Video walk through of id's Tech 5 with John Carmack

by Jared Rea { Aug 4th 2007 at 9:20PM }

If you watched the unbelievably gorgeous trailer for id's new action title, Rage, and were curious as to how they're getting a beast like that to run across the PC, Mac, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 platforms with little additional effort, the answer is simple: John Carmack is a genius. That's the short version of it, anyway. The long version can be found here in GameTrailer's two part walk through of id's Tech 5 engine, hosted by the icon himself, John Carmack.

Tech devotees need only apply, but if you're looking to learn a thing or two about development in this day and age, it's not a scary as it may seem. The second part of this series has been embedded after the break for your viewing pleasure.

Related From Joystiq

RAGE screens show up in id Tech 5 presentation
123 days ago
John Carmack 'very interested' in other id Software iPhone resurrections
161 days ago
Expect an id iPhone game 'every two to three months for the next year'
165 days ago

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

okenny @ Aug 4th 2007 9:51PM

You all noticed that the PS3 is the only version shipping on one media. That's the plus. Here's the minus... the PS3 will probably suffer the most because of it's limited memory. If you read early white papers on mega texturing, you should know that at the end of the day, it's another LOD (level of detail) approach. The detail the PS3 will probably be able to show is going to be be linked heavily to it's texture memory and texture compression technology. I won't get to technical about this because this isn't the place but while blueray will be a great selling point for delivering games on one media... media is dirt cheap for pressing and packaging... what will really matter to developers and publishers is the ability to use the hardware to display their final result and this is where the PS3 will face serious problems with it's memory scheme. I can't wait to here more about Tech 5 and how they plan to deal with what will be an obvious difference in texture quality between multiple platforms.

hvnlysoldr @ Aug 4th 2007 9:55PM

So it's like N64's greater RAM versus PSX's memory cache and media capacity? While technically the N64 had greater specs than PSX it had a memory disadvantage.

okenny @ Aug 4th 2007 10:38PM

Yeah, in the N64, the cartrigde mad it impossible to expand media delivry capacity without dramatically increasing cost versus the PSX's optical media which was well... really cheap to make. Blueray and DVDs now are really cheap to make as well but blueray's capacity will always be a great selling point and to a lesser extent, a technical benefit.

The sad part about the PS3 however is that it has technically more memory then the 360. PS2 system and sound processor memories added to the cache for the SPEs and the RSX's 256 and the 256 MB of system memory and you have almost 600 MB of RAM. The problem with the PS3 is the fact it has all it's memory in so many places and really bad ways for allowing one part of the system to get to another parts memory resources. The cell is great and if you read it's white papers you'll see it is pitched for it's secure blackbox-like behavior. You can't have the graphics card read the cells memory. if you want to do an effect on something the RSX just rendered then you have to copy this way: RSX -> SYSTEM -> SPE. Then to show your effect: SPE -> SYSTEM -> RSX. For separate copying of memory. The 360 doesn't have this problem since it's all devices have share the same memory.

The PS3 can overcome these weaknesses if you make certain concessions but these concessions need to be made at the cost of making things that work well on other platforms. UE3 and Tech5 are trying to abstract it so you can essentially do things that can work on all platforms but the one to suffer the most will always be the PS3 due to it's weird mix of hardware.

Tha Key @ Aug 4th 2007 11:08PM

You realize with the Cell chip, certain things that would be applied to ram can be applied to the 7 different SPEs. Developers with a little creativity could truly begin making games, not at all possible on other systems.

myspace.com/thekeytothelock/

Neebs @ Aug 4th 2007 11:28PM

Tha Key, are you proposing using one of the 7 cores as RAM.

Please tell me you're joking.

Roxinos @ Aug 4th 2007 9:56PM

"If you watched the unbelievably gorgeous trailer for id's new action title, Rage..."

I didn't find it particularly impressive. It looked much like DooM 3 did, to me.

Qitsyoj @ Aug 4th 2007 10:15PM

I'm just so amused that he keeps using PS3 as the example for errors.

Matt @ Aug 4th 2007 11:35PM

John Carmack has ALWAYS been a detractor of the PS3, particularly due to the complexity of software development on the system.

Skunk @ Aug 4th 2007 10:15PM

okenny? What 'memory limit' last time i checked the ps3 ram ran faster than the 360s

tamanchama @ Aug 4th 2007 10:29PM

what he said.

Phil @ Aug 4th 2007 10:34PM

Processor speed and memory are two different things.

okenny @ Aug 4th 2007 10:37PM

Memory limit as in total accessible size is what I mean not speed but on that note... the PS3 doesn't have faster RAM, both system RAMS run at the same speed as their respective processors which is 3.2 GHz. Of all the consoles right now however, the 360 has the fastest RAM available (EDRAM @ 256Gb/s or 32 GB/sec). Hey ... I don't want to start a flame war or spec pasting tug-of-war. I'm just stating that I'm not of the mind the the best way to get good looking games on the PS3 is through multi platform engines. The PS3 has to be treated as a completely different creature to work around many architectural weaknesses that plague it.

Matt B @ Aug 5th 2007 10:55PM

Okenny, I really enjoyed your comments. Yes the EDRAM is fast but it is only 10MB and is used for the frame buffer. Both the PS3 and 360 use GDDR3 with the PS3 have 256 and 360 having 512MB. THe PS3 has 256MB of XDR which runs at 3.2GHz while GDDR3 tops out at 1.3GHZ for both systems.

Kev @ Aug 4th 2007 10:28PM

So what if it runs faster (which is only partially true, because only half of the PS3s RAM is XDR)?

The point is, the PS3 has a maximum of 256 megs for system usage and 256 for graphics. PCs have GIGs of RAM for the system and the 360 has a unified system where the GPU can use as much of the 512 as needed. The PS3 essentially bottlenecked itself by splitting the two RAMs apart.

tamanchama @ Aug 4th 2007 10:30PM

you cant compare pc's to consoles.

Zeus the God @ Aug 5th 2007 2:08AM

He just did.

un1qu3 n3wy0rk @ Aug 4th 2007 10:56PM

id should get a nobel prize for Tech 5.

caramelzappa @ Aug 4th 2007 11:10PM

I thought tech5 was really unimpressive. There wasn't much that set it aside from the Doom 3 engine. I think the Unreal 3 engine and the Cryengine 2 have a lot more to offer.

tet @ Aug 4th 2007 11:52PM

I think you guys that are unimpressed by the engine are looking at it from a totally different perspective than you should. This is not a "zomg go upgrade your computer to 8 cores 10 gb of ram and 8 SLI 8800s / phenom" engine where the bar is raised in terms of making something look more realistic and lifelike (like for example Crysis/UT).
It's a totally different thing: the point for the engine is to ease up game developing...

Evan @ Aug 5th 2007 1:32AM

I don't understand. I was totally blown away by Doom3's graphics and was baffled at the fact that it doesn't support HDR or bloom(out of the box). After playing and beating Doom3 I literally thought there was no need for HDR if you can get shadows right.

caramelzappa @ Aug 5th 2007 1:45AM

@tet

Yes, I understand from a developers perspective this could be awesome, but I'm not a developers, I'm a gamer, and the Doom 3 engine has had it's time. This new tool I think is great and will hopefully bring up the quality of multiplatform gaming, but as far as the peak performance of the engine, compared to it's competitors I think there is something to be desired.

@Evan

Doom 3 did look nice at it's time, but everything I've seen on the engine seems to look jagged and polished. Everything else on the Doom 3 engine so far has had terrible physics compared to what other engines and games are supporting, and while good lighting is indeed important, there is a lot more to a graphical environment.

Unrelated but it came to mind: I bought Doom3 expecting another Doom game, a fun, fast paced shooter, but what I got was a lot of creeping around in the dark stumbling around with the flashlight. I didn't think the game was much fun at all.

Snatcher @ Aug 5th 2007 9:38PM

Here is why this new engine should impress you:

1.) It will dramatically decrease the development cycle.

2.) It will allow game makers to spend more time enhancing the quality of the experience vs just making it run on the system.

3.) Repeat number 2 for emphasis. Games are only as good as the experiences they deliver. Uber-Realistic graphics mean nothing without a great storyline and my pet peeve... terribly designed control schemes. Anyone try the Pirates of the Carribean demo on XBOX Live. Ughhhh..... nuff said.

daupin @ Aug 4th 2007 11:12PM

If this engine is everything that Carmack claims it to be -- an engine that is truly multiplatform from the same code base -- the iD is going to make a TON of cash licensing this thing out. I hope that it will live up to the hype as it will be great for gamers to have an engine that is scalable across different hardware that more effort can be put into the art rather than the technology of a game.

I'm actually rather optimistic; it IS Carmack.

Sidenote: anyone else totally engaged any time Carmack makes any sort of presentation? I find his insights fascinating, even way back when with his "finger" on shugashack or bluenews.

okenny @ Aug 4th 2007 11:31PM

OMG.. can you imagine what the old DOS guys could do with these consoles... Ambrish, LeMoth, and Carmack. I would also love to see the demo scene guys give the consoles a try to. LittleBigPlanet if I heard correctly has members of its development team that were into the demo scene. Because so much of these technologies have such a high price for development, I think XNA is moving in the right direction but could be a bit more powerful in allowing access to Xenos's graphic core. I like the idea behind Sony's Linux attempt but with no real access to anything graphical... it kind of defeats the purpose as the CELL becomes just another processor. I know Microsoft is adding more to their GameStudios Express stuff but I'd like to see Sony open up the RSX on the PS3... it's not like it's gonna break anything :(

Biggie @ Aug 4th 2007 11:37PM

Yeah Carmack is a gaming god. ID5 seems like a return to force for ID software.
As for the whole tech arguments going on in this thread, okenny speaks the truth.

IMHO, the design choice the PS3 made will come back to haunt it. While I have no doubt that a dedicated team will be able to coax magic out of that box, the more flexible and generalized approach of the 360 seems easer to get results from.

Qitsyoj @ Aug 4th 2007 11:35PM

4 formats? What, no Wii? :P

Evan @ Aug 5th 2007 1:34AM

Don't worry we got Quake Arena on DS :).

Justin @ Aug 5th 2007 12:03AM

I'm pretty sure he said "this ships with the game."

Are the giving this software away for modders?

Boris @ Aug 5th 2007 12:23AM

I don't understand how you can "put as many things in a map as you like, without slowing down performance", I mean, the graphic card renders them all, the more things there are to render, the slower it will render it.
It doesn't make sense and he didn't explain how it works other than it just does...

Evan @ Aug 5th 2007 1:38AM

I've been making maps for the Quake 3 engine for over a year now and I can confirm what he said. The more detail you add(with brushwork) the slower it gets. I believe Tech5 utilizes a normalmap generator and terrain morpher at the same time when you use the brush tool to cut/morph terrain

SDF-1 @ Aug 5th 2007 5:01AM

He's talking about surface detail not geometry. In fact he states that many times in the video. Listen too learn.

Jeff @ Aug 5th 2007 12:43AM

I think he meant without losing performance because the engine can't handle it.

Negativecool @ Aug 5th 2007 12:52AM

I must say, at its first showing, I wasn’t impressed at all with what John was throwing out there. But after watching those two vids with John discussing the game engine’s deeper implications, I am truly impressed and very excited to see the games that are created with this.

This has got to be one of the most forward thinking game engines I’ve ever seen. The thing some people are overlooking is, although the graphics it presents are necessarily revolutionary, how they create the game IS. This is a revolutionary way to create cross platform games on systems with complex multi-core processors.

It seems like most game engine companies will pour on how bad ass their game engine looks but completely leave out ease of use (Epic being sued anyone?). While this engine brings the pretty (um…this looks much better than Doom III, and I have a feeling the game id is showing doesn’t show everything it can do visually) but also presents the opportunity to learn how you want to do things in MINUTES! Ease of use FTW!

John’s walkthrough of id’s new engine should really be more for devs than anyone. If I’m a dev watching this, I’m excited as hell. If I’m a gamer, I’m looking forward to all of the great games that are no doubt going to be rolling out with this engine.

(Side note with all the chatter of PS3 bottlenecks…I must say I’m pretty disappointed that Kutaragi, the father of the Playstation and “brilliant” engineer, lead the design of a system with this much of a memory bottleneck. It’s like he was just thinking “I will fit blu ray, the Cell, the RSX, a 2.5” hard drive, and the power brick in the box! How to get the most out of each, I don’t care, I just wanna make it all fit.”)

BulletToothTony @ Aug 5th 2007 1:15AM

man this guy should go to the beauty and the geek and give that speech..

he probably would get slapped..

his voice it's the most annoying thing in the world.. and kept fucking swalloing every 30 secs..

even thou all this talk about the ps3 and how it's gonna bite sony in the ass blahblah blah... nobody here is a ps3 programmer, all you've heard that the memory sucks have come from hater sites, if you go to NON fanboyish sites just information sites they explaing hot the xdr memory it's not the same as dr memory.. they explain that runs about twice as fast

and it also explains that if needed the cell can control the ram from graphics to processin if it was needed..

that's why unreal it's already saying that the unreal engine it's running better in the ps3 at the 8 month mark better than it did in the 360.. keep hoping that the ps3 it's gonna suck, bottom line they didn't hire some dummy to design a multi billion project, this is sony and they're good at hardware..

if there wasn't any good games in the horizon i would doubt this, but rfom alone kicks ass.. and there's a reason why killzone2 won best graphics and halo3 didn't..

bottom line even this nerd will learn to use the ps3 and then find it easy to use.. as for now he should go get a better haircut

Biggie @ Aug 5th 2007 1:24AM

Why are you trying to defend PS3 by dissing Carmack? If he think the PS3 has design issues, the PS3 has design issues. The man knows what he is talking about when it comes to gaming hardware and programing for it.

BulletToothTony @ Aug 5th 2007 1:28AM

he didn't say he had issues with the ps3.. he just pointed at it like an example.. and everybody ran with it.. the guy it's pretty annoying, whether he loves the ps3 or not he sounds like he got punched a lot in high school

Negativecool @ Aug 5th 2007 1:33AM

No sense in arguing with an obvious fanboy Biggie. Anyone who doesn't respect the Carmack and dismisses PS3 design issues as propaganda, is a fanboy.

Evan @ Aug 5th 2007 1:42AM

"t.i = 0x5f3759df - ( t.i >> 1 ); // what the fuck?"

THIS JUSTIFIES EVERYTHING.

Phi Nguyen @ Aug 5th 2007 1:44AM

So the guy swallows a lot. I guess he should apologize for not having your great deepthroating skills. :p

Bottom-line Carmack knows his shit. I mean, he's literally the father of FPS games. If he doesn't like the PS3's architecture, fine. That's his opinion, he's entitled to it and no amount of your discrediting is going to change that.

Some people might love working around the PS3 flaws (Kojima sure can make a pretty game... MGS4 FTW BABY!!!!!) but Carmack is not the first person to state how difficult it is programming for the PS3.

Zeus the God @ Aug 5th 2007 2:15AM

Seriously. This guy has fucking PIONEERED the game engine front, ever since Doom. Ever major advance in game engine history has been because of John Carmack. if you can't respect that, then shut your mouth, because you might as well not even speak. This guy is a God in the eyes of developers.

Avatar @ Aug 5th 2007 6:49AM

Next time you're going to bash John Carmack, at least spell properly. You look like and idiot child having a fit.

Also, NEVER bash John Carmack.

oz @ Aug 5th 2007 10:32AM

BulletTooth, it’s people like you who ruin blogs and message boards.

Whenever such articles are posted there’s always some insecure kid who thinks its worthwhile to make disparaging comments about someone’s appearance. Why bother?

“his voice it's the most annoying thing in the world.. and kept fucking swalloing every 30 secs..”

Are you sure about that, is it actually the most annoying thing in the world?

Please take yourself to an AOL message board, your juvenile and superficial “omg he/she’s so annoying/geeky” comments would be more appreciated there

Poisoned Al @ Aug 5th 2007 1:17PM

I've stopped bothering to read BTTony's posts long ago. He's ether on Sony's payroll or mentally retarded. Or both if he's part of Sony's marketing.

MrBlank @ Aug 5th 2007 1:40AM

It's interesting to see how game development is becoming more standardized -- much like the Web Standards Project. Now it's 100X easier to build Web sites and collaborate on large projects because of standards. I hope the gaming industry gets a jump in creativity from this. I'd be nice not to have to be a huge corporate powerhouse with tons of $$$ to produce a great multi-platform game.

Paul Webb @ Aug 5th 2007 1:54AM

I really enjoyed this video. If handled correctly (which I have no doubt id will), this could be a huge revolution in the way games are programed, and made available to just about any platform that can handle the specs

Carmack has never been wrong before (to my knowledge), and I have no problem following him now. He is the Stephen Hawking of the programing world.

Negativecool @ Aug 5th 2007 1:56AM

John goes on to explain much more, lets clear up some confusion.
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/23179.html

jitty @ Aug 5th 2007 2:17AM

THATS John Carmack. He looks... different from what I imagined. I imagined him to be older, look more experienced... He looks like any regular 28 year old nerd. (Even, thats what most you might imagine a person like home to be) Though I must admit, his work is pretty ingenius. Guess it's another one of the many cases of "don't judge a book by it's cover..."