Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
GoatLord

What will define id tech 666?

Recommended Posts

Because if you look at it, each has had a special feature or two that essentially defines it.

id tech 1: X/Y grid-based mapping that allows for lighting and height changes among other things.

id tech 2: Fully 3D engine with lightmaps.

id tech 3: Same, but with optimizations and a bit more complexity.

id tech 4: Complex self shadowing and general lighting techniques.

id tech 5: Megatextures.

id tech 666: ?

Share this post


Link to post

Hoping the biggest thing will be efficient rendering of large areas combined with excellent textures :)

Share this post


Link to post

Hybrid of some Carmack's works with CryEngine, I think. Well balanced for consoles hardware...and nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post

PISS. >:[






...just kidding. :P

I'm not sure if this counts as an engine thing but if you ask me, the triumphant return of gibs! For about ten years now I've been so frustrated with all the damn rag dolls, people used to fucking EXPLODE in video games and I've been dying to see that return. I know id Tech 5 had dibs but in this game they're more realistic and brutal than ever.

Share this post


Link to post

they said they had new particle effects and rendering system. the smoke + flairs or shiny little particles that were always on your screen were also a part of the new engine. Although to me, that seemed a bit overkill because if u watch the E3 demo with that in mind, you can clearly see taht they've used them too much and in too many places. but if you watch that demo just to kreygasm then u prolly didn't pay attention.

Share this post


Link to post

I hope they don't try to go for gimmicks like with all of the older engines, it just ends up making the engine suffer in the long run (IDTech 4 & 5 got hit especially hard by their focus on their gimmicks).

Share this post


Link to post
NoirSuede said:

I hope they don't try to go for gimmicks like with all of the older engines, it just ends up making the engine suffer in the long run (IDTech 4 & 5 got hit especially hard by their focus on their gimmicks).


Gimmicks? Are you serious?

Share this post


Link to post
NoirSuede said:

(IDTech 4 & 5 got hit especially hard by their focus on their gimmicks).

Do you mean the megatexture technology?

Share this post


Link to post
Avoozl said:

Do you mean the megatexture technology?


idtech 4 (Doom 3) utilized the unified lighting and engine rendering technique, resulting in thick black stencil shadows and an inability to draw large environments. That's seen by some as gimmicky. Megatextures are present in idtech 5 (Rage).

Share this post


Link to post
GoatLord said:

Megatextures are present in idtech 5 (Rage).

Yes I'm aware, but ETQW was an ID Tech 4 game and it utilized megatexture before Rage.

Share this post


Link to post

I hope it will be as polished and optimized as were id Tech 3 and id Tech 4. Those were some slick tech with beautiful source codes. id Tech 5 was a buggy mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Orchid87 said:

I hope it will be as polished and optimized as were id Tech 3 and id Tech 4. Those were some slick tech with beautiful source codes. id Tech 5 was a buggy mess.

I really hope they release a Wolf NO "Remastered" on IDTech 666.
I love that game but I can't stand how optimized it is.
I can run GTA 5 on Ultra settings, but Wolf still runs terribly.

Share this post


Link to post
Avoozl said:

The game looks like its on medium to high graphics settings in that pic.

It looks the same on Ultra

Swann is the worst example, other characters are a bit better. In fact, Doom 3 models were pretty low poly with normal maps making them look higher poly than they actually are. Normal maps can't mask the low poly edges against the background though. Makes me wonder why id hadn't used higher poly models for BFG edition. They have those high-poly models they've made normal maps from, somewhere in their archives.

Share this post


Link to post

Having to optimize poly counts will do that. At least the enemies looked better (although the lost soul is a bit too blocky).

Share this post


Link to post

Other characters look better:

Also don't forget, the graphics were set in stone in 2001-2002, after that id only made the levels and polished bugs.

Share this post


Link to post

I wonder why his head poly count is so low? It can't be because of the stupid glasses.

Share this post


Link to post

Ray tracing, raycasting, voxels stored in an octree. id Tech 6 will combine ray tracing and classic raster graphics. It would work by raycasting the geometry represented by voxels (instead of triangles) stored in an octree.

Share this post


Link to post

Not sure I've seen evidence of that, since shadowing in neo-Doom is clearly selective.

Share this post


Link to post
Hofmann said:

Ray tracing, raycasting, voxels stored in an octree. id Tech 6 will combine ray tracing and classic raster graphics. It would work by raycasting the geometry represented by voxels (instead of triangles) stored in an octree.

I've read this article too, the information was there long before Doom 4 reveal. Doom 4 clearly looks like a conventional engine, without all this stuff. IMO all of this will be either in a post-Doom 4 id tech, or Carmack just took these ideas with himself to Oculus.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah that's horribly out of date. The idea for a voxel engine as id Tech 6 was Carmack's pipe dream which will probably never see the light of day now (certainly not at id anyway).

The fact the new engine is being called id Tech 6 is kind of laughable IMHO. Even just looking at SnapMap and how entity triggering works you can see very little has changed since 4 in that regard; and rendering technology-wise I believe we will find it is more of a regression than a step forward - not saying for bad or wrong reasons either, just that I believe what it's doing is a lot closer to id Tech 4 than what was done in id Tech 5 for Rage that ended up being such a disaster.

I believe the name is mostly for marketing purposes, frankly.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm no tech expert so I'm not sure I see the problem, the game looks perfectly fine in terms of graphics to me even if I was expecting a bigger leap. :S

Anyone's free to fill me in on this, of course.

Also, I hope this game won't have terrible texture pop-ups like Rage did.

Share this post


Link to post

I saw pretty much no texture buffering issues in the demo, either last year at QuakeCon or the footage from this year. It looks very stable. I'm not sure what id could do that no one else is; it's not the 90s (or early 2000s) anymore. Everything looks great, but it doesn't look like it'll blow much out of the water. At the same time, I've been seeing a fair amount of next-gen games that look pretty shitty compared to neo-Doom.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×