Doom3world

Perhaps. I'm not arguing What I've noticed is that using the scrollbar on the dedicated server window freezes the game for clients (rofl) in the same way as with q3 On the other hand, the full-screen console which appears in d3 from time to time bugged me so I thought it's a new code with old heritage.

Originally, much of the low level Q3 stuff was in use:


"The process of building the new engine went much more smoothly than anything we have done before, because I was able to do all the groundwork while the rest of the company worked on TeamArena. By the time they were ready to work on it, things were basically functional. I did most of the early development work with a gutted version of Quake 3, which let me write a brand new renderer without having to rewrite file access code, console code, and all the other subsystems that make up a game. After the renderer was functional and the other programmers came off of TA and Wolf, the rest of the codebase got rewritten. Especially after our move to C++, there is very little code remaining from the Q3 codebase at this point. "

http://archive.gamespy.com/e32002/pc/carmack/

The terms BSP, PVS, lightmap and blocksize were not created by Carmack. He may have been the first person to use BSP trees efficiently in a 3d engine, but those were all existing concepts that hardly belonged to JC.

The keyboard input is hardly the console as a whole, and the code that handles it is probably always reused. It's not like keyboard input changes significantly, ever. From what I've read (and Carmack isn't known to embellish), the rest of the console was rewritten from scratch.

Just looking over the technical specs, it's quite obvious that D3 was a near-total rewrite. The gamecode is EXTREMELY different, as is the renderer. Don't know about the net code, but given all of the physics stuff, it's probably pretty different.

HL2 on the other hand... Anyone who's seen the source code leak can testify that they basically took HL1, wrote a new file access backend and renderer, then bolted about $200,000,000 of proprietary SDKs on to it. The gamecode even uses old HL1 callbacks and uses the old frame/edict based networking stuff. The map format is an attrocious blend of HL1 BSP with displacement-mapped terrain and static meshes. If you wondered why HL2's levels were so short, there's why.

Why do this? Why do you think? Not to shorten development, but rather so they could milk every last penny they could out of Half-Life and Counter-Strike. How do you think they "remastered" the original Half-Life so quickly? Do you know how long it would take to port Quake 1 to ANY other Id engine?

All I know is that Source engine games still load a .qc file...so there's at least that method left over from Quake, and who knows what else.

I couldnt make a popup box say hi in c, but hl2 uses *.mdl & *.bsp's. So in my eyes, it's always going to be quake1. atleast id updated the file extension

several of the updates to Q1 were actuatly things that were "new" in Q2, mostly used in expansion packs though . So Valve could of easily made HL1 from beta Q1 code that had those features.

One thing most people (including me) forget about HL2 is that source wasn't built for HL2, it was built for TF2. Valve started testing the Source net code YEARS ago, so I'd expect that to be pretty simular. But i'm actuatly amazed at what they DIDN't do with source... we've all seen what's been done with the Q1/Q2 source code by home based amatures (tenebrae & code red for example). We know that Valve could of done a better render but they didn't. Maybe it was one of the first hings they finished & spent most of their time on maps & physics implimination.

next up in source engine will probaly be bump mapping. like unreal warfare will probaly have soon. or already has since the last screenshots of ut2007

these shots if you havnt seen um
http://www.unrealtechnology.com/html/te ... ue30.shtml

HL2 has support for bump/normal maps, it's just that only a fraction of the textures use them.

and the lack of dynamic lighting in most cases (not that it doesn't support it, but it's almost never used) makes them pretty much inivisible.

I think there is like umm one enemy that use it...

This just proves how sucky Valve and Source are, and how Steam should be painfully executed.

What do you expect, of a company made up of ex-Microsofters?

HL 1 was a heavly modifyed Quake 1 engine (http://collective.valve-erc.com/index.php?go=q1_or_q2) although some say there was some quake 2 code for coloured lighting and other little touches. HL2 was written from the ground up but some people believe there may be a small bits of code from quake 1 in it, for example the null texture and bsp fromat maps are the same.

i know one of those people is john carmack.

carmack: "Previous source code releases were held up until the last commercial license of the technology shipped, but with the evolving nature of game engines today, it is a lot less clear. There are still bits of early Quake code in Half Life 2, and the remaining licensees of Q3 technology intend to continue their internal developments along similar lines, so there probably won’t be nearly as sharp a cutoff as before. I am still committed to making as much source public as I can, and I won’t wait until the titles from the latest deal have actually shipped, but it is still going to be a little while before I feel comfortable doing the release."

[quote="Foebane"]This just proves how sucky Valve and Source are, and how Steam should be painfully executed.

What do you expect, of a company made up of ex-Microsofters?[/quote]

Shame they are the industry leaders right now, then. It's hypocritical of you to slag off Valve, yet simultaneously be totally behind games which are designed to tick a load of boxes which didn't even exist before HL.

As for graphics, as long as they are fairly competitive, so what, really? HL2 looked great in places (IMO, hi-res lightmaps can still occasionally yield an edge over stencil shadows due to radiosity), Doom3 looked very good overall and Quake4 at it's best looked as good as Doom3 and OK otherwise. My favourite game of the lot though? Q4. You can bet it will have more impact than Doom3, but it's not down to the graphics.

I don't particularly like Valve's approach (if anything, I blame them for a lot), but I appreciate that it exemplifies many of the defining trends in the modern FPS, which other games just imitate.

No, it is not.
The source engine is 100% valve (except for the Havok physics, of course)

Valve re-wrote the whole engine. Nothing comes from HL1.

old thread alert!

all i know is that john carmack himself said there is still bits of quake1 code in the source engine...

it's no different then the CoD 2 engine, which has parts of Quake 3 code in it (heck, id is even listed on the copyright notices because of this!).

i don't really know why valve-fans always get uspet over this. it has part of Quake 1 code in there from HL1. The MDL format isn't that different from HL1's MDL format which hints (strongly) that they kept the model reading code at least.

i love id & doom 3 & don't have a problem saying three's a little bit of Q3A code in there. Heck, why re-write the console system 3 different times?

Sorry, but this thread gets 5/5 for "most useless thread ever!".

I read alot of it so that makes me "the most boring person ever!".