JC Keynote talks consoles

There are really a couple of things going on all at once in my humble opinion. Like you say, we've got people with big stakes in the new consoles saying that they are the best thing since sliced bread. We also have well established PC programmers like Gabe and JC saying that the new designs are really no better (indeed, they seem to give the impression that they are worse) than the current design.

I think quite honestly that JC is just suffering from getting old. He has a *lot* of knowledge about designing and optimizing games for single CPU systems, and going multicore is going to require throwing a lot of that out and starting over. That's not to say all of his experience is worthless. Still, I doubt that it will be JC, Gabe, or even people like Sweeney that are going to be the "god like" programmers for multicore processors. Sure they'll be able to make tries (with varying degrees of success) at it, but it is going to be the next generation of programmers who spend years writing multithreaded engines that will become the masters.

The hardest thing for JC is going to be letting other (younger!) people be the new stars at ID. Sweeney (from what little I've heard) sounds like he's made an effort to bring many people into Epic that have varying areas of expertise. That is, atleast in my opinion, why Epic is succeeding where it appears ID is failing.

Nite_Hawk

 

You are very wrong on that.

id Software games have supported multithreading since Quake 3. If anything, I would consider JC to be one of the leaders in multithreaded game application development, having already had years of experience with it.

 

That rings so true. I wonder if the saying "Can't teach an old dog new tricks" applies to this situation. I believe that old programers have the capacity to learn these new processes...its just that they don't "want" to....probably because they would be on the same level as the younger programmers...which in my opinion is pretty sad reason not to learn this stuff (apart from the fact that it is daunting...but you should always atleast try and do your best...I feel cheesy for saying that...damn Sesame Street)

 

Well, I think part of it is that new programmers start out with a cleaner slate. JC's experience will in some ways help him and in some ways hurt him. I'm sure he will learn how to write code for the Xbox360, and for the PS3, and will probably be able to do a reasonably decent job at it. To a certain extent though he will probably always be thinking about how to solve problems in a serial manner, while someone starting out with the xbox360 or PS3 will more instinctly want to solve them in a parellel manner. The other thing is that JC isn't a kid anymore. He's co-owner of ID and the Technical Director. There is no way he can devote enough time to keep up with some kid in college who is learning the same technology. He just has way too many responsibilities. He will still probably be better than the majority of mediocre programmers out there, but the hotshots of the next generation have the cards stacked in their favor. It's nothing to be a ashamed of though, it happens in all industries. At this point, personally I'd say he is much more valuable as someone who has spent 20 years leading game development teams rather than for his expertise at writing code. Good coders (though rare) are much easier to come by than good project leads.

Nite_Hawk

 

What the heck are some of you guys talking about. Nobody is hating on John Carmack. I think Carmack is one of the best in the game no doubt about it. Why is not believe 100% of what he says hating him? Some of you are living in a sad bubble that will show with next-gen games. You need to live a little, try thinking outside of the box.

I hope some of you don't make games, because if you do I will feel sorry for whomever buys them. I mean really NucNavST3 last post was dead on.

So what are we going to get from these new $300+ machines? All I'm asking for is physics that can compliment the graphics. Is that too much to ask? I want better A.I. than I have now with my PS2. Is that too much to ask? I don't think so.

 

I guess the question to ask about the first-gen screens we've seen is how much are these powerful GPUs carrying the game. Obviously first-gen games NEVER push the hardware. So we are probably all being impressed with the work of NV and ATI really. Especially since there are so many reports of the CPU's being a bitch to optimize for.

They put in no-compromise custom graphics engines and then put in some CPUs with fantastic THEORETICAL performance. But they handicapped them to make them cheaper.

Perhaps there are things we can look for in screenshots and vids that show the CPU being a speed problem?

 

It's not about supporting multithreading. Launching the sound server as another thread isn't exactly rocket science. What is much more difficult (and rewarding in terms of performance) is figuring out how to make efficient parellel algorithms. This is the area where everyone (including JC) has problems. It's really really hard to parellelize some problems, and once you do manage to make something it is even harder to make them perform well. What's even a scarier problem is that you are dealing with realtime applications, and you have to keep almost everything synched. Data dependency is going to be a huge problem, and designing complex yet efficient parellel engines is going to take years to get right. So far pretty much no one has done it because the payoff hasn't been worth it. Now that the hardware companies have pretty much said "This is your way forward" the people that are heavily invested in the old way of doing things are either grumbling or panicking.

Nite_Hawk

 

It seems some of you have no idea where JC is coming from and why he's making comments like that.

He always enjoyed working in a small team, and he has always been a graphics guy. He's known and respected for pushing the graphics envelope, not for inventing new game ideas and not for creating realistic AI or physics simulations. He's also known to be fond of the mod community and helping to bring people into the industry by releasing source code and tools.

Now the problem he has with this multicore solutions is that it's going to take definitely more manhours to efficiently use them. That's not very feasable for a small development team like id or some new game studio (that he may have just helped getting of the ground with the release of the q3 source) that doesn't have EA's resources. So in his opinion a game developer shouldn't be held up by some hardware design decision that's not really improving the game they're making, as he would like to spend those 2-3 extra months for some graphics or gameplay features that are otherwise consumed by thread optimizations. Some may call this lazyness, but in fact it's about priorities under limited resources.

All's well though, developer's will adapt to it. Some more, some less (I wouldn't be too worried about Carmack's programming capabilities, even when we're talking multithreaded here). It's just this time around it's not a matter of 2 years until the tools get better to solve this problem. As JC noted, research hasn't made much progress in the last decades regarding software solutions for multiprocessor designs. So it may stay hard (meaning it may take those extra months optimizing) all to the end of this next generation.

-i0n-

 

He should have explained hiself better if that's what he meant. People aren't getting confused because they're dumb, maybe he didn't get it out right. Sony and MS will do what they can to better games and game development. Isn't it a bit early to say multicore game development isn't going to be solved until next-next-gen.

Why is 2011 the right time to make the change? Why not now? So if his thing is graphics then is he a graphics whore? Should graphics matter just as much as A.I. and physics with next-gen consoles? Why not the power is there now.

Won't XNA help making games easier on the X360? I thought they made huge strides in making game development for mulitcore processors easier. Won't Collada help with a few things as far as extensions go? That should help making games for the PS3 easier to a certain degree.

And what about this whole OpenGL thing. I thought that was suppose to open devs with developing games for the PS3. So what should we expect from next gen games? Xbox 1.5? PS 2.5? I thought we were getting real next generation systems.

I can see it know that there will be alot of surprised people here when they play games on the x360 and PS3. RE5 looks like something that should be fun and way further than what we play today. I know the game isn't coming out this year buy so what. Some devs actually want to tackle this new beast.

And didn't Titianio state that devs that worked on the PS2 should find making a game on the PS3 easier than a PC dev?

 

I think he was pretty clear on what he meant. You must know from your own experience that it's hard to explain everything so everyone understands your point. Everybody has a different point of view. His is of an industry veteran working with brand-new tech, from the developer's angle. He's been very influential in development of GPU hardware too (Q3 was and Doom3 is a target for hardware development) so I'm not surprised he's happy with the 3D hardware... He's been working with 3D IHVs since Quake hit the shelves. Go to Google Groups and read about his comments on Verite, APIs, and Quake.

He probably sees manufacturing as a limit for these CPUs. We could have more capable multi-core chips in the future, with less cutbacks to manage transistor count and thus die size. Assuming the hardware developers really do care about making the programming easier. I wouldn't say that was exactly the top priority this time around. Xbox and Gamecube were really very easy to work with. Xbox360 and PS3 are not going to be. Theoretical performance obviously sells these things and always has. Just look at this forum and all the gossip! And step back and look at the history of consoles....

I'm sure all the developers are using whatever development tools are available. And I'm sure Carmack has access to it all.

PC devs have to deal with the indomitable problem of technical support and a HUGE HUGE open platform. That limits how far they can push the hardware. And costs massively more for support. I also am sure that there are far more console gamers than PC owners with systems that can play the latest games. FAR more. Wonder why PC devs are moving more and more to consoles? Higher sales, lower costs. Hmmmm..

 

He did because that is what I got out of his long keynotes. I believe people are not listening/reading the entire keynotes. e.g.

I disagree.

Note how it was questioned how much work/experience he has in consoles and non-x86 (like PPC/Mac). Not only did I give a lot of information on this, note what the keynotes have the same info for the most part!:

Yet people make silly comments THAT ARE ANSWERED IN THE KEYNOTES and questions that his keynotes without first knowing what is fully in them. And if he was not clear enough, JC believes that the PS3 and Xbox 360 are:

He had a LOT of praise for them. But that praise was tempered with some reservations. Same servervations Gabe stated, as well as those who talked with Anand or people like Hannibal who know a bit about the hardware and software development. This is not one person, but a growing group of non-1st/2nd party companies giving the same feedback: "They are are great machines, but they are not 10x as powerful as a PC".

How could anyone disagree with:

With growing dev team size, skyrocketing costs, and longer development times common sense tells you this is true. This is one of the reasons UE3 is so popular => It allows artists to make shaders (usually done by programmers) and level designers to do more scripting (again usually done by programmers). Tools and features that make GAME CREATION easier are good. Someone may be a good "game designer" but a poor programmer. Allowing more people to be more productive (like artists and map makers) is a good thing. This is why JC praises the tools.

The guy has experience with consoles and multi-cpu game development. Yet people are still calling him "lazy" and "dumb" because he is noting some negatives about the designs and ignoring the positives.

Again:

He just has reservations. But who could not be happy knowing that a $300 console offers performance similar to a high end ($3,000) PC right now

 

The thing is that I have no hope in the same way Carmack has no hope. Yes, it's reasonably powerful, but there isn't anything to get excited about yet -- it's exactly that : reasonably powerful. And to a certain extent, you just answered your own question. It's the challenge that makes working on the thing fun. The game industry simply would not exist if there weren't people who thought that way. I really don't think people like Carmack are thinking differently -- the thing is that they're aware that they're not alone. Second, you can't forget that a programmer's worth in the work world can only be defined by what he's worked on.

As I said though, history will probably repeat itself. You look at the earliest Xbox and PS2 games compared to what we see now. If you asked someone 5 years ago if PS2 could ever handle normal mapping and HDR, and you'd have been laughed at. Now here we are talking about it. I expect a similar rate of uptake on next-gen. Which is still saying that there will be some awesome titles eventually, but it also says that hardly any of the initial promises will be fulfilled, if any at all.

While I agree with that to a certain extent, I don't see that wave of new programmers coming any time soon. Where are they going to come from? Not that many young folks are that good at it, and those people who are good at it generally don't know the first thing about game development (and typically are in for rude awakenings when they learn that game programming is not the land of super-idiots). And ultimately, you're still dealing with a provably unsolvable problem (that being the problem of making efficient parallel code).

It's so funny to think about someone who's only 34-35 as "getting too old." It's not like he's a professional athlete or something. He was just raised on certain styles of coding and development and it has engrained in him certain ways of thinking -- mainly about focusing on tight, efficient pipelines and direct control over everything. This ideal is often at odds with the Epic ideal of making something flexible and usable with good tools.

At the same time, it's that attitude he takes that has trained him to think about how things will perform at the lowest level... that makes him very fit to say what he says about the actual performance of these machines.

 

This whole Carmack bashing and such is totally ridiculous. The guy has programmed consoles for several generations, wrote a multithreaded 3D engine in Quake3, and he's known for coming up with as many solutions as possible until aproblem is properly solved. Doom3 was his what, 5th experimental engine after Quake3? Read up a bit on the old Quake1 engine's development to get to know his attitude for coding before making totally wrong comments and presumptions...

As for console vs. PC, well, as far as I've heard the first year of nextgen will be a tough one - the relatively small installed base could seriously limit sales of the first games. This may be the reason for traditional console dev/publisher houses like Namco to seriously get into the PC market - they have the ex-Blizzard guys working on Hellgate (3D diablo-kind of game) and the guys here on a Warhammer RTS game. So it's probably not about trying to keep the faith of PC gamers...

 

I haven't read this whole thread, and I don't really have time to, but I'd like to comment to the guy who said that JC is getting lazy and just writing a bunch of high level shader code.

John Carmack is writing all the shaders in his next game in asm, and they're *thinking* about moving to Cg. I'd hardly call him lazy. I don't know any other developers doing this!

 

Yet on the other hand the PPE's in the new consoles are very fast compared to the current consoles. I think at first running the rendering loop on a 2nd core (like id did with Quake 3) and sound on another could give a decent experience. This would not max out the CPUs, but overall I think we will be pleasantly surprised. IMO, PC game logic is not too far beyond what the Xbox/PS2 is capable of.

As for sales, you are dead on. Unless the game is a total smash hit (like Mario 64) having a title available for launch does not always mean great sales. Xbox 360 is looking at 2+ million in 2005 (would be shocked if they shipped 3M), and could only hope for 8M by the end of 2006.

Every console transition is rough. Good games fall through the cracks, and good devs can go down with one bad title. With games costing a lot more to make there is very little room for misteps. And add into this longer dev times... a lot higher stakes.

 

Which is probably why even traditionally console-based devs and publishers are turning to the well-known and stable PC market.

 

I always thought that the console market was stable as far as the hardware is concerned.

And this is exactly why I'm super excited about next-gen consoles. This is why I don't want to hear that this (physics that can change a game) won't happen or that A.I. that is way smarter than Band of Brothers 2 shouldn't expand much. I am really looking forward to next year. I know the games will deliver just the way I would like.

 

Na . You only have a window of 2-3 years on the console to make alot of money for your game . Many titles from smaller devs barely make enough . Only large developers make alot of moeny .

Pcs are fluid and never have the change over that consoles have

 

It will all most likely happen on the pc before the console .

wgf 2.0 should be coming in late 2006 early 2007 which will be beyond what hte consoles are rooted in . pc graphics power would most likely be 4-8 times more powerfull than they were when the xbox 360 launched and will be much more feature rich . Cpus will be much more powerfull , we will have physics accelerator s , new sound cards with thier own ram .

That is why the pc side is more exciting esp for someone like carmack .

 

It is true that a lot of change in the console world has an impact on sales and what not. But it is also true that more money is to be made in the console world as there are more gamers for it in general. The actual market is larger in consoles because that is the primary use for the machines, something it was designed for. Costs for a console can be the same as a PC or lower/higher. Each has their own pros and cons. The big thing with consoles is that when a new mahine is release it is harder to sell a lot of software for it. The more users you have the better your chances are. The PS2 has seen a good 4 - 5 years of being profitable for many devs whether they are big or small. But once it comes to make the games for the PS3 the smaller devs may not be so fortunate enough if their initial game is not a success.

Bigger devs/pubs can put their eggs in more than one basket so they usually have a much better chance at being profitable or sustaining the market change from one generation to the next.