Author Topic: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?  (Read 2962 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

LDAsh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
  • Karma: +17/-16
  • Doom Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« Reply #15 on: November 15, 2017, 12:58:04 AM »
I don't think anyone is slagging whatever people do as a hobby for fun, people can even use Torque or GameGuru if they want.  The implication is concerning "serious" development and the OP was talking about commercial use.  There's no need to be defensive about what at this point are facts, not opinions.

TDM is certainly an impressive achievement in many ways but the fact remains that the engine still can't handle wide-open detailed worlds (even by 2004 standards) and modern polycounts, and this isn't going to change.  Much of the content is on-par with mobile gaming by now, I would say.  This is mainly due to lack of "real" LOD, so I don't mean swapping models off the hard drive but actually having the stages in the vertex buffer.  Every time some new trick is implemented like fake-PBR or some post-processing shiny or soft shadows, the performance hit and possible affect on minimum system requirements is usually intolerably bad and not worth it compared to what engines like UE4 can already do with the same hardware and much higher framerates, with a LOT more content getting chewed and digested.  This is simply fact.

A Commodore64 emulator written in Java that requires 8GB RAM and quad-core CPU at minimum before it will even show the splash screen, bogged down by layers upon layers of abstraction, does not impress anyone.  And yes, they do exist.

argoon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
  • Karma: +21/-81
  • Doom Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« Reply #16 on: November 15, 2017, 08:29:27 AM »

I don't care what anyone is using for development, projects, design, rocket science or even quantum physics in their spare time. It's their right to be stuck in the past, use ancient or modern technology or anything they want. People are still using Quake and Doom deriative engines!


Exactly, that is something guys like Motorsep don't understand.

I don't think anyone is slagging whatever people do as a hobby for fun, people can even use Torque or GameGuru if they want.  The implication is concerning "serious" development and the OP was talking about commercial use.  There's no need to be defensive about what at this point are facts, not opinions.


Motorsep has called on people including me for still using this engine, going has far has to say that he is here to remind us everyday that we are wasting our time.

Yes the op was talking about comercial usage and i among others explained why the engine saw few comercial realeases, and i also agree that idtech 4 has it stands is not really the best choice for comercial games but i don't care if anyone wants to make a comercial game with it, i will certainly not call those people stupid or stuck in the past.


TDM is certainly an impressive achievement in many ways but the fact remains that the engine still can't handle wide-open detailed worlds (even by 2004 standards) and modern polycounts, and this isn't going to change.  Much of the content is on-par with mobile gaming by now, I would say.  This is mainly due to lack of "real" LOD, so I don't mean swapping models off the hard drive but actually having the stages in the vertex buffer.  Every time some new trick is implemented like fake-PBR or some post-processing shiny or soft shadows, the performance hit and possible affect on minimum system requirements is usually intolerably bad and not worth it compared to what engines like UE4 can already do with the same hardware and much higher framerates, with a LOT more content getting chewed and digested.  This is simply fact.

A Commodore64 emulator written in Java that requires 8GB RAM and quad-core CPU at minimum before it will even show the splash screen, bogged down by layers upon layers of abstraction, does not impress anyone.  And yes, they do exist.


TDM is indeed a great achievement and that is in part the way that community is very mature and focused and because idtech 4 was fortunately open enough for their needs.

Yes idtech 4 has no real "wide-open detailed worlds" and that is a petty but in now way does it make the engine useless, if it can't do that, don't make a game with it that needs that capability, play with the engine strengths not weaknesses and if your game really needs that (and you don't have the ability to change the engine internals) then go to other engine, i'm not saying that to attack you in any way, i would do the same if my current idea needed wide open spaces fortunately it does not.

No one is claiming idtech 4 can do everything what UE4 can, no one is claiming idtech 4 is easier to use than UE4, for the contrary, i'm just saying idtech 4 is not a useless engine, it has it's place and it's charm, i specially like the cleanness, sharpness of its render, contrary to UE4 and Unity, but that is me, is just a preference.

Quote from: Motorsep
I am confident that you won't be able to make anything but Doom 3 mod that plays and feels exactly like Doom3 (or worse)

And this is why this guy should not be taken seriously, there's many examples of idtech 4 games and mods that feel very different to Doom 3.

Quote from: Motorsep
Even recent attempt to integrate Vulkan into BFG engine stopped when the author dug deeper and discovered there half of the engine needs to be refactored.

Of course Sherlock ANY engine will need heavy refactoring for Vulkan, is a total different way to code renders and shader's, this new API needs engines to be made from the ground up with it in mind, any engine slapping a Vulkan render onto their old architecture will never rip it real benefits, this came from the mouth of Croteam engine developer Alan Ladavac and the Khronos Group it self. Btw, i would love to read the post, where the idSoftware employee working on this Vulkan render, claimed he stooped because he didn't knew needed to change the engine to much for it, i pretty much doubt that a professional engine developer/ coder would be so ignorant about the engine he worked before (unless is a totally new employee that only worked with idtech 5 and 6).   
« Last Edit: November 15, 2017, 09:23:29 AM by argoon »

motorsep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,076
  • Karma: +78/-134
  • Artist
    • View Profile
    • Kot in Action Creative Artel
Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« Reply #17 on: November 15, 2017, 10:59:12 AM »
@argoon You are simply f#cking returd, that's all. Modders mod the game - Doom 3. I never had anything against modding Doom 3. However, you simply refuse to understand that the engine is not suitable for anything else. As an example, there are artists who can make 3D sculptures of people to look life-like using Blender alone. I am sure they can single handily make something like Final Fantasy movies in their lifetime. However, it will never happen in production settings. A large team will be working on such movie and they will use tools (and quality) that will allow them to built said movie within a reasonable time frame and with reasonable quality (no one in the right mind will go all out with tiny details in production if those won't be visible or bring value to the viewer). So they will use Maya or Max, not Blender.

Same goes for id tech 4. There are a handful of devs who would be willing to work with idTech 4 in commercial settings and they don't have enough skills to get idTech 4 to the level of idTech 5/6 or UE4 in the reasonable amount of time (before idTech 7 or UE5 come out). Tools is another story. It will take another team and another skillset to make state of art tools. And on top of that you still need art and gamecode.

But apparently you plainly refuse to acknowledge the facts.

So why don't you GFY and stop advising people on using idTech 4 for commercial production?!

argoon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
  • Karma: +21/-81
  • Doom Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« Reply #18 on: November 15, 2017, 12:33:05 PM »
So why don't you GFY and stop advising people on using idTech 4 for commercial production?!

Quote from: Argoon
... i also agree that idtech 4 has it stands is not really the best choice for comercial games...

You are not only a guy with a really poisonous personality you also have reading disabilities...
« Last Edit: November 15, 2017, 12:36:00 PM by argoon »

Snehk

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 57
  • Karma: +6/-0
  • Doom Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« Reply #19 on: November 15, 2017, 06:31:11 PM »
This place would be almost dead without those quarrels shaking it up... Can't you guys just get it over with already? It's been a few years since BFG engine release, even more so since GPL. At this point, everyone should be happy that it works at all and still have fun with just fiddling with this old tech! Arguments won't change anything. Well, maybe they'll make the atmosphere here more toxic, I can feel that the amount of salt here is approximately four times bigger than the one of Dead Sea!

The engine is not really used by independent developers, because there are better and easier engines out there. Majority of them are artists, that's why things should be greatly simplified. Large studios may consider it a relic of past. But guess what, large studios don't care about UE4 or Unity, or other miraculous engines available for everyone (unless they try to sell it) as well. Large studios have invested too much time, effort and money in their own technology. Now, with that in mind we can say that only hobbyists, or Doom 3 modders that are experienced with the engine remain. Once in a while some looney with idea for a great game on this old engine appears, gets fed up quickly with obscurity of the engine or toxicity of this place, and leaves. This is a normal thing for any existing game engine.

Anyone is entitled to use anything they want (as long as it's legal) to develop their projects. If an indie team insists on using Doom 3 engine, then it's their decision and nobody should care. Were should provide technical information to help such a team work instead.

VGames

  • PD3 Beta Testers
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 764
  • Karma: +17/-69
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« Reply #20 on: November 16, 2017, 12:38:59 PM »
Shut up Snehk!  :P

JK. You're absolutely right. People just use what you want. I think the OP has been answered to death now.
Get the latest on Perfected Doom 3 here - http://www.moddb.com/mods/perfected-doom-3-version-500

revelator

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +3/-0
  • Doom Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« Reply #21 on: September 12, 2019, 09:36:22 PM »
Old topic but heres my take.

While BFG is newer and arguably runs better on newer hardware it has the "exact" same limitations idtech4 has.
Namely piss poor support for big open world maps.
In fact besides BFG running better id removed megamaps from the code,
so idtech4 has an edge there as it can actually support huge maps.
The downside to idtech 4's megamap code is that it is a very early format with little to no compression so the maps will be freaking huge.
One mod i know of used this and its one map was in excess of 10 gb Oo.
Still it looked pretty good :) but sizes like that simply makes using megamaps unfeasible, since a game with 10 maps would amass to around 100gb of drive space.
If someone tried tinkering with a good compression algorithm for the megamaps it might actually make a solid engine for modders to work on.

Nowadays we have have some modernized versions of idtech4 like fhdoom (uses a full  GLSL backend has shadowmaps and SSAO and other goodies) still needs work on the expansion though.
And even though im practically retired i been working on backporting stuff from TDM to idtech4 like support for AVX and AVX2 and multicore rendering using MH's idtech4 port as a base.
Atm im updating the old OpenAL and EAX code to OpenAL-Soft and EFX so that people without a creative card can also use the environmental sounds.
My engine uses a hybrid ARB2 GLSL renderer where all interactions are handled by GLSL and the rest is still ARB2 assembly, so that mods like sikkmod will still work.
This took some tinkering as the code is very fragile, but i managed to cut a sizeable ammount of state changes making it rock solid.

motorsep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,076
  • Karma: +78/-134
  • Artist
    • View Profile
    • Kot in Action Creative Artel
Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« Reply #22 on: September 12, 2019, 11:53:58 PM »
@revelator:

Megatextures is utter crap compare to VT 2.0 in Rage 1 and even other games that use id Tech 5 (id Tech 6 has even better VT tech). Open world maps is so much harder to make play well and look good. Stick with conventional maps. Also, I made massive open map to run with Doom 3 BFG engine - it was massive, if you were to walk across.

It's funny how I see talks about modernizing id tech 4, when there is Storm Engine 2 with working tools and enhanced graphics (based of earlier RBDoom 3 BFG before it became a mess). Just no one really cares to make anything using the engine (and I recall there was some much shit that I didn't release the code back then - now it's open and no one cares).

revelator

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +3/-0
  • Doom Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« Reply #23 on: September 13, 2019, 01:19:12 AM »
It was only a take on what was possible by default between the two engines :), better formats do exist, quake 4 used megamaps for only a few outdoor areas, rage used them extensively but at the time it still looked like crap compared to many other games with huge outdoor areas.
Still i kinda like how megamaps look in idtech 6 now :) and with some (or a lot) of work, the megamap code in tech4 could possibly be made usefull.

And yeah since most large gaming corporations have opened up for the free use of there tech like unreal and cryengine,
not many feel the need to make use of code that would require for them to gasp... do some work themselfs.
Its sad really, because even though the code might lack some features or be in need of some polish to bring it up to date,
it seems noone can be arsed to make that sacrifice even if it means your game might become unique.

Sadly we newer got to see the original Prey2 which used a heavily modified tech4 engine,
from the early pics though it looked freaking awesome and seems to have supported some pretty large maps.

EoceneMiacid

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 137
  • Karma: +7/-16
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« Reply #24 on: September 13, 2019, 04:12:27 AM »
Motorsep, help me out here.

Why are you so keen on trolling and picking fights on this board all the time?

We know you've done some impressive things in the past, but if you consider idtech4 that outdated, your time is surely better spent on forums dealing with more up to date engines?

Why do you have to act like such a dick?
« Last Edit: September 13, 2019, 06:29:33 AM by EoceneMiacid »

motorsep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,076
  • Karma: +78/-134
  • Artist
    • View Profile
    • Kot in Action Creative Artel
Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« Reply #25 on: September 13, 2019, 09:23:00 AM »
Motorsep, help me out here.

I'll try my best  O0

Why are you so keen on trolling and picking fights on this board all the time?

Trolling and picking fights? Not really - only speaking the truth. Only you and maybe a few more people get offended by it, because you idolize id tech 4 and not willing to accept that the world have moved on.

We know you've done some impressive things in the past, but if you consider idtech4 that outdated, your time is surely better spent on forums dealing with more up to date engines?

Well, thank you  :) And indeed I spend my time in UE4. If you look at my posts, I post here quite infrequently.

Why do you have to act like such a dick?

Can't just have you and the devilz carry all this load  >:D

revelator

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +3/-0
  • Doom Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« Reply #26 on: September 13, 2019, 10:32:10 AM »
Well lets not turn this into a flame war :) motorsep is right in regards to the older tech in idtech4 being substandard as of today,
but that is where indie coders might actually shine by creating updates to old paths that in some circumstances are not only just as good as current tech but sometimes even better :).

Most teams today unfortunatly seem to focus on the art and dont give a flying f... about what engine they want to run it on as long as it has the stuff they want by default.
And while corporations opening the code to their propriarity engines to the public for a modest fee if it goes into production might have sounded like a good idea,
it actually killed the coding scene because now the artists push engine side feature request to whatever corp holds the rights to that engine benefitting them
for whatever game they themself plan on developing.

Indie coders rarely if ever have a chance of keeping up with the big boys when it comes to manpower, so it is a lost battle sadly :(.
So there you have it, and im being rather blunt about it now.

 

motorsep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,076
  • Karma: +78/-134
  • Artist
    • View Profile
    • Kot in Action Creative Artel
Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« Reply #27 on: September 13, 2019, 12:00:04 PM »
@revelator:

I can tell you this much - before I went with UE4, I was asking programmers about getting work done on Storm Engine 2. No one wanted to touch it with long stick, even for standard amount of money for indie devs (they could, for a lot of money I didn't have).

Btw, there is no modest fee for UE4 - it's literally free until you ship your game, and if it's not doing great (there is a limit per quarter) - it's literally free, you pay nothing to Epic.

It's all about money. If people want to get down and dirty, they can either go with Unity or UE4, or write their own engines. If  they don't want to dig C++ source or code in C#, they go with UE4 and Blueprints (this is what I do).

I was told that it makes sense to work with UE4 and Unity, for a programmer, because that's what's required in AAA companies. So gaining knowledge in those engines makes monetary and career sense.

Indies are not some kind of sponsored teams where someone pays their bills to have them coding for fun (even if it was a case, I was told by many programmers  it's fun to code in C# for Unity and no fun at all dig id tech 4). They are people with families and bills to pay. It only makes sense to use engine + tools that will help them to ship game faster, and on as many platforms as possible.

The momentum has been lost with id tech 4.

Btw, as game modding engine , if you are focusing on improving gameplay of Doom 3 and not planning on making a total conversion, it's great. However, even for making TC is sucks because of tools (or lack of such) and limited user base (or whatever is left of it).

EoceneMiacid

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 137
  • Karma: +7/-16
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« Reply #28 on: September 13, 2019, 02:40:47 PM »
You're not wrong Motorsep, we know idtech4 isn't competitive with the likes of UE4.

And that's fine as far as I'm concerned because my goal isn't to create a modern AAA game from scratch, something I don't have the time, skill or resources for.





revelator

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +3/-0
  • Doom Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« Reply #29 on: September 13, 2019, 04:45:23 PM »
Learning from industry standard game engines, can be good but most studios are starting to move away from third parties like UE and focussing on in house code.
Just look at what happened between mass effect 3 and mass effect andromeda. All previous games in that series has used unreal tech, but andromeda and in fact all upcomming titles from EA
will use EA's own inhouse frostbite engine.

There was a time when money was not everything... most coders i learned from over the years did it mostly for fun and to tinker with ideas.
This has lead to some amazing projects over the years -> darkplaces FTE xonotic xash to name a few, by coders who did not accept the "this can not be done" clause :).

Sure development on some of these projects has taken years but quite a lot of them are even used today by artists who dont need the latest and most flashy toys,
it all comes down to what you intend to make.
idtech4 is mostly geared towards corridor shooters, it can do large outdoor areas but it is not where it shines (in that regard it was actually less flexible than idtech3).