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

DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue

The Doomworld Forums have an interesting follow-up to the fact that DOOM 3 made use of a "zfail" method of rendering shadows that is patented by Creative Labs (thanks Ant). Recalling this, they asked id's John Carmack how this might impact plans to release the DOOM 3 source code under the GPL at a future date. Sure enough, this situation could potentially result in patent infringement:

When we release the code (no date set), anyone that uses it would potentially be infringing. There are workarounds at a modest performance cost.

View
30 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

30. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 9, 2009, 00:11 Razor
 
Oh my, Derek Smart to the rescue =P I can't wait to read the vitriol that will more than likely spew in 3, 2, 1...

If you have to ask who wants to play with Doom 3 source code then you obviously do not get it. Is it really that terrible that someone might want to take a look and learn from one of the greatest coders of the last 20 years? Is there not worth in peeking inside the black box? Like it or not, John Carmack has had a major influence over the gaming industry, certainly more than yourself.

I'm sure it hurts.

This comment was edited on Apr 9, 2009, 00:15.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 16:25  dsmart 
 
I can't imagine anyone wanting to use that zfail method nowadays anyway when there are so many workarounds. Machines are far faster now and more capable than when Doom3 was released. So the performance drop is negligible.

Then again, why would be pissing around with the Doom 3 source anyway?
 
Avatar 9141
 
Game developers are just human beings who happen to make games for a living. If you want to hold us up to higher standards of conduct, then go ahead
...but don't be surprised if we don't uphold them
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 14:20 Jim
 
Creative is still around?  
Jim
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 12:07 GT
 
I think id/johnc can just remove the offending code and the community would be plenty happy to write new shadow code. No problem.
Actually id doesn't have to remove anything for it to stay in the legal clear. Programmers who develop with the GPL'd Doom 3 source would simply have a choice to make. Pay a royalty or reach some agreement themselves with Creative Labs or write a work-around.

This comment was edited on Apr 8, 2009, 12:36.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 12:04 Veinman
 
It was your card - I had the same thing with my 9800 pro. When I upgraded to a new nVidia, the shadows looked great

Interesting. I had a 9800 Pro also. Maybe I'll actually re-install this dog to see what I think these days.

Nah.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 11:56 Exe
 
At the time Creative registered this patent, they were in the graphics card business.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 10:21 Fartacus
 
As a method of doing volume shadows zfail is well-known among graphics programmers, and Creative in no way invented it - they just got to the patent office first. It is described in numerous articles and books, not one of which says "btw if you use this you will have to pay the 'tards at Creative".

Actually, at the time of discovery by Creative, zfail was unknown amongst graphics programmers. Stencil shadows were a well known technique, but eliminating artefacts of shadow volume intersection with the near plane was either ignored or solved analytically by clipping the shadow volume against the near plane and patching up the holes.

That said, I agree with you 100% about algorithm patents
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 10:16 theAntiELVIS
 
Yeah - but the real question is, should they be able to patent what amounts to an algorithm? Especially one that Carmack came up with independently. The zfail method is also known as "Carmack's Reverse".

As a method of doing volume shadows zfail is well-known among graphics programmers, and Creative in no way invented it - they just got to the patent office first. It is described in numerous articles and books, not one of which says "btw if you use this you will have to pay the 'tards at Creative".

JUST SAY NO TO ALGORITHM PATENTS! It's like saying someone can patent long division.

-tAE-
 
Avatar 473
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 10:08 theAntiELVIS
 
It was your card - I had the same thing with my 9800 pro. When I upgraded to a new nVidia, the shadows looked great

-tAE-
 
Avatar 473
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 09:45 wtf_man
 
I like their soundcards

I'm sorry.

I haven't owned a Creative Labs card since the nForce motheborads first came out... and even before the nForce motherboards, my sound cards were "Windows 98 era" purchases.

Sound Blasters were great in the DOS era. In the Windows 9.x era they totally sucked because, as others have point out, buggy and bloated drivers.

I'm not dissing their hardware engineering, nor their innovations in audio technology. But their drivers have caused many a system crash. Granted, since 2000 / XP is way better at handling crashes than 9.x, the issues got better, but they still suck because of the bloat, IMO.

As someone else said, as soon as on-board audio got "good enough", Creative Labs pretty much became irrelevant. There is zero justification (IMO) to spend an extra $100-$200 on a device with crap drivers that might gain an extra 3% fps in a game... especially when most people don't run more than 2 speakers. And now with Shitsta... you lose some of the features (Although I think they came up with a work around).

If I were to spend the cash on a sound card today... I'd probably buy one of those new ASUS things. But I really can't see the justification over on-board... even with 5+ speakers plugged in... other than a couple of extra FPS. It's just not worth it to me, I guess.
 
Avatar 19499
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 09:43 Ant
 
kxmode: Hardware EAX is cool.  
Avatar 1957
 
Ant @ The Ant Farm: http://antfarm.ma.cx and Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net ...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 08:38 kanniballl
 
Personally the engine used in Doom3 IMO isnt really that impressive, shit I like the Doom2 engine better.

As a game, I felt Doom 3 was horrible. It was beyond stale, some of the monsters were quite lame, it was too dark (light-wise), and the peek-a-boo thing was done WAY too much. The PDAs were a decent touch, a throw-back to things like System Shock 2 and Aliens vs Predator 2 (I never played the originals, so sue me), but for the most part it was like playing a game from the 1990's with fancy graphics.

That being said, you can't compare the two engines. the D3 engine was decades ahead of the D1 and D2 engine.

However, from what I recall, the D3 engine was kind of a hog. Other engines could render equal or better graphics in larger environments and require fewer resources. Far Cry and Half-Life 2 are some examples.

This comment was edited on Apr 8, 2009, 08:46.
 
"Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But then you get to the end and a gorilla starts throwing barrels at you."
-Fry, Futurama
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 08:03 Veinman
 
Surely there are better engine to work on anyway. Doom 3's engine was impressive back then, but these days? And from what I recall, the shadows were all pitch black anyway. Maybe it was just my card.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 07:03 LittleMe
 
InBlack, you are equating the game with the engine. The two are not synonymous. Doom2 may be more fun to play than Doom3, but the doom3 is certainly far more sophisticated and advanced.

I think id/johnc can just remove the offending code and the community would be plenty happy to write new shadow code. No problem.

Releasing the doom3/quake4 source code would be a huge favor to the gaming community. I'm speaking here of gamers and up & coming coders. Johnc knows this too.

Even though I didn't like ET:QW I am glad I bought the game only to support Johnc's open ended commitment to release the source code to the games he has and will develop.
 
Avatar 23321
 
Political freedom can only be preceded by economic freedom which is preceded by monetary freedom.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 05:14 InBlack
 
Well I still play Doom2 online, so yes I do like it better than Doom3 Obviously this is a very subjective opinion, but even objectively the Doom3 engine isnt really that impressive when compared to its counterparts like Source for example.

The graphics are admitedly impressive but, the physics felt especially convulted, jumping and moving around in every single game to use that engine somehow "felt" wrong. Bah Im being subjective again....
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 04:20 Bhruic
 
Personally the engine used in Doom3 IMO isnt really that impressive, shit I like the Doom2 engine better.

I realize you were probably going for hyperbole here, but really? Doom 2 being released back in 1994, and using the same engine that Doom 1 used. You actually think that's better than the Doom 3 engine?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 04:13 InBlack
 
I dont see what the big deal is, id just doesnt have to release the source code. Or if they do they can just implement a workaround. Personally the engine used in Doom3 IMO isnt really that impressive, shit I like the Doom2 engine better.

But yeah the fact that Creative would patent a graphics function, when they arent even in the graphics business is well a testament to human greed, and the fact that the patent system needs an overhaul.
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 03:57 [THA] Hamst3r
 
The way patents work is bullshit.

By the way, I've found the cure for all cancers, but I'm not in the business of curing cancer, so I'm just going to patent it and wait until someone else figures it out and jump all over them, demanding that they pay me for my inventions that they didn't even know I had. It doesn't matter that they figured it out entirely independent of my knowledge, I own the patent!

This comment was edited on Apr 8, 2009, 03:58.
 
Avatar 46050
 
- The Hamster Alliance
http://www.hamsteralliance.com/ (music)

http://twitter.com/hamst3r | http://www.facebook.com/hamsteralliance | http://www.youtube.com/hamsteralliance
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 03:53 KilrathiAce
 
Maybe money from this will pay for Creative making their drivers not suck complete d? oh wait thats impossible.  
Avatar 7413
 
"On 2646.215 I myself attacked & destroyed TCS Tiger's Claw in my Jalthi heavy fighter"
Bakhtosh Redclaw Nar Kiranka
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re: DOOM 3 Source Patent Issue Apr 8, 2009, 03:04 Jackplug
 
Patents as a whole needs to be addressed as its slowly fucking everyone up. Needs to be wiped out or side lined..  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo