Quake2 Ported to Java, Play Via the Web

casemon writes "Quake2 fans unite! Thanks to German software developer ByTonic software, you can now play Quake2 via the web with Jake2 a java port of ID Softwares seminal Quake2. ByTonic claims performance is similar to original C version. From the Jake2 website; "Jake2 is a Java 3D game engine. It is a port of the GPL'd Quake2 game engine from idSoftware. To use the Jake2 engine you need either the data files from the original game or from the demo version available for download from ftp://ftp.idsoftware.com." You actually don't need to get the data files, they've set it up to automatically download the 38Mb demo assets using WebStart. Just click the Play Now button and away you go. Most features supported, even multiplayer server!"

Comments

Erm, link:

[medgooroo]

http://www.bytonic.de/html/jake2.html just thought it might be, you know, handy?

Re:Erm, link:

[MartinG]

This is a bullshit argument that generally presumes a substandard optimization by the binary compiler.

No it assumes that the compiler cannot know the most common runtime code paths (which is true). A JIT engine can of course.

Even with compilers that read seperately collected profiler data (such as recent gcc which can take gprof output) can only work on that one profiler measurement. Lots of software is highly dependent on usage patterns and so different paths will be run depending on how the user uses the software. Only runtime optimisation can take this into account.

Re:Erm, link:

[CowboyBob500]

Exactly. In real life I found that there are 3 types of people who perpetuate the myth that Java is slow:-

1) .NET developers
2) People who's last experience of Java was rollover applets in 1996 and who have refused to install a JVM since
3) Crusty old Unix hackers with beards and rainbow jumpers for whom Window Managers are eye candy and whose idea of a IDE is vi

Bob

Re:Erm, link:

[Keebler71]

Exactly. In real life I found that there are 3 types of people who perpetuate the myth that Java is slow:-

Don't you mean that there are 11 types of people?

Works pretty well

[Anonymous Coward]

I saw it at swing sightings. I tried it with the original game files and didn't notice any difference in speed with the original binaries.
And this with a not so fast computer: PIII 800, TNT 2, 384 MB RAM.
Anyway if you wanna see benchmarks with older computers look at their web.

If I was Sun CEO...

[should_be_linear]

... I would give this guy research lab and resources to create java-based DirectX library. For game developers, it would be just great to write once and sell on Windows on Linux on Mac on Playstation (don't know about XBox). Even without Sun's support, it would be great fot 3rd party to sell such engine/framework.

Re:If I was Sun CEO...

[TheRaven64]

Java already has an OpenGL interface (presumably what this is using). I don't know what this guy is using for sound (although the Java Media Framework might work), or input, but presumably all of the pieces are already there. What Sun really needs to do is market Java better as a game development platform. Add some code for loading models as OpenGL display lists, and a few other convenience methods and start plugging the platform better. Oh, and relax the licensing so I can run Java on my FreeBSD box without jumping through hoops.

Re:"...performance is similar to original C versio

[steevc]

Check out the benchmarks. Similar frame rates to the C version on the same hardware.

I've not tried it myself yet. Might get in trouble at work.

Re:Quake 2 seminal?

[Antonymous Flower]

Quake 2 was the first game designed for and supporting 3d acceleration out of the box. In this way it is certainly seminal. So much so, in fact, that 3d acceleration is no longer a part of the collective consumer consciousness :)

The Slowness Of Java

[Lagged2Death]

Even with 512MB of RAM, Azureus (the hugely popular Java-based BitTorrent client) takes forever to start up, responds sluggishly to user input, and sucks down so much RAM that the Windows PC it's running on is nearly useless for any other task. This isn't simply the nature of BitTorrent - other clients run far more smoothly.

Maybe there are reasons for this that aren't directly related to Java. Maybe Azureus just isn't very well-written, or maybe it's just feature-bloated. Maybe the Windows JVM just stinks.

But in any case, the common perception of Java applications as being slow and ponderous is one that Java applications have earned - there are actual reasons, based on real-world experiences, that cause people to feel this way. That has nothing to do with some pig-headed resistance to change.

Rather than railing against the Java-haters, why not point out some useful, slick, fast Java-based applications? I'd love to see some. Every one that I've tried so far has been a disaster in one way or another. I honestly want to like Java. I like the language, I love the concept - it's the real-world experience with it that I have a problem with.

Re:The Slowness Of Java

[FatherOfONe]

"Rather than railing against the Java-haters, why not point out some useful, slick, fast Java-based applications? I'd love to see some."

Um, you did see what the article is about didn't you? Perhaps you should try it out.

I have used quite a few Java programs and most perform well.

Re:The Slowness Of Java

[Anonymous Coward]

A port of Quake 2 that is slower and uses more memory than the native client that was released seven years ago?

C and profile feedback optimization.

[bored]

I have two points.

Comparing a static C binary, with a JIT is sort of silly. Logically comparing a JIT with a C binary compiled with profile based feedback optimization is probably more legitimate.

Secondly, the released Quake engine had a couple of assembly routines. Proving that C wasn't always the best choice, even back then. My understanding is that the versions of quake with assembly loops are roughtly 30% faster than the C only version they are comparing this with.

In the end these sound like good results, I'm continually amazed at how fast java has gotten. The fundamental arch is pretty much broken for generating fast binaries, and it speaks volumes about the quality of the coders writing the JIT engines that they can make a stack based compilation target run fast on modern processors.

Oh, one final thing, did anyone see what C compiler they used for those numbers? I'm currious if it was the same compiler ID originally used, or one of the more modern intel compilers?