Now that you read my opinion, like you needed another one of those, this site (Devmaster) is great for others looking. Although, it's short on details.
First off, both OpenSceneGraph (OSG for short) and Ogre3D are very well documented, supported, large forum etc... I don't know much about Irrlicht besides it's the newest of them. You probably won't go wrong with either of the first two. Someone mentioned CrystalSpace; I haven't looked at that in years, but it was far behind these guys in features and API.
Domain
If I was deciding, I would want to know what domain I was concentrating in. e.g. Whole earth simulation. Or a sense of what is going to be rendered. Such as: Terrain/earth as seen from air | Inside of a building but with some outside | Something CAD like | Information visualization
I say that, because OpenSceneGraph has a strong influence in the simulation and military setting. Disclosure: that's my field and I use OSG on a daily basis. That said, I've always wanted to try Ogre3D and followed it for years on the sideline; I just haven't got around to it. As such, I can't do a complete compare and contrast. I would argue that due to the respective projects' histories and main users: Ogre3D has a more videogame leaning; OSG a more simulation industry leaning. But, neither is tethered to that arena.
For example, say I had: A simulation heavy with ragdoll/people: I would go with Ogre3D. A simulation having to use a terrapage file: Pretty much would have to go OSG.
Crossplatform
I can't speak for the Linux side of Ogre3D. But, the main developer (Robert Osfield) uses Linux/Macs for all his stuff. CMake is what is used to compile the code. Or just use apt-get to try them both out.
Performance
I would wager the both would get good performance given the proper tweaks (again, what is rendered... bsp files, octtrees, high flying sim?). And OS used might matter on them.
Visual Looks
You can't get any engine and think it will look good without having good models/terrain and shaders. There probably is better support for different techniques between the two, but it would have to a specific example to get an accurate comparison.
Scene Management
When it comes to this section, OSG is very clean and intuitive. Traversing the scene, finding nodes, changing states on subgraphs, all very easy to do.
Scripting
You didn't mention this, but I thought I would throw it in. I would go Ogre3D here. OSG requires a 3rdParty or custom plugin. And, Irrlicht doesn't support it at all.
Now that you read my opinion, like you needed another one of those, this site (Devmaster) is great for others looking. Although, it's short on details.
ps - There is something of a hybrid (OSG based): that is Delta3D. It is also well supported and updated. And there is probably an Ogre3D derivative that is more simulation like :).
If you want to select an engine or any middle ware you need to clearly define what you want to be able to do. You say you are not making a game and you need video codec support. So it sounds like you want 2D/3D, audio, and video playback written with C++.
For 2D/3D ogre is an excellent library. Its been around for a long time, and is well tested, but orge is a graphics rendering engine and not a game engine, though there are third party libraries to add other support. This is an MIT license, very open includes comercial.
For video playback ( and a lot more ) you can look for libraries such as FFmpeg Has a LGPL license, so no static linking on comercial apps.
Irrlicht is a full blown game engine. This maybe useful, but may not. You may have to change your project to match of the engine works. This uses a copy of the zlib license, which is open for comercial usage.
Which more info about your project its hard to give a good recommendation. Hope this helps.
所有 3D 引擎都非常相似。主要区别在于着色器系统的工作方式。 Ogre 有一个漂亮而强大的脚本系统来编写着色器。 Ogre 它非常专业并且有很好的文档（有很多有用的例子和一个很好的社区）。
I think it is a personal choice. I prefer Ogre over Irrlitch (poor API) or OpenSceneGraph (poor comunity). The Ogre source code has a lot of quality and it is used by a lot of comercial games.
It doesn't support video but you can use third party libraries like Ogre3D Video.
If you have on your mind a comercial project consider Unity 3d (the paid version not the free).
All the 3d engines are very similiar. The main difference are how shader system works. Ogre has a nice and powerful script system to write shaders. Ogre it's very professional and well documented (has a lot of useful examples and a nice community).
Torque 3D 看起来比 Ogre3D 成熟得多，基本上它是一个成熟的游戏引擎（MIT 许可证） ）。可以使用 C++ / Visual Studio 进行开发（几个月前测试过），但它也有嵌入式脚本语言。
Torque 3D seems way more mature than Ogre3D, basically it's a full blown Game Engine (MIT License). Development in C++ / Visual Studio is possible (tested some months ago), but it also has an embedded scripting language.
发布评论
评论（6）
首先，OpenSceneGraph（简称 OSG）和 Ogre3D 都有很好的文档、支持、大型论坛等……除了 Irrlicht 是最新的之外，我对 Irrlicht 知之甚少。前两者你可能都不会出错。有人提到了CrystalSpace；我已经很多年没有看过它了，但它在功能和 API 方面远远落后于这些人。
领域
如果我要做出决定，我会想知道我专注于哪个领域。例如整个地球模拟。或者对将要呈现的内容的感觉。例如：从空中看到的地形/地球 |位于建筑物内部，但有一些外部 |类似于 CAD 的东西 |信息可视化
我这么说是因为OpenSceneGraph 在模拟和军事环境中具有强大的影响力。披露：这是我的领域，我每天都使用 OSG。也就是说，我一直想尝试 Ogre3D，并且多年来一直在旁观。我只是还没有时间去做。因此，我无法进行完整的比较和对比。我认为，由于各个项目的历史和主要用户：Ogre3D 更倾向于视频游戏； OSG更倾向于模拟行业。但是，两者都不受那个领域的束缚。
例如，假设我有：
充满布娃娃/人的模拟：我会选择 Ogre3D。
必须使用 terrapage 文件的模拟：几乎必须使用 OSG。
跨平台
我不能谈论 Ogre3D 的 Linux 方面。但是，主要开发人员（Robert Osfield）使用 Linux/Mac 来完成他的所有工作。 CMake 是用来编译代码的。或者只是使用 apt-get 来尝试它们。
性能
我敢打赌，如果进行适当的调整，两者都会获得良好的性能（再次，渲染什么...bsp 文件、八叉树、高空飞行 sim？）。使用的操作系统可能对他们很重要。
视觉外观
如果没有良好的模型/地形和着色器，您就无法获得任何引擎并认为它会看起来不错。两者之间的不同技术可能有更好的支持，但必须有一个具体的示例才能进行准确的比较。
场景管理
当谈到这一部分时，OSG 非常干净和直观。遍历场景、查找节点、更改子图的状态，所有这些都非常容易做到。
脚本编写
你没有提到这一点，但我想我应该把它放进去。我会在这里使用 Ogre3D。 OSG 需要 3rdParty 或自定义插件。而且，Irrlicht 根本不支持它。
Now that you read my opinion, like you needed another one of those, this site (Devmaster) is great for others looking. Although, it's short on details.
ps - 有一种混合体（基于 OSG）：那就是 Delta3D。它也得到了很好的支持和更新。并且可能有一个 Ogre3D 衍生品，更像是模拟:)。
First off, both OpenSceneGraph (OSG for short) and Ogre3D are very well documented, supported, large forum etc... I don't know much about Irrlicht besides it's the newest of them. You probably won't go wrong with either of the first two. Someone mentioned CrystalSpace; I haven't looked at that in years, but it was far behind these guys in features and API.
Domain
If I was deciding, I would want to know what domain I was concentrating in. e.g. Whole earth simulation. Or a sense of what is going to be rendered. Such as: Terrain/earth as seen from air | Inside of a building but with some outside | Something CAD like | Information visualization
I say that, because OpenSceneGraph has a strong influence in the simulation and military setting. Disclosure: that's my field and I use OSG on a daily basis. That said, I've always wanted to try Ogre3D and followed it for years on the sideline; I just haven't got around to it. As such, I can't do a complete compare and contrast. I would argue that due to the respective projects' histories and main users: Ogre3D has a more videogame leaning; OSG a more simulation industry leaning. But, neither is tethered to that arena.
For example, say I had:
A simulation heavy with ragdoll/people: I would go with Ogre3D.
A simulation having to use a terrapage file: Pretty much would have to go OSG.
Crossplatform
I can't speak for the Linux side of Ogre3D. But, the main developer (Robert Osfield) uses Linux/Macs for all his stuff. CMake is what is used to compile the code. Or just use
apt-getto try them both out.Performance
I would wager the both would get good performance given the proper tweaks (again, what is rendered... bsp files, octtrees, high flying sim?). And OS used might matter on them.
Visual Looks
You can't get any engine and think it will look good without having good models/terrain and shaders. There probably is better support for different techniques between the two, but it would have to a specific example to get an accurate comparison.
Scene Management
When it comes to this section, OSG is very clean and intuitive. Traversing the scene, finding nodes, changing states on subgraphs, all very easy to do.
Scripting
You didn't mention this, but I thought I would throw it in. I would go Ogre3D here. OSG requires a 3rdParty or custom plugin. And, Irrlicht doesn't support it at all.
Now that you read my opinion, like you needed another one of those, this site (Devmaster) is great for others looking. Although, it's short on details.
ps - There is something of a hybrid (OSG based): that is Delta3D. It is also well supported and updated. And there is probably an Ogre3D derivative that is more simulation like :).
如果您想选择引擎或任何中间件，您需要清楚地定义您想要做什么。你说你不是在制作游戏，你需要视频编解码器支持。听起来您想要用 C++ 编写 2D/3D、音频和视频播放。
对于 2D/3D ogre 来说是一个优秀的库。它已经存在很长时间了，并且经过了充分的测试，但 orge 是一个图形渲染引擎而不是游戏引擎，尽管有第三方库来添加其他支持。这是麻省理工学院的许可证，非常开放，包括商业。
对于视频播放（以及更多），您可以查找诸如 FFmpeg 之类的库 拥有 LGPL 许可证，因此没有商业应用程序上的静态链接。
Irrlicht 是一个成熟的游戏引擎。这也许有用，但也可能没用。您可能需要更改您的项目以匹配引擎的工作原理。这使用了 zlib 许可证的副本，该许可证可供商业使用。
关于您的项目的更多信息很难给出好的推荐。希望这有帮助。
If you want to select an engine or any middle ware you need to clearly define what you want to be able to do. You say you are not making a game and you need video codec support. So it sounds like you want 2D/3D, audio, and video playback written with C++.
For 2D/3D ogre is an excellent library. Its been around for a long time, and is well tested, but orge is a graphics rendering engine and not a game engine, though there are third party libraries to add other support. This is an MIT license, very open includes comercial.
For video playback ( and a lot more ) you can look for libraries such as FFmpeg Has a LGPL license, so no static linking on comercial apps.
Irrlicht is a full blown game engine. This maybe useful, but may not. You may have to change your project to match of the engine works. This uses a copy of the zlib license, which is open for comercial usage.
Which more info about your project its hard to give a good recommendation. Hope this helps.
我认为这是个人选择。我更喜欢 Ogre，而不是 Irrlitch（糟糕的 API）或 OpenSceneGraph（糟糕的社区）。 Ogre 源代码质量很高，并且被很多商业游戏所使用。
它不支持视频，但您可以使用第三方库，例如 Ogre3D Video。
如果您想要一个商业项目，请考虑 Unity 3d（付费版本而不是免费版本）。
所有 3D 引擎都非常相似。主要区别在于着色器系统的工作方式。 Ogre 有一个漂亮而强大的脚本系统来编写着色器。 Ogre 它非常专业并且有很好的文档（有很多有用的例子和一个很好的社区）。
I think it is a personal choice. I prefer Ogre over Irrlitch (poor API) or OpenSceneGraph (poor comunity). The Ogre source code has a lot of quality and it is used by a lot of comercial games.
It doesn't support video but you can use third party libraries like Ogre3D Video.
If you have on your mind a comercial project consider Unity 3d (the paid version not the free).
All the 3d engines are very similiar. The main difference are how shader system works. Ogre has a nice and powerful script system to write shaders. Ogre it's very professional and well documented (has a lot of useful examples and a nice community).
Ogre 最受欢迎（由于 Google 趋势）您已经弄清楚的那些，因此您可以信赖社区的强大支持。
此外，您应该在 https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/ 上询问
Ogre is most popular (due to Google Trends) of those that you've figured out, so you can count on strong community support.
Moreover, you should ask on https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/
水晶空间看起来也不错。
Crystal Space also looks good.
Torque 3D 看起来比 Ogre3D 成熟得多，基本上它是一个成熟的游戏引擎（MIT 许可证） ）。可以使用 C++ / Visual Studio 进行开发（几个月前测试过），但它也有嵌入式脚本语言。
Torque 3D seems way more mature than Ogre3D, basically it's a full blown Game Engine (MIT License). Development in C++ / Visual Studio is possible (tested some months ago), but it also has an embedded scripting language.