posted: 2025-06-13 14:07:15
Branch
1/ @rasulseidagul
The general opinion on Vulkan is that it is an incomprehensible mess of different GPU specific calls, which are too domain specific to give any hint to the programmer. That makes work of a programmer miserable - and it is true to some degree.
However, I have recently started poking at Vulkan and wrote program that draws cube in perspective projection using instancing.
I honestly find Vulkan as just a slightly more verbose OpenGL, which is a good thing imho. All my knowledge of OpenGL landed perfectly on Vulkan, and I didn’t have problem figuring out how to draw a cube from the simplest triangle example that I could find.
Could it be that people just cry a lot for nothing? They face a challenge -> give up -> and then complain about how hard the API is?
Even more, my OpenGL experience was way more frustrating than working with Vulkan, but that might be just because, now, I understand GPU workflow better at internal level (a skill I didn’t have when I was learning OpenGL).
Though, maybe I don’t have issue with Vulkan now, because I just scratched a surface and the rest of the iceberg body is horrificly complex.
And yet, I really don’t make ground braking games: something like ability to draw models via instancing and basic shader coding + phong lighting + shadow maps is already enough to make decent looking games. Maybe I would also need skeletal animation, bloom, blur, reflections, but that still should be work of same difficulty as in OpenGL I assume.