Quake
I KiLL DoN
anyone know when a beta or demo of the awesome game Quake by ID Software
will be out???
Parafilmus
ikil...@aol.com (I KiLL DoN) wrote:
>anyone know when a beta or demo of the awesome game Quake by ID Software
>will be out???
The shareware version for Dos has been available for a couple of days.
No release date has been announced for a mac version yet.
I wouldn't expect them to start working on a port until after the
registered version is released.
-R. Ryan Clark
Rishi Gupta
I KiLL DoN wrote:
>
> anyone know when a beta or demo of the awesome game Quake by ID Software
> will be out???
For the Mac? Let's assume that the full version for the PC is released
in August or September, the full demo is already out and it will
probably take ID a month to complete it. That would be 3Q 1996. Now
let's assume ID will analyze the sales for two or three months, by this
time it is 4Q 1996. At this time they say, "Okay, let's do a Mac
version." It takes them another month or two to find a company to port
it, draw up contracts and etc. It is now 1Q 1997. Quake will
supposedly be very advanced in terms of AI and engine and such meaning
it will take a while to port. Let's assume 1.5 years to be on the safe
side. It is now 3Q 1998. A demo will probably be released at this time
and full version in 1Q 1999.
I don't really care though, we'll have Dark Forces II at least a year
before MacQuake and it will *KILL* Quake and all it's competitors.
By 1999, well, Bungie will have served up their next offering which will
be nothing short of groundbreaking and LucasArts may have another first
person action game on the market.
In closing, don't expect it for another two years.
BTW: Yes, I am pessimistic.
Timothy A. Seufert
In article <4qmjkl$f...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ikil...@aol.com (I KiLL
DoN) wrote:
>anyone know when a beta or demo of the awesome game Quake by ID Software
>will be out???
The shareware version for the PC was released a couple days ago. There is
no Mac version at the present, and we probably won't get one until '97.
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
|Tim Seufert, bwa...@cats.ucsc.edu | UselessWastedSpace(tm) |
| "I never give them hell. I just tell the truth, and they |
| think it is hell." -Harry S Truman |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Tigger
In article <4qmjkl$f...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ikil...@aol.com (I KiLL
DoN) wrote:
>
>anyone know when a beta or demo of the awesome game Quake by ID Software
>will be out???
Well, shareware version .91 is out for the PC. I believe the most
recent statements from id indicate that the Mac will be one of the
first priorities after the PC version is finished. Given the rate
at which Doom progressed, I expect the PC version will take another
couple of months to really stabilize. Then real work on the Mac
version should begin. id has supposedly written the Quake code
with ease of porting in mind, so I'll go out on a limb and say we'll
start seeing betas toward the end of the year and a release for the
Mac in early '97.
--
| Greg Orman gr...@pomona.edu |
| A man's best friends: a Harley, a Beretta and a Gund. |
Bruce Burkhalter
> anyone know when a beta or demo of the awesome game Quake by ID Software
> will be out???
It's out now. Check www.next-generation.com for a list of ftp sites.
Bruce Burkhalter
Lion Entertainment
che...@eden.com
Bruce Burkhalter
In article <31CEF7...@freenet.carleton.ca>, Rishi Gupta
<ch...@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote:
> I KiLL DoN wrote:
> >
> > anyone know when a beta or demo of the awesome game Quake by ID Software
> > will be out???
>
> For the Mac? Let's assume that the full version for the PC is released
> in August or September, the full demo is already out and it will
> probably take ID a month to complete it. That would be 3Q 1996. Now
> let's assume ID will analyze the sales for two or three months, by this
> time it is 4Q 1996. At this time they say, "Okay, let's do a Mac
> version." It takes them another month or two to find a company to port
> it, draw up contracts and etc. It is now 1Q 1997. Quake will
> supposedly be very advanced in terms of AI and engine and such meaning
> it will take a while to port. Let's assume 1.5 years to be on the safe
> side. It is now 3Q 1998. A demo will probably be released at this time
> and full version in 1Q 1999.
I know this might sound mean but it is not meant that way. It is very
frustrating to see posts like this. It just sounds like mean spirited
bitching and moaning, "So what if the PC users just got Quake, I don't
care." Unless you know how game development and conversion works on the
Mac, please don't post bizarre development schedules that have no basis
with fact or reality.
First, id is talking to several companies about porting Quake to the Mac
(including Lion), but no decisions have been made yet. Please don't ask
about anything else, because I don't know. Really.
The above scenario is so biased and distorted, it is hard to imagine where
to begin. The guys at id very smart both programming and business wise.
They don't need to "analyze the sales for two or three months" and
determine whether or not to do a port. Anyone can tell you that Quake
will be a huge hit. Next, there is no technical reason that the
development of the game can begin immediately. Since they have the demo
out, the code probably won't change much between now and the final version
and the changes should be pretty easy to add. Of course id has to work
out a contract but that isn't a big deal. They have done it many times
before.
It is absolutely ludicrous to believe that it will take 1.5 years to port
Quake. We did Wing Commander III for the Mac in 4 months. It was a hard
4 months but we did it. Wing IV took longer but that was mainly because
the schedule slipped on the PC version. I think it took Presage about 6
months to port Hexen. Our experience with Doom was very positive. The id
guys write very clean code that is easy to port. We had Doom up and
running very quickly. The hard part was getting the networking and modem
play functioning correctly. The hard part with Quake will be getting the
texture mapping engine to be fast. Everything else should be very
straightforward as it is all written in C.
I don't know when Quake for the Mac will come out but it will be *a lot*
earlier than Q1 1999, regardless of who does it. If I gave my boss that
development schedule he would laugh very hard, and then probably fire me.
:)
> I don't really care though, we'll have Dark Forces II at least a year
> before MacQuake and it will *KILL* Quake and all it's competitors.
Of course you don't care because you have some bias against it, probably
sight unseen. We were playing it at work today and it is cool. I think
it is somewhat immature to claim that DF II will "*KILL*" all of its
competitors. What is that based on? Do you know what the competitors
will be in 1999? I am sure it will be good (and am also looking forward
to it) but there is no reason there can't be two (or more) really good
games. I thought DF was great but I don't think it *KILLED* Doom or
Marathon.
> By 1999, well, Bungie will have served up their next offering which will
> be nothing short of groundbreaking and LucasArts may have another first
> person action game on the market.
More strident religion. Bungie and Lucas are very good companies and I am
sure they will do cool stuff. You must be psychic to know what they are
doing and how much better it will be than anything else.
> In closing, don't expect it for another two years.
You wanna bet? I will bet you any amount of money that it will be out
sooner than two years.
> BTW: Yes, I am pessimistic.
I would call it biased.
Rishi, I am sorry to be so harsh (especially since you did the cool Wing
IV page!) but you are way off base.
Rishi Gupta
Bruce Burkhalter wrote:
> First, id is talking to several companies about porting Quake to the Mac
> (including Lion), but no decisions have been made yet. Please don't ask
> about anything else, because I don't know. Really.
Okay, but I am basing my observations partly on Duke Nukem 3D. First a
demo was released, THEN 3D Realms decided to do a port. Last time I
checked 3D Realms' home page, they still haven't licensed a company to
do the port (according to the Duke Nukem 3D FAQ) much less started it.
> It is absolutely ludicrous to believe that it will take 1.5 years to port
> Quake. We did Wing Commander III for the Mac in 4 months. It was a hard
> 4 months but we did it. Wing IV took longer but that was mainly because
> the schedule slipped on the PC version. I think it took Presage about 6
> months to port Hexen.
Four months? That is an impressive number but it is hardly average for
the Mac gaming market. Most ports take much longer than four months
(ie: Descent). The fact that Hexen took 6 months despite it was based
on the MacDoom engine (correct me if I'm wrong) isn't really a big
morale booster for Mac gamers. If there's more to the story than this,
feel free to fill me in.
> > In closing, don't expect it for another two years.
>
> You wanna bet? I will bet you any amount of money that it will be out
> sooner than two years.
I always try to keep the worst case scenario in mind that way I won't be
disappointed in the future. Two years doesn't really seem that
farfetched to me based on other ID games such as Doom and Wolfenstein
3D. I guess we'll just have to wait and see and what happens--ID might
be taking the Mac more seriously now than in the past.
Bruce Burkhalter
In article <31CFE1...@freenet.carleton.ca>, Rishi Gupta
<ch...@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote:
> Bruce Burkhalter wrote:
> > First, id is talking to several companies about porting Quake to the Mac
> > (including Lion), but no decisions have been made yet. Please don't ask
> > about anything else, because I don't know. Really.
>
> Okay, but I am basing my observations partly on Duke Nukem 3D. First a
> demo was released, THEN 3D Realms decided to do a port. Last time I
> checked 3D Realms' home page, they still haven't licensed a company to
> do the port (according to the Duke Nukem 3D FAQ) much less started it.
3D Realms has *always* wanted to do a port of Duke. How do you know these
things? We talk to them about things like this. While they have not
decided what company is going to do Duke for the Mac, there may be other
issues involved that don't relate to their desire to do a Mac verison.
> > It is absolutely ludicrous to believe that it will take 1.5 years to port
> > Quake. We did Wing Commander III for the Mac in 4 months. It was a hard
> > 4 months but we did it. Wing IV took longer but that was mainly because
> > the schedule slipped on the PC version. I think it took Presage about 6
> > months to port Hexen.
>
> Four months? That is an impressive number but it is hardly average for
> the Mac gaming market. Most ports take much longer than four months
> (ie: Descent). The fact that Hexen took 6 months despite it was based
> on the MacDoom engine (correct me if I'm wrong) isn't really a big
> morale booster for Mac gamers. If there's more to the story than this,
> feel free to fill me in.
I think 6 months for Hexen is pretty good. "Based on the MacDoom engine"
is partially true. The engines are similar but the Hexen engine several
more features such as looking up and down. Even so, that is just the
engine. There is a lot of other code that has to be ported as well. You
also have to add about 2 months of testing to every project.
> > > In closing, don't expect it for another two years.
> >
> > You wanna bet? I will bet you any amount of money that it will be out
> > sooner than two years.
>
> I always try to keep the worst case scenario in mind that way I won't be
> disappointed in the future. Two years doesn't really seem that
> farfetched to me based on other ID games such as Doom and Wolfenstein
> 3D. I guess we'll just have to wait and see and what happens--ID might
> be taking the Mac more seriously now than in the past.
Well if that is your attitude then you should be expecting Dark Forces II
sometime in the year 2000. You should also be expecting the next big
thing from Bungie around then too.
All I am saying is that making outlandish posts that are not accurate and
are not based in fact is not a smart thing to do.
Spammer
Bruce Burkhalter of Lion Entertainment(!) wrote:
]I don't know when Quake for the Mac will come out but it will be *a lot*
]
Thank you! It's easy to get discouraged when you want to play games that
are inevitably PC first and yet you don't want to use a PC to do it. I
don't just use PCs at work, I do tech support on the *&^%^%$ things. Macs
have problems as well but when I get the 20th scanner install call of the
day I'm not in a happy mood (one Mac scanner install call in the last two
months!). But. Ranting such as the above is just embarrassing. Have the
guts to be disappointed that both versions aren't simultaneous and the
strength to be grateful when a good port comes. Especially if it's sooner
than hoped for! I hope whoever does the port is someone who really wants in
their heart an optimised kickass Mac Quake, 'cause I sure do!
Sam Agnew
Customer Support
Epson UK Ltd
---
Roadkill has its seasons, just like anything
It's possums in the autum, and it's farm cats in the spring.
- Tom Waits "Murder in the Red Barn"
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This message was created and sent using the Cyberdog Mail System
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Fred Anderson
In article <greg-24069...@tigger.pomona.edu>, gr...@pomona.edu
(Tigger) wrote:
> In article <4qmjkl$f...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ikil...@aol.com (I KiLL
> DoN) wrote:
> >
> >anyone know when a beta or demo of the awesome game Quake by ID Software
> >will be out???
>
> Well, shareware version .91 is out for the PC. I believe the most
> recent statements from id indicate that the Mac will be one of the
> first priorities after the PC version is finished.
Oh joy, nothing like being "one of" the first priorities for a company
like Id, huh?
Rishi Gupta
Bruce Burkhalter wrote:
> Well if that is your attitude then you should be expecting Dark Forces II
> sometime in the year 2000. You should also be expecting the next big
> thing from Bungie around then too.
One big difference. LucasArts usually tries to do dual releases or
releases where the Mac version is only a month or two later than the PC
version (look at games like Rebel Assault II). LucasArts' ports are
also in house, they don't have to hire an outside company to do the port
for them like ID has to. In fact, I think that they develop the Mac
version at the same time as the PC version, I'm not sure.
Bungie, well, Bungie is Mac first (at times Mac only). I highly doubt
that they're doing their development for the DOS version and will then
port it to the Mac by licensing an outside company to do the work (which
is what ID is doing with Quake).
Bernie Wieser
I don't understand...
Why have alternative ports for the iD engine? Why was Hexen done
by someone other than Lion? You're supposed to be able to share WAD files,
right?
So if I go out and buy one of these ports, which one should I get?
I bought all the DOS versions; I'd like a Mac. version that can
read the commercial DOS wads.
B.
Douglas Grounds
In article <cheese-2406...@net-7-208.austin.eden.com>,
che...@eden.com (Bruce Burkhalter) wrote:
> I don't know when Quake for the Mac will come out but it will be *a lot*
> earlier than Q1 1999, regardless of who does it. If I gave my boss that
> development schedule he would laugh very hard, and then probably fire me.
> :)
I'm not sure about the laughing part...
But I agree wholeheartedly with Bruce. I think there are a LOT of people
who are trying to make really good Mac games, and I think that a few have
succeeded. At the same time, I feel like the work that Lion has done on
other platforms has had much more user support than the work we've done on
the Macintosh, even though almost every single Lion employee at least
prefers the Mac (if not some weird symbiotic relationship with their Mac).
What I mean is that if Macintosh owners do not encourage the developers
and publishers who are working to put out great games, and support those
developers and publishers by buying games, there just plain won't be any
Mac games. Not from Lion, not from Lucas, and not even from Bungie. And
that's the truth. Revenue drives any company, and by increasing revenues
you increase the size of the company and its capabilities. Period.
I think everyone who has a Mac (*this is being typed on a Duo 280 - an
old, useless 68K-based Mac*) needs to support ALL the Mac developers and
publishers when they do a good job. That includes id Software, Bungie,
Lucas, Origin/EA, or MacPlay/Interplay. Without the support and dollars,
the Mac community will no longer have anything to complain about.
...That's my $.02 for what it's worth. (Hey, how do you make a "cents"
sign on a Mac, for Christ's sake?)
Douglas Grounds
President
Lion Entertainment, Inc. (Bruce's boss)
Bruce Burkhalter
In article <ADF5C62...@198.161.156.35>, "Bernie Wieser"
<octa...@mail.agt.net> wrote:
>I don't understand...
Now I am the one who is confused. :)
>Why have alternative ports for the iD engine?
I am not sure what you mean by "alternative" ports. Much of the Mac Hexen
code is based on the Mac Doom code. The big difference is that the Hexen
PC engine is an advanced version of the Doom PC engine. I would not
consider it "alternative".
>Why was Hexen done by someone other than Lion?
id decided to go with Presage because they said they could do it cheaper
and faster.
>You're supposed to be able to share WAD files, right?
As far as I know you can use just about any Doom PC WAD file with Mac
Doom. I would assume the same is true with Hexen PC and Mac Hexen. I
don't think you can share Doom WADs with Hexen WADs but I could be wrong.
If you can, I see no reason why the same wouldn't be true on the Mac.
>So if I go out and buy one of these ports, which one should I get?
I am not sure what you mean. If you want Hexen, buy Mac Hexen. If you
want Doom, buy Mac Doom.
>I bought all the DOS versions; I'd like a Mac. version that can
>read the commercial DOS wads.
Again, as far as I know they can.
If I am missing something, please tell me. Hope this helps.
Andrew Welch
Douglas Grounds wrote:
[--snip--]
> What I mean is that if Macintosh owners do not encourage the developers
> and publishers who are working to put out great games, and support those
> developers and publishers by buying games, there just plain won't be any
> Mac games. Not from Lion, not from Lucas, and not even from Bungie. And
> that's the truth. Revenue drives any company, and by increasing revenues
> you increase the size of the company and its capabilities. Period.
Well said; I can't agree with you more.
> I think everyone who has a Mac (*this is being typed on a Duo 280 - an
> old, useless 68K-based Mac*) needs to support ALL the Mac developers and
> publishers when they do a good job. That includes id Software, Bungie,
> Lucas, Origin/EA, or MacPlay/Interplay. Without the support and dollars,
> the Mac community will no longer have anything to complain about.
::sniff:: We don't count? ;)
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Welch - Thaumaturgist - Ambrosia Software, Inc. |
+-------------------------------+------------------------------+
| AOL-> Keyword: Ambrosia | http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/ |
| CIS-> GO word: Ambrosia | ftp://ftp.AmbrosiaSW.com/ |
+-------------------------------+------------------------------+
paul lacy
Parafilmus (rrc...@artsci.wustl.edu) wrote:
: ikil...@aol.com (I KiLL DoN) wrote:
: >anyone know when a beta or demo of the awesome game Quake by ID Software
: >will be out???
: The shareware version for Dos has been available for a couple of days.
: No release date has been announced for a mac version yet.
: I wouldn't expect them to start working on a port until after the
: registered version is released.
Considering that some reports are placing the retail Dos vesion as coming
out in 1997, I wouldn't hold my breath for it. The Linux version will
probably beat the Mac version out :) ... then again there is always
MkLinux so who knows?
Chris Richards
la...@unicorn.it.wsu.edu (paul lacy) writes:
>Considering that some reports are placing the retail Dos vesion as coming
>out in 1997, I wouldn't hold my breath for it.
The retail DOS release is otherwise known as Quake 2 and will be released
some time in 1997. The registered version of Quake is due to ship after
the CD gets mastered, some time in the next 4-6 weeks according to id's
order line.
Chris R
Bruce Burkhalter
In article <31D047...@freenet.carleton.ca>, Rishi Gupta
<ch...@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote:
I was just being pessimistic and bracing myself for the worst possible
scenario. :)
Chris Richards
>People on the PC side who have downloaded it are really having gripes
>about Quake now.
Like almost every game, there seem to be several camps: there are
people who love it, people who are disappointed, and people who won't
be happy unless the game makes them coffee and drives them to work in
the morning (examples of the latter folks could be seen in some of
the bile hurled at EV in this newsgroup). The main disappointment
lies in the fact that Quake is basically Doom III.
>Quake is missing the oomph promised and Id just kept
>dropping features from the game.
The main features are all there: improved lighting, polygon world,
scriptable actions, and better net play, though scriptable actions
aren't possible in the shareware version so no one knows how that'll
turn out. A lot of the bells and wistles were dropped like custom
player textures and speaking into the game world, though.
>It's only got co-op and deathmatch,
It also has team play where players with the same color pants don't
hurt each other. id has alway said that you could put in your own
game formats with QuakeC, though if it's so easy it is disappointing
that they wouldn't have put a few in.
>maximum of four players,
Sixteen, not four.
>nine weapons (mostly duplicates),
True, though the grenade launcher is pretty cool.
>and no action
>button.
I don't think this is such a bad thing. I didn't like it at first, but
after a while, realizes that there isn't much difference between walking
up to a door and pushing a button vs walking into the door to open it.
Plus, the latter allows you to activate things from any angle, such as
pressing a button with your back while fighting.
>By the time Id actually comes out with the full version of Quake
>which can be edited and networked to the extent that was promised,
>LucasArts will have released DF 2 and X-Wing vs. Tie.
I'm confused here -- the full version is due out in 4 to 6 weeks. There
will undoubtedly be patches if that's what you mean, and some of the
networking code appears to need a good shakedown, but I don't think
we're talking 1Q97 at any rate.
>I can't even get it
>to allow people to jump between netgames as was promised. They had better
>get a move on. Right now, it's just Doom with a polygon engine -- although
>I must admit that Cthon looks wicked cool.
Agreed about Cthon. The scriptable nature of traps is one thing in
Quake's favor over Doom, but I agree that Quake is pretty close to Doom
in terms of gameplay. The real advantages of Quake rest in its
programmability with QuakeC and in the levels that can be built using
real 3D archetecture, and neither of those can be assessed at the
moment with only the shareware version available.
Chris R
Ty Klein
che...@eden.com (Bruce Burkhalter) wrote:
> In article <31CFE1...@freenet.carleton.ca>, Rishi Gupta
> <ch...@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote:
>
> > Bruce Burkhalter wrote:
> > > First, id is talking to several companies about porting Quake to the Mac
> > > (including Lion), but no decisions have been made yet. Please don't ask
> > > about anything else, because I don't know. Really.
> >
> > Okay, but I am basing my observations partly on Duke Nukem 3D. First a
> > demo was released, THEN 3D Realms decided to do a port. Last time I
> > checked 3D Realms' home page, they still haven't licensed a company to
> > do the port (according to the Duke Nukem 3D FAQ) much less started it.
>
> 3D Realms has *always* wanted to do a port of Duke. How do you know these
> things? We talk to them about things like this. While they have not
> decided what company is going to do Duke for the Mac, there may be other
> issues involved that don't relate to their desire to do a Mac verison.
I think that what Risha is trying to say is that it can't get *finished*
until it gets *started*. Wanting to do a port,and actually doing the port
are two different things. 3D Realms may want to do a port,but if they
don't start it won't ever get finished. Even if they start doing the port
by August,and you figure it will 5-6 months to complete it(that's being
optimistic) then you can expect that it won't be out until 1Q 97.
>
> > > It is absolutely ludicrous to believe that it will take 1.5 years to port
> > > Quake. We did Wing Commander III for the Mac in 4 months. It was a hard
> > > 4 months but we did it. Wing IV took longer but that was mainly because
> > > the schedule slipped on the PC version. I think it took Presage about 6
> > > months to port Hexen.
> >
> > Four months? That is an impressive number but it is hardly average for
> > the Mac gaming market. Most ports take much longer than four months
> > (ie: Descent). The fact that Hexen took 6 months despite it was based
> > on the MacDoom engine (correct me if I'm wrong) isn't really a big
> > morale booster for Mac gamers. If there's more to the story than this,
> > feel free to fill me in.
>
> I think 6 months for Hexen is pretty good. "Based on the MacDoom engine"
> is partially true. The engines are similar but the Hexen engine several
> more features such as looking up and down. Even so, that is just the
> engine. There is a lot of other code that has to be ported as well. You
> also have to add about 2 months of testing to every project.
6 months isn't all that bad,but if you've been reading any of the posts
in this newsgroup about Machexen you'll see that a large majority of
people were seriously disappointed with the port.
>
> > > > In closing, don't expect it for another two years.
> > >
> > > You wanna bet? I will bet you any amount of money that it will be out
> > > sooner than two years.
> >
> > I always try to keep the worst case scenario in mind that way I won't be
> > disappointed in the future. Two years doesn't really seem that
> > farfetched to me based on other ID games such as Doom and Wolfenstein
> > 3D. I guess we'll just have to wait and see and what happens--ID might
> > be taking the Mac more seriously now than in the past.
>
> Well if that is your attitude then you should be expecting Dark Forces II
> sometime in the year 2000. You should also be expecting the next big
> thing from Bungie around then too.
I can understand why Risha would be very pessimistic about Id's ports.
Id seems to have a history of taking a long time to port their games to
the mac,and when they are ported,they have a tendency to not be very good.
>
> All I am saying is that making outlandish posts that are not accurate and
> are not based in fact is not a smart thing to do.
I'd agree with that!
Hank Sprague
ch...@freenet.carleton.ca writes:
>I don't really care though, we'll have Dark Forces II at least a year
>before MacQuake and it will *KILL* Quake and all it's competitors.
Why do you think this? Does it have better technology, a better story,
or both? I've seen Quake, which seems to be _technologically_ superior to
every 1st person game _currently_ out, but it's irritating because it has
a) No story; this was cute in DOOM, but now id seems to positively revel
in the fact that "we don't need stories to sell our product." b) No
ducking; this is a minor gripe, but really, how much trouble would it
have been to include this after building the great engine? c) The weapons
are still centered on the screen, not angled like in DF or Duke Nukem.
You ever try firing a grenade launcher with the butt of the weapon
centered on the middle of your chest? Let me tell you, it doesn't tickle.
Well, these were just my impressions of Quake, but if DF2 can do these
things better, then I'll be won over. I just haven't heard anything about
DF2, so I'm completely in the dark (Ha Ha!) about it.
--
Tempest
"Retreat, hell! We're just attacking in the opposite direction!"
-US Marine Corps commander,
Changjin Reservoir, Korea.
Fred Anderson
cric...@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu (Chris Richards) wrote:
> Fan...@Ultranet.com (Fred Anderson) writes:
>
> >People on the PC side who have downloaded it are really having gripes
> >about Quake now.
>
> Like almost every game, there seem to be several camps: there are
> people who love it, people who are disappointed, and people who won't
> be happy unless the game makes them coffee and drives them to work in
> the morning (examples of the latter folks could be seen in some of
> the bile hurled at EV in this newsgroup). The main disappointment
> lies in the fact that Quake is basically Doom III.
Yeah, but there's a disproportionate size of the third kind.
> >Quake is missing the oomph promised and Id just kept
> >dropping features from the game.
>
> The main features are all there: improved lighting, polygon world,
> scriptable actions, and better net play, though scriptable actions
> aren't possible in the shareware version so no one knows how that'll
> turn out. A lot of the bells and wistles were dropped like custom
> player textures and speaking into the game world, though.
Guess what? None of that stuff will be in the registered version!
> >It's only got co-op and deathmatch,
>
> It also has team play where players with the same color pants don't
> hurt each other. id has alway said that you could put in your own
> game formats with QuakeC, though if it's so easy it is disappointing
> that they wouldn't have put a few in.
Quake C won't work with the registered version.
> >maximum of four players,
>
> Sixteen, not four.
Oh really? Check your copy of the shareware again. 4.
> >nine weapons (mostly duplicates),
>
> True, though the grenade launcher is pretty cool.
It takes too long to blow up and glows too brightly.
> >and no action
> >button.
>
> I don't think this is such a bad thing. I didn't like it at first, but
> after a while, realizes that there isn't much difference between walking
> up to a door and pushing a button vs walking into the door to open it.
> Plus, the latter allows you to activate things from any angle, such as
> pressing a button with your back while fighting.
As if accidentally opening a door that's hiding several monsters is a good
thing? Pathways Into Darkness had this same setup, but Bungie did good on
this and made it so there weren't many doors except for places where they
wanted this to happen.
> >By the time Id actually comes out with the full version of Quake
> >which can be edited and networked to the extent that was promised,
> >LucasArts will have released DF 2 and X-Wing vs. Tie.
>
> I'm confused here -- the full version is due out in 4 to 6 weeks. There
> will undoubtedly be patches if that's what you mean, and some of the
> networking code appears to need a good shakedown, but I don't think
> we're talking 1Q97 at any rate.
There will be the registered version in a month or two. The actual retail
version with some of the features that Id has promised won't be out until
the middle of next year.
Rishi Gupta
> > 3D Realms has *always* wanted to do a port of Duke. How do you know these
> > things? We talk to them about things like this. While they have not
> > decided what company is going to do Duke for the Mac, there may be other
> > issues involved that don't relate to their desire to do a Mac verison.
>
> I think that what Risha is trying to say is that it can't get *finished*
> until it gets *started*. Wanting to do a port,and actually doing the port
> are two different things. 3D Realms may want to do a port,but if they
> don't start it won't ever get finished. Even if they start doing the port
> by August,and you figure it will 5-6 months to complete it(that's being
Actually, it's Rishi. You wouldn't believe how often I get called Risha
though, it's astounding. :)
But yes, that is essentially I was trying to say. I recall about two
years ago when Quake was just announced, ID said that they planned to
release for all platforms around the same time. Be it MacOS, Dos, Win
95, Win 3.1, you name it. Things didn't quite turn out that way. Had
they worked closely with a company such as Lion to minimize lag time,
I'm sure that they would have more happy Mac customers and would sell
more copies. It may have cost them more money in development costs but
they'd sell more in the long run which would offset any development
costs.
Nobody wants to buy a year old game, speaking of which, how well did
MacDoom II sell anyways? More than 10,000 copies?
> I can understand why Risha would be very pessimistic about Id's ports.
> Id seems to have a history of taking a long time to port their games to
> the mac,and when they are ported,they have a tendency to not be very good.
Quite right. Wolfenstein 3D was 4 years, surely we don't need PowerMacs
to run Wolfenstein! Doom II, 2 years. Hexen--6 months but it was based
on the MacDoom engine so Presage had less work to do than they would if
they were porting the game from scratch. Based on Wolfenstein 3D and
Doom, why shouldn't I think that Quake will take similar amounts of
time? As for the quality of ports, I believe that Doom II was one of
Lion's first games on the Macintosh so they were fairly inexperienced.
As Wing Commander IV shows, the quality of work from Lion has improved
substantially. If ID gets Lion to do the port, I'm sure it will be
playable on 7100-80s. If ID gets Presage to do the port, forget about
it. We'll need one of those 240 mhz 604 based machines that are due
out to get at least 5 fps in 320 x 200 without pixel doubling (okay so
that's exaggeration and pessimissm). :)
---
Rishi Gupta
risg...@cyberus.ca
Visit my Mac Wing Commander IV Page at
http://www.cyberus.ca/~risgupta/macwciv
Bruce Burkhalter
mren...@earthlink.net (Ty Klein) wrote:
> I think that what Risha is trying to say is that it can't get *finished*
> until it gets *started*. Wanting to do a port,and actually doing the port
> are two different things. 3D Realms may want to do a port,but if they
> don't start it won't ever get finished. Even if they start doing the port
> by August,and you figure it will 5-6 months to complete it(that's being
> optimistic) then you can expect that it won't be out until 1Q 97.
To extrapolate a Mac Quake ship date of Q1 1999 because of what is going
with a Mac port of Duke does not make any sense. If it isn't clear, Duke
has nothing to do with Quake and vice versa.
> 6 months isn't all that bad,but if you've been reading any of the posts
> in this newsgroup about Machexen you'll see that a large majority of
> people were seriously disappointed with the port.
I think the main issue (correct me if I am wrong) is one of performance.
Given our experience with Doom, that could be fixed relatively easily.
> I can understand why Risha would be very pessimistic about Id's ports.
> Id seems to have a history of taking a long time to port their games to
> the mac,and when they are ported,they have a tendency to not be very good.
I think the port of Doom was good. It is fast and in hi-res which the PC
version isn't. It had a couple ugly interface things that were not up to
us. There was also a problem with pausing that was fixed in a patch.
Hexen came out within a reasonable time from the PC version. The only
other game that id has ported is Wolf 3D. I didn't play that so I can't
comment. I would say that is a very small sample size with which to claim
it will take 2.5 years to port Quake.
> > All I am saying is that making outlandish posts that are not accurate and
> > are not based in fact is not a smart thing to do.
>
> I'd agree with that!
Thank you. :)
Douglas Grounds
<ch...@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote:
> Quite right. Wolfenstein 3D was 4 years, surely we don't need PowerMacs
> to run Wolfenstein! Doom II, 2 years. Hexen--6 months but it was based
> on the MacDoom engine so Presage had less work to do than they would if
> they were porting the game from scratch. Based on Wolfenstein 3D and
> Doom, why shouldn't I think that Quake will take similar amounts of
> time? As for the quality of ports, I believe that Doom II was one of
> Lion's first games on the Macintosh so they were fairly inexperienced.
> As Wing Commander IV shows, the quality of work from Lion has improved
> substantially. If ID gets Lion to do the port, I'm sure it will be
> playable on 7100-80s. If ID gets Presage to do the port, forget about
> it. We'll need one of those 240 mhz 604 based machines that are due
> out to get at least 5 fps in 320 x 200 without pixel doubling (okay so
> that's exaggeration and pessimissm). :)
DOOM II was NOT one of Lion's first conversions to the Mac. In fact, my
first game (I did most of the programming on DOOM II, but none of the
networking/modem code) was Might and Magic I in 1987. Lion has converted
the following to Macintosh:
Super Wing Commander / Origin
Wing Commander III / Origin
Wing Commander IV / Origin
DOOM II / id & GT
Ultimate DOOM / id & GT
Mario Teaches Typing CD / MacPlay
Personally, I have about 4 other titles for the Macintosh. So no, DOOM II
was nowhere near our first conversion.
Second, I don't know what you're so upset about. There ARE a few things
I'll do differently next time, but look at what we DID do:
Optimized 68K renderer/blitter
Optimized PPC renderer/blitter (You won't believe who helped with
this, so I'm not going to tell you.)
Low Res Mac = High Res DOS (DOOM II / Mac = highest resolution of
ANY DOOM version on ANY platform that I have seen, even
a year after we released it.)
Semi-Configurable Keys (Next time, we'll do this better.)
PC to Mac connectivity via modem & IPX.
Mac to Mac connectivity via a number of methods.
Compatability with PC WADs so users would have TONS of WAD files.
So - tell me, what did we do so badly that you make the comment that
"...they were fairly inexperienced." I just don't buy it.
P.S. Sorry about Bruce and I both rebutting your comments in one week.
Douglas Grounds
President
Lion Entertainment, Inc.
> I do speak on behalf of my employer.
Ty Klein
che...@eden.com (Bruce Burkhalter) wrote:
> In article <mrenigma-270...@news.earthlink.net>,
> mren...@earthlink.net (Ty Klein) wrote:
>
> > I think that what Risha is trying to say is that it can't get *finished*
> > until it gets *started*. Wanting to do a port,and actually doing the port
> > are two different things. 3D Realms may want to do a port,but if they
> > don't start it won't ever get finished. Even if they start doing the port
> > by August,and you figure it will 5-6 months to complete it(that's being
> > optimistic) then you can expect that it won't be out until 1Q 97.
>
> To extrapolate a Mac Quake ship date of Q1 1999 because of what is going
> with a Mac port of Duke does not make any sense. If it isn't clear, Duke
> has nothing to do with Quake and vice versa.
I know that. But it seems to always take around 8months to 1 year for a
port from PC-Mac,so I don't think that early to mid 97 for Quake is a bad
guess.
>
> > 6 months isn't all that bad,but if you've been reading any of the posts
> > in this newsgroup about Machexen you'll see that a large majority of
> > people were seriously disappointed with the port.
>
> I think the main issue (correct me if I am wrong) is one of performance.
> Given our experience with Doom, that could be fixed relatively easily.
It mainly was an issue of performance. But I think that the thing that
bugs so many mac users about the speed is that it's so easy to fix,yet
presage didn't bother to fix it! It makes it seem like they really don't
care at all about the quality of the Mac version.
> > I can understand why Risha would be very pessimistic about Id's ports.
> > Id seems to have a history of taking a long time to port their games to
> > the mac,and when they are ported,they have a tendency to not be very good.
>
> I think the port of Doom was good. It is fast and in hi-res which the PC
> version isn't. It had a couple ugly interface things that were not up to
> us. There was also a problem with pausing that was fixed in a patch.
> Hexen came out within a reasonable time from the PC version. The only
> other game that id has ported is Wolf 3D. I didn't play that so I can't
> comment. I would say that is a very small sample size with which to claim
> it will take 2.5 years to port Quake.
Doom was a pretty good port except for the interface issues. I don't
think it will take 2.5 years to port Quake though. Like I said before,I
think that it will be out in mid 97.
>
> > > All I am saying is that making outlandish posts that are not accurate and
> > > are not based in fact is not a smart thing to do.
> >
> > I'd agree with that!
>
> Thank you. :)
You're welcome!
Thunderbolt
> The main disappointment
> lies in the fact that Quake is basically Doom III.
Well, actually it's doom 4 if you want to get tecnical.... final doom
is out now... big whoop.
(Yea, 64 levels on the same old engine for DOS).
-Thunderbolt
Jan Melander
<espr...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>In article <31CEF7...@freenet.carleton.ca> Rishi Gupta,
>ch...@freenet.carleton.ca writes:
>>I don't really care though, we'll have Dark Forces II at least a year
>>before MacQuake and it will *KILL* Quake and all it's competitors.
>
> Why do you think this? Does it have better technology, a better story,
>or both? I've seen Quake, which seems to be _technologically_ superior to
>every 1st person game _currently_ out, but it's irritating because it has
>a) No story; this was cute in DOOM, but now id seems to positively revel
>in the fact that "we don't need stories to sell our product." b) No
>ducking; this is a minor gripe, but really, how much trouble would it
>have been to include this after building the great engine? c) The weapons
>are still centered on the screen, not angled like in DF or Duke Nukem.
>You ever try firing a grenade launcher with the butt of the weapon
>centered on the middle of your chest? Let me tell you, it doesn't tickle.
> Well, these were just my impressions of Quake, but if DF2 can do these
>things better, then I'll be won over. I just haven't heard anything about
>DF2, so I'm completely in the dark (Ha Ha!) about it.
Then You should checkout http://www.3dg.com/JediKnight/
Cheers,
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jan Melander
WM-Data
jan.me...@got.wmdata.se
---------------------------------------------------------------
Q:Why didn't Intel name their CPU 586 instead of Pentium?
A:When they added 100 to 486 the readout said 585.9999999999765,
and it didn't fit on the chip.
Petteri Sulonen
<ch...@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote:
> Nobody wants to buy a year old game, speaking of which, how well did
> MacDoom II sell anyways? More than 10,000 copies?
A month or so ago I talked with somebody who runs a local Mac store (with
a fairly good and up-to-date selection of games). Guess what's the top
seller? Marathon 2? Wing Commander III? Hexen? X-Wing? Naah. DOOM II.
The thing is that most folks don't play that many games. The one game they
_have_ heard about is DOOM. So when they decide they want "a game", they
go and buy it. It sells like hot cakes. Quake will most likely do too, no
matter when it comes out.
-- Petteri
--
*** psul...@helsinki.fi * Home page: http://www.cs.hut.fi/~psu/ ***
*** A-10 Attack! FAQ Page: http://www.seittipaja.fi/A10FAQ/ ***
Parafilmus
>In article <crichard....@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu>,
>cric...@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu (Chris Richards) wrote:
>> Fan...@Ultranet.com (Fred Anderson) writes:
>> >maximum of four players,
>>
>> Sixteen, not four.
>Oh really? Check your copy of the shareware again. 4.
Uh.. yes, Fred. Really.
(Where did you come up with that notion in the first place?)
The maximum number of players in a Quake netgame is sixteen.
The number is entered at the command prompt.
If you don't enter a number, four is the default maximum.
It's all clearly explained in the readme files, if you'd bother to
look before spreading misinformation.
Of course, that might be a bit irrelevant here, since macQuake won't
be using command-line options anyhow.
-R. Ryan Clark
Chris Richards
>In article <crichard....@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu>,
>cric...@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu (Chris Richards) wrote:
>> Fan...@Ultranet.com (Fred Anderson) writes:
>>
>> >People on the PC side who have downloaded it are really having gripes
>> >about Quake now.
>>
>> Like almost every game, there seem to be several camps: there are
>> people who love it, people who are disappointed, and people who won't
>> be happy unless the game makes them coffee and drives them to work in
>> the morning (examples of the latter folks could be seen in some of
>> the bile hurled at EV in this newsgroup). The main disappointment
>> lies in the fact that Quake is basically Doom III.
>Yeah, but there's a disproportionate size of the third kind.
Probably because Quake was hyped nearly beyond the limits of human
endurance. One thing I will agree with though is that Duke 3D
changed what a lot of people are looking for in a 1st person 3D
game -- static non-descript worlds are on there way out and real-
world situations are the rage. I think a lot of people were
disappointed in Quake because of this.
>> >Quake is missing the oomph promised and Id just kept
>> >dropping features from the game.
>>
>> The main features are all there: improved lighting, polygon world,
>> scriptable actions, and better net play, though scriptable actions
>> aren't possible in the shareware version so no one knows how that'll
>> turn out. A lot of the bells and wistles were dropped like custom
>> player textures and speaking into the game world, though.
>Guess what? None of that stuff will be in the registered version!
The custom textures and speaking won't be; the rest is already there
are is disabled for the shareware version.
>> >It's only got co-op and deathmatch,
>>
>> It also has team play where players with the same color pants don't
>> hurt each other. id has alway said that you could put in your own
>> game formats with QuakeC, though if it's so easy it is disappointing
>> that they wouldn't have put a few in.
>Quake C won't work with the registered version.
What are you talking about? Of course it will. Look at Carmack's
work log where he talks about releasing tools to do just that. I
don't know where you got your information, but I hope you kept the
receipt.
>> >maximum of four players,
>>
>> Sixteen, not four.
>Oh really? Check your copy of the shareware again. 4.
Then how are people playing 16 person net games? The connect limit is
settable by whomever is running the server. The default may be four,
but the maximum isn't (incidentally, you can see how many people are
connected to quake internet servers on some of the web sites that
show what servers are up -- and the max on all of them is 16). id has
said that the networking limit is 16 at the moment for stability's
sake, but should be lifted to whatever the server can handle in the
future.
>> >nine weapons (mostly duplicates),
>>
>> True, though the grenade launcher is pretty cool.
>It takes too long to blow up and glows too brightly.
I like the glowing, and the fact that it explodes on contact with an
enemy makes it useful even if it took 20 minutes to blow up.
>> >and no action
>> >button.
>>
>> I don't think this is such a bad thing. I didn't like it at first, but
>> after a while, realizes that there isn't much difference between walking
>> up to a door and pushing a button vs walking into the door to open it.
>> Plus, the latter allows you to activate things from any angle, such as
>> pressing a button with your back while fighting.
>As if accidentally opening a door that's hiding several monsters is a good
>thing?
If you didn't want to open it, what did you run into it for? I
personally like this feature after playing for a while, though at
first I was as against it as you seem to be. A matter of preference
I suppose, since it has its good and bad points.
>Pathways Into Darkness had this same setup, but Bungie did good on
>this and made it so there weren't many doors except for places where they
>wanted this to happen.
That would be one approach. Another would be to learn to control what
you bang into. I mean, you don't see Riker slamming into doors by
accident on the Enterprise and then cursing the designers for leaving
out an opener switch, do you?
>> >By the time Id actually comes out with the full version of Quake
>> >which can be edited and networked to the extent that was promised,
>> >LucasArts will have released DF 2 and X-Wing vs. Tie.
>>
>> I'm confused here -- the full version is due out in 4 to 6 weeks. There
>> will undoubtedly be patches if that's what you mean, and some of the
>> networking code appears to need a good shakedown, but I don't think
>> we're talking 1Q97 at any rate.
>There will be the registered version in a month or two. The actual retail
>version with some of the features that Id has promised won't be out until
>the middle of next year.
id makes a point of promising absolutely nothing, stating emphatically
that anything they say could change. The registered version is the
full version -- the retail version will be the sequel. What actually
makes its way into DF2 et al remains to be seen, so save the comparisons
until then.
Chris R
John Alexander Chapman
> Fan...@Ultranet.com (Fred Anderson) writes:
> The main disappointment lies in the fact that Quake is basically Doom III.
Hear, hear. There was all this stuff about hand-to-hand combat, this
hammer that you could use a different way for every day of the year, RPG
elements (a package that you trade with someone, sacrifices to demons,
dang it, just OBJECTS THAT DON'T OPEN DOORS OR KILL STUFF would be really
cool. Oh well. We got manse coming for us, and maybe Bungie's next game
will have (read: if Bungie does a 1pp game they must have lest they enter
my Tarantinoid-flash-in-the-pan category) some more of that lovely
Pathways (or better, more sophisticated) stuff in it.), and just danged
complex object and character behavior. I see none of that. Yes, the
levels can do nifty things, platforms can float, but it's nothing
inspiring. Hey, weren't they originally talking about this being like the
ultimate MUD? Quake servers running on UNIX boxes hosting hundreds of
people playing this sophisticated role-playing game? Lord, id needs to
learn to keep Romero's damn mouth shut.
Damn it. Well, at least it's really pretty, and will probably be the
end-all and be-all for the firefight deathmatch genre. I hope it is. No
matter how much it kills the future of the 1pp run and whallop your
friends with horrendously powerful armament genre I wish it did it more.
Because I'd like one really wholly nice game like that, and then I'd like
it to be over. The whole set has too much carried over from Wolfenstien
3D, this crazy 3-verb vocabulary (run, activate object/door/platform,
shoot) and because of this doesn't richly portray any sort of
experience--your interaction is horrendously flat and limited--and it
fails to speak to my soul (like Flight Unlimited, Pilotwings, Trinity,
and all those damned pretty games do). And no longer so well speaks to my
endocrine system (in 99% of situations killing the beasts in these games
is just a monotonous chore, not a challenge). I just wish the genre would
go out with an earth-shattering kaboom that mandated that everybody else
sit down and change the paradigm.
Maybe I'm just getting old.
> True, though the grenade launcher is pretty cool.
Yeah, that's probably going to be pretty fun the first so many times,
popping a grenade down some stairs into a hall and hiding and watching
the body parts fly out with blood trailing behind them. The trailing
blood really adds that certain viscerality that every other 1pp game has
lacked.
As for the rest of the weapons, though, I do think that it's pretty weak.
What the hell? Choices, according to my understanding: Big boom, bigger
boom, fast stream of kill, huge boom, huge, fast boom. Marathon 2 is
about the only one of these games where I ever caught myself really
making a weapon decision based on anything other than ammo supply and
criticality of situation. Nice subtle play there. But in Quake you start
with a friggin' SHOTgun. mm. fun. Pleah. Sorta like all those people who
just dig keying in IDDQD and killing a buncha stuff.
> Agreed about Cthon. The scriptable nature of traps is one thing in
> Quake's favor over Doom, but I agree that Quake is pretty close to Doom
> in terms of gameplay. The real advantages of Quake rest in its
> programmability with QuakeC and in the levels that can be built using
> real 3D archetecture, and neither of those can be assessed at the
> moment with only the shareware version available.
I can vouch for the 3D architecture with the shareware version. It's
nice. Very nice. But then, the scenery is usually the most exciting thing
I find in these games anymore. See previous about the chore of killing.
As for QuakeC, I thought it was cool but now I really don't think it'll
be anything particularly amazing unless you can rework the user interface
and put in some non-killing-oriented behaviors and an inventory.. and
maybe some subtlety in the fighting (imagine if someone could program in
a virtua-fighter style (if not so extensive) attack system in QuakeC.
Then you could have something neat. Good bots and maybe you have kung fu
movie kinda mass fights and then maybe it will get really cool. But I
don't see how it's possible with pick weapon-aim weapon-shoot Quake.
What I do find interesting about Quake as a doomy game is the monsters.
The Rottweilers pretty much invalidate the sorts of strategies that could
get you through Doom easily. Monsters charging you with weapons make
things a lot more interesting. I thought the same of Marathon's fighters
until I learned how to punch them to death.. to stupid, too easy to throw
off balance. And the nice death animations make blowing stuff away
marginally interesting again.
Whatever. Just another game by a bunch of great programmers who make
wonderfully realistic worlds for the technology and can't get over
Satan/gory meathead occultism and killing nameless faceless military-dressed
humans--or who really believe that that's where their market is and don't
want to let those kids down.
--
---
Alex Chapman
na...@owlnet.rice.edu http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~nabob
a little bird just told me that my time is nearly through
Bruce Burkhalter
> But yes, that is essentially I was trying to say. I recall about two
> years ago when Quake was just announced, ID said that they planned to
> release for all platforms around the same time. Be it MacOS, Dos, Win
> 95, Win 3.1, you name it. Things didn't quite turn out that way. Had
> they worked closely with a company such as Lion to minimize lag time,
> I'm sure that they would have more happy Mac customers and would sell
> more copies. It may have cost them more money in development costs but
> they'd sell more in the long run which would offset any development
> costs.
To be honest, I think it would have been a bad idea to try and support all
of the platforms immediately. id realized that as well. The logistical
problems are enormous. It would cost a *lot* more money. It would slow
down development and the PC version would take even longer. It is hard
doing a DOS and Windows version at the same time. They may lose some Mac
sales but they might lose even more PC sales if the game were delayed
longer. The lost sales would not make up for the extra development
costs. I know how much it costs to develop a game.
We worked on Wing IV Mac while Origin was working on the PC version. Even
though the code was similar to Wing III and they were very far along, it
was still difficult. Integrating the latest versions of the source took
about a week. We would purposely hold off putting in the new code because
we knew there would be another source release a week later. Simultaneous
development is very difficult.
> Nobody wants to buy a year old game, speaking of which, how well did
> MacDoom II sell anyways? More than 10,000 copies?
Mac Doom has sold *very* well. It is still in all of the top 10 Mac game
sales charts.
Rishi, you make all of these claims but I don't see justifications behind
them. Do you know what it takes to develop cutting edge game software?
Do you know the issues involved in porting games? Do you know how much it
costs to develop and/or port a game? Do you know what issues arise from
simultaneous development? Do you know what the sales figures are for
various games and much goes to the developer? Again, I don't mean to rip
on you but it is extremely frustrating to see statements such as yours
that seem to be based on wishful thinking. For example, you say "It may
have cost them more money in development costs but they'd sell more in the
long run which would offset any development costs." What basis do you use
for this? It's not that I don't want you to post, because you have raised
some very relevant issues. It is simply an issue of accuracy and
fairness.
I know a lot of this is the feeling that the Mac is not treated seriously
or as a second class citizen. I don't like it either. Instead of making
inaccurate statements and complaing about how bad the world is, do
positive things. Buy games you like (I know you already do this). Tell
publishers that you want their games on the Mac. Tell them you want them
now. Tell them what is bad about their Mac version (I know you do that
too :) ). [Boy I should try out for "Up With People"] ;)
> Quite right. Wolfenstein 3D was 4 years, surely we don't need PowerMacs
> to run Wolfenstein! Doom II, 2 years. Hexen--6 months but it was based
> on the MacDoom engine so Presage had less work to do than they would if
> they were porting the game from scratch. Based on Wolfenstein 3D and
> Doom, why shouldn't I think that Quake will take similar amounts of
> time?
Let's fair. It did not take 4 years to develop Wolf 3D Mac. It took less
than a year once it was decided to do it. I promise you it will not take
id 3 years to decide to do Mac Quake. Doom II came out 8 months after the
PC version.
We can flip it around if you want and look at Lucas. Disclaimer: I like
Lucas and their games. I also think Aaron has done a great job with
them. My dates my be off but I think they are close. X-Wing came out 3
years after the PC version. Rebel Assault I came out a year after the PC
version. Dark Forces came out 8 months the PC version. Why would you
expect Dark Forces II to come out before Quake since it isn't even out on
the PC version yet?
> As for the quality of ports, I believe that Doom II was one of
> Lion's first games on the Macintosh so they were fairly inexperienced.
> As Wing Commander IV shows, the quality of work from Lion has improved
> substantially. If ID gets Lion to do the port, I'm sure it will be
> playable on 7100-80s. If ID gets Presage to do the port, forget about
> it. We'll need one of those 240 mhz 604 based machines that are due
> out to get at least 5 fps in 320 x 200 without pixel doubling (okay so
> that's exaggeration and pessimissm). :)
Doug already answered this part. :) Just to let people know, I have been
at Lion for a year. My first project was Wing III Mac (Mac Doom shipped
right after I got there). I have been programming the Mac for 10 years.
I spent the previous 7 years at Berkeley Systems where I worked on every
version of After Dark and was the project manager. I don't like cheese
but I like the idea of cheese.
Your turn to rip on me, Rishi. :)
Bruce Burkhalter
Lion Entertainment (developer of Wing Commander III & IV Macintosh)
che...@eden.com
Timothy A. Seufert
Fan...@Ultranet.com (Fred Anderson) wrote:
>People on the PC side who have downloaded it are really having gripes
>about Quake now. Quake is missing the oomph promised and Id just kept
>dropping features from the game.
It's more correct to say that the game turned out to be completely
different from the original concept. However, that's probably their fault
for allowing themselves to talk about blue-sky concepts before beginning
work on an actual game.
> It's only got co-op and deathmatch,
>maximum of four players,
The maximum of four players is a shareware limitation. Once you buy the
game you get practically unlimited players in netgames. I believe the
limit will be 16, but the real limit is based upon how good a computer you
run the server on. Once they release the source to the server, you will
be able to recompile it with a different limit.
> nine weapons (mostly duplicates),
OTOH, there are thirteen unique monsters (none of this same monster with a
different color junk), not counting the boss monsters. And if you ask me,
eight weapons (not nine, BTW) are plenty.
> and no action
>button.
You don't need one.
> By the time Id actually comes out with the full version of Quake
>which can be edited and networked to the extent that was promised,
>LucasArts will have released DF 2 and X-Wing vs. Tie.
This is doubtful. Shareware Quake is out now, and there just aren't that
many differences between it and full Quake (the full thing just has more
levels and enables the disabled features). Apparently the CDs are already
close to or actually in mass duplication. (The CD contains the shareware,
and then you call id to pay for a code which decrypts the full version,
also on the CD.)
> I can't even get it
>to allow people to jump between netgames as was promised.
It wasn't promised, it was mentioned. Apparently won't happen until Quake 2.
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
|Tim Seufert, bwa...@cats.ucsc.edu | UselessWastedSpace(tm) |
| "I never give them hell. I just tell the truth, and they |
| think it is hell." -Harry S Truman |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Bruce Burkhalter
> I know that. But it seems to always take around 8months to 1 year for a
> port from PC-Mac,so I don't think that early to mid 97 for Quake is a bad
> guess.
I never disagreed with that. I disagree with the Q1 1999 date.
> It mainly was an issue of performance. But I think that the thing that
> bugs so many mac users about the speed is that it's so easy to fix,yet
> presage didn't bother to fix it! It makes it seem like they really don't
> care at all about the quality of the Mac version.
I don't know the inside story but I would be *very* suprised if they said
"It's just the Mac version so who cares?." Presage is a good company and
has very good people working there. It may also have been more difficult
than I thought it was to fix the speed problem. I do know both Presage
and id are aware of people's sentiments about the performance of Mac
Hexen.
Yoshinori Hirano
> I think the port of Doom was good. It is fast and in hi-res which the PC
> version isn't. It had a couple ugly interface things that were not up to
> us. There was also a problem with pausing that was fixed in a patch.
> Hexen came out within a reasonable time from the PC version. The only
> other game that id has ported is Wolf 3D. I didn't play that so I can't
> comment. I would say that is a very small sample size with which to claim
> it will take 2.5 years to port Quake.
I think the port of Doom II was GREAT. It was playable with 68040
machines and amazingly fast and smooth with PowerPC 66mhz(+256 cache) and
above. I am a very satisfied customer. Lion Entertainment, Keep up the
good work!
Yoshinori Hirano
hyo...@PO-Box.McGill.Ca
McGill University
Rishi Gupta
> We can flip it around if you want and look at Lucas. Disclaimer: I like
> Lucas and their games. I also think Aaron has done a great job with
> them. My dates my be off but I think they are close. X-Wing came out 3
> years after the PC version. Rebel Assault I came out a year after the PC
> version. Dark Forces came out 8 months the PC version. Why would you
> expect Dark Forces II to come out before Quake since it isn't even out on
> the PC version yet?
Since Dark Forces, LucasArts has cut down lag time dramatically. Full
Throttle wasn't all that long (not more than 3 or 4 months), Rebel
Assault II's delay was negligible, Afterlife was released the same day
for both platforms. Admirable for a company which used to dislike the
Mac. I think they gained the loyalty of Mac users when they had their
"Big Mac Attack" campaign.
> Doug already answered this part. :) Just to let people know, I have been
> at Lion for a year. My first project was Wing III Mac (Mac Doom shipped
> right after I got there). I have been programming the Mac for 10 years.
> I spent the previous 7 years at Berkeley Systems where I worked on every
> version of After Dark and was the project manager. I don't like cheese
> but I like the idea of cheese.
I think I accidentally e-mailed my response to Doug instead of posting
it so I guess I'll state here what I said to him:
(in response to Doom II not being Lion's first game): Sorry, I didn't
know, I should have said first well publicised game. I hadn't heard of
Lion before Doom II.
(in response to we're not inexperienced): I didn't mean for it to sound
so negative, I meant inexperienced then relative to today (not
inexperienced as an absolute term). Case in point, compare Super Wing
Commander and Wing Commander III to Wing Commander IV and tell me that
Lion hasn't gained experience in porting games to the Mac. :) This is
actually a compliment in a misguided form. :)
(in response to what am I so upset about): I'm not upset. In case you
all haven't noticed, I actually like Wing Commander IV and I'm am
pleased with Lion's job with it.
What bugs me is that I give heaps of praise to Lion about Wing Commander
IV and then when I say one slightly negative thing, that's what people
pay attention to. I'll bet in my Wing Commander IV review on my web
page, everyone paid attention to the single negative remark I made about
Wing Commander IV and ignored rest of the review (which was praise). Oh
well, as the adage goes "When I say something good, nobody remembers,
when I say something bad, nobody forgets". :)
---
Rishi Gupta: risg...@cyberus.ca
Visit my Mac Wing Commander IV page at
http://www.cyberus.ca/~risgupta/macwciv
Thunderbolt
> Lion has converted
> the following to Macintosh:
>
> Super Wing Commander / Origin
> Wing Commander III / Origin
> Wing Commander IV / Origin
> DOOM II / id & GT
> Ultimate DOOM / id & GT
> Mario Teaches Typing CD / MacPlay
And you seem to be getting better with every port. Doom II was a
little flakey in performance, but WCIV is simply amazing.
(It could also have something to do with the quality of the game that
Lion recieves prior to the port =)
Keep up the good work, and hope that Lion will be porting Duke or
Quake instead of that company that ported Hexen <BLAH>.
gra...@cc1.unt.edu
>What bugs me is that I give heaps of praise to Lion about Wing Commander
>IV and then when I say one slightly negative thing, that's what people
>pay attention to.
Message to Mr. Grounds and Mr. Burkhalter of Lion, "IF YOU CAN'T TAKE THE
HEAT, GET OUT OF THE KITCHEN!"
Let me say that I have not followed the development of the Doom genre games,
and that until very recently have never heard of Lion. Nor do I know
Rishi other than from his posts. So, from a relatively objective
perspective, I'm surprised at your replies to Rishi's criticism. You both
may be excellent programmers, but you could really work on you customer
relations.
A big part of what we do here is share reviews and critiques of games. I
don't think anyone benefits from a developer responding in a condescending
and patronizing manner. No, many of us may not know what all is involved in
developing games, but good grief, why would a developer of any product throw
that in the face of a customer. Especially a customer who has been
persuading many of us to run out and buy one of your products. Like Rishi
said, he has been raving about WCIV in this forum.
In conclusion, surely you guys have been in business long enough to know
that not everyone's going to like your products, or even be gentle in
criticisms. I would have expected criticism to be received in a much more
professional manner from a company that has been in the entertainment
business for any significant length of time.
Michael Graham
Spammer
] Optimized PPC renderer/blitter (You won't believe who helped with
] this, so I'm not going to tell you.)
]
This is a cruel tease!...
Sam
---
Roadkill has its seasons, just like anything
It's possums in the autum, and it's farm cats in the spring.
- Tom Waits "Murder in the Red Barn"
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This message was created and sent using the Cyberdog Mail System
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Wraithe
dgro...@lion-ent.com (Douglas Grounds) wrote:
(Bruce's post deleted)
> I'm not sure about the laughing part...
> But I agree wholeheartedly with Bruce. I think there are a LOT of people
> who are trying to make really good Mac games, and I think that a few have
> succeeded. At the same time, I feel like the work that Lion has done on
> other platforms has had much more user support than the work we've done on
> the Macintosh, even though almost every single Lion employee at least
> prefers the Mac (if not some weird symbiotic relationship with their Mac).
> What I mean is that if Macintosh owners do not encourage the developers
> and publishers who are working to put out great games, and support those
> developers and publishers by buying games, there just plain won't be any
> Mac games. Not from Lion, not from Lucas, and not even from Bungie. And
> that's the truth. Revenue drives any company, and by increasing revenues
> you increase the size of the company and its capabilities. Period.
> I think everyone who has a Mac (*this is being typed on a Duo 280 - an
> old, useless 68K-based Mac*) needs to support ALL the Mac developers and
> publishers when they do a good job. That includes id Software, Bungie,
> Lucas, Origin/EA, or MacPlay/Interplay. Without the support and dollars,
> the Mac community will no longer have anything to complain about.
> ...That's my $.02 for what it's worth. (Hey, how do you make a "cents"
> sign on a Mac, for Christ's sake?)
> Douglas Grounds
> President
> Lion Entertainment, Inc. (Bruce's boss)
Alt-4 = ¢ :) That's the "$" number key, so it makes sense, no? :)
While you're at it, have a look at the "Key Caps" Control Panel, some
very cool characters lurking in there.
Anyways, thanks for the most excellent posts, guys.
I will admit that, I, too, have been, in my day scathing about MacDoom,
and it's brethren. Most of this is because I didn't like DOOM on the PC
either. Gimme Marathon, any day. Hell, for that matter, give me PID. :)
However, I hadn't realized that y'all were responsible for the most
excellent WCIII (and IV). I guess I should have put 2 and 2 together,
having seen all the discussions, but I didn't.
Since I found Wing to be just smokin' on my 8100/100, and Hexen to be a
dragging dog(the Demo, anyways), I'm going to conclude that something else
happened en route. Maybe I should turn RD off. (hell, I have 32Mb of RAM,
yes probably, I should. :)) Mebbe I'll give it another chance...if not,
well, I still haven't gone out and gotten WCIV, yet...:))
Anyways, I agree greatly with your comments, thanks to you folks at
Lion, those who want these games on the Mac, are getting them, and I
notice that the lead time is getting smaller, so we're getting closer to
simultaneous releases. Great work guys!
-Ian
+==========================================================================+
| "Ian".."Wraithe"...pick one | "We all enter this world in the same way: |
| Net: Ia...@gnu.ai.mit.edu | naked; screaming; soaked in blood. But if |
| IRC: Wraithe | you live your life right, that kind of |
|'81XLH "Breakaway bike" | thing doesn't have to stop there." -D.G. |
+==========================================================================+
Tigger
>
>Message to Mr. Grounds and Mr. Burkhalter of Lion, "IF YOU CAN'T TAKE THE
>HEAT, GET OUT OF THE KITCHEN!"
Which is exactly what most developers have done, unfortunately.
>So, from a relatively objective
>perspective, I'm surprised at your replies to Rishi's criticism. You both
>may be excellent programmers, but you could really work on you customer
>relations.
I don't know Rishi either, and while I know who Lion is, I don't have
any particular bias in their favor given that I've never played any of
their games (I'd already played the id games to death on the PC and I
have no interest in the Wing Commander series). And from my relatively
objective perspective, I don't think there's been anything wrong with
what Bruce and Doug have said. They've stood up for themselves and
corrected what appear to be false and/or groundless statements, without
insulting the person who made those statements. I give them a great
deal of credit for that.
>A big part of what we do here is share reviews and critiques of games.
A bigger part is flaming and bitching and whining and generally acting
like spoiled children. I've been participating on the net for nearly
ten years now. You'd think I'd be used to it, but I'm still amazed by
the volume of boorish, childish, selfish material that shows up every
single day.
And no, I'm not singling either Rishi or Michael out here. I've seen
much worse than I've seen in this thread from them or anyone else. I'm
just noting...
>I
>don't think anyone benefits from a developer responding in a condescending
>and patronizing manner.
Again, I don't see their messages as condescending. What would you
prefer? All sweetness and light? That's simply unrealistic, especially
in the face of the groundless vituperation that developers so often
endure when they dare to show themselves. I don't think it's
condescending for Doug and Bruce or anyone else to disagree with
someone, to correct erroneous statements, or to provide information.
If they acted egotistical or were insulting, that would be a different
story. But I at least haven't seen any of that. They've been a little
more forcefull in defending themselves than some might be, but they've
never crossed the line into undesirable behavior if you ask me.
>I would have expected criticism to be received in a much more
>professional manner from a company that has been in the entertainment
>business for any significant length of time.
Apparantly you are one of those who takes "the customer is always right"
literally, who believes that good customer service is achieved only
through kissing ass no matter what. I disagree. Customers run the
full spectrum of human beings. Some of them are real bastards who
need to be stood up to. Unfortunately the net seems to either attract
a higher percentage of those folks than exist in the general population,
or it just seems to bring out the worst in many people. By dealing
with such people (again, I'm not trying to comment on any one person)
firmly but politely and with reason and information, Bruce and Doug
have certainly earned my respect. And my business, if someone ever
contracts with them for a game that interests me (such as the Ultima
series - terribly unsubtle hint to Origin there...).
--
| Greg Orman gr...@pomona.edu |
| A man's best friends: a Harley, a Beretta and a Gund. |
Thunderbolt
> Since Dark Forces, LucasArts has cut down lag time dramatically. Full
> Throttle wasn't all that long (not more than 3 or 4 months), Rebel
> Assault II's delay was negligible, Afterlife was released the same day
> for both platforms.
Also, the Media Play that I work at has Mortimer for the mac..... but
I don't see a PC version in our store yet. =)
LucasArts may have lagged behind for however many years before X-Wing,
but look at the QUALITY! I would rather wait 8 months for an excellent
port than 2 for a bad one any day (Ala Hexen... I don't remember the
exact time that it took, but nearly all of us agree that the game is
damn slow)
-Thunedrbolt
Thunderbolt
> I do know both Presage
> and id are aware of people's sentiments about the performance of Mac
> Hexen.
Good. Mabey someone will actually do something about it.
-Thunderbolt
Aaron Giles
che...@eden.com (Bruce Burkhalter) wrote:
>We can flip it around if you want and look at Lucas. Disclaimer: I like
>Lucas and their games. I also think Aaron has done a great job with
>them. My dates my be off but I think they are close. X-Wing came out 3
>years after the PC version. Rebel Assault I came out a year after the PC
>version. Dark Forces came out 8 months the PC version.
Actally X-Wing was about 2 years (if you count the release of the CD-ROM
version -- and yes, that's cheating a bit) and Rebel 1 was about 8-9
months, but they were both originally released before our current Mac
support really got going. Since then we've been gradually getting better
(and Dark Forces was only 4 months off I should mention :-)
In order of PC release dates....
Day of the Tentacle - 2 years
Rebel Assault - ~9 months
Sam & Max - 1.5 years
X-Wing CD - 2 years
Dark Forces - 4 months
Full Throttle - 5 months
The Dig - 4 months
Rebel Assault 2 - 30 days
TIE CD - no comment
Indiana Jones & his Desktop Adventures - no comment
Afterlife - simultaneous
Mortimer & the Riddles of the Medallion - simultaneous
Outlaws - we'll see...
Jedi Knight - we'll see...
Aaron
--
Aaron Giles
agi...@sirius.com
Have brain, will use it: I speak for myself, not for my employer
Brian P. McCarty
In article <4qvmou$n...@larry.rice.edu>, na...@snowy.owlnet.rice.edu (John
Alexander Chapman) wrote:
> In article <crichard....@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu>,
> cric...@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu (Chris Richards) wrote:
>
> > Fan...@Ultranet.com (Fred Anderson) writes:
> > The main disappointment lies in the fact that Quake is basically Doom III.
>
> Hear, hear. There was all this stuff about hand-to-hand combat, this
> hammer that you could use a different way for every day of the year, RPG
> elements (a package that you trade with someone, sacrifices to demons,
> dang it, just OBJECTS THAT DON'T OPEN DOORS OR KILL STUFF would be really
Let me add my "hear hear". It would be reall cool if Bungie could combine
Martahon (walls at angles, stairs, fluids) and Pathways (inventory,
skills).
Kind of an up-to-date Ultima Underworld.
> cool. Oh well. We got manse coming for us, and maybe Bungie's next game
> will have (read: if Bungie does a 1pp game they must have lest they enter
> my Tarantinoid-flash-in-the-pan category) some more of that lovely
> Pathways (or better, more sophisticated) stuff in it.), and just danged
> complex object and character behavior. I see none of that. Yes, the
> levels can do nifty things, platforms can float, but it's nothing
> inspiring. Hey, weren't they originally talking about this being like the
> ultimate MUD? Quake servers running on UNIX boxes hosting hundreds of
> people playing this sophisticated role-playing game? Lord, id needs to
> learn to keep Romero's damn mouth shut.
>
> Damn it. Well, at least it's really pretty, and will probably be the
> end-all and be-all for the firefight deathmatch genre. I hope it is. No
> matter how much it kills the future of the 1pp run and whallop your
> friends with horrendously powerful armament genre I wish it did it more.
While there is a certain catharsis value in shoot first, shoot second,
and shoot third, maybe ask questions, it bores me pretty quick.
> Because I'd like one really wholly nice game like that, and then I'd like
> it to be over. The whole set has too much carried over from Wolfenstien
> 3D, this crazy 3-verb vocabulary (run, activate object/door/platform,
> shoot) and because of this doesn't richly portray any sort of
don't forget "pick up thing to shoot with, or to load intto object and shoot"
> experience--your interaction is horrendously flat and limited--and it
> fails to speak to my soul (like Flight Unlimited, Pilotwings, Trinity,
> and all those damned pretty games do). And no longer so well speaks to my
> endocrine system (in 99% of situations killing the beasts in these games
> is just a monotonous chore, not a challenge). I just wish the genre would
> go out with an earth-shattering kaboom that mandated that everybody else
> sit down and change the paradigm.
>
> Maybe I'm just getting old.
Maybe I am too...
[weapon stuff deleted]
> --
> ---
> Alex Chapman
> na...@owlnet.rice.edu http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~nabob
> a little bird just told me that my time is nearly through
Brian
would buy Mac Ultima Underword even if the port was only minimally adequate
--
Brian P. McCarty, N9IWP
e-mail:bri...@caledonia.polaristel.net
snail-mail:410 S. Ramsey, Apt. 4 Caledonia, MN 55921-1116
ICBM:43deg 38' 05" N 91deg 29' 48" W
Rishi Gupta
Debatable. Developer support for games or otherwise has never been higher.
> A bigger part is flaming and bitching and whining and generally acting
> like spoiled children. I've been participating on the net for nearly
> ten years now. You'd think I'd be used to it, but I'm still amazed by
> the volume of boorish, childish, selfish material that shows up every
> single day.
I'm not 100% sure if that is directed at me or not. If it is, I must
oppose it. The fact that I show a little pessimism in predicting a three
year delay doesn't mean that I'm acting like a spoiled child. Acting
like a spoiled child would be (excuse the profanity) "those f*ckers at ID
don't care about us Mac people, we have the best computers in the world
and they only made Quake for the PeeCee, well f*ck those a**holes".
Besides, we (Mac users) have the least toys. We *can't* act spoiled.
> full spectrum of human beings. Some of them are real bastards who
> need to be stood up to. Unfortunately the net seems to either attract
I'm sure that comment is not directed at me. If it is, I simply have
no response to it. I simply can't see how I can be a bastard. I haven't
insulted Lion once.
Again, it astounds me. I've praised Lion software in two sepearte
newsgroups, convinced at least three people to buy Wing Commander IV and
put up a web page in it's honour highly praising Lion and then I make one,
offhand, pessimistic comment NOT EVEN ABOUT LION and now I'm in a flamewar.
God, I love how Lion accepts praise. Maybe if I convince a few more
people to buy Wing Commander IV, they'll come up here and shoot me.
--
Rishi Gupta: risg...@cyberus.ca http://www.cyberus.ca/~risgupta/
Visit my Mac Wing Commander IV Page:
http://www.cyberus.ca/~risgupta/macwciv
Bruce Burkhalter
<ch...@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote:
> (in response to what am I so upset about): I'm not upset. In case you
> all haven't noticed, I actually like Wing Commander IV and I'm am
> pleased with Lion's job with it.
>
> What bugs me is that I give heaps of praise to Lion about Wing Commander
> IV and then when I say one slightly negative thing, that's what people
> pay attention to. I'll bet in my Wing Commander IV review on my web
> page, everyone paid attention to the single negative remark I made about
> Wing Commander IV and ignored rest of the review (which was praise). Oh
> well, as the adage goes "When I say something good, nobody remembers,
> when I say something bad, nobody forgets". :)
As I have said in previous posts, I don't like arguing with somebody who
says nice things about us and our games! I have no qualms with anything
that you have said about Wing IV or Doom (both good and bad). My only
complaints (and the start of all this mess), are your statements about
Quake for the Mac. I think they are incorrect and misleading. If you
don't believe me, there is nothing more I can do. Just try to be a little
optimistic. :)
Sorry if anything I said was hurtful.
Bruce Burkhalter
> Message to Mr. Grounds and Mr. Burkhalter of Lion, "IF YOU CAN'T TAKE THE
> HEAT, GET OUT OF THE KITCHEN!"
>
> and that until very recently have never heard of Lion. Nor do I know
> may be excellent programmers, but you could really work on you customer
> relations.
I guess you have missed our presence on this newsgroup for the past year.
I guess you missed all of the posts from people thanking us for being
online. I am not perfect but I think I help more than I hinder in this
newsgroup.
> A big part of what we do here is share reviews and critiques of games. I
> don't think anyone benefits from a developer responding in a condescending
> and patronizing manner. No, many of us may not know what all is involved in
> developing games, but good grief, why would a developer of any product throw
> that in the face of a customer. Especially a customer who has been
> persuading many of us to run out and buy one of your products. Like Rishi
> said, he has been raving about WCIV in this forum.
Please reread the messages in this thread. It is about Quake for the Mac
and the possible status of it. It is not about reviews or critiques of
games Lion has created. Complaints about or products have been aired and
both Doug and I acknowledge them (interface issues with Doom, slow
performance with Wing III, etc.) I do not believe I have been
condescending or patronizing. I have been strong and forceful in my
opinions but my goal is to inform, not denigrate.
When someone makes claims that I believe are incorrect or inaccurate, I
will post a rebuttal, especially when the issue is in an area I have some
expertise in. As you said, most people on this newsgroup don't understand
the development process. For precisely this reason I feel it is important
for me to correct assertations that I know (based on my experience and
knowledge of software development) are incorrect or inaccurate. I do not
consider this "throwing it in the face" of anyone. I am providing
justification for my position which I believe is relevant to the
discussion.
> In conclusion, surely you guys have been in business long enough to know
> that not everyone's going to like your products, or even be gentle in
> criticisms. I would have expected criticism to be received in a much more
> professional manner from a company that has been in the entertainment
> business for any significant length of time.
To reiterate, as far as I am concerned, this issue is about Quake for the
Mac. I accept criticism of products we do. In fact, it is a given that
people will not like parts of our programs. I want to hear what people
have to say, both good and bad, so we can use that information for future
products. I have said this many times in posts to this newsgroup. We
aren't perfect but we are trying to make great products people will enjoy.
Rishi Gupta
I don't think LucasArts should waste time on this game, won't it slow down
development of Jedi Knight for the Mac?
> Outlaws - we'll see...
> Jedi Knight - we'll see...
Before, LucasArts (the Mac division anyhow) was bogged down with porting
games like X-Wing, Sam and Max, Day of the Tentacle while at the same time
trying to get Rebel Assault II, AfterLife and so forth out within a
reasonable time of the PC version. I think that's an incredible feat.
Now that those old ports of games won't be bogging you down, perhaps Jedi
Knight will also be a dual release. :)
BTW: How many Mac programmers does LucasArts gave? I've only heard of
two, you and Brad Post.
Jason Fowler
> Again, it astounds me. I've praised Lion software in two sepearte
> newsgroups, convinced at least three people to buy Wing Commander IV and
> put up a web page in it's honour highly praising Lion and then I make one,
> offhand, pessimistic comment NOT EVEN ABOUT LION and now I'm in a flamewar.
The great(or not so great) thing about usenet is that you can say whatever
you want and thousands of people will listen. As you may or may not(very
likely) have noticed, there are a lot of impressionable readers here. If
you want to make beyond pessimistic comments about a product, fine. There
isn't a whole lot that can be done to stop you. But how can you complain
when someone counters your now public thoughts with logical ones?
Wow. I'm really over reacting here, but I'm getting tired of seeing posts
designed to hurt the reputation of a product or developer. Many people in
this group are now convinced that MacDOOM was a bad port because of posts
like yours.
> God, I love how Lion accepts praise. Maybe if I convince a few more
> people to buy Wing Commander IV, they'll come up here and shoot me.
Lion didn't flame you and your personal approval of WCIV is irrelevant.
Alex Rosenberg
dgro...@lion-ent.com (Douglas Grounds) wrote:
> Optimized PPC renderer/blitter (You won't believe who helped with
> this, so I'm not going to tell you.)
Since Doug won't say, I will.
The Lion folks came to the second Apple Games Kitchen, held in Austin, TX.
The person who helped them the most was Eric Traut. Eric wrote the dynamic
recompiling 68k emulator that's in all the PCI-based Power Macintoshes.
The pixel-doubling blitter is based on code I wrote for a "fire" screen
saver in C while I worked for Apple. I knew that the key optimization
involved the use of the rlwimi instruction. I didn't bother with PPC
assembly at the time because I was using IBM's xlC compiler for the
RS/6000, which happily generated the rlwimi instruction and the loop
overhead was well handled. Aaron Giles of LucasArts ported it to PowerPC
assembly the first night of that kitchen because CodeWarrior didn't (and
still doesn't) generate the rlwimi instruction for the code sequence used.
Aaron put that code on the kitchen's AppleShare server for everybody to
use (the reason I had given him the C code in the first place).
While modifying it for another product (Bungie's Marathon 2), Dave
Falkenburg and I changed the code to make more efficient use of registers
and make it a true leaf routine and use the red zone for temporary storage
(needed to build doubles). Eric Traut popped in and rescheduled the code
to be optimial for all current and planned PowerPC processors at the time.
This improved version was given back to Aaron, who refit it into Dark
Forces.
Eric took that version back into the Lion suite and plugged it into the
Doom code. He then went on to rework much of the vertical and horizontal
texture mappers to render up to 4 pixels at a time and write custom
versions of FixMul and FixDiv in PPC assembly for them. Quicksilver's
Robert Barris helped them by figuring out that an offscreen GWorld 640
pixels wide results in the worst case cache performance for vertical
rendering and came up with a solution for that.
The Apple Game Kitchens have involved some of the best talent in the
industry working together, and that's why they have been so successful.
------------------------------------------------------
| Alexander M. Rosenberg <mailto:al...@bungie.com>|
| Bungie Software <http://www.bungie.com> |
| Nobody cares what I say. |
Aaron Giles
ch...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Rishi Gupta) wrote:
>Aaron Giles (agi...@sirius.com) writes:
>> TIE CD - no comment
>
>I don't think LucasArts should waste time on this game, won't it slow down
>development of Jedi Knight for the Mac?
The majority of the flight sim games -- X-Wing, TIE Fighter, and X-Wing
vs. TIE -- are all done by another group that is totally separate from the
main LucasArts development teams. So whether or not TIE Fighter gets
ported has nothing to do with Jedi Knight's development.
>> Outlaws - we'll see...
>> Jedi Knight - we'll see...
>
>Before, LucasArts (the Mac division anyhow) was bogged down with porting
>games like X-Wing, Sam and Max, Day of the Tentacle while at the same time
>trying to get Rebel Assault II, AfterLife and so forth out within a
>reasonable time of the PC version. I think that's an incredible feat.
Hey, some of us felt it really important to clean up past history and get
these older games out on the Mac -- hell, Day of the Tentacle and Sam &
Max are pretty much my two all-time favorite LucasArts games! :-)
But I would hardly say we were "bogged down" with anything of the sort.
DOTT and SAM were both released between Full Throttle and Rebel 2 -- and I
don't think Rebel 2's release suffered from it. And X-Wing was a very
necessary precursor to releasing any of the flight sims on the Mac.
>Now that those old ports of games won't be bogging you down, perhaps Jedi
>Knight will also be a dual release. :)
We can only hope!
>BTW: How many Mac programmers does LucasArts gave? I've only heard of
>two, you and Brad Post.
Well, the Mac side of LucasArts looks like this....
Brad Post is the Mac programmer for Totally Games, which is the group that
does the flight sim games. He has the difficult job.
I'm the Mac programmer for everything else from Dark Forces forward
(excepting the flight sims of course). I have the easy job (compared to
Brad, anyways)
And I should mention that Dana Fong is our lead tester (who's been in a
constant testing crunch on Mac products for well over a year straight now
and certainly deserves special mention :-)
Butch Weber
>In article <31D2EC...@freenet.carleton.ca>, Rishi Gupta
><ch...@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote:
>
[snip]
As for the quality of ports, I believe that Doom II was one of
>> Lion's first games on the Macintosh so they were fairly inexperienced.
>> As Wing Commander IV shows, the quality of work from Lion has improved
>> substantially. If ID gets Lion to do the port, I'm sure it will be
>> playable on 7100-80s. If ID gets Presage to do the port, forget about
>> it. We'll need one of those 240 mhz 604 based machines that are due
>> out to get at least 5 fps in 320 x 200 without pixel doubling (okay so
>> that's exaggeration and pessimissm). :)
>
>DOOM II was NOT one of Lion's first conversions to the Mac. In fact, my
>first game (I did most of the programming on DOOM II, but none of the
>networking/modem code) was Might and Magic I in 1987. Lion has converted
>the following to Macintosh:
>
> Super Wing Commander / Origin
> Wing Commander III / Origin
> Wing Commander IV / Origin
> DOOM II / id & GT
> Ultimate DOOM / id & GT
> Mario Teaches Typing CD / MacPlay
>
>Personally, I have about 4 other titles for the Macintosh. So no, DOOM II
>was nowhere near our first conversion.
>
>Second, I don't know what you're so upset about. There ARE a few things
>I'll do differently next time, but look at what we DID do:
>
[list of things Lion did deleted ]
>
>So - tell me, what did we do so badly that you make the comment that
>"...they were fairly inexperienced." I just don't buy it.
>
>P.S. Sorry about Bruce and I both rebutting your comments in one week.
>
>Douglas Grounds
>President
>Lion Entertainment, Inc.
>
>> I do speak on behalf of my employer.
I want to jump to Lion's defense here. I think they did a bang-up job on
Doom/Doom II. They admittedly made some goofs (which Doug admits) but it
captures the look and feel of PC Doom pretty well. Sure I would like it
to run faster on my Centris 650, but I'm prety much at the bottom of the
food chain when it comes to supported machines, so I will live with it
until I'm ready to upgrade to a PPCP Mac. I remember when Doug was
porting M&M I - he used to post on GEnie about it. It would be great if
every port done could be a 100% true-to-Mac port, but time and the
original companies decisions may not allow that. Let's not get in the
habit of trashing every port taht comes along just because it doesn't take
advantage of every single Mac feature. One feature they did put in that
Doug didn't mention that I really appreciate was unlimited saves as
opposed to PC Doom's 8(?) slot limit.
Keep up the good work Lion.
Butch Weber
Rishi Gupta
Jason Fowler (joe...@a.crl.com) writes:
> Wow. I'm really over reacting here, but I'm getting tired of seeing posts
> designed to hurt the reputation of a product or developer. Many people in
> this group are now convinced that MacDOOM was a bad port because of posts
> like yours.
Please point out where I said MacDoom is a bad port.
I am most certainly not trying to hurt Lion's reputation or the reputation
of their employees. I fail to see how any of my posts have been designed
to hurt anyone's rep (except maybe my own now that it's come to this).
> Lion didn't flame you and your personal approval of WCIV is irrelevant.
Irrelevant to what? This is (now at least) a discussion about the quality
of Lion's ports, and I feel that WC IV was a good port as simple as that.
Why shouldn't I state my opinion? This is the Internet, everyone has an
opinion. :)
Let's drop this argument okay? What started out as a discussion about
MacQuake has now turned into a disccussion about Lion Software which will
very likely turn into an all out flamewar. We have no information about
MacQuake and it was wrong of me to pessimistic. If I have negatively
influenced anyone about Quake or about Lion Software, I apologize. Now I
will try to steer this thread into the right direction, here is what I
should have said (pressing history erase button):
Full version of Quake will be out in September, between now and then ID
will try to find a company to do the port. Since Quake is mostly pure C,
it will be very easy to convert and it will take six to eight months to
implement networking and texture mapping routines and for testing. It
should be out in Q2 1997 (Q3 if I'm beeing pessimistic).
Now why don't we all keep reading Next-Generation, IMG, Quake FAQs and
browsing the web and maybe we'll find some concrete info on MacQuake.
Spammer
]Let me say that I have not followed the development of the Doom genre
games,
]and that until very recently have never heard of Lion. Nor do I know
]Rishi other than from his posts. So, from a relatively objective
]perspective, I'm surprised at your replies to Rishi's criticism. You both
]may be excellent programmers, but you could really work on you customer
]relations.
]
]A big part of what we do here is share reviews and critiques of games. I
]don't think anyone benefits from a developer responding in a condescending
]and patronizing manner. No, many of us may not know what all is involved
in
]developing games, but good grief, why would a developer of any product
throw
]that in the face of a customer. Especially a customer who has been
]persuading many of us to run out and buy one of your products. Like Rishi
]said, he has been raving about WCIV in this forum.
]
]In conclusion, surely you guys have been in business long enough to know
]that not everyone's going to like your products, or even be gentle in
]criticisms. I would have expected criticism to be received in a much more
]professional manner from a company that has been in the entertainment
]business for any significant length of time.
]
]Michael Graham
]
I think their replies have been fine. This isn't the front page of the New
York Times, it's a newsgroup. I think both sides have been fairly blunt but
neither side has been actually rude, and I don't see either side offended.
:-]
Keep up the great work, Lion, and keep 'em in line Rishi!
Alex Chapman
In article <agiles-2906...@ppp032-sf3.sirius.com>,
agi...@sirius.com (Aaron Giles) wrote:
> Hey, some of us felt it really important to clean up past history and get
> these older games out on the Mac -- hell, Day of the Tentacle and Sam &
> Max are pretty much my two all-time favorite LucasArts games! :-)
Yes. Never got to spend enough time with DOTT to get to see too much, but
it's great. Excellent interface, too. As for Sam & Max, I've never made
such an idiot of myself chuckling in front of a computer screen before.
Sam: 1, 2, 3...
Shav-Ouhl: What're we fightin' for?
Sam: Just checking.
I'm not exactly sure how a company goes about assembling that much
non-linear silliness into a wafer of plastic. Nice smoothing, I might add.
Full Throttle never really excited me from the demo (other than in glitzy
multimedia bright flashing colors and nice animation), not as a game, and
The Dig seems like you might as well just put a movie on a CD. I hope that
older, lower-tech and better-designed stuff comes back.
> Brad Post is the Mac programmer for Totally Games, which is the group that
> does the flight sim games. He has the difficult job.
>
> I'm the Mac programmer for everything else from Dark Forces forward
> (excepting the flight sims of course). I have the easy job (compared to
> Brad, anyways)
Impressive.
David Salvador Flores
In article <dgrounds-270...@apm1-75.realtime.net>,
Douglas Grounds <dgro...@lion-ent.com> wrote:
>In article <31D2EC...@freenet.carleton.ca>, Rishi Gupta
><ch...@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote:
>
[deletia]
> Optimized PPC renderer/blitter (You won't believe who helped with
> this, so I'm not going to tell you.)
Aw, give us a hint at least. Was he a purple dinosaur?
-Dave
David Salvador Flores
In article <31D0B1...@AmbrosiaSW.com>,
Andrew Welch <and...@AmbrosiaSW.com> wrote:
>Douglas Grounds wrote:
>[--snip--]
[deletia]
>
>::sniff:: We don't count? ;)
Actually, you guys count the most IMHO (Well, you and Bungie).
Mealstrom was probably the first game that truly showed off
the Mac's capabilities and unique potential.
Its really depressing, actually, that at a time when PC's
were getting all the "kewl" games, there were plenty of
Macs in existence that could serve as a perfectly viable
platform for many of Ambrosia's current offerings. The
Mac IIci's and IIsi's of yesteryear could easily run
Maelstrom and Swoop, and probably EV and others. Its too
bad that Ambrosia was still in highschool, or whatever,
since Maelstrom was really the first Mac game that many
PC users wished were out for their system.
The Mac was "saddled" with only a 640x480 screen mode, no
320x200, so the machine was pushing around a lot of pixels.
Oddly enough, we had to wait for Ambrosia to come around
and realize that much of the attraction inherent in games is
visual, and if the Mac's gotta update a 640x480 pixel screen,
you might at well make the user aware of this by taking
full advantage of the amount of detail that this permits.
When Andrew Welch decided to put his little spaceships and
asteroids into a ray tracing program, he took what would
have been merely another Asteroids clone (albeit much
better than average in both twists and playability) and turned
it into a visual delight. This is undoubtedly one of the
principal reasons the game has remained a favorite piece
of shareware to this day.
>
>+--------------------------------------------------------------+
>| Andrew Welch - Thaumaturgist - Ambrosia Software, Inc. |
>+-------------------------------+------------------------------+
>| AOL-> Keyword: Ambrosia | http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/ |
>| CIS-> GO word: Ambrosia | ftp://ftp.AmbrosiaSW.com/ |
>+-------------------------------+------------------------------+
-Dave
(That's an extract from the first chapter of my upcoming book:
_How Ambrosia saved the Mac from Extinction, and Saved the World
From Domination by Bill Gates_.)
Tigger
In article <4r22e4$i...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
ch...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Rishi Gupta) wrote:
>Tigger (gr...@pomona.edu) writes:
>> Which is exactly what most developers have done, unfortunately.
>
>Debatable. Developer support for games or otherwise has never been higher.
I would certainly debate that. Having worked in computers for nearly
ten years now, I have found that the level of support from most developers
has gone down, and that the prices have gone up. As far as games are
concerned, I remember getting some pretty good support back during the
salad days with my Apple II. In my years on the Internet, I've seen
many developers for many platforms come and go, usally pretty quickly,
and almost always because of a vast outpouring of flames. Now, developer
presense on the 'net isn't the most important part of support, but it
certainly is nice.
>I'm not 100% sure if that is directed at me or not. If it is, I must
>oppose it. The fact that I show a little pessimism in predicting a three
>year delay doesn't mean that I'm acting like a spoiled child.
No, that and certain other statements I made were not directed at you.
I thought I said that a couple of times in my message, but perhaps I
wasn't clear enough. I was reacting to the general outpouring of boorish
behavior that seems to accompany the appearance of almost any developer
on the 'net. From what I have seen of your posts, you should not be
included in that group.
>Again, it astounds me. I've praised Lion software in two sepearte
>newsgroups, convinced at least three people to buy Wing Commander IV and
>put up a web page in it's honour highly praising Lion and then I make one,
>offhand, pessimistic comment NOT EVEN ABOUT LION and now I'm in a flamewar.
Well, my intention certainly wasn't to start a flame war. I was just
taking the opportunity to make some general comments about the state
of 'net society. My sincere apologies if I accidentally winged you (or
any other specific individual) in the process of taking my shots.
Tigger
In article <alexr-2906962259080001@news>, al...@bungie.com (Alex
Rosenberg) wrote:
>
> [details of an Apple Game Kitchen removed]
> [...]
>| Nobody cares what I say. |
Perhaps nobody at Bungie, but some of us out here find the sort of
"inside look" at the industry you just provided to be absolutely
fascinating. Thank you.
John McLaughlin
I think id has realised "hey, what could be a better advertisement
for a mac game than having the PC gamers salivating over their
shiny new Quake game?". They know that when they finally release
Quake for mac, it's going to sell like hotcakes (doom II did,
even though it couldn't compete with marathon or dark forces).
-John
Chris Richards
John McLaughlin <John.Mc...@cbr.dit.csiro.au> writes:
>I think id has realised "hey, what could be a better advertisement
>for a mac game than having the PC gamers salivating over their
>shiny new Quake game?".
I think they'd like to develop simultaneously for the Mac, but
just don't have the resources. There previous comments seem to
suggest this.
>They know that when they finally release
>Quake for mac, it's going to sell like hotcakes
I imagine it will -- having internet play built in is really
something. You just type CONNECT <IP.ADDRESS> at the console,
and you're connected to a Quake server. I've been playing over
a slip line for the last week or so, and can't believe how much
fun it is to have 4-16 players ready to play any time you want to.
The play is a little sluggish with ping times between 400 and 500,
but still a lot of fun.
>(doom II did,
>even though it couldn't compete with marathon or dark forces).
Be careful about what you mean by compete. I personally didn't
buy Dark Forces because I had played single-player Doom to death
and didn't think DF was different enough to warrant buying for
only single player (since they left out network connections
entirely). I did watch a friend play parts of it and was impressed
though, just not enough to buy it. And Marathon dropped the ball
pretty severely on modem play, particularly when compared to the
fact that Doom can connect to PC versions, which gives the Mac
player a much larger player base for multi-player gaming. Doom
competes very well in multi-player connectivity, which is to me
the strength of these 1st person 3-d games.
Chris R
Rishi Gupta
Tigger wrote:
> In article <4r22e4$i...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
> ch...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Rishi Gupta) wrote:
> >Debatable. Developer support for games or otherwise has never been higher.
>
> I would certainly debate that. Having worked in computers for nearly
> ten years now, I have found that the level of support from most developers
> has gone down, and that the prices have gone up. As far as games are
> concerned, I remember getting some pretty good support back during the
> salad days with my Apple II. In my years on the Internet, I've seen
> many developers for many platforms come and go, usally pretty quickly,
> and almost always because of a vast outpouring of flames. Now, developer
> presense on the 'net isn't the most important part of support, but it
> certainly is nice.
Oh, by "getting out of the kitchen" in your original post I thought you
meant that developers were leaving the Mac. If you meant that online
support and whatnot was going down, I'd wholeheartedly agree. Of course
you have companies like Origin, Lion, Bungie, Ambrosia, Papyrus,
Microprose, etc (just kidding about Microprose :> ) who maintain a very
strong online presence.
--
Rishi Gupta
risg...@cyberus.ca
Visit my Mac Wing Commander IV Page at
http://www.cyberus.ca/~risgupta/macwciv
Rishi Gupta
John McLaughlin wrote:
> Quake for mac, it's going to sell like hotcakes (doom II did,
> even though it couldn't compete with marathon or dark forces).
How well did Doom II sell on the Mac anyways? I've heard people saying
that it sold quite good, but I'd like to hear some numbers. Anyone know
how many copies were sold?
Rishi Gupta
Here's some fairly concrete info I got on MacQuake from Next-Generation.
Snippet from their June 19th Q/A:
Q: Will Quake be coming out for the Mac at the same time as the PC?
A: No. We spoke to Id last week about the possibility, and they told us
that they currently have plans for a Mac version, but at this time have
barely started development as they are concentrating their efforts on
finishing the PC version.
Next-Generation also said last week that Quake for the Mac will be
anywhere from 9 months to a year after the registered PC version has
been released. Assuming that's September 1996, we should be getting
MacQuake in September 1997. So much for Q1 or Q2 1997. :)
Bruce Burkhalter
In article <agiles-2806...@ppp027-sf1.sirius.com>,
agi...@sirius.com (Aaron Giles) wrote:
> In order of PC release dates....
>
> Day of the Tentacle - 2 years
> Rebel Assault - ~9 months
> Sam & Max - 1.5 years
> X-Wing CD - 2 years
> Dark Forces - 4 months
> Full Throttle - 5 months
> The Dig - 4 months
> Rebel Assault 2 - 30 days
> TIE CD - no comment
> Indiana Jones & his Desktop Adventures - no comment
> Afterlife - simultaneous
> Mortimer & the Riddles of the Medallion - simultaneous
> Outlaws - we'll see...
> Jedi Knight - we'll see...
Thanks for correcting my dates. I was expecting that. :)
Congratulations. You and the rest of Lucas are doing a great job. I
can't wait for your new releases.
Bruce Burkhalter
Lion Entertainment (development Wing Commander III & IV Macintosh)
che...@eden.com
Jason Fowler
Rishi Gupta wrote:
>
> Here's some fairly concrete info I got on MacQuake from Next-Generation.
>
> Snippet from their June 19th Q/A:
> Q: Will Quake be coming out for the Mac at the same time as the PC?
>
> A: No. We spoke to Id last week about the possibility, and they told us
> that they currently have plans for a Mac version, but at this time have
> barely started development as they are concentrating their efforts on
> finishing the PC version.
>
> Next-Generation also said last week that Quake for the Mac will be
> anywhere from 9 months to a year after the registered PC version has
> been released. Assuming that's September 1996, we should be getting
> MacQuake in September 1997. So much for Q1 or Q2 1997. :)
I wouldn't call that concrete info just because a PC/game console
orientated magazine said so. MacQuake *will* come out 6-12 months
after the PC version. But its more likely to be released 7 - 9 months
after. I think the time it takes for ID to get a contract going with
Lion/Presage/JohnDoe will play a big part in how long we'll have to
wait for MacQuake. Let's hope that doesn't take to long.
BTW: The above paragraph isn't exactly concrete info either ;) But
IMO, that is how its going to turn out.
Adam Ling
zehao wrote:
>
> ds...@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (David Salvador Flores) wrote:
>
> >The Mac was "saddled" with only a 640x480 screen mode, no
> >320x200, so the machine was pushing around a lot of pixels.
>
>
> I compared a Pentium-100 with a 7200/120, both running Rebel Assult 2
> at 640 x 480 resolution. The frame rate of the Pentium excess that of
> the 7500 by quite a noticable amount.
>
> This contradicts with what i've heard: that PPC 601 is equal or
> better than Pentium at the same clock speed.
>
> Any explainations?
>
> Zehao ChangPC systems have video and sound which divide up the processing load on
the processor to a much greater extent than a Mac does, it's kinda like
having a bunch of decent muscles instead of just one big one. Kinda
bites, cuz' we know the potential is there, someone should release a mac
video/sound card so games would really fly - as they should.
Adam
Dave Kramer
Jason Fowler <joe...@a.crl.com> wrote:
>I wouldn't call that concrete info just because a PC/game console
>orientated magazine said so. MacQuake *will* come out 6-12 months
>after the PC version. But its more likely to be released 7 - 9 months
>after. I think the time it takes for ID to get a contract going with
>Lion/Presage/JohnDoe will play a big part in how long we'll have to
>wait for MacQuake. Let's hope that doesn't take to long.
>BTW: The above paragraph isn't exactly concrete info either ;) But
>IMO, that is how its going to turn out.
I agree with Jason 's very good assessment of the situation..
Keep in mind that MacQuake won't be id's first time at the Mac
software rodeo. They've been learning and getting better at the
porting process. And if someone like Lion or Presage gets the
contract, the game will be in the hands of a company that has
experience working with id -- which could mean better communication,
familiarity with their coding conventions, and just a generally faster
workflow process.
Of course, it's too early to make any solid predictions. The day that
id announces a Mac port is underway and reveals who's doing it, that's
the day I'll break out the crystal ball.
For now, MacHexen is here and Final Doom for Mac is right around the
corner (and from what I've heard, I think it's going to surprise a few
people!). There'll also be ports of Master Levels of Doom (w/Maximum
Doom) and Death Kings of the Dark Citadel (a multi-hub Hexen add-on)
for Mac, so we'll have plenty to keep us busy until MacQuake comes
along. :>
Best,
Dave Kramer
editor, MacDoom Review
http://www.voicenet.com/~reeltime/mdr.html
Rishi Gupta
zehao wrote:
> But this does not explain my experience:
>
> I compared a Pentium-100 with a 7200/120, both running Rebel Assult 2
> at 640 x 480 resolution. The frame rate of the Pentium excess that of
> the 7500 by quite a noticable amount.
>
> This contradicts with what i've heard: that PPC 601 is equal or
> better than Pentium at the same clock speed.
>
> Any explainations?
It depends whether you're talking about the framerate in gameplay or
cutscenes. If the cutscenes were faster on the Pentium, it probably had
a faster or better CD Rom drive. If the gameplay was faster, maybe you
had the "stretch" mode on in the PowerMac. This slows down gameplay,
leave it off. You may see a black stripe on the top and the bottom but
this is due to the way the Mac handles graphics. Both machines are
still pushing around the same amount of data. I'm not sure but the
video on a 7200 isn't that fast (correct me if I'm wrong). Use a
PowerMac with a videocard or use a PowerMac like the 7500 which has fast
graphics on board.
Paul Constantine
In article <31D977...@a.crl.com>, Jason Fowler <joe...@a.crl.com> wrote:
:Rishi Gupta wrote:
:>
:> Here's some fairly concrete info I got on MacQuake from Next-Generation.
:>
:> Snippet from their June 19th Q/A:
:> Q: Will Quake be coming out for the Mac at the same time as the PC?
:>
:> A: No. We spoke to Id last week about the possibility, and they told us
:> that they currently have plans for a Mac version, but at this time have
:> barely started development as they are concentrating their efforts on
:> finishing the PC version.
:>
:> Next-Generation also said last week that Quake for the Mac will be
:> anywhere from 9 months to a year after the registered PC version has
:> been released. Assuming that's September 1996, we should be getting
:> MacQuake in September 1997. So much for Q1 or Q2 1997. :)
:
:I wouldn't call that concrete info just because a PC/game console
:orientated magazine said so. MacQuake *will* come out 6-12 months
:after the PC version. But its more likely to be released 7 - 9 months
:after. I think the time it takes for ID to get a contract going with
:Lion/Presage/JohnDoe will play a big part in how long we'll have to
:wait for MacQuake. Let's hope that doesn't take to long.
:
:BTW: The above paragraph isn't exactly concrete info either ;) But
:IMO, that is how its going to turn out.
So let's ONLY supports game companies that do NOT pull this crap on us!
\\\\
(@ @)
_________________ooOo_(-)_oOoo___
| Paul Constantine \\\\ |
| pa...@inch.com |
| http://www.inch.com/~paulc/ |
---------------------------------
zehao
dgro...@lion-ent.com (Douglas Grounds) wrote:
>Lion has converted the following to Macintosh:
> Super Wing Commander / Origin
> Wing Commander III / Origin
> Wing Commander IV / Origin
> DOOM II / id & GT
> Ultimate DOOM / id & GT
> Mario Teaches Typing CD / MacPlay
How about sports games? There are V. V. V. few sports simulation games
for the Mac. Sports games generally sell well in the PC market, so
what's wrong with the Mac market. PowerPCs are faster than Pentiums so
there aren't any problems with speed.
Games like MacFIFA'96 would be most welcome.
zehao
ds...@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (David Salvador Flores) wrote:
>The Mac was "saddled" with only a 640x480 screen mode, no
>320x200, so the machine was pushing around a lot of pixels.
But this does not explain my experience:
I compared a Pentium-100 with a 7200/120, both running Rebel Assult 2
at 640 x 480 resolution. The frame rate of the Pentium excess that of
the 7500 by quite a noticable amount.
This contradicts with what i've heard: that PPC 601 is equal or
better than Pentium at the same clock speed.
Any explainations?
Zehao Chang
Nathaniel Scheckler
In article <brianm-2806...@rushford-5.dialup.polaristel.net>
Brian P. McCarty, bri...@caledonia.polaristel.net writes:
>would buy Mac Ultima Underword even if the port was only minimally adequate
Heh. The UW games are really great, in fact Ultima and StarCon (and
maybe Shadowcaster) are the reasons I still have an old PC sitting around
on my desk. Since Origin will probably never port UW, you could play it
on a DOS card, or maybe in SoftWindows 3.0. Although neither of these
options performs that well, both UW games run great on a 486SX25 w/4 megs
RAM, so surely even SoftWindows can handle them. You can pick both of
them up on a CD for ~$15, too. Only problem is, they're really best with
a two-button mouse...
Nathaniel Scheckler
Bernie Wieser
I am sure if there was enough demand for UW they'd port it (or do a new
one?), but most people have already bought/played it for the PC.
Besides, UW II had a lot of bugs, and they didn't bother fixing those; why
should they do a port?
B.
evilsofa
Yes. That how fast a computer is compared to another depends on more than
its cpu chip speed.
A LOT more.
--
"You know when I get in the mashed potatoes with my doorknob, all she
do is cry and cry cause the little volleyball don't have no liver or lungs..."
Finally found out meaning and source of above quote! Email if interested.
I notify postmasters of commercial email, which I do NOT want.
zehao
Adam Ling <zu...@ucla.edu> wrote:
>someone should release a mac
>video/sound card so games would really fly - as they should.
> Adam
Damn right,
PC sound cards are so cheap even with wavetables and stuff.
With PCI Macs now, someone should release a sound card TO THE MASSES
(read cheap) to take load off the CPU when playing music of sound
effects.
Demand should be high...............
Disclaimer: I will not be responsible if you design, manufacture
and sell Mac sound cards but ending up filling Chapter 11. Its tough
luck, so don't start bombing me with e-mail (or other stuff, preferbly
not napalm, i like nice and quick deaths)
Po$$e
> This contradicts with what i've heard: that PPC 601 is equal or
> better than Pentium at the same clock speed.
>
> Any explainations?
The Mac version is a port of the PC version. Since the PC version was probably optimized for Intel chips, one video, sound mode, etc, that could be the difference right there. If the game was built from the ground up on a Mac, I think the PPC would be faster.
-Brent
Spammer
]>someone should release a mac
Have you heard how good MIDI sounds with Quicktime 2.5 (currently in Final
Candidate status)? A modern chip like PowerPC or Pentium takes a VERY small
hit doing sound if the routines are efficiently written (and on PowerPC
avoid mode switching). It's one of the things I've always liked about Mac
that we don't _need_ no stinkin' sound cards!
Yumichan
> > Any explainations?
>
> Yes. That how fast a computer is compared to another depends on more than
> its cpu chip speed.
>
> A LOT more.
Exactly!, that's why Mac users should stop throwing around this PPC is
faster then Pentium crap. It only looks bad for us mac users. There are
a LOT more elements in play. And in the real world (barring Photoshop)
PC's are faster and cheaper pound for pound. They are not as elegant or
clean however.
David Salvador Flores
In article <4re4do$6...@tst.hk.super.net>, zehao <ze...@hk.super.net> wrote:
>ds...@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (David Salvador Flores) wrote:
>
>>The Mac was "saddled" with only a 640x480 screen mode, no
>>320x200, so the machine was pushing around a lot of pixels.
>
>But this does not explain my experience:
>
>I compared a Pentium-100 with a 7200/120, both running Rebel Assult 2
>at 640 x 480 resolution. The frame rate of the Pentium excess that of
>the 7500 by quite a noticable amount.
>
>better than Pentium at the same clock speed.
You've got to consider also the amount of RAM that each machine
was dealing with, and also the speed of the CD-ROM drive. In a game
like Rebel Assault, CD Rom speed is "everything."
If you're noticing problems with a game such as Rebal Assault,
I'd assume that your bottleneck is not the CPU, since the RA
series are basically movies with sprites overlayed. Since I can
play small QT movies at a decent rate on an LC III, I doubt that
a QT movie at 640x480 would pose a problem for any modern machine.
Another thing to consider is whether Virtual Memory or RAM Doubler
was turned on. With VW turned on, any Mac blows big chunks at
just about anything. RAM Doubler slows things down too, but
just not nearly as bad as VM.
>
>Any explainations?
>
>Zehao Chang
>
Finally, I didn't get into it, because my post was already too
long, but the PC's benefit also from Hardware based "page flipping"
which allows them something of a speed bonus when compared to
Macs, most of which do not include such circuitry.
-Dave
Joshua Grass
In article <4re4do$6...@tst.hk.super.net>, zehao <ze...@hk.super.net> wrote:
>ds...@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (David Salvador Flores) wrote:
>
>>The Mac was "saddled" with only a 640x480 screen mode, no
>>320x200, so the machine was pushing around a lot of pixels.
>
>But this does not explain my experience:
>
>I compared a Pentium-100 with a 7200/120, both running Rebel Assult 2
>at 640 x 480 resolution. The frame rate of the Pentium excess that of
>the 7500 by quite a noticable amount.
>
>This contradicts with what i've heard: that PPC 601 is equal or
>better than Pentium at the same clock speed.
>
>
>Zehao Chang
>
I think there is debate in the microchip community about this. I know
that everyone agrees the 604 is better then a Pentium at the same
speed, but different test show different results with a 601.
Joshua
--
If you want to know who you are, | jgr...@cs.umass.edu
it's important to know who you've been. | http://anytime.cs.umass.edu/~jgrass
Trevor Powell
In article <4rtm6q$p...@kernighan.cs.umass.edu>, jgr...@cs.umass.edu
(Joshua Grass) wrote:
> In article <4re4do$6...@tst.hk.super.net>, zehao <ze...@hk.super.net> wrote:
> >ds...@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (David Salvador Flores) wrote:
> >I compared a Pentium-100 with a 7200/120, both running Rebel Assult 2
> >at 640 x 480 resolution. The frame rate of the Pentium excess that of
> >the 7500 by quite a noticable amount.
> >
> >This contradicts with what i've heard: that PPC 601 is equal or
> >better than Pentium at the same clock speed.
You're basing absolute speed comparisons of the processors on the speed of
a single ported game from the PC? You can't _possibly_ expect to get
accurate results from such a subjective test!
Trevor Powell
--
Mogumbo Cooshua! | "Sjubidu, Sjubidu, Sjubidu..." (ad nauseum)
- Mogumbo, "Mr. India" | -'Sjubidu' (pronounced /SHOO-bee-DOO/)
| The song that OUGHT to have won the
| EuroVision Song Contest.