Slashdot Mirror

I liked it better the first time it came out when it was called Serious Sam 1+2!

Serious Sam was made in Croatia. Very quickly we're going to see some serious international competition, especially if things like Steam start taking off.

I'm surprised nobody's mentioned Serious Sam, developed by a software company in Croatia, which if I remember correctly won Game of the Year in 2001.

The past two games they've released in this series have been cheap (20 bucks a pop), stable, and very customizable(the engine and level design tools are included), not to mention fun.

Do Indian techs feel that they have the opportunity now to become the producers, the designers, the ones who create businesses?

Nothing was stopping them from being inspired to produce innovative products before, why would this change anything? Look at CroTeam.. the makers of Serious Sam. Just a couple of guys from Croatia who wanted to make a game, and now look at them. They have a great engine, and a top-selling game.

You may want to look into the Serious Engine developed by Croteam. It is capable of doing on-the fly editing without needing to rebuild geometry. As with Build, editing isn't done ingame, but it is still considered realtime. The game is playable even after the most minor of changes (unlike almost every other 3D engine on the market.)

The only cavats:
- The Serious Engine is commercial - you need to purchase a license (although you can get the map editor with the Serious Sam, which isn't too expensive.)
- If you want to sell products with the Serious Engine, you will need to pay a fee for commercial distribution.
- There are a few physics and display bugs with the engine, but these shouldn't be too much of a problem.
- You still need to recalculate lighting and shadows when you make major architectural changes (optional, you could play with missing or non-standard shadows if you desire.)

There aren't many engines that support realtime modifications to the map, but this is one of the most modern ones.

From what I remember, Serious Sam had a P2P based network system, but in recent patch versions switched to a conventional client server due to sync problems.

Does the Half-Life engine support more than one keyboard or more than one mouse on one machine? Does it support split-screen?

No, but Serious Sam does.

That's really beside the point though. Serious Sam is the exception, not the rule. And I wouldn't really want to play FPS with a joystick instead of a keyboard. If I wanted that, I would go out and get one of the new consoles. I don't see the PC (as we know it, anyway) having a "standard" controller. Microsoft tried that with the Sidewinder, which I really liked. It didn't catch on. Oh well, most of the games that enjoy better gameplay from a pad I already have for a console, and for those that I don't I have a USB-> PS2 converter. Play Smash TV or Robotron 2084 via MAME with a PS2 Dual Shock sometime. It's wonderful.

Here's the text I'm refering to below.

----

Pipelines, pipelines... February 25, 2003

Hello, world.

Just wanted to write a word or two regarding the issue raised couple of days ago. Seems like the whole Internet community wants to crucify nVidia about the controversy of how many rendering pipelines GeForceFX realy has. Is it 8 pipelines with 1 texture unit, or 4 with 2, or ... uh... I don't know anymore. And it really DOESN'T matter that much!

The only thing that matters is how fast and how good it can render pixels. And both GeForceFX and Radeon9700 are great products, the kind of hardware that developers long for. So, personally, I don't care much what's "under the hood".

Don't get me wrong, I am into 3D-graphic hardware, but this pipeline thing really went out of proportion. Number of pipelines is a good hardware information, and that's all there's to it. It really doesn't need to reflect the speed of the hardware directly. Come to think of it... currently, there are no games that utilize even 1/3rd of nifty features these two boards have.

Oh, before I forget... I'm not "nVidiot" (and I'm not "fanATIc", either). I'm just a game developer who wants good and fast technology for the future. And both ATI and nVidia have it now!

Just my two cents.

Dean "3D" Sekulic

(Programmer)

P.S. Yes, I snapped.

Choosing Chips Pt. 3

It's easy to see that assumptions may lead a consumer to believe that the INTEL product is a better processor. These basics may have some validity on paper but not so in the real world. Why the lesson on MHz, die size, bus speeds and cache? The lesson is not which processor is better. The lesson is to not make performance assumptions based in the belief that bigger numbers are better.

AMD has changed the fact that more MHz means better. As mentioned previously, side by side processor comparisons between INTEL and AMD chips prove this. The 64-dollar question is why?

By using a layman's analogy once again, an INTEL CPU engine may run at a higher RPM (MHz) but it doesn't have the equivalent torque to match the high RPM (MHz). An AMD processor may run at a lower megahertz but it does have better torque. This is an incredibly simplified explanation but it gives the needed broad brush strokes. AMD technology on how the processor is geared allows their processors to rival and, in some cases, surpass INTEL processors that are clocked at a much higher frequency.

So how does a consumer decide upon which processor? It's safe to say that the majority of PC buyers only care that it works and works fast enough for their needs. The average consumer either doesn't understand or could care less about Front Side Bus Speed, how many transistors there are, or how small a die is. A lot of PC buyers also do not realize that there is another choice beyond what is widely and visibly available on store shelves. AMD vs. INTEL marketing and product awareness is another topic altogether and best left alone lest we travel down another long road.

To berate a point, AMD has shown that in today's marketplace GHz is not the defining mark of a processor. The important piece to the education puzzle is how each of these processors compares in benchmark tests especially introducing the performance to cost side of the equation. There are many comparisons that pit the AMD processor against rival INTEL in the never-ending battle of who's the best. Read a couple of these reviews and they will show in the multitude of benchmark tests that these processors trade off pole positions. In one test AMD may edge out INTEL and in another INTEL may come out ahead. In most the difference between the two is a matter of seconds, frames, or a handful of points. In real world everyday performance there would be an almost unnoticeable difference in most applications when comparing similar processors.

Bar graphs may show who's ahead but it's important to look at the physical numbers before making a decision. Ask yourself who's ahead and by how much and in what particular application. A 2.8 GHz INTEL processor may achieve more frames per second than an AMD 2600+ in Quake but without insult, the difference is small and most likely unnoticed by the user actually playing the game unless their goal is boasting rights.

That being said what would be another deciding factor? The AMD processor is priced far more competitively than the INTEL processor which means there's more money left over to pocket or spend on more RAM, a better video card or another hard drive.

Processor Prices*

AMD

INTEL

Athlon XP 2600+ (2.13 GHz)

$300

Pentium 4 2.8 GHz

$537

Athlon XP 2400+ (2 GHz)

$200

Pentium 4 2.53 GHz

$240

Athlon XP 2200+ (1.8 GHz)

$146

Pentium 4 2.4 GHz

$206

Athlon XP 2100+ (1.73 GHz)

$112

Pentium 4 2.2 GHz

$202

Athlon XP 2000+ (1.67 GHz)

$59

Pentium 4 2.0 GHz

$161

Athlon XP 1900+ (1.6 GHz)

$78

Pentium 4 1.9 GHz

$154

Athlon XP 1800+ (1.53 GHz)

$64

Pentium 4 1.8 GHz

$139

Athlon XP 1700+ (1.47 GHz)

$59

Pentium 4 1.7 GHz

$125

Athlon XP 1600+ (1.43 GHz)

$52

Pentium 4 1.6 GHz

$117

Athlon XP 1500+ (1.4 GHz)

$53

Pentium 4 1.5 GHz

$102

*Prices in USDfrom www.pricewatch.com August 31, 02 Socket A/478 processors.

But you may think GHz to GHz again and wonder why you are paying $200 for an AMD 2400+ (2 GHz) when for another $6 more the 2.6 GHz Intel processor is available. A buyer may think that $6 for another point four GHz may be better. But that's just not the case. Read a review or three and there will be a performance picture that will form. Combine the performance/price analysis with your expectations and then the answer should be clearer.

The final scoff any nay-sayer of AMD product may volunteer is that of stability. Many consumers state the reason for choosing INTEL is due to the perception that INTEL systems are more stable and require less driver updates and tweaking. This may have been the case years ago but is completely false at present. Any system can be properly set up and IF LEFT ALONE will or should continue to operate as intended. AMD systems are stable. If a consumer purchases a pre-configured AMD system from a reputable source they are going to have the same stability experience as if they purchased a pre-configured INTEL system. Large pre-configured PC suppliers go to great lengths to ensure that all of the components as sold work reliably with each other right out of the box. Intel is also the dominant force with far more processors per PC than AMD. Software and hardware developers would choose to align and optimize their product with the processor product that is in more homes and businesses. It's a marketing move. If a consumer chooses to build the computer from individually purchased components then they run the same risk of hardware conflicts and problems regardless of processor choice.

Which processor is better? Which truck is better, Chevy or Ford? I don't think an overall clear-cut winner can be crowned but when trying to build a powerful system within a budget we think of ourselves as smart shoppers by getting the most with AMD.

The mother of all boards

Selecting an AMD based system has other advantages. AMD based motherboards offer a wider range of motherboard configuration options than rival INTEL based motherboards. Which AMD driven motherboard is a matter of the requirements mixed with a dash of personal experience, a pinch of recommendations from friends, a paragraph or twenty from the forums and a page or four or sixty of research.

I admit I've had a preference for ABIT product. I've grown to rely on ABIT for their stability and flexibility. They offer a wide range of choices to suit almost any need. The ABIT AT7 was supplied to us for this system which proved to be really good...and really bad.

CPU

• Supports AMD-K7 Athlon /Athlon XP Socket A 200/266MHz FSB Processors
  
• Supports AMD-K7 Duron Socket A 200 MHz FSB Processors
  
  

Chipset

• VIA KT333 / VIA VT8233A
  
• Supports Ultra DMA 33/66/100/133 IDE protocol
  
• Supports Advanced Configuration and Power Management Interface (ACPI)
  
• Accelerated Graphics Port connector supports AGP 2X(3.3V)and 4X(1.5V)mode (Sideband) device
  
• Supports 200/266/333 MHz (100/133/166MHz Double Data Rate) Memory Bus Setting
  
  

Ultra DMA 133/ RAID

• High Point HPT374 IDE Controller
  
• Ultra DMA 133MB/sec data transfer rate
  
• RAID 0 (striping mode for boosting performance)
  
• RAID 1 (mirroring mode for data security)
  
• RAID 0 + 1(striping and mirroring)
  
  

Memory

• Four 184-pin DIMM sockets support PC1600/PC2100/PC2700 DDR DRAM modules
  
• Supports DDR333 unbuffered DRAMs up to 2GB and registered DRAMs up to 3GB
  
• Supports 6 banks up to 3GB DRAMs for unbuffered DDR200/266 modules
  
• Supports 8 banks up to 3.5GB DRAMs for registered DDR200/266 modules
  
  

Audio

• Realtek ALC650 (AC-Link)
  
• Supports 6CH DAC for AC3 5.1 CH purpose
  
• Professional digital audio interface supporting 24-bit SPDIF OUT
  
• Card Reader (Optional)
  
• Supports Memory card (MS or SD) Interface
  
• Supports SONY Memory Stick Interface/ SD Memory Card Interface
  
• Supports Compact Flash ROM Interface
  
  

System BIOS

• SoftMenu III Technology to set CPU parameters
  
• Supports Plug-and-Play (PNP)
  
• Supports Advanced Configuration Power Interface (ACPI)
  
• Supports Desktop Management Interface (DMI)
  
• Write-Protect Anti-Virus function by AWARD BIOS
  
  

LAN

• On board Realtek 8100B single chip Ethernet controller interface
  
• 10/100Mb Operation
  
• User friendly driver included
  
  

Multi I/O Functions

• 2 Channels of Bus Master IDE Ports supporting up to 4 Ultra DMA 33/66/100/133 devices
  
• 4 Channels of Bus Master IDE Ports supporting up to 8 Ultra DMA 33/66/100/133 (RAID 0/1/1+0) devices
  
• 4 USB 1.1 Connectors
  
• On board VIA VT6202 USB 2.0 header for four extra USB channels
  
• Three 1394a fully compliant cable ports at 100/200/400 megabits per second
  
• Audio connector (Line-in, Center/Sub, Surround Spk , Front Spk , Mic-in)
  
  

Miscellaneous

• ATX form factor
  
• 1 AGP 1.5v slot, 3 PCI slots
  
• Hardware monitoring - Including Fan speeds, Voltages, System environment temperature
  

Motherboard Pros and Cons

It boils down to a few obvious reasons why this board made the top of the list. The AT7 has the capacity to support an obscene amount of hard drive space. When working in broadcast design with uncompressed video it's going to be needed. External storage solutions of any substance are extremely expensive. The AT7 could feasibly run eight 160 Gigabyte drives off the highpoint controller. That's over a terabyte of hard drive space which is almost 1000 hours of video at DVD quality. As I said before...it's an obscene amount of hard drive space. Data integrity is of a concern but a mirrored array can be easily set up. As a rule, in a professional work environment, projects should and are backed up to external media as completed.

The AT7 has 4 USB headers which is becoming commonplace but is always of benefit. The AT7 also features USB 2.0 support and it's good to have technology that looks forward anticipating options rather than falling quickly into obsolescence.

Two built-in 1394a (FireWire) ports were of great value. Shoving large files (400-800 MB) around a network can be excruciatingly slow. A quick solution was to transfer data to an external FireWire drive and then walk the drive from system to system as it was required and that isn't too often. It's a reusable and fast conduit for large file transfer between the graphic workstations and the edit suite, MAC or PC. It's true. Not every business is perfect and the IT folks just haven't got around to connecting the graphic design workstations with the non-linear suites on their own large bandwidth network.

The AT7 came with other onboard features that presented a cost effective solution compared to purchasing 3rd party PCI cards and these include surprisingly good 6 Channel sound and NIC.

There is only one caution with the AT7 and one issue.

The AT7 does not have parallel or serial ports on the back plane. It is a legacy free motherboard. If there is a need to attach these types of peripherals then the AT7 will disappoint.

The issue with the AT7 was of questionable support of the new AMD Thoroughbred processors. The AT7 wasn't totally compatible with this new series of processors. It was extremely unstable with any amount or combination of DIMMS of Registered ECC ram. Unbuffered RAM in any amount or combination would eventually generate a HARDWARE MALFUNCTION blue screen. This occurred every 3-5 hours for no apparent reason. It is hoped that a future BIOS will fix this or future AT7 boards have been tweaked at the assembly plant.

Please note that a 1900+ Palomino processor functioned beautifully with 4 DIMMS of 256 MB PC2100 memory in either Registered ECC or unbuffered sampling. The AT7 test system chugged magnificently through render after render without a problem. I hope ABIT is focused on the concerns pointed out and will hopefully have a solution soon.

A Clear Choice

This comment comes from the art director and makes me cringe as powerful hardware costs powerful bucks. Complex 2D and 3D work has a tendency to eat video cards for breakfast. A fast gaming card usually does not have the supporting features and will quickly expose its shortcomings under a task especially in 3D design. Enter a powerful Matrox Parhelia at a significantly less than powerful cost.

A clear choice

The background on the Matrox Parhelia 512 comes from Icrontic's initial review.

The Parhelia-512 is the world's first 512-bit Graphics Processing Unit packed with 256 MB DDR on board. A 256-bit memory interface shoveling out a hefty 17.6 GB/s 275 MHz memory bandwidth.

Matrox is well known for their world class DualHead dual monitor support and now they have taken it one step further by adding a third monitor. The third monitor opens up a new era of gaming that Matrox has dubbed Surround Gaming. How are they going to do this and maintain frame rates AND take gaming environments to the next level? Matrox created a Quad Vertex Shader Array made up of four 128-bit vertex shader engines. Add the highest quality trilinear and anistropic filtering through their 64 Super Sample Texture Filtering. Matrox also boasts that their 36-Stage Shader Array is the most complex rendering engine ever built. Smooth it all out with 16x Fragment Antialiasing (FAA-16x).

SURROUND GAMING obviously wasn't a priority in a video card for broadcast design. It wouldn't be productive for the designers to be fragging away in Quake instead of doing their work. But they still did anyway. The term used was research but I didn't believe that for a minute. Below Softimage XSIoccupies two monitors and the third is available for Illustrator. This is very handy for changing any textures inside Softimage.

Another phrase floating about the Matrox offices these days is SURROUND DESIGN. In the past PC monitors got larger as graphic designers needed more elbow room to work. Then came two monitors providing space to place and there isn't a system in the author's design department that isn't dual monitor. If it's single monitor then it's for e-mail and that's because that hardware hasn't been replaced yet.

Then in came the Parhelia sporting triple monitors and the designers looked at me as if I was nuts. Sebastian MacDougal of Matrox explains:

Matrox Parhelia and Surround Design are enjoying a lot of support from design focused Independent Software Vendors (ISV's) who agree that the more you can see, the more productive you will become. The ability to either spread a project across three displays or having the ability to place various windows strategically across your desktop for better organization is something that workstation users have been asking for, for years. However, in the past it required using multiple cards which drastically reduced performance, and unless you are using Parhelia, this is still the case with competing graphics solutions today. But perhaps the most substantial benefit for the ISV's that we work so closely with is that Surround Design, in most cases, requires no direct intervention at the SW level in order to get it to work, meaning it is very easy for most ISV's to support and the advantages are enormous. To give you an idea, with the current 1.01 driver, Parhelia and Surround Design is optimized for: Softimage|XSI , 3ds max, AutoCAD and Microstation, with many other applications to follow shortly. At Siggraph 2002 in San Antonio Texas, the reception on the part of attendees to Parhelia and Surround Design was tremendous and it is completely understandable. An interesting analogy is how designing on one monitor is similar to a horse with blinders, having three displays just opens things up and allows you to be more productive.

Initially the designers didn't know what to do with the third monitor but in time they began using the extra display each in their own way. Due to the fact that the system had sufficient power and resources they could work in two or three programs simultaneously. For example After Effects is much easier to work in over two monitors and, thus, the third monitor allowed for Photoshop or Illustrator to remain open and easily accessible to adjust or create any elements for use within the After Effects project. The Parhelia has the memory size and graphics processing power to allow for smooth interaction with these programs. Combine this with the strength of the CPU and available system RAM and many a designer were kept happy.

How a user may work with three monitors is up to them but a third desktop enables a user to work within a program that is better suited for two monitors AND keep access to other tools without having to minimize or hide the main program. For example Adobe After Effects stays open in two monitors and Photoshop remains accessible on the third. Pictures above speak louder than words.

One of the Parhelia's strong selling features is, what Matrox has termed, GigaColor. This feature and its benefits were expanded upon in Icrontic's first review.

Dig around and there's a feature that most may not pay attention to but for the 2D/3D graphics professional and even the home user it will mean stunning images right to the desktop. Matrox hung the term 10-bit GigaColor on it. To you and me it is 10-bit video technology and it runs through a very speedy dual integrated 400 MHz 10-bit RAMDAC. That leaves the competition many MHz back. 10-bit technology is the same technology that allows for precise picture control in home theatre DVD players. 10-bit technology can partially be found in high-end video cards that cost thousands of dollars.

The difference is that Parhelia-512 delivers 10-bit technology through the entire card.

It must be told that 10-bit GigaColor still remains a bit of a mystery though it has been literally beaten into my ears by the kind folks over at Matrox. 10-bit GigaColor provides for an increase in the shades of any given color from the standard of 256 to 1024. The color palette leaps up from 16.7 million to 1 billion. This is a benefit when acquiring images such as through the use of a scanner where image control will be to a greater precision at time of capture. A greater range of the shades of a color is available thus greater control over what is kept or discarded is possible. This would primarily benefit print and magazine pre-press artists.

But sadly we people in television deal in comparatively grainy and low rest images and the benefits of GigaColor didn't jump out and bite us on the nose. For the record the designers did notice the desktop appeared more saturated and colorful when it was pointed out to them. You have to understand that designers work with what they have. Technology is not such a big deal. They care about what they can do with it rather than what it has under the hood. Though we would be much more satisfied if the rest of the computer system moved to 10-bit color base but that would mean new technology for ...well...everything.

There is good news on the horizon about GigaColor according to Matrox.

Upcoming OS's from Microsoft (i.e. Longhorn) will include support for greater than 8-bit per color channel precision at the desktop level, which is why you are seeing more and more companies include support for higher precision color depths. But of course, we were the first and are the first shipping product to offer that functionality, and as we make our own boards you know you'll get the right components for sustained image quality

The designers were quick to adapt to the flexibility the Parhelia offered and enjoyed working in an environment that produced clear, crisp images to the desktop. The only drawback is each of them would like a Parhelia of their own and 3 digital flat panels. That means a few more dollars added to this year's capital purchase forms. More paperwork....just what I enjoy.

Keeping Cool

The heatsink is also just another player in the heat game. As the Case Cooling Tweaks articles point out the correct choice of a PC case and additional fan modifications can help win the battle against heat and noise.

On the Case

Breaking out of the beige box...the right way.

AMK Computers came to the table with the SX1000 and set up a workstation case that delivers looks, cooling efficiency and a few other treats. The base SX1000 case comes standard with

• Space 4 drives in a removable bay
  
• Space for a zip and floppy in a removable bay.
  
• fan mounts (two front-two rear)
  
• space for 4 external 5.25 inch drives
  
• locking access panel
  
• locking front drive cover
  
  

To this AMK added:

• A side window with 2 more fans
  
• A top blowhole
  
• VBLOCK sound dampening material
  
• Cable Loom
  
• Rounded cables
  
• Digital Doc 5
  
• Enermax 465 PSU (FC)
  
• Fan filters
  
  

The neon lights were thrown in for this article just to make the case look better. I think they add a few MHz here and there due to the fact the case looks faster.

Seven fans plus the two Enermax PSU fans and heatsink fan may seem like a lot and loud. Quite the opposite as all the case fans were kept to ADDA 25 CFM/ 25 dBA specifications and regulated by the Digital Doc 5 fan controller. When the fans were not needed they were shut off. Only two fans, the top exhaust blowhole fan and one of the rear exhaust fans, were kept constantly running. (In addition to the PSU and heatsink fans). The two always on fans provided continual airflow yet emitted a minimum of noise. Again the computer in non-stress applications or when not rendering ran at below 30 dBA...less than a normal whisper.

The heatsink is warmed by the processor as the system was stressed. The fin design of the CAK4-76T allowed for the tips of the Digital Doc 5 thermistors to be inserted between the fins. This did not block airflow but this configuration allowed the Digital Doc 5 to directly read the temperature of the heatsink. Fans were turned on or off in a preset order to compensate for the increases or decreases in temperature. A full roar my cat was louder.

The last cooling tweak was to apply the WPCRSET tweak to enable the CPU halt command. This halts the processor and allows it to drop 5-10 degrees Celsius off pre-tweak levels. Besides updating the drivers the WPCRSET tweak was the only software OS hack if it could be called that.

In order to test this configuration a SOFTIMAGE project followed by an After Effects project were rendered out. The Softimage render took approximately 50 minutes (the first flat peak) and the After Effects render (the second peak) took 10 minutes. The following graph shows the temperatures never exceeded 46 degrees Celsius (23.5 C room temperature) which is only a 10-12 degree Celsius increase over base line temperature. That's a very satisfactory result especially with a system that operates through a range of 25-35 dBA.

The neon lights are available as an option and it was rather humorous watching designers and other employees wander by, stop, and back up to take a second look. Most came in and peered into the side window of the PC and said the word cool a lot. It is true that these people know of nothing other than the beige box. They asked why the window? The answer was why not?

Computers can become very dusty even in apparently clean offices. Filters are the solution to greatly cut down on the amount of dust that collects and clogs a PC after months of use. Filters do reduce airflow but they are worth it. A picture is worth a thousand words and this was the result of only 3 weeks of operation. The fans these filters covered were also not spinning at all times. This dust was the result of what was sucked into the case (or tried to be) from the airflow generated by the back plate and PSU fan. The filter on the left is clean and the one on the right...ugh.

The plethora of benchmark programs can be important when determining what does what task faster or better. These are specific assessments of individual functions. For this article it was decided to add a few more of what is our assessment of real world tests. It was also thought important to show how a change in one particular component could affect end results. It is hoped that the result of these tests will help you assess priorities in system configuration to match the priorities in system expectations.

The test system.

• AMD 2100+ Thoroughbred Core Processor
  
• AMD 1900+ Palomino Core Processor
  
• ABIT AT7 motherboard
  
• Matrox Parhelia 512 triple head video card in single head mode* 1.01.69 beta driver
  
• 2 x 512 MB Micron PC2100 RAM
  
• Sony 52x CD
  
• LG 32x10x40x CDRW
  
• 16 x DVD (not included in pricing)
  
• 40 GB Maxtor ATA133 Hard Drive
  
• 60 GB Maxtor ATA133 Hard Drive
  
• 2 x Samsung 950p 19 Monitors
  
• USB Keyboard and Logitech USB wireless Optical Mouse
  
• Globalwin CAK4-76T HSF
  
• AMK SX1000 modded PC case (window, fans, cables, loom)
  
• Enermax 465 Watt FC PSU
  
• Windows XP Professional build 2600 updated
  
• Digital Doc5
  
  

*dual and triple monitors enabled for Adobe After Effects and Softimage benchmarks only.

Programs used:

• Sisoft Sandra 2002
  
• ZD Media Business Winstone 2001
  
• ZD Media Content Creation Winstone 2001
  
• MadOnion 3DMark 2001 SE
  
• Quake III Arena
  
• Passmark Performance.
  
• Commanche 4
  
• Serious Sam: the Second Encounter
  
• GL Excess
  
• Drone Z
  
• SpecviewPerf 7.0
  
• PSBench
  
• Adobe Photoshop 7.0
  
• Adobe After Effects 5.5
  
• SoftimageXSI 2.0.1
  
• MediaCleaner Pro 5
  

The above benchmark programs are publicly available. For more about Ziff Davis and the etesting labs program go here.

Needless to say when Linus dropped the bomb, I slurped up a 0.97 Debian system via ftp and started toying with it. Compared to MS-DOS and Windows 3.0, Debian Linux and XFree86 was such a stupendous improvement that any power user literally drooled over its potential...

C.A. 2002 now a new bunch of jerk-wads like yourself with more money than sense wants to support these criminals? Microsoft makes the U.S. Government ( the most notoriously corrupt government in the history of the world ) look like a bunch of wanna-bees. Don't get me wrong here, I like my corrupt government, but I don't want Microsoft to _become_ the government, which it is working very dilligently and insidiously to do.

Windows looks like a PIECE OF CRAP compared to Debian with Enlightenment 16, "Hand of God" theme, and Gnome with "Graphite" theme. The only time I ever boot to Windows is to play Serious Sam . So don't call me "kiddie" and go pay your tribute to Bill "Mammon" Gates, you foolish spendthrift and enemy of freedom. You are buying your way into slavery, fool.

Wheres the friggin' Tequila... arghhh!

the fact is that many developers prefer it to DirectX, and not for ideological reasons.

Unfortunately, this is not as true as we might wish it to be. Micros~1, as usual, has stacked the deck in its favor.

If you're a graphics card manufacturer, you want to make sure that your drivers will do the right thing. Thus, you need to test the hell out of it. Surprise, surprise, Micros~1 has a little thing called WHQL (Windoze Hardware Quality Labs) which exhaustively tests your hardware and drivers to make certain they behave properly. If you pass, you get a little WHQL sticker to put on your box. Thus, the graphics OEM can save the expense of creating its own verification department.

What do you have to do to earn WHQL certification? Well, that changes over time as Windoze acquires more cruft^H^H^H^H^Hfeatures. But one thing you must do is fully complete their DirectX validation suite. If you fail, you don't get the sticker.

So who does OpenGL validation? Well, Micros~1 will do that for you, too. But it's optional, not required. Moreover, they won't perform OpenGL testing unless and until you've already passed DirectX testing. So, if you're a graphics OEM living on razor-thin margins, you're not going to spend one engineering dollar more than is absolutely necessary to get that WHQL sticker, and to heck with everything else. So OpenGL gets short shrift.

So why did OpenGL get anywhere at all? Two words: John Carmack. Carmack and id Software are the de facto certification authority for OpenGL: "If Quake runs, it works." Trouble is, earlier versions of Quake only used a subset of the full OpenGL API, so card makers only supported exactly that. As Carmack exercised more of the API in new releases of Quake, card vendors slowly got the idea that supporting the complete API was probably a wise move. NVidia got the hint way early, and it didn't hurt that they had a bunch of ex-SGI engineers on staff.

But even so, OpenGL support remains spotty and uneven, because there is no comprehensive certification authority (that wields any political clout) for OpenGL. If your DirectX implementation is broken, Micros~1 will tell you exactly what you messed up. There is, to my knowledge, no such facility in place for testing OpenGL. Thus, OpenGL implementations are broken in different ways across different cards. DirectX is fundamentally broken, but because of WHQL testing, it's broken the same way across all cards. Because of this comparative uniformity across cards, game developers just go straight to DirectX, and maybe will write an OpenGL rendering layer as an afterthought, despite the fact that OpenGL is easier to write for, and can often be seen offering higher performance. id Software was the sole exception to this rule, offering OpenGL support only. It looked like CroTeam, creators of Serious Sam, were going to boost OpenGL's mindshare, but they have since caved in, and their latest Serious Sam release features DirectX support.

Now, Micros~1 has acquired the lever it needs to kill OpenGL. Vertex shaders are the Next Big Thing in hardware-assisted rendering, and they have been under development for some time. It was hacked into DirectX as of DX8 (IIRC), but the OpenGL ARB has been trying to come up with an equivalent solution that is cross-platform and network-transparent. (Hence the perception that OpenGL is "lagging" DirectX.) Even if the ARB makes vertex shaders an optional extension, it will effectively kill OpenGL's already-tenuous popularity as a rendering API, because developers won't be able to rely on vertex shading extensions being installed. Thus, if you're a game developer, and you want vertex shading in your game, then you'll use DirectX and nothing else.

This is Micros~1's idea of, "Competing on the merits."

Schwab

the fact is that many developers prefer it to DirectX, and not for ideological reasons.

Unfortunately, this is not as true as we might wish it to be. Micros~1, as usual, has stacked the deck in its favor.

If you're a graphics card manufacturer, you want to make sure that your drivers will do the right thing. Thus, you need to test the hell out of it. Surprise, surprise, Micros~1 has a little thing called WHQL (Windoze Hardware Quality Labs) which exhaustively tests your hardware and drivers to make certain they behave properly. If you pass, you get a little WHQL sticker to put on your box. Thus, the graphics OEM can save the expense of creating its own verification department.

What do you have to do to earn WHQL certification? Well, that changes over time as Windoze acquires more cruft^H^H^H^H^Hfeatures. But one thing you must do is fully complete their DirectX validation suite. If you fail, you don't get the sticker.

So who does OpenGL validation? Well, Micros~1 will do that for you, too. But it's optional, not required. Moreover, they won't perform OpenGL testing unless and until you've already passed DirectX testing. So, if you're a graphics OEM living on razor-thin margins, you're not going to spend one engineering dollar more than is absolutely necessary to get that WHQL sticker, and to heck with everything else. So OpenGL gets short shrift.

So why did OpenGL get anywhere at all? Two words: John Carmack. Carmack and id Software are the de facto certification authority for OpenGL: "If Quake runs, it works." Trouble is, earlier versions of Quake only used a subset of the full OpenGL API, so card makers only supported exactly that. As Carmack exercised more of the API in new releases of Quake, card vendors slowly got the idea that supporting the complete API was probably a wise move. NVidia got the hint way early, and it didn't hurt that they had a bunch of ex-SGI engineers on staff.

But even so, OpenGL support remains spotty and uneven, because there is no comprehensive certification authority (that wields any political clout) for OpenGL. If your DirectX implementation is broken, Micros~1 will tell you exactly what you messed up. There is, to my knowledge, no such facility in place for testing OpenGL. Thus, OpenGL implementations are broken in different ways across different cards. DirectX is fundamentally broken, but because of WHQL testing, it's broken the same way across all cards. Because of this comparative uniformity across cards, game developers just go straight to DirectX, and maybe will write an OpenGL rendering layer as an afterthought, despite the fact that OpenGL is easier to write for, and can often be seen offering higher performance. id Software was the sole exception to this rule, offering OpenGL support only. It looked like CroTeam, creators of Serious Sam, were going to boost OpenGL's mindshare, but they have since caved in, and their latest Serious Sam release features DirectX support.

Now, Micros~1 has acquired the lever it needs to kill OpenGL. Vertex shaders are the Next Big Thing in hardware-assisted rendering, and they have been under development for some time. It was hacked into DirectX as of DX8 (IIRC), but the OpenGL ARB has been trying to come up with an equivalent solution that is cross-platform and network-transparent. (Hence the perception that OpenGL is "lagging" DirectX.) Even if the ARB makes vertex shaders an optional extension, it will effectively kill OpenGL's already-tenuous popularity as a rendering API, because developers won't be able to rely on vertex shading extensions being installed. Thus, if you're a game developer, and you want vertex shading in your game, then you'll use DirectX and nothing else.

This is Micros~1's idea of, "Competing on the merits."

Schwab

Actually, the Serious Engine does a pretty impressive job with both fog and flame effects. It's still a few steps away from realistic, but it does a substantially better job than the Unreal or Quake technology at the moment.

The demo versions of both Serious Sam games have a "technology test" level you can walk through in single-player mode that shows off the engine's capabilities pretty well.

Sam can kick anyone's ass.

You can tell when a game is good or bad, and 95% of the time, it's about how much the developers love what they do.

Take a look at Morrowind, the upcoming game from Bethseda. I've spent a week with it, and while it's still beta and crashes, you can see that they give a damn if people like what they're doing. It's not about how much money you spend - the game Starships Unlimited and Serious Sam were made on a low budget - but they were both fun, entertaining games that succeeding in spite of their backgrounds. (Let's face it - who would have thought a no-name Crotian programming house would have made one of the best games of 2001, and 2002 with Serious Sam 2?)

Then look at Final Fantasy X. Basically, it's a movie that sometimes you walk from point A to point B to watch the next movie. And it tells - the designers just didn't have that same love, that same pride in what they did (except in making great movie scenes and giving a reason to make sure Lulu won so you could check her out when she bent over.)

It's true with fucking everything. If somebody doesn't care about what they make and what they do, then neither will anybody else. It doesn't always work (Battlecruiser 3000 - lots of love there, but not universally loved), but it's true with your work, your spouse, your children - and the games you play.

Of course, that's my opinion. I could be wrong.

It's been in Serious Sam several years ago?

What do you mean Serious Sam is not real life? They're not using UNREAL engine!

Croteam is using Ogg Vorbis for the release of "Serious Sam: The Second Encounter". It's first mentioned in the October 14, 2001 update on the main page of croteam.com

Interestingly enough, "Serious Sam: The First Encounter" used MP3, and a patch has been released to allow it to use Ogg Vorbis.

Sure man, Doom / Doom 2 are awesome games. If you like those, pick up serious sam EBWorld did a survey of all the big gaming sites and magazines, and Serious Sam walked away with best game of 2001. It's 20$. It's Doom (complete with funky sense of humour, 300 enemy battles on absolutely HUGE maps, 20 story tall final baddie) with 2001 level graphics. It's amazing; if you deem FPS's of today a little too involving, Serious Sam is non-stop heart-pouding action. No story, no dialog, no stupid NPCs, just shooting and shooting and ambushes and shooting and armies and shooting. If you think you like Doom over other FPS because of the awesome enemy spawning and item placement and non stop action, Serious Sam is your leap into the 2000s ... and at 20$, you have no excuse not to give it a shot! Shit, I'd have spent 50$ on it .. it truely was one of the most enjoyable games I've played and completed in YEARS.

Slightly offtopic, but I noticed that Serious Sam Second Encounter uses Ogg Vorbis - I found that cool. I hope more game developers start using Ogg. Way to go Croteam! Ranjit.

I tried to download the game, but of course Fileplanet is full, but they would nicely let me download it, if I signed up for thier service. Not today... Ok, lucky BluesNews had a link that worked. 3 hours later I was good to go.

Launched the server, didnt know how to tell it private, so I reduced it to 4 guys. Within 1 minute the server was full. Everyone also just downloaded and I was the only server that had a good ping in Seattle. lol Played for 2 hours, learning, then found a 12 person server, much better.

Likes.. :)
Well, its not quake3 with powerups, you get killed quick. You have to watch yourself, its like more like CounterStrike in that respect. Good GFX, fast game play, the level was just made for deathmatch.
Respawn points are rooms in back, so you dont get spawn killed. That was a MAJOR change to most multiplayer games.

Dislikes:
The only level was kinda small, After getting killed by a damn sniper in a good spot, I switched to rockets, (only get 6 shots) and spamed hit window. Dead. :) Started to play it like quake3a and that was fun for awhile. I finally switched to the machine gun, started to do head shots, and stayed in the hallways. Thats when my points went up, and stopped getting killed. I think the shot gun should be tweaked, up closed dead, farther away, usless. Also taunting the enemy in german was a neat idea.

But all the new games, Serrious Sam 2 beta engine ROCKS. It actually lets you pick the refresh rate, and turn on all the options to make it look freaking awesome. Even plays OGG music files too.

Also, New York Racing came out, its about the movie the 5th element, but a race game with floating cars. Gotta pick that up, the demo was really good. Not alot of news about it, but read one on ISO News

Since Ogg Vorbis got another mention, it may be worth mentioning that Croteam, creators of the surprise hit 3D shooter, Serious Sam, have announced that their upcoming sequel will have its music encoded using Ogg Vorbis, replacing MP3. Writes Alen Ladavac, "We've tried encoding all the music for SE with Oggdrop at 64kbps and the quality was perfect even at such low bitrate."

I submitted this to Slashdot two weeks ago, and it was rejected. (Hence, "Sore Loser" in the title.)

Schwab

Since Ogg Vorbis got another mention, it may be worth mentioning that Croteam, creators of the surprise hit 3D shooter, Serious Sam, have announced that their upcoming sequel will have its music encoded using Ogg Vorbis, replacing MP3. Writes Alen Ladavac, "We've tried encoding all the music for SE with Oggdrop at 64kbps and the quality was perfect even at such low bitrate."

I submitted this to Slashdot two weeks ago, and it was rejected. (Hence, "Sore Loser" in the title.)

Schwab

I just read this article about Croteam using it for their next game:

"We did a major change in the sound engine between FE and SE. And its name is Ogg Vorbis. Yeah, that's right, we're using ogg for music playing. In case someone hasn't heard of it yet, Ogg Vorbis (http://www.vorbis.com) is a patent-free, open source audio codec project. Or in english: a music compressor that plainly rocks. Make sure you check it out. We've tried encoding all the music for SE with Oggdrop at 64kbps and the quality was perfect even at such low bitrate. In the final version, since we won't need the extra space, we'll be shipping with 128kbps music tracks, for even higher fidelity. The guys there are really helpful and supportive and the whole project is surprisingly functional already. There are plugins for all major music players and other music programs."

Games do not need a GeForce 3 of any race in my experience. I have a GeForce 2 MX (the cheapo one) and an Athlon 850 and have had no slow-downs at all.

First, almost all on-line 3D gaming is Half-Life mods such as Team Fortress Classic and Counter-Strike (and the under-rated GlobalWarFare) as most of you probably know. I get a solid 60 frames per second, no matter how many explosions or close-up models. (I use OpenGL. There seems to be a quirk with close-up models and DirectX.)

I cannot speak for on-line RPG gamers, but I assume they are sitting pretty as well.

The most detail rich, awe-inspring, gorgeous game I have played in over a year was Serious Sam (which only costs $20 and don't let the cheap price fool you. It is great!) This game has pool reflections on the walls around the pool and in the pool, glowing monsters, lens flares, dusty light rays and a portal showing another world with waving flags all at once! I have had in excess of 50 monsters on screen chasing me down. (Yahooooo!) My set-up plays it flawlessly. (Also, I tried it on a P3 600 Mhz with a GeForce (1) and it stuttered.)

If I haven't made my counter-point, it's that these new cards are fine, but not the next level that may be needed once a new generation of games come out (if ever). Having worked in 3D graphics, my feeling is that most of the tricks from research have finally been used up and it will take a new generation of crack programmers to get much farther, like the good ol' days. So, until then, have fun with a GeForce 2 (or equivalent) and an Athlon 850 (or equivalent)!

Games do not need a GeForce 3 of any race in my experience. I have a GeForce 2 MX (the cheapo one) and an Athlon 850 and have had no slow-downs at all.

First, almost all on-line 3D gaming is Half-Life mods such as Team Fortress Classic and Counter-Strike (and the under-rated GlobalWarFare) as most of you probably know. I get a solid 60 frames per second, no matter how many explosions or close-up models. (I use OpenGL. There seems to be a quirk with close-up models and DirectX.)

I cannot speak for on-line RPG gamers, but I assume they are sitting pretty as well.

The most detail rich, awe-inspring, gorgeous game I have played in over a year was Serious Sam (which only costs $20 and don't let the cheap price fool you. It is great!) This game has pool reflections on the walls around the pool and in the pool, glowing monsters, lens flares, dusty light rays and a portal showing another world with waving flags all at once! I have had in excess of 50 monsters on screen chasing me down. (Yahooooo!) My set-up plays it flawlessly. (Also, I tried it on a P3 600 Mhz with a GeForce (1) and it stuttered.)

If I haven't made my counter-point, it's that these new cards are fine, but not the next level that may be needed once a new generation of games come out (if ever). Having worked in 3D graphics, my feeling is that most of the tricks from research have finally been used up and it will take a new generation of crack programmers to get much farther, like the good ol' days. So, until then, have fun with a GeForce 2 (or equivalent) and an Athlon 850 (or equivalent)!

Games do not need a GeForce 3 of any race in my experience. I have a GeForce 2 MX (the cheapo one) and an Athlon 850 and have had no slow-downs at all.

First, almost all on-line 3D gaming is Half-Life mods such as Team Fortress Classic and Counter-Strike (and the under-rated GlobalWarFare) as most of you probably know. I get a solid 60 frames per second, no matter how many explosions or close-up models. (I use OpenGL. There seems to be a quirk with close-up models and DirectX.)

I cannot speak for on-line RPG gamers, but I assume they are sitting pretty as well.

The most detail rich, awe-inspring, gorgeous game I have played in over a year was Serious Sam (which only costs $20 and don't let the cheap price fool you. It is great!) This game has pool reflections on the walls around the pool and in the pool, glowing monsters, lens flares, dusty light rays and a portal showing another world with waving flags all at once! I have had in excess of 50 monsters on screen chasing me down. (Yahooooo!) My set-up plays it flawlessly. (Also, I tried it on a P3 600 Mhz with a GeForce (1) and it stuttered.)

If I haven't made my counter-point, it's that these new cards are fine, but not the next level that may be needed once a new generation of games come out (if ever). Having worked in 3D graphics, my feeling is that most of the tricks from research have finally been used up and it will take a new generation of crack programmers to get much farther, like the good ol' days. So, until then, have fun with a GeForce 2 (or equivalent) and an Athlon 850 (or equivalent)!

Games do not need a GeForce 3 of any race in my experience. I have a GeForce 2 MX (the cheapo one) and an Athlon 850 and have had no slow-downs at all.

First, almost all on-line 3D gaming is Half-Life mods such as Team Fortress Classic and Counter-Strike (and the under-rated GlobalWarFare) as most of you probably know. I get a solid 60 frames per second, no matter how many explosions or close-up models. (I use OpenGL. There seems to be a quirk with close-up models and DirectX.)

I cannot speak for on-line RPG gamers, but I assume they are sitting pretty as well.

The most detail rich, awe-inspring, gorgeous game I have played in over a year was Serious Sam (which only costs $20 and don't let the cheap price fool you. It is great!) This game has pool reflections on the walls around the pool and in the pool, glowing monsters, lens flares, dusty light rays and a portal showing another world with waving flags all at once! I have had in excess of 50 monsters on screen chasing me down. (Yahooooo!) My set-up plays it flawlessly. (Also, I tried it on a P3 600 Mhz with a GeForce (1) and it stuttered.)

If I haven't made my counter-point, it's that these new cards are fine, but not the next level that may be needed once a new generation of games come out (if ever). Having worked in 3D graphics, my feeling is that most of the tricks from research have finally been used up and it will take a new generation of crack programmers to get much farther, like the good ol' days. So, until then, have fun with a GeForce 2 (or equivalent) and an Athlon 850 (or equivalent)!

Imagine, a game that has the fear factor of Doom, the physics of Q2, and the eye candy of Q3. I can hope, can't I?

On the other hand, if you want to try your pen at cool quips, maybe you should do it for Serious Sam instead. He's more international (since he's from Croatia) and cooler because his engine rocks and has features id hasn't even done. After all, Croteam DID invent this contest, which I guess will become one more thing Duke rips off. (http://www.croteam.com/quotes)

For those who haven't yet seen it, check out Serious Sam from Croteam.

Of course, in an interview they said it was 5 years in the making, so it's not an overnight success thing. But there are still a few surprises out there.

As a hard-core gamer of many years, I suggest other adrenaline gamers do not miss Serious Sam! It's like a cross between Doom and Robotron. Dozens of enemies attacking at once for only twenty bucks! (-:

With K7-850 ($100) and GeForce2MX ($100) it runs smooth and is full of gorgeous effects.

Congratulations for having survived as a writer. I shudder to think of trying to succesfully do that...

I'm wondering something. In ancient Rome and Greece (and I'm sure elsewhere) talented poets/painters/sculptors were supported by wealthy personages - Michaelangelo or whoever would be funded by a local rich guy to do great works of art. Michaelangelo got to eat and invent the helicopter in his spare time, the world got awesome art, and the rich guy got the status of being the progenitor of all this good stuff. Everyone's happy and hundreds of years later we're all still benefiting.

Skip forward to today and we have vaguely comparable examples. Slashdot is a whipass good forum that many geeks frequent. Andover.net supports /. This is a prestige thing for Andover, you gotta think - /. has better hardware and support than in the pre-Andover days and they sure as hell aren't making any money for Andover other than banners. We're all just visitors, not customers keep in mind- we'd all scream bloody murder if we were charged a yearly fee to utilize Slashdot.

What I'm trying to get to is - what if somebody like Bill Gates was funding Croteam or somebody like Jim Clark had said to the guys at Looking Glass "Forget the big publishing company that screwed you, here's ten million bucks, go make System Shock 3"? Bad examples, I know, but back in the day, the patrons of artists were generally pretty crass bourgois businessmen who just wanted the prestige! Who cares? The world got something for free from an asshole with an ego.

We have more millionaires now than at any point in American history - why aren't these bloated rich guys patronizing high profile, high quality content creators? Not trying to get rich off them, just giving them a measly couple of bucks to produce great work. It doesn't seem that complicated to me - please tell me why I'm wrong.

Killcreek wrote the strategy guide. I saw it in the store and joked, gee I wonder how they're gonna sell that, with a centerfold of Killcreek? I opened it up and sure enough there it was. On the new doom front Old Man Murray in response to the Id announcment had a link to a group of Croation developers developing a game called Serious Sam. It looks like it has promise.