8 ms·

Id to release Doom3 source code

161 points by aqrashik 15y ago

DuqE 15y ago
I know nothing about game development, I just play them, but would be interested in seeing the source code of this game.
- jacques_chester 15y ago
  FWIW, the source code for Quake 1-3 is already available. Quake 3 in particular has been a subject of ongoing work.
- dmaz 15y ago
  Carmack has released id's previous engines, they're pretty interesting to read, and folks are still maintaining them. The technology ioquake3[1] is 10 years old now, but well-maintained as an open-source project. Darkplaces[2] is a heavily-updated Quake I engine that maintains backwards compatibility with Q1 while using fairly modern game programming techniques. Google ported Darkplaces to NaCl a while ago, and it has renderers in OpenGL, Direct X, and OpenGL ES now. [1] http://svn.icculus.org/*checkout*/quake3/trunk/README http://svn.icculus.org/*checkout*/quake3/trunk/README [2] http://git.xonotic.org/?p=xonotic/darkplaces.git;a=summary http://git.xonotic.org/?p=xonotic/darkplaces.git;a=summary
aninteger 15y ago
This article is almost a month old now. I'd guess we will see a release around December like they have done in the past. I wouldn't expect anything before October. This will be the first id software release in c++ and it will be interesting to see what subset of the c++ language they used.
- barrettcolin 15y ago
  You can get a pretty good idea from looking at the mod sdk code, which is available from here: http://iddevnet.com/doom3/ http://iddevnet.com/doom3/ There's quite a lot available in the game code; the physics system at least, maybe also the script interpreter? I haven't looked in a while.
a3_nm 15y ago
No mention of license, though.
- fserb 15y ago
  previous games were released under GPL, this one should probably follow.
  - coob 15y ago
    yes but which version :)
    - burgerbrain 15y ago
      Almost without question v2. That is what they used in the past and this time there are patent issues to boot.
sanxiyn 15y ago
"Note that Doom 3's famous shadow renderer is based on technology patented by Creative Labs." This is a very sad situation, given that this technology was independently rediscovered and popularized by John Carmack. He learned about the patent only after the fact.
- runevault 15y ago
  To me that whole debacle was one of the biggest examples of the problems with the patent system today. For all intents and purposes Creative patented a mathematical formula.
  - commandar 15y ago
    It's worse than that, really. Creative bought a company (3D Labs) that patented a mathematical formula. Creative wasn't even directly responsible for coming up with the technique.
    - bryanh 15y ago
      I don't think most people take issue with the fact that patents are purchasable or otherwise transferable. If I create a valid, useful (non-software) patent, I should be able to sell or license it in any way I see fit. The issue is software patents, at least in these circles.
      - slowpoke 15y ago
        >I don't think most people take issue with the fact that patents are purchasable or otherwise transferable. I do, because I object to the absurd concept of ownership over ideas. Software patents just take the absurdity to the utter and bizarre maximum. There is no benefit for humanity to be gained through patents, they merely hinder our technological advancement.
        rcfox 15y ago
        > There is no benefit for humanity to be gained through patents, they merely hinder our technological advancement. I disagree. There are three alternatives (that come to mind) to patents: 1) Make all information freely accessible to anyone. This is the one we'd all like everyone to do. However, there's very little (economic) incentive to innovate when you do all of the heavy thinking and anyone else can just come along and beat you to the implementation. 2) Stop innovating. If you can't protect your ideas, you might as well just stop trying. 3) Hide your information. Only you can benefit from the information if no one else knows about it. (You can't license information and keep it a secret at the same time!) There are laws to help protect you, but you also have to do a lot of work to protect yourself. You can also keep your information secret indefinitely. By filing a patent, you're telling the world how to do something (allegedly) new. In 20 years, (or longer/shorter, depending on the country) everyone is freely able to use the idea.
hiena03 15y ago
I hope they include the changes to the engine made for ET:QW. I'm particularly interested in megatexture. But they say "Doom3 source code" not Id tech 4, so they probably won't.
shabble 15y ago
There's a nice writeup of someone going through the original quake code: http://fabiensanglard.net/quakeSource/index.php http://fabiensanglard.net/quakeSource/index.php Seems to turn up in most threads about iD engine source/dev - I'll do it this time :)
- aw3c2 15y ago
  And if you want to follow an experienced programmer's quest to make a fast and stable DirectX9, C++ Quake engine then follow http://mhquake.blogspot.com/ http://mhquake.blogspot.com/
empika 15y ago
I'm sure Carmack says alot more about the patent issues and open sourcing the engine in the keynote. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zgYG-_ha28 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zgYG-_ha28
- spdy 15y ago
  It is amazing how technical his talk is it`s really intressting if you have a progamming background. And it just so different to any other keynote for a game i have ever seen. edit: 5 mins to the end he talks about the doom3 opensource
yason 15y ago
I must say that, unlike with Doom I and II, it will certainly be more exciting to wade through the source code and learn tricks than actually play the game and wade through the endless monotonic, boring action.
- aw3c2 15y ago
  Doom 3 is actually a very nice if somewhat cheesy horror shooter.
ScaryPlotter 15y ago
August 4, 2011 ?

161 points by aqrashik 15y ago

DuqE 15y ago

I know nothing about game development, I just play them, but would be interested in seeing the source code of this game.

jacques_chester 15y ago
FWIW, the source code for Quake 1-3 is already available. Quake 3 in particular has been a subject of ongoing work.
dmaz 15y ago
Carmack has released id's previous engines, they're pretty interesting to read, and folks are still maintaining them. The technology ioquake3[1] is 10 years old now, but well-maintained as an open-source project. Darkplaces[2] is a heavily-updated Quake I engine that maintains backwards compatibility with Q1 while using fairly modern game programming techniques. Google ported Darkplaces to NaCl a while ago, and it has renderers in OpenGL, Direct X, and OpenGL ES now. [1] http://svn.icculus.org/*checkout*/quake3/trunk/README http://svn.icculus.org/*checkout*/quake3/trunk/README [2] http://git.xonotic.org/?p=xonotic/darkplaces.git;a=summary http://git.xonotic.org/?p=xonotic/darkplaces.git;a=summary

aninteger 15y ago

This article is almost a month old now. I'd guess we will see a release around December like they have done in the past. I wouldn't expect anything before October. This will be the first id software release in c++ and it will be interesting to see what subset of the c++ language they used.

barrettcolin 15y ago
You can get a pretty good idea from looking at the mod sdk code, which is available from here: http://iddevnet.com/doom3/ http://iddevnet.com/doom3/ There's quite a lot available in the game code; the physics system at least, maybe also the script interpreter? I haven't looked in a while.

a3_nm 15y ago

No mention of license, though.

fserb 15y ago
previous games were released under GPL, this one should probably follow.
- coob 15y ago
  yes but which version :)
  - burgerbrain 15y ago
    Almost without question v2. That is what they used in the past and this time there are patent issues to boot.

sanxiyn 15y ago

"Note that Doom 3's famous shadow renderer is based on technology patented by Creative Labs." This is a very sad situation, given that this technology was independently rediscovered and popularized by John Carmack. He learned about the patent only after the fact.

runevault 15y ago
To me that whole debacle was one of the biggest examples of the problems with the patent system today. For all intents and purposes Creative patented a mathematical formula.
- commandar 15y ago
  It's worse than that, really. Creative bought a company (3D Labs) that patented a mathematical formula. Creative wasn't even directly responsible for coming up with the technique.
  - bryanh 15y ago
    I don't think most people take issue with the fact that patents are purchasable or otherwise transferable. If I create a valid, useful (non-software) patent, I should be able to sell or license it in any way I see fit. The issue is software patents, at least in these circles.
    - slowpoke 15y ago
      >I don't think most people take issue with the fact that patents are purchasable or otherwise transferable. I do, because I object to the absurd concept of ownership over ideas. Software patents just take the absurdity to the utter and bizarre maximum. There is no benefit for humanity to be gained through patents, they merely hinder our technological advancement.
      - rcfox 15y ago
        > There is no benefit for humanity to be gained through patents, they merely hinder our technological advancement. I disagree. There are three alternatives (that come to mind) to patents: 1) Make all information freely accessible to anyone. This is the one we'd all like everyone to do. However, there's very little (economic) incentive to innovate when you do all of the heavy thinking and anyone else can just come along and beat you to the implementation. 2) Stop innovating. If you can't protect your ideas, you might as well just stop trying. 3) Hide your information. Only you can benefit from the information if no one else knows about it. (You can't license information and keep it a secret at the same time!) There are laws to help protect you, but you also have to do a lot of work to protect yourself. You can also keep your information secret indefinitely. By filing a patent, you're telling the world how to do something (allegedly) new. In 20 years, (or longer/shorter, depending on the country) everyone is freely able to use the idea.

hiena03 15y ago

I hope they include the changes to the engine made for ET:QW. I'm particularly interested in megatexture. But they say "Doom3 source code" not Id tech 4, so they probably won't.

shabble 15y ago

There's a nice writeup of someone going through the original quake code: http://fabiensanglard.net/quakeSource/index.php http://fabiensanglard.net/quakeSource/index.php Seems to turn up in most threads about iD engine source/dev - I'll do it this time :)

aw3c2 15y ago
And if you want to follow an experienced programmer's quest to make a fast and stable DirectX9, C++ Quake engine then follow http://mhquake.blogspot.com/ http://mhquake.blogspot.com/

empika 15y ago

I'm sure Carmack says alot more about the patent issues and open sourcing the engine in the keynote. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zgYG-_ha28 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zgYG-_ha28

spdy 15y ago
It is amazing how technical his talk is it`s really intressting if you have a progamming background. And it just so different to any other keynote for a game i have ever seen. edit: 5 mins to the end he talks about the doom3 opensource

yason 15y ago

I must say that, unlike with Doom I and II, it will certainly be more exciting to wade through the source code and learn tricks than actually play the game and wade through the endless monotonic, boring action.

aw3c2 15y ago
Doom 3 is actually a very nice if somewhat cheesy horror shooter.

ScaryPlotter 15y ago

August 4, 2011 ?