Doom 3 for Linux Released

questions by mirko · 2004-10-05 01:02 · Score: 4, Insightful

does this means this uses OpenGL instead of DirectX ?
has somebody any clue when the osx version will be released ?

--
Trolling using another account since 2005.

Re:questions by Dogers · 2004-10-05 01:05 · Score: 5, Informative

id have ALWAYS used OpenGL for the graphics rendering. But they use DirectX for sound on windows, which is what will take time to convert to *nix..

--
I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you.
Re:questions by Evangelion · 2004-10-05 01:05 · Score: 2, Informative

Since GLQuake, id has always used OpenGL instead of Direct3D.

But on Windows, it might perfectly well use other parts of DirectX that aren't Direct3D.
Re:questions by Xetrov · 2004-10-05 01:06 · Score: 3, Informative

It uses OpenGL in windows.
OpenGL and DirectX aren't equivalent anyway, you must be thinking of Direct3D, which is the graphics library.
Re:questions by _undan · 2004-10-05 01:08 · Score: 1

1. Yes. There's no way id would've used DirectX for Doom3, considering they've been using OpenGL since Quake 2 (if not 1)
2. If this is any indication, pretty damn soon.
Re:questions by mahdi13 · 2004-10-05 01:11 · Score: 1

Quake 1 was software only, but there have been many OpenGL ports made for it since it was released

--
"Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
Re:questions by julesh · 2004-10-05 01:11 · Score: 2, Informative

OpenGL and DirectX aren't equivalent anyway, you must be thinking of Direct3D, which is the graphics library.

Direct3D has been renamed "DirectX graphics". Weren't you paying attention to that announcement? :)
Re:questions by Jagasian · 2004-10-05 01:11 · Score: 2, Interesting

Id Software has used OpenGL since the original Quake, when they released a free OpenGL based Quake patch. Note that Id Software did the most public experimentation with the original Quake. They released Windows versions of Quake for free (Quake was originally DOS), they released versions with improved network code, especially network prediction... this was the most famous Quake upgrade called "Quakeworld". I am sure I am leaving out some of the other Quake experiments.
Re:questions by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:18 · Score: 0

Wow, first post actually had something relevant to say.
No it didn't. Since when was there DirectX for Linux? Stupid question. Duh.
Re:questions by CountBrass · 2004-10-05 01:18 · Score: 1

relevant? perhaps, but also ill-informed and obviously rushed to get the all important first post crowd.

--
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
Re:questions by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:38 · Score: 0

Would you have prefered some GNAA statement ?
Re:questions by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:43 · Score: 0

this is just another lame and pseudo failed attemp at karma whoring

just shut up if you dont have to say anything usefull

tell me one engine carmak has written utilizing directX
Re:questions by static0verdrive · 2004-10-05 02:04 · Score: 2, Funny

Actually, id didn't make GLQuake. But thanks to whoever did!

--
========
77 77 77 2e 6d 65 6c 76 69 6e 73 2e 63 6f 6d
Re:questions by essreenim · 2004-10-05 02:23 · Score: 1

Thats not really where people get confused.

There are those who think that DirectX is some magical piece of software that installs on you r computer and allows you to play all these new amazing games - wrong.

The major graphics card manufacturers bring out hardare support for advances such as volumetric fog effects..etc. Basicaly all the new reflections and textures etc.

There then has to be a way ion software to talk to this hardware.

The 2 main ways are OpenGL (multiplatform),
and Direct3D(DirectX) - Windows only :/

They both to the job. DirectX might do a little more but only fractionally - and not enough to justify it over a ful multiplatform choice.

The very latest OpenGL version (that I know of) is OpenGL 1.5 though there may be something newer now.
The latest DirectX is DirectX 9.0C as far as I know.
Re:questions by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 03:06 · Score: 0

Actually, they did.
Re:questions by the_2nd_coming · 2004-10-05 03:09 · Score: 1

umm actually, they used Glide for GL Quake.

--

I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Re:questions by rpdillon · 2004-10-05 03:11 · Score: 1

Yeah, the did.

If you could get in, check their FTP, it has glQuake right there. And I remember Carmack releasing, and that being the reason I bought my Diamond Monster 3D...such sweet FPS loving back in 1996.
Re:questions by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 03:17 · Score: 0

Yes, of course. Those are usually funny, elaborate and well thought through.
Re:questions by static0verdrive · 2004-10-05 03:54 · Score: 1

I knew they hosted the file but I didn't think they were the ones who coded it. I guess I stand corrected. Thanks!

--
========
77 77 77 2e 6d 65 6c 76 69 6e 73 2e 63 6f 6d
Re:questions by drinkypoo · 2004-10-05 03:55 · Score: 1

So then what would you call DirectDraw? GDI++? (Or maybe GDI#)

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:questions by Sj0 · 2004-10-05 04:41 · Score: 2, Informative

There is no DirectDraw API any more. Programmers are encouraged to use the DirectGraphics API instead.

--
It's been a long time.
Re:questions by Sj0 · 2004-10-05 04:46 · Score: 2, Insightful

Neither glQuake nor Quake 2 will run if you don't have DirectX installed. They use it for a few things, including sound and input.

OpenGL is just a graphics library.

--
It's been a long time.
Re:questions by goebbels · 2004-10-05 10:01 · Score: 0, Flamebait

osx does not deserve a version. Sorry, I am very biased. See you in hell.
Re:questions by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 10:19 · Score: 0

umm actually, they used Glide for GL Quake
No, they required the use of a "mini-GL" which converted their OpenGL calls into the Glide equivalents. You can play GLQuake on modern hardware with no glide/3dfx in sight.

I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by drunkennewfiemidget · 2004-10-05 01:02 · Score: 5, Interesting

I've always found *nix to be a lot better at properly utilising its hardware than Windows. This is not a Windows flame message(tm) it is what I've found in the past.

I wonder if Doom 3 can be successfully played on lesser hardware if played in linux...

Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by mahdi13 · 2004-10-05 01:07 · Score: 1

It seems to run about the same, some reports say that it runs a tad slower but from personal experiance it runs a tad better for me

Just keep the detail level at medium and it runs fine on an Athlon +1600 w/ a Geforce 4 ti 4800 and 382 of (older)DDR memory. But I really could use more memory as I see the game effectivly sucks it all away during play.

--
"Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Moby+Cock · 2004-10-05 01:08 · Score: 1

Maybe submit an Ask Slaskdot post to see if anyone has tried it...
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Beowulf_Boy · 2004-10-05 01:10 · Score: 5, Interesting

Funny, I've played FPS games side by side in linux and windows, and I'd say the windows box was a slight bit faster. I was playing Quake 3 and Soldier of Fortune.

Not that I'm trashing linux, I use it daily. I have 2 boxes, with Synergy setup between them. One is linux, the other windows. I use the linux box for websurfing, AIM, and as a file server, and the windows box (since it has a bigger monitor) for doing any programming homework and playing games. I just find that linux isn't quite there yet for gaming. Hopefully soon though, its came a long way.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:15 · Score: 1, Informative

You know this is a really old axiom amongst the real zealots but I think those of us who use both Linux and Windows everyday realize that once you start using X Window the difference really goes away. On a server there is no competition. Linux will outperform Windows 99% of the time (the other 1% is somebody who doesn't realize that a server doesn't need X).

Also, so much of the game performance lies on the video card that you really are at the mercy of the drivers when it comes to performace.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by TrancePhreak · 2004-10-05 01:15 · Score: 3, Informative

The earlier article on /. about the Linux 3D performance tests show that you are incorrect. They do, however, show that 3D gaming is nowhere near unbearable in Linux.

--

-]Phreak Out[-
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by noselasd · 2004-10-05 01:18 · Score: 2, Informative

In respect to games, the OS doesn't have _that_ much to say.
It's mostly CPU and GPU burning. Quality of the GFX drivers are very important.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by dweezil-n0xad · 2004-10-05 01:19 · Score: 3, Informative

you can benchmark Doom III ingame:
open the console: [~]
type: timedemo demo1
my results: 2148 frames rendered in 68.2 seconds = 31.5 fps
system specs:
AMD XP2000+
512 MB DDR266
GeForce3 MSI StarForce 822 ViVo 64MB DDR
KT400 chipset

os: Gentoo 2.6.9-rc2/NPTL/Prelinking/gcc 3.4.2
driver: nvidia 1.0.6111-r2

obviously my old graphics card is the bottleneck. I don't have a windows box here, but maybe someone who has a dualboot can test this benchmark.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by gowen · 2004-10-05 01:29 · Score: 4, Insightful

It's pretty sad that when you say something even slightly critical of linux, you feel the need to defend yourself from the moderators by parading your linux qualifications to prove that your really truly one of the cognoscenti.

(Beowulf Boy, this isn't a criticism of you, but the mentality of moderators)

--
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by dweezil-n0xad · 2004-10-05 01:31 · Score: 1

d'oh, forgot the settings:
640*480, low quality
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by strider44 · 2004-10-05 01:36 · Score: 2, Interesting

yep, it depends solely on your system setup as to which operating system will be better. Basically a new ATI card you're stuffed with linux, NVIDIA is slightly lower on most, slightly higher on some.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by JudgeFurious · 2004-10-05 01:37 · Score: 3, Insightful

That's the way the system works. Say nothing critical of Linux, Acknowledge nothing positive in Windows, and you take your chances when making a comment on OSX. That is of course because you never know which moderator you're going to get. It might be the Apple zealot or it might be the guy who's so sick of Apple zealots that he slams you down for daring to mention it.

At least with Linux and Windows you know where you stand. ..."all your Beowulf clusters in Soviet Russia belong to us for Profit!!!" may be the only truly safe ground in here.

--
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:46 · Score: 2, Funny

At least with Linux and Windows you know where you stand.

You're not even safe there. I've been modded down multiple times for saying Windows98 was unstable.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by static0verdrive · 2004-10-05 01:50 · Score: 1

Generally speaking, I've found quake 3 to be a lot snappier in linux as well and I'm expecting similar results with Doom 3; although you may need the same specs to keep it from complaining, it'll probably run better.

--
========
77 77 77 2e 6d 65 6c 76 69 6e 73 2e 63 6f 6d
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:01 · Score: 0

I agree with you, and I am a Linux fanboy! It isn't surprising as Microsoft has bypassed DirectX around Windows like a Christmas tree. Whether it is actually stable and reasonable to maintain is another issue...
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by kmike · 2004-10-05 02:06 · Score: 2, Informative

Copy-pasting my post from under the earlier story about Doom3 Linux release:

Using the same config (1280x1024, High settings, 8xAF, no AA, all effects on) on Athlon XP 1.4GHz /640mb RAM/GeForce FX 6800, timedemo demo1 precache:
Win98se/Forceware 61.21: 30.1 fps
Linux 2.6.7/NVidia drivers 61.11: 28.9 fps

So perfomance is very close, which probably attributes to slow CPU. One difference is that Windows Doom3 version is 1.0 - I didn't bother to download 1.1 and hack it to work in Win98 (shame on id for yielding to MS and dropping win98 support!).

On the other hand, I didn't bother to quit whole bunch of terminals and Mozilla and vicq and what not when running Linux version :)
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by pe1rxq · 2004-10-05 02:19 · Score: 3, Funny

You weren't modded redundant by any chance?

--
Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by j.bellone · 2004-10-05 02:24 · Score: 0, Flamebait

I love Linux, I do programming work on there nearly every day. I don't own a linux box yet, but I plan on buying one soon so I don't need to pay for hosting anymore. But the fact of the matter still remains.

When I want to play games, I want to play games. I don't want to be struggling to make those games work when I could run a shitty operating system but have it work properly. I also own an ATI card, and ATI's driver performance is more than below par on Linux.

Mod me down, I really couldn't care. That's the *only* thing that I don't like about Linux. Games don't work properly, video drivers don't work properly, or they run like shit. Until then, I'll be running Windows XP.

--
I'm f#$king magic!
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by JudgeFurious · 2004-10-05 02:30 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Not yet but I did get an "Offtopic" already. Guilty as charged.

--
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by ohad_l · 2004-10-05 02:31 · Score: 1

Same here - usually. However, I have the demo installed on both Windows XP and Linux (Gentoo Linux, 2.6 vanilla kernel), and get significantly better performance - 10-15fps - on Windows. GeForce FX 5700 Ultra Abit NF7 (nForce II) running an AMD Athlon XP 2600 at 1830.176 Mhz. 1024x768, medium quality, no AA It might, however, be services that I'm running... although all of them show up at top as using 0.0 CPU. I suspect that the situation will be different a few patches from now - UT2004's performance has certainly improved.

--
If it weren't for fog, the world would run at a really crappy framerate.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:39 · Score: 0

However, I have the demo installed on both Windows XP and Linux (Gentoo Linux, 2.6 vanilla kernel), and get significantly better performance - 10-15fps - on Windows.
If you have KDE or GNOME running, I would shut them down. Try running X with only an xterm. You'll probably have much better performance.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Karn · 2004-10-05 02:39 · Score: 4, Interesting

To be fair, Quake 3 is basically the only platform-independant game that isn't disadvantaged on Linux in some way (pure OpenGL, not a Direct3D port/afterthought), and he was claiming something that is contradicting what benchmarking sites like Tomshardware have shown, that games can run faster in Linux than in Windows. For example, Tom has a benchmark page here that shows Linux outperforming Win2K on Q3. The difference is probably not noticable to a casual gamer, but benchmark junkies who tweak their machine to milk an extra 5fps out of their rig will.

So basically, it isn't sad that the guy had to put a disclaimer in there, because what he said does in fact contradict popular belief, as well as somewhat recent published benchmarks.

(Disclaimer: I'm not one of these dillusional people who claim Linux can run Windows games faster than Windows itself under Wine. The only game I recognize as running equal or better in Linux is Quake3.)

--

Why do I keep typing pythong?
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Hieronymus+Howard · 2004-10-05 02:40 · Score: 1

According to Linux-Gamers.net, Timothee Besset of ID software said about the linux port, "I'm getting surprisingly good performance compared to the Windows version".

This is great timing too. ID release the Linux client only 2 days after my girlfriend gave me Doom 3 for my birthday!
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:41 · Score: 0

Wait, who said something critical of linux? I'll frag 'em!
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by auzy · 2004-10-05 03:06 · Score: 1

Prob is it doesn't use ALSA, but OSS, so I doubt it even has support for hardware audio mixing :(

they'll fix that eventually though, and that will speed it up alot I'm guessing.. Dont expect much speedwise from the first port
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by incom · 2004-10-05 03:06 · Score: 1

Really? Q3 faster in windows than linux? What type of hardware you got running, and which distro/win version. Not doubting you, it's just the opposite of most peoples experiences.

--
True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by dbkluck · 2004-10-05 03:09 · Score: 1

I've always found *nix to be a lot better at properly utilising its hardware than Windows.

In most cases you're right, but I think with Doom 3, Windows is going to have an advantage. The Linux GPU drivers just don't get the same kind of developer attention and optimization that their Windows counterparts get.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Gramie2 · 2004-10-05 03:09 · Score: 0, Offtopic

"... to prove that your really truly one of the cognoscenti."

When all you really have to do is use "your" and "you're" in the wrong places!
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 03:14 · Score: 0

You should be modded down. Nvidia drivers work very well and every game actually written for linux runs pretty darn well. Your not "telling it like it is", your just spreading FUD. The only thing that makes linux a less ideal gaming platform is lack of games. There is NO technical reason why you can't play games correctly on Linux. Games like Unreal Tour. Doom 3 etc prove that. btw crappy ati linux drivers? how did you possibly miss the million posts everywhere on the net where you are warned that for Linux gaming do NOT use Ati?
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by FooBarWidget · 2004-10-05 03:31 · Score: 2, Insightful

Yeah so tell me, why do so many EXTREMELY Linux-critical posts on Slashdot get modded up? Even posts that claim that Linux-critical posts will get modded down, are modded up. You are either very ignorant, or lying.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 03:34 · Score: 0

Surprisingly?

He was expecting 20% of the Windows performance, but actually got 40%, or what?

Marketese...
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Rico_Suave · 2004-10-05 03:34 · Score: 2, Insightful

"(shame on id for yielding to MS and dropping win98 support!)"

Why? Win98 is ancient and deserves to be dropped - the sooner the better.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 03:36 · Score: 0

i think your system ram is just as much of a bottleneck. get 1gb at least.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Sevn · 2004-10-05 03:39 · Score: 1

It has to do with window managers, and whatever else you have running in the background. I run fluxbox and I don't try to make my home machine any kind of server. So every game run noticably faster on Linux. If you want a real mindphuck, explain why quake3 running under FreeBSD with Linux emulation is slightly faster than under native Linux. I've never seen that one satisfactorily explained.

--
For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by wheany · 2004-10-05 03:40 · Score: 2, Interesting

And having to to choose one kind of display card instead of another because one kind doesn't work well under Linux just proves your point, doesn't it?
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by drinkypoo · 2004-10-05 03:47 · Score: 1

Bzzzz! Synergy! -1 Buzzword.

Seriously though, the weak link in linux is the 3D support, probably due to the closed-source nature of the drivers.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 03:52 · Score: 0

The only game I recognize as running equal or better in Linux is Quake3.

Try NWN. I have an old (Celeron 600, TNT2) dual-boot machine in which it's almost unplayable under Windows, but reasonably smooth under Linux - especially after I created a separate runlevel for it that disables anything not necessary (no daemons, X starts the NWN executable directly, so no KDE/GNOME or other desktop stuff.)
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by jherekc · 2004-10-05 03:58 · Score: 1

Thats just rubbish. The Linux NVIDIA drivers are based on the same code as their Windows counterparts.

--
"lack of quality control is one of the pillars of slashdot"
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by SsShane · 2004-10-05 04:04 · Score: 1

If it makes you feel better, I'm a lurker with good karma that moderates frequently. I am not a Linux zealot (just a fan) and try to moderate based on the context and content of a message, without bias. The only thing I hate is when someone says "I'll prbably get modded to hell for this..." because they always get the opposite. I still don't moderate them negatively for that alone.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 04:11 · Score: 0

Actually, based on what I'm seeing, D3 is about 10FPS faster under Linux than XP on the same box. Haven't tried multiplayer yet, that's for tonight!
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 04:17 · Score: 0

Funny, I've always found the opposite to be true. I play Quake3 (Urban Terror mod) and Enemy Territory on Linux, principally because both are quite unplayable on the same machine running windows--which admittedly sucks big time (Duron 1000, 192MB pc100 RAM, GeForce2 GTS 64MB, SB Live!).

Both games are unplayable in Windows. Base quake3 runs fine, but Urban Terror sputters and freezes for ~500ms every few seconds, especially while turning. No issue under Linux, it runs, and does exactly what it should do. And I'm not running some minimalistic blackbox setup either, full Gnome, gkrellm, lots of ions, maybe a couple shells and other stuff up at the same time. No problem.

Exactly the same can be said about ET. I don't get the highest framerates (hardware being the limiting factor here), but it never drops below 30, and it's quite playable. Under windows, it's even worse than Urban Terror. Completely unplayable, it sputters everytime there's an explosion or when you shoot your gun.

With my hardware I KNOW Linux runs better than Windows (and yeah I check for spyware/viruses regularly, I'm speaking of a fresh install with maybe just a software firewall running, basically the same as what I have on Linux). But that's been my experience all along, Linux runs awesomely on older hardware. Frankly, if it runs better on older stuff than Windows, I have a hard time seeing why that would not be true on newer hardware... One of these days I'll have to upgrade and test that belief.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by fuzzix · 2004-10-05 04:22 · Score: 1

Disclaimer: I'm not one of these dillusional people who claim Linux can run Windows games faster than Windows itself under Wine.
Thanks be to $DEITY_OF_CHOICE that I'm not the only one who's noticed! While Wine(X)/Cedega have a decent enough list of titles when it comes to compatibility, the performance on some titles is atrocious...

On my PIII/700 I can play games like Half Life without major issues as the box far outstrips the minimum requirements for this game but a borderline case like say, GTAIII, where I just about match the recommended spec has very mixed results. Taking the example of GTAIII the compatibility is excellent. The interface, audio and so on react exactly as under Windows but I can only get an unbearable framerate - a graphics card upgrade had little effect... the performance is dropping somewhere else - at API level I guess.

I switched entirely to Linux over a year ago and I plan to sort out a new box (A64) to play DooM 3 - I suppose I'll also pick up UT2K3/4... Maybe I'll get GTAIII back as well :)
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Karn · 2004-10-05 04:23 · Score: 1

I have 3 copies of NWN, actually. The first one I bought from Tuxgames, one was a gift, and one was from Walmart. :) Sadly, my experience has been it runs quite a bit better under Windows, which I found out by playing the game in Windows after I had been playing in Linux for some time. I'm not certain why that is, but it is just my experience (XP2000+, 512MB DDR, Geforce 4 Ti 4200). Do you know of any 'official' benchmarks?

--

Why do I keep typing pythong?
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 04:23 · Score: 0

ATI's work just fine. They're slightly more convoluted to setup, but they work. The only problem I've had with an ATI was when one was DOA (woked for a short time, then screwed up).
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Afrosheen · 2004-10-05 04:30 · Score: 1

My results: 2148 frames in 50.3 seconds = 42.7fps. Now the second time I demo'ed it, I switched from KDE to IceWM. Results: 2148 frames in 48.6 seconds = 44.2fps. I ran it two more concurrent times which improved. 45.7 seconds @ 47fps and 45.8 seconds @ 46.9fps.

This is on Mandrake 10.1 with kernel 2.6.8.1-10mdk, Athlon 2800+, 768mb pc 2700, GeforceFX 5900 XT 128mb ram, lame ECS Nforce2 chipset.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 04:42 · Score: 0

probably because it links against BSD libc at runtime compared to GNU's Glibc which is far larger (and more featureful).
The difference in the libaries could explain it, either as a result of lower memory usage or a better optimised function call (sufficiant to cancel out the conversion penalty between kernel calls)
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Noginbump · 2004-10-05 04:46 · Score: 0, Offtopic

I am similar to you, but I actually post now and then. When someone mentions getting "modded to hell", I look for a reason that they should. I usually don't find one.

I try to avoid stuff to moderate that I feel strongly about: politics, religon, Han shooting first. It's hard to mod up a JarJar fan, after all.

Of course, I would moderate yours and my posts as "off-topic". :)

--
He who questions training, only trains himself at asking questions. -- The Sphinx, Mystery Men
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by blixel · 2004-10-05 04:48 · Score: 1

The only thing I hate is when someone says "I'll prbably get modded to hell for this..."

It sets the tone for what the poster is about to say. If someone says something negative about Linux, all the Linux zealots mod him down, and the moderators that actually moderate fairly just think he's ranting so they'll either ignore the message or mod it down. Zealots are hopeless - that's why they are zealots - and they will mod down everything that doesn't coincide with their extremely narrow minded view of the world. But by setting a tone for the message, it lets the fair moderators know that it's not just a rant.

I can attest to that. There are plenty of times where I would like to chime in with a statement (not a rant) about Linux. But I feel the need to put a disclaimer on my message, sugar coat it, and/or be sure to tie in some "fact" that such and such situation on Windows isn't any better. Sad - but that's how this forum works.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 04:53 · Score: 0

If your hardware is bleeding edge, of course the Windows drivers will be much better. A completely different case is when your hardware is old (the Linux drivers have had some time to catch up) and barely meets the minimum requirements of the game. I used an old computer to play Return to Castle Wolfenstein in both Windows and Linux and I remember having a lot less memory swap in Linux.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by TelJanin · 2004-10-05 04:58 · Score: 2, Insightful

All it means is that ATI sucks for 3D Linux gaming of any sort. For example, my printer spews out random ASCII characters every time I try to print from it in Windows. That doesn't mean that Windows sucks for printing, it means the printer's driver sucks.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 04:59 · Score: 0

The only problem I've had with an ATI was when one was DOA (woked for a short time, then screwed up).

So not DOA. That stands for Dead on Arrival, which your card clearly was not.

You can call me pedantic, but that don't make you right.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Sj0 · 2004-10-05 05:02 · Score: 1

Legacy support and the fact that it is actually more secure out of the box than either 2k or XP are compelling reasons to keep it around.

--
It's been a long time.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by TelJanin · 2004-10-05 05:03 · Score: 1

How on earth could this get modded informative?

If it's a server, it's got a bunch of daemons running in the backround, sucking up resources.
Some servers do need X.
Most video card makers only produce drivers for the GLX framework, which requires X
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by ohad_l · 2004-10-05 05:03 · Score: 1

No, that's not it... I'm running OpenBox, and it doesn't create a noticable performance hit (compared UT2004 to with Openbox or without). By the way, you don't even need an xterm. A good way to run games is with xinit - give the full path to the binary, and an X server will pop up running just your game (and shut down when you leave). Works particularily well if you want two X displays - one for the game, and one for other stuff (instant messaging, web-based UT server management and the like).

--
If it weren't for fog, the world would run at a really crappy framerate.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Sj0 · 2004-10-05 05:05 · Score: 1

Can Linux the OS be blamed for shitty drivers(from ATI?! big shock there to anyone with a few years experience outside of the radeon range) from another company? Besides, there are an increasing number of supported cards. Sure, yours may not be supported, but Nvidia isn't the only choice for OpenGL under Linux.

--
It's been a long time.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by TelJanin · 2004-10-05 05:05 · Score: 2, Insightful

Being closed-source has never stopped NVidia's drivers from being great.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by wheany · 2004-10-05 05:36 · Score: 2, Insightful

Well, if Linux only has shitty drivers for one brand of cards, that kind of diminishes the suitability of Linux for games. No matter who makes the drivers.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by drinkypoo · 2004-10-05 05:44 · Score: 1

It would be great if they would work on the latest, greatest, and custom-patched kernels reliably. They don't. That's not that great. Be nice if they'd work on the antiquated kernel versions as well...

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 06:45 · Score: 0

Are you sure you're not confusing the wine or winex benchmark with the native linux port benchmark? I'm too lazy to dig up the link on tomshardware, but it had something to do about windows gaming on linux through emulation*.

* Yes, yes, I know, Wine Is Not an Emulator
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Suriel · 2004-10-05 06:48 · Score: 0

I am sure there are tons more developers working on windows drivers than linux drivers in any consumer performance hardware company... Plus direct x is just good stuff.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by iMaple · 2004-10-05 07:08 · Score: 1

I use the linux box for websurfing, AIM, and as a file server, and the windows box (since it has a bigger monitor) for doing any programming homework and playing games.

Games is ok but why programming ? I first started using linux bcos I found it easier to program in Linux (believe it or not , I switched bcos of the middle click paste :) ) . I mean unless u use .Net why should programming homeworks in Windows be easier ? Not flaming , just curious
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by JudgeFurious · 2004-10-05 07:13 · Score: 1

And another one. Go mods!

I got Karma to burn boys, Karma to burn! There aren't enough of you out there to affect my Karma rating.

--
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Beowulf_Boy · 2004-10-05 07:45 · Score: 1

I use a program called DevC++ for most of my homework for classes, because its the same thing we have in our labs, and it makes it much easier.

Plus, I can't put a linux machine on the campus network, they register everything by MAC, and make me take it down to the tech's to get it checked out. They are afraid of "linux spreading virii on their network." Umm...Yeah.....
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by valkraider · 2004-10-05 08:05 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Mod parent up +1 insightful, +1 funny, +1 interesting, +1 underrated.

Mod parent down -1 offtopic, -1 overrated, -1 redundant, -1 flamebait.

Net? 8 moderators blew their wads....
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Sj0 · 2004-10-05 08:44 · Score: 1

Tell that to S3 et. al. who can't write decent drivers for WINDOWS. :P

--
It's been a long time.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by wheany · 2004-10-05 08:56 · Score: 1

Yeah, like S3 is really relevant in gaming these days.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Arcanix · 2004-10-05 09:42 · Score: 1

Apps that were designed with OpenGL (such as most id games) typically will run faster on linux. A DirectX native application though will often be quicker than a comparative OpenGL application because DirectX allows direct hardware access. OpenGL doesn't have this capability since it's platform independent, it still has to go through the system API and that incurs a performance penalty.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 10:14 · Score: 0

So, they register everything by MAC? BFD!

MACs don't change when you use Linux (unless you want them to), it's set in hardware on yor NIC, and that MAC is used by default.

Just install windows (dual boot it if you desire) on the machine you intend to use, have them register it, then go to your dorm and install Linux. Done and Done.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by captaineo · 2004-10-05 10:19 · Score: 1

I have a feeling that while Linux is probably faster at the "output" side of things (OpenGL rendering, memory management, etc), it might be hobbled at the "input" side (sampling the mouse location). I did some investigations years ago into why XFree86 feels so unresponsive compared to Windows, and discovered some truly horrible stuff going on with the mouse sampling (e.g. X ignoring or doubling mouse updates here and there). I don't know if the kernel side of mouse/keyboard input has been tuned for low latency either. This could easily lead to an impression of sluggishness even if the rendering speed is higher than on Windows.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by tsq · 2004-10-05 12:02 · Score: 1

Ironically enough, for a mod to say this post is `interesting' (ie modding up), s/he will be defeating the purpose of the post.

--
This sig is Y2K compliant.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Sj0 · 2004-10-05 12:37 · Score: 1

And S3s relevance is really relevant here.

To be honest, Intel has the largest slice ofthe market by volume, and they have working drivers for Linux. How's that for relevance?

--
It's been a long time.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 17:03 · Score: 0

Flamebait? WTF are you crackhead mods smokin dere?
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by suckmysav · 2004-10-05 17:08 · Score: 1

"XP2000+, 512MB DDR, Geforce 4 Ti 4200

Just a note Karn, but those were my exact machine specs up until about 6 weeks ago. Then I popped in an XP2400 and another 512Mb RAM and you would not believe the noticeable performance improvement, and it only cost me a coupla hundred Aussie bucks!

But you better hurry, because the t'bird Athlons are getting harder to come by these days.

--
"You can't fight in here, this is the war room!"
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 17:12 · Score: 0

And it looks like some funny bastard did just that :-)
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 18:11 · Score: 0

linux emulation is done at the syscall level. It still uses glibc.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by Karn · 2004-10-06 01:38 · Score: 1

I noticed terrible mouse tracking in Quake 3 with older versions of XFree86 (3.X), but ever since the DGA extension, I haven't really noticed a difference between mouse input on Windows and Linux. What version of X did you look into?

--

Why do I keep typing pythong?
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by captaineo · 2004-10-06 02:12 · Score: 1

This was a long time ago, I think it was either a very late XFree 3.3 or a very early 4.0.

I did traces using one of those kernel-level toolkits that logs interupts and system calls. The most significant problem I noticed was that the X server ignored something like 10% of the mouse interrupts. Also X would sometimes try to update the display twice during one monitor refresh. This causes the "sticky/jumpy" feeling of mouse movement in X compared to Windows. (laggy window movement and resizing is another, unrelated problem, caused by lack of synchronization between clients and the window manager)

I should note that I was just looking at the standard X desktop behavior. I did not investigate the DGA extension. Still I was surprised at how sub-optimal the default behavior was.

I was using a USB mouse which sent interrupts at a fixed frequency (120Hz I think). I tried dropping my monitor resolution so that I could use this as a refresh rate, and that made a big improvement.
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by TrancePhreak · 2004-10-07 03:59 · Score: 1

53.5fps, 1024x768 Ultra/High Quality (I get the same score for both)
Windows XP SP2, P4-3.2gHz C, 1GB DDR 400mHz, GeForce 5900 Ultra 256MB, Sound Blaster Audigy Platinum

--

-]Phreak Out[-
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by hollywoodcole · 2004-10-07 05:01 · Score: 1

Plus, I can't put a linux machine on the campus network, they register everything by MAC, and make me take it down to the tech's to get it checked out. They are afraid of "linux spreading virii on their network." Umm...Yeah.....
you are seriously dealing with some dumb tech people at your school(or the there just saying that for another reason) But just go and get you a router and only thing they will see is the router's hardware address and you will then be fine!
Re:I wonder if the hardware specs are the same... by JFitzsimmons · 2004-10-08 04:40 · Score: 1

Seriously, you should have just slapped them right there for calling them 'virii'. The word is VIRUSES. I hate that even more than I hate the misuse of the word their/there/they're and your/you're.

--
Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. -Anonymous

Nothing for you to see here. Please move along. by Realistic_Dragon · 2004-10-05 01:03 · Score: 5, Funny

Well, yes, but isn't that what the duct_tape_flashlight mod is for?

--
Beep beep.

Errm by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:03 · Score: 3, Funny

Game patch for WIndows, Linux version. Can someone tell me what the difference is?

Re:Errm by mirko · 2004-10-05 01:05 · Score: 2, Funny

Linux is a patch aimed as a Windows replacement for PC users ;)

--
Trolling using another account since 2005.
Re:Errm by freakmn · 2004-10-05 09:49 · Score: 1

I believe that what you are referring to is the fact that the Linux version of the .pak files are available as a patch to Windows servers, allowing Linux clients to join. From the FAQ:
The Linux paks were not included in the Win32 1.1 release. But you can drop the Linux game pak file in your base/ directory: Linux 1.1 game file for win32 servers

--
warning: This post is likely to contain gobs of dripping sarcasm. Consume at your own risk.

Decent info here. by will_die · 2004-10-05 01:03 · Score: 3, Funny

DUP and the really bad thing is that they are posted right after each other as seen here.

Re:Decent info here. by scambaiter · 2004-10-05 02:18 · Score: 1

hey, at least you can prepare a nice comment for the "linux doom3 released" story posted tomorrow.

--
sick of sigs... *sigh*

Well.. by TheRealMindChild · 2004-10-05 01:04 · Score: 1, Informative

CmdrTaco + Normal Day = Dupe

http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/10/04/ 2122236&tid=127&tid=106

CmdrTaco is like that boss we all had that swore he was the best in the world, but in fact he was approaching the worst... but you couldnt fire his incompotent ass because he is the head cheese

--

"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson

Re:Well.. by wagemonkey · 2004-10-05 01:11 · Score: 1, Funny

Hmm, maybe we should call him "David Brent" from now on?
Re:Well.. by Deaths+Hand · 2004-10-05 01:12 · Score: 0, Offtopic

To be fair to CmdrTaco, the original article in the link above doesn't show up on my main page on Slashdot, so I never saw the original article either. I just went back through Monday's articles and it doesn't show up there. Only when I click on the "Games" section does it actually appear. Weird. I haven't set my main page prefs to filter any articles out, so it should be displayed. Hmm, slashdot bug perhaps.
Re:Well.. by Shadowlion · 2004-10-05 01:24 · Score: 1

I haven't set my main page prefs to filter any articles out, so it should be displayed.

Don't worry, that doesn't work either. I have my homepage set to filter out several categories of stories, and to my knowledge, not a single story that fits the criteria has been filtered.
Re:Well.. by gerddie · 2004-10-05 01:29 · Score: 3, Informative

Hmm, slashdot bug perhaps.
Certainly not - not all articles make it to the main page. Maybe what's missing is an "All sections" page.
Re:Well.. by Jupiter9 · 2004-10-05 01:52 · Score: 0

Because he puts out dupe posts now and then makes him a bad boss? That doesn't make a lot of sense. How does that effect his employees in a direct way other then perhaps set a bad example. Shoot, if that was my bosses big problem, I'd have it made in the shade. My point: it's not really a big deal, get over it.

--

--
Does anyone remember /\/\/\?
Re:Well.. by numbski · 2004-10-05 02:13 · Score: 1

You can set all articles to appear in your main page if you so request it to in your preferences. FYI.

--
Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).
Re:Well.. by Dever · 2004-10-05 08:23 · Score: 1

"CmdrTaco is like that boss we all had that swore he was the best in the world, but in fact he was approaching the worst... but you couldnt fire his incompotent ass because he is the head cheese"
like....Commander David Brent?

--
- I'd prefer not to.

ATI Drivers by kaleco · 2004-10-05 01:07 · Score: 5, Informative

The ID release information suggests that ATI might finally get their finger out and are working towards decent Linux drivers. This would surely be a great contribution to Linux, even for non-Doomers ;)

--
Prosperity is only an instrument to be used, not a deity to be worshipped. Calvin Coolidge

Re:ATI Drivers by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:27 · Score: 1, Interesting

ATI better provide drivers that _work_ for a chance.

I've read the anandtech article about Linux GPU performance and honestly, I still do not know how to get my ATI Radeon 9700 Pro to work properly under SuSe. It's a pain in the butt!

I've never had such problems with the NVIDIA card I had before.

Basically ATI has been an infinite source of frustration for me, because I cannot get their card to work with opengl acceleration properly.
Re:ATI Drivers by sundru · 2004-10-05 02:01 · Score: 3, Informative

Yeah i got a ati 9800 pro and the fglrx drivers suck big time , quake 3 comes up with a black screen with something like ascii symbols moving.

Have a look at
http://www.petitiononline.com/atipet/petition.html /

to meet other frustrated people . i even sent a couple of emails to ATI folks
Re:ATI Drivers by essreenim · 2004-10-05 02:26 · Score: 1

I agree. The ONLY thing that mad me buy my MSI GeForce5700 ober a Radion was Linux drivers.
Re:ATI Drivers by wowbagger · 2004-10-05 02:44 · Score: 2, Insightful

I will beleive ATI will release decent drivers when I load the driver on my machine and it works.

X.org V6.8 has been out for how long now, and in pre-release for how long, and yet, ATI does not have a build of their drivers for it. All the major distros have gone to X.org over XFree86, and yet ATI is not supporting the current release of X.org - this would be like them not supporting DirectX 9 for Windows.

Their drivers do not support the tuner subsystem on their cards, nor is it possible to get the GATOS stuff to work with their drivers. Y'know, the tuners that are one of the big differentiators between the ATI cards and the nVidia cards?

In many ways, the only thing worse than no support is support which hath only one buttocks, to paraphrase the Boomer Bible. If you know you will get NO support, you can at least eliminate them from the list of cards you will get. But half-assed support makes you think that, just perhaps, if you give them another chance, they might just support you enough this time - like victim of spousal abuse giving their partner "one more chance because they really do love me, honest!"

It is truly unfortunate - you have the choice of binary-only support from nVidia, binary support from ATI, or source support for old cards.

--
www.eFax.com are spammers
Re:ATI Drivers by daemonc · 2004-10-05 03:16 · Score: 1

Decent Linux drivers?

At this point I would be overjoyed to just have working drivers for my Radeon.

I have yet to get any ATI dirvers to compile correctly on any version of Fedora.

If this rumor is true, it might just be enough to keep me from selling the Radeon annd buying a GeForce...

--
All that we see or seem is but a dream within a dream.
Re:ATI Drivers by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 03:49 · Score: 0

Fixed link:
http://www.petitiononline.com/atipet/petition.html
Re:ATI Drivers by thehunger · 2004-10-05 04:02 · Score: 1

> I still do not know how to get my ATI Radeon 9700
> Pro to work properly under SuSe. It's a pain in
> the butt!

Thats because the current ATI driver only supports kernel 2.4, while SUSE is using 2.6 by default.

It only goes to show how far behind ATI are with their drivers. Even the latest driver that they put up on their site a few days ago is 2.4 only.
Re:ATI Drivers by Skevin · 2004-10-05 05:54 · Score: 2, Informative
Even though my general experience is that ATI drivers have traditionally been a little dodgy, I've gone with SuSE because they have their own special fglrx drivers and instructions which don't involve quite as many steps as the normal methods of installation... plus you don't have to recompile the whole thing. My experience with games on ATI is as follows:
- FLGRX 3.7: Screensavers work fine, but that's about it.
- FLGRX 3.9: Winex still crashes, UT2004 still crashes, but Neverwinter Nights runs fine, with a few bugs.
- FLGRX 3.11 (what I use currently with a mobility FireGL T2): NWN runs beautifully with all the bells and whistles (1024x768 at 32 bit). UT2004 runs okay at 1024x768x32 with some high quality textures and dynamic lighting @ ~28 FPS (UT2004 used to crash a lot on my ATI-based setups, but it seemed to stabilize with the UT2004 3323 patch). Winex still barfs on me
- FLGRX 3.14.1: This is the latest and greatest(?) driver you can get for SuSE. Prelminary testing shows Alien Swarm runs decent now, but Winex still barfs on me. I will try the Doom installer later today, and respond with my own benchmarks on a 2GHz T42 Thinkpad with 2G and a 128MB Mobility FireGL T2.
- If you just follow SuSE's instructions at the link I provided, you should be fine.
  
  Solomon Chang
--
"Twice half-assed makes an ass whole." --Solomon K. Chang
Re:ATI Drivers by fstanchina · 2004-10-05 08:04 · Score: 1

Thats because the current ATI driver only supports kernel 2.4 [...]
Bullshit. I've been using the fglrx driver on 2.6 since version 3.2.8 IIRC, it needed a couple of patches but it worked. Recent versions don't need any changes. I maintain Debian packages of the fglrx driver and I have dozens of users on 2.6 in case you need proof.
Re:ATI Drivers by thebagel · 2004-10-05 13:08 · Score: 1

It works out-of-the-box on Gentoo (ATI + X.Org).

The only reason I haven't switched by Jakhel · 2004-10-05 01:09 · Score: 3, Interesting

from XP to linux is the lack of game developers support for linux, the rest of the software (excluding photoshop) that I use is free open sourced. Now both ID and Epic have released linux versions of their games. If valve and others follow suite, I will definately be switching OS sooner.

Re:The only reason I haven't switched by Zemplar · 2004-10-05 01:19 · Score: 0

I'm a recent convet, and it was worth it.

For Photoshop look work into the GIMP as a good free alternative or Codeweavers Crossover to run Photoshop on Linux.
Re:The only reason I haven't switched by j.bellone · 2004-10-05 02:28 · Score: 1

If Valve releases a native Linux version of Steam, this computer will be formatted faster than you can say Steam. But I highly doubt it, for the simple fact that Half-Life 2 is running DirectX9, so don't expect a native Linux version from them.

--
I'm f#$king magic!
Re:The only reason I haven't switched by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:35 · Score: 0

Half Life 2 is has a lot of DX9 specific code. You won't be seeing a Linux or MacOS X version any time soon. Having said that, if the game lives up to its hype it might be worth keeping XP just for it.

Turbo Smorgreff
Re:The only reason I haven't switched by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 04:45 · Score: 0

If you already own XP and you can use it well, I see no reason for you to switch to Linux.
Re:The only reason I haven't switched by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 06:00 · Score: 0

Who cares, really? "Oh, I'd switch to GNU/Hurd if it'd get me a blowjob from the head Cheerleader." Nobody but the Microsoft haters care if you use Windows or not. Honestly.
Re:The only reason I haven't switched by AigariusDebian · 2004-10-05 07:43 · Score: 1

Valve has specifically stated that they will insure that HL2 works fully under Cedega. Valve even has several people on the team devoted to fixing glitches in Linux under Cedega.
Re:The only reason I haven't switched by j.bellone · 2004-10-05 09:21 · Score: 1

I'm sorry, but I'll believe it. Valve tends to give false promises.

--
I'm f#$king magic!

DUP! by JDizzy · 2004-10-05 01:09 · Score: 4, Informative

I swear! The editors cannot search, and shame on Taco since he knows better!

http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/10/0 4/ 2122236&tid=127&tid=106

--
It isn't a lie if you belive it.

Re:DUP! by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:21 · Score: 0

Maybe in their quest to be the first to break the news that mistakes are made in their haste. It works most of the time for CBS.
Re:DUP! by PetoskeyGuy · 2004-10-05 02:08 · Score: 1

Give him a break. Sure they were posted less then 24 hours after each other with no other stories between but look at the headlines...

Doom 3 for Linux Released
Posted by CmdrTaco on Tuesday October 05, @09:01AM

Linux Doom 3 Client Released
Posted by Zonk on Monday October 04, @06:30PM ... then again maybe the editors get paid based on the number of replies to their stories.
Re:DUP! by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:22 · Score: 0

It seems your post is also a duplicate. You were beaten by 5 minutes, and judging by the length of your message it shouldn't have taken 5 minutes to write so no excuses ;)
Re:DUP! by Hieronymus+Howard · 2004-10-05 02:45 · Score: 2, Informative

The first one wasn't posted to the Slashdot front page. Since I, for one, don't usually read games.slashdot.org, I this was the first that I saw about it.
Re:DUP! by MacGod · 2004-10-05 03:05 · Score: 1

Enough whining about dupes! Oh, heaven forbid! A story gets on here twice!

If it's a dupe, just don't read the second one! It's not hurting you, and nobody's forcing you to read it. I know a "DUPE!" post equals an instant +5 for some unfathomable reason, but please resist the urge!

Slashdot is free for many of us, and cheap for the rest, so really, the fiscal loss, and the emotional pain and agony should be minimum. If you see something is a dupe, save your (and our) time, and just ignore the second posting.

--
"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one " -Albert Einstein
Re:DUP! by drinkypoo · 2004-10-05 03:50 · Score: 1

And if you cared about games, you'd read games.slashdot.org, and this dupe would be redundant to you. Since you don't read games, it must not be important to you. The point still stands.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:DUP! by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 03:58 · Score: 0

then again maybe the editors get paid based on the number of replies to their stories.

Actually they do, albeit indirectly.

More comments --> more ad exposures --> potentially more ad clicks.

One would suspect that this is why so many stories are thinly veiled trolls (eg. "SCO this, SCO that"), or indignation about other troll articles (eg. "Look everybody! X says Lunix si teh suxx0rz!!!"), and why things like the "Politics" section was added (get people to yammer for thousands of posts about Bush, Michael Moore, Iraq and other tedious but inflammatory old topics).
Re:DUP! by Sj0 · 2004-10-05 05:18 · Score: 1

That's the crazyist thing I've ever heard. I'm a freaking indie game developer and I only hop onto games.slashdot.org once in a while!

--
It's been a long time.
Re:DUP! by drinkypoo · 2004-10-05 05:30 · Score: 1

That seems pretty lame to me. I'm just a gamer, and a casual one at that (I spend a lot of time at it, but not a lot of money) and I read games basically every day. There's usually not much there that interests me, the bar for submissions to games seems to be a lot lower than the rest of slashdot, but I still check it over. It's your call what you read, of course.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:DUP! by mabinogi · 2004-10-05 10:45 · Score: 1

I was unaware that games.slashdot.org was required reading....

Do those of us who don't check it every five minutes have to give back our consoles or something?

--
Advanced users are users too!
Re:DUP! by drinkypoo · 2004-10-05 11:01 · Score: 1

No, but you sure can't bitch about missing gaming-related news that's been posted on slashdot.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:DUP! by mabinogi · 2004-10-05 12:11 · Score: 1

but no one was doing that....

bah...it's a silly argument anyway ;)

It's a dupe and the editors should have known better regardless of who looks at games.slashdot.org and who just looks at the front page. THEY should at least be aware of what's posted in all the sections - especially when it's a dupe of the last article posted in a section.

--
Advanced users are users too!

Who cares??? by Isldeur · 2004-10-05 01:09 · Score: 5, Funny

"the Linux edition of Doom 3 has been released by ID Software."

Who cares about Doom?! I've been playing Duke Nukem Forever here on GNU Hurd for months!

Re:Who cares??? by BenjyD · 2004-10-05 01:12 · Score: 1

On your 200 MIPS SparcStation-5?
Re:Who cares??? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 06:48 · Score: 0

Me too! With a BitBoys graphics card!
Re:Who cares??? by alien_blueprint · 2004-10-05 10:53 · Score: 1

And it's written in Perl 6, right?

Had it yesterday. by Sp4c3+C4d3t · 2004-10-05 01:11 · Score: 1, Interesting

I got it yesterday. It performed a lot better (smoother looking) than on Windows, so I was happy.

--
Happy New Year, it's 1984!

Re:Had it yesterday. by essreenim · 2004-10-05 02:30 · Score: 1

Hey,
Could you send me some details about what you use.
I want to set it up at home so I want to be sure there are no troubles ehen I begin.

Im using Slackware 10.0 2.4.26 - in x86 mode with Via onboard sound card, GeForce FX5700 VTD 256, 512 mb ram,
Atrhlon64 3000+ s754. **ALSA** sound

Im pretty sure I need to download OSS if I want to play. ALSA is not supported by DOOM3.

Any issues/pointers you can give me regarding OSS would be appreciated....

Im using Linux official nV drivers (61.11)
Re:Had it yesterday. by Tyreth · 2004-10-05 02:36 · Score: 1

Seems to run a bit worse in linux for me. Any ideas why that might by?

Esp in the more cpu intensive areas, rotating my view left or right has jolts, but moving forward and backwards doesn't.
Re:Had it yesterday. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:39 · Score: 0

I take you're using the superproprietary NVidia drivers, right? What card is it? Those of us who trusted ATI and don't want to taint their kernel will have to wait for the DRI drivers to polish the 9200 support. I bought an ATI card because NVidia's 2D output looks like sh*t, but maybe it wasn't that wise a decision after all.
Re:Had it yesterday. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 03:33 · Score: 0

Alsa has an OSS compatibility layer, you probably only need to load "snd_pcm_oss" and "snd_mixer_oss" modules...
Re:Had it yesterday. by jherekc · 2004-10-05 04:02 · Score: 1

It's called OSS Emulation which is an option for ALSA when you compile it.

--
"lack of quality control is one of the pillars of slashdot"
Re:Had it yesterday. by essreenim · 2004-10-06 04:43 · Score: 1

Thanks and Anonymous coward too ..
Apologies slashdot for the side track.
Look fwd to trting it out

ATI by island_tux · 2004-10-05 01:12 · Score: 0

I hope ATI keeps their promises about fixing their drivers. Cause when you kind of think about it, having Linux ro run perfectly on a $ 3000 Notebook with just the Graphics Card (ATI Mobility 9700 256MB) lagging !! that plainly sucks ! :(

--
What Sig

Re:dupe by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:14 · Score: 0

That surprises you? A significant portion of the Doom/Quake/Counter Strike playing world posts here.

A few special notes by GweeDo · 2004-10-05 01:15 · Score: 5, Informative

Be sure that your X Server is set to 24 bit mode. 16 bit mode won't workie. Also, it uses OSS for sound output. So all of us ALSA users had better have OSS emulation. Hope those two things help.

--
Unstable Apps: Our Android Apps Don't Suck

Re:A few special notes by Cyn · 2004-10-05 01:44 · Score: 1

Isn't OSS emulation an option in the kernel config for ALSA drivers, and hasn't it been for a while now?

I'm too lazy (read: should be working) to go check.

--
cyn, free software and *nix operating systems enthusiast.
Re:A few special notes by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 03:26 · Score: 0

Thank you, I was getting an error that OpenGL couldn't be initialized - I changed from 16bpp to 24 bppp and it works great :)
Re:A few special notes by fuck_this_shit · 2004-10-05 05:13 · Score: 0, Troll

The need for hints like these is why Linux still sucks.
Re:A few special notes by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 06:29 · Score: 0

It was just a helpful reminder, not a hint. OSS emulation is very well documented and not hard to set up at all. Oh and when you compile the module for OSS emulation, it doesn't force you to restart all of Linux like Windows because it can be inserted into a running kernel.
Re:A few special notes by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 06:51 · Score: 0

That means folks with the envy24 chipset (ice1712) still won't be able to play id linux games?
Mmap issues with rtcw, rtcw:et, quake3 and now doom 3? I would have guessed they'd found a workaround by now (perhaps by using ALSA).
Re:A few special notes by sploo22 · 2004-10-05 10:14 · Score: 1

Not to mention that most modern distros have it configured by default for backwards compatibility. If you're not savvy enough to modify your kernel, you don't have to worry about it anyway.

--
Karma: Segmentation fault (tried to dereference a null post)
Re:A few special notes by Mr.+Hankey · 2004-10-05 20:05 · Score: 1

And the need for hints such as those at the following URL:

http://www.lavasoftsupport.com/index.php?&act=ST &f =24&t=22661

are why Windows still sucks IMO, and probably always will. I'm not saying that you're 100% wrong, Linux probably isn't for you. Linux is for those who enjoy computing, not those who tolerate it. I'm just happy to have the choice. I'm even happier now that I have a native Doom 3 client.

(FWIW, I just spent entirely too long getting rid of that @!$*^# VX2 spyware from someone's computer. Your post was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.)

--
GPL: Free as in will
Re:A few special notes by fuck_this_shit · 2004-10-05 22:06 · Score: 1

You are right, Linux isn't for me. FreeBSD is. And the suggestion in the light of security concerns would be OS X. Or to isntall anti spyware in Windows, something much easier than fiddling with the abovementioned problems in Linux to get a game running.
Re:A few special notes by Mr.+Hankey · 2004-10-06 20:05 · Score: 1

Whatever works for you. I have FreeBSD 4 and 5 in VMware on my desktop, with FreeBSD 5 on a partition on my laptop, but prefer Linux based systems for general use. FWIW, the native Doom 3 client required no fiddling around on my system outside of copying over the data files. It works with the saved games I made under Cedega too, which is quite a nice touch.

I'm curious though; has the Linux Doom 3 binary been tried with the FreeBSD Linux emulation layer, or perhaps the Windows binary on any variant of Wine that runs on an x86 *BSD? It'd be interesting to see how it performs in comparison to a Linux kernel based system on the same hardware. The iBCS layer in Linux is quite efficient, I imagine FreeBSD's Linux emulation layer should be as well.

--
GPL: Free as in will

Re:Jon Carmack, eh? by mirko · 2004-10-05 01:15 · Score: 2, Insightful

Carmack could have been working for NASA or the US military, but instead he simply sits around coding violent computer games.

Seems that you should have taken another example...

--
Trolling using another account since 2005.

Linux for games? Hahaha-hey wait. by Faust7 · 2004-10-05 01:16 · Score: 3, Insightful

This ought to go a long way towards legitimizing Linux as a gaming platform. It's Doom 3, for god's sake. Hard to get bigger than that. As long as they're able to standardize installation across some of the most popular distros.

--
The coolest voice ever.

Re:Linux for games? Hahaha-hey wait. by kayak334 · 2004-10-05 01:42 · Score: 1

One big name game isn't going to go very far in legitimizing Linux as a gaming platform. Consistancy of big name releases for Linux is going to go a long way towards legitimizing Linux as a gaming platform. If, for example, Half Life 2 were to also come out for Linux in the near future, that, combined with the Doom3 release, would go a long way.

You aren't going to get a gamer base with a few big name games. It takes a lot, and they have to work as well as they do in Windows.
Re:Linux for games? Hahaha-hey wait. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:03 · Score: 0

This ought to go a long way towards legitimizing Linux as a gaming platform. It's Doom 3, for god's sake. Hard to get bigger than that.
Am I the only one that thinks Doom 3 is the most overhyped game in the history of video games? I played it for a weekend and got thoroughly bored with it. I'm looking forward to a real game: Battlefield 2. There were three games I really got into because of mods, Quake (due to TeamFortress), Half-Life (due to TeamFortress Classic and later Counter-Strike), and Battlefield 1942 (due to Desert Combat). These three games have occupied 95% of my gaming time over the last 7 years or so.

Pretty half-assed attempt by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:16 · Score: 0, Redundant

No AMD64 builds, no ATI support, no ALSA, stereo sound only. meh..

Re:Pretty half-assed attempt by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:35 · Score: 0

But if they hadn't it ported that fast you probably would also have screemed bloody murder. Pretty hard for id to get it right for you, eh?
Re:Pretty half-assed attempt by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:04 · Score: 0

Read the howto, dumbass. ATI stuff not working is ATI's fault, not ID's.
Re:Pretty half-assed attempt by HoneyBunchesOfGoats · 2004-10-05 02:10 · Score: 1

Do you see any other games currently shipping with AMD64 builds? There's currently one, and it's a joint effort by AMD and Atari to sell people on 64-bit gaming, but it fails to make its case.

ATi is the one to blame for their poor support of *nix.

As for sound issues, there were software patent issues with Creative over 3d sound, which might have something to do with it. I don't know about the ALSA vs. OSS thing though.
Re:Pretty half-assed attempt by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:44 · Score: 0

Ok, you and the post after yours. Let me get this straight. They've spent a lot of man hours porting the stuff to Linux, a project which makes them exactly $0 and you come to complain here? Fork off dude, give the guys a break. 64bit port, yes, for 3 people using it that might be interested in games. The ATI problem, well, blame ATI not id.

And don't get me started on the sound issue. Those bastards from Creative Labs pulled some SCO shit to force them to use their sound engine (search for Carmacks reverse on google), which, of course, doesn't port to Linux.

If anything, thank the people involved and give them time to improve an already excellent product. If gaming is such a priority for you get a PS2 or install XP.
Re:Pretty half-assed attempt by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 04:42 · Score: 0

The time will come--within 7 years--that no one will have X86 on the desktop and it will only be in portable devices. AMD64 is the future of all PCs as soon as games start pushing past 32-bit addressing limits, which will be very soon given the exponential growth of game requirements over time and that even Doom 3 already takes advantage of a gig if you have it.

I don't see why iD doesn't make an amd64 build now to flush out their flow and give people more reason to try it out. That way some of us don't have to struggle getting a 32-bit environment working either.

oh no, not again... by nappingcracker · 2004-10-05 01:20 · Score: 4, Interesting

once again Linux seems to get the short end. Im was (and am) really pleased that iD was supporting Linux, but it seems that once again Linux is the afterthought. Stereo sound for Doom 3? It was fine for the original quake, throw on some stereo headphones and get scared stiff; stereo sound does not cut it with this game. No 64bit build? cut off Linux's nuts a bit more, why dont you?

time will tell, and maybe these things will come, but most of the time these things loose steam as the team loses motivation and counts $$$.

Isnt it easier to develop for Linux, and port to windows? This way everything works in Linux, and if it works in Linux it cant be that hard to tie into windows? Easier said than done, sure, but easier than porting from windows to Linux.

I hope they take time to polish the Linux release and do not half ass it.

--
|plastic....or gasoline?|

Re:oh no, not again... by pgrst · 2004-10-05 01:34 · Score: 5, Insightful

time will tell, and maybe these things will come, but most of the time these things loose steam as the team loses motivation and counts $$$.

you say that like it's a bad thing. ID is a business, not a charity. The economics are probably very simple. The Windows version will likely turn a profit several orders of magnitude larger than a linux version.

If I worked for ID I know which version I would concentrate on.....
Re:oh no, not again... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:52 · Score: 1, Insightful

Isnt it easier to develop for Linux, and port to windows? This way everything works in Linux, and if it works in Linux it cant be that hard to tie into windows? Easier said than done, sure, but easier than porting from windows to Linux.

Uh, why? Why should Linux to Windows be easier than Windows to Linux?
Re:oh no, not again... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:55 · Score: 0

lol try to compare visual studio.net 2003 to GCC + vi

and yes, emacs sucks even more
Re:oh no, not again... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:24 · Score: 0

Yeah, Windoze programmers are too braindead to figure out the powerful GCC + Vim/Emacs combo. That's okay though. You mouse jockeys can get anus-raped by Gates and Monkey Boy Ballmer for all I care. Just don't come crying when your source code gets stolen from the latest Windoze worm of the week. Valve Software anyone?
Re:oh no, not again... by Teogue · 2004-10-05 02:36 · Score: 1

Most real developers hate VS. If you need to be coddled by a nice IDE linux has several that do a more than adequate job. KDevelop and Anjuta (which I use when I feel like being coddled) are the most notable.

As for GCC, it does not automatically find everything for you like VS, but that is a good thing. It is one more step towards knowing what is in your code. If you don't know enough to get your compiler flags right or at least use a makefile, then you most likely are not a decent programmer. In which case VS will hold your hand and put your flags in for you, but I suggest you take the time to learn what is being compiled into your code. You can probably do away with a large chunk of space on disk and in memory.

--
Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
Re:oh no, not again... by frission · 2004-10-05 03:53 · Score: 1

i don't know why everyone is freaking out about the 5.1, believe me a dark room and headphones will do wonders to scare the crap out of you.
Re:oh no, not again... by droleary · 2004-10-05 04:59 · Score: 0

The Windows version will likely turn a profit several orders of magnitude larger than a linux version.

I'm betting just about every other platform will be an order of magnitude larger than the Linux market. If I worked for them, Linux would not be even a second priority; it makes no sense. They should have done a Mac version first; target the only other major commercial platform that users can't boot into Windows to play the game. That code could then have been leveraged for a Linux version, but even a console version would make more business sense than Linux. It's not like id needs the geek creds, either. This is a big business misstep, and it only ensures I will be buying UT2004 and not DOOM3.
Re:oh no, not again... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 06:19 · Score: 1, Informative

This is a big business misstep, and it only ensures I will be buying UT2004 and not DOOM3.
Oops. UT2004 is available for Linux too. Was available from Day 1. Obviously these guys are busy making a "big business misstep" too. Now where are you going to take your non-Linux dollars?
Re:oh no, not again... by TheDredd · 2004-10-05 06:33 · Score: 1

If I worked for ID I know which version I would concentrate on.....

Yeah! The Amiga version of course!
Re:oh no, not again... by BenjyD · 2004-10-05 11:48 · Score: 1

I always thought that Id 'wasted' their development time on Linux versions because they wanted to get the Linux users playing their games. Linux users are likely to be either server admins who will set up decent multiplayer servers, improving the online game for the Windows gamers or programmers who are more likely to contribute to the mod scene.
Re:oh no, not again... by droleary · 2004-10-05 12:33 · Score: 1

Oops. UT2004 is available for Linux too. Was available from Day 1. Obviously these guys are busy making a "big business misstep" too. Now where are you going to take your non-Linux dollars?

You're clearly not very bright, so I'm not sure why you're being moderated up. I don't have "non-Linux dollars". To put it in a manner your mind can grasp, I have Linux dollars for my Linux server and Mac dollars for my Mac desktop. When something is released with the commercially misguided target of a Linux desktop, it naturally will not be purchased by me. It does me no harm that UT came out for Linux, but it does me no benefit either, excepting maybe that I find it a bit cooler that it's a nice, portable game engine. Contrast the actual geek creds UT earns by doing that with how DOOM3 is hitting the market. So your pointing out that UT is being done right in no way invalidates my assertion that DOOM3 is being done wrong.
Re:oh no, not again... by droleary · 2004-10-05 12:50 · Score: 1

Linux users are likely to be either server admins who will set up decent multiplayer servers, improving the online game for the Windows gamers or programmers who are more likely to contribute to the mod scene.

I see zero evidence to back up that logic. A server is a server, and if they can put it out for the Linux variant of Unix, there is no reason they shouldn't be putting it out for the BSD variant of Unix that commercially ships more units than all other Unix boxes combined (read: Mac OS X). Also, to my knowledge, most mod developers use Windows as their primary platform. Feel free to correct me with some actual links to the contrary, if what you say is indeed true.

Re:Jon Carmack, eh? by JDevers · 2004-10-05 01:20 · Score: 1

Wasn't GLQuake released more for the 3Dfx Voodoo cards? I owned a Virge GX and I definitely don't remember it being able to do much besides look goofy in PCWorld's 3D benchmark...

Do I have to pay twice? by a_nonamiss · 2004-10-05 01:21 · Score: 4, Insightful

Please forgive my ignorance, but would I have to buy a seperate version for Linux, or does my serial number for the Windows version somehow allow me to download the Linux binary?

Not that this question isn't entirely academic, because my Linux box isn't capable of running Doom 3 anyways, but I am just curious how they are handling this.

--
-Arthur
Cave ne ante ullas catapultas ambules

Re:Do I have to pay twice? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:28 · Score: 5, Informative

does my serial number for the Windows version somehow allow me to download the Linux binary?

There's no serial number check - anyone can download the game binary. However it's useless without the game data files which you'll have to copy from a windows install or from the CDs.
Re:Do I have to pay twice? by mahdi13 · 2004-10-05 01:49 · Score: 1

Which might be a bad mistake for id, not having a serial-check at all. Now all the butt-pirates need to worry about is getting the pak files

Shouldn't the serial key be required for online play? (I've never played Doom3 online so I don't know)

--
"Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
Re:Do I have to pay twice? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:56 · Score: 0

Oh, sorry - I thought he meant did he have to enter his serial number to actually get the download. Which you don't.

By the sounds of it you *do* need the serial to play but not the CD in the drive - I haven't had a chance to play with it myself yet.
Re:Do I have to pay twice? by mahdi13 · 2004-10-05 02:39 · Score: 1

I installed it last night, copied the base/ directory over to /usr/local/games/doom3/base and fired off doom3, didn't once ask for a serial-number

unless it grabbed the serial from my Windows install when I copied over the base/ directory (I extraced the pak files so I don't know what was all in that base/ directory)

--
"Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
Re:Do I have to pay twice? by tricops · 2004-10-05 02:57 · Score: 1

It creates a "doomkey" file in the base directory when it is run and you enter the key for the first time. I would imagine the linux version would have asked for the key if that had not been there. This is exactly how it was done with quake3.

With that in mind... I wonder if they have it fixed this time so it doesn't need a copy of the key file in every mod directory you play in. I always thought that was incredibly dumb. (It would ask you for the key everytime you played a new mod...)

--
(\(\
(^v^)
(")")
This is the cute vorpal bunny virus, copy to your sig or runaway, runaway in fear!
Re:Do I have to pay twice? by rpdillon · 2004-10-05 03:32 · Score: 2, Informative

To answer your question, the install*does* go through without asking, but the first time you play *online* it asks you to provide the serial number.
Re:Do I have to pay twice? by mvdw · 2004-10-05 16:24 · Score: 1

With that in mind... I wonder if they have it fixed this time so it doesn't need a copy of the key file in every mod directory you play in. I always thought that was incredibly dumb. (It would ask you for the key everytime you played a new mod...)
$ cd /usr/local/games/doom3 $ for d in $(find . -type d) ; do cp $key $d ; done

It's not really all that hard, is it folks??
Re:Do I have to pay twice? by tricops · 2004-10-05 16:44 · Score: 1

Right, because a) I do so much batch programming that I have the syntax memorized (I still use XP for games), and b) that's so convenient when you connect to a new mod type you haven't played before and it creates the new directory, downloads the modfiles, and asks you for a key (well, with the smaller modtypes anyway - with bigger mods I know you have to download/install it separately anyway).

So no it isn't that hard, but that's ignoring the main point. That is, yes it is a stupid design and it is annoying when it could have been done differently/better very easily.

id has made some neat games, but their interface/etc design decisions have been lacking in some areas.

--
(\(\
(^v^)
(")")
This is the cute vorpal bunny virus, copy to your sig or runaway, runaway in fear!

Re:Jon Carmack, eh? by Gentlewhisper · 2004-10-05 01:21 · Score: 1

Erm...

I swear I saw this before.

Are you sure you own the IP to this post?

--
Online backup with Mozy, sounds like Ozzie, but more!

Dumb question by DrXym · 2004-10-05 01:22 · Score: 3, Interesting

But since the Linux version doesn't care about copy protection, shouldn't ID release a patch that also allows the Win32 version to run without the CD? Make it so you have to have the CD and a valid key to apply the patch, but after that it works without it.

Re:Dumb question by FinestLittleSpace · 2004-10-05 01:41 · Score: 1

I feelt hat the protection on the windows copies could be much more of a publisher's descision than the developers.

thinking about it, mass piracy (like it doesnt happen anyway...) on windows will have a much bigger sales impact than on linux... so obviously they're not as bothered....
Re:Dumb question by DrXym · 2004-10-05 01:50 · Score: 2, Insightful

Yes, but in this instance has a CD key in addition to copy protection. What's it matter that I have the disc inserted thereafter, so long as I've fed the thing a validated key.
If it wants to verify the disc is copy protected it can do it during the key validation. Thereafter it should really make no difference.
Besides copy protection is a joke. It takes literally a few hours at most for someone to crack a game - I'm sure Doom 3 is already available over P2P in cracked versions - and I know there are cracks on GameCopyWorld. But I'd rather trust ID to produce a CD-free version that Joe R00t. If
As I see it, copy protection at play time is a pain in the ass, especially as so many games require a key or serial number to play.
Re:Dumb question by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:52 · Score: 0

Windows users are used to ignoring licenses.
Re:Dumb question by FinestLittleSpace · 2004-10-05 01:59 · Score: 1

As I said, Copy protection keeps the execs happy. Anyone who believes that it work's is a pratt. Still, if you wanna stop someone copying it for a friend, it's better than nothing at all...
Re:Dumb question by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:25 · Score: 0

Doom 3 was there in a nice DVD edition (no disk required when running) on the day it was officially released, even before it had arrived in stores.

I have been forced many times to go out and find a no-cd release because I couldn't get the official CD I bought to run. It makes you feel silly, being honest and shelving out the money, and yet having to find cracked releases anyway. Sigh.
Re:Dumb question by DrXym · 2004-10-05 02:45 · Score: 1

It's odd that Doom 3 actually shipped on CD. DVDs cost pennies to produce these days and I reckon any difference in cost would recovered because there is less labelling, packaging and shipping weight. Far Cry came out on DVD and it's much better for it too.

Anyway I've grabbed my Doom 3 for Linux now and its blissfully copy protection free. It's just too bad my Linux w/ NVidia NX2 is too underpowered to play it. I tried running it there and it was getting about 12fps. Still, I might be able to use it as a server.
Re:Dumb question by drinkypoo · 2004-10-05 03:53 · Score: 1

Putting the game on CD means that people only have to upgrade half their system in order to be able to play the thing.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"

Whither OS X ?? by blakespot · 2004-10-05 01:24 · Score: 5, Interesting

So where is DOOM 3 for OS X? My new dual G5 2.5 is just itching for something to challenge it. Of course...until Apple ships the GeForce 6800 Ultra I ordered as part of the bundle, I'm using the interrim Radeon 9600XT - not sure how well that will push DOOM 3 at high resolution....

blakespot

--
-- Heisenberg may have slept here.
iPod Hacks.com

Re:Whither OS X ?? by WhatAmIDoingHere · 2004-10-05 01:35 · Score: 0, Flamebait

So you bought an apple.. in the hopes of gaming?

And I bought a Yugo so I could join an extreme racing club.

--
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
Re:Whither OS X ?? by mog007 · 2004-10-05 02:21 · Score: 1

My 9600XT ran it pretty well. 1024x768 on high detail without noticable stuttering. That's without AF and FSAA turned on, though.

--
Learn something new.
Re:Whither OS X ?? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:31 · Score: 0

50% Flamebait 50% Overrated

I meant it in good spirits..

At least I've got the karma to burn by pissing off Apple Zealots.
Re:Whither OS X ?? by justins · 2004-10-05 04:35 · Score: 0, Flamebait

My new [blakespot.com] dual G5 2.5 is just itching for something to challenge it.

Well, upgrading Macs is pretty difficult, often nearly impossible. Maybe give that a try.

--
Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
Re:Whither OS X ?? by blakespot · 2004-10-05 06:07 · Score: 4, Informative

Well...let's see.

The day the G5 arrived at my home I installed 2GB of Crucial PC3200 RAM (four 512MB DIMMs), bringing the total system RAM up to 2.5GB. I also installed a 74GB WD Raptor 10,000 RPM SATA HD, delegating the existing 250GB Maxtor for use as a "data" drive while the Ratpor takes on the boot / application storage role. I plugged my trusty external, FireWire 250GB Maxtor in to use as a backup drive.

A few weeks later I added a 3.3v PCI FireWire board with 3 ports. I've got a couple iPods, an iSight web cam, an external FireWire HD, and my DV cam to mate with the G5 from time to time. The extra ports make things a little easier.

Right now the machine has a Radeon 9600XT in the AGP 8x slot, as I'd mentioned in the original post. In the next few weeks I should be getting a GeForce 6800 Ultra which I will swap in for the Radeon. There's another upgrade.

I am trying to think what else I might wish to upgrade but will be unable, due to the difficulty you cite in upgrading Macs. I've got a 1250MHz CPU bus, and so I probably won't be wishing I could upgrade my motherboard anytime soon - but that would be a hard thing to do, granted. The two 2.5GHz, liquid-cooled CPU's are on a large daughterboard that connectst with the motherboard through dual CPU jacks. This would seem to allow 3rd parties to offer CPU upgrades down the road. They've certainly done so for the G3's and G4's in the past. I guess we'll have to wait and see. And it would be difficult to add another internal optical drive, I'll grant you. Given that this is a DVD writer capable of burning CD's, I've not go a great need for an additional unit that I can see. I suppose copying a DVD or CD would require caching to disk with just one drive, but I can probably squeeze that data somewhere amongst the G5's 575GB of on-line storage.

So I've got bluetooth, integrated modem, GHz ethernet, 5 FireWire 400 ports, 1 FireWire 800 port, 2 USB 2.0 ports, analog audio in/out, digital (optical) audio in/out, an additional headphone jack, AirPort 802.11g as an option, dual screen support via digital outputs, and 2 empty PCI-X slots. How am I held back again?

blakespot

--
-- Heisenberg may have slept here.
iPod Hacks.com
Re:Whither OS X ?? by __aailob1448 · 2004-10-05 07:31 · Score: 1, Troll

My new dual G5 2.5 is just itching for something to challenge it.
And it'll keep itching until it dies of old age.
Re:Whither OS X ?? by mrchaotica · 2004-10-05 07:51 · Score: 1

While I'd love to see it come out for OSX as well, it wouldn't do me much good on my lowly 12" iBook. Even THPS4 is barely playable. : (

--
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Re:Whither OS X ?? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 08:25 · Score: 2, Insightful

How am I held back again?

No Doom 3. ZING!
Re:Whither OS X ?? by justins · 2004-10-05 10:40 · Score: 1

How am I held back again?

Well, I'd say both you and whoever moderated me down to -1 are "held back" in the old sense-of-humor department.

--
Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
Re:Whither OS X ?? by snuf23 · 2004-10-05 13:06 · Score: 2, Funny

Damn. I've never felt so dirty reading someone describe their computer before.
You don't by any chance were a black beret, have a goatee and show up on Penny Arcade from time to time do you?

--
Sometimes my arms bend back.
Re:Whither OS X ?? by snuf23 · 2004-10-05 13:19 · Score: 1

Well it beats the crap outta my meager pc:
3.2GHz P4
Gig of DDR 400 .5 terabyte internal storage
CDR and 8xDVDR
overclocked 6800 GT
Audigy 2 ZS
Some of those firewire things and a few USB thingees which I guess are supposed to "mate" with stuff

all that and I still can't play the Apple logo slider puzzle. I mean I beat it once, but its still a fun game.

Guess I'll just have to settle with Doom 3, City of Heroes, Call of Duty expansion, Rise of Nations, Star Wars Battlefront, Battlefield Vietnam...

*sigh*

--
Sometimes my arms bend back.
Re:Whither OS X ?? by blakespot · 2004-10-05 23:01 · Score: 1

Indeed - looking at your specs, a second optical drive, which I lack, may well be nice - I haven't copied a CD or DVD in a couple years though so I don't have the pain of that process fresh in my mind to cause me to lust for one.

It's funny - you miss the Apple slider game and I miss that Blue Screen of Death game. I've not been able to find anything close to a port of that to Mac OS X. Seems it takes alot to get that running under *NIX....

blakespot

--
-- Heisenberg may have slept here.
iPod Hacks.com
Re:Whither OS X ?? by snuf23 · 2004-10-06 15:47 · Score: 1

I miss the blue screen of death game too. It was really fun. Too bad I haven't seem it even once on this system. Oh Bill why have you forsaken us?
Seriously, I've seen OS X systems that crap out a lot and I've seen Windows systems that crap out a lot - I've seen misconfigured UNIX and Linux systems that blow up too. There isn't a perfect OS out there and what's even worse there sure aren't any perfect users.
Call me platform agnostic - I work with Mac OS 9, OS X, Windows 98-XP, Red Hat Linux and FreeBSD on a daily basis. They each have their merits. Well except Mac OS 9 and Windows 98 that is.

--
Sometimes my arms bend back.

Not much in the way of a HAL in Linux yet by gilesjuk · 2004-10-05 01:25 · Score: 1

There's much easier access to low level resources in Linux than in Windows NT/2k/XP. This makes porting software and updating for major changes (like AMD64) harder but results in better timing and performance in many cases.

Linux will get a form of HAL layer eventually, but I would imagine this will be bypassable to keep the embedded developers happy.

As for if Linux performs better, I'd say there's not much in it. While Linux has some better code for various things, GCC doesn't produce the fastest code, some say Microsoft and Intel's compilers produce faster code.

Re:Not much in the way of a HAL in Linux yet by pe1rxq · 2004-10-05 01:43 · Score: 1

What kind of HAL do you mean? POSIX?
Linux programs get the same interface in about every architecture as long as you stay away from assembler and accessing io directly (which is the kernels job anyway).... And even if you do program part in assembler its good practice to do it in C first so even then porting won't be a problem.

Jeroen

--
Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
Re:Not much in the way of a HAL in Linux yet by BenjyD · 2004-10-05 04:02 · Score: 1

No HAL? Hmmm...
bdr@arthurdent:~ $ ps aux|grep hal hal 3858 0.0 0.7 5972 4656 ? Ss 15:59 0:02 /usr/sbin/hald --drop-privileges
Works fine for me :)

nope by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:26 · Score: 0

I usually only get at most an extra 5fps in Linux over windows. Sometimes I get pretty much the same (negligible difference), or worse in Linux. So I doubt it would make any difference whatsoever in terms of playability.

Mirrors by incuso · 2004-10-05 01:28 · Score: 1

Obviously, the ftp id server is already /.ted!

Any mirror elsewhere?

Thanks,
M.

Re:Mirrors by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:02 · Score: 0

Bittorrent from id

Re:Jon Carmack, eh? (Butterfly Effect) by Reverant · 2004-10-05 01:29 · Score: 2, Insightful

Let's suppose for a moment that your points are true; and that because of Doom/Quake/etc, 100 people have been killed worldwide in events like the one you menton.

Now, let's suppose that Carmack worked for "the US military" instead. He could have developed a new incredible cluster bomb, that was first tested en masse in Iraq and killed 1000s of people.

Never forget the Butterfly effect. You can NEVER predict what your actions may trigger as a result. I'm sure Einstein didn't see it coming when his nuclear research was used to build the nuclear bomb and killed 100,000 people in Japan during WWII.

Come-get-some by Hinhule · 2004-10-05 01:29 · Score: 0

I read Doom 3 I read Come-get-some department and I think Duke Nukem!

It worked fine by tod_miller · 2004-10-05 01:30 · Score: 4, Funny

until all hell broke loose, then I hit alt-ctrl-~, did a ps -aux and hit kill -9 on everything I could find.

I think I must have been out of ammo or something, because it kept giving me stick about command not find.

I tried apt-get and still nothing.

No seriously, everything works fine, except all the PDAs on the base don't work right, because I guess linux on the PDA is a bit immature for the martian market :-)

--
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com

Re:It worked fine by pugdk · 2004-10-09 05:21 · Score: 1

the pda works just fine for me. What I didn't notice at first was that you should *not* use the mousebuttons but your designated *fire* button (which in my case is CTRL). After I figured that out the PDA now works perfectly...
Re:It worked fine by tod_miller · 2004-10-10 19:11 · Score: 1

I was joking about the status of installing linux on all PDA's on Mars...

But thanks for the info...

--
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com

Linux vs Windows performance by yoyhed · 2004-10-05 01:32 · Score: 5, Informative

During the intro level, I get around 45 fps average in Linux, and 60 fps in Windows. My guess would be just that nvidia's Linux geforce driver hasn't had as much time put into it as their Windows one.

But I did notice it started up faster, and was smoother/faster in the menus in Linux than in Windows. And the whole computer wasn't slow for 30 seconds after I exited out of the game in Linux.

By the way, this story is a dupe, it was posted in the Games section yesterday (by a different submitter) so if you want more info check that out too.

WinXP Pro / Slackware 10
800x600 Medium Quality
AthlonXP 2800+
512mb ddr400
Geforce FX 5700 Ultra

--
WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1

Re:Linux vs Windows performance by p-hawk42 · 2004-10-05 02:04 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Possibly offtopic, but I think all these dupes give the moderators a welcome break from having to hear rants about how Winbloze is teh sux0r.
Re:Linux vs Windows performance by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:11 · Score: 0

http://ucguides.savagehelp.com/Doom3/FPSVisuals.ht m
ignore the premade configs, but adjust:

Make a text file called autoexec.cfg in your Doom3 'Base' directory and add:

image_useCache - set to 1
image_cacheMegs - 1/3 -14th system ram
image_cacheMinK - minimum cache in K not Meg 2048

com_videoram - make sure this value is the ammount of video ram your card has

it won't add FPS, but it will be noticeably smoother.

the other commands on that site can help, but don't go overboard otherwise you'll lose some playing experience.

play it in the dark with the sound way up.
easily the best game i've ever played.

YOU'RE WELCOME.
Re:Linux vs Windows performance by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 04:26 · Score: 0

And the whole computer wasn't slow for 30 seconds after I exited out of the game in Linux.

And that is my main complaint about Windows. The REQUIRED swap usage. I have a gig of ram in this machine, it should rarely have to touch the swap file. But it does a lot, and I currently am using 335 megs of swap on this relatively fresh Windows XP install. When I start up Doom3 and play a bit it's smooth, but when I exit my computer is unusable for the standard 30 seconds or so.

I've tried all sorts of things to eliminate the swap file, make it a fixed size, remove it entirely etc, but XP just re-enables and auto-adjusts it for me anyways.

It like it's pushing programs to swap to make lots of memory available in case it even needs the ram for anything... but the problem is the memory is always kept available for programs "just in case". But since this is always the case, the memory is never used.

This is probably ideal for low memory situations, but not for users with lots of ram. Am I missing some hidden setting meant for people with plenty of ram?

-- gid
Re:Linux vs Windows performance by yoyhed · 2004-10-05 06:01 · Score: 1

335 megs usage without running a game? Even after an uptime of several days, when idling, I'm at about 150 megs.
To answer your question, right-click My Computer, and go into Properties. Go into the Advanced tab, and in the Performance section, hit Settings. Go into the Advanced tab again, and under the Virtual Memory section, hit Change. Choose the appropriate partition and you can either set the paging file's min and max size, or choose No Paging File. In my experience, Windows does not undo what settings you've applied.
If you still want a swap file (I know Photoshop bitches at you if you don't have one, and it says you reap no Photoshop performance benefit from having none), there is a registry setting that minimizes usage of the swap file, at least with core Windows stuff.

--
WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1
Re:Linux vs Windows performance by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 09:24 · Score: 0

I'm running a java ide, firefox, thunderbird, a few putty sessions, hires background spanning over 2 monitors, virus scanner, winamp, mirand im, ultramon, etc...

Maybe I'll try turning off swap again, see maybe it's a certain program that was forcing the swap file to be turned back on...

-- gid

Hrmmph by Cirrius · 2004-10-05 01:32 · Score: 4, Funny

Well damn, the linux version of here I can't complain anymore. Oh wait, hey id where's the damn MAC port huh?? There's like 27 people waiting for it, chop chop!

Re:Hrmmph by ytsejam-ppc · 2004-10-05 02:14 · Score: 1

I suspect there are quite a few more than 27 people waiting for it. Personally, I'll buy it without the intention of playing it very often, just to support companies that take the time to port fresh games to the Mac. id is certainly one of those companies.
Re:Hrmmph by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:15 · Score: 0

Hmm...make that 28. My G4 tower would love to play Doom3.
Re:Hrmmph by PsychoSid · 2004-10-05 04:00 · Score: 1

On another note can this be played on PPC/Linux or just x86 Linux ?
Re:Hrmmph by MacGod · 2004-10-05 05:47 · Score: 1

This does make me wonder if the Mac port will be out soon. Presumably, much of the difficulty in the Linux port was translating DirectX to OpenGL, and possibly a fwe other *Nix issues. Now that they've been solved, maybe the Mac port's coming soon. /me knocks on wood, rubs rabbit's foot and horseshoe, crosses fingers etc

--
"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one " -Albert Einstein
Re:Hrmmph by haunebu · 2004-10-05 06:12 · Score: 1

My my dual 2.5Ghz Power Mac G5 is waiting for it. And by the way, MAC stands for Media Access Control. Mac, on the other hand, is short for Macintosh.

--

Blue skies, Barthy Burgers, girls...
Re:Hrmmph by ryanw · 2004-10-05 06:28 · Score: 1

I'll buy it without the intention of playing it very often, just to support companies that take the time to port fresh games to the Mac.
I would think that would be true for a lot of people on macs. We want to let the software vendors know there is a market and to continue or start making more software for us. I would estimate that more percentage of gamers on the mac actually buy the games than on windows. That probably makes the mac market at least something companies should look at. But there is no question even with the huge numbers of piracy on the windows side there is much more chance of success on windows over any other platform.
I wish they would release their numbers for sales for each platform. I guess with ID they just allow a download for the binaries on linux, but they could at least show some sort of stats showing the numbers.
Re:Hrmmph by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 07:03 · Score: 0

Doom3 is already opengl. I guess as a mac user, that excuses your ignorance.
Re:Hrmmph by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 08:35 · Score: 0

Have fun waiting with your MACinTRASH. Now I'm off to play Doom on my dual Xeon 3.6Ghz. ;)
Re:Hrmmph by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 12:22 · Score: 0

Jesus God Almighty, its called Humour, people... get some, get some!
Re:Hrmmph by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 17:11 · Score: 0

don't be stupid there is nothing binary compatible with ppc linux other than stuff compiled for it. The only viable gaming platform on linux is x86 linux(do you see any good ppc linux drivers for your geforce fx or ati radeon? they don't exist)
Re:Hrmmph by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-06 00:55 · Score: 0

There isn't a dual 3.6Ghz Xeon from Dell. Not to say it even matters, but a setup from Dell's site of a machine similar to the dual G5 ($3000) costs $6000 both before the monitor.

Why not use SDL? by Izaak · 2004-10-05 01:34 · Score: 4, Insightful

id have ALWAYS used OpenGL for the graphics rendering. But they use DirectX for sound on windows, which is what will take time to convert to *nix..

I've heard this said before and wondered why they don't use a combination of SDL/Alsa/OpenGL to keep it cross platform. I've been doing that and have a single code base that compiles to Linux, Windows, and Mac with no nasty piles of #ifdef'ed code.

--

The Bolachek Journals

Re:Why not use SDL? by Dogers · 2004-10-05 01:50 · Score: 4, Insightful

Not knowing much (read: anything) about SDL and ALSA on windows, my guess is they dont want to be stuck supporting that if theres any problems with it. Why bother with that hassle when the numbers of people donwloading and actually USING the linux version are so small compared with that of windows?

--
I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you.
Re:Why not use SDL? by brendan_orr · 2004-10-05 01:51 · Score: 3, Informative

I think you mean OpenAL instead of Alsa
Aside from that, I agree with you wholeheartily
Re:Why not use SDL? by Watcher · 2004-10-05 01:52 · Score: 5, Interesting

id has always had a healthy NIH (not invented here) syndrome that they learned from mess with the original Doom sound library they used. The thing never quite worked right, and caused no end of troubles. Even though SDL is open source, id has their own debugged code laying around that has been used for years that does the same thing-there really is no gain for them to throw out code they know and trust for someone else's work.

I've tried out SDL a few times, and although I've found it pretty workable, when you bring multithreading in it has troubles, especially if you don't want to render in your main thread.
Re:Why not use SDL? by essreenim · 2004-10-05 02:15 · Score: 1

Well they decided to use OSS for the sound which is a bit disappointing to me as I use ALSA on Slackware 10.
Im excited about this though. I cant wait to get the binary and set it up at home.
Re:Why not use SDL? by Izaak · 2004-10-05 03:39 · Score: 1

I think you mean OpenAL instead of Alsa
Aside from that, I agree with you wholeheartily

Exactly. Thanks for the correction.

--
The Bolachek Journals
Re:Why not use SDL? by Izaak · 2004-10-05 03:49 · Score: 2, Interesting

id has always had a healthy NIH (not invented here) syndrome that they learned from mess with the original Doom sound library they used. The thing never quite worked right, and caused no end of troubles. Even though SDL is open source, id has their own debugged code laying around that has been used for years that does the same thing-there really is no gain for them to throw out code they know and trust for someone else's work.

I assumed it was something along those lines, as ID actually has a longer history than SDL. The nice thing about SDL, however, is that the Windows version acts as an abstraction layer to the very same DirectX calls they are probably using anyway. They could take some of the programming effort they are currently spending on their own code base and use it to improve SDL and probably be much farther ahead in time-to-market terms.

I've tried out SDL a few times, and although I've found it pretty workable, when you bring multithreading in it has troubles, especially if you don't want to render in your main thread.

I've been using SDL for quite a while now, and I am very impressed with speed of improvement and current level of quality. I originally had some stability problems with OpenGL/SDL integration, but those appear to be completely fixed now. I have not run into the multithreading issues you describe, but then I tend to do all my rendering in one thread just as a matter of good game design (using other threads for sim and net code).

--
The Bolachek Journals
Re:Why not use SDL? by aber · 2004-10-05 04:51 · Score: 1

Why bother with that hassle when the numbers of people donwloading and actually USING the linux version are so small compared with that of windows?

That would be true if they were never going to port it to other platforms. Given that they did port it, it seems worse to have to change infrastructure (e.g., from MS stuff to SDL) than to have used SDL/OpenAL to begin with.
Re:Why not use SDL? by justins · 2004-10-05 04:51 · Score: 1

I've heard this said before and wondered why they don't use a combination of SDL/Alsa/OpenGL to keep it cross platform. I've been doing that and have a single code base that compiles to Linux, Windows, and Mac with no nasty piles of #ifdef'ed code.

Isn't surround sound in SDL still pretty ghetto? With DirectX everything is already supported and working for them.

--
Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
Re:Why not use SDL? by Matt+Ownby · 2004-10-05 04:56 · Score: 1

As far as I know, id had already released linux ports of Doom, Quake and Quake2 before Sam L. did SDLQuake (which was the first time I had ever heard of SDL myself, so I am not sure how long it was around before that time). At any rate, SDL does have a small overhead and since id had already went ahead and written the sound/glx code for linux, they were already doing what SDL would've done anyway so it would've actually been more work to convert it over to SDL; plus this may have introduced more overhead into the Windows build.

In short, by not using SDL, the game's performance cannot be any worse, and it may be better.
Re:Why not use SDL? by lurwas · 2004-10-05 05:34 · Score: 0

Probably because they need to support the X-box as well?
Re:Why not use SDL? by Cereal+Box · 2004-10-05 05:45 · Score: 2, Interesting

I've heard this said before and wondered why they don't use a combination of SDL/Alsa/OpenGL to keep it cross platform.

Perhaps -- and I know this may be shocking to some -- iD doesn't find SDL to be as advanced as DirectX when it comes to sound and input.

Besides which, since SDL sits on top of DirectX (note that this does not necessarily mean that SDL can do everything that DirectX does), that means they've got to deal with one extra level of abstraction, which hinders speed, if even slightly.
Re:Why not use SDL? by imr · 2004-10-05 06:49 · Score: 1

The good side of that is that they don't use proprietary stuff and you can expect they release their code at some point. Like their d3 physics engine.
The bad side of it is that the way they use the dsp was terrible in q3 and propagated to enemy territory and probably other linux q3 based games or ports. The forums are full of people having problems with launching those games when teamspeak or arts or other dsp using software are running.
I have cryptic alsa commands to run in some file in order to cope with this.
Re:Why not use SDL? by runderwo · 2004-10-05 09:19 · Score: 1

The nice thing about SDL, however, is that the Windows version acts as an abstraction layer to the very same DirectX calls they are probably using anyway.
ID uses OpenGL.

--
LRC, the best-read libertarian site on the web
Re:Why not use SDL? by Izaak · 2004-10-05 09:40 · Score: 1

ID uses OpenGL.

SDL is not an OpenGL replacement, though it can be used very well in conjunction with OpenGL to handle game controllers, multithreading, sound, etc. in a crossplatfrom way. Basically all the stuff iD is using DirectX for. As some people have mentioned (including me) this adds an extra level of abstraction that could slightly impact performance, but there would be a gain in how quickly games are released to multiple platforms. Personally I think the performance impact would be negligable, as the really heavy lifting occurs in the 3D rendering, which is already pure OpenGL anyway. Controller input and sound is going to be mostly I/O bound and have no appreciable impact on performance.

Oh, and it does bare repeating that OpenAL is probably the good way to go for high end cross-platform 3D sound support, though I haven't used it myself so I can't speak from experience.

--
The Bolachek Journals
Re:Why not use SDL? by floamy · 2004-10-05 11:22 · Score: 1

SDL doesn't do surround sound, OpenAL does. OpenAL is open source and works well with SDL applications. It is used in many games, including Unreal Tournament 2004 for Windows, Linux, and Mac. ID didn't use it in Doom 3 because they made their own mixing engine.
Re:Why not use SDL? by ernstp · 2004-10-05 18:39 · Score: 1

When you say ALSA, you really mean OpenAL, right?

That's what Epic uses for UT200*, and it seems to be a really mature and good library these days.

Will be included in a standard install of OSX 10.4.

CD checking by yoyhed · 2004-10-05 01:37 · Score: 1

One thing I noticed that I like about the Linux client is that it doesn't require the CD to be inserted to play.

I already have my computer set up to use from my bed, with wireless mouse/keyboard etc, now there's one less CD I have to get up to put in!

--
WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1

Re:CD checking by brendan_orr · 2004-10-05 02:06 · Score: 1

The same is true for Unreal Tournament 2004 (and 2003?). Quit neat having it shared on my NFS server and sharing it (loads decently on my 10MBit connections) can anybody say instant Lan party?

Can't wait to recieve it in the mail (preordered from Tux Games)
Re:CD checking by sidepocket · 2004-10-05 03:12 · Score: 1

I already have my computer set up to use from my bed, with wireless mouse/keyboard etc, now there's one less CD I have to get up to put in!

No offense bro, but that is truly a lazy office. On one hand I envy you, but on the other I'm curious to know if you're gigantic or not. Like when Homer set up that bird to hit the "Y" key :)
Re:CD checking by yoyhed · 2004-10-05 03:53 · Score: 1

Not an office, my bedroom. I'm not gigantic at all by the way, I'm 6 feet tall, 175 lbs.

--
WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1
Re:CD checking by sidepocket · 2004-10-05 04:19 · Score: 1

i stand corrected :)
Re:CD checking by Dimensio · 2004-10-06 08:39 · Score: 1

Many CD check systems (not all -- UT2K4 does not have this problem) require full Administrative rights to run. Most WinXP/2k users are morons who don't understand that you are not supposed to run as Administrator all the time so they don't notice because they are not running under a Power Users account normally, even though they should.

Linux users, however, typically know better than to run as root at all times. If a Linux client for a game included a CD check system that required the user to run as root, the developers would almost certainly be lynched, and rightfully so. (Of course, companies that put Admin-requiring checks on Windows games should also have the people making those decisions lynched, but we don't live in a perfect world).

--
STOP MISUSING APOSTROPHES, YOU MORONS!!!
Re:CD checking by yoyhed · 2004-10-06 09:10 · Score: 1

Interesting. I'll have to try that out with more games, I hate moving my damn arm to put in a damn CD when I just want to play the damn game. I usually just download a no-cd crack, but then I have to worry about online compatibility, and getting a new no-cd when patches come out.
It may be true that many CD check systems require Administrative rights to run, but apparently not for Doom 3. I created a limited user account in Windows XP and it still required the correct CD to start Doom 3.
By the way, I don't think it's a lack of root access on Linux that was stopping CD checking, there's probably just no CD checking implemented. Id seems cool that way.
On a side note, one of the reasons I love Linux is because typically it, and the software written for it, is devoid of bitchy-ass shit like CD checking (and I use such language because the game isn't even using files from the CD, we have plenty of HD space nowadays).

--
WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1

Next on Slashdot by imr · 2004-10-05 01:39 · Score: 5, Funny

-Doom3 Linux binary released. by Timothy.
-Release of the Doom3 Linux version. by michael.
-Linux Doom3 finally released. by Cliff.
-A look at the socio-economics behind the Linux Doom3 release. by JKatz
-The Doom3 Linux server is included in the Linux Doom3 release. By CowboyNeal.
- Doom 3 for Linux Released. by CmdrTaco who doesnt even read his own stories.

Re:Next on Slashdot by jaredbpd · 2004-10-05 01:42 · Score: 2, Funny

Now I'm glad I filter out Jon Katz! I just couldn't handle that many Doom 3 stories, LOL
Re:Next on Slashdot by dasunt · 2004-10-05 02:03 · Score: 0

Sure, you complain about the dupes, but imagine the productivity increase they cause.

I've glanced at slashdot today, saw the Doom3 story, and thought "Hmmm, I already read all the stories below this -- time to go back to work."
Re:Next on Slashdot by ExoticMandibles · 2004-10-05 02:56 · Score: 3, Funny

Don't forget, in two months we'll get "Doom 3 Now Available On Linux" as submitted by Roland Piqualle!
Re:Next on Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 03:08 · Score: 0

The real CmdrTaco left long ago after he become a millionaire from Linux ipo's years ago. Heck he's so rich he is probably voting for Bush and hoping for more tax cuts for those in the $250,000 and up tax bracket. ;)

from a sclug posting from 4 years ago

"The other piece of news is that both VA and Andover come out of IPO
lockup on the 5th and 6th of june. This means that ESR and CmdrTaco
can sell their shares and turn them into real money on those days.
Using current market figures I have tabulated their wealth:
o ESR - 6.96 mil
o CmdrTaco - 2.09 mil

The small number for CmdrTaco is because the whole of the sale of /. was between andover and blockstackers of which CmdrTaco only owns a
paltry 25%. Also of that 2.09 mil CmdrTaco got something like $375k in
cash when he sold back in '99."

He also IIRC got shares from the Red Hat IPO. So like I said ,the real CmdrTaco left long ago due to the fact that he is stinkin rich and no longer needs to argue amongst us nerds. The reason for so many dupes and lack of basic review is the robot he hired hasn't been debugged yet. Hear that Taco! I'm on to you.

Re:Jon Carmack, eh? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:42 · Score: 0

/me whistles

http://lists.erps.org/archives/erps-list/msg0435 8. shtml

Re:Jon Carmack, eh? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:43 · Score: 0

>> Carmack could have been working for NASA or the US military, but instead he simply sits around coding violent computer games.

Military? Yah, he could be killing people for real. Geez.

has a few limitations by auzy · 2004-10-05 01:44 · Score: 1

I noticed they are still using OSS instead of Alsa for the meantime and aren't supporting AMD64, so unfortunately we wont be able to say definately how great it runs in linux compared to windows at the moment.. because with OSS, its bound to be slower. The oxygen bar known issue would be pretty annoying too. Hopefully though this will spawn a massive amount of new linux games based on the doom 3 engine. Anyone feel like benchmarking to test at the moment?

Re:has a few limitations by sigaar · 2004-10-05 03:17 · Score: 1

No man, if you're using a later kernel/distro you ARE using ALSA. ALSA is emulating OSS.

They're just using the OSS API which means all you're missing is surround sound but it is actually alsa doing the work.

--
sigaar

Re:Jon Carmack, eh? (Butterfly Effect) by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:45 · Score: 1, Interesting

Yes he did. He weighed the possible consequences of his actions against the possible consequences of his inaction (mostly, Nazi Germany getting it first), and decided reluctantly that it was the lesser evil.

Later in his life, he came to change his mind and regret his decision. Fortunately we had some real amoral go-getters like von Neumann and Kissinger around, so we didn't have to worry about needing that pansy Einstein, except for licensing his image to a score of motivational-merchandise manufacturers.

Linux Doomed again!! by lcsjk · 2004-10-05 01:52 · Score: 1

Where have we heard that before?

Re:Jon Carmack, eh? (Butterfly Effect) by MondoMor · 2004-10-05 01:53 · Score: 0, Interesting

Actually, Einstein encouraged the US to develop an atomic bomb, because he feared the Germans were far ahead of the Americans. While he did not approve of its use, he saw the deterrent value of an atomic weapon, and was well aware that it would probably be used eventually.

It turns out the Germans had sqandered their lead in atomic research, allowing the Americans to develop and test an atomic bomb first. After Germany's collapse, and the realization that Japan would never surrender (fighting with religious fervor to the last man, woman and child), the Americans decided to use the weapon in the Pacific to force Japan to unconditional surrender.

Re:Is Doom 3 free ? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:54 · Score: 2, Informative

The Linux binaries are a free download, but you still need to buy the CD that contains the rest of the game.

I know :) by Faust7 · 2004-10-05 01:55 · Score: 1

I'm well aware of all that. But one big-name release, done relatively quickly compared to previous Linux game releases, is a huge first step to providing the needed momentum.

--
The coolest voice ever.

Re:I know :) by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 12:16 · Score: 0

Done very quickly? I have completed Doom 3 thrice, now! And, WOW! A Linux version is released. Look, I am as big a fan of Linux as the next guy, but it just isn't the Cats Meow in some fields...

license by njko · 2004-10-05 01:56 · Score: 1

what about the license terms?
ftp download equals free of charge?

--
\n.\n

Re:license by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:00 · Score: 0

what about the license terms?

The download is useless without the game data which you have to buy.

There'll be a standard commercial licence in the package I'd imagine - no reverse engineering, etc.
Re:license by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 07:07 · Score: 0

Its just the binary (i.e the linux executable)

If you have ever played doom 1/2 or quake1-3 on linux you would know. You just copy over the pak files from the CD and use the linux binary.

Re:Jon Carmack, eh? by Begossi · 2004-10-05 01:57 · Score: 4, Funny

I still remember the good days when we didn't have computer games, and thus no violence at all.

--
Friend of the Wise, Brother of the Brave.

Re:Jon Carmack, eh? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 01:59 · Score: 0

That'd be funny, seeing as openGL support on VooDoo cards was a joke at best.

They ran Direct3D and Glide great, but openGL support was middling to none.

BitTorrent by chadruva · 2004-10-05 02:00 · Score: 2, Insightful

I'm glad they provide a bittorrent for it, their FTP server has been full for a while!

--
C-x C-c

Works great ... but ... by bushboy · 2004-10-05 02:03 · Score: 5, Informative

Tried it today on slack 10, 2.6.7 kernel, 6111 drivers.

Got pretty much exactly the same timedemo benchmark as win32 (same box), although I could swear it felt smoother and sharper somehow.
I think I can coax a bit more out of it - I could with Linux Quake3.

Pity about the 5.1 sound - I really hope they get a patch for that soon as it's a big part of what makes the game fun.

For the record, it seems you have to be running X in 24bit mode - unsure if that was the case for quake3 too ?

Another thing, which would only apply to the small percentage interested - no editor support under linux.
No idea if this is planned for a future patch, but GTKRadiant now supports Doom 3 (without the render preview in the current build)

Still, kudos to id software for supporting Linux !

--
A slashdotting - you get the stick first and then the carrot !

Re:Works great ... but ... by Peyna · 2004-10-05 03:22 · Score: 1

although I could swear it felt smoother and sharper somehow.

Probably because you wanted it to be better, so you perceived it to be so, even if it wasn't. Don't worry, it's a common thing for humans to do.

--
What?
Re:Works great ... but ... by frission · 2004-10-05 03:36 · Score: 1

one of the things that helped my frame rates was uncompressing the pk4 files into the base directory. i got about an extra 10 fps and increased load time significantly. I haven't tried this in linux yet, but it definitely works in windows. PS: If you like the theme song, i think it's in the 003.pk4 file, d3theme.ogg
Re:Works great ... but ... by justins · 2004-10-05 04:29 · Score: 1

although I could swear it felt smoother and sharper somehow.

Probably because you wanted it to be better, so you perceived it to be so, even if it wasn't. Don't worry, it's a common thing for humans to do.

It's a pretty common perception, though. I would have guessed that it was becuase XFree86 is a little better at mouse sampling but if it's showing even in demos, it's probably something else.

--
Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
Re:Works great ... but ... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 04:56 · Score: 0

Wow, you got increased load time? PK4 files are just compressed archives; uncompressing them on a machine with a slow hard drive will actually increase loading times.

Your claim about 10 extra FPS sounds like complete BS.
Re:Works great ... but ... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 09:52 · Score: 0

Wow, you got increased load time? PK4 files are just compressed archives; uncompressing them on a machine with a slow hard drive will actually increase loading times.
Did you read what you just wrote?

id Bittorrent tracker by O0o0Oblubb!O0o0O · 2004-10-05 02:05 · Score: 5, Informative

This should get you playing in no time.

http://zerowing.idsoftware.com:6969/

Re:id Bittorrent tracker by incuso · 2004-10-05 03:45 · Score: 1

Thanks, I solved :)

Re:Jon Carmack, eh? (Butterfly Effect) by wertarbyte · 2004-10-05 02:07 · Score: 1

I'm sure Einstein didn't see it coming when his nuclear research was used to build the nuclear bomb and killed 100,000 people in Japan during WWII.

He did not only see it coming, he recommended building the bomb, fearing nazi germany could reach its goal of contructing the uranium bomb first.

--
Life is just nature's way of keeping meat fresh.

Linux gaming benchmarks on Anandtech.com by IronChefMorimoto · 2004-10-05 02:09 · Score: 5, Informative

As a nice companion to this Doom3 Linux release, there's also a Linux gaming benchmark article on Anandtech.com this morning:

http://www.anandtech.com/linux/showdoc.aspx?i=2229

It's more of an AGP GPU on Linux comparison, but the information on some of the setup was, for a Linux newbie like me, a little informative. I had considered doing a Linux installation on my A64 gaming machine (using a separate hard drive) and installing some of the Linux versions of games that are mentioned in the article.

I'm curious, though -- do most of the mainstream game Linux versions come on the CD-ROM or have to be downloaded from the developer? Doom3, for example, requires the Windows CD for adding some files to the Linux installation. Enemy Territory is standalone. What about Jedi Knights: Jedi Academy, as mentioned in the Anandtech article? On the CD-ROM? Or a free download without requiring anything from the original Windows CD-ROM?

Anyway -- a good article. I enjoyed seeing information about gaming on Linux. Now, I just gotta get an Nvidia card so I don't have to struggle as a Linux newbie with the ATI driver installation.

IronChefMorimoto

Re:Linux gaming benchmarks on Anandtech.com by imr · 2004-10-05 03:17 · Score: 0

I find your post quite interresting and informative.
I might add this article from a not so famous web news site which adds a little bit to your infos:
yesterday
Might I add that you seem qualified for a slashdot editor job?
Re:Linux gaming benchmarks on Anandtech.com by IronChefMorimoto · 2004-10-05 03:31 · Score: 1, Redundant

DOH! Sorry about that. It scrolled offscreen before I saw it, and I had just read the Anandtech.com article before posting my comment in the Doom3 area. My bad, but hey -- at least people who missed it onscreen yesterday and look at it again. ;-)

IronChefMorimoto
Re:Linux gaming benchmarks on Anandtech.com by imr · 2004-10-05 06:42 · Score: 0, Flamebait

No sir! Don't expect me to be easy on you!

I was expecting the other article to stay on screen a little longer and had put a few karma whoring notes in it, notes I have put in every doom3 articles so far.
It was a quite simple, low profile, mom and pop shop of karma whoring. Until you came.

Right now, when people arrive to my little shop of karma whore, they already have posted on your little irresponsible page, and say "doh! The other one was a dupe!" but don't bother to enter my little realm. And right now, I havent received one single point in return of investment.

So i had 2 ways to cope with the loss in karma whoring margins:
-either repost everything.
-or take on you.
Re:Linux gaming benchmarks on Anandtech.com by VocabularyNazi · 2004-10-05 06:53 · Score: 0

perhaps these suggestions will help you to get your radeon working with 3d acceleration under Linux, as mine works fine(Radeon 9200 Pro on Mandrake 10.0 Official w/ kernel 2.6.3-7-up4GB)

http://linuxiso.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21825

the n00b howto is in the last post about a quarter of the way down in the post.

--
I will not be using Plan 9 in the creation of weapons of mass destruction to be used by nations other than the US.
Re:Linux gaming benchmarks on Anandtech.com by IronChefMorimoto · 2004-10-05 07:50 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Sadly, I had no idea that I was competing against you for Karma. Thanks to the FAQ, I'm still pretty much confused. Continue to whore if it makes you happy, but if I'm an indirect Kharma pimp, I expect my cut, bitch. ;-)

IronChefMorimoto
Re:Linux gaming benchmarks on Anandtech.com by imr · 2004-10-05 08:25 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Well, you have entered a dangerous territory mister, and trying to gather the favor of the slashdot editors by posting dupes was not the safest way to enter this game, as they certainly are not those who matters around here.
Oh yes, you are going to get your cut, and a nasty one, yessir.

Re:Jon Carmack, eh? (Butterfly Effect) by jonastullus · 2004-10-05 02:10 · Score: 1

I'm sure Einstein didn't see it coming when his nuclear research was used to build the nuclear bomb and killed 100,000 people in Japan during WWII.

From http://www.doug-long.com/einstein.htm:

"The physicist Albert Einstein did not directly participate in the invention of the atomic bomb."
"The atomic bomb related work that Einstein did was very limited and he completed it in two days during December 1941."

"Einstein's greatest role in the invention of the atomic bomb was signing a letter to President Franklin Roosevelt urging that the bomb be built."

"Einstein biographer Ronald Clark has observed that the atomic bomb would have been invented without Einstein's letters, but that without the early U.S. work that resulted from the letters, the a-bombs might not have been ready in time to use during the war on Japan"

"In November 1954, five months before his death, Einstein summarized his feelings about his role in the creation of the atomic bomb: "I made one great mistake in my life... when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made; but there was some justification - the danger that the Germans would make them.""

well, he didn't have the concept of the atom bomb in mind when he published his wellknown formula E=mc^2. but when the germans seemed to be coming closer and closer to a working nuclear bomb, he still urgend roosevelt to push the american effort of developing and building one in order not to let the germans have this advantage!

jethr0

Hmm.. interesting, but with a number of gotchas.. by d_jedi · 2004-10-05 02:13 · Score: 5, Informative

The Linux version only requires a P3 1.0GHz, while the Windows version needs a P4 1.5GHz (although with the P4's incredibly long pipeline, the difference isn't as big as you might think..)

But look at the FAQ for a number of gotcha!s..
- No AMD64 build (this would have been sweet.. but, oh well.. not a showstopper)
- Won't run on ATI cards using the fglrx driver! I don't know.. is this the driver used by ALL ATI cards for Linux? If so, this is a major issue for anyone wanting to play the game on Linux..
- No 5.1 sound.. considering that the eerie sounds are a good part of what makes the game..

In all, I'll be sticking to using the Windows version of the game :->

--
I am the maverick of Slashdot

After all that it's not actually that good. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:24 · Score: 0

I mean, it looks nice enough given the right hardware but they've hardly been innovative in the gameplay stakes. Run down dark corridors and shoot things when they jump out at you.

The storyline isnt exactly gripping and I just found it got tedious very quickly.

Maybe I'm just jaded or something.

I hope to Dog HL2 turns out better.

Time is natures way of making sure everything doesnt happen at once.
Space is natures way of making sure it doesnt all happen to you.

Re:Jon Carmack, eh? (Butterfly Effect) by Sidicas · 2004-10-05 02:27 · Score: 0

I'm sure Einstein didn't see it coming when his nuclear research was used to build the nuclear bomb and killed 100,000 people in Japan during WWII

Actually, he was in favor of the U.S. developing an atomic bomb. In fact, I believe that he was the first one to suggest it to the president. It wasn't until after the war that he changed his views. See here

Use Linux for AIM and Windows for Programming? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:33 · Score: 0

Am I the only one that thinks this is ass backwards?

Re:Use Linux for AIM and Windows for Programming? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 05:02 · Score: 0

Use Linux for AIM and Windows for Programming? Am I the only one that thinks this is ass backwards?

It's only backwards if you don't want to be employed.
Re:Use Linux for AIM and Windows for Programming? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 09:32 · Score: 0

Oh, ok, I'll tell my boss to pack away these Unix boxes. Apparently some numbnuts on Slashdot says that software isn't developed on them.

Re:Jon Carmack, eh? by bioglaze · 2004-10-05 02:36 · Score: 1

Wasn't GLQuake released more for the 3Dfx Voodoo cards?
True, but later everyone got accelerated Quake , not only 3DFX chip owners.

--
Who is John Galt?

On DirectX and OGL by tod_miller · 2004-10-05 02:36 · Score: 1

read Carmacks old .plan files and he slates DX in favour of OGL.

M$ own like 99.9999999999999999999999% of OGL now anyway, so they don't really care.

--
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com

Honesty by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:45 · Score: 0

Meant in good spirits my ass. Just say it, you like being "that guy" (the one that must inevitably point out that Macs aren't the premier platform for gaming, even though it's not relevant, interesting, or even original).

Here's the response that you seem to have missed for the last few years (if not more):
"I have a Mac because it does the things I do primarily well. I'd also like to play some games on it because they are capable computers."

Why didn't you make the argument that Linux isn't for gamin as well? Oh, that's right, because this is about a game being released on Linux. Holy crap, they port games!

If you're going to be a platform bigot, you could at least bring your A-game. This half-assed, unoriginal, off-topic criticism of the Mac platform was stupid and you know it. It had nothing to do with being a Zealot, it has everything to do with you being a complete and utter moron.

Re:Honesty by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 08:29 · Score: 0

You're either into artsy stuff or you're a faggot.

LMAO! Spoken by someone with the stated sexual preference of having "sexwithanimals". Classy!
Re:Honesty by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 09:23 · Score: 0

You're either into artsy stuff or you're a faggot.

Your mother must be proud. I think this perfectly sums up how much strong your ideas are.
Re:Honesty by WhatAmIDoingHere · 2004-10-05 13:44 · Score: 1

"how much strong"

What is that supposed to mean?

--
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.

Re:help! rar w/ passwd by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 02:49 · Score: 0

Did you read the .nfo? The password is here

ATI drivers and running under FC2 by bernywork · 2004-10-05 02:52 · Score: 4, Informative

AWESOME!!!!

There were some new drivers released the other day.

I installed these applied the fedora patch and it runs just fine on a Radeon 9600. Not that fast mind you, but it certainly works.

BTW, if you are attempting to download, try the Bitorrent network, I pulled down the installer in about 30 seconds.

--
Curiosity was framed; ignorance killed the cat. -- Author unknown

Re:ATI drivers and running under FC2 by thehunger · 2004-10-05 04:05 · Score: 1

Isnt fedora on kernel 2.6 yet? I run SUSE myself and the drivers are 2.4 only..
Re:ATI drivers and running under FC2 by VocabularyNazi · 2004-10-05 07:01 · Score: 1

drivers are 2.4 only ?? ATI's drivers ??? 2.4 only ??? i don't think so.. i use mandrake 10 with kernel 2.6.3-7-up4GB and am using a radeon 9200 Pro and have had no trouble getting the driver modules to recompile for my kernel.

--
I will not be using Plan 9 in the creation of weapons of mass destruction to be used by nations other than the US.
Re:ATI drivers and running under FC2 by valkraider · 2004-10-05 08:10 · Score: 1

Ahh. OSX gets nicer every day.

Which is good, because it'll be a few days before DOOM3 ever hits OSX. :)

Score -5 Redundant by G-Spot · 2004-10-05 02:53 · Score: 1

Can an entire story be moderated down as redundant?

Re:Score -5 Redundant by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 03:49 · Score: 0

Can an entire story be moderated down as redundant?
Can this duplicate dupe complaint be moderated down as redundant?
Re:Score -5 Redundant by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 05:00 · Score: 0

Those who modded down a complaint to mod down the story have been modded down. And now, on with the complaints!

Re:Hmm.. interesting, but with a number of gotchas by shadow303 · 2004-10-05 02:53 · Score: 3, Informative

The fglrx driver is the only driver which provides 3d support for anything newer than a radeon 9200. The specs for cards up to (and I beleive including) 9200 were released and there is 3d support using open source drivers.

Yes, the ATI problem is a major issue, but at this point, we are used to getting the shaft from ATI.

--
I've got a mind like a steel trap - it's got an animal's foot stuck in it.

Report of someone elses comments by BlackHawk-666 · 2004-10-05 02:54 · Score: 1

Move along, nothing to see, other than a repost of someone elses comments...

http://lists.erps.org/archives/erps-l ist/msg04358.shtml

--
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.

Simple thanks by MikeBabcock · 2004-10-05 03:06 · Score: 1

Thanks a lot ID. I bought Quake ]I[ for Linux (aluminium tin edition) and will buy a copy of Doom 3 as soon as you actually ship a Linux boxed set. In the mean time, I'll play the demo and leave my download tracker running.

PS, thanks for using modern technology, as always, even for your downloads.

--
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)

Re:Simple thanks by rpdillon · 2004-10-05 03:43 · Score: 2, Informative

Just download the client. They've already said there won't be a Linux box set.
Re:Simple thanks by sloanster · 2004-10-05 07:31 · Score: 2, Informative

tuxgames.com will be packaging the linux binaries with the data files and a linux installer - I've got doom3 for linux on order with them - if you want a doom 3 for linux boxed set, you might consider giving them your business.
Re:Simple thanks by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 12:27 · Score: 0

And, this post proves you can't:

A.) Make Linux Users happy unless your name is Linus
B.) Make gamers happy unless your name is John Carmac-!

Okay, so you can't make Gamers happy. Period.
Re:Simple thanks by MikeBabcock · 2004-10-06 03:17 · Score: 2, Insightful

I much prefer going to a big computer retailer and asking for Linux software.

Not because I like paying Electronics Boutique prices, but because it makes them tell the publishers "we're getting requests for Linux software".

--
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
Re:Simple thanks by sloanster · 2004-10-06 04:43 · Score: 1

I much prefer going to a big computer retailer and asking for Linux software.

That's good too - but it need not be an either/or proposition, you can do both, as applicable.

Excited for Linux by Bullseye_blam · 2004-10-05 03:07 · Score: 1

Is this the OS port that makes the game fun?

-Bullseye

Re:Excited for Linux by BenjyD · 2004-10-05 03:57 · Score: 1

No, it's still just a very advanced "how many shades of black can your monitor display" test.
Re:Excited for Linux by Ziviyr · 2004-10-05 08:54 · Score: 1

I'm so cool, my monitor has 40 shades of no-difference pure black. I rock! :-)

--

Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!

Better Support with Cedega(WineX) by Bruha · 2004-10-05 03:28 · Score: 2, Interesting

I havent verified it yet but Cedega IIRC did fully support the game. In face full sound worked and all that other jazz that we expected but did not get in the full release for Linux.

Re:dupe by wheany · 2004-10-05 03:33 · Score: 0, Troll

Yeah, well it was posted by CmdrDupe.

Video Drivers by phorm · 2004-10-05 03:49 · Score: 1

Probably the video drivers here, which in reference to games is definately an important factor. Perhaps the parent was talking more about the overall picture? My laptop sucks for games anyways (no 3d video card), but I would definately say that it handles very nicely under load in comparison to windows (I can have a full GUI, Thunderbird, FireFox, GAIM, and a GCC compile running at the same time without nasty lag or jerking while switching between).

Windows definately seems to do better at many times when putting pretty stuff on the screen, but Linux multitasks much better overall on this rig (2.6 kernel, Celeron 800, 256MB RAM, crappy Trident video and sound).

Yeah! let's vote... by fikx · 2004-10-05 03:53 · Score: 1

OK, I've been waiting for it to come out. Now I want to vote with my wallet. Hopefully a buying surge (even a small one) will show some linux support.
Anyone else?
Does ID have an online store?

--
AB HOC POSSUM VIDERE DOMUM TUUM

Re:Yeah! let's vote... by Mr.+Sketch · 2004-10-05 08:53 · Score: 1

Yes, ID does have an online store, and they just recently announced a price cut at their online store to USD$44.95. So, how can management be convinced that the surge is due to the linux release or the price cut?

I too have been debating about this issue and haven't decided if I should wait for tuxgames to release their version so my purchase will be definitely a linux purchase or just buy the windows version in the store and download the linux client. Tuxgames hasn't released their version yet, and for the US it will be 5-10 shipping after they do release so I'll probably end up having to wait 2 weeks that way or 20 minutes to go to store and buy + download linux client.

--
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.

Re:Sweet by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 04:05 · Score: 1, Funny

It IS a very boring game.

10 Wander about in corridors, see nothing, turn on flashlight/lower weapon, something scary pops out of the wall, get killed because you can't use your gun.

20 Wander about in corridors, see nothing, DON'T turn on flashlight/lower weapon, something scary pops out of the wall, shoot at the place where the scary thing was last you got killed and hope you hit something.

30 GOTO 10

It's bloody pretty though (when you can see anything).

Level Editor by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 04:05 · Score: 0

Do we have one yet?

now what about the SDK? by jonwil · 2004-10-05 04:07 · Score: 1

now that we have the patch and linux client, how about the SDK?

Yesterday by ratta · 2004-10-05 04:07 · Score: 0

I tried the windows version, today the linux one, same fps, but i found the linux one somewhat faster and smoother, i can't say why... But my psychologist told me that i shouldn't care...

--
Wondering why i am doing so strange posts? I am trying to get a "+5,Flamebait" or "-1,Insightful" rating.

wew.. good job carmack by neoneye · 2004-10-05 04:29 · Score: 1

thanks for thinking of linux.

MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 04:51 · Score: 0

Parent is nowhere near being insightful. Id games have always used OpenGL. Please moderators, if you aren't sure, at least moderate as 'interesting' instead of 'insightful'.

kewl! by otis+wildflower · 2004-10-05 05:23 · Score: 1

I'd love to play it, I even emerged it, but I don't think my poor 128mb card can handle 24-bit @ 1920x1200 :p

I suppose 16-bit is too 1998, but it's good enough for me ;)

i would care but... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 05:28 · Score: 0

Doom 3 gets boring as hell after about 20 minutes...

Re:Is Doom 3 free ? by Tharian · 2004-10-05 05:35 · Score: 1

So how does this go towards showing the Linux market as a viable option if I have to go out and buy a Windows version anyway? Won't this artificially inflate the Windows numbers?

--
I'm not a nerd. I'm a geek. Nerds make more money.

Because Linux functionality is a subset by AHumbleOpinion · 2004-10-05 05:53 · Score: 1

Why should Linux to Windows be easier than Windows to Linux

Because it is easier to move to a functional superset than to a functional subset. In other words all implemented features are available and you have a working matching game at an earlier date. However you can not ship at this point. You still have to add the "enhancements" like 3D sound to the Windows version. The prior posters point is more of a accounting trick than a practical point. It may actually be counterproductive since it may delay the release of the Windows version, the version that pays the bills. Even id says that Linux versions do not make sense from a business perspective, that they do them merely because they think it is cool. That is in reference to the client, the server is an entirely different story. For the servers Linux makes a lot of business sense.

Linux version not done for profit by AHumbleOpinion · 2004-10-05 06:01 · Score: 1

A while ago in Game Developer Magazine id stated that the Linux versions do not make sense from a business perspective and that they do them merely because they think it is cool to do so. Of course they are referring to clients not servers.

Linux is Doomed for the third time! by lcsjk · 2004-10-05 06:03 · Score: 0, Redundant

This just keeps cropping up again and again!

Sure, it's off topic, and has nothing to do with the article, and its probably not even funny! In fact it's so far off, that I would use my 5 points to mod it down, but I can't use them here now.

Does this mean we can now run it on -this- pc? by sserendipity · 2004-10-05 06:07 · Score: 2, Funny

Cray XD1

Re:Hmm.. interesting, but with a number of gotchas by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 07:09 · Score: 0

Won't run on ATI cards using the fglrx driver! I don't know.. is this the driver used by ALL ATI cards for Linux? If so, this is a major issue for anyone wanting to play the game on Linux..

ATI drivers suck under windows and linux, that is ATI's problem, not idSoftware's.

Re:Hmm.. interesting, but with a number of gotchas by d_jedi · 2004-10-05 07:36 · Score: 1

ATI drivers suck under windows and linux, that is ATI's problem, not idSoftware's.

I didn't say it was id's fault. All I'm saying is you can't just d/l the Linux binaries and expect to start playing. There are some serious issues that would prevent this..

Of course, anyone who bought a vid card specifically for Doom 3 would have already bought an nVidia 6800 series card, but that's another story :->

Personally, I was interested in running the binaries, particularily for benchmarking purposes, but with my 9800 Pro card.. I can't.

--
I am the maverick of Slashdot

It's pretty obvious why by Laebshade · 2004-10-05 07:51 · Score: 2, Insightful

Monkeys. Lots and lots of monkeys with high UIDs. And mod points.

What about the user mods? by DunbarTheInept · 2004-10-05 09:23 · Score: 1

Will this work with user-created mods? For example, can I download the infamous flashlight-duct-tape mod and make it work on linux, or is that mod going to only work on Windows? (I don't know the format of how mods work - are they distributed as snippets of executable binaries?)

--

Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

I'm waiting.... by maniac+trek · 2004-10-05 10:05 · Score: 1

... for it to come out for os x. I'm gonna be waiting for a while.

It doesn't work by lukestuts · 2004-10-05 10:30 · Score: 1

I've got everything installed properly but all I get is a black screen. Any ideas?

Re:It doesn't work by Stevyn · 2004-10-05 15:23 · Score: 1

RTFM!!!!!

Did that help?

Re:Hmm.. interesting, but with a number of gotchas by Barto · 2004-10-05 11:50 · Score: 1

fglrx is used by R300 (that is, Radeon 9500 through 9800) and newer cards. Older cards can use the DRI driver included with X.

The lack of support for fglrx is understandable: it's unusable due to poor speed and bugs. If you want to game on Linux you really need an nVidia card (unfortunately).

Actually they do work with X.org... by xavierpayne · 2004-10-05 12:34 · Score: 1

I am using the latest fglx drivers with X.org for Mandrake 10.1
Here is some guidance Copied and pasted from some forum I visited when having issues...

BEGIN QUOTE
yeah i also am using slack 10 and my graphic card is 9600 pro
here is how i did it

1. download the ati drivers, make sure you get the xfree 4.3 ones.
2. open terminal.
3. su
4. cd into directory containing the drivers you just downloaded
5. rpm2tgz fglrx****.rpm
6. installpkg fglrx****.tgz
7. cd /lib/modules/fglrx/build_mod
8. sh make.sh
9. cd ..
10. sh make_install.sh
11. fglrxconfig
12. rename /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 to xorg.conf (backup your xorg.conf first)
13. reboot or restart x server
14. open terminal
15. glxinfo it should say near the top direct rendering YES. (which means hardware opengl working)
END QUOTE

I must saying being able to use both my monitors in Linux finally is Swa-friggin-eet!

Re:Actually they do work with X.org... by wowbagger · 2004-10-05 23:59 · Score: 1

Do they work with V6.8, or just V6.7?

When I tried them, they segfaulted at startup, repeatably.

--
www.eFax.com are spammers

Re:Linux Doomed again!! by Stevyn · 2004-10-05 15:20 · Score: 1

Netcraft confirms it

Historically speaking by babybird · 2004-10-05 16:11 · Score: 2, Informative

iD has always done this with the windows version after several patches. They only have the copy protection in the codebase for the first several versions of the software. But I doubt they'll remove the serial number requirement.

I think Quake 3 lost the CD protection around version 3.12 or 3.17 or something like that. It was the same with Quake 2. CD protection always goes bye bye in the Windows version in a later patch.

--
Keith D.

Re:Deja Vu by Anonymous Coward · 2004-10-05 17:38 · Score: 0

Oh c'mon mods, that guy deserves at least a +1 funny

Need to be recompiled by ReKleSS · 2004-10-05 18:22 · Score: 1

As the subject says. Quake 1 and quake 3 used bytecode. Quake 2 used libraries (DLL and ELF). Doom 3 uses libraries _and_ scripts. Since the SDK hasn't been released yet, I assume the flashlight mod is a script... poke around, you might be able to hack it into working. It's more likely to be because of the patch rather than the OS.
-ReK

--
md5sum -c reality.md5 reality: FAILED md5sum: WARNING: 1 of 1 computed checksum did NOT match

Works for me... by Dimensio · 2004-10-05 20:24 · Score: 2, Informative

I use the pistol-flashlight mod, and I have no problems. In fact, I was able to simply copy over the pak file addons that I use (some new SFX, a gore mod, pistol flashlight and a chaingun tweak) and they all work.

--
STOP MISUSING APOSTROPHES, YOU MORONS!!!

Whoever wrote SafeDisc 3 should be killed horribly by Dimensio · 2004-10-06 08:18 · Score: 1

Unfortunately, copy protection mechanisms add to system overhead and frequently require obnoxious permission levels.

When gaming in Windows, I ALWAYS grab a noCD crack because I absolutely refuse to run my games with full Administrative rights. There is no legitimate reason whatsoever to require that a game have full Admin rights to run, but game publisher execs seem to think that it's a great idea to force a completely artifical requirement that goes against the recommendation of every competent Windows security expert out there.

Also, "works" has no apostrophe.

--
STOP MISUSING APOSTROPHES, YOU MORONS!!!

Re:Is Doom 3 free ? by craXORjack · 2004-10-06 13:55 · Score: 1

Like this

What you will get is the Windows retail CD plus a Linux installer CD and the count goes toward Linux gaming.

--
Liberals call everyone Nazis yet they are the closest thing to it.

411 comments