×

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!

Carmack Expounds on Doom III

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the lots-of-monsters dept.

Games 351

Rainier Wolfecastle writes: "Non-high-end-comp-owning geeks rejoice! GameSpot is reporting that John Carmack has confirmed that Doom III is Xbox-bound. Carmack said that id is totally commited to bringing the game to Microsoft's console with its visual splendor intact. Best of all, the game could be available on the Xbox as soon as May next year." And Warrior-GS writes: "John Carmack gave a two-hour presentation about Doom 3 and engine technology. GameSpy reports on the presentations and analyzes Carmack's comments and how they apply to the future of gaming. There is also a look at the demo of Doom III"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

351 comments

Linux? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090858)

Does uit run on lonux?

PS/2? (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090860)

It would save me from upgrading my computer if it came out on PS/2 too :)

Re:PS/2? (0, Offtopic)

dadragon (177695) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090867)

Something tells me that a Microchannel computer will not be able to run Doom III due to its lack of decent 3D support.

Oh, you meant the Playstation2? Sorry.. :)

Re:PS/2? (1)

vipw (228) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090950)

I'm pretty sure he meant the old IBM system. Slashdot made that mistake with a headline earlier today.

Re:PS/2? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090879)

You expect this to run on a system with no pixel or vertex shaders, and no hardware T&L?

Sorry, the PS2 is simply not powerful enough for this. Even the Gamecube's graphics chip isn't quite flexible enough to pull it off.

Re:PS/2? (1, Flamebait)

emir (111909) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090881)

i heard that it will be available for ps2 but gfx wont be as good as on pc/xbox because ps2 isnt powerful enough

Re:PS/2? (5, Informative)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091116)

"i heard that it will be available for ps2 but gfx wont be as good as on pc/xbox because ps2 isnt powerful enough..."

I'm going to have to defend Mr Emir here. What he said is not flamebait, it's the truth. The pS2 has bottlenecks that render it impossible to achieve the same visual quality as the XBOX with this game. It's too RAM heavy. It's widely known that the PS2's texture buffer is very slim compared to XBOX or even GameCube. The fact that it doesn't have texture compression doesn't help it either.

The PS2 could get a version of it, but it'll definitely be noticably worse than the XBOX version. Call it flamebait if ya like, but I find it ridiculous to believe that anybody'd disagree with me. The PS2 wasn't built for that!

Carmack's finally coming around... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090865)

Developing for Xbox may mean that Carmack is finally willing to join the rest of the game development community and use the standard Direct3D API instead of this proprietary OpenGL stuff he keeps raving about.

Ummm.... (-1, Flamebait)

Issue9mm (97360) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090868)

Yay?

I'm sure that there are plenty of us that own Xboxes, but fortunately, I'm not one of them. I'm glad that Carmack is getting more exposure, though, even if I don't like the crowd so much.

-9mm-

Re:Ummm.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091039)

>but fortunately, I'm not one of them.

I'll have to agree with you on that one. I don't own an XBox [sic], I already own a PC...

recompile.org [recompile.org]

Listed to the Address (5, Informative)

IronTek (153138) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090880)

The folks here [gamers-ammo.com] managed to record the audio of carmack's speech despite the "no audio, no video" policy (who knows how they snuck it in!).

enjoy! [gamers-ammo.com]

Re:Listed to the Address (1, Informative)

Richard5mith (209559) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090915)

Team Sportscast Network broadcast the speech live, which is what the MP3 came from.

For the speech... http://www.fileshack.com/file.x?fid=855 [fileshack.com]

Re:Listed to the Address (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090963)

Does anybody want to put that up somewhere where you don't have to have an account to download it.

Re:Listed to the Address (1)

MrP- (45616) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091023)

Just use cypherpunk/cypherpunk , I just tried it and it works.

Is it just me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090965)

Is it just me or does he talk a lot like Professor Frink?

Re:Is it just me... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091031)

lol yeah he does, hrrm!

i was waiting for him to scream HOYVEN!

Re:Is it just me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091147)

You know what's scary (for me)? I've never seen a picture of him before. Omigosh, from the right angle he looks a lot like me (or I like him, I suppose). I mean, a lot

That being said, my voice is a rich baritone, and I've never once said "HOYVEN!"

Re:Listed to the Address (1)

Saeger (456549) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091091)

Aren't they still using the convenient Terrorist Excuse to keep people from bringing stuff like that in?

Much like how another group of assholes [yahoo.com] is abusing the terrorist card by demanding that the government ban adbanner-towing planes from flying over their stadiums... when the real reason for their 'concern' is that they don't get a cut of the revenue.

(You can mod me down now... I feel better)

--

Re:Listed to the Address (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091199)

It is not an excuse to be proactive about common sense security measures.

Re:Listed to the Address (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091204)

How'd they do it? To paraphrase the late great Dr. Richard Feynman, "there's plenty of room in the bottom."

Owww, stop it...

Sad (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090884)

He should have chose Playstation

Toms Hardware Coverage (1)

T-Kir (597145) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090886)

gratuitous link to Toms Hardware [tomshardware.com] who are covering the QuakeCon for those who haven't been there yet.

They have info on the first 2 days so far (link is to day 1).

zerg (4, Funny)

Lord Omlette (124579) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090887)

Before anyone accuses Carmack of selling out to Microsoft, please keep in mind that his wife is really hot and he owns his own aerospace company. He doesn't have to sell out to anyone.

Trent Reznor (1)

T-Kir (597145) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090923)

Slightly offtopic I know, but he is good mates with Nine Inch Nails frontman Trent Reznor, which goes down well IMO.

Plus his work on all the audio for Doom III is excellent, if you want a more thematic music befitting the type of game Doom is (or anything id does for that matter), he is the man to do it.

Plus they're pushing the envelope a bit with the "I would like to see the standard adoption of 5.1 sound across the board". Screw those crappy stereo sound cards!!!

Re:Trent Reznor (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091037)

Trent Reznor, which goes down well

That should be 'who goes down well.' Trent is a person, not an object. And anyway, of the two I think Carmack gives better head.

Re:Trent Reznor (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091120)

I think he is refering to the actual friendship, in which case "which" works.

Re:zerg (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090934)

As aerospace companies all over the world are suffering a global 'crisis', he might still have to sell out to Micro$oft.

Just wanted to state tis one, dunnow his wife, but i believe you she's hot ;o)

Re:zerg (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090974)

someone post a picture of carmack's hot wife!

Uh. His wife is a mail order bride. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091008)

But yeah she is hot.

Re:zerg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091112)

Anna Kang [68.12.198.137] isn't that hot.

Even I've had hotter asian poontang than that.

Re:zerg (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091183)

Man, that room must fucking STINK!

Yes Doom III looks cool, but... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090893)

Can it use google.com like a wizard and win $10k at a Quake III tournament? Daler can :)

Re:Yes Doom III looks cool, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090902)

It's an inside joke for anyone who didn't pay attention to Quakecon2002. Daler is a player who placed 2nd and is known on irc for cheating in trivia games using google.

Dropping system requirements? (1)

DamienMcKenna (181101) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090900)

Given how he has stated before that graphics chips on the market last year really wouldn't be up to playing the game well, does that mean he has dropped the system requirements to make it work on the xbox? Or is he going to make a "trimmed-down" version to fix the xbox with a coupon in the box to buy the "Full Experience" PC edition?

Re:Dropping system requirements? (2)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090913)

Well I'm sure it would just be a matter of dropping some of the rendering options. One thing though I read that doomIII is not going to support sound acceleration hardware in the pc, while the xbox version will (could be because its not standardized enough on the pc or something I don't know)

Re:Dropping system requirements? (1)

Kragg (300602) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091055)

No, because as he said in the article... There are 6 different rendering engines for different cards, but they all do the same thing, only at differing resolutions.

The big point he made (which I like a lot) was that he wants it to look the same on any hardware. So your flashy new effects aren't going to be used... but at least it's consistent.

And I expect the xbox will be able to cope. Well, in 320x200 at 8bit colour anyway :)

btw does anybody know how well cg aligns with what he's talking about - higher level apis by which you just specify what you want done and get the card to do it in whichever way is best? From what I know this isn't even close to cg (or is it gc..?), so he's wandering off on his own by the looks of things.

After seeing screenshots and reading that article. (2, Funny)

TellarHK (159748) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090905)

... I think I need to change my underwear.

Anyone got a cigarette?

Wow, what a fag, you jacked off the a DOOM 3 demo (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090931)

There are these great new things out called "women". They are attractive and you can actually have sex with them, you can even cum inside them so you don't get your pants dirty. If you have some free time, please check it out.

Re:After seeing screenshots and reading that artic (1, Offtopic)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091065)

... I think I need to change my underwear.

Anyone got a cigarette?


If you need to burn off your underwear with a cigarette, then yes you do need to change it.

API? (5, Interesting)

Sivar (316343) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090916)

Does this mean that JC (John Carmack, not the other one) has caved in and will be using Direct3D, or can he use OpenGL without Microsoft throwing a fit?

Re:API? (1)

Quazi (3460) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090952)

My guess (the keyword here = "guess") is that another company besides id will do the Xbox port. id will oversee the operation to make sure it operates as close to the OGL original, but they won't touch the DirectX code itself.

Re:API? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091012)

Why won't id mess around with DirectX? Doesn't JC help create the entire specs of DX?

Re:API? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091022)

Because DirectX is not portable. Id likes to do simultaneous development of their titles across multiple platforms (Linux, Windows, MacOS X), so OpenGL remains a solid choice.

Eric

Re:API? (2, Informative)

lowe0 (136140) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090985)

Nvidia has an ICD for the XBox, IIRC. MS didn't throw a fit about it for exactly this reason.

Re:API? (2)

FyRE666 (263011) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091051)

Does this mean that JC (John Carmack, not the other one) has caved in and will be using Direct3D, or can he use OpenGL without Microsoft throwing a fit?

Er, this is John Carmack - he can do whatever the hell he likes! Really, even Redmond know how much money he can make (or cost) them. If there ever was a case of the tail wagging the dog, it's him. Likewise, I'm guessing Sony offered him the Earth to get a PS2 version of Doom III...

Re:API? (4, Insightful)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091076)

I doubt that department of MS would even care. Just because it's MS, doesn't mean that the XBOX department has any interest in 'evil plans to take over the world'. The goal of that department is to make money. If they sell a million copies of Doom III on the XBOX, then it doesn't matter if ID uses OPG, D3D, or Logo.

Re:API? (3, Funny)

(startx) (37027) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091092)

Doom3 should definately be written in LogoWriter, cause that kicked ass back in day...wait, even better, I'll make a LogoWriter mod for it! it'll be sweet!

Re:API? (3, Informative)

mr_zorg (259994) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091202)

The XBOX boots a minimal Win2K-embedded kernel with just enough support to run the built-in menus and bootstrap the DVD drive. Beyond that it is up to the software vendor to load up any additional modules they need for their game from the DVD drive. Theoretically there's nothing that says the XBOX has to use Direct3D, they could just as easily boot up and use an OpenGL library. Presuming there is one for that graphics chipset -- and since it's essentially a GeForce 3 Ti, I don't see why there wouldn't be.

As for the porting, I can't imagine there's much to it. The XBOX is a PC at heart, after all. Basically, they just need to pick and choose which Win2K modules they want to load and test it all to make sure it works as expected. Of course, if the game has a complex GUI (which FPSes usually don't) they may need to rework the GUI for simpler use with controller, but that's about it...

penny arcade says it all (0, Redundant)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090922)

-- "Some day they will make a game with the DOOM III engine..."

Tom

Re:penny arcade says it all (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090955)

*nod*

It's interesting that it often takes two completely different types of game designer to make a good game.

Usually you need a kick ass programmer, and a gifted storyteller. There are almost always never the same person.

Re:penny arcade says it all (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091105)

wahahahahaha john romero ahahahdadhkakjdhakfhlsdkfnv

blort
hee hee

Re:penny arcade says it all (1)

Ark42 (522144) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091102)

Yeah, Wolfenstein 3 (maybe?)

Kinda like, one day somebody made a game with that Quake3 engine, and called it RTCW.

OpenGL (1)

zapf (119998) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090924)

Remember: this doesn't only mean that Doom III will get onto the Xbox, this means many FPS's will. It also shows that games which do not primarily use Direct3D are quite portable to Xbox.

Re:OpenGL (5, Insightful)

CheechBG (247105) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090978)

disclaimer: I do not own an XBox. I sell them, have played extensively with them, but do not as of yet own one.

I don't see the point of FPS's on XBox. Granted, I've played Halo, got through most of the beginning levels, but it still nags at me that I could be a order of magnitude better at it with a simle keyboard and mouse.

Now games like DOA3, NFL 2K3, stuff like that, rightly deserves to be on a console, it is easily (and in the case of the former, recommended for play) on a gamepad. Give me a keyboard and mouse option, and I'll be a happy guy.

Re:OpenGL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090991)

>>could be a order of magnitude better at it with a simle keyboard and mouse

Bungie swears up and down that a PC version is on the way.

Re:OpenGL (1)

talonyx (125221) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091027)

Well, that makes you a majority of one....

At least the Xbox's pad is better than its predecessors at FPS games. Try the new Xbox Controller - S, the smaller japanese version. Much better.

I agree there's more speed and precision with a mouse, but if you want it that badly, hack up a USB mouse to an Xbox cable and hope for support :D

Re:OpenGL (2)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091087)

I agree. Interface problems make XBOX (or GC, or PS2, or GB...) a silly platform to make FPS games for. It'd be like bumper car racing with a series of light switches as your controls. Heh.

If they were to take Doom III and make it more like Zelda for the N64, they could create more value in the game by making it an adventure game. It'd be cool if they did that with the franchise. It'd be like an action version of Resident Evil.

Rendering - two generations from done? (4, Interesting)

Animats (122034) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090933)

From what Carmack is saying, we're about two generations of graphics card technology away from being done. This is encouraging. But there's an assumption that you have a controlled game world, where the world model doesn't overwhelm the graphics pipeline.

There will still be scaling issues, where the world is big and a lot of it is contributing to the image onscreen. Level of detail processing can help, but there are situations where you have to examine an excessive amount of geometry. One of the worst cases is a detailed city street, where you can see many blocks ahead and there are lots of trees, signs and whatnot that can obscure surfaces further away. Doing that well requires grinding through a lot of geometry. An insane amount of CPU time went into those long views down streets in Toy Story. All those houses have full detail. Game designers currently avoid such situations. Most driving games are laid out so that you never look down a really long street. And fog is your friend. It's still going to be a while before we have architectural-flythrough quality for long views in urban areas in real time.

Then again, a background process rendering billboards of distant street sections...

Re:Rendering - two generations from done? (1, Interesting)

dscowboy (224532) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091007)

From what Carmack is saying, we're about two generations of graphics card technology away from being done.

It's disappointing to see an industry leader make such short-sighted statements. Graphics technology will not be 'done' until we can't visually tell the difference between real-life and a game.

In real life, I can cut through an orange with a knife at any angle and see the internal structure of the orange in the cross section I created. In real life, I can use a magnifying glass to view an object/texture at 10x its normal size, with no loss of clarity, no pixel artifacts.

Carmack is talking about two more generations of vertex/triangle/bit-map based graphics cards. What about raytracing? What about voxels?

The 'ideal' graphics card would be able to render a world comprised of billions of voxels/atoms, each with their own properties and physics, and with raytraced photons creating the light. Suggesting that we'll be 'done' in 2 generations is just silly. It would require a totally new knid of PC architecture just to deal with the memory bandwidth requirements of an 'ideal' graphics processor.

Re:Rendering - two generations from done? (2)

TobyWong (168498) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091044)

Try reading the article before you comment. He talks specifically about raytracing.

As for "being done" I don't even recall reading that... closest I can think of is JC predicting a two-fold increase in desktop rendering power in the next few years which is pretty reasonable.

Re:Rendering - two generations from done? (5, Informative)

John Carmack (101025) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091151)

My comment specifically regards the "shelf life" of a rendering engine. I think that an upcoming game engine, either the next one or the one after that, will have a notably longer usable life for content creation than we have seen so far. Instead of having to learn new paradigms for content creation every couple years, designers will be able to continue working with common tools that evolve in a compatible way. Renderman is the obvious example -- lots of things have improved and evolved, but its fundamental definition is clearly the same that it was over a decade ago.

This is only loosly related to the realism of the graphics. I don't think a detailed world simulation that is indistinquishable from reality will be here in the next decade, except for tightly controlled environments. You will be able to have real-time flythroughs that can qualify as indistinguishable, but given the ability to "test reality" interactively, we have a lot farther to go with simulation than with rendering.

John Carmack

Re:Rendering - two generations from done? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091097)

GTA3 did a good job of rendering distant objects. Shorside's buildings were clearly visible

Shitty, just plain shitty (0, Flamebait)

wobedraggled (549225) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090935)

Well, I just hope the minimum requirement's for the pc version are a Celeron with 64megs of ram. So much for this game being light years ahead, because if it's going to look the same on the xbox those are going to have to be the specs. Just my .02

Directx or OpenGL? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090943)

This is just a comment I thought needed to be bought up. I thought that Doom3 was going to be OpenGL based not DirectX (I thought xbox uses DirectX only). Does this mean once John Carmack finishes the OpenGL engine, he has to go back and rewrite it for DirectX?

Whoops! (3, Insightful)

dscowboy (224532) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090945)

Funny, I thought MS created the XBOX to move gaming away from PCs. Turns out that PC games are keeping the XBOX alive.

Developers that only make console games will always make games for the PS2 because of the bigger market. Developers that make PC games however, will rarely make PS2 games, because the hardware is different and its difficult/impossible to port. PC games like Doom III and Morrowind will keep the XBOX alive simply because they aren't/won't be available on PS2.

It looks like MS's only hope of growing their market share to compete with Sony is to cozy up with the PC game developers. How ironic.

cozy up with the PC game developers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090983)

That's odd. I thought the XBox was a PC. It was done on purpose to give PC game developers an easy transition to console development. What's so ironic about that?

Re:Whoops! (3, Insightful)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091106)

"Funny, I thought MS created the XBOX to move gaming away from PCs."

No. They didn't create the XBOX to move games from PC's, they didn't do it to make Direct3D the de-facto standard, they didn't do it to make Windows a monopoly, they didn't do it to put a set-top box on your tv, they didn't do it to save the whales, and they didn't do it to demand one million dollars from the government. They created the XBOX to tap into the video game market and make money. That's all.

They made the XBOX PC-like so that PC-based developers would have an easy time transitioning to it. What makes a game system successful is a combination of number of games and quality of games. If a cool game for PC is already in development, you wouldn't have to fight too hard to make an XBOX port of it. GC, PS2, DC, etc don't have it so easy.

That's actually a really cool strategy to get a number of games onto a new system. The neat thing is that if MS follows suit with XBOX 2, then all the old games will still work. You could even make new games that work on the old hardware, but suddenly get better with the new hardware. That's brilliant!

"Non-high-end-comp-owning geeks rejoice!"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090948)

Isn't the x-box a high end computer though?

Pentium 3 733MHz
Geforce 3 w/ dual Pixel Shader units
128mb RAM
hdd, dvd

Re:"Non-high-end-comp-owning geeks rejoice!"? (1)

wobedraggled (549225) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090951)

Specs are wrong See my above comment on this one only 64meg in the xbox and the proc is closer to the celeron than a p3.

Re:"Non-high-end-comp-owning geeks rejoice!"? (1)

DiscoOnTheSide (544139) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090958)

No offence, and I'm not trying to troll or flamebait, but I don't exactly consider a 733Mhz PIII a "high end computer". I consider a 2.53 Ghz P4 or a AMD XP2200+ "high end" But youre right. My poor college-student ass leapt for joy when I saw that. My current computer and kick the crap out of an XBox, so all I can say to Carmack is...."Bring it, bitch." :-P

Re:"Non-high-end-comp-owning geeks rejoice!"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091129)

Carmack will tear you a new ass, boy! If you think for a second that the X-box version will be the equal of the PC version; you are fucking nuts. It will destroy any hopes and dreams you ever have of calling your system "high-end" ever again as it pummels you with the hardest scenes you have ever scene.

Thanks,
The English Troll.

Re:"Non-high-end-comp-owning geeks rejoice!"? (1)

DataMine (601955) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091124)

The XBOX may not be HIGH end when it comes to PC's. But think of it this way.. The XBOX is only running ONE App at a time. How much garbage do most people have running on their PCS? Imagine running DOS on a Celeron 733.. Its almost to scary to think about..

Re:"Non-high-end-comp-owning geeks rejoice!"? (2, Insightful)

ergo98 (9391) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091156)

Uh...that's silly. Right now my idle thread, the thread that runs when no other process has any use whatsoever for their timeslices, is running at 99%, and that's where it runs for almost all regular computing. Generally I only play one game at a time, and when I do that game gets 100% of the CPU for the duration of gameplay. Memory is hardly a consideration as there's so much that no single app can reasonably use it all.

Re:"Non-high-end-comp-owning geeks rejoice!"? (5, Insightful)

John Carmack (101025) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091191)

The X-Box GPU is more of a GF4 than a GF3, but a modern PC is generally much higher end than an X-Box.

However, you can usually count on getting twice the performance out of an absolutely fixed platform if you put a little work into it. There are lots of tradeoffs that need to balance between the different cards on a general purpose platform -- things that I don't do with vertex programs because it would make the older cards even slower, avoiding special casing that would be too difficult to test across all platforms (and driver revs), and double buffering of vertex data to abstract across VAR and vertex objects, for instance. We might cut the "core tick" of Doom from 60hz to 30hz on X-Box if we need the extra performance, because it has no chance of holding 60hz, but the PC version will eventually scale to that with the faster CPUs and graphics cards.

John Carmack

Horrible system requirements though (2, Informative)

wpmegee (325603) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090959)

More than likely, anyone with less than a Geforce3, or Radeon 8500 (i.e. has programmable vertex and pixel shaders and DDR memory), 128mb or ram, and ~750mhz will not be able to play this game at playable frame rates. Or they could just change the resolution down to 512x384 and live without all the nifty vertex/pixel shading.

So be thy forewarned all those with GeForce2 MXs, Rage 128s, and integrated graphics, upgrade or don't try to play this game.

Re:Horrible system requirements though (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091034)

Having a Geforce 3 to play Doom 3 should be a non-issue. A friend of mine just got a Geforce 3 for around $90. By the time Doom 3 comes out (Xmas 2003?), not only will the ATI Radeon 9700 and NV30 be out, but their speed-bumped versions will likely be out, too.

So a Geforce 3 will be basically low-end and cost much less.

Eric

No surprise here.. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4090960)

John Carmack is a race traitor. He has no loyalty to his own people or anything else for that matter. This little prick makes me sick. It's time for the night of the rope.

Pleaze bitch. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091018)

Gook or not his wife is one hot piece of ass.

DVD? (2)

skydude_20 (307538) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090970)

does this mean that possibly the game will be published on DVD discs for the PC as well, being that it sounds like it would need that much space, versus like a 4-6 CD set?

Carmack out of ideas? (0, Insightful)

Compuser (14899) | more than 11 years ago | (#4090998)

Ok, so I am going to catch a lot of flack
for this, but his speech doesn't sound too exciting.
Sure you can write an engine with better
lighting, sure you can watch the cards get
faster and polygon count get higher, but where's
the jump in technology? I wish Carmack would
find something to revolutionize rather than
focus on incremental improvements. Just think
of what the guy could do if he focused on
modeling realistic physics or decent AI...

Re:Carmack out of ideas? (2)

talonyx (125221) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091019)

You didn't read the article. There are awesome physics going in there, including enemies falling down stairs when killed, and more realistic box movement among other things.

Don't be an ignoramus. Read the damned article next time before you shout your mouth off about something. If you think that Doom 3 is 'incremental', you're certainly not the person who should be talking about it.

Awesome? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091154)

Like enemies falling down stairs hasn't been done years ago. More realistic movement? Try Hitman. It really pisses me off that so many gamers are ignorant to the advances other games make simply because they only pay attention to those publicized the most.

id has never made a technical innovation outside of graphics.

Re:Carmack out of ideas? (1)

King of the World (212739) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091025)

Imagine if Bainbow Bright spent more time combing her horsey rather than fighting bad guys. That horsey is so pretty!

Re:Carmack out of ideas? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091045)

Here is your flak, as requested
They HAVE been focusing on a realistic physics engine. That is one of the things that makes it so remarkable

The other thing is the lighting system, which is well above anything currently out there.

All in all, it's at least a LITTLE revolutionary :P

The Race is on !!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091005)

Will Doom3 be ported to the Xbox first, or will it run on XBox throug linux with a mod chip first?

Video of DOOM III (0, Flamebait)

Ender77 (551980) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091047)

Guys, there is a hand cam video of the demo floating on the web. For legal reasons I wont post a link to it, but I am sure you smart people can find it.

Carmack=past his time. (-1, Troll)

Gizzmonic (412910) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091049)

Why is the Slashdot crowd always hanging on some vaporware peddling by a man who's on his way down in the video game world?

Look, Carmack did great with Wolfenstein 3D, and Doom was pretty okay, but there's only so many times you can dress up a cabbage in a pretty silk number and call it Cinderella. FPS's are like porn-once you've seen one, you've seen 'em all, and id's offerings aren't even close to the best anymore.

"But wait!" you cry. "Doom3 has like, hardware texture and lighting, and zbuggering, and mip-mapped megapixels, or something. I read it on a benchmark site where a red bar (which represented Doom3) was longer than a blue bar (which represented Half-Life)." Listen friend, if you wanna fetishize technology, be my guest. Pull that $400 waffle iron out of your case and have intercourse with it for all I care(I recommend doing this 2-3 hours after powering down the computer, so as to allow it to cool down fully.) But don't kid yourself about Doom 3, it's not going to be a revolution in video games, or even FPS's for that matter. Duke Nukem 3D, Half-Life, the Sims-those are the true innovators of FPS. Doom 3 will come and go, and your life won't change a bit (although you might stay up a few nights crusing USENET for cracks). In the meantime, realize that Carmack, like Michael Jackson, was once the "King of Pop," but now that title belongs to Britney Spears. So go buy a Pepsi, ya know?

Re:Carmack=past his time. (2)

Tadrith (557354) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091084)


This, of course, explains why they brought an awesome writer in for the story (the guy who wroite The 7th Guest), and also why they brought one of the most talented artists in the industry in for the music, right?

Post Doom III and GPL (0, Troll)

The Evil Plush Toy (513809) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091060)

It seems weird thinking oh John starting to work on the next level of id technology. Doom III seems like such a technological shock that it's pretty tough to imagine what more could be done at the time being. Also, anyone hear any rumors on when Quake III gets GPL'ed? HEY WAIT isn't there a VS.NET clause saying you can't release GPL software? Looks like id'll have to stick to Vs 6.0. But would Microsoft even dare sue id?

more from JC (1)

thopo (315128) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091103)

tomshardware als has some pages about Quakecon 2002.

Especially interesting is JC's keynote [tomshardware.com] in which he, among other things, mentions that they will make special backends for nVIDIA/ATI/3DLabs chips but most likely not for Matrox/S3 chips!

caveat... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091115)

One of the best reasons to get an id game is, even if you don't care for the game itself, there's guaranteed to be a bunch of mods that expand on the original design. Console = no mods. Someone will say it's possible, yes I know. But it isn't likely.

I also meant to add: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091143)

If MS allows the Xbox players to be networked to the PC players... can you say lambs to the slaughter? I think PC Q3A vs. Dreamcast Q3A showed what'll happen.

FPS on consoles (4, Insightful)

forkboy (8644) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091123)

Am I the only one that absolutely HATES playing an FPS on a console? I don't understand the popularity that games like Halo, Half Life and Quake have had on various console systems...it's just not the same level on control if you're not playing with a mouse and keyboard. Maybe I'm just too stuck in my ways to learn a new method of control, but I simply can't enjoy those types on games on consoles.

The only games I can enjoy on a console are platformers (Sonic, Jak and Daxter, etc), sports games, racing games, and fighting games (mortal kombat, virtua fighter, etc)

So, is it just a matter of getting used to the controls for FPS-type games on consoles or am I do I actually have a point?

Re:FPS on consoles (1)

HimalayanRoadblock (601900) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091158)

Goldeneye was the only FPS console that I really enjoyed. You had to stop moving to aim carefully, but 4 people in the same room kicking ass was incredible, especially considering its almost 6 years old.

Re:FPS on consoles (2)

NeMon'ess (160583) | more than 11 years ago | (#4091170)

You have a point, but the bigger issue for me is the lack of resolution. Playing a FPS or driving game at 640x480 SUCKS!

Uh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091187)

So is slashbot anti-Xbox or pro-Xbox today?

Xbox Vs Desktop (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4091196)

i dont believe how stoopid some of you so called computer experts are...

whats the screen res of a 17" monitor??? whats the res of standard TV???

enuff said...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...