Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Doom 3 Source Released

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the done-and-done dept.

First Person Shooters (Games) 187

alteveer writes "Just like Quake 3 before it, the Doom 3 source code has been released to the public (minus rendering of stencil shadows via the 'depth fail' method, a functionality commonly known as 'Carmack's Reverse')."

cancel ×

187 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with the (4, Interesting)

CmdrPony (2505686) | about 2 years ago | (#38142758)

old ID engines?

I'm curious because the tech is there. Are there any fun open source games?

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38142786)

Check out Tremulous

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (-1, Flamebait)

CmdrPony (2505686) | about 2 years ago | (#38142836)

Check out Tremulous

The game features two opposing teams: humans and aliens. Each team must attack the enemy's base and team members, while defending their own base.

Sounds boring and so seen. Is there anything like Team Fortress 2 or Modern Warfare 3? With the good team dynamics and classes of TF2, or perks and leveling system of MW3? What about the huge battles, tanks and aircrafts of Battlefield 3?

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38142876)

My friends and I have LANs with WesternQ3, Proball, and Urban Terror.

What you are asking for is a game that gets hundreds of thousands of dollars poured into it. These games are side projects for most of the developers.

The aformentioned games are great at LAN parties for people who care more about the gameplay and having fun than the level of your character.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1)

the linux geek (799780) | about 2 years ago | (#38142894)

Tremulous has an in-depth class/upgrade/building system if I recall. It's actually pretty unique, but not really my cup of tea.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (5, Informative)

xavdeman (946931) | about 2 years ago | (#38142956)

It's funny you mention Modern Warfare 3 since that game's engine is based on id Tech 3, an engine id Software open sourced before, just like they are doing now with Tech 4. "The engine was first used for Call of Duty 2 in 2005 under a proprietary license of id Tech 3 created by id Software in 1999, as at this time, the engine was a heavily modified version of the Quake III engine. The engine did not have an official name until IGN was told at the E3 2009 by the studio that Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 would run on the "IW 4.0 engine". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IW_engine)

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143144)

Most of the FOSS games I've seen made look to me like a Quake 3 clone. How about a CoD4 clone for a change? It doesn't have to be a graphical powerhouse, but I like the game play of CoD4.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (2, Funny)

Lanteran (1883836) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144686)

Wait, you mean you actually LIKE CoD? Geek card status: revoked. I mean, you would have been fine if you hadn't compared it FAVORABLY to quake 3. There is no comparison, only disgrace.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38145068)

Oh my... someone has a differing opinion? Don't get me wrong, Quake 3 is a great game. But there is no need for tens of different open source clones of it. A FOSS game with CoD4 like concepts would be a breath of fresh air compared to its competitors. Also, there really isn't anything wrong with CoD1 through CoD4. It had all the features that PC gamers wanted (mod tools, true dedicated servers). CoD4 is still highly played on the PC.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1)

Lord_Jeremy (1612839) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143312)

Very informative, thanks for the heads up. This makes me wonder if the rather small maps and close quarters (relative to say the Battlefield games) are partially a limitation of the engine from it's Quake 3 roots. As "modern warfare"-ey as the CoD games may be, I've always felt they had a strong element of the traditional Quake DM style both in team dynamics (or lack thereof) and balance. Heh, if anything in the more recent games CoD series has reverted a great deal back toward the Quake style with more twitchiness, more shots to kill a player and removal of mechanics like lean. Can't say it's a bad thing, but personally I prefer the Battlefield and even the Counter-Strike style a great deal more.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143386)

"Heh, if anything in the more recent games CoD series has reverted a great deal back toward the Quake style with more twitchiness, more shots to kill a player and removal of mechanics like lean."

Have you even played Black Ops or MW3? More shots to kill a player? Seriously?

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1)

lexman098 (1983842) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143476)

Yeah, more shots to kill, slower fire rates and more recoil. Ha.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1, Offtopic)

Lord_Jeremy (1612839) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143586)

In my playing experience, going from CoD4:MW to CoD:WaW and CoD:MW2 the games got a lot more twitchy. I haven't played Black Ops all that much (to be honest, it's by far my least favorite out of all of them) but now that I'm thinking about it, weapons did seem more powerful than in the previous three. I have not yet played MW3 at all. I'm having enough fun with Battlefield 3 that I doubt I'll ever play another Call of Duty game.

On another note, I have to say I was quite disappointed with the Battlefield 3 single player experience. Between the weak campaign and the poorly-implemented cooperative mode, it really feels like DICE was trying to imitate the successful single and cooperative player elements from the recent CoD games. Unfortunately not only did they fail to innovate, they failed to even create an acceptable facsimile.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (2, Interesting)

Gripp (1969738) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144434)

Why are you trolling /. with your BF3 vs MW3 babble? both are about "realistic" warfare. but there are only so many ways you can make a FPS before it becomes "just the same old shit". especially if both games have the same visual goals. I've been over FPS since about CoD4. at this point every FPS seems like the same'ol to me (because they are). and it sounds like that may be happening to you too.

on a separate note, i've never understood the desire for an FPS to be "realistic"... i mean, they simply can't be realistic - unless most single shots kill you, or shrapnel from 50m away for that matter. or, at the very least, limit your mobility and senses to a point that you'll be dead soon regardless. and i doubt anyone hardly ever plays in a sleep deprived, hypertensive state - much less with serious crotch rot, athletes foot and scabs/bites from being in dirty/damp places for days without the chance for personal hygiene (your mom's basement does NOT count!). And the most **enjoyable** FPS PvP that I've played were no where near "realistic" (quake, halo, lost planet (yes, the grapple ftw), etc) yet, realism is where all of the push/cash seems to be anymore. it's confusing to me. /rant...

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (0)

Lord_Jeremy (1612839) | more than 2 years ago | (#38145542)

Not once did I say I preferred the "realism" of one game over another. The reason I tend to prefer Battlefield-style games over Call of Duty-style games is the same reason I prefer say Team Fortress 2 over Half Life 2 Deathmatch. Some FPSes are designed with strategy or tactics in mind. The gameplay mechanics force the player to think (with varying degrees of frequency) about the actions they are taking. Relatively low character health and accurate weapons in Battlefield 3 means you can't charge up through a big empty field and expect to survive. You have to use tactics like cover, flanking, or even distraction. Similarly, in Team Fortress 2 it'd be a poor idea to play the Spy class and run straight at a Heavy with your revolver. On the flip side in most Quake style multiplayer games, if you stand still for more than 10 seconds you're dead. Some games emphasize reflexes and the ability to make split second decisions while others emphasize relatively long-term planning and sometimes a coordinated team effort.
Pro Quake 3 [youtube.com]
Pro MW2 [youtube.com] - Obviously not at the same pace as Quake 3 but same concept
Battlefield 3 Support Class [youtube.com] - Totally different beast

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144510)

I feel like the level design is more due to the way the teams work-- a wide open space a-la wake island would result in the aliens getting torn to pieces. The game lends itself far more to closed in maps.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143484)

Let me guess, you are one of those whiners that bitch even when you are being hanged to death with a new rope...

Bla Bla Bla.. I dont like pink rope....... Gaaaaaaaakk...

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (2)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144492)

Its not based around vehicles, and its not a straight up FPS. It is similar in some ways to TF2, but probably the closest thing to it is Command and Conquer: Renegade (a FPS / RTS hybrid).

One of its charming unique aspects is the versatility of the aliens-- being able to play a wall-crawling headcrab or a gigantic trampling monstrosity is always a lot of fun, and it feels really balanced-- a good character can use the weakest weapons and still dominate.

There are reasons to play Battlefield, or TF2, but theyre different sorts of games-- Battlefield (at least BF2) emphasizes the team aspect to an unusual degree with coordination, while TF2 seems to focus on pairs of people on a smaller scale. Tremulous focuses instead on fast-paced action like unreal with a fortress-building aspect.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (4, Informative)

Ciccio87 (2101982) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143652)

Check out Tremulous

Or World Of Padman, also (as far as I know) a derivative work from Quake3 sources, like Tremulous. (World Of Padman [worldofpadman.com] )

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144448)

I came here to post because of tremulous.

Be nice if this could turn into something similar.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1)

Lanteran (1883836) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144700)

It'd be really nice if we could start work on porting Trem to idtech4. Imagine the possibilities! *drool*

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (4, Informative)

Lemming Mark (849014) | about 2 years ago | (#38142828)

Xonotic (successor to Nexuiz) is worth a look: http://www.xonotic.org/ [xonotic.org]

I think that might actually have evolved from Quake 2 era code originally, or something crazy like that - it's a lot more advanced now.

UFO:AI uses the Quake 2 engine on some level as well I think: http://ufoai.ninex.info/wiki/index.php/News [ninex.info]

In my experience Nexuiz and UFO:AI have both been quality Open Source games, although I think UFO:AI contains some media that are not categorised as fully Free in the strictest sense. Xonotic looks to be doing some cool new things and I hope that UFO:AI has also improved since I last played with it.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 2 years ago | (#38142958)

Quake. Nexuiz uses the darkplaces engine, which is the first quake's engine redone :)

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1)

richlv (778496) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143120)

was going to plug ufo:ai, even though i don't have the time to popularise it much lately. it uses id engine for 3d environments (although quite modified by now), and is of a fairly good quality and fun level.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38142862)

Urban Terror came out of Quake 3. Very fun. The issue is that these online games tend to get filled with a lot of South American / Spanish speaking players (think TeamSpeak). If you speak Spanish, it would be better, as communicating in team games can be difficult sometimes.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (2)

nonsensical (1237544) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143084)

The game is the most popular in Europe even more than South America. But North America has plenty of people playing, and it's own league, http://www.ftwgl.com

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (2, Interesting)

Hadlock (143607) | about 2 years ago | (#38142870)

Not Open Source, but Brink came out this spring based on the Doom 3 (IDTECH 3, I think?) source code. While terribly supported by the developer (Splash Damage) for the PC, it's a beautiful game, and really says a lot about what can be done with this codebase.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38142906)

Urban Terror was a Q3 mod, but is now a standalone, free game.

I still play it all the time, the circle jumping, and walljumping aspects make for some really fun gameplay. Kind of like street fighter turbo or something...

http://www.urbanterror.info/home/

Loads of fun...dare I say, I kinda like it more than q3...

Here's a good vid of the extra movement abilities -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVV5aCFY4QI

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1)

nonsensical (1237544) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143030)

Urban Terror is a great game, what makes it unique is, as parent suggested, the movement mechanics of the game. Once you learn how to jump and move, it feels natural, to jump off walls, to gain speed while jumping, it just works beautifully.

The weapons are well balanced, and fun. It has a very large and active community, and many sub communities, from jumpers to active Leagues in North America, Europe and South America. You can always find good servers to play on.

Plus the game is in development for a new version, so don't let the old looking graphics scare you away. It also runs on mac, linux and windows.

I originally found Urban Terror due to some post on /. a while back as well.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (5, Insightful)

next_ghost (1868792) | about 2 years ago | (#38142930)

Even if nobody created anything new, the ability to keep the original ID games up to date with modern systems is more than enough.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (2)

Hamsterdan (815291) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144394)

If only Lucasarts were listening... I mean, the possibility they could still *sell* the original X-wing & TIE series (DOS ones, with iMuse, not the CD-audio crap) aren't just there, so unless it's

1- Just because they don't want to
2- Some code might have been licensed

My money is on n.1

(yes, I know about Dosbox, but it has some sound issues)

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (3, Informative)

Joehonkie (665142) | about 2 years ago | (#38142938)

Many mentioned above and Warsow (http://www.warsow.net/) which takes the arcadey style of Quake 3 even up yet another notch.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143304)

Doom 3 release is going to be great for The Dark Mod among other projects: http://www.thedarkmod.com/main/

Open Arena (3, Informative)

nullchar (446050) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143610)

Open Arena [wikia.com] is a small, but active community. There are always open games to play online, and some crazy mods [wikia.com] (like Defrag to learn how to circle jump) that make it fun.

Works great in linux with old hardware as it's based off Quake III.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1)

Kevin108 (760520) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144292)

How about zDoom? Doom plus mouse-look, jumping and support for modern resolutions is win.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (5, Insightful)

chilvence (1210312) | more than 2 years ago | (#38145064)

From the tone of your post, it sounds as if you are dubious about the point of companies releasing their source.

I find that depressing. Once a studio has released a game, patched the worst of the bugs, and moved on, disbanded, been bought up, that game is effectively dead. Sooner or later, some new hardware or software update will poke a hole in it, it will become impossible to run, and it will sink into the abyss taking all its fun and charm with it. The only way to keep hold of your old favourite games is to preserve your old computer, like an embalmed beige corpse in a crypt under the stairs, exhuming it once in a while to fill a void left by the abscence of anything even remotely similar in modern games.

For me this game would be Dungeon Keeper, for you, I bet there is a 90% chance there is something you can fit in this story.

My point is, id is a good sport releasing source code, but ALL games should release their source eventually. Once they have been sold in their millions, they are, in spirit, public property, and like a park or a road or a shopping centre, they need people to maintain them, until they have been able to live out their full lifespan gracefully.

Now if you need me I will be under the stairs, slapping my imps...

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1)

Bent Mind (853241) | more than 2 years ago | (#38145338)

I've always enjoyed World of Padman [worldofpadman.com] . It is a cartoon-styled world of paint ball fights based on the Quake III Arena engine.

Re:Has anyone actually made any worthwhile with th (1)

F34nor (321515) | more than 2 years ago | (#38145510)

quake 2 --> halflife --> natural selection

Can I learn how to program the GPU from the source (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38142798)

To the gurus,

Is it possible to learn how to program the GPUs from the source?

Thank you !

Re:Can I learn how to program the GPU from the sou (5, Insightful)

masternerdguy (2468142) | about 2 years ago | (#38142820)

Yes but you'd be better off learning by assembling a simple program than reverse engineering a big one.

Re:Can I learn how to program the GPU from the sou (1)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143094)

To the gurus,

Is it possible to learn how to program the GPUs from the source?

Thank you !

That's a very broad question, do you want to do general purpose computations on the GPU or use the GPU for custom shading effects in the graphics pipeline of an application/game?
Your best bet is probably some tutorials on CUDA or OpenCL for GPGPU and Cg, GLSL or HLSL for shading.

Re:Can I learn how to program the GPU from the sou (2)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143112)

How about just doing some tutorials [gamedev.net] ? Those ones are pretty old of course, but they're what I used when I was messing around with 3D graphics as a teenager.

Re:Can I learn how to program the GPU from the sou (5, Informative)

Dan East (318230) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143258)

I've worked extensively with the Quake 1 and 2 sources (I ported them both to Pocket PC, which required rewriting a lot of the computationally expensive routines from floating point to fixed point math, as the ARM processors of that era did not have a FPU). I can say that no, you're not going to learn anything that way. The code has few if any comments at all, the routines are optimized, the data structures are optimized, tons of preprocessing of data happens both at the content level and during load time, plus any other trick Carmack could throw in there to increase performance. Unless you wanting to follow the path of execution as it relates to a specific data set or type of rendering, just to see the exact techniques used (obviously knowing specifically what you are looking for) then you're not going to learn that way.

Re:Can I learn how to program the GPU from the sou (1)

PwnzerDragoon (2014464) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144822)

Not easily, no. It would be a bit like learning a foreign language by taking a job as a UN translator. Or if you need that in a car analogy, learning to drive by becoming a stunt driver.

Another level (5, Interesting)

masternerdguy (2468142) | about 2 years ago | (#38142804)

Carmack has raised the bar for the game industry once again.

Re:Another level (1)

esquizoide (834082) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143396)

He lowered pretty down with MEGATEXTURES, though.

Re:Another level (2)

nbohr1more (2039034) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144304)

Megatextures still have potential. They just need to be more conservative instead of trying to make everything out of them. Mixing traditional textures and Megatextures gave the game BRINK it's distinctive look and the technique could be extended further. John Carmack was trying too hard to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eating_your_own_dog_food [wikipedia.org] A more realistic approach would've been optimal.

Re:Another level (1)

tapo (855172) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144824)

Brink didn't use Megatextures, there was no need for it to do so.

The only two games to use Megatextures so far are RAGE and Quake Wars. In the latter, they work quite well.

May I be the first to say (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38142810)

Thank you, Id!!!

Nice! (1, Redundant)

Grindalf (1089511) | about 2 years ago | (#38142826)

Nice! Good call ID Software ...

Hail (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38142844)

to the king, baby!

This version is brought to you by fleshlight.

License (4, Informative)

u17 (1730558) | about 2 years ago | (#38142962)

It seems that the licensing is a mess.

The header in the source files state that the code is GPLv3 or any later version, with additional clauses added.

In addition, the Doom 3 Source Code is also subject to certain additional terms. You should have received a copy of these additional terms immediately following the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License which accompanied the Doom 3 Source Code. If not, please request a copy in writing from id Software at the address below.

However, it seems that it is only possible to apply these additional terms to GPL version 3 exactly (and not any later version):

2. Replacement of Section 16. Section 16 of the GPL shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

These additional terms seem to be just disclaimers of liability and an indemnity clause, but it is entirely possible that they make the source GPL-incompatible, which, if true, would be a huge disappointment.

So not only is the license not self-consistent, it is likely also GPL-incompatible. The additional terms may further make the license non-free, and definitely non-DFSG-compliant. Thanks go to the corporate lawyers who have turned Carmack's good intentions into an abomination. I hope that they can re-release this under saner terms.

Re:License (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143154)

This doesn't seem to be a problem since the base GPL v3 license explicitly allows replacement of Section 16:

7. Additional Terms.

    "Additional permissions" are terms that supplement the terms of this
License by making exceptions from one or more of its conditions.
Additional permissions that are applicable to the entire Program shall
be treated as though they were included in this License, to the extent
that they are valid under applicable law. If additional permissions
apply only to part of the Program, that part may be used separately
under those permissions, but the entire Program remains governed by
this License without regard to the additional permissions.

    When you convey a copy of a covered work, you may at your option
remove any additional permissions from that copy, or from any part of
it. (Additional permissions may be written to require their own
removal in certain cases when you modify the work.) You may place
additional permissions on material, added by you to a covered work,
for which you have or can give appropriate copyright permission.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, for material you
add to a covered work, you may (if authorized by the copyright holders of
that material) supplement the terms of this License with terms:

        a) Disclaiming warranty or limiting liability differently from the
        terms of sections 15 and 16 of this License; or

        b) Requiring preservation of specified reasonable legal notices or
        author attributions in that material or in the Appropriate Legal
        Notices displayed by works containing it; or ... [snip] ...

Re:License (3)

u17 (1730558) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143360)

The GPL3 does indeed state that. But isn't the purpose of section 7 only to allow the copyright holder to work around the fact that the header of the license states that changing it is not allowed? Section 7 explicitly mentions that you have to have permission from the copyright holder to add additional clauses. You may thus add restrictions to the license which are not counter to the spirit of the vanilla GPL3.

But the question is, how does this affect compatibility between "GPL3 with additional restrictions" and just "GPL3"? Since without permission from the copyright holder you cannot add or remove additional restrictions, you may not use the licenses interchangeably. Because the additional restrictions are not present in the vanilla GPL3 (which does not allow additional restrictions unless you are the copyright holder and these restrictions fall under section 7), if you combine GPL3 code and "GPL3 with restrictions" code, it seems to me that there is no possible way to satisfy the terms of both licenses simultaneously.

So the way I see it, although GPL3 allows you to add these terms, by doing so you make your license GPL3-incompatible. If this is the case then it is troubling, and I would welcome any clarification from someone who knows the details behind this.

Carmack's Reverse (3, Funny)

orphiuchus (1146483) | about 2 years ago | (#38142966)

Oh, I thought that was when he went from the god of PC graphics with games like Quake to their bane with that abortion Rage.

Re:Carmack's Reverse (5, Informative)

scdeimos (632778) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143080)

This is hardly an authoritative source, but it does give some historical insight (from 2009) into why Carmack's Reverse had to be removed from the Doom 3 source release: http://newenthusiast.com/carmacks-reverse-still-an-issue-20090409489 [newenthusiast.com]

Re:Carmack's Reverse (5, Interesting)

xavdeman (946931) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143086)

It took Carmack a considerably shorter time to come up with that engine than it took for id's art department to make a game out of it. And that game isn't even good. Seriously id Software needs to refocus on one thing, making great engines with tech-demo games (Doom 3) or great games with outdated engines because all they are doing now is tech-demo games with outdated engines (Rage). The id Tech 5 engine was first shown at the WWDC 2007, RAGE was released just a month ago. So there's a four year disparity. Also, the engine (or at least, RAGE) lacks features like HDR, which are present even in the (old, but updated) Source engine.

Re:Carmack's Reverse (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143438)

I'd mod you up if I had points.

I like the Doom 3 engine, but the game itself was lack luster. It does say a lot that the game still looks pretty good years later, but the gameplay hasn't aged well at all. I still get a blast out of playing Wolf3d, Doom and Quake, but Doom 3 was a serious snore. As much as people complained about DNF, it was at least fun to play and funny.

Re:Carmack's Reverse (4, Informative)

Lord_Jeremy (1612839) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143614)

IMHO the best thing about Doom 3 was that it lead to Quake 4, which is definitely one of my favorite single player games. Hell, Q4 is also one of the few games that had both worthwhile single player and multiplayer.

Re:Carmack's Reverse (2)

SpazmodeusG (1334705) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143240)

You're overstating it a bit on Rage. It's an OK game with a good FPS engine behind it which was buggy on release but has since been fixed.

Re:Carmack's Reverse (1)

ThePeices (635180) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143294)

Buggy on release, but since been fixed.

Nothing new here, move along.

This is standard operating practice in the deadline centric software industry.

Re:Carmack's Reverse (2)

am 2k (217885) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143508)

If you remove the deadline, you get something like Duke Nukem Forever. A game is never "done", so you have to make a cut somewhere.

Re:Carmack's Reverse (1)

francium goes boom (1969836) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143626)

Or you get a game like Starcraft II or Diablo 3, or DotA2 or Half Life 3/ep3 (please?).

DNF's issue was George Broussard. He always wanted the latest and greatest and that is something you can never have and release a finished game.

Re:Carmack's Reverse (1)

am 2k (217885) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143700)

The folks at Blizzard do have internal deadlines, they just don't communicate them to the outside.

Last year, their timeline was leaked [teamliquid.net] , showing the release dates of several titles for the next few years.

Re:Carmack's Reverse (2)

dudpixel (1429789) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143814)

In order to meet a deadline, you should drop features, not quality.

I guess this is something that really determines how good the project lead is...

Surround sound (2)

Brebs (888917) | about 2 years ago | (#38142974)

Great, can fix the surround sound [gentoo.org] now.

what's this function doing in here... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38143044)

when the comment says /* ... //FIXME: This is pretty much wrong. won't access data in most situations. ...
*/

The function in question is idInterpreter::GetRegisterValue in neo/game/script/Script_Interpreter.c

A lot more FIXMEs in other source files. Fun to read.

Open Content Projects (2)

Hsien-Ko (1090623) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143060)

Anyone going to cook some up?

I may or may not do it because I personally loath MD5's lack of precalculated normals.

Quake4 source is obviously not included so no OpenArena4. Probably something coopey and SPey would be in order (OMG A LINUX FIRST?)

The Dark Mod! (5, Interesting)

nbohr1more (2039034) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143162)

The Dark Mod, a Doom 3 total conversion which turns the game into something similar to the "Thief" series games, will now be able to optimize and fix render, AI, and physics. This is a day for celebration! www.thedarkmod.com http://www.moddb.com/mods/the-dark-mod [moddb.com]

Re:The Dark Mod! (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143454)

The real product as far as I'm concerned with iD games is as much the mods you get for free from the community as the game itself. There have been some amazing mods over the years.

Re:The Dark Mod! (3, Funny)

nbohr1more (2039034) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143548)

Compiled Re:The Dark Mod! (2)

mrmeval (662166) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144420)

I just tried to compile it and it squeeled and died. I use 64 bit Fedora so 32bit systems may 'just work'.

Do

scons NOCURL='1'

As it the compile fails add in the i686 development version of the library it's crying for. There is no static version of zlib so you'll have to grab the source, compile it and copy zlib.a to /usr/lib

Re:Compiled Re:The Dark Mod! (2)

mrmeval (662166) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144484)

This fixed all the rendering problems I have been having with the GPL radeon driver.

Re:Compiled Re:The Dark Mod! (2)

nbohr1more (2039034) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144562)

Thanks for the update! If you get a chance, stop by The Dark Mod forums to discuss your findings. http://forums.thedarkmod.com/ [thedarkmod.com]

i think. (4, Insightful)

Truekaiser (724672) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143232)

considering id is now owned by besthesda, that this is going to be the last release of their engine source as they now have final say. and when was the last time they even acknowledged the existence of linux let alone treat pc gamer's well?

Re:i think. (2)

francium goes boom (1969836) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143648)

Bethesda has treated PC gamers very well with the Fall Out and Elder Scrolls games. Releasing API's to allow fan made mods to their games are one of the reasons I enjoy playing them.

But like just about everyone else these days, if I get the game day 1 i'll be paying $60 to beta test for them.

Re:i think. (3, Informative)

X3J11 (791922) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143842)

Bethesda has treated PC gamers very well with the Fall Out and Elder Scrolls games.

If by "very well" you meant "released buggy games and a few patches that fixed a small percentage of those bugs, and then left it to the community of players to fix everything else" then yes, you are correct.

For example, there is the Unofficial Oblivion Patch [tesnexus.com]

This mod is a joint effort to fix the vast amount of bugs currently existing in Oblivion v1.2.0.416, fixing over 2,200 bugs so far!

For another example, there was the Fallout 3 1.4 patch, issued three months after the previous patch, with folks complaining left and right about how buggy the game was (it would throw up an error on Windows when exiting the game... they couldn't even get their "quit program" routine to not crash!).

The patch does not actually fix any known bugs. The only new features are:
- New achievements for The Pitt
- Support for multiple add-ons (Gamers in Asia can now play Operation: Anchorage, unlike before).

Releasing API's to allow fan made mods to their games are one of the reasons I enjoy playing them.

They don't release an API, or you misunderstand what an API is - they release a "construction kit". Some might think I am splitting hairs, but they have never put out anything that lets you communicate directly with the internals of the game engine, a "programming interface" if you will.

Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of Bethesda's games - Skyrim on day 1, Fallout (and New Vegas, different people I know) collector's editions (PC and XBOX). But I am also not blind to how poor their code seems to be and how little they really support and fix their games. When equipping an item causes the game to crash, something is seriously wrong (Morrowind did that to me all the time).

Re:i think. (2)

Mia'cova (691309) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144076)

When something crashes on exit, it's usually due to some form of memory leak. Those aren't always trivial to investigate and fix. It's not as brain dead simple as you seem to imply.

Re:i think. (1)

Steauengeglase (512315) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144032)

Sounds more like the opposite. This would be the first engine source release with ZeniMax having the final say.

Re:i think. (1)

Little Brickout (896529) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144208)

That would be RtCW I believe.

Re:i think. (1)

Little Brickout (896529) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144186)

Uh, no. Zenimax okayed the release of Arx Fatalis source code earlier this year. This isn't just an id thing.

Re:i think. (4, Informative)

petman (619526) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144202)

Minor detail: id Software, as well as Bethesda Softworks, is owned by Zenimax Media. In other words, id and Bethesda are sister companies.

Now please mod me informative.

Some neat projects (2)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143292)

Recall the Pathways into Darkness mod for D3 based on the old Bungie game from 1993?
http://rampancy.net/reviews/pathwaysredux [rampancy.net]

Re:Some neat projects (1)

Lord_Jeremy (1612839) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143628)

Hah! I literally just started playing through that incredible gem (the original Pathways, that is) on a 68k Mac emulator. I had wondered if there was a remake, thanks for the insight!

Any magic? (1)

Crackez (605836) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143560)

Any magic found in the Doom 3 sources yet? Like 0x5f3759df from Quake III Arena?

Re:Any magic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144456)

Yeah the Carmack Reverse, and they had to yank it out because of patent issues.
Modern FPU's blow the doors off anything using the Fast Inverse Square Root trick. It was clever then, dated now.

Shadow clarification (1)

rapidreload (2476516) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143596)

(minus rendering of stencil shadows via the 'depth fail' method, a functionality commonly known as 'Carmack's Reverse').

I though Carmack had produced a workaround for the patent issue brought on by the original "depth fail" method of stencil shadows. The summary (and to some extend the README.txt file in the base of the GitHub project) suggests that the stencil shadow rendering functionality is completely missing - as in, no shadows at all. That doesn't sound like a workaround so much as ripping out a core component of the engine. If so this greatly reduces the immersiveness of the engine (and its usefulness in total conversion mods like The Dark Mod). Hopefully someone can clarify as to whether this is true or I'm just reading things incorrectly.

Re:Shadow clarification (1)

nbohr1more (2039034) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144052)

Stencil shadows haven't been removed. Just the depth-fail method (which may mean a performance penalty unless Carmack worked some new magic...) Even without the shadows, the per-pixel dynamic lighting is still valuable and new shadow methods can be implemented anyway (especially with so much of the engine tracking light positional effects).

Re:Shadow clarification (5, Informative)

XenoBrain (719411) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144062)

You can read the substituted implementation here: https://github.com/TTimo/doom3.gpl/blob/master/neo/renderer/tr_stencilshadow.cpp [github.com] https://github.com/TTimo/doom3.gpl/blob/master/neo/renderer/tr_shadowbounds.cpp [github.com] I won't pretend to fully understand it but it does seem to be an implementaion of shadow volumes.

Useless (2, Interesting)

Sigvatr (1207234) | more than 2 years ago | (#38143734)

Doom 3's shadowing technology is what made it stand out at the time. What good is yet another FPS engine being released open source when its distinguishing feature is removed?

Re:Useless (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38144266)

It's not removed, it's been reimplemented in a slightly more inefficient way to dodge patent issues.

Re:Useless (1)

787style (816008) | more than 2 years ago | (#38144744)

What would happen if the offensive code was simply commented out, allowing downloaders to easily add the offending code back in?

iodoom3 (5, Interesting)

Time Doctor (79352) | more than 2 years ago | (#38145086)

If anyone is interested I've created iodoom3 [iodoom3.org] to follow on from the ioquake3 project [ioquake3.org] my team put together.

Let me know what you'd like to see in a modernized Doom 3 Engine!

Re:iodoom3 (1)

IronSight (1925612) | more than 2 years ago | (#38145340)

Off the top of my head... For linux, pulseaudio and alsa support. Blender model support (and not needing an aftermarket plugin for blender). Android port (separate team I know :( ). Motion blur. Ambient occulsion. Different measures to prevent such things as aimbots (somehow magically people can't make aimbots for serious sam games, might be something to look into) and servers that don't send you positional data of other players unless they are within your view area. Desktop resolution autodetect at startup that lists all resolutions possible on the system.

thanks John! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38145134)

salute!

First thing I want to see.. (1)

gearloos (816828) | more than 2 years ago | (#38145180)

First thing I want to see is someone please add some light to the dam game!!! It's just plain to dam dark!

Re:First thing I want to see.. (1)

IronSight (1925612) | more than 2 years ago | (#38145504)

That kind of requires the source maps to add the light entities, then to upload those levels which are not free. So I doubt that would happen. Though a mod could come out with new levels that could have more light in them but they couldn't be the same levels unless those levels are also opened. Just because the game's source code was open sourced doesn't mean the game data is free now. Not that it is that hard to make some single player missions with some light in them. We saw plenty of scenes in quake 4 (same engine) that were bright. They made the game dark and gloomy to hide the 4 zombies SLOWLY walking towards you. Duct tape mod helped a bit with the situation by giving you a flashlight "duct taped" to your gun. Though I think an interesting mod would more be splinter cell style Infra-red/NVG's. Mostly what the game source covers are things like network code, graphics engine, sound output, input, resource loading, how the console works, how it loads scripts for the game data to do what it is meant to do. Like you can't edit "how a gun looks/how many monsters are in a room/how many lights are in an area/what the startup videos look like/how many shots until you have to reload/what sound the cyber-demon makes when it dies" in the engine source.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>