PDA

View Full Version : Id Software



yaro_dup1
05-11-2003, 01:23 AM
Hi,

Does John Carmack know Direct3D? What do You think guys?

McNugget
05-11-2003, 02:01 AM
Does Direct 3D come from Microsoft?

yaro_dup1
05-11-2003, 02:07 AM
yeah, so what? Does Carmack hate Microsoft?

nexusone
05-11-2003, 07:31 AM
I don't think he hates Microsoft, but it is how they try to control everything.

He does not want to limit himself to windows only by using direct X.


Originally posted by glYaro:
yeah, so what? Does Carmack hate Microsoft?

Obli
05-11-2003, 09:25 AM
I think he knows about direct3D. I figured it out while reading his .plan. BTW, he probably weighted the direct3d vs GL very carefully when choosing what API to support.

When he did that (GLquake1, q2), I think the GL was better than the D3D on every aspect, with portability as an added plus but I cannot be sure, I know nothing of D3D. I fear there will be a day in which I need to study it a bit.

yaro_dup1
05-11-2003, 10:41 AM
I think one of the most significant arguments for choosing OpenGL by Carmack was multiplatformal support (as nexusone said). Ouake1 was supported by Win, Sun, Linux etc.
Could be someone here on that forum who knows Carmack well ???

Cheers,
yaro

[This message has been edited by glYaro (edited 05-11-2003).]

JanHH
05-11-2003, 03:22 PM
he once wrote an article about opengl vs direct3d and why the latter is ****.. but later he changed is mind and said "ok, direct3v version xxx finally is a useable api". but still he doesn't bother using it, mainly because a) it's windows-only (there's a linux version of every id game) and b) why should one do that when familiar with opengl.

dorbie
05-11-2003, 05:03 PM
Here is the .plan from John Carmack that's contemporaneous with his decision to use OpenGL when the D3D vs OpenGL debates were at their most intense.
http://www.thekeep.org/~rmitz/carmack.on.opengl.html

It's not recent of course. D3D has changed quite a bit, and OpenGL has many extensions now, OTOH OpenGL's extension issues are clearing up in a number of areas.

[This message has been edited by dorbie (edited 05-11-2003).]

phil_da_bill
05-13-2003, 01:30 PM
OK, i really need help... i dont know much about computers so dont say all kinds of stuff i dont understand, any ways, this is the problem... I have a game called counter-strike and when i play i cant see bullet holes and blood, that ahppend becus i cant set my video options to open gl... it tells me that my card dont support it... how do i get open gl or voodoo or voodoo 2? plz help me!!

satan
05-13-2003, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by phil_da_bill:
OK, i really need help... i dont know much about computers so dont say all kinds of stuff i dont understand, any ways, this is the problem... I have a game called counter-strike and when i play i cant see bullet holes and blood, that ahppend becus i cant set my video options to open gl... it tells me that my card dont support it... how do i get open gl or voodoo or voodoo 2? plz help me!! http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/...er=1&start=here (http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/cgi_directory/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&number=1&start=here)

c_olin
05-14-2003, 11:05 AM
he is using OpenGL for doom 3?

id like to see that code

05-14-2003, 12:39 PM
Doom III uses Direct3D 9; he's leaving the OpenGL port to other conversion houses (I heard).

S'plains why DoomIII is on Xbox so quick, no?

dorbie
05-14-2003, 01:56 PM
No you are absolutely wrong about this.

Carmack is using OpenGL for Doom III.

He is supporting several code paths, for basic rendering, rendering with ARB extensions and rendering with proprietary extensions from NVIDIA & ATI.

He even implemented an GL2 code path for higher level shading.

Carmack has written extensively about his use of OpenGL in Doom III in several .plan files and discussed it in interviews.

05-14-2003, 02:18 PM
Excellent Smithers!

I stand corrected and, more importantly, OpenGL continues to rock my nappy verld!

thinkc
05-14-2003, 11:22 PM
I only know that the sound part of Quake/DOOM(Windows edition)is DirectSound used.

yaro_dup1
05-15-2003, 03:14 AM
BTW: What about Doom III? When will be released? Some of You - from America should have it earlier than me...

Tom78
05-15-2003, 03:17 AM
By the end of the year. November or so.

cu
Tom

dorbie
05-15-2003, 07:48 AM
Yep, id has used DirectX in the past but not the D3D part of DirectX. For 3D graphics Carmack has used OpenGL, even where he used DirectX for other stuff.

DJSnow
05-16-2003, 12:29 PM
@dorbie:

fascinating, how unregistered trolls are throwing wrong informations in here, isn't it ? *laughing* http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/biggrin.gif http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/biggrin.gif

marcus256
05-21-2003, 04:32 AM
Originally posted by dorbie:
Here is the .plan from John Carmack that's contemporaneous with his decision to use OpenGL when the D3D vs OpenGL debates were at their most intense.
...

It think that .plan is quite dated ('96), but much of it still holds true (from Carmacks point of view I mean).

The part I have always been the second most concerned about is how D3D forces the application programmer to do hardware dependent optimizations and low level gfx HW management - something that is always better handled by the hardware driver (just as Carmack mentions in the linked .plan). Of course, to some extent you will want to benchmark etc under OpenGL too, to see which solution is the best, but in general... I mean - with D3D you have to specify if you want to use HW or SW transformations, lock/unlock & memcpy vertex data to vertex buffers on your own etc. etc. Heck, even the Glide API was more highlevel than that in several areas (but I suppose it was modelled after OpenGL). At least Glide was easier to use (if you don't count that you had to do all T&L manually on the CPU).

The thing I am the most concerned about, though, is platform independence (even here Glide had an edge over D3D http://192.48.159.181/discussion_boards/ubb/wink.gif ).

Uhm, going OT into D3D vs. OGL - sorry... http://192.48.159.181/discussion_boards/ubb/redface.gif

[This message has been edited by marcus256 (edited 05-21-2003).]

dorbie
05-22-2003, 01:09 PM
DJSnow, yep the same propaganda keeps recirculating and history is constantly revised by people who hear the story second hand or buy into the latest wave of hogwash from Microsoft. I've only posted the facts.

Marcus, I said that .plan was contemporaneous with the early debate over OpenGL v D3D. I know it is dated and pointed out a few areas of concern that have changed since. It remains one of THE seminal position pieces on the whole OpenGL vs D3D debate. If Carmack hadn't taken the stand he did then and written that .plan we probably would not have the excellent OpenGL implementations we enjoy on our cheap PC cards today, and Microsoft would have the graphics IHVs over a barrel.

[This message has been edited by dorbie (edited 05-22-2003).]