Will DNF take advantage of quad cores?

[bokaj]

Originally Posted by Commando Nukem

Quake 4, sucked. DooM3, dissappointed many. Unreal 3 has upset some too. Longer dev times and a little more care in the gameplay area might have helped avoid those "failings"

Then again it is also a matter of timing. At least Doom3 was released and it was well reviewed and many of us loved it even if it had some shortcomings.
Some of these (small enviroments, few enemies) made it possible for most PC´s to run it real smooth with fantastic visuals for the time being. Delays means harder competition and bigger demands from the consumer base because of continuos development.

And now Doom 4 is under development and could be released before DNF also.
11 years IS doing alot of things wrong. More often a not it will in the end result in a game that will dissapoint many not being perfect. Not even 3Drealm dissagree with that.

Look at what DNF have to compete with today ... games, graphic engines etc .. and imagine what the competition is when it is finally released. You can't modify an engine to keep up with all these new ones build from the bottom optimized for new hardware and possibilities.

But don't get me wrong. I have faith in DNF and expect a fun game as long 3Drealm focus getting the best experience with the existing setup .. exploiting possibilities and respecting/accepting limitations ... just like ID did with Doom 3.

[Skiffer]

Originally Posted by bokaj

11 years IS doing alot of things wrong.

11 years is doing one thing wrong, and that's blurting out "HAY GUYS WE'RE DOIN A SUPAH SECRIT DUKE NUKEM GAEM OK!?" while at the early levels of development, not standing on anything solid. That's about it. Not exactly the first project to have done that either, but one of the few that hasn't been scrapped or had its' corners cut off and shoveled out prematurelly, which, in my opinion, is the biggest mistake you can make in development.

Originally Posted by bokaj

More often a not it will in the end result in a game that will dissapoint many not being perfect. Not even 3Drealm dissagree with that.

Even I can't disagree with that; mainly because it's too cryptic for me to understand.

Originally Posted by bokaj

Look at what DNF have to compete with today ... games, graphic engines etc .. and imagine what the competition is when it is finally released.

About the same, unless some sekrit gaem makes an appearance and blows everyone away.

Originally Posted by bokaj

You can't modify an engine to keep up with all these new ones build from the bottom optimized for new hardware and possibilities.

New ones? Where? Same old engines dominating the scene, as far as I can tell. And also, you can modify an engine to keep up with new ones built from scratch, and optimize them for new hardware and add new features, relatively hassle free.

[LarsBM]

You should also consider the fact that PC hardware is developing slower in this age than in the 90's. It will take way longer before DNF really gets outdated with it's current engine than (ie) it took for Quake.

[Servo]

At this rate, quad core computers will have gone the way of 8-track players by the time DNF is released.
Love,
Servo

[Commando Nukem]

Originally Posted by bokaj

Then again it is also a matter of timing. At least Doom3 was released and it was well reviewed and many of us loved it even if it had some shortcomings.
Some of these (small enviroments, few enemies) made it possible for most PC´s to run it real smooth with fantastic visuals for the time being. Delays means harder competition and bigger demands from the consumer base because of continuos development.

You missed my point. The point was DooM 3 could have been a lot better, it didnt meet its hype, and although my first playthrough was an intense and enjoyable one, that was it. it wasn't replayable, and the multiplayer just never took off. Id basically abandoned the mod community and let the entire thing go to waste. DooM 3 needed another six months in my view, and Quake 4 was just poorly done from day 0.

Originally Posted by bokaj

And now Doom 4 is under development and could be released before DNF also.
11 years IS doing alot of things wrong. More often a not it will in the end result in a game that will dissapoint many not being perfect. Not even 3Drealm dissagree with that.

...and it'll probably be a piece of crap if it makes it out that quickly.

It isnt doing a lot of things wrong. Maybe in the begining, but not now.

Originally Posted by bokaj

Look at what DNF have to compete with today ... games, graphic engines etc .. and imagine what the competition is when it is finally released. You can't modify an engine to keep up with all these new ones build from the bottom optimized for new hardware and possibilities.

Im lookng, but im not seeing. Theres a lot of wowzer graphics games but they all seem to be pretty friggin lack luster in the gameplay department. Half Life 2 was probably the last game that I had a "load" of fun with on the PC.

Originally Posted by bokaj

But don't get me wrong. I have faith in DNF and expect a fun game as long 3Drealm focus getting the best experience with the existing setup .. exploiting possibilities and respecting/accepting limitations ... just like ID did with Doom 3.

Id didnt "accept" limitations, they made them themselves to rush the game out before it was ready. This shows with the immediate release of two patches to fix the basically, broken deathmatch at release.

3DR wont have those major issues because they'll have probably delt with them before release. This is why taking 11 years and getting it right is better then taking four years and having to patch an unfinished broken game, and have it limp into death.

[trackit]

Originally Posted by LarsBM

You should also consider the fact that PC hardware is developing slower in this age than in the 90's. It will take way longer before DNF really gets outdated with it's current engine than (ie) it took for Quake.

what is your source?

[bokaj]

Skiffer -> ehh .. right. Your comment about the engines .. I am sure you know what you are talking about!!

Originally Posted by Commando Nukem

You missed my point. The point was DooM 3 could have been a lot better, it didnt meet its hype, and although my first playthrough was an intense and enjoyable one, that was it. it wasn't replayable, and the multiplayer just never took off. Id basically abandoned the mod community and let the entire thing go to waste. DooM 3 needed another six months in my view, and Quake 4 was just poorly done from day 0..

But it is your view. Doom 3 got very good reviews overall. Speaking about the gamers many hated it and many loved it .. i am one of the last ones and have played it through again every 8 months or so. Simple but fun and good at what its doing. But hey .. it is a matter of opinion. I am just happy that it was released and they are not still working on it and now have moved on to Doom 4 which hopefully will be much better than Doom 3 could ever have been.

It isnt doing a lot of things wrong. Maybe in the begining, but not now.
..

[QUOTE] Scott miller has said himself that they have made a lot of wrong decisions and now finally is on the right track. Which is good.. I think you will agree with me that there could have been a DNF if things had been handelled (can't spell that) differently and we could now have been waiting on a sequel.

Im lookng, but im not seeing. Theres a lot of wowzer graphics games but they all seem to be pretty friggin lack luster in the gameplay department. Half Life 2 was probably the last game that I had a "load" of fun with on the PC.
..

A matter of taste. I like COD4, Bioshock and even Crysis. But also HL2. I agree with you that DNF don't have to live up to the best looking games (if that is what you are saying) to be a excellent game. It could be on the same engine as HL2 which in my opinion is starting to age but still be very good looking and of course have good gameplay.

Id didnt "accept" limitations, they made them themselves to rush the game out before it was ready. This shows with the immediate release of two patches to fix the basically, broken deathmatch at release.
..

I talk about single player. Especially lack of open enviroments and small number of enemies. The computers couldn't have handelled it at the time.
I never play MP so maybe you have a point there.

3DR wont have those major issues because they'll have probably delt with them before release. This is why taking 11 years and getting it right is better then taking four years and having to patch an unfinished broken game, and have it limp into death.

I hope you are right although it still have nothing to do with 11 contra 4 years.
I'm working with development every day and using a long time has nothing to do with getting the product right. Timing is important. Within a time limit you have to get the best out of the technology, implement the wanted features and launch the product.
This takes good project planning and a lot of diciplin and hard decisions. If you wait to long the market is changing and you have to adapt ... implement new trends, features etc and the end result is seldom optimal.
Our expectations as customers are changing all the time.

I would be surprised if DNF will be a very polished game when it is released but we can only wait and see. To be honest I don't care so much. I'm not the one to talk forever about the flaws if the core gameplay is good.

[Commando Nukem]

Originally Posted by bokaj

But it is your view. .

No, its a scientifically provable fact.

Originally Posted by bokaj

Doom 3 got very good reviews overall.

And thats somebody else view. Whats your point?

Originally Posted by bokaj

Speaking about the gamers many hated it and many loved it.

Yep, like I said, there were many people who gave the game mixed views. Some hated it, some enjoyed it. The games mid-section is troubled with repetitive fire fights and a way too linear quality.

They rushed the game out, they had to reduce just about everything visually, including cutting out several of the more action oriented/big set pieces, and replace them with the cooridor shooter setup to ensure the lower end systems could handle it. So instead of gameplay being their primary focus, they focused on pushing the game out the door.

Originally Posted by bokaj

Scott miller has said himself that they have made a lot of wrong decisions and now finally is on the right track. Which is good.. I think you will agree with me that there could have been a DNF if things had been handelled (can't spell that) differently and we could now have been waiting on a sequel.

Like I said, 11 years doesnt mean something was wrong. Maybe in the begining that was so, but now they have it on track. You arent refuting what I said, only reinforcing it.

No, DNF as it was back then could not have worked out any different because of what transpired in the ways of personell and projects. 3DRs problem was simply being the passionate underdog and having too many good ideas and not enough people to execute them.

Originally Posted by bokaj

A matter of taste. I like COD4, Bioshock and even Crysis. But also HL2. I agree with you that DNF don't have to live up to the best looking games (if that is what you are saying) to be a excellent game. It could be on the same engine as HL2 which in my opinion is starting to age but still be very good looking and of course have good gameplay.

All im going to say is "Wolfenstein 3D." Its community still numbers in the hundreds, with active mods being released all the time. Thats 16 years onward. Graphics dont matter, I dont even compare games based on graphics, because WHO THE HELL CARES? If it looks good for what its trying to achieve, fine, but this obsessive attitude with graphics detail in the entire gaming community is beyond the bend of absurdity.

People want to say DNF looks old now? Fine, thats just a bitchy angsty mentality from people with no patience in them, and im not really speaking in your direction on this point, just something i've seen posted on the teaser on youtube and so forth. People drive me insane sometimes.

Originally Posted by bokaj

I talk about single player. Especially lack of open enviroments and small number of enemies. The computers couldn't have handelled it at the time.
I never play MP so maybe you have a point there.

Even the single player was cut down from its more amitious gameplay roots for a quicker release. DooM3 should not have hit shelves until 2005 as far as im concerned. Pushing hardware like that is going to start hurting games as money gets tighter.

Originally Posted by bokaj

I hope you are right although it still have nothing to do with 11 contra 4 years.
I'm working with development every day and using a long time has nothing to do with getting the product right. Timing is important. Within a time limit you have to get the best out of the technology, implement the wanted features and launch the product.
This takes good project planning and a lot of diciplin and hard decisions. If you wait to long the market is changing and you have to adapt ... implement new trends, features etc and the end result is seldom optimal.
Our expectations as customers are changing all the time.

I used to work on my own gaming projects with small teams, im aware of the strain and the importance of structure. 3DR has already established their talent. That shouldn't be in doubt. But it is as is shown below in what you end on. This isnt fair to them. How many good games must they make before people give them some slack? If they need 11 years to get what they feel is right, thats their business. If they end up screwing it up, then it will be an epic tradegy, but my gut tells me its going to be a very great day in gaming land when DNF is released.

...Well thats the customers fault, not the developers, if people cant get a grapple on their own perceptions and opinions and have to be led around by the latest "trend" thats absolutely their fault. Individual responsbility and self control.

Originally Posted by bokaj

I would be surprised if DNF will be a very polished game when it is released but we can only wait and see. To be honest I don't care so much. I'm not the one to talk forever about the flaws if the core gameplay is good.

Suprised? This is 3D Realms we're talking about. I think you're just plain cynical for no reason whatsoever.

However, this is just my "view"

[Skiffer]

Originally Posted by bokaj

Skiffer -> ehh .. right. Your comment about the engines .. I am sure you know what you are talking about!!

I do. Why, were you being sarcastic? Rage & Neon hardly apply at this stage, and Source & Cry are going on 4 years. Unreal & IdTech are updates of previous installments, and then there's really not much left to account for where PC FPS's are concerned. ( Unless Serious makes an odd comeback, or if the Soviets polish the X-ray untill it shines; which is doubtful )

All in all, relatively few 'new' engines out there, and I'd say Cry / Unreal / Id-tech sort of proves that the 'old' engines can 'keep up' with some tweaking.

[LarsBM]

Originally Posted by trackit

what is your source?

Remember in the mid-late 90s? If you had a good pc for a year, maybe a year and a half you couldnt even play new games that came out. I have a three year old PC and Im running newer games fine (not at max grafics of course but you know).

There is a maximum capacity for PC power with the current way with chips etc on plastic boards. Before we can leap to much stronger PCs than we have the technology have to be remade.

[bokaj]

Commando Nukem ->

I of course disagree as regards Doom 3 and doubt you have the inside knowledge about what they had to do and didn't. Referring to reviews (gamerankings - 87.5 %) is just to reffer to the generel opinion and not just your and my view. But I agree that you personally can love a game with overall bad reviews and virsa versa. That said I hope for DNF that it will do just as well when it is released.
I'm quite sure that it will be a love and hate game for the gamers just because it is DNF. It may surprise you but you can be sure that I will be in the group that focus on the positive aspects.

I also totally agree that 11 years is 3Drealms business. It is not like i am mad at them or something crazy like that. Just saying that in my world it is doing things wrong because you could have used all these resourced on other projects. I know at least for me it wouldn't be satisfying. It is not the 11 years that will make a good DNF but what they are doing in these last years. Focusing, being more realistic, more manpower etc.. read the interviews. I have the feeling we are just discussing words here. I also preffer one good game in 11 years to three bad ones.

But ok .. we have made our points. We want a good game and believe we will get it .. sooner or later

[bokaj]

Originally Posted by Skiffer

I do. Why, were you being sarcastic? .

Sorry about that .. we are just to far from each other and a discussion would be pointless

[fast-1]

There is always a way for the dual core for modding, for instance a way to use different graphics for multi tasking.

Valve who made Half life said they would use it but it does not matter now though.

Quad how is that on the motherboard, is it two cpu on same place ?

[Angilion]

It is unlikely to need it. Though having the capacity to expand the games performance to even higher FPS and graphics levels via an option would be great I think, for those who own the computers to do it.

Then according to your own argument, you are a graphics whore. So I can simply dismiss you.

[Angilion]

Originally Posted by fast-1

There is always a way for the dual core for modding, for instance a way to use different graphics for multi tasking.

Valve who made Half life said they would use it but it does not matter now though.

Quad how is that on the motherboard, is it two cpu on same place ?

One CPU, with 4 processing cores on it, sharing cache to some extent. Can be two dual-core CPUs reworked onto one chip, or a native quad-core design, but it's packaged into one item. You can get motherboards that support two (or more) CPUs, but one of those with two dual-core CPUs wouldn't be referred to as quad-core.

[Commando Nukem]

Originally Posted by Angilion

Then according to your own argument, you are a graphics whore. So I can simply dismiss you.

I dont care if you dismiss me. Go ahead, you have my permission. You clearly didn't pay attention to what I said on the matter...

Graphics as a top priority? Stupid. However, having good graphics? It's A good idea. Giving your game some room for expansion on higher systems and "future" systems is a good idea.

Thats the one place, about the only place, ID put their eyes to the horizon and gave the game the capacity to look even better on hardware that was absolutely at the cutting edge.

Its one thing to have scalability acrossed hardware, its another to be a "cutting edge" whore and have a game that requires a monster computer to run. A game can go a long way to have scalability.

[Angilion]

And in your comments dismissing me, you managed to overlook the fact that I said that cutting-edge graphics, or even average graphics for the time, wasn't important to me, emphasised by my stating that DN3D with the HRP was great fun.

[Evil_C]

You have to take this "news" with a grain of salt. Every couple of years somebody asks George what type of hardware they're running and he tells us and every time the specs go up. It's best to wait until the game has gone gold and they release the final specs before going out and buying a new rig or upgrading your current one.

i can run crysis so its a given ill be able to run dnf, as george wants dnf to be playable on consoles so its gonna be less than crysis.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by timothy2

i can run crysis so its a given ill be able to run dnf, as george wants dnf to be playable on consoles so its gonna be less than crysis.

George never said that.

he never did but its obvious he likes consoles, and then he was or is hiring people with xbox360 experience and such, and crysis devs said crysis cant run on consoles.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by timothy2

he never did but its obvious he likes consoles, and then he was or is hiring people with xbox360 experience and such, and crysis devs said crysis cant run on consoles.

What are you basing your opinion on? Because it's just that. An opinion. 3DR was never hiring for someone with Xbox 360 experience. What does Crysis have to do with DNF? Absolutely nothing. Seriously, stop hurting my brain. I don't like reading nonsensical things with poor grammar to boot.

[bokaj]

Reaper -> 3DR have talk about it several times. This is something from late 2007

"We plan to have a multi-platform release if possible. We're not nailing down a date yet, but we're excited about the game's progress," CEO Scott Miller is quoted by CVG as stating.

More often than not this means that the game is scaled to be able run on the consoles, XBox360 and PS3. If you are lucky you get small improvements in graphics on the PC as in GoW and Mass Effect.

So if you can run Crysis on your PC which the devs have claimed could never run on the consoles, you will most likely have no problems with DNF.

This is not bullet proof but timothy2´s guess is based on better arguments than 95 % of what you are reading in these forums.

Don't worry about that it hurts your brain .. maybe it just needs the exercize..

also in gamasutra the job listings have xbox experience or something like that.

what does my grammar has to do with anything?

[alexgk]

Originally Posted by timothy2

also in gamasutra the job listings have xbox experience or something like that.

It's true, but please stop this discussion. Nothing has really been confirmed.

[bokaj]

Originally Posted by alexgk

It's true, but please stop this discussion. Nothing has really been confirmed.

When has this become a limitation in these forums. That DNF is coming to the consoles if it is released is almost more certain than it is released at all

[jagguar20]

No, no no no cmon, I will need to upgrade my pc for third time the same year!

[alexgk]

Originally Posted by bokaj

When has this become a limitation in these forums. That DNF is coming to the consoles if it is released is almost more certain than it is released at all

Nothing has been confirmed officially. They haven't said: "Hey, we'll release DNF for Xbox360 and PS3". So everything else is just speculation...

everything else being this very forum! so we might as well not speak at all

[bokaj]

alexgk -> and so what???? this is a Forum where everybody including you my friend is speculating all the time. I'm repeating myself but DNF coming to the consoles is almost a fact. Not based on pure speculation but very, very strong indications from interviews with the 3DR staff. Don't believe us to follow your private rules about what should be discussed or not

[alexgk]

Originally Posted by bokaj

Don't believe us to follow your private rules about what should be discussed or not

I introduce to you the FAQ:

From the FAQ:
5) Will you port DNF to Linux/Mac/Xbox/PS2/Xbox 360/PS3/Wii/etc.. The decision on what to port DNF to hasn't been made, and won't be made until the game is about ready to be released (or after it's done - we simply don't know yet). Yes, some of the more recent consoles are more likely than others, but we honestly have not done any work on any port to anything other than the PC original.

Believe me, I've discussed this as well, and also been warned...

[bokaj]

Anyway .. I think the faq is a little outdated now. After the trailer and everything much more is allowed.

I can eg say that I think the game will be released late 2009. It is not tabu anymore ....

[JobivanHiob]

he is stating rumors here! We need this to get answered correctly.

well whos best than scott miller to spread that rumor:

"We haven't formally announced any platforms for DNF," "But, of course hitting the big three makes the most sense (PC, PS3, 360)."

[alexgk]

Originally Posted by George Broussard
Platforms have not been finalized or announced.

Here.

Please stay on topic, it's been enough...

ok sorry, why cant i see your name with a different color? is that an error on my settings?

[Joe Siegler]

Enough. George has answered the question, there's little left to discuss.