John Carmack talked @ GDC
- Thread starter 991060
- Start date
DemoCoder said:Hellbinder said:
Or Gabe and ATI right?
Please, Carmack is one of the most forthright and honest people in the entire industry. He's already rich, doesn't need anyone, and can do whatever the heck he wants. The guy's building a friggin rocket ship for christsakes, has given away the source code to many of his engines, and has contributed to Open Source GL drivers. He could have been alot wealthier if he wanted to, and "sold out", but he chose to stay at a small company and keep his freedom.
The fact that he didn't find the NV30 completely worthless and had some nice things to say about it really bugs you, but it is hardly indicative that he is a liar, has a hidden agenda, or is overly influenced by IHV relationships. He is also given cards by other IHVs as well, and he has heavy influence on the industry.
Sorry to say this but DC... you obviously A WAY BIASED. It's simply ridiculous how you're acting when it comes to NVIDIA.... it's just, let me put this way, DUMB.
Whatever you're trying to suggest about JC and even I do think HB is dumb and biased like a 3rd grade child - still true: JC IS REALLY REALLY prefer NVIDIA, regardless its disgusting, cheating, fake, obviously crappy and low-level business tricks. DO YOU HEAR ME, DC???
Actually - with all my respect, man - I'm getting tired of your unconditional love on whatever NV is doing. Just check your latest posts - isn't this ridiculous? Like a stupidest child in the neighborhood...
Back to business...
Do you remember when JC said NV still has better drivers?
He did it after all those famous scandals!!! After he made this funny comment, everybody I know in this industry thought ... errr, is this guy REAL? He did take something at the morning, didn't he? He was high recently, right?Fodder said:
Although this is so true carmack really isn't all that interested in game developement anymore now their is still a whole team of talented people at ID but a few years from now who knows whats going to happend and the up coming unreal engine is sounding very very nice.
StealthHawk
Regular
V3 said:
Actually they already did re-release the original Super Mario Bros games with updated graphics: Super Mario All Stars on SNES.
Yeah, that was an intelligent comeback.T2k said:
John Carmack's relationship with the drivers is rather different from most of us. He is a programmer, meaning he has knowledge about when his code follows the spec, but isn't rendered properly. In his view, better drivers are the ones that render according to the spec (and therefore any type of "cheats" have no effect here, as there's no way to cheat on fresh code). You should be able to take this straight from is .plan posts.Do you remember when JC said NV still has better drivers?
Yes, that sold pretty well too, but I was talking about the recent GBA released. Nintendo released all the remake with the Super Mario Advance series. But for the original Super Mario Brothers, they didn't even bother taking the remake of SNES version, they just release the NES version as famicom classics range, and its the best seller of that range with around 250,000 copies sold thus far.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Chalnoth said:
Slight correction.
Carmack knows when the drive code follows his spec. That is, when drivers are tuned to perform to his engines, and when they produce the results he wants.
There was a .plan somehwere from Carmack that specifically talked about cheats, and IIRC, he said something like "if I don't know about it, I don't really care...filtering, AA, etc, isn't really a concern of mine." That was a while ago, and I'd have to look it up.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Bjorn said:
It could be....though I thought they both had similar things to say on it.
Did a quick search and found this by Carmack:
http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/finger.pl?id=1&time=20011117012727
http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/finger.pl?id=1&time=20011117012727
Joe DeFuria
Legend
So he shouldn't be happy with "unavoidable brinlinear."
Equating Gabe Newell's commentary and the issues with the FX with IHV favoritism is inaccurate. They did put an IHV in a better light than another, but that's because of the hardware each IHV delivered and the way it was represented.
Drawing a parallel to the Doom 3 benchmark is superficial and dishonest, due to the many differences in the representation of IHVs between the issues. The HL2 benches accurately represented the IHVs where they were mentioned, and their hardware, in detail and with abundant corroboration. The Doom 3 benchmark media event did not accurately represent one IHV's hardware, and largely because the other IHV tried to stage things that way, and some media outlets obliged.
What is pertinent to both of these issues, however, is the things John Carmack said and decided, because he was directly involved in one project, and made commentary related to the other.
He does seem to deserve blame for whatever decision making he had a part in for the significant issues for the Doom 3 event it allowed.
But he also confirmed and backed up Gabe's commentary, Valve's experience with IHV hardware performance, and what this meant for developers.
This supports further that the Doom 3 event was a "fiasco" compared to the "Shader Day" event, but also supports that John Carmack is honest. Oh the confusion!
Let's try piecing this together: the indication is that he might have made or allowed...a mistake, and one that people might have valid reason for blaming him for, and he also displays a fundamental honesty over a broad range of discussion.
To me this indicates the somewhat controversial thought that he is a 1) fundamentally honest 2) human being. Don't lock me up in an asylum, please.
Also:
In the context of other remarks about shader replacement (that you could search for in B3D's news archive, I believe), that Carmack quote looks pretty damned spot-on. He shouldn't be against brilienar in that context, because in the context he discusses the user should have conformant trilinear and then have the option to select brilinear if they want. He is directly talking against "unavoidable brilinear".
Drawing a parallel to the Doom 3 benchmark is superficial and dishonest, due to the many differences in the representation of IHVs between the issues. The HL2 benches accurately represented the IHVs where they were mentioned, and their hardware, in detail and with abundant corroboration. The Doom 3 benchmark media event did not accurately represent one IHV's hardware, and largely because the other IHV tried to stage things that way, and some media outlets obliged.
What is pertinent to both of these issues, however, is the things John Carmack said and decided, because he was directly involved in one project, and made commentary related to the other.
He does seem to deserve blame for whatever decision making he had a part in for the significant issues for the Doom 3 event it allowed.
But he also confirmed and backed up Gabe's commentary, Valve's experience with IHV hardware performance, and what this meant for developers.
This supports further that the Doom 3 event was a "fiasco" compared to the "Shader Day" event, but also supports that John Carmack is honest. Oh the confusion!
Let's try piecing this together: the indication is that he might have made or allowed...a mistake, and one that people might have valid reason for blaming him for, and he also displays a fundamental honesty over a broad range of discussion.
To me this indicates the somewhat controversial thought that he is a 1) fundamentally honest 2) human being. Don't lock me up in an asylum, please.
Also:
In the context of other remarks about shader replacement (that you could search for in B3D's news archive, I believe), that Carmack quote looks pretty damned spot-on. He shouldn't be against brilienar in that context, because in the context he discusses the user should have conformant trilinear and then have the option to select brilinear if they want. He is directly talking against "unavoidable brilinear".
Doomtrooper
Veteran
ANYONE should be against the driver overiding the Control Panel options unless the possibly of some control panel options causing rendering errors i.e Splinter Cell and AA.
If I set 6X AA on my computer, on my graphic card I paid $400 for, in my home I should get 6XAA.
We all know why Brilinear was introduced, Graph Wars.
If I set 6X AA on my computer, on my graphic card I paid $400 for, in my home I should get 6XAA.
We all know why Brilinear was introduced, Graph Wars.
Chalnoth said:Yeah, that was an intelligent comeback.T2k said:
I can imagine it's hard to digest for you, Chalnoth because I calling back your loved company's disgusting fakings.
John Carmack's relationship with the drivers is rather different from most of us. He is a programmer, meaning he has knowledge about when his code follows the spec, but isn't rendered properly. In his view, better drivers are the ones that render according to the spec (and therefore any type of "cheats" have no effect here, as there's no way to cheat on fresh code). You should be able to take this straight from is .plan posts.Do you remember when JC said NV still has better drivers?
? You're joking? You better be...
Chalnoth, let me correct you again (as usually):
1. my friends working in this industry and some of them are programmers
2. I'm working in this industry (3D animation) as well even though I'm not a coder (I'm an IT engineer)
3. somehow after JC's ridiculous comment on the driver quality, all of us were shocked: is this guy using the same drivers like everybody else? He doesn't use ANY modelling software to see the problems w/ Quadros? Is he not playing games at all, not even on weekly basis to see the problems w/ current Dets - despite the fact he's a game developer?
Edits: missing style codes and typos
Hellbinder
Banned
hmm.. As i reread through Carmacks comments it sure does seem they they are "stuck in a Rut" so to speak where developing new ideas comes into play. I mean, Their First thought was to recreate Quake 2??
That Company has become way to Technology Driven instead of Content driven. I remember back when Quake 2 was comming out how they would take little pot shots at Epic about "eye candy" and all.
Funny how times change.
Doom-III Hopefully Delivers on a really great Game play "experience" and does not once again shock us all about how great their engine "could be" if someone else would make a game from it.
That Company has become way to Technology Driven instead of Content driven. I remember back when Quake 2 was comming out how they would take little pot shots at Epic about "eye candy" and all.
Funny how times change.
Doom-III Hopefully Delivers on a really great Game play "experience" and does not once again shock us all about how great their engine "could be" if someone else would make a game from it.
Hellbinder
Banned
Oops doubble post
Yeah, but to remake the exact same game with the only difference being a graphical facelift is not your typical sequel.
