Carmack On Doom III And The Evolution Of Graphics

Toasty16 writes "David Kushner over at Wired has a write-up on the progress of Doom III, hinting at a possible fall release, that is unless Microsoft convinces id to sit on the game until an Xbox version is completed. He also talks to Carmack about the evolution of game engines and the possibility of a "next-generation rendering engine [that] will be a stable, mature technology that lasts in more or less its basic form for a long time." Will this lead to a shift from coders to "technical directors," as Carmack believes? This ties into the Slashdot story awhile back about new titles for sysadmins."

Comments

How long could an Xboxen version take?

[frovingslosh]

that is unless Microsoft convinces id to sit on the game until an Xbox version is completed.

The X thing is basically a PC running a form of you-know-what OS, with a Nvidia graphics processor, that you likely have to program with a well know M$ API the code already works on. How long could it take to get it running on the X-box if it's ready for Windows? Sure, there are differences, but I wouldn't expect any significant changed for an x-box port. Just add some code to let it reload saved games and/or boot Linux and it will be a sure winner.

Re:How long could an Xboxen version take?

[kence]

As I understand it, the challenge of "porting" to XBox isn't that you're coding for a different platform, it's that you're working with more constrained resources. The game designers might have to cut the number of unique characters on a map, or the unique texture maps for the characters, etc - just to make it run on the freak'n box.

You know what they say: It's all part and parcel of the whole genii gig: phenomenal cosmic powers, itty bitty living space.

Re:Typical

[BigBir3d]

RTFA

But id could pocket some cash from Microsoft. Redmond keeps calling, trying to convince the company to release a version of Doom III for the Xbox: "We're being offered a pretty significant amount of money to sit on it until an Xbox port is done," says Carmack. id hasn't announced a decision yet.

Re:Here's a dumb question.

[Anonymous Coward]

IBM has a distributed OpenGL rendering system. It needed lots of expensive equipment to be useful though, like myrinet links between the cluster boxes and some sort of frame buffer unit. Performed quite well from what I was told, but very very expensive.

Amazon is Enthusiastic

[t3mp357]

They have Doom III listed for release on 7/31/03...

Anyone else already paid for their copy?

Re:bored with first person shoot em ups

[irc.goatse.cx troll]

I havn't had a chance to try it yet, but I hear sega's Rez for the PS2 is a really fun take on the 'side scroller shooter' type game (only done in some weird starfox-like 3d from what the screenshots show).

Re:Typical

[ecchi_0]

It'll have net play without a doubt, so what would really be missing?

Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't Doom III singleplayer only? I don't think there would be any netplay to speak of.

Re:bored with first person shoot em ups

[WatertonMan]

There still are many companies writing these more simple games but with excellent game play. You don't have to run MAME with the associated 20 year old graphics.

For instance Ambrosia has had versions of classic games with excellent graphics and game play. I'm sure that were I to look I could find many more examples.

Just because most of the games down at CompUSA most games are fairly complex and driven by "gee whiz" graphics and long play time doesn't mean all are.

Original First Person Shooter?

[emarkp]

From the article

In 1991, coding a game called Hovertank, Carmack faced a challenge no programmer had yet tackled: how to get a computer to quickly render a three-dimensional world from a first-person perspective. .... It was the original first-person shooter.

Um, I don't think so. The first first-person perspective game I remember is BattleZone, published in 1983. The first first-person shooter I recall is Xybots (or maybe you'd call it 3rd person), published in 1987.

Id has been a phenomemnon, but let's give credit where it's due.

Re:Typical

[NanoGator]

"Granted, they would all be professionaly made, but who cares? Most of the player-made doom wads were pathetic. "

The player-made Quake mods were awesome.

Don't be willfully ignorant to my point.

Re:bored with first person shoot em ups

[mcc]

it would be cool to see what could be done with this genre using today's technology and wizardry

Actually, since you asked.. have you heard of Ikaruga? It's supposed to be one of the greatest shooter games of all time, as well as one of the most challenging, and it's just been retooled graphically and otherwise for the Gamecube and rereleased (It was originally a dreamcast game).

Also, despite being a 2d topdown shooter, it supposedly has an absolutely fantastic storyline and pushes the gamecube to somewhere near its technical limit. I haven't played it or seen screenshots, and i don't really plan on playing it, as i wasn't a huge shooter fan, but i've heard nothing but nonstop spooging about it for the last month. Apparently this game is just targed specifically at everyone who misses fun little space shooter games, and manages to hit some kind of pinnacle for the genre.

(I like my gamecube. It's nice to have a machine that seems to be specifically designed to target "everyone who thought video games were better before the invention of the CD-ROM". ^_^)

Re:"We've already demonstrated" - er NO!

[damiam]

all those perty DX9 effects don't exist on the XBox, making the true glory and splendor of DOOMIII a non-existant on the XBox.

Doom III uses OpenGL, and thus the DirectX version is irrelevent. DoomIII was designed from the start to target the features of the GeForce3, which the Xbox certainly has.

Re:Another new graphics engine..

[Erik Hollensbe]

HL was released, the SDK had not come out for quite a long time after that.

People went *NUTS* over the SDK. Half-Life, at the time, had some of the most realistic lighting and best textures (Second only to maybe SiN in the Texture Dept) out there. Despite the fact that people did not have the SDK yet, there were already modifications being planned and lots of ground work already done.

Half-Life is still one of the most actively modified games existing, even though there are many, many better engines out there. Natural Selection is a recent and popular example.

Not only is the SDK useful, but it has a huge support base from the community AND from valve. In the past, many modifications to the HL engine have been made just to accomodate mod developers and server operators. They simply know how to treat their user base well, and it has paid off quite well for them. Not only did the original game make a lot of money, but the whole franchise and games made by *fans* made money for them... One of which was Counter-Strike.

You are mislead.

Re:Evolution is a lie.

[Galvatron]

Computer graphics did evolve, they just evolved through a Lamarckian, rather than a Darwinian, process. Evolution does not mean Darwinism, they're two different words, and the former is more general than the latter.