quakeworld launch '96

[Syluxguy28O3]

its cool to watch these people drool over quake.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXw6BkZ-gdY&feature=related]QuakeWorld Launch Event - 1996 - YouTube[/ame]

[grave_digga]

Nice find! I love Carmack, i could listen to him for hours.

[Roy Batty]

Me too, I love his keynotes every year at quake con.

[Mindf!3ldzX]

I'm not so much a fan of him,as I am of the entire Id effort to bring me Quake1. Carmack is cool and all but,he's only a COG in a greater machine.

[Baker]

Carmack is cool and all but,he's only a COG in a greater machine.

From what I've experience, I see things differently. The Quake engine and supporting set of tools (map building tools: the lighting tool, the visibility tool) combined with the engine (memory management, input, networking, "time" management, software renderer) and the console and the progs interpreter/compiler (cross platform) and a configuration system --- there is huge chunk of technology in just old WinQuake.

Quake 3 does something like "just in compilation to assembly language" with it's game logic, has from what I understand its own shader system, more complex player prediction using a "frame buffer" (probably the "standard" today) and this is aside from Doom 3 and mega texture stuff.

I agree that you still need someone with some vision and creativity to make the content that gives a game life.

But the more I've become familiar with Quake deep-inside from engine coding (sheesh there is a ton to learn, far more than is commonly thought about) ... one realizes that the engine itself and all the things it does is easy to underestimate.

There is validity in what you say in the sense that Q1 is bizarrely creative, and the later ones ... well ...

[Mindf!3ldzX]

From what I've experience, I see things differently. The Quake engine and supporting set of tools (map building tools: the lighting tool, the visibility tool) combined with the engine (memory management, input, networking, "time" management, software renderer) and the console and the progs interpreter/compiler (cross platform) and a configuration system --- there is huge chunk of technology in just old WinQuake.

Quake 3 does something like "just in compilation to assembly language" with it's game logic, has from what I understand its own shader system, more complex player prediction using a "frame buffer" (probably the "standard" today) and this is aside from Doom 3 and mega texture stuff.

I agree that you still need someone with some vision and creativity to make the content that gives a game life.

But the more I've become familiar with Quake deep-inside from engine coding (sheesh there is a ton to learn, far more than is commonly thought about) ... one realizes that the engine itself and all the things it does is easy to underestimate.

There is validity in what you say in the sense that Q1 is bizarrely creative, and the later ones ... well ...

Yah, the only two guys I know of who get credit on Quake1 in a regular basis is Romero and Carmack.

[echos]

who else could you credit, trent for doing the music? the texture guy for making so many brown textures that the palette was half brown?

carmack deserves credit because he was one of the pioneers in bringing out fully 3d games, and he enabled people to modify them instead of trying to lock them out of doing it which was really cool. he could of instead sicced lawyers on everyone if he wanted to corner the market on selling addon packs.

romero and willits made the best levels in my opinion so i think they should get major credit for that, designing such great things in 3d when it was an entirely new technology, using a very basic map editor to do it with at that. mcgee and petersen made some maps i like too, but overall the ones i liked the best were from romero and willits.