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."
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.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't Doom III singleplayer only? I don't think there would be any netplay to speak of.
Id has been a phenomemnon, but let's give credit where it's due.
"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.
"Derp de derp."
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.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD