Slashdot Mirror


Carmack: Lord of the Games

seer writes: "This article on Red Herring is a nice look at the interworkings of id software, most specifically their famous employee John Carmack. It delves deeply into the fact that id has stayed a very small company and dabbles with other topics such as Carmack's tendency to stay away from Microsoft 'standards' and the whole DooM ]I[ debacle. An interesting read."

126 of 420 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah ... ok Bill .... by reaper20 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Mr. Gates sent a video with congratulations that teased, "I just want you to know that I can write slicker and tighter code than John."

    This is the funniest thing Bill Gates has EVER said.

    1. Re:Yeah ... ok Bill .... by Skirwan · · Score: 5, Funny
      "I just want you to know that I can write slicker and tighter code than John."

      This is the funniest thing Bill Gates has EVER said.
      Your listening license agreement specifically forbids quoting, citing, referring to, or referencing Mr. Gates in any context that has not been Microsoft approved and certified. As Slashdot falls under neither category, quoting Mr. Gates on this site is a license violation that may result in responses such as but not limited to prosecution, abortion of listening rights, or death by electrocution. Please cease all unauthorized quotational operations immediately, or we will be forced to take remonstrative actions.

      Thank you, have a nice day.

      --
      Damn the Emperor!
    2. Re:Yeah ... ok Bill .... by jallen02 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Its obviously a tease, sheesh. Gates probably does not code much, John does every day. If you ask me (not that you did) it shows that Mr. Gates has a pretty good sense of humor. Yeah he may have billions in the bank but its an obvious jest. Heh, I would feel pretty good if the leader of the commercialized software world complimented me so.

      Jeremy

    3. Re:Yeah ... ok Bill .... by ultraright · · Score: 3, Informative
      Actually. http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/18949 .html
      Reuben Harris has been disassembling a binary with some help from Monte Davidoff, the third author of Altair BASIC (along with Gates and Paul Allen) and who we interviewed here last week. He has the same question in mind:- "'Could Bill Gates Write Code?' Or was he merely the luckiest man alive," before concluding... "Yes He Bloody Could!" Although Reuben's analysis is not quite complete, he tells us that Gates, Allen and Davidoff threw every trick at the book to squeeze the interpreter into 4 kilobytes. They succeeded and left some headroom for the programs themselves - without which it would have been pretty useless, of course.
      ;P
  2. Re:lord by bigjocker · · Score: 3, Funny

    he is a god amoung men and is the main contributing reason as to why i no longer have a social life.. long live john carmack

    so ... are you still dating him ?? :)

    Please, somebody, mod this as funny for the first time on my life !!!!

    --
    Life isn't like a box of chocolates. It's more like a jar of jalapenos. What you do today, might burn your ass tomorrow.
  3. Not another Java by Hentai · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There was a point in id software's evolution where John Carmack almost adopted Java as the "scripting language" for Quake 3. This got abandoned REAL quick when it wasn't fast enough.

    Java is all about interoperability, then ease of design, then speed.

    Id software's game engines are all about speed, then interoperability, then ease of use. All the same, they STILL tend to be pretty easy to use, since they aren't motivated by business decisions as much as they are by making a really, really cool game engine [while this has positive business ramifications, obviously, that's not why they do it].

    Quake 3 is a SUPERB game engine on all platforms. I can write my own game as a Quake 3 mod, and without any recompiling, have it instantly work, at high framerate and with no bugs or glitches, on three different platforms. Show me how Java can do that.

    Id software's game engines ALREADY surpass Java. It's not going to get worse from here; it's going to get better.

    --
    -Hentai [in vita non pacem est]
    1. Re:Not another Java by BCoates · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There was a point in id software's evolution where John Carmack almost adopted Java as the "scripting language" for Quake 3. This got abandoned REAL quick when it wasn't fast enough.

      I'm not sure speed is java's real problem for something like that--I would be really surprised if java managed to be slower than the homemade language used in Quake I (QuakeC)...

      Probably has more to do with java's bondage-and-discipline aspects (absolutely zero control over memory management, for example) or the great difficulty making java code interoperate with C.

      --
      Benjamin Coates

    2. Re:Not another Java by spiro_killglance · · Score: 2


      I don't know about Quake3 scripting. But Unreal
      Script in (what else) Unreal and Unreal tournament, looks like a very nice language, very
      java-ish, but compiled (once per level entry i think), and with the addition of "states" to the Object Oriented language. Because depend on what state the object is in, method with the same name, but in different state blocks are called. Really nifty.

    3. Re:Not another Java by captaineo · · Score: 3, Informative
      so according to your post, i should be able to install any mod for PC Q3 on to my mac and play it?

      Yep. Compile once, run anywhere =).


      (well, it won't work if the mod is distributed as a .DLL - but very few are, since JC made it very clear that this is a bad idea)

  4. Article needs a little help with math... by Omerna · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "He told a faithful crowd that the new Doom will have images comprised of 250,000 polygons, compared with only 10,000 or so in Quake III. That's not far away from the 1.5 million- polygon characters in the animated film Shrek, which set a new standard for realism for computer-animated cartoon characters."

    So basically they only need a six-fold increase in polygons to reach what Shrek had- not to mention that the environment is constantly changing as characters interact with it, whereas Shrek was always the same. Oops.

    --


    No sig for you.
    1. Re:Article needs a little help with math... by talonyx · · Score: 2

      Look at the numbers again.

      When moving from 10,000 to 250,000 polygons, you are increasing the computational requirements 25 times.

      6 times this level? Three years maximum for hardware to catch up.

    2. Re:Article needs a little help with math... by mESSDan · · Score: 2
      Obviously your math needs a little work too. New Doom; 250k polys, Quake3; 10k polys. that's 25 times the number of polygons. If they do that with the next engine, their next game will have images comprised of 6,250,000 polys. See how it works?

      Granted, I'm not saying that will happen, but it could.

      --

      -- Dan
    3. Re:Article needs a little help with math... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Shrek was always the same

      I think that you're confusing Shrek-the-movie with Shrek-the-poster.

    4. Re:Article needs a little help with math... by rtaylor · · Score: 2

      hah..

      Thats one of the best comments I've seen all day.

      Well done!

      Where's the moderators when you need them?

      --
      Rod Taylor
    5. Re:Article needs a little help with math... by VoiceOfRaisin · · Score: 2, Informative

      he is saying sixfold from doom (250,000) to shrek (1,500,000).

      but this is also inaccurate because they compare the full number of polygons per SCENE in quake3 and doom3, to a CHARACTER in shrek. a full scene in shrek i would imagine is a very very large number.

    6. Re:Article needs a little help with math... by haruharaharu · · Score: 2

      If they do that with the next engine, their next game will have images comprised of 6,250,000 polys

      Man, I'd hate to be the artist that has to make the content for that.

      --
      Reboot macht Frei.
    7. Re:Article needs a little help with math... by talonyx · · Score: 2

      No, I know there's a sizfold increase from 250,000 to 1.5 million...

      I mean that in three years, we'll be doing that 1.5 million no sweat, and in three more I'm sure games will look like Final Fantasy.

      It just takes time....

  5. Re:Directions for Id by MajroMax · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Money not a major motivator? I wonder how honest that statement is. More importantly, where can Id be going with Carmack's other "attitudes?"

    You may be missing the bit that says "Mr. Carmack, a multimillionaire."

    Once you're able to buy just about anything you want, the ability to buy more stuff isn't that attractive. Beyond that, "more money" would come with an inevitable loss of control -- to take ID Software to a large company would mean hiring legions of programmers and managers.

    At that point, it becomes what most large buisnesses become -- merely brand names. When that happens, it's no longer Carmack's baby, and it probably wouldn't be something he enjoys.

    Ergo, ID Software stays small.

    --
    "Evil company X is threatening to restrict our rights! Let's all get together to stop--OOOH! SHINEY!!!" -- AC
  6. Re:Directions for Id by nomadic · · Score: 3, Redundant

    If money isn't the motivator, why does Id make the same, market-proven games again and again? I mean, I can respect the technical achievements of Quake III, but beyond the graphics it's not much different than Quake II, Quake, Doom II, or Doom. It would be nice to see Id actually take a chance on a game, rather than churn out the same thing year after year.

  7. Could they use actual technology names? by roystgnr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    To this reporter, Carmack isn't using OpenGL, an existing 3D graphics standard which Microsoft refused to adopt in favor of their (for years inferior) attempt to lock programmers in to DirectX, he's using "his own graphics technology" which is "almost like a religious thing for him".

    1. Re:Could they use actual technology names? by dimator · · Score: 4, Insightful

      DirectX has won the 3D standard wars

      The "won" in your sentence makes it seem as though there was ever a question. It was less a war than it was "ramming down the throat" of the developer.

      OpenGL is a niche market

      That may be true, but in my opinion, Carmack is the reason there's even that niche market. If he didn't choose OpenGL in the Quake1 days, no 3D chip/boardmakers would have given supporting the spec a second glance, and now non-Windows users would be left in the cold, software- and hardware-wise.

      --
      python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
    2. Re:Could they use actual technology names? by brianvan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This was an article written for Red Herring magazine. While we all know that the author is referring to OpenGL, I thought it was an appropriate editing choice to keep the number of technical terms down to a minimum. The focus of the story is not the technology, but the man himself.

      Also, you have to think about the readers of Red Herring. An article written for that magazine would be best targeted toward the average business professional that likes learning about different businesses, industries, and methods - to be somewhat familiar with them. OpenGL is something that would be fairly obscure for them to learn about while reading on a couch in the reception area.

      All in all, it would have been nice to see them give direct publicity to OpenGL, but I thought the article was very readable without its mention. Hence, it's a well written article partly for that fact.

    3. Re:Could they use actual technology names? by sheldon · · Score: 2

      "OpenGL, an existing 3D graphics standard which Microsoft refused to adopt"

      I wonder about that comment. Microsoft certainly didn't refuse to adopt OpenGL initially as it was included in the first versions of Windows NT and promoted as a big feature. They saw this as an important aspect of future computing, and they wanted to support it.

      Microsoft is not a company to just go off and create new software from scratch if they can obtain it elsewhere for cheap. So, something happened to encourage Microsoft to go off and work on Direct3D. A license dispute or something.

    4. Re:Could they use actual technology names? by Fnord · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually if I remember correctly it came from a sort of fight between the Win9x and WinNT teams. You're right that OpenGL was touted as a feature of NT. As a result Microsoft originally decided not to put it in 9x, as they believed at the time that by the time opengl was needed NT would be the standard. So the 9x team started making direct3d, targeting it at games, and because no game developer expected to be run on NT it started catching on. By the time NT had d3d and 9x had opengl (which wasn't too long afterwards) ms decided to use d3d as a tactical technology and proceeded to ram it down our throats.

    5. Re:Could they use actual technology names? by gol64738 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Microsoft is not a company to just go off and create new software from scratch if they can obtain it elsewhere for cheap.

      i couldn't have said this better myself, except you should have left off the 'elsewhere for cheap' part.

      here's microsoft's own homemade company plan:

      1. obtain technology, using whatever means necessary (if it's an illegal way, request to speak with Bill in a private meeting, he might be interested).

      2. once new technology is obtained, close it up and cloud it up with a bunch of bloaty code.

      3. give millions to other companies to 'influence' them to adopt this technology for their products, further locking the technology into some sort of twisted 'standard'.

      but wait, let me ask you a few questions:

      does all this mean that the obtained technology is the the best solution to any problem?
      NO

      does this mean that if a better technology becomes available, then it has a chance to become the standard?
      heheh, NO (isn't it beautiful?)

      does this benefit the customer in any way, shape or form?
      NO

      i refuse to support corporations who practice bad business ethics.

      where would science be today if Isaac Newton or Einstein failed to share their discoveries to other scientists?

      open source mimics evolution in computing science. it's just a matter of time before Gates and his anti-customer business practices cease to exist.

    6. Re:Could they use actual technology names? by jht · · Score: 3, Insightful
      i refuse to support corporations who practice bad business ethics.

      where would science be today if Isaac Newton or Einstein failed to share their discoveries to other scientists?

      As much as these (and many others non cited in your post) are giants of science, they discovered fundamental principles. Most fundamental science today is still shared in much the same way.

      Would Newton and Einstein have been so generous to the world if their discoveries had been readily exploitable for commercial use and financial gain? I'm not so sure. Look at another giant - Edison. On the one hand, he did a tremendous amount of research, but on the other hand he tried to aggressively market his work and was a heavy user of the patent system.

      Imagine if Einstein's discoveries led him directly to the design of the first atomic powerplant. I suspect he would have patented the sucker as fast as he could have.

      The real issue is that fundamental discoveries (like gravity and E=MC squared) typically aren't the same as applied ones (like OpenGL, Java, and almost anything in computing since the early days). The fundamental discoveries lay the groundwork for the applied discoveries - but the applied discoveries are where the money is.
      --
      -- Josh Turiel
      "2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
    7. Re:Could they use actual technology names? by (void*) · · Score: 2

      Imagine if Einstein's discoveries led him directly to the design of the first atomic powerplant. I suspect he would have patented the sucker as fast as he could have.

      Consider Feynman, who thought the applications of Nuclear reactors obvious. Take it, stick it on a submarine and use it for propoulsion. That's a nuclear powered submarine. Take it and use it to drive a rocket - a nuclear powered rocket. And someone got him to patent it for $1! And in return, there are some who think him an expert on nuclear reocketry.


      The lesson is this: capitalism is great, but don't try to understand everyone's motivations in those terms. You will fail.

    8. Re:Could they use actual technology names? by overunderunderdone · · Score: 2

      where would science be today if Isaac Newton or Einstein failed to share their discoveries to other scientists?

      This is a common anti-patent argument and unfortunately is based on a faulty premise. Scientific discoveries such as Newtons or Einsteins cannot be patented. An invention that uses a scientific principle CAN be. So Albert could not (then or now) patent the theory of relativity or E=MC2. He COULD however have patented an invention or machine such as an atom bomb or a nuclear power plant.

      Einstien didn't patent his discoveries not because he was opposed to patents on principle but because his discoveries were not patentable. He DID have a few inventions that he DID patent (something having to do with refridgeration). And if they haven't expired you will have to pay his estate royalties if you use his invention.

      Ironically patents were developed to encourage scientific openness. Prior to the development of patent law inventions (that could be) were kept secret by the inventor to protect himself from competion by others knocking it off. For an interesting example of how this worked look at a modern relic from that time - the Zildjian cymbal company. Avedis Zildjian invented a metelurgical process that made better cymbals in the early 1600's - he kept his invention secret so he would not have to compete with others imitating his method and it has been kept secret (and provided a living for the Zildjian family) ever since. But who knows what other uses the secret metelurgical process may have had? The peculiar metal that Zildjian invented may have been useful for things other than nice sounding cymbals. The world will never know - it is still a secret. That is how almost ALL inventions were prior to the development of patents - closely guarded secrets or if they became known afforded no way for their inventor to compete with his immitators who lacked his R&D costs and could undercut his prices. The inventor also had to restrict his own uses of the invention to insure that it remained secret. Patents were a means of avoiding these problems - The inventor publically discloses his invention and in return is granted a limited time a monopoly. The inventor benefits because he can get the full benefit of his work. He need not restrict his business plans or processes to protect the secret or live in fear that he will lose his livelyhood. Everyone else benefits because the invention is now public knowledge - Anyone who wants to use it or incorporate it into their own inventions can - IF they can come to an agreement with the patent holder. In the long run it enters the public domain freely usable by everyone. You may think that it takes too long for *everyone* to benefit. Then again, it has been 384 years and the Zildjian family's metalurgical process is STILL not "open".

  8. Has Bill Gates written any code... by ColGraff · · Score: 2, Offtopic

    ...since the eighties? I seem to recall that he has not, but I could be mistaken.

    --
    I'm the stranger...posting to /.
    1. Re:Has Bill Gates written any code... by pergamon · · Score: 2, Informative

      I asked this very question when visiting MS 6 years ago... the answer from the guy showing me around (who had been working there since the early/mid 80s) was that no, he hadn't written any code in many, many years.

    2. Re:Has Bill Gates written any code... by subuni · · Score: 4, Funny

      From what I hear, the last piece of code Bill Gates wrote was gorilla.bas .. I don't know about you, but I think that's MUCH slicker code than any of John Carmack's inventions...

    3. Re:Has Bill Gates written any code... by Safety+Cap · · Score: 2
      Radio Shack TRS-80 Model 3~

      The Model 3 didn't come in a laptop. It was a battleship-grey "desktop." The Model 4 they had a luggable version (the 4p: p=it will rip your arm right off!).

      The TRS-80 laptop line started with the Model 100.

      --
      Yeah, right.
    4. Re:Has Bill Gates written any code... by Syre · · Score: 4, Informative

      The last major code Gates wrote (so I've read) was the software for the Radio Shack portable Tandy TRS-100 (which had a rather long battery life, built-in modem, and was widely used by journalists in its day).

      Gates' claim to being able to write tight code is not without support: he did, after all, write much of MicroSoft's original code, which were BASIC interpreters that ran on systems with very very little RAM.

  9. OMG Thats great by vulgarDPS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This article is the most motivating article I have ever read. He not only tries to write code that will port well in order to insure his product gets to as many people as possible, but unlike other stupid software companies he refuses to overextend his company to more the 17 people.

    I've worked at alot of companies and one thing is for sure. Everything starts to go to shit when you can't walk over and talk to all the other developers.

    This would be the ideal company to work for and they make the ideal product. Then they let the community do the beta testing. I love this man. His ideas are harsh on the MS way to do things which is probably why they work so well. Instead of employing rediculous amounts of people inefficently turn a mediocre product and then either market it to hell and back to make everyone think they need it, or force all of their existing customers onto it.

    They keep a small number of really smart people in one room and turn one of the best products out, and let the product practically sell itself. This is how things would be in an ideal world, but the idea of making the best product so that people will pick it over others is wearing thin, esspecially now that Microsoft has bought most of the GL patents from SGI.

    1. Re:OMG Thats great by Wee · · Score: 2
      This would be the ideal company to work for

      But they only need 17 people. One sort of begets the other, I think...

      -B

      --

      Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.

  10. Re:Directions for Id by Flagran · · Score: 4, Insightful
    You seem to have misunderstood Mr. Carmack. He doesn't deny that money is a motivation for him, but that "more money" is a "major motivator". His claim is more like this: "I have sufficient money that I'm not motivated to do something purely for the purpose of getting more money."

    He obviously wants other things more than he wants to get richer than he already is. I'm not a mind reader, but I'm guessing those things include personal satisfaction, public recognition, love, health, and probably the ability to maintain his current standard of living. This is just an example of how money can only take you so far on the road towards happiness.

    --
    Make love, not sigs
  11. Re:Oh dear, not again... by MajroMax · · Score: 5, Informative
    a common code that can run on Windows, Linux, and Macintosh operating systems Last time they did this we got Java. And look what it has done for our web browsing experience! Oh wait, you don't like lag?

    This is really an unfair comparison -- you're comparing oranges and apple pie.

    From a compatibility perspective, Java is all about cross-platform-binary-compatibility. To do that, it essentially needs to emulate a consistent set of machine-interfaces -- that's where the Virtual Machine comes in. Beyond that, Java is also supposed to be a "next generation" "idiot-proof" language, and to that end it sacrificed speed for safety (of code).

    Carmack's code is about source compatibility. So far as I know, the primary language for ID Software's 1st-person shooters is C/C++. That language, to the bane of novice programmers everywhere, has a tendency to make absolutely no assumptions for you, and as a result well-written code can be highly efficent [gaining an immediate speed advantage over comparably well-written Java code]. Of course, it does mandate some level of system-speficic code somewhere in there, but a good programmer (like, for example, Carkack) will encapsulate it behind an #IFDEF or two.

    The only thing that really stops people from writing cross-platform code is system-specific libraries (Like DirectX). Once your code is built around something that tends to be as fundamental as DirectX, a transplant to another library for a different platform is no easy task.

    Carmack's "common code," is therefore merely smart design. As the article says, he shies away from the system-specific libraries, so porting becomes a much easier task.

    --
    "Evil company X is threatening to restrict our rights! Let's all get together to stop--OOOH! SHINEY!!!" -- AC
  12. It gets better. by dangermouse · · Score: 5, Informative
    Thanks to my grade school teachers' firm belief in reading comprehension skills, I noticed that the article claims Shrek has characters comprised of 1.5 million polygons, while the new Doom will display images comprised of 250,000 polygons.

    Having seen Shrek, I know there is more onscreen at any given moment than a single character.

    Those apples are nowhere near the size of those oranges.

  13. Request for new /. feature: by Com2Kid · · Score: 2

    I want bells and whistels to go off on my computer whenever Mr Carmack posts a message to /. :)

    Seriously, this would be cool. Shoot, granted already his postings make front page news on many gaming news sites (yes the front page news thing is a joke, of course it is on the front page. ^_^ ) but I want to know RIGHT AWAY!

    *IDEA!!!*
    Hey, how about we all get some funds together and pay Mr. Carmack to develop the next version of Nethack? :) :) :) :) :)

  14. Gameplay vs. Technology by Y-Crate · · Score: 4, Interesting
    But Mr. Carmack and his company have their critics. Their games are bloody and repetitive. Many former Id employees moved on because they tired of making the same game where players shoot anything that moves
    Which is why I'm glad that the've decided to keep all the engine work in-house, while farming out a lot of the actual game development to more qualified parties.

    By the time Quake 3 Arena came out, I think a lot of people realized that id had basically become a brilliant game engine company that should just cast off the illusions that they were experts in creating innovative gameplay. Because I think, while you can debate the merits of the technology behind id's products until the end of time, it became clear to many that the innovative gameplay was happening somewhere else. While the engine was brillaint, Quake 3 the game was the same old, same old. Deathmatch in a brown castle.

    While many people had not-so-kind things to say about the multiplayer aspects of the origional Unreal, when Unreal Tournamnet came out, Epic was pushing the bounderies of online gameplay, while id was left in the dust, cranking out the same thing yet again.

    Not to say Quake 3 was a crap game, a hell of a lot of people enjoyed it then and enjoy it to this day. I'm just saying that it was part of a downward trend at id, one that they seem to have addressed, and I commend John Carmack for that.
    1. Re:Gameplay vs. Technology by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ummmm, I really don't see how you can call UT something new and great in game play and Quake 3 the same old. I own both and really, find them to be the same thing. Ya, the maps are different, weapons are different, etc but the core of the game is the same. I don't ever play either of them in their default mode, as you said, it's old. It's the mods I like.

      But seriously, what does UT (in an unmodded state) offer that Quake 3 doesn't? I'm talking signficant gameplay things here that are NEW. I am well aware of the differences, I just don't think UT is new and revolutionary.

    2. Re:Gameplay vs. Technology by Osty · · Score: 2

      But seriously, what does UT (in an unmodded state) offer that Quake 3 doesn't? I'm talking signficant gameplay things here that are NEW. I am well aware of the differences, I just don't think UT is new and revolutionary.

      Domination and Assault. Okay, so the game types were not terribly new (the Domination game type was first seen in the old Team Fortress mod for Quake 1, with the excellent map canalzon; Assault was again seen first in a primitive form in Team Fortress, with the map hunted), but they were types that had not been previously available out of the box in a commercial game, and they were definitely not types available in Quake 3 (q3 had only deathmatch, team deathmatch, and CTF). As far as anybody playing the games in the default state, I wouldn't expect that. These games are pushing three years old. There have been many and more mods for them that extend the gameplay quite farther than the original default modes. It may very well be that Q3A has surpassed UT when you count the quality mods (I don't know, I haven't stayed on top of the communities for either).


      However, both id and Epic are better engine developers than game designers. Witness the sheer number of games that have been based on their technology -- for Epic, there's DS9: The Fallen, Deus Ex, Wheel of Time, Rune, the never-to-be-released Duke Nukem Forever, and probably a few more I'm missing; for id, there have been games ranging from the early Wolf3D days (IIRC, Blake Stone was based on the Wolf3D engine), to Doom/Doom2 (Hexen and Heretic), to Quake (Hexen 2, Half-Life, DNF was going to use this originally), to Quake 2 (Daikatana, Anachronox), all the way up to Quake 3 (Elite Force, FAKK2, Alice, RTCW, MOH:AA, and more). id knows this, which is why they worked with Grey Matter and Nerve to make the recent Return to Castle Wolfenstein. Epic also knows this, which is why they're working with Legend (the guys who did Wheel of Time) to make the next Unreal (unimaginatively named Unreal 2). Expect to see more of this happening in the future -- as games keep getting bigger and more expensive to produce, companies will begin specializing. I don't think it'll be uncommon to see collaborations of three or more companies on a single game (like RTCW), where each company does what they're good at (single-player gameplay, multi-player gameplay, engine, art, design, marketing, etc).

    3. Re:Gameplay vs. Technology by Fishstick · · Score: 2

      >the never-to-be-released Duke Nukem Forever

      I keep forgetting about this until someone mentions it again. 3D Realms has had a press-blackout for what, over a year now? Seems like it was 2-3 years ago that DNF development was switched from the Quake 2 engine to the Unreal engine. Now Q3A and UT have come and gone, Unreal 2 and a new Doom are on the horizon and still DNF is MIA.

      Either that is going to be one hell of a game or they've had to start over a couple of times? How can you ever hope to sell enough copies of a game to make back what has been spent in development this many years?

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    4. Re:Gameplay vs. Technology by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      Christ, I remember when PREY was going to be THE NEXT BIG THING. As I recall, there was a huge article in PC Gamer, the same issue as the one that claimed X-Wing vs TiE Fighter would have 16 player LAN games, with voice chat.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    5. Re:Gameplay vs. Technology by Suppafly · · Score: 2

      Yeh.. its sad.. prey got canned so the company could dump resources into DNF which seems to be marketable due to the existing franchise it had.. which is a total shame.. Prey was nearly done when it was canned.. DNF will prob never be done

  15. ID engines by BrookHarty · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even thou FPS games dont make the level of sales of everquest or pokemon, ID game engines are the best for FPS shooters.

    The norm at Lan parties are mostly ID engines based games. RTCW, MOHAA Demo, Q3A, Q3A Urban Terror, Action Quake2, the only 2 games that wasnt, where Counter Strike and Ghost Recon. The main game for money was CS, but we had so much fun playing Q3A UT, we had to push back the CS tourney.

    -
    Amiga OS is out for your x86

    1. Re:ID engines by Perdo · · Score: 2

      Counter Strike and halflife are Quake engined

      --

      If voting were effective, it would be illegal by now.

    2. Re:ID engines by Robotech_Master · · Score: 2

      As I understand it, the Half-Life folks started out with the Quake (1) engine as a base, but then hacked and extended it to the point where it has little code in common with Quake anymore.

      --
      Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
    3. Re:ID engines by krogoth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, Counter-Strike is a mod for Half-Life, which is based on the Quake2 engine (either that or Quake - I'm a bit confused from conflicting reports I heard in the early days of Half-Life, but I believe it's Quake2). That means Ghost Recon is the only game on your list not based on an id engine.

      --

      They that quote Benjamin Franklin on liberty and safety deserve neither.
    4. Re:ID engines by TotallyUseless · · Score: 2

      years after they released their *only* game it has little in common with the quake games. it used to share much more code.

      --

      Time for some tasty Shiner Bock!
  16. Re:nice tits by buckeyeguy · · Score: 4, Funny

    But as the article stated, Id makes roughly $1 million per employee... hell, at that clip, Carmack can buy back John Romero's car.

    --
    I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
  17. Oi! Hands off my favorite game! by Ravagin · · Score: 2

    develop the next version of Nethack? :)

    With significant respect to mr. carmack... no. He's welcome to design supsersexy fps or whatever interface, but I (and I think a lot of nh players share the sentiment) like nethack just the way it is. The current interface really can't be beat for straightforwardness. Besides, we all know that it's not appearances that matter.

    And the devteam does a damn fine job on their own.

    :) Excuse me. I'm... easily excitable... about these things.

    --

    Karma: T-rexcellent.

  18. id software and open source by Bluecoat93 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    One thing I personally like about John Carmack and id software is that they have a long history of (eventually) releasing their games as open source.

    Take a look at the FTP site: Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, Quake, and Quake 2 are all available. You still have to have the map files and other game data from a "real" copy of the game in order to play it, but all of Carmack and Co's magic is up there for study.

    In short, they have quite a history of "giving back to the community." Even for games (such as Q3) where the full source isn't released, id always releases SDK's (for lack of a better term) to allow anyone that wants to the chance to create add-ons, extensions, and "total conversions" -- new games based on the existing code.

    Very, very, cool.

    1. Re:id software and open source by gmhowell · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Haven't many mentioned that an OSS game engine with copyrighted artwork is a way to make Linux games fly?

      Sounds good to me. I need to go to the bargain racks and get some of the data files for these src packages.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    2. Re:id software and open source by Razzak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Of course, it also has the great side effect of making those old games fully hackable and getting more people to upgrade to their latest game.

      But that's the cynical side of me, I love the fact they release the source code too.

    3. Re:id software and open source by Imuho · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The above post, not the parent, should be "+5, Insightful". Every game which carmack releases source for become unplayable in a week. Which means I am forced to upgrade to the newest game, in a manner much more convincing than any microsoft release-- because I am one of the best quake players, and I get accused of cheating and banned from servers when I don't. Meanwhile the opponents whom I dominated a week before somehow stop missing rail shots, start shooting through walls, and move too fast for even me to hit. I still usually win, because no cheat can give you the strategic insight needed to be really good, but much of the fun is taken away.

      I've given Carmack more money than I've given Gates, for this very reason. Q3A isn't more fun than Q1, or at least it wasn't before the speedhack killed it. Neither is RTCW really more fun than Q3A- although I guess I'll buy it soon, right about the time people start flying in Q3A.

      Open Source works great for projects which began as open source and had meaningful feedback from the beginning. For games or other applications which have finished their development cycle it is a nightmare; it combines the worst features of security through obscurity with the worst features of open source software.

      IMUHO if Carmack was really a supporter of open source, Doom III/RTCW would be open NOW so that when they came out they would be unhackable. I think his rationale for releasing his source is simply that he wants to sell more cd's, while masturbating to the egoboo he gets from being worshipped on slashdot.

      If I'm wrong about this, and he is really just a brilliant but naive programmer, I apologize; the reason I keep buying Quake instead of half-life or one of the other clones is because I believe the innovators like carmack should be rewarded. He gave us the fps genre, and I always get my money's worth from a game he makes within a few days of buying it, so in my mind the upgradaing is worth it. However, the open sourcing is not something I think is good for either the quake community or the open source community, and is not something I think he deserves kudos for. The day the source for a game is released while still in beta I will join y'all in celebrating his altruism.

    4. Re:id software and open source by imadork · · Score: 3, Interesting
      One thing I personally like about John Carmack and id software is that they have a long history of (eventually) releasing their games as open source.

      So many software companies (and not just MS, mind you) are content to sell code at full price that they've written years ago and just require periodic maintenance now.

      It seems to me that one way to prove beyond a doubt that you have skills it to write a program, make your money off of it over the course of a few years, and then give it away because the stuff you've written since then is actually worth more to people.

    5. Re:id software and open source by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 2

      The artwork is copyrighted and not free, but there's nothing preventing you from providing free alternatives.

      Frankly, while the artworks are nice and cool, they are much, much more easily replaced than the engine.

    6. Re:id software and open source by TheAwfulTruth · · Score: 2

      That is so NOT true! The artwork, sound and thread of game play are the ONLY things that make a game interesting or fun at all. And that type of creativity is VERY hard to some by. Game engines are already a dime a dozen, so why aren't there hundreds of great games for Linux right now? Right, because the art/music/gameplay elements are far harder to do than you're imagining they are.

      --
      Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
  19. Re:Oh dear, not again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You are uninformed why John Carmack did not use Java. FlipCode had the following pertaining to Carmack's view on Java: John Carmack considered using Java in id's Q3. He discusses several pros and cons. His biggest problem with Java was (believe it or not) portability -- It seems that Linux's and Solaris' implementations of the JVM are lacking (with respect to JNI) as compared to Windows'. However, John does say at the end of this interview, "As for embedding... If I did want to go off and start fresh, I would likely try doing almost everything in Java." John Carmack considered using Java in id's games for quite some time, "... I want Quake 3: Arena running on every platform that has hardware- accelerated OpenGL and an Internet connection.... I had been working under the assumption that Java was the right way to go, but ... The programming language [used in Quake3] is interpreted ANSI C. The game will have an interpreter for a virtual RISC-like CPU." (Unreal followed a similar approach.) ... "When it comes around to the next development cycle, I will make the Java decision again." As for embedding: "We are still working with significant chunks of an existing code base. If I did want to go off and start fresh, I would likely try doing almost everything in Java." -- Game Developer Magazine, July 1999 issue. As more and more developers start taking advantage of all that Object-Oriented Programming (OOP) has to offer game development, extensible Java game objects may become the norm. More advanced players may even start to demand it - who wants to learn a proprietary script syntax for each new game they want to extend? If Sun delivers what they've promised, Java may (in time) become the de facto standard. Or not... 8-)

  20. Re:Directions for Id by javilon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    " I mean, I can respect the technical achievements of Quake III"

    You just answered your own question: Carmack is a programmer, so probably he just enjoys the "technical achievements". No small thing to me.

    It's sort of what OS people does, but making a bit more money.

    --


    When his defense asked, "Which computer has Jon Johansen trespassed upon?" the answer was: "His own."
  21. Re:Directions for Id by Iffy+Bonzoolie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, I think the article alluded to Carmack being more focused on building a great game ENGINE, rather than a great GAME. In theory, if someone licenses the next-gen Id game engine, then all their development time is spent building a good game, and not something that puts shapes on the screen (which, to do well, is itself a major project).

    It's about specialization, people doing what they are really good at, instead of trying to do everything and selling mediocrity.

    -If

    --
    Run a pencil-and-paper RPG campaign with your far-off friends: Gametable!
  22. Re:Oi! Hands off my favorite game! by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 2

    Besides, there already is a graphic, SDL-based version of nethack: Falcon's Eye.

  23. Re:Oh dear, not again... by Phroggy · · Score: 2

    Last time they did this we got Java. And look what it has done for our web browsing experience! Oh wait, you don't like lag?

    Java is (sort of) slow because Java uses a virtual machine, basically emulating everything. Id Software's code runs natively on each platform, so it runs at full speed. It's easy to port to new platforms, because it's designed with cross-platform compatibility in mind from the beginning. Some other games and apps are written just for win32 on x86 with no thought given to other platforms, so when they decide it'd be nice to have a Mac or Linux version, major chunks of code have to be completely rewritten. Companies like Loki and MacSoft specialize in exactly that. Ever notice that a lot of games are released for win32 6 months before other platforms? Quake 3 was released simultaneously for win32, Linux and Mac OS.

    --
    $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
    $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  24. Re:Wolf3D the first FPS, don't think so... by Com2Kid · · Score: 2

    I have that one too.

    B0w d0w|\| 2 m3 for 1 @m the FP$ GOD!

    Or something to that extent. :)

    I even have an advertisment for a Porno Doom mod. (the advertisment says it has drivable vechicals! Somehow I doubt that but. . . .)

    The article says he does not like the whole entire hero worship thing. . . .

    He may need us to come to his defense though when Bill Gates kidnaps him and demands that Mr. Carmack uses DirectX in his next game. :)

  25. required to work long and hard.. by NotAnotherReboot · · Score: 3, Funny

    I quote, "Thanks to profit sharing, some employees make $450,000 to $600,000 in a good year. With such pay, the company expects employees to put in long, hard hours, says Todd Hollenshead." That's why no one ever wonders why John Romero no longer works at id.

    1. Re:required to work long and hard.. by Billly+Gates · · Score: 4, Informative

      Romero did not quit. He was fired.

      I no longer have the url but John Carmack said Romeo would blow off the day by playing and not coding and would not listen to other employees about idea's for the games. He basically wanted a game with a story and intereactive plot while John Carmack did not. The split grew worse and worse and he eventually refused to work on the same assignments as Carmack and he would do his own thing anyway. Carmack got so pissed that he went to the CEO and made a case to fire him. The CEO who was behind John Carmack all long fired Romeo and another co-worker to set an example. John Carmack is a perfectionists and doesn't like other people getting in his way. But what made it worse was that the whole team went one way while Romeo refused to go with the flow. THis and not the hours is why is he left.

    2. Re:required to work long and hard.. by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 2

      What's with the personal inferences?

      You can tell the story without explicitly demonizing anyone:

      Romero did not quit, he was fired.

      I no longer have the url but John Carmack said Romero would blow off the day by playing and not coding and would not listen to the other employess about ideas for the games. [fine, since this is hearsay] He and John Carmack held two different visions for the games they worked on. This got to the point where he [Romero] would not work on the same assignments as Carmack and would do his own thing. Carmack and the CEO fired Romero and another coworker [since it's very clearly lack of team effort, inability to perform adequatley, refusal to work, etc, no need to mention getting pised, or seting an example. Nor is it necessary to mention JC's perfectionism, which has no bearing on the story.] The whole team would go one way, and Romero refused to go with the flow. This, and not the long hours, is why he [Romero] left.

    3. Re:required to work long and hard.. by Shimbo · · Score: 2
      Hey. I would take the chance to bust ass for three or four years for permanent financial stability.


      Well maybe. If you were locked in a cupboard somwhere. However, you have to get on with your boss and co-workers. Most great feats of hacking are done for the love of it: I don't believe that most people could carry it off once they lost faith in what they were doing.

  26. Re:Oi! Hands off my favorite game! by Com2Kid · · Score: 2

    Hey, at least it would still be portable. :) Ok not the same immense portability that the current Nethack has, but hey, it would work on at least 3 OSs. :)

    Make him keep the current game design, just have him write an underlying graphics engine, hehe.

    Actualy the original Quake (and Quake 2?) have been shown to be able to run in text only modes, so hey, a Carmack version of Nethack may very well support terminals as well! :)

  27. Re:Wolf3D the first FPS, don't think so... by Ch_Omega · · Score: 3, Informative

    "Catacomb Abyss Released: Dec 1991 The first FPS."

    Not really. The game Dark Side for the Commodore 64 was a fully polygonal, first person shooter, that was released in 1988, i think. The only problem was that it had a framerate of about 3 or 4 fps. ;)

    On a sidenote, the engine Catacomb Abyss used was written by John Carmack, and share alot of code with the younger Wolf3D. :)

  28. offspring by mojo-raisin · · Score: 3, Funny

    Carmack and Torvalds should have a child...

  29. eh? by _ganja_ · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Would you trust a tech writter that made statements like this: "The new Doom likely will require a no less powerful chip than the soon-to-be-released Nvidia GeForce3. Soon to be replaced more like.


    I actually thought Adrian Carmack was Johns brother as I remember reading it somewhere, one of the articles was obviously wrong. I'm sure someone will give an autoritive answer on that one.

    --

    A journey of a thousand miles starts with a brutal anal raping at airport security

    1. Re:eh? by coupland · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Here's your authoritative answer: Adrian and John are not related. Many notable (and misinformed) publications have made the mistake of assuming they're brothers, hence the reason you read many articles that say otherwise.

  30. Re:Mr Men by BitwizeGHC · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Mr. Evil..."

    "Dr. Evil. I didn't spend four years in evil medical school to be called Mr., thank you very much."

    ^_^

    --
    N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
  31. Re:Wolf3D the first FPS, don't think so... by Rayonic · · Score: 3, Informative

    Good point, but do you know who made Catacomb Abyss?
    That's right, id Software. Seems it all keeps coming back to them. Sp00ky, eh?

  32. Re:Directions for Id by BlackGriffen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Think of the name of the company: *id* software. It's supposed to be simple software that appeals to the gamers id (i.e. cruelty, lust, greed, et al.). The id does not need, nor does it understand deep plots, or innovative gameplay. It understands revenge, the joy of domination, you know, the primitive stuff.

    At least they're not making the kind of tame that their title also implies: porn.

    BlackGriffen

  33. Re:GeForce3??? by Tuzanor · · Score: 2

    That was probably just an old quote...

  34. Poor Article by idealego · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Microsoft tried to launch a graphics standard for PC hardware in the early '90s" We'd be talking 96 here, not early 90's.

    "is sticking to his own graphics technology" It's called opengl.

    I didn't bother to read further, obviously the article is written by someone who is clueless.

  35. Bill Gates programs people now... by yintercept · · Score: 2, Funny

    Althought, it may be more accurate to say "he programs governments now."

  36. Here's an interesting thought... by cperciva · · Score: 3

    Anyone want to make guesses at how many hours Bill Gates has spent playing Carmack's games?

  37. Apples & Oranges by Tassach · · Score: 3, Informative
    The Q3 game engine is a slick and flexible piece of code. However, it is a one trick pony: it makes it very easy to write First-Person shooters, but it is useless for any other purpose whatsoever -- even for other game genres like classic arcade scrollers, flight simulators, real-time strategy, turn-based stategy, et cetera.

    Java, on the other hand, is a GENERAL PURPOSE PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE. You could use it to write ANY of the above kind of games, or a client-server application, or a spreadsheet, or pretty much anything else.

    You also need to remember that the Java Programming Language and the Java Runtime Environment (JRE) are totally and completely different things. Java source code can be compiled into native machine code, which will run as fast or faster than comperable C++ code. Other languages ( like Python) can be compiled into Byte Codes and run under the JRE

    --
    Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    1. Re:Apples & Oranges by carlfish · · Score: 2, Interesting
      --
      The more I learn about the Internet, the more amazed I am that it works at all.
    2. Re:Apples & Oranges by renoX · · Score: 2

      > Java, on the other hand, is a GENERAL PURPOSE PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE.
      > You could use it to write ANY of the above kind of games, or a client-server application, or a spreadsheet, or pretty much anything else.

      You could, you could..
      Do you know the differences between theory and pratice?
      In theory you're right, in pratice do you know a Java compiler which produce native code which is as fast as C++, without any memory increase?

      No? Then your point means nothing.

  38. This is why I don't trust news sources... by Phleg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...if I can find multiple things they got wrong on things I know about, then I seriously doubt they're getting the stuff right that I don't know about.

    Mr. Carmack, cofounder and lead programmer at Id Software, is sticking to his own graphics technology. He is an absolute techno-purist who seeks to produce a common code that can run on Windows, Linux, and Macintosh operating systems--something he can't do with Microsoft's technology.

    It's not his own graphics technology, it's OpenGL, which is used by many programmers around the globe. And he doesn't do it because he wants to have portable code. That's a part of it, sure, but he uses OpenGL mainly because it's easier to code, which means less development time and less debugging time. Also, it allows for greater flexibility. Not to mention, with Direct3D, can we say, "namespace pollution"? I thought so.

    And by being such a purist, he delights hard-core gamers and graphics experts.

    Oh yes, I get every id game simply because he "sticks to his own graphics technology". Did the author actually consider that he delights hard-core gamers simply because he creates realistic games that have fun gameplay and stunning visuals?

    The new Doom likely will require a no less powerful chip than the soon-to-be-released Nvidia GeForce3.

    Newly released about a year ago...

    He told a faithful crowd that the new Doom will have images comprised of 250,000 polygons, compared with only 10,000 or so in Quake III. That's not far away from the 1.5 million- polygon characters in the animated film Shrek, which set a new standard for realism for computer-animated cartoon characters.

    Notice he said "images comprised of 250,000 polygons", and "That's not far from the 1.5 million- polygon characters in...Shrek". This isn't like comparing apples to oranges, it's comparing apples to Mack trucks.

    --
    No comment.
  39. Give Id a break! by EggplantMan · · Score: 2, Insightful
    From what I gleaned from the article, it seems that Id's intention is to push the graphical envelope. In order to do that, Id needs to stay bleeding edge, and part of that is to be able to create a game quickly.

    Id can produce an action game with a minimum of man hours. I think once you start to move into say, the RPG genre the man hours increase significantly.

    Think of all the media that comes with a Square game. CGI movies, voice acting, the presence of a script with dialogue, a plot, the list is very long. In order to do something like this Id would have to expand, which they're very much against. In short, don't expect Id to change genres anytime soon!

    --

    ?-|||-----x<*))))><
  40. Re:Directions for Id by ocbwilg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Money not a major motivator? I wonder how honest that statement is.

    You left out a word there. It's not that money isn't a major motivator. He said that "more money" wasn't a major motivator. There is a difference.

    Carmack is already a multi-millionaire. More money would only make him more of a multi-millionaire. Which is better, being a multi-millionaire or a bigger multi-millionaire? How are any of your basic needs being fulfilled any better if you have $40 million in the bank versus $20 million?

    It sounds to me like Carmack has already realized that Id gives him all the freedom and financial security he could want. The thing that he seems really interested in is writing "better code" and a "cooler 3D graphics engine." How does having more money help him there?

  41. Re:Directions for Id by ocbwilg · · Score: 2

    If money isn't the motivator, why does Id make the same, market-proven games again and again?

    You've misquoted the article. He said that "more money" isn't a motivator. But Id is a business, and in order for them to stay in business they must remain profitable. If Id becomes unprofitable then it goes out of business, which means that Carmack can't spend all of his time writing the really cool code that he does now (which appears to be his motivation).

  42. Re:No, Carmack has the mail order bride... by lowe0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ummmm... nope. She's actually an ex-id employee. Who had quite a hand in their business development. And now runs a production company.

    I'd write more, but I'm sure Carmack could correct this himself. You did know he reads this site, right?

    I suppose if you insist on bashing KillCreek's not-so-impressive surgical augmentation, that's your thing. But ripping on Carmack's wife, in a thread about him? Man, that's low....

  43. Re:Directions for Id by Afrosheen · · Score: 2

    O contraire, monfrair. QuakeIII did extremely well, and continues to do so, through mods and extensions. Granted, Team Arena didn't get my dollars but excellent mods like Urban Terror breathe new life into the whole CTF/DM experience. CounterStrike seems primitive by comparison.

  44. Re:Id created the first true 3D game? by Jailbrekr · · Score: 4, Informative

    Uh, NO.

    BattleZone in the arcade, and Stellar7 on the Apple ][. same thing.

    --
    Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
  45. Geforce3 not released yet? by Genie1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    The new Doom likely will require a no less powerful chip than the soon-to-be-released Nvidia GeForce3.

    Did they mean GeForce4 or are all the GeForce3 cards on the market right now fakes?

  46. gotta love this line wish others would read it by Kasmiur · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "It legitimized the shareware movement, starting in 1993 with progressive releases of the Doom franchise, which generated more than $100 million in revenue (even though roughly 15 million copies of the original were downloaded for free). "

    Now if only the RIAA and other places would read that and understand that sometimes when done properly that such things do work in a internet world.

    --
    -THIS SPACE FOR RENT!
    1. Re:gotta love this line wish others would read it by swb · · Score: 2

      Let's pretend the RIAA did adopt a Doom-type shareware business model and that it was successful (ie, they generated profitable sales). After sales had plateaued, the RIAA business leaders would become hopelessly obsessed with the business demands for increased "growth" in profits and would seize the idea of capturing the "lost" sales that were downloaded but didn't lead to a purchase. They would come up with a way to eliminate or corrupt the shareware component (encryption, standards compromises, etc etc).

      As it stands now, the RIAA is *already* obsessed with the idea of capturing sales "lost" to piracy/home taping/sharing/RIPs/etc, which is why they're so eager to try copy protecting CDs, embracing encryption/limited use and so on. Their goal is to get a percentage of every recorded musical experience people have.

      The Business Software people are kind of the same way -- they're obsessed with 'piracy' as lost retail sales, at least in public. In private they probably acknowledge they cannot reclaim more than 20% of these sales since they're products that people simply wouldn't purchase at their retail prices but will use for free.

      The RIAA, on the other hand, looks at ALL recording use they weren't paid directly for as a potential lost sale and this is what will never allow them to give anything away.

  47. Re:Directions for Id by Kintanon · · Score: 2

    Because story innovation isn't the motivator for Carmack either. He likes to code. He likes to code FPS games. So that's what he does. The money is a byproduct which allows him to continue coding whatever he wants.

    Kintanon

    --
    Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
  48. Spectre VR, not Stellar7 by torpor · · Score: 2

    I seem to remember SpectreVR came out before Stellar7.

    Also, it was one of the first (if not the first) multiplayer LAN games, too ...

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    1. Re:Spectre VR, not Stellar7 by torpor · · Score: 2

      Ah, I did not know that it was re-made on the PC and Mac ... that's interesting. I'll have to look for it for my Apple ][ emu some time ...

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  49. Re:Directions for Id by EvilJohn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Money not a major motivator? I wonder how honest that statement is. More importantly, where can Id be going with Carmack's other "attitudes?"

    No, money isn't a major motivator for Mr. Carmack, and as for his attitudes, I've found him to be one of the most even tempered people I've ever met.

    --

    Less Talk, More Beer.
  50. Now that I think about it... by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 2, Insightful

    this article does have a bit of a point. If GLQuake never came out we'd have seen an onslaught of Software REndered crap. GLQuake made the relatively big push to hardware rendered3D which gave us 3D chips in even the cheapest piece of junk today.

    Although I think that's more of Romero's fault IIRC.

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
  51. Ironic by Judecca · · Score: 4, Funny

    And so the poor man who just wants to be left alone, and not a cult icon...

    ... is written about, and posted on slashdot.

  52. good grief by nomadic · · Score: 2

    Alright, all these replies telling me he concentrates on game engines. Fine. I know.

    If Id's actually going to sell games to end users, though, then they should expect to face criticism for them. The engine's nice, no argument about that. But the game themselves are extremely repetitive, which is why so many people have left Id after getting bored with the Same Old FPS With Better Graphics&copy.

    And to everyone complaining about how Carmack himself would rather focus on game engines, please note that I didn't name him in my post; I criticized Id.

  53. Its the tone, not the buzzword. by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 4, Insightful


    While we all know that the author is referring to OpenGL, I thought it was an appropriate editing choice to keep the number of technical terms down to a minimum. The focus of the story is not the technology, but the man himself.


    I can agree that a business publication would want to avoid technical discussion, I think you're missing the tone that the article presented. Read it again:

    Eight years later, Mr. Carmack is still steering clear of Microsoft's standard as he cranks out the next version of Id Software's Doom.

    ...

    "It's almost like a religious thing for him," grumbles Otto Berkes, a Microsoft program manager who until recently oversaw the company's DirectX graphics technology division. Unlike Mr. Carmack, many other game developers have adopted the technology.

    ...

    Mr. Carmack, cofounder and lead programmer at Id Software, is sticking to his own graphics technology.

    The message is plain. Carmack avoids an industry standard developed by Microsoft called DirectX. Everybody else uses it. Instead, Carmack is some kind of technological religious zealot who uses his own system.


    Granted... the article does go on to point out that his decission allows his software to run on many platforms. Something Microsoft's technology does not allow. But its possible that someone unfamiliar with the industry might miss this message and attribute Carmack's refusal of microsoft as another aspect of his ecentric personality.


    It would be different if the writer had reported Carmack has adopted an open graphics standard over a more restrictive standard provided by Microsoft... despite Microsoft's professed incredulity over the choice.

  54. Coding is NOT art? by inkswamp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    From the article: "That's not what we're doing," Mr. Carmack says. "We're doing entertainment. Saying it's art is a kind of sophistry from people who want to aggrandize our industry."

    I totally disagree with this statement. I view coding (particularly coding for games) as something that straddles the gulf between work and art. It may not be 100% pure art, but it's certainly not aggrandizing to say that there is a fair amount of artistry in well conceived and written code. The first 25 years of my life was spent pursuing a variety of artistic endeavors (writing, music, visual arts) and I get nearly the exact same feeling in me when I'm writing code as when I'm composing music or drawing. There is definitely some link between those activities. I feel the same creative impulses firing when I'm programming as when I'm doing any other art form and I feel that same sense of artistic fulfillment or satisfaction when I'm finished with a project. It probably sounds a little fruit-loopy, but it's the truth. There is an element of artistry in writing code. I have no doubt about that.

    --Rick

    --
    --Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
  55. Re:Oi! Hands off my favorite game! by Ravagin · · Score: 2

    Yes! Exactly!

    --

    Karma: T-rexcellent.

  56. I don't think so. by IPFreely · · Score: 2
    In 1996, Id created the first true 3D game, Quake

    Not quite. Descent was out before that, and it is even more 3-D than Quake.

    --
    There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
    1. Re:I don't think so. by ymgve · · Score: 2

      Tell me how one game can be 'more' 3D than the other? Both Descent and Quake had 6 degrees of freedom. Both had textured levels, dynamic lightning and to a certain extent movable objects.
      Care to explain further?

    2. Re:I don't think so. by jonnythan · · Score: 2

      Quake didn't have those degrees of freedom. You couldn't have overlapping passages, for instance. There was no true vertical dimension in the engine, it was only simulated.

      Think about this...in Q3A or UT, you have to point upward to shoot at someone standing on a platform. In Quake, you pointed towards the platform and the shots automatically went "up" to where the person was standing.

      No corkscrew shaped tunnels in Quake, the 3D part was really just polygonal characters and walls instead of Doom's sprites, not a true 3D engine.

    3. Re:I don't think so. by ymgve · · Score: 2

      You are completely wrong. Quake could - and in almost every level had, overlapping passages. I can assure you, it was as fully 3D as any game to come after it. To quote Gamespy: "The most amazing quality of Quake was the first completely three-dimensional environment, with the most advanced physics system of its time."

  57. Re:nice tits by Galvatron · · Score: 2

    Actually, he's building a spaceship.

    --
    "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
  58. Re:Wolf3D the first FPS, don't think so... by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

    And Gunship, which was, if I recall correctly, the first polygonal flight sim.

    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  59. Porting OpenGL code written in C++ by John+Harrison · · Score: 3, Informative
    I am sure that I am not the only person here who has ported an OpenGL game from one platform to another but nobody else has mentioned it so here goes.

    For my graphics class in college we had to write an Asteroids program in OpenGL. I decided that it was kind of lame to do all the work to render asteroids and ships in 3-D only to shoot them in a 2-D plane. So I implemented a 3-D space shooter involving asteroids. It soon became apparent that in order for there to be enough asteroids to hit you there had to be A LOT of asteroids. The number that sticks in my head is 400. Since shooting 400 asteroids was pretty dumb I added some Tie-Fighters to the mix and had the objective be to shoot the Tie-Fighters.

    All the work in this class was done on Macintosh computers. I was the proud owner of a Mac Performa 6200. It ran at 66 MHz, with no 3-D graphics card. I actually got my little game to run at a reasonable speed on it. Everybody else in the class wrote games that were played in a 2-D plane and many of them didn't run fast even on the brand new G3s that were showing up around campus.

    Now for the point of my story. After graduation I went to work for a certain company and they gave my a nice laptop. It ran Windows. I decided it would be nice to try to play my game on it. The port was EXTREMELY easy. I had to add a crappy Win32 main and I had to replace the keypress codes since I hadn't used GLUT for kepresses since it didn't work with multiple keypresses. I also yanked the sound code out since it was Mac specific. But it took only a few hours to have the game up and running.

    If you want to see the result you can get it here. Source is there too.

    I later loaded Linux on my laptop and ported the game to Linux. It took a bit longer to find working keypress calls. I ended up using SDL without porting the whole game to SDL. The result was a little ugly but the game worked just fine. I haven't invested the time needed to polish up the Linux version is all.

    Looking back I know that it would be very easy to write this OpenGL based game in such a way that it would run on all three of these platforms with a simple recompile if I had used #IFDEFs. Being lazy and busy with other things I haven't done that. But it is impressive how portable a game written in OpenGL can be.

  60. Yeah, but don't forget... by artemis67 · · Score: 2

    he can do it all in 640k of memory, too!

  61. Re:GeForce3??? by Sj0 · · Score: 2

    It must be an old quote. It's been said many times that the new Doom will need a Geforce 3 because it will utilize per-pixel shading.

    --
    It's been a long time.
  62. What an obnoxious article... by GLevangelist · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I am utterly sick of these silly, superficial and sycophantic articles. There is simply no reason for them to exist. It seems that a pragmatic analysis of id and its employees has yet to be written. It's one thing to see stupid 'fanboyism' (E.g "UNREAL SUX0RZ!!!111") posted by the shallow morons who buzz around the VoodooExtreme comment boards like flies around shit, but another thing to see it on supposedly reputable and objective news sites.

    I strongly disagree that John Carmack is id. What he is is a very intelligent and motivated individual that has been in the game industry for a very long time. Thus, he has a great deal of power and leverage over other companies. The fact that id created a great many 'firsts' (or at the very least evolved previously foetal genres to an acceptable level) compounds this. However, there are many other people in the game industry who are equally skilled. They, however, may not be in the position to fully exploit their talents. They may be employed by a company that has the technological ability to make 'quantum leap' titles, but a lack of inclination. Managerial oppression is epidemic wherever you look, much to the detriment of many companies. When you are management, things are much easier (Granted, id is more of a 'flat pyramid' than most companies. So, things aren't as simple as one might assume).

    Indeed, the real 'computer graphics experts' don't work in the game industry. The best opportunities are actually found in disciplines like professional flight simulation or non-real-time graphics technology development (E.g Renderman), not game creation. People like Alan Watt, Jim Blinn and Eric Haines (Slap yourself if you said "Who?") work at companies like Pixar, SGI, Microsoft, Hewlett Packard, IBM and Autodesk. It is these people who develop new techniques, publish them at SIGGRAPH and provide game developers (among others) with algorithms with which to implement in their engines. That isn't to say that game developers simply perform implementations, innovation is essential for any kind of specialised task, but it is the work of many hundreds of individuals (most of whom the average Quake player has never heard of) that has produced the plethora of techniques that the game 'Gods' rely on.

    When articles assume that 'John Carmack is id' blame and praise are grossly misattributed. Of course, there is a great deal of overlap in the roles of team members, but praising John Carmack for the finely balanced weapons in Quake3 is utterly ludicrous. In this case, id's creative team (Robert Duffy etc) miss out on the recognition they deserve. If John Carmack were really the hyper quick, hyper intelligent polymath that people make him out to be, id's employee list would be one person long. It isn't. id is (take a deep breath, this may shock you) a team of highly skilled individuals that when working in concert have the ability to produce great games. Each should receive the recognition they deserve.

    Consider this, would people idolise John Carmack if id's games were terrible?

  63. Re:Directions for Id by Decimal · · Score: 2

    > "I mean, I can respect the technical achievements of Quake III"

    You just answered your own question: Carmack is a programmer, so probably he just enjoys the "technical achievements". No small thing to me.


    Right. With a passion for coding but not for a certain genre, an RPG from ID would probably turn out rather stale. Anybody remember "Descent to Undermountain"?

    --

    Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
  64. Anybody remember this email? by dark_panda · · Score: 2

    I remember seeing posted somewhere, maybe a on usenet or something, a long time ago. Pretty funny, I guess.


    Subj: Wolf-3D Section: Action/Arcade Games
    From: Ty Graham 72350,2636 # 191387, * No Replies *
    To: Id Software 72600,1333 Date: 24-Jul-92 18:27:27

    Jay, just thought I'd drop a note to let you know how popular Wolf3D is
    here at Microsoft. It seems like I can't walk down a hall without hearing
    'Mein Leben' from someone's office. I hope you guys are getting revenue
    from all this.

    Anyway, we were sitting around talking the other day, discussing games for
    Windows, and someone said 'What are those cool guys at Id doing?'. So how
    about it. Are you guys looking at Win games at all? Win32?

    In a perfect world, I'd have you guys port the Wolf engine to a multiuser
    maze game for Windows for Workgroups. We need a good M'user Win game.

    Anyway some thoughts.

    Ty Graham (Microsoft)


    Wolf3D in Windows for Workgroups? Sitting next to the Microsoft Hearts Network? Hah.

    J

  65. Re:Directions for Id by ocbwilg · · Score: 2

    Consider the amount of money he's probably made from various games, Carmack can spend all of his time doing whatever the hell he wants, at this point.

    Maybe. But a portion of the work is done by Carmack and team. And he would still need the artists to show off his new game engine designs if he ever had any hopes of all of his work being put to use.

    While it's true that he could fund a team out of pocket, why do that when you can have a $20 million dollar business that funds it for you? If his programmers and artists are making $400,000+ to do the work, it's a fair bet that they wouldn't be happy doing it for what Carmack could afford to pay out of his own pocket.

    That's probably what's the coolest thing about Id...they're paying above top-dollar for the top programmers and artists. They're constantly helping to define the future of the industry with their next generation game engines, and the workers there get to take part in it.

  66. A few corrections by John+Carmack · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A few corrections to the article:

    "My own graphics technology"
    is OpenGL.

    "Mr. Carmack also plays computer games in the office with his coworkers"
    I played Q3 quite a bit, but not much since then. The team focus of TeamArena and Wolfenstein just isn't my favorite type of game.

    "Polygon counts"
    The Doom engine is not an ultra-high poly count engine, because it is built around dynamic lighting and shadowing, but it is still a large step up from our previous games. Typical scenes will have around 150,000 polygons, versus 10,000 for Q3. There will certainly be other games with higher raw polygon counts, but that is really focusing on the trees, not the forest (image quality). The large numbers that have occasionally been tossed around are the polygon counts for the high detail characters that are used in the generation of normal maps for the real time rendering. Some characters are over 500,000 polygons in their original form.

    "It looks like the type of game that is so thrilling to play that gamers will do so over and over again, even though it lacks a narrative plot."

    Unlike everything we have done before, the new Doom actually DOES have a real plot, and I think it is going to be presented well. I don't really expect most people to believe us at this point, but wait and see...

    "The new Doom likely will require a no less powerful chip than the soon-to-be-released Nvidia GeForce3"

    It is designed for full impact on a GeForce-3, but it still runs on a GeForce-1 or Radeon.

    They didn't reproduce the graph of our revenues from the print version, but that was also way off base. I guess they estimated them based on our title sales, but while Doom II remains our best selling title, we have much better royalty arrangements now than we did back then, so we make more money today.

    John Carmack

    1. Re:A few corrections by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      George B here from 3DRealms. John listen, were having a hell of a time with Duke using the Unreal engine and see no end in sight. Is there any way I can convince you to let us use the Doom3 technology with DukeForever? Im willing to was and wax your car for the next year if that helps sweeten the pot. Let me know
      Your porkrib eating buddy,
      George

    2. Re:A few corrections by Jagasian · · Score: 2

      Yeah, and you can still play Bubble Bobble with the Mame arcade emulator which runs on almost every computer known to man.

  67. The outcome of Steed? by detritus. · · Score: 2

    I know the article is about Caramack, but it was such a good bedtime story, I was wondering whatever happened to the fired Mr. Steed.

    Anyone know whether he was asked back, refused to come back, or still holds a grudge?

  68. Just who is pushing OGL then? by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    In the PC game arena, No one other then Carmak really. GL would probably still be used in simulators and other high-end, non-pc apps. But I don't think SGI or anyone really, other then carmak, is really pushing GL on the desktop.

    The success of GL on the desktop is really mostly because of what Carmak has done with it.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  69. Hi idiot. by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    You could write the games, they'd just be slower. Duh.

    Now, lets see you write a webserver in QuakeC, how about a relational database, or a P2P app. And do it quickly. Yeh, you can make your own game in Quake. Who cares. In java, you can do anything.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  70. non-microsoft games by oomcow · · Score: 2, Interesting

    carmack is cool in that he's one of the last bastions of hope for non microsoft controlled game development (i.e. he uses open gl).

    long live open gl (hopefully)!

  71. Re:Directions for Id by matp · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, totally. I've worked for companies who were started by a techie and yet whose whole raison d'aitre was to IPO and make loads of money. woo-hoo. As soon as the suits get involved, you lose control, and if you're a techie, you soon lose interest at having to compromise to dumb-asses who really don't have a clue. Now if you can do both (i.e make money and stay technically pure) then that's got to be the ultimate goal in my book. (God that last sentence sounds so lame, but you get my point). Carmack's one of the few who's managed to do both. Full respect to him, despite the unwanted attention that it brings to him.

  72. Re:Wolf3D the first FPS, don't think so... by Rayonic · · Score: 2

    "It was not made by ID Software, it was made by a publisher named Softdisk [3dgamers.com]."

    You DO know the difference between publishing and developing, right?