Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

On Doom III & the Xbox

HomeLan Fed has a story up based on tidbits about Doom III found in the latest print issue of Wired Magazine. According to what they've read, there is a solo mission pack planned in addition to the multiplayer add-on that's previously been mentioned, and that Microsoft is offering vault loads off money to make the eagerly anticipated upcoming shooter remake an Xbox exclusive port (something that has not been committed to). The Xbox may turn out to be the only console version, but here's betting that Xbox Xclusivity doesn't turn out to be the case, as John Carmack has demonstrated very strong feelings about cross-platform computing, and, of course, id Software already has vault loads of money.

View
132 Replies. 7 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Older >

132. Re: Doom 3: The Sequel Apr 11, 2003, 07:45 Jobz
 
"I don't know why you guys are trying to argue with me since I have already pointed out that I AM PSYCHIC"

I have special powers too, amazing strength. I first noticed my amazing strength when i held my grandmother in a headlock until she passed out.

maybe me and u could team up? we would be AWESOME!

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
131. Re: Doom 3: The Sequel Apr 11, 2003, 04:03 fredrickson
 
* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Apr 14, 14:31.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
130. Re: Doom 3: The Sequel Apr 10, 2003, 22:33 fredrickson
 
* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Apr 14, 14:32.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
129. Doom 3: The Sequel Apr 10, 2003, 21:32 Smellfinger
 
I don't know why you guys are trying to argue with me since I have already pointed out that I AM PSYCHIC. I am remote viewing roughly 12 months into the future and am simply reporting on what has already happened. See, time is cyclical and shit.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
128. Re: looking good Apr 10, 2003, 18:05 s_ridenour
 
The XBOX doesn't support OpenGL because Microsoft doesn't *want* it to support OpenGL. DirectX is Microsoft's proprietary graphics API, and the more people use it the more control Microsoft will have, so it only makes sense that DirectX will be the sole graphics API for the XBOX.

The easiest way for id to do an XBOX port would be to strip out all the ATI support, and then write a graphics library that has the same API as OpenGL, but is a wrapper for DirectX. But that would add overhead (and thusly hurt performance), and for Doom III to run on 3 year old hardware the last thing needed is more overhead.

Halo probably felt like a half-assed version of a FPS for PCs because that's what it was. Originally it was going to be for Macs and PCs, but then Bungie sold themselves to Microsoft (they were in no financial trouble; the corporate execs probably wanted to do something else and just figured they could make more money by selling the company than they could from their severance packages), and MS decided that the game would be a flagship title for the XBOX. Subsequently, many of the game's features were ripped out, others were redone, and to date there has been no version of Halo for the PC or Mac, mostly because that game is still one of the few "killer apps" for the XBOX.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
127. Re: looking good Apr 10, 2003, 17:47 PsycSui
 
The XBox runs on a basic windows opperating system, right? If Windows supports OpenGL, why can't the Xbox support OpenGL? Also, Jon Carmack said they'll probably do an XBox port. So, my question is,m if it's possible, how would they do it? Carmack is a technical director for the XBox, so I think a port is possible. I also think a port is very likely. But, as Carmack said, it wouldn't run at full boar.

"Doom 3 is going to be a terrible game. I know this because I'm psychic and can see roughly 12 months into the future. It will get good reviews at first, like every id game, but once the eye candy wears off (the graphics will be good on a technical level but awful on an aesthetic level) everyone will realize what a terrible game it is. This will take about 6 months from the day it's released.

"When it's released on Xbox, it will be overshadowed by Halo 2, which will be the superior game. People will buy Doom 3 to play 4 player games on Xbox Live, but it's not going to have the same impact as the original Doom."

Ok Smellfinger.

Here's what I think: Halo is a half-assed version of a computer FPS. Here is why: it has he lame-wad console "every indoor area is just a bunch of hallways that look the same" crap. I mean, did Bungie every think of building a base that makes sense? You know, with cabins and mess halls and all that other stuff. Where are they? Ok, I guss there are a few on the last map, but c'mon. Get rid of the monotonous hallway garbage! Another problem with Halo is it doesn't have very many weapons. Also, the alien weapons suck. And the Warthog? C'mon! I realise some people suck at driving, but you don't need to dum it down that much. People say the driving is genius, I say it's lame. Make it drive like a real car PLEASE!

I hope Halo 2 isn't sucky like that.

I hate pre-release reviews. Is DOOM III out yet? No. Has anyone here played the finished product? No. How much do people here know about DOOM III? Not a whole helluva lot.

"the graphics will be good on a technical level but awful on an aesthetic level." What a load of horsecrap! id is #1 in texture and model work, hands down. and their level design is just as good as anyone else's. the demo they showed at E3 had spectacular levels, complete with offices, lockers, boxes, chairs, storage, bathrooms... you know, real stuff. Something Halo didn't have.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
126. Re: looking good Apr 10, 2003, 17:15 ReDeeMeR
 
Well Xbox has some hybrid PII-PIII CPU, obviously it's alot slower then normal PIII and the video card is even slower then Geforce3 normal, because on Geforce3 Splinter cell doesnt lag in 640x480 with everything maxed and it does on Xbox when you get into bigger firefight or more people on screen...
I'm not even saying that on PC you have buggy drivers etc...

Also Doom3 will use ALOT of system and video memory, neither are present in Xbox and to transfer a game from OpenGL to DX with less requirements is impossible, unless losing the visual quality, but that's all what Doom3 is in the end.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
125. Bleh... Apr 10, 2003, 03:57 s_ridenour
 
To the obligatory, "Doom III will have great graphics, but the rest of the game will have no story and just be mindless action" trolls: everybody at id has already said that the focus of Doom III is not on action, but on scaring the shit out of people. No matter how many times they say this, some people have it stuck in their decidedly thick skulls that the game will just be mindless action.

This is why Gabe and Tycho over at Penny Arcade bug me sometimes: on the one hand, they say, "Boy, looks like a great engine. Can't wait 'til somebody makes a great game to go with it," and then when id says they're focusing on actually making a great single player game that will be scary as hell and release some screenshots with only a few monsters in 'em instead of a few hundred, they say, "Where are the rooms chock full of bad guys? Doesn't look very Doom-like to me...".

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
124. Re: looking good Apr 10, 2003, 03:49 s_ridenour
 
Actually, the (approximately) 60hz refresh rate is *interlaced*. That means that it draws every other line until it reaches the bottom of the screen, then goes back to the top and draws in the rest, about 60 times a second. The actual broadcast framerate for *whole frames* on NTSC video is 29.97, and PAL is 25. That's it, no 24 (for movies, it gets converted from 24 to 29.97 during the transfer to video), or anything else.

As for it possibly looking as good on the XBox due to XBox-specific optimization: probably not. John Carmack and co. have stated again and again that in order to run Doom III at maximum graphics quality you'll need a PC that's high-end when the game comes out, and even that will only get you 30fps or so. A PC that's high-end today will get you good GFX, but not the best that the game has to offer.

I just don't think that the XBOX, it's Celeron CPU, and 3 year old GFX hardware could keep up with a then-high-end PC running the game at maximal graphics quality.

I'm not going to rule out the possibility of an XBOX port, but the game would have to be rewritten to use DirectX (uses OpenGL right now), and the graphics would be watered down.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
123. Re: looking good Apr 9, 2003, 21:58 Waachi
 
> Which is a moot point since Xbox, PS2 and Gamecube can be hooked to an SVGA monitor with the right equipment.

Well it's not a moot point actually. The actual programming of console games limits the output to 30/25fps. This is why bad PAL conversions sometimes play at 83.3% the speed of the NTSC original.

Using a VGA box won't magically make the games create extra frames to increase the framerate to (true) 60fps. In fact if you look at the monitors OSD (if yours supports it) you'll find that the refresh rate when using a VGA box is 50 or 60Hz Interlaced - exactly the same as a TV. The only difference between using a TV and a VGA box and monitor is the image clarity.

Also in case you were wondering, PS2's NTSC output is at 640x480 resolution. PAL output is vertically slightly higher, an increase of roughly 20% to make it somewhere around 640x576.

Trust me, I have a VGA box on my PS2.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
122. Re: looking good Apr 9, 2003, 21:54 [Snake]
 
as the one who started all this... =) does anyone have any thoughts on the tv resolution compared to the monitor? i could hardly believe that anyone could think they're even comparable. when actually watching tv, I don't really notice it, but if i make my computer output to my tv (GF4 with s-video out) or if i play a console game, the resolution just plain out scares me.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
121. Re: looking good Apr 9, 2003, 19:51 Ray Marden
 
As has been fought discussed below, the "limitations" are less relevent these days or, in another sense, are artificial in nature (limited by older hardware, customer acceptance, general acceptance, etc.)

Thinking people need to consider refresh rate and whether or not the output is interlaced,
Ray

------------------------------------------------------
"Reminder: Personal attacks = nono"
"Posting to pretend you are someone else is on the official no-no list too."
http://users.ign.com/collection/RayMarden
Currently playing: Emperor's Tomb (shut up), IGI 2, Raven Shield, Tenchu 3, and Wind Waker.
 
Avatar 2647
 
Everything is awesome!!!
http://shoutengine.com/GarnettonGames/
I love you, mom.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
120. Doom 3 Apr 9, 2003, 19:19 Smellfinger
 
Doom 3 is going to be a terrible game. I know this because I'm psychic and can see roughly 12 months into the future. It will get good reviews at first, like every id game, but once the eye candy wears off (the graphics will be good on a technical level but awful on an aesthetic level) everyone will realize what a terrible game it is. This will take about 6 months from the day it's released.

When it's released on Xbox, it will be overshadowed by Halo 2, which will be the superior game. People will buy Doom 3 to play 4 player games on Xbox Live, but it's not going to have the same impact as the original Doom.

One good thing will come out of Doom 3, though: the 3D engine.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
119. Re: looking good Apr 9, 2003, 19:09 Smellfinger
 
Sometimes the clowns drop their pants.
This comment was edited on Oct 17, 01:40.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
118. Re: looking good Apr 9, 2003, 18:31 Waachi
 
Actually you're all wrong about TV refresh rates. NTSC is a 60Hz display however a TV's display is interlaced which means it takes two vertical passes to draw the whole screen, one pass for the odd lines, one more for the even lines. So a 60Hz display on a TV is capable of displaying only 30fps, and a 50Hz PAL display is capable of displaying 25fps at a slightly higher resolution.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
117. Re: looking good Apr 9, 2003, 16:29 nin
 
So let me get this straight: if my monitor is set to an 85Hz refresh rate, but DOOM III isn running at 10fps on my machine, I'm watching DOOM III at 85fps?

You guys are full of crap. The refresh rate is the rate at which the screen refreshes. But the screen refresh and the frames it actually shows are two different things. If you're running a game at 60 FPS, you can have a refresh rate thats 120hz, which means your screen will refresh 2 times for every frame that is shown. So when I'm running a game at 10fps on a monitor running a 60hz, 5 out of every 6 refreshes the monitor will say "hey, do I have a new image to show? If not, show the last image."

You answered your own question. Your monitor refreshes constantly, even if the image isn't new. Just because the hardware is physically able, doesn't mean the software can keep up with it. Same thing with tvs...Just because the tv CAN run at 60hz, doesn't mean programs are broadcast at that rate.

In your above scenario, (85/10) the monitor would refresh at 85 times, but only 10 of the frames would be different.

 
http://store.nin.com/index.php?cPath=10
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
116. Re: looking good Apr 9, 2003, 16:18 PsycSui
 
So let me get this straight: if my monitor is set to an 85Hz refresh rate, but DOOM III isn running at 10fps on my machine, I'm watching DOOM III at 85fps?

You guys are full of crap. The refresh rate is the rate at which the screen refreshes. But the screen refresh and the frames it actually shows are two different things. If you're running a game at 60 FPS, you can have a refresh rate thats 120hz, which means your screen will refresh 2 times for every frame that is shown. So when I'm running a game at 10fps on a monitor running a 60hz, 5 out of every 6 refreshes the monitor will say "hey, do I have a new image to show? If not, show the last image."

I believe DOOM III will, at some time, be on the XBox. I believe it will be ported to the XBox by a company other than id. I believe that it will not look as good and that the feature set will not be as rich as the PC version.

The way id deals with different hardware configurations is simple. If you have a GF1 or a GF2, turn some stuff off. If you've got a GF4 or a 9700, leave the stuff on. The XBox is in the middle, so some stuff would be turned off.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
115. Re: looking good Apr 9, 2003, 15:26 Skirrow
 
Actually NTSC tv's have a screen refresh rate of 60hz so games can run at 60fps, NTSC and Pal TV programs are broadcast at 24-30fps. Pal tv's have a screen refresh rate of 50hz and therefore can display only 50fps. But then theres Pal60 which runs at 60hz as with ntsc. Pal video is also of a higher resolution to NTSC vertically, something like 50 lines or something. Look at PC monitors, you be using a resolution of 1024x768 at 100hz and still get 200FPS ins some games. The monitor however cant display all of the frames and thats why you get occasions where one half of the screen seems to be out of line with the other. Thats where V-sync comes in. This limits the FPS to the monitors refresh rate so if its at 100hz you will only get 100fps and the image tearing stops.

Also, Doom 3 could well be just as good as the PC version graphically and just as smooth since the game will be re-written to take advantage of the hardware. The pc version will never be optimised as much as a console version due to the vast amounts of different PC configurations. ID have to contend with different CPU's, Memory, Mobo Chipsets, GFX and Sound cards, operating systems, to name a few. The problem they have is that they have to get the game to run on ALL hardware so its impossible to have it running optimally on each of them. With the XBOX version however they only have 1 set of hardware to concentrate on, so all their time can go onto optimising the game for that hardware. I cant see how a PS2 version will be possible though. Its a powerful machine but there just isnt the memory for the game without sacrificing shed loads of GFX quality. As for the gamecube, i'm pretty sure it could be possible but not as nice as the XBOX version.
Cant wait to find out though =D

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
114. Re: looking good Apr 9, 2003, 14:35 [Snake]
 
yeah the AC power runs at 60 hz, but the framerate is about 24. look closely sometime as something is moving across the screen. you can definitely see the frames aren't at 60, which is basically fluid. the resolution is about 525x380 something... its right there in that neighborhood, but not exactly sure. not much lower than 640x480. the thing that also gets me about it is that the pixels have blurred edges rather than sharp ones like monitors. it makes my head hurt.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
113. Re: looking good Apr 9, 2003, 14:27 nin
 
I was under the impression US tvs run at 60hz, with is basically 60fps. And the resolution on a standard tv was 640x480.

 
http://store.nin.com/index.php?cPath=10
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
132 Replies. 7 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo