4 ms·

It is quite remarkable how fast Carmack moved their engines forward, especially given the pioneering nature of the progress in question. Wolfenstein 3D, May 19

It is quite remarkable how fast Carmack moved their engines forward, especially given the pioneering nature of the progress in question. Wolfenstein 3D, May 1992 -> Doom, December 1993 -> Quake 1, June 1996 -> Quake 2, December 1997 In the span of five years, they went from: Wolf: https://i.imgur.com/1gGewDp.png https://i.imgur.com/1gGewDp.png Doom: https://i.imgur.com/6CqvrLg.png https://i.imgur.com/6CqvrLg.png Q1: https://i.imgur.com/6wZg8NG.png https://i.imgur.com/6wZg8NG.png Q2: https://i.imgur.com/4Lxtg4f.jpg https://i.imgur.com/4Lxtg4f.jpg The leap forward between the release dates of Doom and Quake 2 in just four years is particularly impressive.

benj111 8y ago
Not to detract from your point but I seem to recall Doom being playable on PCs of the day. * I remember some years after quake 2 was out (99ish ?) a friend showing off his new computer by actually playing quake 1 with all the bells and whistles turned on. So yes the engines did develop quickly. Much quicker than the PCs of the day in fact. *being school kids, these weren't gaming PCs, these were for 'homework' and 'research'.
- int_19h 8y ago
  PCs would keep up fine, but only so long as you had a 3D graphics accelerator (3dfx or similar). Since it was something that was only of use in games at the time, many builders omitted it, resulting in a large gap. Still, Q2 was perfectly playable even on below-average PCs at the time of release, if you were willing to stick to the same resolution as Doom (i.e. 320x200).
- andrewf 8y ago
  I think the hardware was moving forward equally quickly, but there was a more dramatic spread between the low and high end of the installed base. People waited years between upgrades because computers were so expensive. At the same time, Moore's law really was doubling speeds every 18 months. When Wolf3D came out in May 1992, its minimum spec targeted the installed base of 286s, and a 50Mhz 486 was bleeding edge. When Doom was released in Dec 1993, you could buy a Pentium. (And if you kept it till '96, that Pentium could manage Quake at 320x200). I agree there was a bifurcation in the late 90s when 3D hardware acceleration arrived (see the colored lighting and texture filtering in the Q2 screenshot). Quake 1 was getting patched with hardware rendering up until Quake 2's release, likely the bells and whistles your friend showed off :)
- ethbro 8y ago
  Because I was curious, recommended specs (quick searching): Wolf, 1992: 386, 4 MB memory, 8 MB disk Doom, 1993: 486, 8 MB memory, 40 MB disk, Sound Blaster Pro/compatible Q1, 1996: 75 MHz+, 32 MB memory, 128 MB disk, SBP/c, GeForce 6200 LE / Radeon Express 1200 Q2, 1997: 90 MHz+, 32 MB memory, 32 MB disk, SBP/c, 4x CD-ROM, GeForce 6200 LE / Rage 128 Ultra 16 MB Which isn't to knock the awesome folks at id at all! Just, it was a heady time on both the hardware and software sides.
  - Impossible 8y ago
    Geforce 6200 LE is a card from 2004, are you looking at modern specs for the versions of the games on Steam? Quake was originally released with only a software renderer and later GLQuake was released with OpenGL support, that only really ran well initially on 3DFX Voodoo cards, although technically I think S3 Verge and some other 3D accelerators were supported. Quake 2 supported 3D accelerators at launch but also had a software renderer, like many notable PC games of the late 90s (Half-Life, Unreal tournament, Deus Ex, etc). Quake 3 was controversial in 1999 for being one of the first major PC games that required a 3D accelerator, among other things, the term GPU didn't really get used for PC graphics cards until Nvidia released the Geforce 256.
    - ethbro 8y ago
      I was looking at whatever pulled up. Most of those are on the other side of the pre-internet chasm though, so not much accurate info. Thanks for correcting!
  - MrTortoise 8y ago
    Q1 didn't need 32 megs. We had it running on 8. I remember working all summer to but another 8 when I was building a monster rig to goto 16 in 1998
- MrTortoise 8y ago
  Quake was completely playable on high end gear dx4100 and p60 was fine. Quakegl came about later.
  - rasz 8y ago
    "completely playable" usually doesnt mean 8 to 12 frames per second in 320x200

benj111 8y ago

Not to detract from your point but I seem to recall Doom being playable on PCs of the day. * I remember some years after quake 2 was out (99ish ?) a friend showing off his new computer by actually playing quake 1 with all the bells and whistles turned on. So yes the engines did develop quickly. Much quicker than the PCs of the day in fact. *being school kids, these weren't gaming PCs, these were for 'homework' and 'research'.

int_19h 8y ago
PCs would keep up fine, but only so long as you had a 3D graphics accelerator (3dfx or similar). Since it was something that was only of use in games at the time, many builders omitted it, resulting in a large gap. Still, Q2 was perfectly playable even on below-average PCs at the time of release, if you were willing to stick to the same resolution as Doom (i.e. 320x200).
andrewf 8y ago
I think the hardware was moving forward equally quickly, but there was a more dramatic spread between the low and high end of the installed base. People waited years between upgrades because computers were so expensive. At the same time, Moore's law really was doubling speeds every 18 months. When Wolf3D came out in May 1992, its minimum spec targeted the installed base of 286s, and a 50Mhz 486 was bleeding edge. When Doom was released in Dec 1993, you could buy a Pentium. (And if you kept it till '96, that Pentium could manage Quake at 320x200). I agree there was a bifurcation in the late 90s when 3D hardware acceleration arrived (see the colored lighting and texture filtering in the Q2 screenshot). Quake 1 was getting patched with hardware rendering up until Quake 2's release, likely the bells and whistles your friend showed off :)
ethbro 8y ago
Because I was curious, recommended specs (quick searching): Wolf, 1992: 386, 4 MB memory, 8 MB disk Doom, 1993: 486, 8 MB memory, 40 MB disk, Sound Blaster Pro/compatible Q1, 1996: 75 MHz+, 32 MB memory, 128 MB disk, SBP/c, GeForce 6200 LE / Radeon Express 1200 Q2, 1997: 90 MHz+, 32 MB memory, 32 MB disk, SBP/c, 4x CD-ROM, GeForce 6200 LE / Rage 128 Ultra 16 MB Which isn't to knock the awesome folks at id at all! Just, it was a heady time on both the hardware and software sides.
- Impossible 8y ago
  Geforce 6200 LE is a card from 2004, are you looking at modern specs for the versions of the games on Steam? Quake was originally released with only a software renderer and later GLQuake was released with OpenGL support, that only really ran well initially on 3DFX Voodoo cards, although technically I think S3 Verge and some other 3D accelerators were supported. Quake 2 supported 3D accelerators at launch but also had a software renderer, like many notable PC games of the late 90s (Half-Life, Unreal tournament, Deus Ex, etc). Quake 3 was controversial in 1999 for being one of the first major PC games that required a 3D accelerator, among other things, the term GPU didn't really get used for PC graphics cards until Nvidia released the Geforce 256.
  - ethbro 8y ago
    I was looking at whatever pulled up. Most of those are on the other side of the pre-internet chasm though, so not much accurate info. Thanks for correcting!
- MrTortoise 8y ago
  Q1 didn't need 32 megs. We had it running on 8. I remember working all summer to but another 8 when I was building a monster rig to goto 16 in 1998
MrTortoise 8y ago
Quake was completely playable on high end gear dx4100 and p60 was fine. Quakegl came about later.
- rasz 8y ago
  "completely playable" usually doesnt mean 8 to 12 frames per second in 320x200