id's new game tech unveiled! (on a mac!)

H

hungryduck

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 29, 2005
Messages
1,530
Well, the WWDC keynote is underway w/ steve jobs at the moment, and they're doing a big presentation on how they're going to jumpstart mac gaming with a "MacDVD" type thing (like the games for windows label on PC games these days).
Anyway, John Carmack got up on stage to demo id softwares new game engine, "id Tech 5" on a mac, very interesting. Kinda crazy that this is all being debuted on a mac, not a pc.
Short quote:

"So the last couple of years at iD we've been working in secrecy on next-gen tech and a game for it... this is the first time we're showing anything we've done on it publicly." iD Tech 5... "What we've got here is the entire world with unique textures, 20GB of textures covering this track. They can go in and look at the world and, say, change the color of the mountaintop, or carve their name into the rock. They can change as much as they want on surfaces with no impact on the game."
Click to expand...

dsc5202ma6.jpg

dsc5203px8.jpg

dsc5201jc8.jpg

dsc5205lm1.jpg
 
That looks tasty, hopefully the PC version will look as nice. Thanks for the info!
 
It's looks, good, but a tad dated. It reminds me strongly of the Doom III engine. I don't think that Mac games are going any where .The audience on the PC is already small enough, ten percent of that would be nothing.
 
Something feels odd with the perspective, especially with shot #3.
 
acascianelli said:
The PC gaming crowd is small? What makes you say that?
Click to expand...

cuz he's a console playing dope fiend?

but seriously... the PC gaming crowd will never be small... all new innovations will come to PC first because PC stays ahead of console technology 100% of the time, due to upgrade paths for every single element within it. All MMOs, all massive multiplayer FPS arenas like Quake Wars or UT2007 are coming to PCs because aim-assist had a name for itself before FPSs came to consoles... oh yea... it was called cheating... but apart from any game ethics, it realy is a terrible way to conduct fps combat. For something like click-through gaming visa the FF series, console is fine... but ask for accuracy and responce time and KB+M wipe the floor with gamepads.

Sad but true. Just different types of games for different platforms, and both Halo and Gears of War developers just shoot themselves in the foot by not catering to PC technology... but I bet their paid off enough by MS and Sony respectively to restrict themselves to their own consoles and not feel the financtial hit an un-sponsored company would if it tried to make console-only FPSs..

back on topic...

games for macs have historicaly been for ages 8 and bellow.. and the only reason it is shown on a mac is because ID and carmack have allways developed with OpenGL style engines... meaning they were compatible with any platform... including linux. So no, ID will not make games exclusively for Macs... they simply make games that play on everything. A very good company I might add, but it will find a terrible partner in Jobs if it chooses that restriction and does not keep to its spirit of multi-platform adaptability.
 
20gb of textures? why? when you need that much storage for textures why not just make them procedural? You can get over 10x more textures in the same space then plus they'll be higher resolution. Sorry but 20GB is far too excessive and completely unnecessary. But then it IS a tech demo. They can easily trim that down.
 
didn't the doom 3 engine also debut on a mac?
 
The Red said:
all new innovations will come to PC first because PC stays ahead of console technology 100% of the time, due to upgrade paths for every single element within it.
Click to expand...

You really shouldn't pretend to know what your talking about. In many cases the innovations come to the consoles first as they can push new tech that is not supported on the pcs yet. Good example of this is the edram on the xbox 360s graphics chip. Consoles for the most part come out ahead of the pc market. The PC market just passes them over the span of the console.


Anyway yea I do agree that the mac platform has not been a real gamming platform for a while now. As the market share grows you will see more developers market their products for it though. ID is just showing off its new tech.
 
swatbat said:
You really shouldn't pretend to know what your talking about. In many cases the innovations come to the consoles first as they can push new tech that is not supported on the pcs yet. Good example of this is the edram on the xbox 360s graphics chip. Consoles for the most part come out ahead of the pc market. The PC market just passes them over the span of the console.
Click to expand...

All eDRAM is, is embedded ram, and it has been used in PS2, PSP, Nintendo Wii, and GameCube far longer than the 360s, and it in no way enhanced anything with respec to making it more innovative or better than a PC... the 360 graphics could not compare to what you could purchase from the top shelf with respect to PC graphics cards at the time of its release and its even worse now. In fact, it made it worse, where you couldnt swap out faster ram, nor upgrade the ammount there-of. So please understand what you're talking about before you list a detriment as a benefit like MS marketing.

Could you please list in what ways have consoles come out ahead of the PC market in anything but making their users pay out the ass for a system they couldnt upgrade?
 
acascianelli said:
The PC gaming crowd is small? What makes you say that?
Click to expand...

Well, I mean compared to consoles. There's certainly money to be made there, but lets face it, there are just more people with Xbox than gaming PC's. I was it weren't so, but when a capable set up costs 1500$ plus another two or three hundred a year on upgrade that you'll feel compelled to buy to get it even better, most people, especially kid's parents, will go for an Xbox. Thats just the way it is with anything, casual users will always out number the enthusiasts. The PC is not casual friendly.
 
i've heard this pc/console debate somewhere before...i just can't pinpoint where...
 
The Red said:
All eDRAM is, is embedded ram, and it has been used in PS2, PSP, Nintendo Wii, and GameCube far longer than the 360s, and it in no way enhanced anything with respec to making it more innovative or better than a PC... the 360 graphics could not compare to what you could purchase from the top shelf with respect to PC graphics cards at the time of its release and its even worse now. In fact, it made it worse, where you couldnt swap out faster ram, nor upgrade the ammount there-of. So please understand what you're talking about before you list a detriment as a benefit like MS marketing.

Could you please list in what ways have consoles come out ahead of the PC market in anything but making their users pay out the ass for a system they couldnt upgrade?
Click to expand...

Yes eDram is embedded ram. It is how they used it. In this case ati took out a patent on the tech in how its used. I'm kinda susprised they have not used it in the desktop cards yet. Also the graphics on the consoles generally beat out the pc counter parts when they come out. Sure they pc wins in the long run. It can be upgraded where the console can not. The pc also costs a lot more and does more then gaming. Thats not the only example. Your claim that all the innovations come to the pc first though is a load of shit. Also to say users pay out the ass for a console is not really true(sans the ps3).
 
Not only that but it seems EA is returning to Mac and a load of games are getting ported (or using the Cedega-libs)
 
eeyrjmr said:
Not only that but it seems EA is returning to Mac and a load of games are getting ported (or using the Cedega-libs)
Click to expand...

Yea I saw that too. Good news if your a mac owner I guess. Personaly I want to see what id is going to do with that new game engine.
 
Obi_Kwiet said:
Well, I mean compared to consoles. There's certainly money to be made there, but lets face it, there are just more people with Xbox than gaming PC's. I was it weren't so, but when a capable set up costs 1500$ plus another two or three hundred a year on upgrade that you'll feel compelled to buy to get it even better, most people, especially kid's parents, will go for an Xbox. Thats just the way it is with anything, casual users will always out number the enthusiasts. The PC is not casual friendly.
Click to expand...

That is way off base. For one there is no way to show how many game pc's there are, 2 and I hate to use a game like this since I cant stand it but CS is one game that can show there are more pc game machines than any amount of xbox's, both the old one and 360 respectively. I would even venture to say there are even more ps2's than xbox and 360 combined. The PC has always been casual friendly, its mostly a mind set of the modern console gamer to think otherwise. Some of those casual pc gamers most likely dont have up to date pc's but they do still have them.
 
Occidio said:
That is way off base. For one there is no way to show how many game pc's there are, 2 and I hate to use a game like this since I cant stand it but CS is one game that can show there are more pc game machines than any amount of xbox's, both the old one and 360 respectively. I would even venture to say there are even more ps2's than xbox and 360 combined. The PC has always been casual friendly, its mostly a mind set of the modern console gamer to think otherwise. Some of those casual pc gamers most likely dont have up to date pc's but they do still have them.
Click to expand...

I have a friend who has a decent cheap PC and he plays a shitload of games on it, and I dont really consider him to be really "hardcore" or whatever. He plays Civ 4, Rome Total War, and a lot of FPS, and he defintiely didnt spend 1500 on his PC... and I'm sure there are many more out there like him.
 
Skirrow said:
20gb of textures? why? when you need that much storage for textures why not just make them procedural? You can get over 10x more textures in the same space then plus they'll be higher resolution.
Click to expand...
Procedural generation takes a lot of time. Most games that use it generate the content during installation. The rest do it during loading times. It's not something you can do as part of generating each frame - you do it once, and store the texture (or model, of whatever). Either way, when the game is running, you'll need 20GB of space to accommodate it. Generating higher resolution textures is only going to make it worse.

Obi_Kwiet said:
It's looks, good, but a tad dated. It reminds me strongly of the Doom III engine.
Click to expand...
Uh... Given that we're looking at 440x292 photos of a projector screen, I think I'll reserve judgement for the moment ;) .
 
The audience on the PC is already small enough, ten percent of that would be nothing.
Click to expand...

Lord knows, my friends and I love to sit down at our $3000 Macs and play a thrilling game of Oregon Trail. Or when we gather together to play Super Mash Brothers.


Anyway, tech5 still looks like lumpy poo, remonessant of Doom 3.
 
Only interesting part was his attempt to let the game artists go into the engine to do their work on the fly. Except this wasn't demonstrated. As far as visuals go, it looks "ok".

Wasn't a whole lot to actually see, might as well just wait for the bigger demonstration he was talking about.
 
Obi_Kwiet said:
...but lets face it, there are just more people with Xbox than gaming PC's...
Click to expand...

Actually there are not more people with Xbox's than with gaming PC's. Heck, more people are currently subscribed to PC based online MMORPG's than the total combined sales of Xbox and Xbox 360 game systems. Add in the "normal", but non-MMORPG gamers, and the numbers favor the PC by a considerable amount.

The reason so many people don't realize just how much PC's dominate the gaming market is because in the US console and gaming PC sales are more balanced than in much or the rest of the world. Another cause of this issue is that PC game sales are generally lower than console game sales. There are lots of reasons for this, but mostly it is because so many PC gamers play only one game at a time, sometimes for months or years at a time (like most MMORPG's, CounterStrike, Diablo II, the Battlefield Series, and The Sims). This kind of dedication to a single game is much more rare in the console world, for many reasons, but mostly because of the lack of expansions and mods, and, until recently, the lack of good online multiplayer support.

Regardless, the truth is that gaming PCs and PC gamers are still far more prevalent than consoles and console gamers. It is just the perception of which is more common that has changed, not the reality. Though I admit with the speed of console sales this generation it might not be long until the numbers are almost even, maybe around 2012.
 
OMG gameers on mac...its the end of the world!!! First Intel in mac's, then apple windows apps, now this...third sign of the apocalypse :eek: :eek: :eek:
Steve Jobs, the Antichrist??? Who would have guessed?
 
Nothing says I'm stupid better than making rash judgments on something that has just been posted. Especially on thumbnail sized images?! As usual Carmack will make a great engine for the masses to enjoy!
 
Nothing says I'm stupid more than making rash assumptions on what I've seen (I.E. the actual video footage of the engine in action)... As usual the sheep will follow the herd.
 
swatbat said:
You really shouldn't pretend to know what your talking about. In many cases the innovations come to the consoles first as they can push new tech that is not supported on the pcs yet. Good example of this is the edram on the xbox 360s graphics chip. Consoles for the most part come out ahead of the pc market. The PC market just passes them over the span of the console.
Click to expand...

Innovation from a system which starts it's life as the best it will ever be, compared to a system which you can continually upgrade, that has graphics life cycle of about 5 years instead of about 1.5 years?

Almost all of the technology both hardware and software that goes into consoles is derived from technology already being used in PC's.
 
Im suprised this hasnt sparked the debate about size in terms of gb for next gen games. I would assume that compression will be able to bring down those 20gb to around 2-3 but still how much will the full game require?
 
Frosteh said:
Innovation from a system which starts it's life as the best it will ever be, compared to a system which you can continually upgrade, that has graphics life cycle of about 5 years instead of about 1.5 years?

Almost all of the technology both hardware and software that goes into consoles is derived from technology already being used in PC's.
Click to expand...

Wow you couldn't be more wrong. A "system which starts it's life as the best it will ever be"?

I guess you haven't touched a console in a long time. Because from what I recall... games that came out on the PS2 when it first launched.... look nothing like the games coming out currently for the PS2. For a console that has been around as long as the PS2.... the graphics have only improved which no "upgrades".

The PS3 was originally (and I'm sure they are still working with it) designed to churn out games using ONLY the Cell CPU's. They stuck a GPU in the PS3 at last moment to probably try to get more games out sooner. The games coming out now for PS3 are going to be no where close to what they will look like after Dev's learn tricks and get better coding for Cell Processors.

PS2 has been around a lot longer than 1.5 years... as far as I'm concerned the PC needs to be updated a lot more frequently to play games "fluid" than any console does. Games that come out in 3 years will just fine on my PS3.... I can't say the same for my 7800GT PC.... In fact... that card is a bit over a year old... and its feeling its age.

As for your statement "Almost all of the technology both hardware and software that goes into consoles is derived from technology already being used in PC's."

Again my friend, but you are wrong. How many home PC's do you know using Cell Processors?

I'm not trying to turn this into a PC vs Console thread... but your post is anything but true.
 
I wish Carmack would use his immense brain to crack the problem of outdoor environments that aren't just big rooms with a skybox ceiling. Much as the textures look all fine and dandy (from what you can see in the vid), the demo still has that same claustrophobic feeling that has plagued the outdoor areas in all id games. I was willing the camera to rise out of the canyon and show a vast 3d landscape, but of course it didn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top