Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

John Carmack On Consoles Vs. Personal Computers 243

Posted by emmett from the but-ryan-gordon-is-cooler dept.
Dave 'Fargo' Kosak writes "John Carmack addressed an audience of roughly 1,000 gamers this past weekend at QuakeCon 2000. This year he decided to speak on the issue of PCs vs console gaming -- and he proceeded to do so, for nearly an hour and a half, sans notes. He also discussed id Software's plans regarding the new console generation, the X-Box, mod-making, different operating systems and more. GameSpy has posted a full four-page writeup."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

John Carmack on Consoles vs. Personal Computers More

John Carmack on Consoles vs. Personal Computers

Comments Filter:
  • That's sad really, I had thought Linux game sales were doing well, looking at Loki's numerous ports of Windows games. But reading this article and hearing Carmack saying how he was disappointed with Quake 3 Linux sales was a bite of reality. I wonder if Linux graphics and drivers will eventually mature to the point where relatively new users to Linux can just pop in the install CD and be playing the game in 15 minutes, instead of fiddling around for a couple days and giving up.

    I really think that Linux won't take off on the desktop, until this obstacle is overcome. How many people here are forced to run Windows solely because of games (that or a lack of a decent, mature web browser) or know someone that is in the same predictament?
  • Because there would be no way to know how many copies are being sold to linux users, hence no way to know how much demand their would be for future linux ports.
  • Well this is probably flame bait, but I thought that compatability was what the Mac was all about.

    For the most part, with the Mac, programs will run the first time, even if you have non OEM stuff in the boxes, and thats because there is a standard that third party manufacturers attend to. This is also true with hardware. As a couple of months ago I installed a two disk Ultra160 array in all of about 20 minutes. And the damn thing works first boot!!! I hate to say it, but sometimes standards are good things.

    And as for the buy one every two years mentality, I have got a Apple Powerbook from 1995 that still sees relatively heavy use in my wifes class that she teaches at the local community college. Granted, the latest games are a non issue here but it does run presenataion software quite nicely, and as soon as she decides to upgrade, the Powerbook will soldier on quite nicely as a Linux server.
  • Dear John,

    I too bought Q3A for Linux to support Linux games in general. I'm very proud to have the Linux version of the game.

    On the other hand, I was never able to get it installed and running. I know the fix for this now, getting Mandrake Linux 7.1 which has TNT2 support, which I'll be doing in the near future.

    Why can't we have an installer right away? Don't all the file names stay the same the last week or so? If yes, someone could be working on the installing while everyone else is cleaning up the rest of the killer bugs. I just don't get that.

    I agree with others. Linux will never have the same thrust as Windows if the versions aren't released at the same time and at the same price. Yes I also understand the bean counter side. I've been there, but am now a Systems Analyst.

    For those of you working on the GUIs for Linux. Take a look at OS/2 and you will a clue as to what I'm looking for. Yes IBM (bleep)s and is (bleep)ed up. That doesn't mean the interface and OS weren't and aren't better in a lot of ways. If only IBM would fully release OS/2 to open source. Of course there is that little part about MS owning part of the technology. How about getting the judge to force MS to give up their rights to that?

    Sabon
  • As I was laying in bed thinking about my previous post (#5 [slashdot.org]), it all became clear to me why the X-box is so feature rich. Microsoft is exempt from the Gilette wager [to refresh, "Give away the razor, make it back on the blades."]. Play along: Let's say you buy the X-box with the intent on making it your own little computer. It runs WinCE (MS software quickly available... for a price: and they know that you WILL use MS software. The price that you drop on Office 2035 will quickly recoup any loss that they might have had). They know that no matter what, you will buy the blades. Okay, let's say you buy it to be a linux box... Okay, now you can't play those nice Xbox games. The 4000 (highball) people that do buy the box for that purpose are just a drop in the bucket anyway.

    Bill Gates is like Cartman: you really should respect his authority. It must feel good to sit down at the craps table knowing that you made a winning roll before the dealer even hands you the dice.
  • ...did a number on your sales. I went out of my way to get it when I saw it over a Fry's in Garland. Works decently and relatively painlessly with all but the latest CVS for the ATI RagePRO (Thanks to you and Gareth!). It's still quite painful and unstable for some out there.
  • All the pre-release information I've read about the Playstation 2 states that it supports HDTV. While no resolutions have been stated, HDTV is denoted as 720p and/or 1080i. A 480p image is denoted as SDTV. (HDTV = Hi Def, SDTV = Standard Def - i = interlaced, p = progressive)

    A vast majority of the HDTV sets are widescreen. As such, I think widescreen gaming will have more apeal than multi-monitor gaming. Not many people will go to the trouble(cost, deskspace, etc) of multiple monitors for a game or two they might play whereas HDTV is the future of television in the USA(NTSC is scheduled to phase out in 2006-info from the HDTV FAQ [hdtv.net]).

  • Well duh. But PC's are far more versatile. Read the article - this has been covered.

    --

  • If you want a web page to do it you could do worse than check out my man Corniche's [slashdot.org] 31337 converter site [geocities.com].

    Tag line: Utilising GeoCities to subvert humanity.

    wrighty.

  • It'll make all those console RPGs look like cartoons (and I'm not talking about the graphics)

    --

  • Think about it this way. You turn mouse-look on which is practically a default in games now. This means you move the mouse to physically turn your viewpoint and angle of vision. With one calculated move you can spin your character 180 degrees around and 40 degrees down.

    Most expert FPS players set their mouse resolution insanely high so that the slightest twitch moves the character quickly. This means minimal movement, a fraction of an inch, to accomplish gymnastic moves you simply CANNOT do with a device that provides upper-limit movement like arrow pads on consoles and arrow keys on keyboards. They both provide no analog feel to movement. You are either turning or you arn't. No fast turns, no slow turns except by controlled tapping which decreases your accuracy.

    That is just mouse movement. I set up my keyboard bindings to provide compass movement. N S E W. There is no turning with the keyboard that is all handled with the mouse.

    If you have dual input movement you can accomplish such feats as circle strafing, attacking your opponent while he is chasing you, midair snipes, ect.

    You can always tell a one-input movement player because they can't effectively circle strafe. In other words, you can circle around them, always pointed at them, and fire at them. If you are fighting somebody that is using a gamepad or keyboard input only you can stay behind them and they can't do a thing about it.

    The other advantages were brought up in another message. I have a five button mouse (wheel counts as three) I bind macros to the wheel such as firing off one missile and returning to the previous weapon. You can't even make or bind macros with a console.

    On the keyboard I don't use the default 1-9 numbers for weapon selection. That is too slow because it requires moving my hand from the movement keys. So, I've bound three keys around the movement area for weapon macros that alternate between similiar weapons (nail gun, shot gun - supernail gun, double barrel - grenade launcher, rocket launcher) ect.

    Everything else I need is bound right within that district so I never move my hands.

    You simply cannot do this stuff with a console.

    I had a friend that swore by keyboard input alone. He wouldn't use a mouse because it was too weird. He was a GOOD player with just the keyboard, but there were obvious limitations to what he could do. I finally converted him to dual input and he became one of the best Quake players I've ever seen.
  • You can get the linux binaries by downloading the linux patch. Just install the patch to the windows installation.
  • I can't actually buy half these games in the UK. Civ:CTP and QuakeII are the only Linux games I've seen actually sat on shelves. (And yes, I bought CTP.) Loki's stuff just isn't here: even stores that WANT to sell the stuff can't. "Game" just dropped their Linux section because after four months of having CTP and Quake on it (and selling some), they couldn't get hold of new products: Railroad Tycoon II apparently STILL has no UK release date and the Windows version is in the 10 quid bin. Trouble is that now they've tried it and it didn't pan out, they're not likely to give it another go. It's no good people pointing at 30 available games if they're not actually available at ground level. If they're not on shelves, they're not going to have casual purchasers and mail ordering stuff from California is not quite the same.
  • Name me a single N64 game that requires a rumble pack or the memory expansion. The only modern example I can think of is Ape Escape for the PSX - it needs the Dual Shock controller (which has been bundled with all PSXs for well over a year now)

    --

  • Reminds me of an old Gary Larson cartoon, of parents watching kids playing on their consoles while in a thought-bubble above their heads are their dream "Employment Ads" sections:

    Wanted: Super Mario player, $70,000 plus benefits

    Can you rescue the princess? Join our team: $80,000.

  • Yeah, all id has done is essentially invent the FPS, make LAN multiplaying popular, make internet multiplayer possible, make the first killer app for 3d accelerators, make the first true 3D gaming engine, and bring OpenGL to the Windows market. Nothing innovative there.

    --

  • Q3 wasn't intended to have a story - it was from DAY ONE meant to be multiplayer arcade action... which it did bery well

    --

  • I always thought the real difference between console games and PC games is the social part. Often you fire up the consol to play with your friends (I recently spent 6 VERY fun hours playing WWF Smackdown with a friend...).

    Then on the other hand most PC games are made for playing alone or over LAN. While the LAN gaming can be a social experience (LAN parties, etc.), you are mostly playing by yourself.

    With a console, you and a couple of friends could have a bud... Playing the game... ;-)

    --

    "I'm surfin the dead zone

  • (like a DVD player into it why the hell do you need to run a DVD player on a video game machine?)

    Erm, to play DVDs?

  • Really what ever happened to having graphics good enough that when you look at your hand in the game it looks like your hand in real life...

    Huh???

    Are you talking about going back to sprites and bitmap graphics instead of real 3D graphics? I hope not.

    The reason the game devlopers started using real 3D is that the bitmaps and sprites are static. If you want an object or a player to perform a new action you have to render a completeley new bitmap for each movement, distance and angle, while in 3D you just apply some transformations to the model (Very roughly spoken).

    This is much easier to handle ingame and looks better, at the cost of details. The 2% advances you are talking about are the slow, but steady advances in making real 3D graphics as detailed as your mentioned photo realistic hand.

    WowTIP, stating the obvious... ;-)

    --

    "I'm surfin the dead zone
  • On page 3 of that interview, there's a photo of Carmack fragging - on a Mac! Looks like a G4, plus a sweet LCD screen. Hope he brought his own mouse ;)

    I'm pretty sure they played on G3s last year.

    - Scott
    ------
    Scott Stevenson
  • I had no desire to buy the Windows version. Besides, I wanted the game as much as a reference app for Utah-GLX as I wanted it for what it was.
  • Metal Gear Solid should be out on the PC in September. It comes with all of the VR Missions as well. Good enough? :)
  • Ok I still don't understand how that can help you with anything but a narrow spectrum of games which include: 1. Things with a MUD style interface (albiet with graphics) where it could let you do things similar to what a Diku codebase could do and allow for groupings of characters in various situations. 2. Confrontational situations (FPS deathmatch, battles, challenges, chat) where some lonely stupid 10 year old will make you look stupid. Really I don't like having to pay for access to a mud (I get that for free now with a mud I play on and a free ISP, and I really don't want to deal with little billy and him making an ass of me).
  • I picked up a Q3 Linux Tin Box in little old London, Ontario from Electronics Boutique *very* shortly after Loki released them.

    However,*sigh*
    I pretty much exclusively play it on Win98 for performance reasons but my money will always go to the Linux guys in hopes that one day things will be better.

    Kudos to id and Loki.

    sTrAiN
  • I hate -- absolutely HATE -- NTSC...it is just aweful and I am still amazed we tolerate it daily.

    I can tell by the context that you don't actually mean that NTSC fills you with awe

    But what about John Carmacks Brains? [dingoblue.net.au]


    --------------------------------------
  • Is it just me or is there no third page?
    All I get for the third page [gamespy.com] is the the gamespy logo and a banner ad.
    I can see it on the source though...how odd.
    Here it is:

    id Development and Consoles:

    It was a natural progression at this point for Carmack to let the audience in on what direction id Software would be taking in the console market. "Our primary platform is still Windows 2000 right now, with simultaneous support for Mac and Linux," he began. "But with consoles, we are spending quite a bit of time looking at what we want to do there." Because the Xbox uses nVidia technology, he did say that it's likely to be a development direction id will take--the Xbox's technology specs are almost "spot on," he said, with what he's designing the new technology around, and so it's a natural direction for them to take.


    He also discussed the consequences of developers working their titles around Xbox technology, and thus potentially favoring one hardware developer (nVidia) over another, therefore putting twice the amount of development time towards one manufacturer, possibly shortchanging those users without the same hardware. It's a tough issue, Carmack says.

    While simultaneous development for the Xbox will be a trivial issue with id, the other console systems will be a different matter, simply because out of all the upcoming consoles, the Xbox happens to have system specs so close to what Carmack is currently developing for in the PC arena. The bottom line, Carmack explained, was that id remains a PC-focused developer--cutting back on the technology simply because one of the platforms they might be interested doesn't have the right feature set is not something that id is willing to do at the moment.

    Windows, Macs, Linux, and id:

    Porting games to different platforms has always been a contentious issue in game development, with some developers deciding not to support Mac or Linux ports of their games for varying reasons. Carmack diverted the discussion for a bit into the subject of id's support in making games for Windows, Mac, and Linux, saying that id is indeed happy to support the Mac OS/X, but that Linux is a bit more complicated.

    "Quake III sales on Linux were disappointing, below what we were hoping to see on that," he said. "A lot of it probably has to do with the fact that the infrastructure is set up so that to play a 3D game is just really tough on Linux." At the game's release, it could only be played with one of two drivers: the 3dfx Voodoo drivers or the Matrox drivers. It's Carmack's hope that by the time id's next game is released, most Linux users will be running distributions of Linux that have proper 3D support.

    The fourth page [gamespy.com] seems to work.

    ---

  • "Did you know that Wolfenstein had acceptable 3d like graphics and ran on a 286?"

    Acceptable? Nevermind resolution or frame rate, the features that future games added are well beyond looks: six-degrees of freedom, arbitrary map geometry, programmable physics, truely dynamic scenery (destroy stuff, put stuff back together), and then on top of all that, the improvements in graphics are beyond looking more realistic. Games now are really more asthetically pleasing than they were "way back when". Look at Need for Speed (a driving game) or Jane's F15 sim, or Unreal. These games are beautiful. It's beyond alpha channels and lens flare.

    Maybe your point is that noone has come up with a new plot? So what? There hasn't been a new story since humans started writing stuff down. The Greeks outlined all the possible stories that could be (father-son battle, gods vs mortals, etc), and everything else is just a variation on that. There hasn't been anything new in Hollywood except actors and technology since the 20s. So what?

    I don't know what 2% increase you're talking about, but as much as is possible right now, humans are advancing everything they know how. Just because we haven't gotten to Mars doesn't mean a 2% increase in rocket speed isn't important.

    If you want to go play Wolfenstein, be my guest, but good luck trying to modify it to change the behavior of the AI, or add new rules to the game, or change the physics, or add the ability to see through a stain-glass window and still have it run on a 286.

    Now, throwing out all the technical aspects, there have still been advances in gameplay itself. All the ID games are basic "kill everything that moves", but as many have already posted, there are dozens of games which deviate from this: half-life, thief, and Tomb Raider, and dozens of non-FPS. There are sims, sports games, strategy games, tactical games, RPGs, MMORPGs, and many games that defy classification (tetris clones, for example).

    You could take the stance that none of these are original, and that the creators lacked immagination, but why would you want to? There are pleny of fun games, even if they all have roots in greek comedies and tragedies. Life is fractal: it repeats itself at every scale. There's no point in calling that a lack of immagination. It's just too easy to say "this is just like that was."

    So, prove me wrong and go make a game noone has ever thought of before with a story noone has heard and technology noone has seen. That would be cool.
  • Multimedia Technologies in Vancouver also carries some Loki's games for linux (in addition to just about every linux distribution under the sun, office suites and even BeOS, and how about XIG X-servers...).

    The problem is: PRICE!!!!

    I mean, it's a nice metal box, but $70 Canadian is way too much. Well ok, maybe not so bad when the game came out but they still have some older Loki games at insane "recommended retail" prices. Since Multimedia is the cheapest store in town, you have to walk about 5 meters and pick up windows version of the same game for 1/2 price. No wonder a single linux copy is sitting on shelves for months.
  • I hate -- absolutely HATE -- NTSC...it is just aweful and I am still amazed we tolerate it daily

    I disagree, though not about NTSC sucking as a video standard. I take our continued acceptance of NTSC as a positive sign - a sign that TV is not yet so important that we must spend billions just so we can watch the local news at such a high res that you can count the hairs in the anchor's nose. Long live NTSC!

  • I can run Quake3 at 1280x1024 -- four times NTSC resolution...why would I ever play it on a console?

    Maybe because the cost of a 40" TV is actually reasonable compared to the cost of a 40" monitor?

    - Scott
    ------
    Scott Stevenson
  • As long as it can do 480P, I'm happy.


    Refrag
  • The whinny rich kid who wants more glitzy crap? The company that is in a pissing match with another company for loosers to buy their flimsy wares? The lazy programmer who just ran out of ideas and just wants to give a game with 2% better graphics that only maybe Rembrant could really destinguish against. Take the PS2 they are going to charge up the ass for some system that will cost 3x the current selling price of the current playstation to play games that still don't look photorealistic and will probably cost more just so they could cram more crap (like a DVD player into it why the hell do you need to run a DVD player on a video game machine?) These are the problems I see. Why should people be so god damn serious about their free leasure time? Why should it cost thousands to deck yourself out. I thought mass production and modern manufacturing were supposed to drive costs down not increase them.
  • quoting the article:

    A "stateless" console system--one with the typical console hardware and no additions like a hard drive or peripherals--makes for a much more standardized gaming experience for the user--if the game you make works on your Dreamcast, it'll work on everyone's Dreamcast, because there's no worry that the user might have a different video card than you, for example. But if consoles go the way trends show, utilizing hard drives, peripherals, and other PC-like features, then, Carmack explains, "it's not a matter of a game console versus a PC, it's more a matter of PC versus another gaming platform."

    With the evolution of OSs, software, and hardware on PC's i feel that eventually pc's will eventually be used primarily for development, mission critical applications, and serving a broad range from home network administration to asp's.

    game consoles on the otherhand, with their extreme user-friendly-plug-it-in-and-you-have-mastered-uti lizing-it-in-10-minutes design, and the evolution of its multimedia counterparts, it will eventually be the workstation.

    it may sound far fetched but both have come along way from their beginnings and will never end, technology has the darwin effect, it always evolves to survive.

    pardon the spelling if it is off ;)

  • I want a computer that is cheap and that works well is that too much to ask and maybe works well with current software long into the future. I really don't care if my computer is pretty or not.
  • Look, the Linux market just isn't that big. If every single person who uses Linux for a workstation bought the Linux version, it *still* would have been a miniscule fraction of the Windows sales.

    Also, I was under the impression that everyone here was pretty much dyed-in-the-wool Windows haters. Obviously games come before principles, 'cause a lot of people here bought the Windows version rather than wating a couple of weeks for the Linux version.

    --

  • and you'd boot your computer if you wanted to play others (Ultima, Castle Wolfenstein, MS Flight Simulator).

    For shame! It was SubLOGIC Flight Simulator! ;)

    Still, I did love Karateka, Elite, Kabul Spy (ok, I hated Kabul Spy), Infocom.*..

    *reminisce*

    Your Working Boy,
  • Carmack doesn't intend for the best FPS graphics engine available to be used at below 640x480 Not until the Xbox is released (if it's ever released) will there be a console platform worthy on Carmack's attention Aren't you contradicting yourself here? I mean the Xbox will have the same resolution as the other consoles, right?
  • Another reason is that Mom & Pop can justify paying for the PS2 for the kids to play games on because when the kids have gone to bed they can watch a DVD movie on the thing.

    Regards, Ralph.
  • It's probably the video cards you've seen on the PC side that was the problem. Many 3dfx cards I've seen deliver a very washed out appearance, while many Nvidia cards deliver very vibrant colors, and I hear the picture quality of the Matrox G400 is excellent.

    I have a 3dfx V3, which isn't too bad.
  • Sorry about the formatting, I hit submit a bit too fast.
  • The early 80s console/computer analogy is a bit off... the Atari 2600/Intellivision/Colecovision weren't popular at the same time as the Commodore 64/Atari 1200XL/Apple IIe. When the videogame market crashed in 84, *that's* when the personal computers started making inroads. The best Colecovision game paled in comparison to average C64 games. And when the Amiga and Atari ST lines were introduced around 86 - no competition whatsoever! They made anything else look like a toy. It wasn't until the NES was introduced in 88 that the console/computer debate really started.

    --

  • "And there's also the possibility of hybrid PC/console machines (like the Amiga was).

    Please explain to me in which way amiga was a hybrid PC/console machine. I always thought of it as a PC, only better (at the time). The fact that the games on the amiga kicked most console games ass doesn't make it a console.

    --

    "I'm surfin the dead zone
  • Actually, E.T. sold millions of copies. But it was still a fraction of the carts that Atari actually made (somewhere in the 25-30 million area).

    --



  • The X-Box runs a stripped down Win2k kernel. I would say that about 75% of the full functionality is there, but ALL apps run in ring0. That is why they call it a 'game' machine.

    What a joke, eh?
  • CBS was promoting a field sequential color system, which received FCC approval and began limited operation in 1951. It soon died and was replaced with RCA's system, color NTSC, in 1953. RCA did hardware, CBS did not. The original NTSC system used three electron guns and a shadow mask CRT. Sony invented the single gun Trinitron CRT. NASA later used a field sequential color system for Apollo and other manned missions.
  • This is exactly what happened to me. As soon as Q3A for Linux was released, I was all over it. Unfortunately, my Linux box is just a bit underpowered to play it, so I'm kinda stuck until I can get a new system.

    A lot of Linux users have underpowered systems simply because you can run Linux very respectibly on them. Windows 2000 users are going to always have to have the latest hardware, therefore its not an issue to them. Compounding the problem is that the Linux version of Q3A was benchmarked to be about 10-15% slower then the Windows version.

    Some people have commented on the fact that the game was hard to setup and run. I found the Q3A betas very hard to keep from SIG11'ing, but the final gold version was pretty stable for me.

    At any rate, I'm hanging onto this CD. It won't be long before I get a new Athlon and life will be good again : )
  • Because it removes a large chunk of the supposed benefits of computer gaming, namely, not having to put up with the rather crappy NTSC display standard.

    There are a number of problems with both formats, truth be told. Here's how I see it:

    Computer games:

    1. Are easily upgradable, comparatively speaking.
    2. Give the gamer more choices in gaming. Don't like the PSX's conroller? Tough. On the PC, though, you've got the choice of mouse, keyboard, joystick (analog or digital), gamepad, or whatever your pleasure may be (depending on the game)
    3. Aesthetically can be much better looking: a good sound card and video card on the PC will blow away any console competition.

    Console games:

    1. Ensure out-of-the-box compatibility with your hardware. Slashdot may not be the best place to judge how important this is, since we all are self-proclaimed nerds, but the average user who isn't interested in continually tweaking their system and upgrading to the next cool thing can get rather frustrated.
    2. As a result of this, standards are a bit more reliable. Anyone remember when Id had to provide a patch for Quake because Nvidia's cards gave users playing with them the ability to see through the water? Everyone's working off the same page in hardware and control issues.
    3. Simplicity. Though not as much of an issue as it once was, a computer game has to deal with a lot more overhead than a console game.
    4. More portable. If I wanted to take my copy of Vagrant Story to go show a friend, all I'd need is the game CD and perhaps my memory card. If he didn't have a PSX, I'd need to pack the console and one or two wires. Even so, its still easier than having to go install, cross my fingers, and hope I don't run into any compatibility issues.
    5. Personally, I've always preferred playing games with a nice controller than a rather unwieldy keyboard or mouse.

    I'm an old-time console gamer, having owned consoles since before the days of the NES. Until a few years ago, the only computer games I played were Maxis-style simulations or strategy games (the one type of game I feel is suited to a mouse-driven interface). Since getting my new system, I've been delving more into the computer gaming world, but I do think I get more enjoyment out of my Playstation than my computer in gaming terms. This may change, but I'm not ready to give up my consoles yet.

  • PC's vs Consoles: DEATHMATCH (Score:4)

    by IAmATuringMachine! ( 62994 ) on Tuesday August 08, 2000 @08:45PM (#868838)
    Carmack pointed out a lot of interesting points about how the console folks make their money. They seem to follow the Gillette "Give away the razor, make it back on the blades" principle. With the growth of the internet and superfast network connections coming into many homes, it is not a surprise that the Game console manufacturers are a little bit hesitant to support all of the neat little gadgets available. It is sort of like the Netpliance system- they sell you the console with the expectation that they are going to make something back on it. If you go and buy a playstation, hook a a keyboard and a printer up to it, and maybe throw linux on it, they don't get anything in return for their wager that you are going to keep them alive. In the end, I don't really see how computers and consoles can really coexist peacefully... at least it is apparent that it gets harder every day.
  • The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dogs
    S is required.

    Isn't the one at the end of jumps enough, or does it take two 'S's to rock your world?
    --
    Cheers

  • It may not be 1280x1024 but you can get a VGA adapter for the Dreamcast that does 640x480. You can also buy the keyboard for the Dreamcast. As far as wanting a mouse for Quake, it's simple, don't buy it for your console, buy it for the computer. I agree that each platform has it's specialities, but not everyone can afford a computer and every console that comes out.
  • >It's that half step ahead that will keep PCs out there as gaming hardware. They
    >will always have the advantage of being able to try out new hardware ideas sooner
    >than the "standard" consoles will. They will also be able to support many alternate
    >hardware options that the consoles can't.

    Total and utter bullshit. This is precisly the crap that has turned me off on PC gaming. PC gaming and PC gamers have little or interest in supporting older hardware with their "you need rush out and get the latest hardware" to run the latest crappy release of some lame PC game with pretty graphics.

  • General... (Score:5)

    by ChristianBaekkelund ( 99069 ) <draco.mit@edu> on Tuesday August 08, 2000 @08:46PM (#868842) Homepage
    I am admittedly a rather adamant computer-gamer as opposed to console gamer for a number of basic reasons:

    • Resolution: I hate -- absolutely HATE -- NTSC...it is just aweful and I am still amazed we tolerate it daily. Without even getting into the "Never The Same Color" problems of NTSC, the resolution is just crap...I can run Quake3 at 1280x1024 -- four times NTSC resolution...why would I ever play it on a console?
    • Controls: This may be getting better with the PSX2 and the next generation of consoles, but the single gamepad controls for a console are just annoying as hell after a while...sometimes I just want a mouse (for example, when playing Quake!). Any game that requires a keyboard?...gone! (therefore, if anyone wanted to perhaps make a retro text adventure game real cheap?...nope! Not that it would matter anyways, because it'd probably have to be unofficial (I doubt Sony would license such) and text sucks on TVs anyways) The PSX2 has some USB ports...hopefully that'll improve matters.

    With that said, there will always be certain genres of games I will want to play on consoles rather than PCs. Sports games, racing games, and 2 person fighting games, I'd much rather play on a console. Real Time Strategy games (ala Starcraft), First Person Shooters, and adventure games, I'd much rather play on a PC...I mean seriously, how on earth can you play a RTS or FPS on something with no mouse and low resolution??

    Ahwell, I suppose all those damn Pokemon games will keep the consoles indefinitely alive, and in fact, twice as popular gaming platforms as the PC.

  • it seams like every one is falling for the hype. the chip (nv25) that will be in the X-box will be out next spring for the pc, and the X-box will come out 6 months later right about the same times as Nvidia releases nv30 for the PC.

    Every now and then consoles jump ahead, but in the long run, the pc always catch up. I remember when playstation came out, back then every body stated it was the death of the pc as a gaming platform.

    It didn't happen and it wont for a long time a head.

    the pc people newer show any thing a year and a half, before they release it. So when the console people do, everybody thing they are ahead of the pc. the ps2 is currently more power full then the current pc (for graphics) but it wont stay ahead that long. the X-box wont even be better then the hi end pc at launch day.
  • Does anyone have a transcript of his speech?


    Refrag
  • I like the trend toward so-called "stateless" console systems, but inevitably there will be strings attached. Let's face it, unless you have a complete monopoly over the video game market, you're going to run into the same problems with either the paradigm of stateless systems or gaming on a PC.
  • i dunno. i did my part and shelled out $50 for q3arena for linux, and honestly, i found the install to be really easy and straightforward. then ran the point release to upgrade it and i was online and playing in no time. honestly, i had the most trouble getting it working under windows on the same machine (used to be dual boot, and yes, for gaming). the linux quake3 was less of a hassle for me. i guess part of the problem is that a lot of stores don't stock the linux version, so the linux gamer who wants it just buys the windows version and gets it working. personally, i own both copies ('cause i played it in windows long before linux) but hey. i dunno. i guess all i can do is encourage the linux gamers out there to go and BUY linux games. if the store doesn't stock them, ask them to. let them know that there is a market. and please, PLEASE don't "pirate" linux games... it hurts sales, makes the market look smaller and leads to less linux game development.

    --
    you must amputate to email me

  • I dont know about everyone else, but I don't think about shifting my attention from translation (keyboard) to rotation and up/down viewing (mouse). I just do it. Maybe that means I play FPSes too much.

    Now that I think about it, I absolutely can't stand playing FPSes on consoles. The controls just aren't quick enough. I mean, how can you snipe someone with arrow keys (what the d-pad essentially is)? I can track moving things (people) much much faster with a mouse.
  • Mmm. Getting closer, at least.

    It's gonna be a royal bitch to fit a sofa in front of my desk, though...
  • Ever play Perfect Dark of Goldeneye on 64? Those are shining examples of excellent FPS games on a console. Granted when you try and play multiplayer, you're looking at probably 150x150, but TV kind of has that natural FSAA goin on so it's not so bad.

    Both of those games support some interesting controller combinations as well, including some 2-controllers per player options. 2 analog joysticks can be quite hard to get used to, but it is far superior to being a keyboard jockey and maybe slightly under a mouse for control. FPS games on consoles can be quite fun and addicting, as long as they address some of the inherent shortcomings of the systems compared to their PC brethen.

  • I don't see the problem with resolution. I have 20/20 and see everything fine and I don't have a problem with the actual picture unless it's from interference but when the signal is good it dosn't matter.

  • Actually... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The Amiga was kind of like that. Although you could get a faster CPU, HD, memory and video card (not always though... kinda hard to stick a video card in an A600...), most games were written for the stock hardware: an A500 with 1MB RAM (the machine came with only 512K, but the extra RAM was not really a big deal). But despite this, the games kicked ass.

    This kind of thing probably wouldn't work with a PC though, since the hardware isn't specialized enough. The Amiga was really a cross between a PC and a gaming console.
  • It's called a Mac. The more you standardize the computer, the less it becomes a PC thus defeating the point of having a completely (well, nearly) open platform and market. I think the PC would suddenly realize the limitations in some ways that the Mac and obviously a console has due to more standardization. Less software and hardware choices. The PC will never be standardized, because if it changed at such a fundamental, it would no longer be what we call a PC.
  • OK, so its not really on topic, but its relating to QuakeCon, so what the heck. :)

    I know many of us techs look for cool cases, and some of these [planetquake.com] friggin rock. The grand prize [planetquake.com] winner is a *great* idea, with PVC and all. Hope it doesnt get brittle from heat (not like there's much with that fan).

    //epit

    -----
    If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed...

  • The only thing that I can add to this is the following: CompUSA started out supporting games for linux -- Civ:Call to Power was available at the one here for several months, and this is Baton Rouge, LA, not a hotbed for linux users I would think. But the best place to buy linux games is Electronics Boutique. Apparently, they get all of Loki's games in, without question. The last time I was there, there were at least 4 titles just begging to be bought, and displayed in a prominent place. So find an EB and buy linux games there. BTW, does anyone know the final sales totals for Q3A for the win, linux and mac versions? I was kinda interested in seeing where they stood at the 6 month mark.
  • GT is Epic's publisher (Unreal Tournament). And GT wouldn't even put the linux verion in the box, you had to download it (and I believe Loki now supports the Linux UT). Activision was the Win32 publisher for Q3A and Loki is the Linux publisher for Q3A.

    Hope that helps.
  • I read a complaint about low sales on the Linux
    platform. Perhaps the sales would have been better
    if the Linux version had been available for sale.

    You may think I'm joking, actually I've looked
    in a lot of stores around here and have not
    found a single one where the linux version was
    available. Of course it's available on the net
    but at at lest $10 to $15 more than the
    winblows version.

    It turned out that I bought some other kind of
    games for my son, on the playstation ...

  • True, there are a lot of controls on a dual shock, but you can't access them all at once without some major hand dexterity. In particular, using both the analog and the digital movement controls at once is a joke. (never mind keeping your fingers in position near the buttons!)

    Those controllers are good for some games, but I couldn't imagine playing a FPS with them.

  • That's true. I'm wondering that all these people with PC backgrounds going into the console market is going to result in either crappier games/os software or add the patching capability. MS has a history of 'upgrades/features release/bug fix' paths in their software. id's also patch crazy. Hopefully being homogenous will result in lower severe bug counts.

    Also, while buggy programming can happen anywhere, it is much much rarer in the console market. Also, what was the recall for? I remember hearing stuff about faulty ram or having region locking disabled but nothing about the programming being particularly wrong.
  • I disagree.

    I think there are plenty of original games coming out. It's just harder to find them, because the market is so glutted with crappy games. Original is a relative term. It's like people who complain that all Hollywood's movies are unoriginal and stupid. What are you comparing to? Are you looking back at the first video games and noticing that the jump in originality from no video games to early video games was more significant than that from last year's games and this year's game? Well duh.

    I also think that comparing Wolfenstein to say, Quake III on strength of the 3D graphics and finding them close is laughable. I guess I am one of those people who claim graphics have increased "soooo much." Download the latest trailer for the Final Fantasy movie and tell me we aren't advancing significantly in 3D graphics. Sure, that's not real-time gaming, but in a few years, maybe it will be. Quake III's quality would have been movie-special-effects quality a few years ago.

    If you think the existing games suck so much, why don't you go make one, and we'll see if we like yours better. If we do, then you'll make lots of money and the gaming community will be happy. If not, maybe you'll stop complaining about the better games that are coming out.

  • Low Linux Sales (Score:4)

    by CrusadeR ( 555 ) on Tuesday August 08, 2000 @10:05PM (#868873) Homepage
    Although the points raised by Carmack (rudimentary 3D support; high learning curve) did impact the Linux sales of Quake III: Arena, one other factor should be considered: the disparity between Win32 and Linux Q3A's release dates. The Win32 version shipped on December 5th, while the Linux version didn't begin shipping to retail stores until just before Xmas on around the 23rd. Furthermore, as stated in a .plan update by Carmack, it was known that Linux binaries would be made available at a later date for those who purchased a CD for a diffferent OS. I think its fair to say that many of the hardcore gamers who would've otherwise purchased a Linux version bought the Win32 retail CD upon release instead of waiting for the Linux box to ship. Additionally, a Linux dedicated server binary was released on the 5th, so Linux server admins were able to again purchase the Win32 release without fear of not being able to run a multiplayer server. Ironically, this situation was one Carmack (and Loki for that matter) had wanted to avoid:
    We should be handing off the masters for all three platforms within a day or two of each other, but they aren't going to show up in stores at the same time. Publishers, distributers, and stores are willing to go out of their way to expedite the arrival of the pc version, but they just won't go to the same amount of trouble for mac and linux boxes.


    THE EXECUTABLES FOR ALL PLATFORMS WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD UNTIL AFTER CHRISTMAS. This means that if you want to play on the mac or linux, don't pick up a copy of the pc version and expect to download the other executables.

    Our first update to the game will be for all platforms, and will allow any version to be converted into any other, but we intend to hold that off for a little while.

    We are doing this at the request of the distributors. The fear is that everyone will just grab a windows version, and the separate boxes will be ignored.

    A lot of companies are going to be watching the sales figures for the mac and linux versions of Q3 to see if the platforms are actually worth supporting. If everyone bought a windows version and the other boxes sold like crap in comparison, that would be plenty of evidence for most executives to can any cross platform development.

    I know there are a lot of people that play in both windows and linux, and this may be a bit of an inconvenience in the short term, but this is an ideal time to cast a vote as a consumer.
    I guess the hope is that sales of Loki's (and Hyperion's, and whoever else begins shipping Linux ports or original software) titles which are available as stand-alone Linux retail releases only (without the possibility of an upgrade from a Win32 version) will gradually improve to the point where more retailers and developers will give Linux a look. Upcoming in-house Linux titles such as Anarchy Online and Neverwinter Nights will also need to show stronger sales to make our presence known to the bean counters. Solidarity with $ is all the executives which run the PC gaming industry understand, and although it'll take time and a considerable amount of effort, I think it can be done. The inherent strengths of Linux as a consumer (yes, consumer) platform, which are only just now beginning to be tapped, should allow Linux to carve out a penguin-sized niche in the market, but once again it's up to the Linux users themselves to make it happen... the industry just isn't going to start serving games to you on a silver platter.
  • You can download the demo to check compatibility with your video card.

    At over 50MB, that's just not feasible for me...

  • I, like many others, am often guilty of impatience. When I go to a store because I want to buy a good game to occupy myself with, I go in, look at the titles, find the coolest one at the moment, and buy it. I don't even really look for a linux version because I have NEVER seen a linux version of ANY game in software/game stores. NEVER. Not even in the chains that LokiSoft lists as appropriate retailers. I asked a clerk at one such store about the linux version of Myth II...he didn't even know there WAS a linux version. This store was among the chains mentioned on Loki's webpage.

    Given a choice, if I entered a store to buy a game and there was a linux version alongside the windoze version, in EVERY case I WOULD buy the linux version. I'm there to toss my money away anyway and I will go for the native version over the requires-reboot version EVERY TIME. I'm not given that option. Better yet, I would like to see CDs with "For Windoze or Linux" on the box for all such games where this is possible (some RPGs and adventure games require many CDs, which may make this unrealistic - requiring separate boxes).

    If a really must-have game has been released and I am really interested in it. I do NOT want to wait for some indefinite period for Loki to get around to licensing the rights to port it OR wait for a linux version to be released...and THEN only on the net. I PREFER to buy my games in a store. I buy it, take it home, install it then and there, and fire it up. I do not WANT to go thru the credit card online crap, wait for delivery, etc. I HATE USING MY CREDIT CARD AND I BEGRUDGE BEING REQUIRED TO.

    Gaming companies should UNDERSTAND that if they do not want "disappointing" linux game sales, they need to release the linux version SIMULTANEOUSLY and the games actually MUST appear in the stores right next to the Doze version. It is bad marketing to do otherwise. It is BOUND to fail, expecting the impatient gamer to wait some unknown period of time for a port to appear and THEN have it ONLY appear on the web. Bad! It isn't as critical for Mac users (sure it is IRRITATING as all hell to have to wait for the port) since nothing is really going to get them to drop their Macs and just buy a Windoze PC. The story is different with linux. Linux almost always being used on an x86 that either has a copy of Doze on it OR is capable of easily accepting a Doze install -- JUST TO PLAY A FREAKIN' GAME.

    I HATE rebooting for anything. I hate shutting down my setiathome, going thru the reboot process to windoze, playing the game for a while and then having to reboot again. It is plainly better to not have to. I would bet that any and all linux users would do as I state...given a choice between the windoze or linux version of a game at the time the game is actually WANTED, they would go with the linux version every time. Every. Time. That would definitely improve "disappointing" linux sales.

  • Traditionally, it's been more than a half step. PS/2 and X-Box are the first consoles ever that will be/are all that close to being as powerful as their PC rivals.

    The next closest thing was the Sega Saturn. Playstation was never as powerful as PCs when it shipped, largely due to the low resolution and the poor little 38mhz R3000 32-bit MIPS processor. (MIPS being a company here, for those that don't know, now part of SGI I believe?)

    The up side of PCs is that they are upgradable, as you said. The down side, of course, is just the same point. You get developers making it so that their games only work with a 3d accelerator (This is called "laziness" or "marketing schedule" since it takes time and effort to do a software 3d engine) and so that they require the latest and greatest Pimpium Processor with Increased-Level-1-Cache-X technology. But again, this is also the strength; You can wring more performance out of a PC with every new upgrade. Console systems don't HAVE upgrades.

    Or at least, they didn't. Now you'll be able to add more peripherals including hard drives (PS/2 will have an IEEE1394-connected disk; X-Box will have one internally) and ethernet NICs (What's taking Sega so long?) but it's important to realize that these are very limited numbers of upgrades. I don't know anything about how these boxes are doing things internally, but I'd assume they're just using TCP/IP for the networking, so you as a game developer don't have to care about what the connection type is, just about metering your bandwidth usage. On a side note, I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft also included NetBEUI support on the X-Box's version of Windows Whatever; In fact, I'll be kind of let down if they drop it. It's really useful on small, non-internet-connected LANs. Being able to buy a 10mbps hub and hook three or four X-boxen up to it and not have to do any configuration would be slick.

    Also, there's been a lot of talk about USB, but it's important to recognize that most USB devices will not be usable. Period. Oh, you'll be able to use the most common cameras and such, any standard USB hub should work (But that's pure speculation) and of course there's the ubiquitous Zip USB, which I suspect will be supported by everything just because everyone and their great-grandmother has a Zip drive, seemingly even if they don't have a computer. I kind of doubt anyone will adhere to a filesystem standard, but if they do, for the record, it should be Fat32 or Fat16.

    It really is nice just how stable console systems tend to be. I do say tend because there are always crashy games on console platforms. Even Driver, one of my favorite PSX games, has a crash bug I've run into. But all in all, console games don't have those problems, and that makes them very attractive. Also, consoles are instant-on (some of them have really annoying splash screens you can't skip, though, are you listening Sony?) and hook up to your TV. For those who hate NTSC, the current generation of consoles all have VGA built in or as an add-on.

    Are consoles going to kill PCs? Not any time soon. Will they shrink the PC market? Most definitely. What do I think Console makers need to do to shrink the PC market? Get a good standards-based web browser that supports DHTML, Flash, Shockwave, Windows media, Real media, mp3s, Java, and HTML 3.2. This one thing alone will make many, many people forget about their PCs and move to a console.

    Everyone look out for Microsoft.

  • Why the X Box makes me paranoid... (Score:4)

    by Frymaster ( 171343 ) on Tuesday August 08, 2000 @10:07PM (#868897) Homepage Journal
    MSFT is into expansion and let's face it, in the software world, they've expanded about as far as they can. What does that leave for new territory? Well, the net for one (or should I say the .NET) but that's a tough nut to crack. The biggest unexploited territory is hardware.... enter the X box.

    If msft made a computer today "optimally designed to run Winders 2x" the DOJ would probably send old Bill to Levenworth. The solution, therefore, is for msft to get into the hardware racket via the backdoor. It's a simple concept of thin-edge-of-the-wedgery really:

    1. Make a console, give it some net connectivity.
    2. Establish a hefty marketshare.
    3. Offer web/email/yattayatta as enhancements or a 2.0
    4. Bring out a new copy of Office with some web-connected features (like, oh, a power-point driven email reader... msft's had worse ideas...)
    5. Offer this new Office for the X crowd.
    6. Gotta have a keyboard and mouse for that... make those too.
    7. Throw in a monitor for that hi-res everyone wants
    8. Announce that the next X-thingy will have the option to run winders
    9. It's a computer... but it's still a "game console".
    10. Version 4.0 is "optimized to run Winders 2003"

    Since the "total Microsoft solution" seems to be actually popular with people, the Xcomputer will sell a tonne. Why buy from Dell? It's essentially only a partially-supported platform by the time we get to point 10. It runs winders standard but those "extra" features require the optimized Xcomputer.

    But it's still a game console if the DOJ comes knocking.

    Am I paranoid or what?

  • A "stateless" console system--one with the typical console hardware and no additions like a hard drive or peripherals--makes for a much more standardized gaming experience for the user--if the game you make works on your Dreamcast, it'll work on everyone's Dreamcast, because there's no worry that the user might have a different video card than you, for example.

    You seem quite happy with the fact consoles are becoming more like PCs - personally, I think it's a shame - for this very reason.

    I'm a die-hard home computer/PC gamer, ever since the Sinclair Spectrum, and have never owned a console (well, except a gameboy, but that doesn't count ;-). But I like consoles like the Dreamcast, because everything just works.

    With the evolution of OSs, software, and hardware on PC's i feel that eventually pc's will eventually be used primarily for development, mission critical applications, and serving a broad range from home network administration to asp's.

    Yeah, PCs as we know them may become rarer, like you say with devices like consoles taking their roles, but I doubt that they will die out. In the same way that there are car enthusiasts, who fix up their own hot-rod, there will be PC enthusiasts, who tinker with their PCs.

    Carmack explains, "it's not a matter of a game console versus a PC, it's more a matter of PC versus another gaming platform."

    Take a PSX2/Xbox with a harddrive, hook a modem, keyboard & mouse up to the USB ports, and you've got yourself a PC, in my book. It may not be a PC in the "IMB compatible" sense - but you still hear people reffer to Apple's as PCs, as in "Personal Computer". The only difference is that is has a funky custom chipset and you plug it into your TV set - sounds like this could be the new Amiga we have been waiting for.

    It's like the difference between night ... and slightly later that night ;-)

    Finally, a little off topic, but if you are reading this article, you may be interested in this link, that I spotted on the page: Mein Leiben! [3dactionplanet.com]

  • A bit of historical perspective (Score:5)

    by John Miles ( 108215 ) on Tuesday August 08, 2000 @10:13PM (#868900) Homepage Journal
    At 32, I'm already something of an old fogie, relative to many of my peers in the PC game business. I've been a programmer ever since the day I first got my hands on an Apple ][+ at the age of 14. Even with the threat of encroaching senility on the horizon, I can still remember debating the merits of 8-bit home computers vis-a-vis the primitive game consoles of the day. Those debates sounded an awful lot like the debates we're having today. The ultimate answer back then was that most gamers were better off keeping both platforms handy. I think that's still true.

    There were giants in the earth in those days. The "PC" platforms were the legendary 8-bit Apples, Ataris, and Commodores, while the "console" guys owned Colecovisions, Intellivisions, and Atari VCSs. The IBM PC platform hadn't made any significant inroads into consumer space by the early 80s, at least not in my neighborhood. Just as today, though, practically all of the people who had a home computer also owned a home videogame console. And just like today, you'd crank up your Atari if you wanted to play certain games (Missile Command, Space Invaders) and you'd boot your computer if you wanted to play others (Ultima, Castle Wolfenstein, MS Flight Simulator). I don't remember anyone complaining about not being able to play a decent game of Zork on their Colecovision or Kaboom! on their Apple. Games that required more than the 'twitch and dodge' level of user interaction were played on the home computer, while those that relied on bright, colorful animated sprites were a natural fit for the consoles of the time.

    I was (and am) different, though -- I didn't own a console as a kid, and never felt the slightest stirrings of desire for one. Still don't. When I wasn't playing games on my Apple, I was either cracking their copy protection and disassembling them, or making lame-ass attempts at writing my own. I learned how the Bresenham line algorithm worked by poring over the entrails of Ultima II's DNGDRAW.OBJ, and Karateka taught me what good sound and animation code looked like. When my friends and I would discuss the relative merits of console versus PC gaming, it would always come down to that: my platform of choice was a genuine creativity tool, and the other was just a thing they hooked up to their TVs to play a bunch of games I sucked at. :)

    I could not have become a professional programmer and game developer if my folks had bought me a Colecovision instead of an Apple for Christmas in 1982, and neither could Carmack, Romero, Garriott, or many of the other eminences grise currently duking it out on JeffK's SmartyMan Gaem Designar Survivor Island [somethingawful.com]. We all got our start more or less the same way: by making the most of an open platform.

    So it's with some regret that I see PC game developers flocking to the PS2s and XBoxen of the world, cheerfully paying Microsoft and Sony ten bucks a box or more in hopes of deliverance from the PC's tech-support hassles and platform variability. The magic of the Apple ][ was that it was a general-purpose computing device that could do anything you wanted -- you could run the assemblers and editors you needed to build your game on the exact same piece of hardware that Nasir Gebelli, Richard Garriott, or Ken Williams had on their desks. There were no excuses -- you could do anything those guys could do, assuming you didn't suck.

    Fortunately, that's still true of the PC world today. Even though our machines are close to five orders of magnitude faster than the old 1 MHz 8-bit home computers, any high-school kid with a PC still has access to an inexpensive, ubiquitous, open platform fit for nurturing new talent. (Microsoft bashers may object to my application of the term 'open platform' to a Wintel PC, but as far as I'm concerned, any machine I can write and sell code on without paying platform royalties is 'open' enough.)

    My lengthy rant will have served its purpose if it inspires some of the die-hard console advocates out there to give a second thought to their own history. Few games more interesting than Super Mario Brothers really owe their origins to the proprietary arcade/console side of the business. Almost all the good stuff came from some bored, geeky kid fooling around on a home computer, or from college students with more access to general-purpose computer hardware than their professors knew what to do with.

    I don't think PC gamers and console gamers are genuinely trapped in an us-versus-them situation, but if I'm wrong, and we really do have to draw battle lines in the sand, I know what side I'm on. :)
  • You can probably put some blame on the late release of the Linux version. Too many linux users just went and got the windows version. And I blame them if no more games are ported to linux and Loki goes out of business:)

  • Linux gaming market (Score:5)

    by John Carmack ( 101025 ) on Wednesday August 09, 2000 @09:46AM (#868912)
    Yes, the linux sales figures were low. Low enough that they are certainly not going to provide an incentive for other developers to do simultaneous linux releases, which was a good chunk of my goal. The sales would cover the costs of porting, but they wouldn't make a bean-counter blink.

    I think Loki did a fantastic job - they went above and beyond what was required, pestering us (a good thing in this case) about the linux deliverables, taking pre-orders, doing the tin box run, shipping CDs first, then boxes when available, etc.

    There are a number of possible reasons why you might not have bought the linux specific version:

    You couldn't find the game in stores near you. This is going to remain a problem for quite some time.

    The game is available earlier for windows. Even with a simultaneous release, this is going to continue. Big publishers making large lot runs get priority, and that is just life.

    The game costs more for linux. This is probably also not going to change. The wholesale prices are probably the same, but big stores severely discount popular titles and advertise them to bring customers in. This won't happen with linux versions.

    Configuring 3D on linux is a significant chore. I expect this will largely be gone by the time we ship another game. As the DRI drivers mature and XF4.0 becomes standard in distributions, people should start having out-of-box 3D support.

    The game runs slower in linux than under windows. While we did have a couple benchmark victories on some cards, the general rule will still stand: a high performance card on windows will probably have more significant effort expended on optimization than it will get from an open source driver. Nvidia's drivers may be the exception, because all of their windows optimization work immediately applies to the linux version, but it is valid for most of the mesa based drivers.

    Trying to change this would probably have negative long-term consequences. There are certainly coders in the open source community that are every bit as good of optimizers as the driver writers at the card companies, but I have always tried to restrain them from going gung-ho at winning benchmarks against windows. Mesa is going to be with us five years from now, and dodgy optimizations are going to make future work a lot more difficult.

    Loki's position is that the free availability of linux executables for download to convert windows versions into linux versions was the primary factor. They have been recommending that we stop making full executables available, and only do binary patches.

    I hate binary patches, and I think that going down that road would be making life more difficult for the people playing our games.

    That becomes the crucial question: How much inconvenience is it worth to help nurture a new market? We tried a small bit of it with Q3 by not making the linux executables available for a while. Is it worth even more? The upside is that a visibly healthy independent market would bring more titles to it.

    The fallback position is to just have hybrid CD's. I'm pretty sure we can force our publishers to have a linux executable in an "unsupported" directory. You would lose technical support, you wouldn't get an install program, and you wouldn't have anyone that is really dedicated to the issues of the product, but it would be there on day 1.

    John Carmack

  • A data point of 1 for UT. I don't own even the Doze version of UT NOR Q3A. I don't want, nor do I desire a net-only game. I hate deathmatch games. They were novel for about a week but then, after you've played one deathmatch, you've played them all. They are monotonous.

    I WOULD download a linux half-life binary (I already own the game and play it, thus far, under Wine). This and games like it are good as they have a GOOD single player option as well as the option for the same old run, kill, die, reappear randomly, run, kill, die, reappear, etc, ad infinitum net game deathmatch. I look forward to the new Doom and would LOVE a linux port. Since Carmack has mentioned that there will be a linux version (probably after the release of the Doze version, goddamnit), I will wait until the linux version is available and then get THAT one.

    Loki's problem is that they are porting games that are already out and being used, usually for months or longer. MOST people who wanted the game ALREADY have it. Why go out and buy a linux version after you already paid for the Doze version, played it, and have since moved to the next game? Fortunately for Loki, I do not yet own Myth II so I can buy that one from them. Unfortunately for Loki, their linux ports are simply not widely available (or even KNOWN about) in stores - not even in those chain retailers mentioned on the Loki website! I looked for Myth II for linux at a local store, which is listed as one of the good stores on the Loki site. They didn't have ANY linux game from Loki and the clerks didn't even know of the linux port. So, I am STUCK buying online from Loki directly. I frickin' HATE using my credit card. Credit cards are EVIL. I don't like waiting for mail delivery either. When I buy a game in a store, I usually go home, immediately install it, and play. Can't do that with online purchases. Bad. Bad. Bad. GET THE STORES TO ACTUALLY STOCK THE FRICKIN' GAMES or take them off the website list. It doesn't count if a store in LA stocks it. It's the only one in the country. Bad.

    Until Loki produces their own game (hopefully it will be good), all they can do is rely on late purchases of games that have already been out for about a year or so. It would be REAL nice if they would sign an agreement with some company to do a linux port of a game BEFORE it is released so that a linux version can be available simultaneously with the Doze version. This is REALLY important. Loki presently has to rely on the rich gamer who loves linux and doesn't mind paying for a game twice (they already bought the Doze version, had NO idea that Loki would produce a linux version until it was too late, give Loki money for almost altruistic purposes), or depends on those slower buyers who go out and buy older games now and again.

    Halo is expected to be a BIG hit game that really takes the market when it comes available. People, linux users and Doze-heads, will buy it the moment it is released (unless M$ f*cks everyone and only permits an X-box release to improve sales of their new X-box). There is no reason to assume that Loki will be able to produce a port of it to linux, certainly not soon after its debut (and M$ would likely not permit the licensing to Loki to produce a port to a competitive OS anyway...damn M$, have to f*ck up everything they look at). What a disappointing suprize if a year later, Loki produces a linux port of Halo. MOST people who were interested in that game already bought it, linux and doze users. They are not likely to want to pay again. By that time, another big game will be available (Doze version) so Loki will be trolling for the Johny-come-lately buyers. This business model is precarious and certain to be low margin.

  • >Carmack is master of the gaming world.

    Assuming your gaming world consists of nothing but carbon-copy first-person shooters. Mine doesn't. :-b

    Carmack is the master of PC gaming graphics. Or was, back before most PC developers knew mucb about 3D. These days, Quake III looks pretty run of the mill next to lots of games, technology-wise (ditto for Unreal Tournament).

  • I agree, but why bother with the OS, which has increasingly bad associations for consumers?

    If I were MS I'd package Office 2002 as a standalone "thing" that takes over your machine just like a game. By definition it wouldn't have to worry about DLL hell or other applications so would be more stable. It would do most of what most people want it to do. Swapping discs and restarting the box is just as intuitive to many as using the Start menu.

    I don't like world domination either, but if they can make something that "just works" like a TV or a typewriter, give 'em credit.

  • It was thought up a hell of a lot longer than 20 years ago.. Early 1960s, in fact.

    At the time there were two compeating products biding to become the official standard, a 'simple' one gun solution from RCA, and a more complex three gun (one streem for each of RGB, no grille) from [somebody else].

    The solution from RCA won out for two main reasons:

    • It was forawards and backwards compatable with the existing B&W NTSC standard (which itself was for/backwards compatable with a preWWII experemental standard), so the color NTSC signal could be viewed on B&W tvs, and the B&W signal could be viewed on color sets.
    • RCA owned NBC, and the other company just did hardware, so there was actualy some content using one of the standards, so it took hold (sound familer?)

    Im compeled to bring this up whenever I talk about the B&W-color transition and RCA/NBC, so I will agian. Star Trek (TOS) was filmed and brodcast in color (one of the first shows to do so), and was, infact, one of the most popular color programs on the air (using either the-at-the-time-rating-system (which said ST sucked, in general) or a resonable system (which would have said ST was a hit)). It sold TV sets for RCA. Thats why it survived as long as it did (which is not long enough).

  • Mayhaps you dislike the controls of the game you mention because most of them were *designed* for the PC with it's ubiquitous kb/mouse combination? Adaptations are rarely very good.
    (For example, try playing tetris on a keyboard or a gamepad.)

    Consoles *do* need a keyboard like device. I've been dying for one for a while. Basically a specially designed baord that has 'optimal' button/key placement and lots of them. At this point in console evolution I'd rather have a specialized device like this than a full keyboard.
  • On page 3 of that interview, there's a photo of Carmack fragging - on a Mac! Looks like a G4, plus a sweet LCD screen. Hope he brought his own mouse ;)
  • An interesting point of view. It should be intersting to examine Sony which is the only major player to ship both console and pc units. Both are very cool and both have good visibility. I've heard that Sony is surviving on the strength of PS/PS2 sales but I wonder how they view their own pc products.

    I went into a CompUSA to just browse and saw a whole row of slick Sony PC products (the firewire hds, flat screen units, ultra-portable laptops, etc). I think the X-Box will be the first really big push to 'compete' with pcs. These systems will probably look like net-appliances in terms of non-console functionality for a while but there's a key issue and that is "Do people who play console games _really want_ to be able to have their console be a pc?"

    The other issue, of course, is platform stability. As others mentioned, as well as Carmack, once you start selling compatibility with generic interfaces (modems, usb, etc) you run into driver support issues. The develoeprs and consumers fall into the mess that PC gaming/hardware/drivers is in. The support costs for this for everyone involved (patches, tech support, downloads) will be large and may take away enough from the profit to kill support.

    And then theres a item that the X-Box which really concerns many people: patching. With the introduction of built in hard-drives (not like the PS2's add on HD) you run into the potential to require patching. More importantly you have to condition the users and developers to accept patching... which leads us right back to where we are in PC gaming. Maybe it's just me but I'd _really_ like to avoid this issue completely.

    I think convergence in this area will be avoided for a little longer, but that depends a lot on how well the X-Box does and how MS handles the consoles role. Again we play 'wait and see'.
  • The plain old fact of it is that Linux has really bad game support now. Look at Terminus, which was recently released. The joystick support in Linux cannot support many digital sticks, and you want a digital stick for space sims. This is not a knock, but a fact. Not to mention the inherent difficulty involved in installation, etc...

    On a dual boot machine the choice was a no-brainer, as I own a joystick that is not Linux supported, I ended up buying the Win32 version. Yes, it broke my heart, but...

    Same with many of the upcoming Linux games, Alpha Centauri?? Own it already... Heroes III, 49.99 for Linux, 19.95 for Windows. And I own it already.

    Linux still has a long way to go in this market, but I'm not really certain that this is the direction we need to go. Our kernel (at least for the time being) is still structured around reliability, and until we have hardware manufacturers writing Linux drivers, we will always be playing catch-up with the win32 platform.

    Anyway, am I the only one who read the line "The best workstation and the best platform were one and the same?" This would have started a flame war had it not been said by Carmack....

    ~Hammy
  • PC hardware is cheap and fast, but it isn't consistent or standardized. Some of it is broken by design.

    I recently bought some games (Diablo, Starcraft) that run on both the Mac and PC. I quickly noticed that the color rendition on the Mac looked much better than what was displayed on the PC. The Mac versions looks good without any tweaking of the computer. The PC versions looks terrible, even with the gamma setting cranked up to the maximum value. I've seen similar problems with Doom and Quake on PCs. I'm not sure if it is a problem with the operating system, device drivers or video cards. The Mac has the advantage that it was designed as an integrated system, and Apple has to keep all those graphic arts people happy. On the PC there are multiple companies designing the hardware and software components. I wonder if they ever talk to each other. The video card driver in my PC allows the user to tweak the gamma, but somehow this setting is ignored by the DirectX video drivers used by many games. I wonder how game developers keep their sanity when they have to deal with broken drivers and non-standard hardware, not to mention the endless combinations of operating system versions and DLLs. It makes a standardized console platform look very attractive. Why is it so hard to do graphics on a PC?

    By the way, I see the same problems with graphics on PCs running Linux. So it isn't just a problem with Microsoft software.

  • There's nothing wrong with being in the minority, so don't think I'm insulting you, but you are. The vast majority of FPS addicts laugh at the thought of playing without a mouse and keyboard. Mice give you ultra-precise control, and the keyboard gives you more keys than you'll ever need to bind. While it is true that console FPS games have come a long way in the last five years, the interface is IMNSHO their primary obstacle. The introduction of joysticks on standard console gamepads helps, but not much -- not only is truely precise control almost impossible due to the joystick's small size, but the way you have to hold the joystick in position to retain a constant perspective (other than straight ahead) makes my hands sore after six hours or so. The joysticks do not give the needed precision. The N64 controller could suffice for a DOOM port, but no TFC sniper or Q3A railgunner could live with it.

    Even ignoring those precision problems, there just aren't enough buttons to play effectively. Any console FPS with more than a dozen weapons will end up using a horrible switching mechansism a la Turok 2 (which would be a joke to use in a modern online multiplayer FPS).

    When playing Quake 3 on a PC, I use

    • 9 keys to access individual weapons
    • 4 keys for horizontal movement
    • 1 key each for crouch, run/walk, and jump
    • 1 key each for chat, console, and "use"
    • 3 mouse buttons and a mousewheel for switching weapons and other functions
    • 1 mouse for aiming/climbing/steering
    You just try to duplicate the functionality of ~25 buttons and a mouse on the current crop of gamepads! Not gonna happen. If console manufacturers get a clue, they'll bundle a mouse and keyboard with their new systems. Combine that with Internet access and a DVD player, and you've got a pretty schweet entertainment system/web appliance... competition for both PC games and WebTV-type stuff.

    Playing on a PC, I get a superior interface, much higher video resolution, much better graphics, and much faster action. (Goldeneye feels like walking through molasses after playing even the original Quake!!)

    I am happy to hear that at least someone enjoyed an N64 port of an id game. You're the first person I've met that has. :-)

    ---------///----------
    All generalizations are false.

  • I should add that it is next to impossible still now to find the Linux version in stores in France (and in the rest of Europe as well probably), and was completely impossible a few months ago.
  • Quake III Arena sales were not severly hampered by any technical problem (lets face it the average linux user is ready to face those far far easier than a windows user), they were hampered by the availability problems that you have described. Also, in Ireland (and I think the UK) the Linux version never appeared in retail shops that I could find. To anyone who knows Dublin and Belfast, I repeatedly tried Game, Electronic Boutique, HMV, Virgin and Easons and in every shop always asked at the counter if they had it, if they would have it and if they could get it. This [slashdot.org] is the sort of rubbish I got back (btw is /. failing to produce the comments from links? cause it is coming up blank on me though I'm pretty sure it is right).
    It is not fair to knock the sales of Q]|[ for Linux when it was not given even the slightest chance (IMHO). I did what they wanted and drooled over the windows boxes waiting for the big pretty silver hunk of joy to arrive. I bought Quake I the Offering for Linux cause I found it on my travels. I was happy to pay double the windows price (e.g. IR£70 or about $100) to have a shop get it in for me (they never discussed price, I was always just sent to one of their rivals). End result, I haven't bought Quake III at all yet (though I bought the QI for win and linux and qII for win) and I am starting to wonder if I ever will. The only reason why I want the Linux box is (apart from to play the game, but to be honest I am game playing so little at the moment that it is no hardship for me to miss out even on this!) to register my vote with the entire industry, and not just Id. Unless I am influencing a shop so that next time they _might_ get a linux box without being jumped on I am not going to buy the Linux box, so I still refuse to mail order it (unless someone can tell me a retail store I can access that also does mail order that only has it on mail order at the moment). I'd also like to see just one copy sitting on the shelf of just one store in my country, if nothing else maybe a few people who had never heard of Quake for Linux will see Linux in a new light.
  • too bad no one will read this...

    i have a much easier time going back to my old favorite console games than to my old favorite computer games. while i can play zelda any day of the week, my old favorite computer games, zork, castles, doom, and the better king's quests feel so sadly dated.

    i guess its in that two button controller.
  • I find that the PC is a much more versitle system. It allows, and, in may respects, encourages, people to customize the hell out of it. Different video cards, memory, operating systems -- it all blends together in a nice, personalized machine.

    Consoles, on the other hand, are a set thing. You plunk down your 200 bux, and you know that you are getting exactly what your buddy got. You can do some VERY basic customizing (mod chips, etc) but it is discouraged by the manufacturer.

    HOWEVER, there are some positive points for consoles.. for one, if you buy a console game, you are POSITIVE that it will work. No 'do I have enough ram?' questions, video card drivers, or hard disk space. It's a very efficient system in that respect.

    I'm curious as to how the X-BOX will turn out.. will MS let us plunk our own hardware inside it? Install a different OS? Well, probably not.. I'll wait and see though.

    But, for now, just give me my PC -- posting to Slashdot using a PSX2 would be pretty weird =)
  • just buy the latest subsidized console and get some very respectable hardware with the company taking the loss

    This is why I do not think consoles will ever support expansion slots that allow you to hook up normal PC hardware to the console. The only way console manufactures can make a profit is by keeping everything that gives the console functionality proprietary.

    As an aside, the idea to make the source code available so people have complete freedom with the software is a completely different idea than the idea of destroying a company's profit model by buying a company's loss leader and hacking it so we don't need to "buy the razors". I really wish people would not confuse the libery of having source available with the idea that it is OK to get something for nothing at a corporation's expense.

    - Sam

  • me too. (Score:3)

    by Bad_CRC ( 137146 ) on Wednesday August 09, 2000 @12:42PM (#869003)
    I am yet another person who wanted to buy the linux version of Q3, but I don't have a store that sells it within 100 miles, and I don't want to order off the net.

    could I drive 3 hours to get a copy, or compromise my desires to not order off the net, in order to order a game for linux instead of windows? yea, but would most people (including myself, as someone who was just a casual user at the time) do it? no.

    It's too bad.

    Linux version sitting beside the windows version on the shelf in the software store, and you bet your ass I'd be right there buying the linux version. Hell, I only play Q3 in linux. But as it is, it's not just a slight inconvenience to get the linux version, it's a MAJOR inconvenience. Which, if that isn't bad enough, People end up comparing the two.

    Would not releasing a linux patch have made me buy linux q3? no, it would have made me not buy Q3 at all.

    Loki is a good company, and they are doing all they can. But, without proper distribution (not a single retail outlet supported by loki in my town of 110,000 people) you can't possibly get an accurate representation of the interest. It's the same with releasing old, outdated games. Of course you can't generate the same interest.

    Obviously, the problem here is that you can't get the marketshare without interest, and you can't get interest without marketshare. major hurdle to overcome, no good solutions.

    ________

  • I forgot to add this: in my observations the single greatest factor in teh success or failure of the console market (now developers have 'free' choice) is what games get released on what platforms. IIRC the N64 was/is a huge flop in Japan largely because Square (Final Fantasy) and a multitude of other developers didn't like Nintendo's dev kits and hardware. Popular belief seems to be that Nintendo-Japan is barely staying even while Pokemon has made Nintendo-USA profitable.

    So, whether key developers flock to a platform is also key to the success of the console. Obviously Carmack/id is a key developer from the PC side of things but he's a very small fish in a large ocean in the console market.

    I also wonder if standards will relax with the influx of PC developers turned console developers (or both) especially in light of MS's X-Box entry. I know a lot of people believe that MS can turn out a really good OS layer but I still have reservations (even with fixed hardware target).
  • Furthermore, as stated in a .plan update by Carmack, it was known that Linux binaries would be made available at a later date for those who purchased a CD for a diffferent OS.

    But did this ever happen? I couldn't find Linux binaries for the full game itself. Only the demo and test versions. I'm not particularly keen on shelling out the US$70 needed to buy Q3A for Linux (that's what it costs here in the UK), when I already have the Windows version and am not even sure I'll be able to get it working with my video card/Xserver combination.

  • It's also interesting when you look at the download statistics for the Linux UT binaries. (For those of you who didn't know, to play UT on GNU/Linux you have to buy the normal (as in Windows) retail veriosn and then download some Linux binaries.) On FilePlanet [fileplanet.com] (the only worthwhile GameSpy site now that Lowtax left!), there have been over thirty-thousand downloads of the latest Windows patch, and only six-hundred downloads of the Linux patch. Check this out:

    Patch 425 (latest)

    30139 downloads, Win32

    601 downloads, Linux

    Patch 413 (from March/April)

    198767 downloads, Win32

    1659 downloads, Linux

    Demo 348 (last October)

    193333 downloads, Win32

    29923 downloads, Linux

    To me, those figures confirm what we've known all along: Linux users love free software but aren't going to pay for the retail version. ;-) I wonder if Epic thinks the extra development cost and time were worth the extra sales, which probably amount to less than 3% of all copies sold. Maybe Cliffy B [cliffyb.com] just wanted to appear l337 [planetunreal.com] to the Linux community [warezcrawler.com].

    ---------///----------
    All generalizations are false.

  • Nyet (Score:4)

    by barracg8 ( 61682 ) on Tuesday August 08, 2000 @09:16PM (#869024)
    "I do believe that doing a little bit of driver work is good for a programmer's soul," he said.

    Nyet!

    Caffeine for mind.
    Pizza for body.
    Sushi... for SOUL.

  • It appears to be a lack of imagination (Score:3)

    by sips ( 212702 ) on Tuesday August 08, 2000 @09:24PM (#869027) Homepage
    Really it seems that most games are not at all original in the least. And they justify the use and application of more hardware to cover up the fact that they don't have any new ideas. Did you know that Wolfenstein had acceptable 3d like graphics and ran on a 286? Hell I can run the original doom on an old 486/33 with no problems. Then people claim that these graphics have increased soooo much and it's totally obvious? Really what ever happened to having graphics good enough that when you look at your hand in the game it looks like your hand in real life (assuming they are modled after the same thing?) Hardware upgrades that increase graphics that humans can see by a 2% increase and give the game some mp3 player and they thing that really counts for an actual advance?

Slashdot Top Deals

"Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence, it will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines." -- Bertrand Russell

Close