Slashdot Mirror


Cube: A Modern 3D Game Engine

An anonymous reader writes "There is a new 3d game engine being developed by Wouter van Oortmerssen (aka Aardappel) that utilizes SDL and OpenGL. It is pretty full-featured already, and is heavily influenced by Quake3." Same guy who did panoramic Quake.

169 comments

  1. ..and this would be.. by newr00tic · · Score: 0

    "The Little engine that could.."

    --
    A horse can't be sick, you know, even if he wants to.
  2. First impressions.... by H3XA · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Great effort but not comparable to modern day "eye candy" engines yet.... looks more like a Quake 2 level of geometry with nice colour and lighting ability. Perhaps the adjustable LOD is set on a low level....

    I wonder how well it handles high polygon counts or is the empahsis more on engine ability rather than model design for now?

    - HeXa

    1. Re:First impressions.... by dnaumov · · Score: 2

      It's not that it's free, it's FUN.

    2. Re:First impressions.... by Wyzard · · Score: 1

      The reason it reminds you of Quake 2 is that a lot of the textures he used in his sample levels actually are borrowed Quake 2 textures.

      Quake 3's big "cool new feature" is the powerful shader engine, which allows dynamic textures composed of multiple images which move or fade or whatever. They give the map a feeling of "liveliness" - water ripples, health spheres shimmer, jump pads pulse, and so on. Coming up with textures to draw is independent of actually drawing geometry, so a similar system could be added to the Cube engine.

      The adjustable LOD is an idea that's used in the Unreal engine, and it's what allows Unreal to render huge open spaces like canyons that the Quake engine couldn't even hope to attempt. In Unreal, actors (monsters, pickups, etc.) seen at a distance are drawn with fewer polygons, making them render faster. AFAIK the map geometry itself isn't affected, but in Cube it sounds like it is. The author did say, after all, that it's a "landscape-style engine" that just "pretends to be an indoor first person shooter engine".

      Personally, I think this is really cool and we'll be seeing more of it in the future.

    3. Re:First impressions.... by Aardappel · · Score: 1
      The reason it reminds you of Quake 2 is that a lot of the textures he used in his sample levels actually are borrowed Quake 2 textures

      bzzzt... all textures that are part of cube are 100% non commercial, made by authors like Sock and Iikka Keranen. Some of them may look similar to the "base" style of quake2, but they're not copied.

    4. Re:First impressions.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shouldn't that be rrrnnt?

  3. Clarification please? by httpamphibio.us · · Score: 1

    "Most of the engine design is targeted at reaching feature richness through simplicity of structure and brute force, rather than finely tuned complexity."

    This doesn't really sound like a *good* thing to me. Can somebody with a little more technical knowledge explain how this is advantageous?

    --
    sig.
    1. Re:Clarification please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Translation: "it's here to make the author look leet for still working with old engine concepts".

    2. Re:Clarification please? by Chatterton · · Score: 1

      It is based on the fact that old 3D engines where CPU intensives, then need more complexity to reduce the needed calculation power. Now as the video card does a good chunk of the work, we can reduce the complexity and let do the hard work by the video card...

    3. Re:Clarification please? by PineGreen · · Score: 2

      Well, it can be advantageous.

      You can really optimize your code to work on low-end machines with a reasonable fps, but this recquire a lot of trickery, precomputing everything, and making difficult design decision what fits where. A good example of such design is Crystal Space

      On the other hand, you can keep your code very simple, which makes it easibly extensible and wait for one year if you want to make it work on low-end machines.

    4. Re:Clarification please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Crystal Space would be a good example, that is if it did run well on low-end machines. I have a Voodoo-3 3000, Athlon 750, 256MB of ram and their demo applications run 10FPS max -- that isn't exagerating either.

    5. Re:Clarification please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using complete sentences and correct grammar is usually a good idea if one is trying to convey a message. Spelling counts too but let's work on first things first.

    6. Re:Clarification please? by Nutello · · Score: 1

      Simplicity of structure means that you don't need a fast CPU and allows cool things like realtime editing (other engines require you to "compile" your maps - Cube also lets you edit maps with other users on the Internet). That "brute force" means that it relies a lot on a fast GPU.

      In other words, the real bottleneck with Cube is the graphic card and its OpenGL implementation, not the CPU. As long as you have decent OGL drivers and something relatively recent like a GeForce 3-4 or a Radeon, even a CPU under the GHz mark should be more than enough.

      Slightly unrelated, but given Aardappel's background, OF COURSE there is a powerful scripting language built-in.

    7. Re:Clarification please? by Jrod5000+at+RPI · · Score: 1

      its advantageous because the code is simple and more maintainable and it doesn't rely on any clever tricks that few people would understand. it also means that the code is more generic and can be adapted for many situations.

  4. any particular reason... by tahpot · · Score: 1

    that this guy isn't already working for id?

    1. Re:any particular reason... by dzym · · Score: 4, Funny

      We tried to get him to submit his resume to id Software. I dunno whatever became of that.

    2. Re:any particular reason... by Gumshoe · · Score: 2

      As of a few months ago, he was working with Amiga in some capacity creating the Sheep language. Any old Amiga users out there might remember AmigaE which Wouter also created.

    3. Re:any particular reason... by Tomun · · Score: 1

      Here's a list of Wouter's other languages.

      We'll probably find out that Cube is written in False or PIG. Thats probably the reason its not open source..

    4. Re:any particular reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      [12:43] <@arioch> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=36886&cid=3967 157
      [12:44] <@arioch> I dunno why my comment got +1 funny
      [12:44] <@locust> well, aard is reasonably accomplished
      [12:44] <@Afterglow> because you are a walking joke
      [12:44] <@locust> and you're posting on slashdot
      [12:44] <@locust> as a slashdot poster, the odds of you knowing anyone accomplished are slim
      [12:45] <@arioch> rofl
      [12:45] <@locust> so odds are you're joking, rather than making a genuine statement
      [12:47] <@country_boy> simpler explanation: slashdot is full of mongers

    5. Re:any particular reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's written in Visual C++ and Assembly.

  5. Cube, the game by dnaumov · · Score: 4, Informative

    There's more to Cube then just the engine. It makes for a very nice game. It currently has deathmatch, deathmatch-sp and primitive sp. Try the deathmatch sometime, it's very fun. The engine itself is actually developed by 2 people, Aard does all the main stuff, while the other guy does the networking and the porting to *NIX platforms.

    There is also a very nice community of people developing maps for Cube, Aard is rather open-minded, so every new Cube release also tends to include at least several new maps. The game engine is not currently open-source, however, Aard plans to open-source it in "some time in the future".

    1. Re:Cube, the game by G-funk · · Score: 2

      "some time in the future" sounds to me like "if I can't sell it to somebody first"

      Just my .2c

      I started the d/l before I read there's no sources, which is a shame I was kinda looking forward to having a look at such a small project with such a nice output. Seemed like a good place to do some simple bot programming.

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    2. Re:Cube, the game by SimonKeogh · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ack, very primitive sp I'd say. I just keept running out of ammo and dying. The stupid maps start with mosters running at you. However, I like the idea of plenty of mosters, it kinda reminds me of doom.

    3. Re:Cube, the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      get a load of serious sam if you want good ol' doom with plenty of glitz....

    4. Re:Cube, the game by fingal · · Score: 4, Informative
      "some time in the future" sounds to me like "if I can't sell it to somebody first"

      or when I am sufficiently happy with the internal data structure of my code that it is not going to go through any major structural changes and therefore has an API that is interesting to link to...

      --

      The only Good System is a Sound System

    5. Re:Cube, the game by Nutello · · Score: 1
      "some time in the future" sounds to me like "if I can't sell it to somebody first"
      You obviously don't know Aardappel. He's been known to release sources, as he did with his E compiler. And guess what, it really was "some time in the future", i.e. when he had pretty much stopped making changes to it. Cube is still a work in progress and I bet you won't see the sources until it "stabilises", after a few more releases. I.e., when he is satisfied with it. You might not agree, but that's his code after all.

      And no, actually he doesn't even think it would be appropriate using in a commercial project, as it more or less deliberately lacks some bells and whistles. It's just something that he wanted to do for fun, his way and mostly on his own, simply for the sake of it. I know because we talked a lot about this stuff.
      I started the d/l before I read there's no sources, which is a shame I was kinda looking forward to having a look at such a small project with such a nice output. Seemed like a good place to do some simple bot programming.
      Do not despair. In the meantime, I suggest you start looking into the built-in language. It's quite powerful, I've been experimenting with it for advanced mapping purposes. And if there's something that it can't do for you (scripted AI?), ask Aardappel nicely and he might add it.
    6. Re:Cube, the game by Bistronaut · · Score: 2
      "some time in the future" sounds to me like "if I can't sell it to somebody first"
      Give the guys some slack. It's perfectly reasonable to want to polish a few things before they open-source it. I'm sure it's worthwile to make your code easy to grok and build up some fanfare first. That way you keep more of the curious coders who check it out initially.
    7. Re:Cube, the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      G-func wrote:

      "some time in the future" sounds to me like "if I can't sell it to somebody first"

      So? Whats wrong with making money on something if possible?

    8. Re:Cube, the game by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1
      "some time in the future" sounds to me like "if I can't sell it to somebody first"

      -1, Overly Cynical

    9. Re:Cube, the game by Aardappel · · Score: 4, Informative

      I guess its hard for both open & closed source fanatics to understand what I am doing with cube w.r.t. to the source.

      No, I am not trying to sell it (cube is a fun little engine, but it lacks 101 features to be commercially viable).

      No, I am not an Evil Closed Source Person. If you look at my homepage you'll see all my other projects come with source code (mostly GPL). If you read the cube docs, you'd see there is a plan to release the sources (BSD/ZLIB).

      and no, the code doesn't require major restructuring / cleanup before it can be released. The exe size on win32 with "mimimize code size" is 80k or so, I am sure everyone will agree that given the feature set there is not a lot of fat to trim.

      My motivation for not releasing the source yet is that cube is purely programming fun, and I have very particular coding/design ideas (minimalism) which I don't trust others to follow (yes, very arrogant, but its my code, deal with it).

    10. Re:Cube, the game by WowTIP · · Score: 2

      Well, you can't really blame the game engine for that, can you? I checked it out and found it quite impressive. Guess some really determined mod guys could make something very cool out of this, when it is OS:ed...

      And you do know that you can change the difficulty level, right? ;)

      It would be cool to try it out MP, but all the MP servers seems to be /.:ed. Any more servers anyone?

      --

      --

      "I'm surfin the dead zone
      In the twilight, unknown"
    11. Re:Cube, the game by Gorgonzola · · Score: 2

      First of all, it is your code indeed, so there is no reason to hold you accountable for your licensing decisions.

      Having said that, what about keeping an official tree that is up to your minimalistic standards and rejecting any patches that don't meet them? Let the infidels have their own forks, you will be the one maintaining the canonical version.


      --
      -- Spelling and grammar errors tend to be a sign of erroneous thinking.
    12. Re:Cube, the game by Aardappel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know that is the way to go. Just right now I don't want the hassle of arguing with lots of people why I won't accept their 3 megabyte lensflare patches. Not a lot of point running an open source project if you are going to reject almost all patches anyway. When this goes open source, forking will be the only option for people that want to add changes.

    13. Re:Cube, the game by G-funk · · Score: 2

      /me ducks barrage of flames from my earlier post ...

      Perhaps instead of running an open source project, simply allow a gpl source download with a "don't call me i'll call you" disclaimer, and like the ahteos guy just let everybody know you're not taking patches?

      I'm not calling names or anything, and I'm not pro-open source or pro-closed source, I just like to look at behind the scenes on cool projects, and this looks to me like a cool project :)

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    14. Re:Cube, the game by antrik · · Score: 1

      That doesn't explain why not releasing the source just now. Poeple wanting more features could fork it (actually, not very likely...); and people following your approach may still be "useful". Where is the Problem?

      If you are doing it only for yourself, why releasing it at all?

      --
      All my comments get moderated +-0, spotless.
    15. Re:Cube, the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I have very particular coding/design ideas (minimalism) which I don't
      trust others to follow (yes, very arrogant, but its my code, deal with it).
      No, I won't deal with it. I'll just use and contribute to some of the 100,000
      other open source 3D engines out there (Nebula, World Foundry, Crystal Space,
      Blender). Good luck trying to get mindshare with your arrogance!
    16. Re:Cube, the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> Guess some really determined mod guys could make something very cool out of this, when it is OS:ed...

      Um... Check this out:

      http://www.deathillustrated.com.

      It's made with the cube engine.

  6. You lot are useless :/ by Idimmu+Xul · · Score: 4, Funny

    I've managed to download the game in under 30 mins with a 56k modem!

    I remember back in the day, when all this was fields, real men programmed in Cobol and simply uttering the phrase Slashdot Effect was enough to make any sane SysAdmin turn into a gibbering puddle of jelly and spend the rest of his life in rehab :/

    You kids nowadays with your fancy broadband, useless :/

    --
    The problem with slashdot is that most of its users were bullied and stuffed into lockers as kids!
    1. Re:You lot are useless :/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut the hell up.

    2. Re:You lot are useless :/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think that's sad? I managed to download it in under one minute and twenty-five seconds.

    3. Re:You lot are useless :/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      8 secs...

    4. Re:You lot are useless :/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its not on that big of a link, nice try.

    5. Re:You lot are useless :/ by wuHoncho · · Score: 1

      real men programmed in Cobol

      Correction: real men drove their pickup trucks to the woods and shot their dinner with a very large rifle. real programmers programmed in assembly language.

      Who in their right mind would write a game engine in COBOL?

      --


      Just another freak in the freak kingdom.
  7. Interesting editing mode by theefer · · Score: 5, Informative

    The main interest in this engine is, I think, the editing mode. It's simply amazing. Anytime you want while in game (I suppose not during a deathmatch though), you just press E and enter the editing mode.

    You can raise/lower small cubes (or group of cubes) with the mouse scroller, etc. Everything can be built this way. It's both easy and powerful, requires no compilation (press E again and play) and works really well !

    The graphics are far from ugly, I'd say the game is rather pretty. It works well under linux, which is a good thing too.

    But you really have to try this editing mode ;-)

    Let's hope the engine will be open source ...

    --
    theefer
    1. Re:Interesting editing mode by abe+ferlman · · Score: 1

      Heh,

      sounds like the wall of bone spell in diablo2.

      --
      microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
    2. Re:Interesting editing mode by zapfie · · Score: 1

      From what I gandered in the readme, you can even edit maps when you are in multiplayer mode! =)

      --
      slashdot!=valid HTML
    3. Re:Interesting editing mode by xmda · · Score: 1

      "E". by the way, was a very nice programming language written by the same guy on the Amiga. I used it to create some very small (executables) programs.

  8. What is wrong with SDL & Full screen games by nuggz · · Score: 2

    I have 1 beef with full screen games.
    I can't switch back to X.

    I like linux because it multitasks, and multitasks well. Stable and I can leave it going with all my applications right were I left them.

    Then I play a game, I can't pause it and switch back to grab a phone number, check a calendar, I'm stuck.

    Why can't they simply put the game in a window, or leave some way to flip back to X?

    1. Re:What is wrong with SDL & Full screen games by Nutello · · Score: 1

      RTFM?

    2. Re:What is wrong with SDL & Full screen games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is technically possibly, but unfortantly something SDL have to support.

      Basically all there has to be done is that when a SDL application is full-screen, if someone press alt-tab it will minimize itself and switch back to the original resolution. When the window manager un-iconifies it, it will switch back to the fullscreen resolution.

    3. Re:What is wrong with SDL & Full screen games by koali · · Score: 1

      Start a second X webserver. I do it all the time to play Q3 et al. and be able to switch to my desktop with ctrl+alt+f(x)...

    4. Re:What is wrong with SDL & Full screen games by therealmoose · · Score: 0

      xinit -e cube -- :1 (from another tty) Just use ctrl-alt-f[78] to switch. Another advantage of X is that it multitasks well and support multiple virtual displays!

    5. Re:What is wrong with SDL & Full screen games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What dont you just use Windows you dork?

    6. Re:What is wrong with SDL & Full screen games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *hides katana*
      come over here trolli trolli, get the fishi!
      *cuts head off*

    7. Re:What is wrong with SDL & Full screen games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll bet you sleep with your 20-sided dice under your pillow.

    8. Re:What is wrong with SDL & Full screen games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least I'm not making a rich man cum.

    9. Re:What is wrong with SDL & Full screen games by rneches · · Score: 2
      Well, I've got a proposition for you.
      • Check the source out of CVS
      • Hack together something that lets you work around your window manager's key bindings.
      • Post your patch to the SDL mailing list
      So what if you're not a big-time programmer? Read the documentation, the man pages, and the FAQs. If you still need guidance, politely solicit assistance from the appropriate SDL mailing list. If you're coherant, polite and willing to learn, you will find that people will help you. I can't overemphasize how important it is to communicate like an adult. Every project wants helpful, compotent and motivated developers. Make it your goal to become such a person, and you'll receive a remarkable amount of help. (In contrast, if you whine and bitch on the mailing list, you will be ignored at best.)

      Yes, your first patch will probably suck. Big deal. Think of it as a "proof of concept." If it turns out to be a Good Idea, someone with more experience may clean it up a bit. Maybe that someone will be you, assuming you keep hacking. If all goes well, then your patch will be included in a release. Put it on your resume, pat yourself on the back, and enjoy gaming on your platform of choice.

      --
      In spite of the suggestions and all the tests that I have made, I have not cavato a spider from the hole.
  9. Cool engine, but we need more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wish someone or a group of someones will take the engine and write a dynamically extensible 3D FPS.. aiming for realism with damage from bullets and ricochets :-)

    1. Re:Cool engine, but we need more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      aiming for realism with damage from bullets and ricochets

      What like assigning a material properties to objects, tracking the trajectory of projectiles, and dynamically modifying the impacted object with an appropriate bullet hole, fracture, or whatever? And then calculating the ricochet if needed based on material type and calculated damage done?

      Uh, hasn't most of that been done? Certainly for the larger weapons some of it has. Processing power must now be up to the level need to track individual bullets...

  10. FOO BAR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    foo /foo/

    1. interj. Term of disgust. 2. [very common] Used very generally as a sample name for absolutely anything, esp. programs and files (esp. scratch files). 3. First on the standard
    list of metasyntactic variables used in syntax examples.

    See also bar, baz, qux, quux, corge, grault, garply, waldo, fred, plugh, xyzzy, thud.

  11. Blah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, that sucked.
    I'm going back to my Doom3 nightly build. Still a few bugs to work out of the pixel shader, but otherwise top-notch.

  12. Is anybody else... by G-funk · · Score: 1

    ...Having problems? I get 9fps, on my p3 1g with a gf2mx, and that ain't right! Running in XP

    Anybody know the answer?

    --
    Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    1. Re:Is anybody else... by Drakin · · Score: 1

      Running a 1ghz Duron with a gf2mx based chip, hitting no lower than 58 fps... although, I'm running 2k... sounds like you've got a problem somewhere there...

    2. Re:Is anybody else... by RinkSpringer · · Score: 1

      I get 60fps on an Athlon 1.1GHz with a GeForce4 Ti4400... looks nice to me :)

    3. Re:Is anybody else... by Nutello · · Score: 1

      What resolution?

      The CPU is more than adequate, you might even find it spends some time idle. First of all I'd check the OpenGL drivers.

    4. Re:Is anybody else... by traskjd · · Score: 1

      You mention you are running XP. The default XP drivers for geforce cards are useless - make sure you download the ones from nvidia and you should notice a MASSIVE increase in speed. If you have done this then the problem lies elsewhere (duh :)

      Hope that helps

    5. Re:Is anybody else... by oPless · · Score: 1

      Sounds like somehow you're using Software GL.

      You neglected to also say what O/S You use :-)

    6. Re:Is anybody else... by MikeV · · Score: 1

      RH Linux 7.1 on a Celeron 533mhz 128mb with a GF2 MX400 64mb at 24bit running between 69fps and 109fps - wow. Neat engine - wayyyyy better than my cheasy little engine.

      9fps is seriously bad - check your configurations, drivers, SDL versions, etc...even for Microsoft, that's real bad. I think enough people on MS chimed in that they're getting good fps.

      Good luck...

    7. Re:Is anybody else... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly, on a Microsoft platform-- the same specs could get you around 150 fps.

      Thanks. But no thanks.

    8. Re:Is anybody else... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That framerate sucks...

      Egads... that's terrible compared to Q3 or even UT.

      My POS 800 Mhz, GF2 MX machine gets 200+ FPS in Q3.

    9. Re:Is anybody else... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Athlon 750, Radeon 8500, Win2K
      I get between 150-250fps :D

  13. Voxels? by Kaenneth · · Score: 1

    What makes this different then a Voxel engine?

    1. Re:Voxels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact that it doesn't use voxels?

    2. Re:Voxels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doh? It uses polygons instead of voxels...
      Are you for real?

    3. Re:Voxels? by PaleBoy · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's not TOO far off to say it's voxel-based. All of the geometry in the engine is based off of small cubes, which either rise from the floor or descend from the ceiling.

      So even though the cubes themselves are polygonal, as are the creatures and what-not, the levels themselves are kinda built on a voxel-like concept.

      --
      ------ What's sadder than realizing you've filtered out your own comments?
  14. Lets Go Old Skool by jj666 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    All I want is an efficiently programmed game that's small in size so I don't need another hard drive to install it. Unreal Tournament in ASM - 20MB and faster than a cheetah riding a rocket, lovely :o)

    --
    [JJ]
    "Insert Dead Smart n Clever Sig Here So I Look Brainy"
    1. Re:Lets Go Old Skool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *** PARADOX ALERT ****

      "Unreal" and "Fast" used in same sentence

      *** ABORT ABORT ****

    2. Re:Lets Go Old Skool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hey i run unreal tourny in 1600x1200x16b on my p3 500 tnt2 ultra 32mb at over 30fps...seems fast enough to me.

    3. Re:Lets Go Old Skool by jj666 · · Score: 1

      I run UT at 640x480 because I don't want any lag but that's not the point I was making... more engines = crappier coded games = more powerful hardware needed

      Because the engine is so badly managed you *need* the more powerful hardware to make it playable :o) A well programmed Unreal Tournament in ASM would run great on a P200MMX with a crappy 4MB DX powered card, hell I was happy with Doom 2 on my 486-100 - that was powerful enough for me then - and still would be should Win2K have happened to be able run on it :o)

      Just think if M$ (who of all people would be capable) programmed exclusively in ASM can you imagine how much new hardware would be needed? People would be downgrading not upgrading!

      --
      [JJ]
      "Insert Dead Smart n Clever Sig Here So I Look Brainy"
    4. Re:Lets Go Old Skool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love UT as much as anybody, but seriously dude, unreal is really fucking slow. Compared to, saw, quake 3.

  15. I love it... by Corbin+Dallas · · Score: 5, Funny

    If for no other reason that the game's storyline. From the docs:

    Official game storyline: "You kill stuff. The End."

    Finally a first person shooter that doesn't try to beat me over the head with hours of meaningless plot development!

    --
    Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.
    1. Re:I love it... by PhoenxHwk · · Score: 2

      Think Quake 3:
      There's some Arena tournament in outer space. Yeah, that's enough plot.

    2. Re:I love it... by Wyzard · · Score: 1

      Try Deus Ex. Meaningful plot development.

  16. Waste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why don't you use DirectX? Such a fucking waste of time, just to prove you can scratch you own itch... losers...

  17. looks nice, but... by Kresh · · Score: 2, Interesting

    quote from the "most wanted feature" forum:

    "#267: ..

    by Gom Jabbar on 07/20/2002 14:46 through 217.4.101.162

    There won't be room over room. At least not within the next 10 years..."

    sounds like doom 10 years before

    1. Re:looks nice, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      huh?

      not doom again!!! please!!! nooooooooooo

      the modern hardware is capable of much more.

    2. Re:looks nice, but... by Kynde · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There won't be room over room. At least not within the next 10 years...

      Geez, 2D projections to 3D again?

      Why was this interesting news item? It's not open source, it's like Doom with enhanced lighting, but not even enhanced enough, since it's vertex based (although fine grained). Just because it's built on top of SDL/OpenGL doesn't count for much, because there are numerous such projects out there, sadly none of them have gotten much wind under their wings. GPL'd 3D engine that gets masses moving is what I'm anxiously waiting for.

      --
      1 Earth is warming, 2 It's us, 3 it's royally bad, 4 we need to take action NOW
    3. Re:looks nice, but... by Nutello · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Why was this interesting news item?
      Name another engine with realtime and cooperative editing. And if you think you can do better, go ahead and write that "GPL'd 3D engine that gets masses moving".

      You are seriously missing the point, anyway. Cube doesn't want to be the ultimate, perfect engine with a ton of features. It doesn't want to please everyone, either. It's an attempt to do things in a certain way, out of intellectual curiosity. Don't you ever wonder "well, what happens if I followed THIS one approach thoroughly?". What matters the most is where you end up and what you learnt in the process.

      Yes, just for the sake of featuritis you could do things differently if you really wanted to, but then it wouldn't be the same exercise. You would be missing the initial point altogether... pretty much like asking why that fuel-efficient car can't do 0-100Km/h as fast as a BMW does.
    4. Re:looks nice, but... by rabidcow · · Score: 1

      Indeed, it sounds like a slightly more complex build engine. Even Quake I could do room-above-room, it's got features like an enhanced DN3D. (except real 3d models)

      and you can tell from the screen shots. Nice colors, but no holes anywhere. Look for a railing with open space above and below it, or a bridge. (which I believe they had on the first level of Quake 1)

    5. Re:looks nice, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, there were bridges on the intro map in quake. I couldn't go back to designing 2D maps for doom again after doing quake or ut maps. I also can't see why an engine designer would want to go back to the 2D style doom engine... ugh.

      Ken's labyrinth... damn, that brings back memories. Welcome to ken's labyrinth! Cute music too.

    6. Re:looks nice, but... by Kynde · · Score: 2

      You are seriously missing the point, anyway. Cube doesn't want to be the ultimate, perfect engine with a ton of features.

      And you haven't played loads of 1st person games either if that's what you think about no room over room.

      Doom was 2D world projected into 3D (meaning it was only DRAWN as if it were 3D), it had no actual height in it.

      Writing any "3D engine" these without 3D space in the world that it shows is pointless. 3D cards and processors are fast enough.

      Yes, I do give credit to what he's accomplished with the lighting and all, but 2D world does not cut it.

      It's not about the visual looks, it's about the manouverability inside the world that 3D engine tries to represent!

      --
      1 Earth is warming, 2 It's us, 3 it's royally bad, 4 we need to take action NOW
  18. DM servers by cobar · · Score: 5, Informative

    For anybody that's interested in trying out the multiplayer, I have a server running at:
    deskstar.101freeway.com

    for at least the rest of the weekend.

    1. Re:DM servers by Ramadog · · Score: 1
      That was fun

      Aiken.

  19. whats best way to begin something like this? by PaganRitual · · Score: 3, Interesting

    looks pretty cool, but it does look kinda like a prettier version of that old 'chasm' game ... or quake 1 i suppose ... not to be critical, i loved both of those games ... and im in no place to be critical because i cant even do anything remotely this good ...

    speaking of which ... what would be the best way to start on a project like this, say 3d enigine, from a beginners level? i know that a 3d engine isnt even something you consider from a beginners level, but this is what i would like to be looking at doing some time in the future ... any one care to share how they got started on game programming? what would be the best plan of attack? or is it just a matter of sitting down with a C++ book, then a visual C++ book (or could anyone tell me what other avenues i might look at with regards to IDE, including under linux), then a game programming book etc etc??? and are there specific websites, examples, source code that i should be checking out???
    ive wanted to do game programming for ages, but ive never pulled my finger out and sat down and got into it, but now that the new version of the stupid accounting software i code at work has gone gold, i wanna clear my brain of VB and get down and dirty into some serious (and entertaining) coding ... any useful advice would be most welcome ...

    replies to my hotmail acct welcome ...

    1. Re:whats best way to begin something like this? by JFMulder · · Score: 5, Informative

      You should first look at NeHe OpenGL tutorials. It will teach you a long way into 3d programming. It's very well written and covers a lot of subjects. Check it out at http://nehe.gamedev.net/. There are a lot of tutorials, and most of them is written in more than one language, so you can learn about using OpenGL even tough C++ is not your favorite language. The are tutorials in C++, PowerBasic... And code for Mac, Windows, Linux, everything! A true gem. This is the best beginners ressource you can find.

    2. Re:whats best way to begin something like this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blitz3D :)

    3. Re:whats best way to begin something like this? by x+mani+x · · Score: 3, Informative

      Note: I am not a game programmer, but I am a programmer with some very basic knowledge about game design.

      what would be the best way to start on a project like this, say 3d enigine, from a beginners level?

      Use a really high level graphics API, so that all the gritty details are hidden from you. OpenGL is IMHO very low level in this context. SGI's Open Inventor sounds about right, but there's probably better API's out there for games.

      any one care to share how they got started on game programming? what would be the best plan of attack? or is it just a matter of sitting down with a C++ book, then a visual C++ book (or could anyone tell me what other avenues i might look at with regards to IDE, including under linux), then a game programming book etc etc???

      I suggest that before you start getting into game programming, start with seperately writing little programs to tinker with different aspects of game programming, like writing a screensaver (mostly graphics work, you can throw in a little AI, but there is no user interaction so it makes it much easier for you). Once you know your favorite language's syntax in and out, and you know how to attack/avoid the typical design problems you will no doubt encounter in game design, you can start thinking about design a game/engine.

      You're on the right track in terms of reading books. But it is definately not a matter of getting a C++ book, then getting a video game book, and going at it. Designing games involves a lot of things other than drawing graphics. You will need to be familiar with physics, human perception, collision detection, artificial intelligence, and many other things. For most people, this (at least!) means having taken a major in CS and/or CE and/or EE and/or Math (pick one). A game programming book will summarize some of these topics, but unless you dive head first into, for example, AI, your understanding of it will be very shallow.

      and are there specific websites, examples, source code that i should be checking out???

      I believe the Quake2 source has been released. Download it and read it. I'd recommend you start by hacking the code to add in your own features to the game as a first step to understanding it. Run it through a debugger to get a feel for how the game works (I have a feeling debugging quake2 in gdb or ddd would be extremely painful -- try to get your hands on Microsoft's Visual C++ debugger, it blows away anything on Linux and even Workshop on Solaris).

      ive wanted to do game programming for ages, but ive never pulled my finger out and sat down and got into it, but now that the new version of the stupid accounting software i code at work has gone gold, i wanna clear my brain of VB and get down and dirty into some serious (and entertaining) coding ... any useful advice would be most welcome ...

      Game programming is really, really hard. Much harder than you think. However, I hope I haven't discouraged you. If you feel motivated to do it, then don't let anyone stop you! Just know that it will take an insane amount of hard work and study (I'm talking on the order of years, not days, weeks or months) to get even a mediocre game or game engine out the door. :)

      Good luck,
      -Mani

    4. Re:whats best way to begin something like this? by Harbinger(JDW) · · Score: 1

      As well as NeHe, the guys over at Game Tutorials have quite a few OpenGL tutorials (which nicely complements NeHe's). Their site is at http://www.gametutorials.com/. They also have tutorials on how to program in C++, C, DirectX, Win32, and using Visual C++ (if you are into that kind of thing 8).

      You also might want to read some of the good articles at Gamasutra (http://www.gamasutra.com) as they have good game related news and articles. The registration is free and gives you access to all of their articles and web lectures.

      You can also read some of the articles at http://www.gamedev.net, http://www.flipcode.com and there is a good resource for stuff like this at http://www.angelcode.com. These are just some of the best sites I have found. Hope that helps.

    5. Re:whats best way to begin something like this? by tswinzig · · Score: 2

      what would be the best way to start on a project like this, say 3d enigine, from a beginners level?

      Step 1: Read all of John Carmack's writings.
      Step 2: ...
      Step 3: Create your own 3D game engine!

      --

      "And like that ... he's gone."
    6. Re:whats best way to begin something like this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    7. Re:whats best way to begin something like this? by KFK+-+Wildcat · · Score: 1
      I've learnt the basics of OpenGL with Nehe's Tutorials. It was ok. Then I found GameTutorials which is, IMHO, far superior. The tutorial code is much better and as easy to understand, and it does have a ton of tutorials covering basics to advanced topics (BSP trees, Volumetric fog, Q3 models animations, etc.) Almost all tutorials are ported to SDL.

      Here's a funny quote from DigiBen, of the two admins:

      I was just looking over the OpenGL tutorials and I want to ONCE again throw out my gratitude for the sweet SDL ports that Golem and EvilSmile have compiled for us. There is only like 20 more, if that before they are ALL! done. I was going to then go and post our site on SlashDot once that is done, which I hear TRASHES web sites because of all their hits. So once those are done, or near done, prepare for some huge publicity and a bunch of crazy linux users to start pouring in :)
    8. Re:whats best way to begin something like this? by moncyb · · Score: 2

      I am not a game programmer, but I have a few suggestions that may help out:

      I don't know how much programming experience you have, but from what you said, it seems you only know some Visual Basic. You may want to start with a good high level language then move to C/C++. How about Java? If you learn it properly, it should teach you good object oriented programming techniques--plus it has some similarities to C++. Python may be a good contender as well, however I haven't done much with it, so I can't say. I heard both those languages have OpenGL interfaces. They allow you to link with C, so you can ease your way into C/C++.

      You may want to check out Crystal Space, OGRE, and other open source game libraries/engines. They could be a good stepping stone to building your first game.

      You may want to learn some assembly language. You probably won't write entire programs in it, however at times you may need to optimize certain parts of your code. In addition, it can help you understand how the compiler/CPU interprets the code and how to make it run faster. I'm not sure of a good book/site to learn assembly--most of my info about it is outdated. Going to the processor manufacturer's sites will give you documentation for the instruction sets at the very least.

      When you look at the assembly info, make sure you learn the MMX instructions. They should speed up your game code in some situations. MMX macros for C also exist too--I thought there was one called libMMX. I can't seem to find it now.

      Usenet can be a good help too. The comp.graphics.algorithms FAQ has lots of information.

      It would also be a good idea to learn as much as you can about math and physics like the other poster said. I recommend Technical Mathematics with Caculus by Paul Calter--it goes from very basic math all the way through caculus. As for physics, I don't have any suggestions, however the Calter book does touch on some physics concepts.

    9. Re:whats best way to begin something like this? by kubrick · · Score: 1

      Does that second step have something to do with underpants? :)

      --
      deus does not exist but if he does
    10. Re:whats best way to begin something like this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since I have done a good deal of 3D programming myself, I figured I would chime in.

      Don't try and write a 3D engine off the bat, you will just waste your time. If you want to write games and get good at 3D stuff, you need to have a really solid foundation of 3D knowledge before running off into 3D engine land. Your best bet to gain knowledge is to write little programs that teach you something about 3D. For example, write a program to calculate the normal of a triangle and then try back face culling. Or write a program that gets you familiar with vectors and what you can do with them. This may not be the most exciting thing in the world to do, but it is important. Just remove the idea of a 3D engine from your mind and focus on learning the basics.

      I saw a few people recommend that you look at an established 3D engine such as Quake2 or Crystal Space, but I would really suggest that you avoid doing that. These are complicated beasts and they will overwhelm you if you are new to 3D. Maybe after you have got the basics down you could take a look at the Quake3 game source and write mods with it, but I would wait on that until you are further along.

      If you haven't been programming in C++ for that long, make sure that you know the language really well before you even start trying anything that is games or graphics related. I constantly see people trying to move forward into graphics without basic knowledge of the language that they are using and they inevitably run into tons of problems.

      As far as resources, I like flipCode, http://www.flipcode.com, a great deal, but I have written a few articles for them, so I am biased. Many good resources are tailored to a specific API, so once you know the API you want to use, you will be able to find a lot of stuff. There is a mountain of information out there that you can take advantage of, so if you do some searching I am sure you will be able to find something.

      Hope this helps,
      Nate Miller

    11. Re:whats best way to begin something like this? by davesag · · Score: 1
      before there can be a game programmer there needs to be a game. too many games are made by people with zero sense of playability. before anyone dives into any sort of game development remember to try to make a fun game first. everything else comes next.

      my 2c.

      --
      I used to have a better sig than this, but I got tired of it
    12. Re:whats best way to begin something like this? by PaganRitual · · Score: 1

      thanks for the advice ...

      care to recommend an API? wasnt too sure from a quick peek at flipcode.com as to whether it was OpenGL or DirectX aligned ... what have you done most of your stuff in??? and have you had experience with both, and can offer any reasoning behind a preference??? (please excuse my ignorance, i havent had time to do a search for any of your articles to see if that answers my question, feel free to just ignore me and ill get off my butt and find them myself)

  20. Not open source [yet] by RinkSpringer · · Score: 2

    A quote from the page:

    The source code for Cube has not been released yet, because Cube is for me a purely fun programming project with a very minimalistic style of design & implementation, and I want to keep all the fun to myself :) It will be open sourced in the future, under a license similar to BSD/MIT/ZLIB etc

    Such a shame, I'm sure some people out here would want to help this guy make his stuff...

    On the sidenote, Aardappel is Dutch, and it literally means potato :-)

    1. Re:Not open source [yet] by codexus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, but I understand his decision. He doesn't want to be the leader of a community project where he would do more management than coding. He wants to code his own engine for fun. Open-sourcing too early would not help and might result in problems. This reminds me of phpNuke which eventually forked and AtheOS (I'm not sure if it forked but I know the author wanted to continue do most of the coding himself and was concerned about a fork he didn't want.)

      --
      True warriors use the Klingon Google
    2. Re:Not open source [yet] by Ogerman · · Score: 2

      Yes, but I understand his decision. He doesn't want to be the leader of a community project where he would do more management than coding. He wants to code his own engine for fun. Open-sourcing too early would not help and might result in problems.

      Sorry, but that's a BS argument. Just because the source is available doesn't mean you have to accept patches to your pet project. And if somebody takes your code and forks, who cares?! Just be sure to protect your efforts with GPL so nobody can free-ride with commercial proprietary forks. More likely, this guy is unsure if he's ever going to release the source--which IMHO is silly because there's no way he can compete with the 'big boys'. He should release the source and sell artwork/levels/etc. Then it'd be more than just another no-name game company with mediocre products. Source code is insurance of community, therefore a market.

    3. Re:Not open source [yet] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the sidenote, Aardappel is Dutch, and it literally means potato :-)

      Actually, "literally" it means "apple of the earth" - "functionally" it means potato ;-)

    4. Re:Not open source [yet] by RinkSpringer · · Score: 2

      Not really. Ask anyone to translate aardappel into Dutch, and they'd say potato. Hey, I live in the Netherlands, I know :D

    5. Re:Not open source [yet] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you want to translate a Dutch word into Dutch? :)

  21. offtopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for that post. I was just talking to a friend that no matter how good Linux gets, it'll never get anywhere because of the community's l33t conceit and your post just proved it.

    1. Re:offtopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Well, _DID_ you RTFM?

    2. Re:offtopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>RTFM?

      >Thanks for that post. I was just talking to a friend that no matter how good Linux gets, it'll never get anywhere because of the community's l33t conceit and your post just proved it.


      No, you'll never get anywhere because you moan and bitch just the original question here, instead of _RTFM_ !!!

    3. Re:offtopic by Nutello · · Score: 1

      I'm far from being representative of the "Linux community".

      Yet, one of the very first things Cube's Readme says is:

      'note well: the engine is still in beta stages, and also VERY different from any engine you have seen before. Failure to read the documentation in its entirety may cause you to:

      * miss out on the cool features.
      * run it in an unoptimal way for your system.
      * conclude it "sucks" prematurely.'

      The -t option can be found simply by following the first link in readme.html, clearly labelled with "config: on running the game and configuring it for your machine". The link comes even before the blurb I quoted above. It's not like it is buried in an obscure file somewhere.

      I usually go out of my way to help people and whine a lot myself when there's missing, cryptic or misleading information, but in this case it definitely would have taken less time for the original poster to just look at readme.html than to post on Slashdot (at the very least he had to wait the infamous 20 seconds).

    4. Re:offtopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was talking about a bigger picture than this story. Did you RM(y)FP(ost)?

    5. Re:offtopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't have to. Playing games in full screen in XP works perfectly.

    6. Re:offtopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use XP. It works. AFAIConcered, I'm already there.

    7. Re:offtopic by Nutello · · Score: 1

      No, I RYFT(roll) instead. You said that my post proved the bigger picture. Wrong. I even agree with you that the "you-idiot-don-t-get-it-why-don-t-you-go-back-to-w indoze" attitude stinks, but obviously in this case the original poster hasn't even attempted to look for the answer, which is one of the very first things the documentation clearly mentions - had it been otherwise, he would have had all the reasons in the world to complain.

    8. Re:offtopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh is that how it works? Point out a fact and get labeled a troll? This is why I love /. The entertainment factor is off the scale.

  22. Open source might not be good for a game. by actor_au · · Score: 1

    This isn't a troll, far from it.
    While I agree that Open Sourcing is a better way to go with Operating systems and Applications it shouldn't apply to games that are going to be played over the internet. It gives l33t h4x0rs and script-kiddies an instant referance to help them in cheating. SDKs are bad enough(but at least theses take some time to work with) but the entire source would cripple any hopes of playing a fair game.
    The saddest thing is that this looks like a really interesting project and from what I can gather from people who have it already the games engine is pretty flexable and innovative, if cheaters didn't exist then I would support open-sourcing every game under the sun but sadly I can't. Sad day.

    --
    Read Errant Story.
    1. Re:Open source might not be good for a game. by forsetti · · Score: 1

      Well, on the surface I agree with you, but there are ways to write the code such that cheating is impossible, such as server-centric data, or at least server-side bounds checking (hey -- that sprite shouldn't be able to jump that high!). I think we really need to foucs on better coding strategies. Actually, I feel that this applies to software engineering as a whole -- we need to rethink the existing paradigms, and build new ones from scratch, based on what we now know!

      --
      10b||~10b -- aah, what a question!
    2. Re:Open source might not be good for a game. by PaleBoy · · Score: 1

      In terms of cheating with the source, I don't believe that the game that comes with this engine is really supposed to be that big of a deal - it's more of a showcase for the engine itself. The problem would be in the future, if full fledged games came out using the engine. But, I personally believe that the ideal engine would be able to still prevent cheating, even with people understanding the cheat-prevention mechanisms. It would be like the ideal encryption- even if you know the algorithm, the code should still be unbreakable without the key. That has always been a very difficult thing to obtain, however. On a side note, if someone DID hack the game, that would be have to be some sort of milestone for the developers, right? You're not big-time until you have cheaters!

      --
      ------ What's sadder than realizing you've filtered out your own comments?
    3. Re:Open source might not be good for a game. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Open source isn't good for much, it just kills value, thats all there is to it.

      Makes it harder in a business that has a rough time already and erases jobs and investments.

    4. Re:Open source might not be good for a game. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It can only "cripple any hopes of playing a fair game" if the game was already vulnerable to begin with. Open Sourcing a game could actually be good for its security, if the developer knows in advance that he's going to open source it, since he'll have to design it right.

      IMHO, though, some of OS/FS advantages don't apply very well to games:

      • Open source development isn't really needed, because the development team for a game can/should be pretty small, compared to other types of projects.
      • Being Free Software is a less important value to users of games, than users of other types of software. Nobody feels "locked in" to a game. Most people don't worry too much about a game being "orphaned" by developers who have gone on to other things (although there are exceptions).
      So the reasons for a game being open, aren't as strong as they are for operating systems and applications.
    5. Re:Open source might not be good for a game. by Aardappel · · Score: 1
      In terms of cheating with the source, I don't believe that the game that comes with this engine is really supposed to be that big of a deal - it's more of a showcase for the engine itself.

      Sorry, wrong assumption. One of my goals was to keep the engine ultra-simplistic, so I would actually manage to spend time on the parts I find interesting, such as the in-game editing and the multiplayer & single player gameplay. Yes, cheating is a problem, especially for cube since a lot of the gameplay code runs (authoratively) client side. There is a lot that can be done in terms of checking though, but I fear that if someone builds a multiplayer oriented game off this with a significant community, it will have to be closed source again.

    6. Re:Open source might not be good for a game. by RoadWarriorX · · Score: 1
      "While I agree that Open Sourcing is a better way to go with Operating systems and Applications it shouldn't apply to games that are going to be played over the internet."

      Well, it depends on how the game is designed. A well-thought game engine will consider this possibility already.

      In an internet game, the client only needs to render it's version of the game state. The master game state is stored on the server. As events happen, the client is responsible for changing it's version of the game state, as well as notifying the server of a state change. Each client in turn would need to recieve state information from the server. As part of the protocol, the server should be able to query portions of the client's version of the game state and compare with the master game state. If the network communication protocol is designed properly, then it the server that really controls the game. So it really does not matter if the game is open-source, because the client must at least be able to communicate with the game server on the server's terms in order just to play the game online.

      -- Elementary, my dear Watson.
    7. Re:Open source might not be good for a game. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The in-game editing is _really_ cool. I love it! I think I'll make a game myself...

    8. Re:Open source might not be good for a game. by PaleBoy · · Score: 1
      Goodness. Consider me completely corrected. This engine is certainly streamlined, and fascinating. I feel like there is a game to be built on it implementing the in game editing function- Tron cycling would be a perfect fit, for example.

      But there are a lot of other possibilities for the real time deformation aspect. DM in a maze, controlled by a maze-master, or a just a general universal terrain master, opening up doors and creating walls at their leisure while everyone else blew each other away.

      --
      ------ What's sadder than realizing you've filtered out your own comments?
  23. A question... by TheDook · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one noticing this game technically has the same level design as duke nukem or something similar? From what I can see there are no rooms above other rooms... I mean it doesnt look like things can hover in mid air (like bridges).

    I'm not sure about this at all but I played it a while ago and now that I look at the screenshots it doesn't look like it's possible.

    The game is fun and all but is this "A Modern 3D Game Engine" ?

    1. Re:A question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Short answer: No, it isn't.

  24. not true 3d by EpsCylonB · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Still downloading the engine but the docs on the site make for interesting reading. This engine is not capable of having rooms over rooms, in fact the author compares it to doom which is obviously not 3D.

    From reading the docs I think the real innovation here is in the gui which sounds like it has obviously had a lot of time spent on it.

    Having edited with the quake and unreal engines it seems this prog is trying to remove the bar into editing by making editing easy enough for anyone to jump in and play around. A good thing in my opoinion.

  25. no rooms over rooms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you can't have any 'rooms over rooms' because, and if you had read his main page, you would know this, it's a "Landscape-style engine that pretends to be an indoor first person shooter engine" He probably uses a heightmap or something similar. That's why you can't create floating cubes or anything in the editing mode, you can only raise or lower the floor. This allows for the high frame-rates and no map compile times. A good idea for a landscape engine, but I really don't think it's the way to create the next quake3 killer. The "Z" element (or Y in opengl, whatever, depends on how you set it up) is pretty crucial to having a fun FPS. There's a reason that nobody plays Duke Nukem anymore :)

    1. Re:no rooms over rooms by PaleBoy · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, this engine seems like it was designed for the ULTIMATE Tron cycle game. ;)

      --
      ------ What's sadder than realizing you've filtered out your own comments?
  26. Panquake? by Marvel+Man · · Score: 0

    Other than the fact that there is a meal at the local resraunt called the "Panquake", All you can eat pancakes.. maybe this will be worth something. All panquake is, is quake with "fov 360" turned on by default. But a new game engine could be cool none the less

  27. Wouter's progr. languages are way more interesting by Otis_INF · · Score: 3, Informative

    He did quite a lot of work on the front of visual programming and came up with a lot of programming languages which are definitely worth a look.

    Check out the page: http://wouter.fov120.com/proglang/index.html.

    --
    Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.
  28. Hrm by Cave+Dweller · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Combines very high precision dynamic occlusion culling with a form of geometric mipmapping [...]"

    Thats a nice way of saying "It looks pretty and lets you kill stuff". Hehe.

  29. are you kidding me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A "modern 3d game engine"?? this is barely 3d. While its interesting and all, and perhaps fun for the guy who wrote it. I really dont understand what the big deal is. In all fairness, its interesting, but clearly another example of how slashdot is pretty useless anymore. I mean come on making a big deal over this thing and calling it "modern" is more than a stretch.

    and this crap i read about how the 'system is simple' and thats just wonderfull because its easilly usable for many things or what not, gimmie a break. go check out the level editing 'tutorials' the thing is a joke, its got a couple dozen requirements of things that just wont work. no actually its a pretty awuful design that has an extremely narrow set of features.

    have fun with your toy.

    p.s. dont most 'modern engines' at least have a particle system??

    1. Re:are you kidding me? by EsH1 · · Score: 1

      I think a point is being missed here. Cube is modern simply because game engines really haven't been done quite like this before (ignoring TombRaider). It's admirable that the developer decided to be creative and look at indoor world geometry in a different way than the current prevailing tech-fashion demands. Quake is Quake-- it's one game (even it's an amazingly good one), and it has a particular focus. I think we're all so wowed by the technology that we forget that Carmack designed the engine to do certain things at the expense of other things. Cube is obviously well designed and is working (how many of us programmers can claim both of these), but also is probably more of a true game engine than most out there for the simple reason that it choses it's own priorities rather than using those of a popular game.

      --
      -- Cheers.
  30. Argh: Quake is seriously outdated by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm a game developer, and I find it endlessly amusing that internetters love to equate Quake technology with the cutting edge. I guess it begs the question: Do wannabe game programmers and fanboys have any experience with engines that are *not* Quake-like?

    For example, look at the amazing stuff done in high-end PlayStation 2 games. There's no way you could get the Quake III engine to do those kinds of things. And yet everyone fawns all over Quake like it's the only game technology available. In reality, it's just that there's a distinct lack of familiarity with what else is available, much as hardcore Linux advocates don't know about OSes other than Linux and Windows, and don't know much at all about OS history prior to 1991.

  31. Re:Argh: Quake is seriously outdated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Do wannabe game programmers and fanboys have any experience with engines that are *not* Quake-like?
    • Nah...
  32. BILL GATES OWNS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do you not use DirectX? Die now please.

    1. Re:BILL GATES OWNS by RoadWarriorX · · Score: 1

      Shut up, Bill. Get your own forum! ;-)

  33. IDEs under linux by Cadrach · · Score: 1
    I like to use anjuta, an IDE built on the GNOME libraries. A friend of mine was complaining that there were no IDEs in Linux that could compete with MS Visual Studio. I showed him anjuta, and he dropped the argument :) You can check it out at http://anjuta.sourceforge.net.

    Apparently some people swear by kdevelop which, as you may be able to tell, is a KDE application. I haven't used it much personally, but you might want to check it out at http://www.kdevelop.org

    --
    Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable. --H.L. Mencken
  34. Reality is, if you're relying on the clients... by Svartalf · · Score: 2

    ...the game can be hacked. Source doesn't make it much easier from what I can see- there seems to be enough hacks and "trainers" out there for the games out right now. These cheating tools end up showing up fairly quickly after the game comes out and so far, all of these games are closed source. Simply put, securing things is a difficult proposition at best (curtailing performance, etc.) if you rely on the client side being clean, etc.- having source only makes it slightly easier.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  35. Boring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many of these 3d shooters do we really need? I've played so many of them and they are all the same. What ever happened to creative and original games?

    1. Re:Boring by B.J.+Blazkowicz · · Score: 0

      This is nothing else but an ENGINE. Not a real game. It's the worst FPS ever.

  36. Re:Argh: Quake is seriously outdated by reflective+recursion · · Score: 2

    Erm. I'm curious.. what can PS2 games do that games using Quake3 engine can't? Nearly a year after Q3 was out, games continued to use Q2 engine. I know Q3 isn't much more than Q1 with shaders and lightmaps, etc. But a low-res PS2? Certain things engines are good at and certain things they are not. Q3 is still very good for indoor environments. For outdoor environments it sucks ass. It probably wouldn't be good for a Mario or Sonic type game. I don't doubt there is a better indoor engine. Infact, I know it's name: Doom 3.

    --
    Dijkstra Considered Dead
  37. Re:Argh: Quake is seriously outdated by Tekai · · Score: 1

    almost every OS is compared too windows, though you know it's not really great and there are better. Sometimes it's not quality but "well known" that counts.

  38. No security through obscurity by NortWind · · Score: 1
    Open Sourcing is... an instant referance to help them in cheating.

    If the game code were open source, it would be possible to add security that actually worked. The chances that a cheat would be found by l33t h4x0rs would go down as many eyes would have had a chance to really close the holes.

    Even in the event that a cheat were found, the ability to respond quickly would be a plus for open sourcing the game.

  39. Re:Argh: Quake is seriously outdated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    +3 insightfull? if the parent had mentioned what engines he is talking about perhaps.
    just name the other engines that:
    • offer equal framerates (no mather what hardware/os/graphics chip)
    • solid network play that doesn`t lag becouse the engine is to busy syngronising eye candy/effects/complex animations/sprites/particle effects
    • has stable >2 player servers
    I hear somebody in the back arguing that these are only importand for multiplayer, duh that what the q3 arena is about, its a multiplayer engine that sacrefices eye candy for multiplayer gameplay (dont ask me why people develop single player games on it). Now I dont know what playstation games you talk about and comparing them to pc engines is like comparing apple powers macs and.... fpu-less cpu based home brew computers but I bet you are thinking of something that doesnt mix well with 4kb/s network bandwith at a 100ms latency while keeping all its effect turned on and supporting >2 players (my guess is you are thinking of some sort of fighting game, do they even have multiple floor levels in their maps?).
  40. Re:Wouter's progr. languages are way more interest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Haha, I remember programming in E, "back in the day".

    LOL, memories.

  41. Re:Wouter's progr. languages are way more interest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, I find it interesting that in all those languages there is never any mention of working with type-inferencing.

    I am continually suprised at the lack of languages that do type-inferencing. It is a wonderful feature and I would love to have a type-inferencing C++.

    The only language I've used heavily that has type-inferencing is O'Caml and even though I generally like the language, the syntax pisses me off to no end.

  42. A note for people with slow FPS rates (for NVidia) by vmalloc_ · · Score: 1

    If your FPS is going very slow, as in 9FPS-ish, and you're using an NVidia Card, go to nvidia.com and get the latest video drivers. It fixed the problem for me.

  43. Re:Wouter's progr. languages are way more interest by Aardappel · · Score: 1

    You were so busy to talk about your favourite feature that you forgot to actually look at the page I guess. Quite a few languages of mine do TI, for example the "Bla" one (read the doc and/ or source code) has quite extensive TI.

    Yes TI is great. But it is not without issues outside of the world of functional programming (though most have sensible solutions).

  44. thanks for the help. by PaganRitual · · Score: 1

    cool, looks like i have enough stuff there to keep me going for a while ... thanks for all the links/ideas everybody, and for the blatant BlitzBasic spam hehehe (joke) ;) interesting that i dont think anyone made mention of the directX sdk etc etc ... although i guess i do have to remember that this is /. hehehe :)

    just to give the full pic for those who like to read a bio, i actually have a CS major which i finished 3 yrs ago, and i am two third year maths topics short of making it a CS/MATH double major (which i plan on going back and doing at some point in time), and a fair bit of C++ experience (i wrote my own text based blackjack program at uni on the unix machines, and then 'ported' it to DOS) and tinkered with it at a graphical level in DOS (good old Black Arts of 3D Game Programming book), but had a major issue with some sort of pointer array which ended up with me putting a stop to the whole thing ... and i have been a VB programmer professionally (i dont think those words go together but whatever) for the past 2 yrs or so, and VB tends to let you be a very lazy programmer, and MDI form accounting software is just ridiculously easy to the point of tedium, so before i go senile from VB infection (yes, thats a B, not a D, its a lame joke, i hope you enjoy it) :) at the ripe old age of 25, i would like to get back into what i originally had planned, which was C++ game programming ... wish me luck (*walks off into the sunset, cue campy tear-jerking music*)

    1. Re:thanks for the help. by JFMulder · · Score: 2

      The reason why I didn't go into DirectX stuff is mainly because I don't know much about it. But from what I've seen in some college course, it has a lot of fluffy stuff and initlization routines you have to go through before drawing even a single pixel in Direct 3D and DirectDraw, while in GL you create a window, create a GL context, bind them, and you're ready to go.

      If you don't want to start from scratch, Direct3d has 2 modes : immediate and something I think is called retained mode. Retained mode is basically a basic 3d engine with notions of meshes, lights, directions, parent/child space, that sort of stuff, already implemented and is great for beginners. It can even load .x files, which you can create with 3DS Max and then convert to .x with a utility that comes with the SDK. You don't even have to care about model loading, isn't it great? Or of course you can get dirty and play with the immediate mode which achieves the same purpose as OpenGL does, but with a totally different system, which, as Carmack once put it "is broken, but still works."

      For the sound though, you will have to go with DirectSound, since it's the best way to make audio on Windows. You might want to look for OpenAL, if you want to do cross platform stuff. It's the OpenGL for audio, hence the AL. I'm not sure though that the standard is set in stone. You should check that out.

  45. Has anyone figure out how to TURN in the game? by ultrapenguin · · Score: 1

    Left/right arrows "Strafe", and there seems to be no way to actually TURN into some direction.

    Any ideas?

    No, "mouse turning" isnt what I am looking for.

  46. Re:Argh: Quake is seriously outdated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For example, look at the amazing stuff done in high-end PlayStation 2 games. There's no way you could get the Quake III engine to do those kinds of things.

    *ahem* Q3A looks better then all but the most advanced console games (RE on gamecube, Halo, no PS2 titles i can think of)..
    BUT you're missing the point-- those games dropped in the last year. Quake 3 is now several years old, and still the benchmark for engine quality, until Doom 3 drops. this IS the point-- the standard for engine quality NEVER rises until Id pushes it up. nothing looked leaps and bounds better then Quake until Q2 came out, and nothing looked better then that until Q3A came out.. nothing will look better then Doom 3 for a few years agin. regardless of how good their games play, this is Id's legacy.

    schmoko.

  47. idea by applejacks · · Score: 1

    So we got all these hi-dollar video cards that can render cgi movies that takes several machines hours. Why is it so hard for them to make a real physics game engine. Lets not forget the enemies. Why must all henchmen in games look alike. Doom4 will have clones. I mean all this time they spend makeing levels why can't they make about 400 difffernt unique henchmen and 3 or 4 levels. I like variaty. Why can't legs fall off at differnt sections and flesh splatter. Why can't I use question marks. Why can't Model's mouths move when they are talking. Why do i continuiously believe the hype. ... l8r

  48. Doom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doom and its source ports are GPL'd (thank Carmack). Go download some. There are ports with room over room, slopes, opengl, 3d models, etc. Check out http://www.doomworld.com and find out about the ports.

    I also thing q and q2 are GPL'd already. Not sure, though. Google it.

  49. Bad Romero by sbeast702 · · Score: 1

    You would think John Romero could think of a better new alias than "Wouter van Oortmerssen (aka Aardappel)".