|
|
 |
| [Jul 26, 2004, 4:07 pm ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
Robert Duffy, id Software programmer,
updated his .plan about DOOM 3 settings and how they will work, discussing
specifics about the "ultra" quality setting as well as differences in how
certain data are handled differently by ATI and NVIDIA hardware. He also
mentions that the game is capped at 60 FPS (except when running demos as a
benchmark), discusses the software used during development, as well as a bit on
a hard drive nightmare encountered along the way. Here's a bit: Image
fidelity is dependent on what quality level we load the textures at.
In Ultra quality, we load each texture; diffuse, specular, normal map at full
resolution with no compression. In a typical DOOM 3 level, this can hover around
a whopping 500MB of texture data. This will run on current hardware but
obviously we cannot fit 500MB of texture data onto a 256MB card and the amount
of texture data referenced in a give scene per frame ( 60 times a second ) can
easily be 50MB+. This can cause some choppiness as a lot of memory bandwidth is
being consumed. It does however look fantastic :-) and it is certainly playable
on high end systems but due to the hitching that can occur we chose to require a
512MB Video card before setting this automatically.
High quality uses compression ( DXT1,3,5 ) for specular and diffuse and no
compression for normal maps. This looks very very close to Ultra quality but the
compression does cause some loss. This is the quality that for instance the PC
Gamer review was played in.
Medium quality uses compression for specular, diffuse, and normal maps. This
still looks really really good but compressing the normal maps can produce a few
artifacts especially on hard angled or round edges. This level gets us
comfortably onto 128MB video cards.
Low quality does everything medium quality does but it also downsizes textures
over 512x512 and we downsize specular maps to 64x64 in this mode as well. This
fits us onto a 64MB video card.
 |
| 62. |
Re: Here's an idea. |
Jul 26, 2004, 19:38 |
WaltC |
|
|
THose were the days!!!
Speaking of the old days, I wonder if anyone remembers the period (~1986-1990) when almost the only screen shots placed on the back of computer game boxes were grabbed from the Commodore Amiga? I remember this in particular of EA games at the time, and from lots of other game publishers, too. You'd see these great-looking (for the time) 16/32-color game screen shots pictured on the box even for x86 games, too, which were often at the time restricted to a CGA display (4 Very Ugly Colors displayed in Very Low Resolutions in giant, clunky, uuuugly pixels.)
During that time I owned both Amigas and x86 boxes, and the only time I bought a game for the x86 box it was a port of the Amiga "Test Drive" (the original game) version I enjoyed a lot on my A500 back in '87-'88, IIRC. The game box displayed screenshots from the Amiga version on the back, like so many of them did, with a little asterisk in small print near the bottom of the box back that read:
*Screen shots taken from the Commodore Amiga (TM) version of the game. Others may vary.
Well the x86 Tandy I had at the time also was capable of a 16-color EGA display mode, so I assumed the x86 Test Drive port would display in 16 colors, and have never been so upset as to discover the port of the game to x86 was restricted to 4-color CGA. In contrast, the Amiga version (the one pictured on the back of the x86 program box) rendered in at least 16 colors and looked so much better the two versions weren't even recognizable as the same game, and instead of the 8-bit stereo sound native to the Amiga version, I got treated to "speaker beeps" from my Tandy. From the Amiga I got 8-bit police sirens that sounded like the real thing--from the Tandy I got a pitiful series of beeps that sounded much more like a warbling whistle than a siren.
In those days it was no trouble to return opened software for a refund, and I returned that x86 version of Test Drive with prejudice!...;) I wrote a scathing letter to the Test Drive publisher at the time protesting what seemed to me blatant misrepresentation. Fat lot of good it did. Heh...;)
How things change. Back then, x86 computer games were pretty much the bottom of the barrel graphically and certainly from an audio perspective. Today, x86 3d games look and sound an order of magnitude better than games did then, and are literally the "only game in town," if you want to stay near the cutting edge of technology.
But the thing I miss most about the "old days" (there are lots of things about them that I don't miss at all), is the freewheeling nature of the computer industry at the time. Then, games were often written in their entirety by a single person, who, amazingly, did all of the programming and graphics and sound work (at home often enough)...;) A really "big" development team back then was 5-10 people. Today, game devs and publishers seem to have three people employed for every on-screen pixel rendered...;) It's such a formal, "megacorp" thing these days, requiring so much investor funding (not to mention the public stock sales by publishers, etc.), that much of the raw creativity, and originality, especially, has been lost.
The computer games industry today is a lot like the movie industry in that game publishers are reluctant to "take a chance" on imaginative games that don't fit the popular genre of "first-person shooters," and other such genres, etc. If one WWII 3d-game is published and does well, for instance, suddenly there's a raft of WWII/Viet Nam era war games published and that's all you see for awhile. For awhile it was racing games, flight simulators, and so forth--game publishers all looking to find that "perfect genre" that would guarantee them instant mega-success.
It's kind of sad, but this megacorp approach for gaming produces a lot of mediocre, ho-hum, "cookie cutter games." This is so often the case that I wonder when I'll see the next truly original 3d game that will capture my imagination and enthrall and entertain me for months...;) I loved the original Half-Life single-player, mainly because the story was so original and fresh, and because the game told it so well. I wonder if the upcoming HL2 will manage to pull that off again, though. Baldur's Gate was an original game that has also been copied to death...:) Now we come to Doom 3...which I'm looking forward to and will most certainly buy.
Just from the screenshots of the game I've seen and some of the general descriptive info I've read about it--I swear if this games doesn't sound, to me, like a *remake* of the original Unreal by Epic Software (not UT, Unreal.) Of course it isn't meant to be a literal remake, but it certainly sounds very much like that *original and imaginative* game that was so popular precisely because it was original and imaginative. I wonder, though, if D3 today has any chance of appearing as fresh and orignal as Unreal when it appeared a few years ago.
So the thing I liked about the "old days," and miss most today, was that the creative spark, especially for computer gaming, was fresh and new and vigorous, and a "good game" didn't have to fall into a genre category to be good--it was good if it was good--and the genre category it may have fit was entirely of secondary concern. In that respect, I'd like to return to the "good old days," certainly. But as for the rest of it, I'm glad those days are behind us...:D
(What the heck got me off on *this* tangent?...;) Waiter, another pot of coffee, please!)
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| It is well known that I do not make mistakes--so if you should happen across a mistake in anything I have written, be assured that I did not write it! |
|
|
 |
|
| |
| |
|
Date |
Subject |
Author |
| |
1. |
Jul 26, 16:10 |
No subject |
Dalumberjack |
| |
3. |
Jul 26, 16:12 |
Re: No subject |
JoeCool |
| |
8. |
Jul 26, 16:23 |
512mb cards.. |
Yakumo |
| |
11. |
Jul 26, 16:27 |
Re: 512mb cards.. |
Gandhi |
| |
22. |
Jul 26, 16:47 |
Re: 512mb cards.. |
Bronco |
| |
25. |
Jul 26, 16:56 |
Re: 512mb cards.. |
Gandhi |
| |
2. |
Jul 26, 16:11 |
dewm 3 |
zuul |
| |
4. |
Jul 26, 16:13 |
Re: dewm 3 |
SmyTTor |
| |
5. |
Jul 26, 16:17 |
Re: dewm 3 |
kanniballl |
| |
17. |
Jul 26, 16:33 |
Re: dewm 3 |
Ray Marden |
| |
18. |
Jul 26, 16:34 |
Re: dewm 3 |
MindStalkerReturned |
| |
6. |
Jul 26, 16:17 |
Re: dewm 3 |
LoonBB |
| |
7. |
Jul 26, 16:22 |
. . . . |
joeslim |
| |
9. |
Jul 26, 16:25 |
No subject |
Dalumberjack |
| |
13. |
Jul 26, 16:29 |
Re: No subject |
Gandhi |
| |
15. |
Jul 26, 16:32 |
Re: No subject |
Dalumberjack |
| |
14. |
Jul 26, 16:30 |
Re: No subject |
Tango |
| |
28. |
Jul 26, 17:10 |
Re: No subject |
Redwood |
| |
41. |
Jul 26, 18:04 |
Re: No subject |
Scottish Martial Arts |
| |
10. |
Jul 26, 16:26 |
video memory |
wiltshire |
| |
105. |
Jul 27, 01:31 |
Re: video memory |
Rockn-Roll |
| |
12. |
Jul 26, 16:29 |
First OGG |
MindStalkerReturned |
| |
30. |
Jul 26, 17:17 |
Re: First OGG |
DrEvil |
| |
42. |
Jul 26, 18:08 |
Re: First OGG |
Protoz |
| |
43. |
Jul 26, 18:09 |
Re: First OGG |
JoeCool |
| |
48. |
Jul 26, 18:23 |
Re: First OGG |
JoeCool |
| |
45. |
Jul 26, 18:16 |
Re: First OGG |
Tango |
| |
49. |
Jul 26, 18:23 |
Re: First OGG |
Propagandhi |
| |
16. |
Jul 26, 16:32 |
levels? |
Jim |
| |
21. |
Jul 26, 16:39 |
Re: levels? |
MindStalkerReturned |
| |
53. |
Jul 26, 18:51 |
Re: levels? |
ildon |
| |
19. |
Jul 26, 16:34 |
No subject |
D4rkKnight |
| |
20. |
Jul 26, 16:37 |
curious |
Fillem |
| |
23. |
Jul 26, 16:51 |
No subject |
Pr()ZaC |
| |
38. |
Jul 26, 17:52 |
Re: No subject |
ProdigyXL |
| |
40. |
Jul 26, 17:58 |
Re: No subject |
DedEye |
| |
24. |
Jul 26, 16:52 |
Here's an idea. |
thwart |
| |
26. |
Jul 26, 16:58 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
Gandhi |
| |
27. |
Jul 26, 17:07 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
MindStalkerReturned |
| |
29. |
Jul 26, 17:13 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
CountLovE |
| |
32. |
Jul 26, 17:38 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
JoeCool |
| |
34. |
Jul 26, 17:41 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
CountLovE |
| |
36. |
Jul 26, 17:43 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
JoeCool |
| |
35. |
Jul 26, 17:41 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
Cutedge |
| >> |
62. |
Jul 26, 19:38 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
WaltC |
| |
64. |
Jul 26, 19:46 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
Dalumberjack |
| |
67. |
Jul 26, 19:51 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
Ray Marden |
| |
68. |
Jul 26, 20:02 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
quazz |
| |
75. |
Jul 26, 20:23 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
WaltC |
| |
111. |
Jul 27, 02:35 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
Krovven |
| |
112. |
Jul 27, 03:11 |
On anticipation |
gerauchertes |
| |
115. |
Jul 27, 07:07 |
Re: On anticipation |
Yakumo |
| |
66. |
Jul 26, 19:49 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
pob |
| |
39. |
Jul 26, 17:58 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
Dante_uk |
| |
63. |
Jul 26, 19:44 |
Re: Here's an idea. |
sadef |
| |
31. |
Jul 26, 17:22 |
No subject |
space captain |
| |
33. |
Jul 26, 17:40 |
Re: No subject |
Muscular Beaver |
| |
60. |
Jul 26, 19:28 |
Re: No subject |
Jim |
| |
37. |
Jul 26, 17:49 |
No subject |
Chris Robbers |
| |
44. |
Jul 26, 18:12 |
I wonder if dual PCI-Express 256mb cards |
Hunterzyph |
| |
50. |
Jul 26, 18:26 |
Re: I wonder if dual PCI-Express 256mb cards |
Ray Marden |
| |
46. |
Jul 26, 18:17 |
No subject |
Dalumberjack |
| |
47. |
Jul 26, 18:18 |
No subject |
space captain |
| |
51. |
Jul 26, 18:30 |
So what we're overlooking is... |
Cpt. Piloter |
| |
52. |
Jul 26, 18:37 |
Re: So what we're overlooking is... |
Ray Marden |
| |
58. |
Jul 26, 19:23 |
Re: So what we're overlooking is... |
nin |
| |
59. |
Jul 26, 19:25 |
Re: So what we're overlooking is... |
Ray Marden |
| |
55. |
Jul 26, 19:01 |
Re: So what we're overlooking is... |
CountLovE |
| |
65. |
Jul 26, 19:49 |
Re: So what we're overlooking is... |
Cpt. Piloter |
| |
54. |
Jul 26, 18:57 |
Requirements... I know... |
OCed_5150 |
| |
56. |
Jul 26, 19:14 |
No subject |
HIGH_PING |
| |
57. |
Jul 26, 19:22 |
Re: No subject |
zuul |
| |
61. |
Jul 26, 19:28 |
Little Difference? |
Sixis |
| |
83. |
Jul 26, 21:23 |
Re: Little Difference? |
Chris Robbers |
| |
69. |
Jul 26, 20:04 |
No subject |
Pete |
| |
70. |
Jul 26, 20:10 |
Re: No subject |
tunis5000 |
| |
72. |
Jul 26, 20:17 |
Re: No subject |
Scottish Martial Arts |
| |
71. |
Jul 26, 20:14 |
Re: No subject |
Ray Marden |
| |
73. |
Jul 26, 20:19 |
Re: No subject |
Tango |
| |
87. |
Jul 26, 22:04 |
Re: No subject |
Yakumo |
| |
88. |
Jul 26, 22:21 |
Re: You know what? I say 'Ahhh, shit!" |
Yakumo |
| |
89. |
Jul 26, 22:36 |
Re: No subject |
dubfanatic |
| |
74. |
Jul 26, 20:20 |
No subject |
Acleacius |
| |
76. |
Jul 26, 20:23 |
Re: No subject |
Ray Marden |
| |
77. |
Jul 26, 20:34 |
800xt |
bizarro |
| |
81. |
Jul 26, 21:13 |
Re: 800xt |
Yuzzem |
| |
82. |
Jul 26, 21:18 |
Re: 800xt |
gulo |
| |
86. |
Jul 26, 22:04 |
Re: 800xt |
zuul |
| |
78. |
Jul 26, 20:41 |
No subject |
OCed_5150 |
| |
79. |
Jul 26, 20:42 |
Re: |
Rseman |
| |
80. |
Jul 26, 20:58 |
Beyond Good and Evil |
James Webb |
| |
84. |
Jul 26, 21:30 |
No subject |
Jamil |
| |
85. |
Jul 26, 22:03 |
You know what? I say 'Ahhh, shit!" |
MacD |
| |
90. |
Jul 26, 22:42 |
Re: You know what? I say 'Ahhh, shit! |
MindStalkerReturned |
| |
93. |
Jul 26, 23:37 |
Re: You know what? I say 'Ahhh, shit! |
Propagandhi |
| |
91. |
Jul 26, 23:01 |
No subject |
Pete |
| |
92. |
Jul 26, 23:13 |
Re: No subject |
Gandhi |
| |
94. |
Jul 26, 23:42 |
Re: No subject |
Ray Marden |
| |
95. |
Jul 26, 23:53 |
Re: No subject |
Sixis |
| |
96. |
Jul 27, 00:16 |
Re: No subject |
Ray Marden |
| |
97. |
Jul 27, 00:21 |
Re: No subject |
Sixis |
| |
98. |
Jul 27, 00:32 |
new benchmarks coming |
gulo |
| |
99. |
Jul 27, 00:35 |
No subject |
Planet X |
| |
103. |
Jul 27, 01:10 |
On personal finances |
gerauchertes |
| |
104. |
Jul 27, 01:22 |
Re: On personal finances |
Planet X |
| |
117. |
Jul 27, 08:06 |
Re: On personal finances |
WaltC |
| |
121. |
Jul 27, 09:23 |
Re: On personal finances |
Sugarman |
| |
122. |
Jul 27, 09:28 |
Re: On personal finances |
JosephBlowski |
| |
123. |
Jul 27, 09:39 |
Re: On personal finances |
MeatForce |
| |
124. |
Jul 27, 09:51 |
On acts of god |
gerauchertes |
| |
126. |
Jul 27, 10:45 |
WaltC |
Isus_in_Black. |
| |
129. |
Jul 27, 11:14 |
Re: WaltC |
Gandhi |
| |
130. |
Jul 27, 11:25 |
RE:Ghandi |
Isus_in_Black. |
| |
149. |
Jul 28, 01:29 |
Re: WaltC |
anon@24.76 |
| |
132. |
Jul 27, 12:06 |
Re: Isus |
Gandhi |
| |
138. |
Jul 27, 13:22 |
Re: Isus |
Duc |
| |
139. |
Jul 27, 14:42 |
Re: Isus |
Eps |
| |
100. |
Jul 27, 00:36 |
Re: Demo |
Sixis |
| |
101. |
Jul 27, 00:42 |
No subject |
Dalumberjack |
| |
102. |
Jul 27, 01:02 |
Re: No subject |
Sixis |
| |
113. |
Jul 27, 05:19 |
Re: No subject |
LwoodPDowd |
| |
114. |
Jul 27, 06:55 |
Best deal |
NHS7000 |
| |
106. |
Jul 27, 01:57 |
Regarding system memory. |
m00t |
| |
107. |
Jul 27, 02:09 |
Regarding video memory. |
m00t |
| |
108. |
Jul 27, 02:12 |
No subject |
m00t |
| |
109. |
Jul 27, 02:27 |
. |
seenitall |
| |
110. |
Jul 27, 02:29 |
Re: No subject |
Sepharo |
| |
125. |
Jul 27, 10:30 |
Re: No subject |
Cpt. Piloter |
| |
127. |
Jul 27, 11:05 |
Re: No subject |
Gandhi |
| |
116. |
Jul 27, 07:28 |
No subject |
degust |
| |
118. |
Jul 27, 08:11 |
Re: Good luck... |
Animals for Crackers |
| |
119. |
Jul 27, 08:54 |
Compared to other hobbies |
NoGodForMe |
| |
120. |
Jul 27, 09:23 |
On anticipation/On anticipation II |
gerauchertes |
| |
128. |
Jul 27, 11:05 |
vid card progression |
MacD |
| |
131. |
Jul 27, 11:51 |
Re: vid card progression |
Hanneth |
| |
141. |
Jul 27, 15:44 |
Re: vid card progression |
Sepharo |
| |
142. |
Jul 27, 16:13 |
Re: vid card progression |
Dalumberjack |
| |
143. |
Jul 27, 16:43 |
One more week!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
Gandhi |
| |
144. |
Jul 27, 16:55 |
Re: One more week!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
nin |
| |
145. |
Jul 27, 17:34 |
Re: One more week!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
Gandhi |
| |
146. |
Jul 27, 20:51 |
XP or W2K |
JohnnyB |
| |
147. |
Jul 27, 21:15 |
Re: vid card progression |
Corn Wizard |
| |
133. |
Jul 27, 12:13 |
Re: vid card progression |
Roger Mellie |
| |
134. |
Jul 27, 12:46 |
Re: vid card progression |
zuul |
| |
135. |
Jul 27, 12:55 |
Re: vid card progression |
Celestial Toad |
| |
136. |
Jul 27, 12:55 |
Re: vid card progression |
Celestial Toad |
| |
137. |
Jul 27, 12:58 |
Re: vid card progression |
Celestial Toad |
| |
140. |
Jul 27, 14:53 |
Re: vid card progression |
nin |
| |
148. |
Jul 28, 00:18 |
techie question about RAM.. |
Wookiestick |
| |
151. |
Aug 2, 10:35 |
Re: techie question about RAM.. |
Rockn-Roll |
| |
150. |
Jul 28, 09:07 |
/3GB Boot.ini setting |
MunkyBoy |
|
|
|