Doom 3 Programmer on OGG, Ultra, 60FPS Play 66
Cryect writes "Appears that Doom 3 is making use of Ogg Vorbis to reduce memory usage for sounds. This comes from id programmer Robert Duffy's latest plan update where he says: 'When we started on memory optimization, most levels used between 80 and 100 megabytes of sound data. We made the choice to move to .OGG for quite a few sounds which effectively removed the problem for us.'" Duffy also comments on texture usage in 'Ultra' mode ("In Ultra quality, we load each texture; diffuse, specular, normal map at full resolution with no compression. In a typical DOOM 3 level, this can hover around a whopping 500MB of texture data") and framerate ("The game is capped at 60fps for normal game play. For render demos, like what was used for the HardOCP stuff, we run those at full tilt which is why you will see 60fps.")
Cool (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Cool (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Cool (Score:5, Informative)
You would be correct.
From Vorbis website [vorbis.com] --
Re:Cool (Score:2)
Re:Cool (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Cool (Score:1)
Re:Cool (Score:2)
Re:Cool (Score:2)
More interesting I think is the number of games using Python, lua and other open source languages for scripting.
Re:Operation Flashpoint uses OGG (Score:1)
Operation Flashpoint [codemasters.com]
uses ogg for all sound effects.
Eagerly waiting for OPF2 coming out.
Re:Cool (Score:2)
Wouldn't this add to the processor usage? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Wouldn't this add to the processor usage? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Wouldn't this add to the processor usage? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wouldn't this add to the processor usage? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Wouldn't this add to the processor usage? (Score:2)
Re:Wouldn't this add to the processor usage? (Score:1)
Re:Wouldn't this add to the processor usage? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Wouldn't this add to the processor usage? (Score:4, Informative)
You are correct. Shifting the burden from a resource that can't handle a load to a resource that can is a big part of optimization
Re:Wouldn't this add to the processor usage? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Wouldn't this add to the processor usage? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Wouldn't this add to the processor usage? (Score:2)
Nitpicking (Score:1, Informative)
And how could Ogg possibly improve the size of their sounds? Ogg is a container format. I think they mean Vorbis [vorbis.com], the compression codec.
I know I'm being anal retentive. I don't care.
Container format = Stupid (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Container format = Stupid (Score:1)
Troll, countertroll (Score:2)
Cool, is this ASF file I have here audio, or a video? Because apparently you can tell "just by looking at it." Never mind that nobody else can. :-)
The truth is, file extensions mean DICK in the grand scheme of things. Operating systems should choose more intelligent ways to distinguish filetypes... it doesn't matter if you use metadata or a program like file(1), either option are better than using file extensions to leap to conclusions.
And anyway, both audio and video open using the same application,
Re:Container format = Stupid (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Container format = Stupid (Score:1)
Ogg is great for gaming (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Ogg is great for gaming (Score:2)
Re:Ogg is great for gaming (Score:1)
Here's a Related Question (Score:5, Interesting)
I mean, I think it would be nice to see exactly what the game looks like on the Min specs, and if recent games have proven anything, it ought to look incredible.
I ran the UT2004 demo at what must have been hovering near the recommended mark (practically all the special spiffies were turned off), and the graphics still blew me away.
If anything, this might convince me to buy the game or to upgrade hardware to "release" level, and it would also give people a *real* taste of what the game will look like.
Re:Here's a Related Question (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Here's a Related Question (Score:4, Insightful)
Other than that, i think, as a developer, you would want the presentation of your product to be shown at its best. I do get your point, but I think demo's do quite a good , ifnot better job at determining if your rig is going to pull the game.
Re:Here's a Related Question (Score:1)
Re:Here's a Related Question (Score:1)
More Related Questions (Score:2, Insightful)
This is completley true for me as well. I almost felt like I was getting something for free.
Questions...
Is it just me or are the developers of UT2004 not getting enough critical and community thanks for making a game that runs so well on crappy systems? I could be totally wrong, but it doesn't seem like they are. Methinks it's just
Re:More Related Questions (Score:2)
Remember when Halflife came out shortly thereafter?
It really doesn't get the credit it deserves in this area, totally playable fps that didn't look half bad - in software mode
Re:More Related Questions (Score:2)
Don't shortchange Unreal's software mode; it was one of the first games to really make use of that new-fangled MMX crap, and on a fast enough processor, it looked better than the 3dfx mode, as it was 32 bit colour, not 16 bit.
Re:More Related Questions (Score:2)
Re:Here's a Related Question (Score:2)
We've wondered whether the Russian coders super-duper trimmed down their code because they didn't have access to as high end workstations as a lot of western gamers.
Re:What hardware? (Score:3, Funny)
Frame Rate before food!
What about AGP? (Score:2)
Re:What about AGP? (Score:1)
Re:What about AGP? (Score:2)
Re:What about AGP? (Score:1)
Are 512MB adapters even out?
They will be shortly. nVidia and ATI are due to release 512MB versions of their top line cards. Yes, they are expensive, but who said playing Doom 3 properly was going to be cheap? Using PCI-Express to allocate system memory as video
Re:What hardware? (Score:1)
SLI? (Score:2)
I don't know alot about how the memory is handled in an SLI setup. Can the cards access each others memory?
Just curious since I'm sure there will be the uber d00dz who would be willing to spend 1k to run at maximum c00lness
Re:SLI? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm no graphics programmer, but I'd suspect that no, it wouldn't, because both GPUs would be rendering the same scene, and thus both would need the same textures (and whatever other kinds of maps).
Well, if one GPU renders the top half of the frame and the other the bottom, you might be able to buy a little bit of savings (think floor vs ceiling textures). But I don't expect that to have too much effect.
Re:SLI? (Score:1)
It would have a gigantic effect, a x1.86 to sometimes almost x2 effect! Haha, just read the fuckin' article right here from Tom's Hardware covering nVidia's new ideas on SLI.
http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/200406
Re:SLI? (Score:2)
Re:SLI? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What hardware? (Score:3, Informative)
128MB Sound card anyone? (Score:2)
More benchmarks please (Score:1)
Re:More benchmarks please (Score:2)
Dave
Capped at 60 fps (Score:4, Informative)
This quote made no sense to me until I did RTFA, and realized that it was faulty. What really was written in the article was:
"...which is why you will see > 60fps."
500Mb will be enough? (Score:1)