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: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.

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: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.