Doom 3 could've happened for DC?

Imerion · Post by **Imerion** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 3:02 pm

So you are the one who made that level? It really looks fantastic! Great work! I have been following the Holly 3D project quite some time now, and when those pics showed up on the official page I realized the wait certainly was worth it! A short time later came a model along, looking just as good.

and i know a person that is running ODE (another physics engine) on DC as we speak...

I think I know who it is.

Looking at those pics and considering the ODE library, I don't doubt a game like HL2 or Halo would be any problems at all.

Segata Sanshiro · Post by **Segata Sanshiro** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 8:10 pm

Yeah, i also made the character, but I'm not quite satisfied with the texture, so I'll redo it for the tech demo release.

Darkfalz · Post by **Darkfalz** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 6:07 am

Well I remember reading Carmack saying Doom 3 would run nicely on a Voodoo5... when 3dfx was still in business.

cube_b3 · Post by **cube_b3** » Fri Dec 09, 2005 8:47 am

Definetly

Darkfalz · Post by **Darkfalz** » Sun Dec 11, 2005 12:46 am

Keep in mind that many of the 3D hardware capabilities of the PowerVR were never or rarely used, because it couldn't do them very fast. Things like FSAA, trilinear or aniostropic filtering or bump mapping. FSAA was only used in two games as far as I know, WSB2k2 and NHL2k2. I don't think any games used trilinear or aniosotropic. Bump mapping may have been used sparingly, but I couldn't give any examples.

Rand Linden · Post by **Rand Linden** » Sun Dec 11, 2005 10:45 am

Darkfalz wrote:Keep in mind that many of the 3D hardware capabilities of the PowerVR were never or rarely used, because it couldn't do them very fast. Things like FSAA, trilinear or aniostropic filtering or bump mapping. FSAA was only used in two games as far as I know, WSB2k2 and NHL2k2. I don't think any games used trilinear or aniosotropic. Bump mapping may have been used sparingly, but I couldn't give any examples.

Um... no -- pretty much everything you've posted above is completely wrong regarding the PVR2/DC.

Why not just delete your post and save everyone a lot of confusion in the future ?

Rand.

FuriKuri · Post by **FuriKuri** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 6:22 pm

Hey Rand, would you mind being helpful by explaining all about the PVR2 and Dreamcast's 3d use and capabilities?

GyroVorbis · Post by **GyroVorbis** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 7:40 pm

I really doubt that Mr. Linden has time for that. You can just google the tech documents.

FuriKuri · Post by **FuriKuri** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:49 pm

What do you mean by doesn't have the time? Last time I checked, if you have the time to tell someone they are completely wrong, then you have the time to explain your reasoning.

Here is my reasoning:

For Rand to say someone's comments was wrong, he would have already known why his comments were wrong. Since he already knew it, he should be able to explain why his post was wrong without spending time to do research. So all the time it should take, is the time to write a nice descriptive paragraph..

nymus · Post by **nymus** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 1:36 am

FuriKuri wrote:What do you mean by doesn't have the time? Last time I checked, if you have the time to tell someone they are completely wrong, then you have the time to explain your reasoning.

One could also make a simple supportive statement eg "you can find correct specs on the web" which doesn't take much time and makes clear that their disagreement is based on knowledge of the facts/truth and is not just spam.

Anyway, Rand is right. The PowerVR 2 DC is capable of rendering scenes loaded with 3D effects without sacrificing performace. The impact of the various effects is not unique to PowerVR. In fact, as scenes become more complex, PowerVR scales better than "conventional" 3D cards primarily because deferred rendering will help reduce the number of polygons that need effects put on them.

Also, someone said earlier that PowerVR has hardware T&L which is not true. Excluded for cost reduction and focus on bandwidth efficiency, I do not think this feature was used much in the field of Dreamcast's competition; PS2, GC, XBox *edit* enough to overshadow PowerVR*, so it was a worthy compromise.

Technically, anything is possible if you have the time and resources, so a Dreamcast port of Doom 3, tailored to Dreamcast hardware would look and run well, however, the difference in hardware b/w a PC and Dreamcast would make such a port very expensive which is probably why it was only ported to the Xbox.

Rand Linden · Post by **Rand Linden** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 7:09 am

FuriKuri wrote:Hey Rand, would you mind being helpful by explaining all about the PVR2 and Dreamcast's 3d use and capabilities?

If you want the information, look it up.

FuriKuri wrote:What do you mean by doesn't have the time? Last time I checked, if you have the time to tell someone they are completely wrong, then you have the time to explain your reasoning.

Knowing that something is incorrect and having the time to explain why that is the case are completely unrelated.

See above.

Rand.

FuriKuri · Post by **FuriKuri** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 12:41 pm

I have no problem finding any of the specs about the dreamcast. My point is that I can't find information on the use of the dreamcast's capabilities in games. What I would like to know is what Rand knows about which of the dreamcast's abilities were used in games, since pretty much everything Darkfalz said was wrong according to Rand.

Rand Linden wrote:
Darkfalz wrote:Keep in mind that many of the 3D hardware capabilities of the PowerVR were never or rarely used, because it couldn't do them very fast. Things like FSAA, trilinear or aniostropic filtering or bump mapping. FSAA was only used in two games as far as I know, WSB2k2 and NHL2k2. I don't think any games used trilinear or aniosotropic. Bump mapping may have been used sparingly, but I couldn't give any examples.
Um... no -- pretty much everything you've posted above is completely wrong regarding the PVR2/DC.

Why not just delete your post and save everyone a lot of confusion in the future ?

Rand.

nymus · Post by **nymus** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 7:08 pm

Rand Linden wrote: Knowing that something is incorrect and having the time to explain why that is the case are completely unrelated.

It is the "expression" not "knowledge" of your own opinion that is at issue here.

Saying that something is incorrect is pointless without some explanation. If you have the time to voice your disagreement, then you should make the time to explain it.

Post by **Quzar** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:15 pm

nymus wrote:Saying that something is incorrect is pointless without some explanation. If you have the time to voice your disagreement, then you should make the time to explain it.

You are saying the exact same thing that Rand already refuted with what you quoted. There is a HUGE difference between a sentence long statement of falsehood, and the page+ long proper explanation that he probably couldn't really give in full due to whatever things we don't know about pertaining to bleemcast.

nymus · Post by **nymus** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 1:54 am

Round and round we go

Someone please clarify the following.

Person 1 says the formula for volume of a cuboid is LxW.

Person 2 "knows" this is false so he says "Person 1, you are wrong. Please keep your mouth shut to avoid confusion."

Everyone is better informed

OR

Person 1 says the formula for volume of a cuboid is LxW.

Person 2 "knows" this is false but doesn't feel he should bother explaining basic geometry or sharing secrets with uneducated fare and so decides to STFU.

Person 3 "knows" this is false and says "Person 1 is incorrect. The correct formula is LxWxH"

Everyone is better informed.

nymus · Post by **nymus** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 2:00 am

OT, does anyone else wonder about the "new" consoles experiencing the same popup, slowdown etc issues as previous generations, only with higher resolutions and polygon counts?

Post by **Quzar** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:52 am

nymus wrote:Round and round we go

Someone please clarify the following.

Person 1 says the formula for volume of a cuboid is LxW.

Person 2 "knows" this is false so he says "Person 1, you are wrong. Please keep your mouth shut to avoid confusion."

Everyone is better informed

OR

Person 1 says the formula for volume of a cuboid is LxW.

Person 2 "knows" this is false but doesn't feel he should bother explaining basic geometry or sharing secrets with uneducated fare and so decides to STFU.

Person 3 "knows" this is false and says "Person 1 is incorrect. The correct formula is LxWxH"

Everyone is better informed.

And yet, if he had simply done what Rand said I'm sure he would be much more informed than he is now that he complained about being given help and you rushed in with an answer that just said that Rand was right followed by what boils down to "blah blah blah" as it has much information, but most all of it is unrelated to what the question at hand was.

Also, wtf is your problem with Rand? It seems like you only show up to bash him and try to give your own answers to questions and look like he is some horrible person ( /me recalls that whole crazy macro tirade)

Skynet · Post by **Skynet** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:55 am

I say we lock this before it gets outta hand.

MetaFox · Post by **MetaFox** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:02 am

Skynet wrote:I say we lock this before it gets outta hand.

As you wish.

impetus · Post by **impetus** » Tue Jan 03, 2006 10:42 pm

sorry, fox but i have to wiggle in here to say that Doom 3 would've been nearly unplayable on a single analog.