Doom3 and OpenGL2.0

Screaming Lunatic writes "John Carmack has decided to write an OpenGL2.0 rendering path for Doom3. You can read his .plan or you can finger him. This will be huge for the development of OpenGL2.0. Video cards are typically benchmarked with respect to the framerate when running Quake3. Future benchmarks will be based on Doom3. This means IHVs will be somewhat forced to write good OpenGL2.0 implementations."

Comments

Don't mod parent up before reading this.

[GigsVT]

http://www.gamespy.com/e32002/pc/carmack/index2.sh tml

I wish I could rip off Carmack's words and present them as my own, that would make me uber-leet like you.

Re:Don't mod parent up before reading this.

[Anonymous Coward]

next time make it a link you lazy cumguzzler.

Re:OpenGL 2.0 and OpenSource

[ToLu the Happy Furby]

Also, does anyone know if there will be a supported version of Doom3 for Linux, or will we be relying on ported versions?

id has released nearly simultaneous Linux binaries for all of their games (client and server) since Quake 1, and released Linux patches for Doom 1 and 2 as well. Loki was involved inasmuch as they published a retail box of Linux Q3; however, this was never really important because you could always get Linux Q3 by buying the Windows version and downloading a small patch from id. (Indeed, the retail Linux version sold poorly, probably because it was released a couple weeks after the Windows version and thus many people went the buy-Windows-and-download-patch route.)

I believe id has officially announced that Doom 3 will available for Linux (and Mac), but if not it's still a virtual certainty. id has always been a tremendous supporter of open standards; Carmack chose OpenGL over DirectX for Quake (and thereby single-handedly created the consumer OpenGL market), and in addition to working on Mac, Linux and Windows versions of all 3 Quake games simultaneously, released Doom ports for Next (id developed on Next workstations back then), Solaris, IRIX (I think, or maybe that was unofficial), and I believe even Linux on Alpha in addition to the already mentioned x86 Linux ports.

Again, id has always done the port themselves; most likely, you will have to buy the Windows version and download a patch which will almost certainly be available within days of release.

You think that's bad

[wrinkledshirt]

Go read some of Abrash's Black Book. The guy makes jokes out of assembly language. The only laughing I ever did was that nervous kind that you do while thinking, "Boy, am I out of my league..."

Re:Not as great as it sounds for OpenGL 2.0

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually all the "seperate DLLs" were the same files, just in different directories, probably to help stupid people figure out how to use the MiniGL. I know that's the case, as I did a FC on them and there's no difference. There are 4 different 3dfx MiniGLs out, all of which you can get at http://3dfxunderground.cjb.net if you're curious.

Re:Nothing like a little Carmack... QWZX

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, it's not as if building an X-prize level rocket ship doesn't have any world-changing potential.

Re:OpenGL patents

[uncleFester]

Didn't MS buy OpenGL patents from SGI recently?

Hard to tell... (more stuff found here). The opengl.org Licensing page links back to oss.sgi.com...

It's not easy to tell who currently owns the rights to OpenGL.. er, the OpenGL API. *gak*

-fester

Re:What I would really like

[DeadMeat (TM)]

This actually happened with Q3Test; they released Mac first, then Linux, and finally Windows. Carmack wanted to go in order of least gamers to most in order to shake out the bugs before it hit a really wide audience.

I seriously doubt Apple or Red Hat's sales jumped much overnight over it. A few gaming sites with way too much money on their hands bought iMacs to try it out, but that's about it. Installing a new OS (or switching hardware platforms entirely!) is an awfully daunting task for a couple of weeks of early play.

Re:Not as great as it sounds for OpenGL 2.0

[DetrimentalFiend]

I think you and others don't understand OpenGL 2.0 like the person you replied to. OpenGL 2.0 makes almost everything programable meaninging that there are much closer to infinite possibilites of how the program can use OpenGL. In 1.x everything was fixed and only had a few ways that things were typically done. Now it's doubtfull that two games will use OpenGL 2.0 quite the same. Sure there will be faster ways to pass the vertex data and generally smarter ways to write code, but I don't think we'll see anything to the same extent as with OpenGL 1.0.

Re:Great. More time wasted installing in Linux

[sloanster]

uh... let's see.

1. Install Red Hat 7.3
2. Download Nvidia drivers
3. Install according to instructions on website

Voila - accelerated 3D on Linux -

Q3A and RtCW run great!

(just what were you supposedly spending all this time on?)

Re:Nothing like a little Carmack...

[Forkenhoppen]

Quad-based geometry has to be converted back to triangles at some point for rendering anyways. Since this can be done two ways (quads don't have to be square, or even equilateral, but imagine a sandwich on texas toast; you can cut it top left to bottom right or top right to bottom left) geometry can look slightly different with different implementations. If the points don't exist on a plain, then the normal won't be correct either, which is another problem. (ie; What do you do if your quad's warped?)

Also, if your triangles don't map perfectly with the texture, you'll get tearing along the crease between the two triangles. To fix this, you have to subdivide the triangles further until it's no longer as noticeable. It's a real bother..

ARB_ path refers to what we're used to; multiple texture rendering stages, dot3 bump mapping and the like. Stuff that works on Geforce 2s, ATi Radeons, etc. These are standards agreed on by the OpenGL Architecture Review Board, usually extensions that will be promoted to being part of the standard in the next version of OpenGL.

The NV20 path is for Geforce 3 and up. A vertex program is NVidia terminology for vertex shader. Assuming the OpenGL version numbers reflect the DirectX ones, version 1.0 was a holdover from pre-release; it's missing a register that's required to do index/palette-based matrix skinning. 1.1 has this register. Other than that, there is no difference.

Direct3D against OpenGL

[krogoth]

"I'm sure D3D will suck less with each forthcoming version, but this is an oportunity to just bypass dragging the entire development community through the messy evolution of an ill-birthed API." - John Carmack, 1996

Re:Not as great as it sounds for OpenGL 2.0

[cyborch]

Is there a layman's reference I can read about how OpenGL 2.0 works?

There's a very nice overview with more information here.

(google is your friend.)

You are so wrong.

[Karellen]

Get a grip dude. Doom is not evil.

I have to admit, that is a tragic story and something no-one should ever have to go through.

That said, it's a fucking computer game. Nothing more, nothing less. It's not a physically addictive chemical. It wasn't created from a pact with the devil, in an attempt to lure people to sinful (suicidal) deaths. It's pixels (blocky ones at that) on a screen, and a pretty limited set of sounds being repeated through a set of (normally pretty crappy) speakers.

Your friend got addicted to it - well I'm sorry, but don't go blaming anyone else, even the people that made it.

Your friend started skipping work and playing 18+hours/day? Shit, didn't that clue him into the fact that something was getting a bit fucked up with his priorities and he ought to stop? When I started playing CivIII until 3:00 in the morning and I had to get up at 6:30 for work, I realised that it was time to delete the thing. Do I blame the writers for making such a great game? No. I congratulate them. And then I deleted it. When I realised that I was really _needing_ a drink to get me going some days a while back after I'd started drinking heavily for a month or so after a girlfriend left me, I realised it was time to stop drinking completely for a while and just get over her. Do I blame beer for being a seductive place of solace, or the brewers who made it? No. Do I blame by girlfriend? No. She didn't see a future for us and ended it. What was she supposed to do? Stay in a relationship she didn't like for the sole purpose of not hurting my feelings? Hell no. That's part of being an adult. You realise when your life isn't doing what it should, and sort it out. It's your life, and you gotta take responsibility for it.

Shit, didn't it occur to _you_ that you oughta talk your friend out of this sort of behaviour? Or force him out of it? Get rid of the source of his fix? Some fucking friend you turned out to be.

All Doom had to do with your friends unforunate demise was be there.

It's not `wrong'. It's not `evil'. Neither is it `right' or `good'. It just is. And you or your friend or anyone else on the planet can take it or leave it. What they get out of it is entirely their own responsibility. That's one of the breaks of being an adult in a free country.

Stop blaming other people for your friend's death. It's not their fault. Get. Over. It.

K.