View Single Post
Old 07-11-09, 02:55 AM   #107
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 379
Default Re: Doom 4 30FPS cap (?)

Originally Posted by Protoplasym View Post
A. Agreed, his engines have always amazed me.... IDTech 4 is still my favorite with U3 coming in a close second and Source in 3rd. I see your point about gamers 'wanting wide open gaming' at that time, but hell... I knew what to expect from Doom 3 before I ever even got my hands on it. I knew it was going to be a corridor shooter, I knew it was going to be linear, and I definitely knew it was going to be horror. It hit me like a ton of bricks when I first played (still does, lol) because my expectations were met with complete success! Yeah, I'm hoping that with IDTech 5, ID will make some money and lots of games will be made with it... in regards to the supposed ease of use for the editor, I'm thinking this might be the case for ID this time around. I've always read how people say that Epics' Engines/Editors are way easier to use vs. IDs' tools. I hope that's soon to change.
Well the main thing with IDTech5's editor, was the way you painted the world, you didnt just paint down textures or shaders, you painted down mesh-fields, essentially an area that has actual 3d geometry generated, its essentially just another paint layer, but doesnt add a flat surface(or a faked 3d surface like normal mapping or parallax mapping, and I am sure I spelled that wrong).
Not to mention its also using megatexture which has proven fast and provides a system that lets the game have a unique texture for every inch of the gameworld, none of this massive tiling of textures

B. No, the frames don't slow down when I'm looking at a bunch of activity necessarily... honestly, I think it's simply the 169.21s I'm on and nothing more.
Well, while I dont recall getting such a slowdown, doesnt mean I didnt

C. You make solid points, but : ) you can't refute the fact that giving the player the option is a 'nothing' considering you said it shouldn't have any negative effect on framerate. I'm the type of player that will have a fight in a hack n slash, and then want to look around at the world to see how things are constructed.

I bought my 88 for fast frames, and also so I could turn everything up... I honestly don't see the point in painstakingly designing a gorgeous world if one can't look at it from more than 1 angle... seriously.
Well see, since the game is made from the start for a fixed camera position, they are designing the graphics around that aspect.
Honestly though, this is one thing where its simply a matter of opinion, I like a free camera aswell, but I dont think itll work as well in a game like Diablo, Starcraft 2 is a bit different because, by nature of RTS, you are already looking at the big picture, you are controlling upto hundreds of units, so it makes sense to have more camera control.
But yeah, just my opinion

D. Oh wow, IDTech 1... that's interesting that you're (I assume, pardon me if I'm incorrect) melding tech from IDTech 1 and HL1 (which is an amazingly beefed up IDTech 2), and then adding IDTech 3 stuff as well. Sounds very complicated to me. Understand that the only modding I've done was making maps for Doom 1/2 back in the day (they weren't very good, lol) and making maps for some RTSs (which anyone can do)... so what you're doing sounds advanced as hell to me.
Pretty sure HL1 used IDTech1, but they heavily modified certain parts, restructuring the engine.
However, suprisingly, its not as complex as it first sounds in regard to the levels, idtech 1, 2 and 3, and I think even 4 to some extent, use the same base level format: BSP
Though obviously by making modifications each time, the more iterations it goes through, the less like the previous versions it will be.
There only differences between HL1 and Q1 levels are the fact HL1 uses full colour for its static lights(stored in the level data), its version number (Q1 is 29, HL1 is 30), and the fact HL1 grabs its textures from an external .wad file, Q1 builds its textures into the level itself.
Other then those three things, the rest of the structure is identical, so I can pretty much use Quakes code to load the level, then just modify where it loads the textures and lighting and I have HL1 levels working in Quake
Though, with all this said, HL1 levels were done by someone back when the Quake source was first released, so I am not doing anything new, just learning the engine so I can better hack it up
Oh, also, Quake 3 levels are in the same boat, though there is alot more changed in Q3 BSP compared to HL1 BSP.

E. Considering that Mame exists and rocks at what it does... what kind of emulation are you looking at accomplishing exactly? PS1/2 type stuff??
To be honest I dont really have any goals within emulation itself, though I will eventually have a single emulator, emulating many different machines that I will prolly release at some point, but I doubt I would support it more then that.
Its mainly just a hardware learning experience, since in order to emulate the hardware, you have to know how it works, and there is actually bugs in the hardware(like the gameboy for example) that games actually rely on, so you have to add these bugs and quirks into the emulation aswell.

I am reminded though of an old design I did for something I dubbed a "MMOU", thats MMO Universe, where you could walk on planets, in ships etc.
But the the idea that is relevant is my object system.
Essentially instead of just having a physics object that you can move around or maybe destroy like in CSS, they would be fully functional objects, the basic idea is that each object would have interface Inputs and Outputs, pretty much like plugging a cable into the back of your computer, these Inputs and Outputs would have a type, to say what they can take in and put out, through each I/O.
Now with this system modeled out, take a basic example, in the game you have a "ComputerTower", it has 2 Inputs: Keyboard, Mouse, and 2 outputs: Audio, Video
So you take your ComputerTower, and can choose what to actually plug into it, you could play the Video out into your Monitor object, or maybe plug it directly into the ships DisplayScreen, which I am sure the captain wouldnt be too happy about :P
After I/O, comes the devices "Function", which is essentially what it does with the input and what it outputs.
Thats a boring example though, so I will go with something with a bit more gameplay relevance, this same system, you have a Transmitter object which takes an Audio input, and has a RadioWave output(essentially an area broadcast on a certain frequency), you have a Mic which obviously only has Audio output, so you plug it into the Transmitter and it sends out RadioWaves, on a certain frequency, of an audio type.
Someone could have a Receiver which takes RadioWaves as input, and has an Audio output, if they tune in to the right frequency, or "near enough", they will start to pick up the signal which gets sent through its Audio output, which could be hooked up to a recorder or maybe just speakers.
So taken the above, say the first person with his Transmitter wants to send a message to his guild, so he uses the Transmitter, the person with a Receiver might be an enemy spy, which will be able to listen in on the transmittion, as long as he has the right frequency.
Though things will be a bit simpler then that, since "frequency" wouldnt be number controller as such, your guild frequency wont be a random number, itll be a name etc, one thing I thought about alot when I was designing the MMOU was how the user interacts with things, no matter how complex the core of the game is, if the interface is kept simple, the User will "get it" very quickly
Now take my emulation code, wack that into a game Object, and we have emulation working right inside the game

Phew, that was a bit longwinded, hope you dont mind the read :P
The MMOU was an old idea anyway which might never happen, but its always on the back of my mind.

F. I agree... I say screw, "making it look 3x better"... just give us 3-4x the baddies on screen at once!!! Give us oldschool Doom1/2 type action!
Couldn't agree more, though I am not holding my breath

G. I don't get those opinions: I think it's a great looking game! Hell, if I could force AA, it'd look sooo sharp! The models look awesome, the damage is really cool, and the world is detailed as can be. Framerate rocks, stable... I don't get the bad reviews. Yeah, it's linear as hell, but if one enjoys a good railride and knows what to expect, what's the problem?.. lol.

SOF 1... after looking at screenies (and reading reviews that 2 improved a LOT of things about the gameplay as well as the look of the engine), I decided that SOF 2 Gold was as far back as I was willing to go.
Yeah, thats the nasty thing about Opinions, even though you think something might be really stupid or insane, someone will agree with it.
The internet taught me that suprisingly :P

H. Yeah, I appreciate ID copying those elements from other games to make Doom3 more interesting, it definitely helped. I thought the voice acting was excellent and was definitely a huge part of me getting into the experience the first time I played it! I don't mind that they slowed the pace compared to the previous games... but honestly: take a look at that 'Nightmare Mod' and tell me that with that random script and different placement of monsters, Doom 3 couldn't be a much faster paced game...?...

I can't stress enough that I think the AI director invented by Turtle Rock should be implemented in ALL shooters from now on. It should be something to be licensed to other games imo.

WHY in the world do we want 'static' placement of badguys in our gaming worlds anymore???? When there's this completely bada** AI that will intuitively place enemies, randomly, every time we go through a level... I just don't get it.

If not pay for the rights to use that code, then copy it!!! I still don't have Left for Dead, but I've read plenty of reviews about everone raving about this AI Director... it sounds soooo awesome and I've been wanting something like this since I fell in love with Wolfenstein 3D.

Just imagine how the insane amount of replay value we'd all get from our favorite shooters if every 'runthrough' was different and unique.

Doom 3 would be beyond bada*s, HL2 anyone.... christ, the list could go on forever.

I'm not sure why I haven't seen anyone else online mention a similar lust for such tech to be implemented in our shooters. Am I the only one?...
You know, I have had the same kind of ideas, for a different MMO design I did(I know I do alot of designs dont I? :P )
Its a bit different to the way L4D works though, but is kind of the same thing, though thats because I thought of it years ago.
Essentially each NPC faction is a dynamic faction, there is no static NPC spawning in the design at all, each NPC in a faction has its own basic AI to fulfill its goals, then there is a faction AI which just manages the overall needs of the faction, different faction types(races) have different needs.
And to fill those needs it assigns an NPC a job, such as guard, scout, blacksmith, hunter, spawner(thats a fun job..) etc
So the faction will have needs such as food, water, land, war, population etc
A faction of orcs for example, would have a higher war need then other races, and to fulfill that there would be infighting, raids on nearby villages etc.
So a faction has needs, that the faction AI assigns jobs, or roles, to the NPCs within the faction to meet those needs.
The unique aspect of this though is the spawner role, which is actually a building, not an NPC, each spawner spawns new NPCs at a constant rate, until the faction grows a certain size then it splits into 2 factions, and 1 faction attempts to establish a home in a new location.
So essentially, these spawners will never stop spawning, it wont wait for an NPC to die before it spawns a new one, so if players, or other NPC factions, dont get in and thin them out, they keep expanding.
Now the fun thing about this is NPC factions will collide for land, meaning theres going to be battles all over the place as factions fight for land.
Now this brings me to the final piece in the faction puzzle: spawner buildings can be destroyed, and if theres noone left that the faction AI can assign to a builder role to rebuild a spawner, that faction simply dies out, leaving that area open for other factions to come in and take it, or even for a player guild to take it as their own.
Plus, NPC factions will raid player towns aswell, means the world is constantly changing, and if there were multiple servers, one server might have orcs everywhere, where as on another server orcs could be wiped out to extinction(though the system will find some way to bring back extinct races from time to time).

And I completely agree, a dynamic spawning system, even in a FPS is much more interesting then a static spawning system that is the same every time you play through, though honestly, while L4D is different every time, it never seems to be quite like what ive read about, generally, I think the AI director is asleep when I am playing :P
Atomizer is offline   Reply With Quote