🚀 go-pugleaf

John Eckart wrote:
> Is there such a thing as a Quake 4? I've heard roomers that it's being made, but I don't know if it's BS or not.

Yes, Quake IV is currently in development, based on the Doom 3 engine.

It is being developed by Raven Software, however, not id.

http://www.ravengames.com/quake4/

"DF" <user@mail.com> wrote in message news:bmhvcc$ece$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> John Eckart wrote:
> > Is there such a thing as a Quake 4? I've heard roomers that it's being
made, but I don't know if it's BS or not.
>
> Yes, Quake IV is currently in development, based on the Doom 3 engine.
>
> It is being developed by Raven Software, however, not id.
>
> http://www.ravengames.com/quake4/

Is ID working on a next generation game?

Bootstrap Bill wrote:

> Is ID working on a next generation game?

Ya, they are busy working on Doom 3.

http://doomworld.com/doom3/

You can already download a demo of Doom 3. However it was not released 
by id, it was leaked, i.e. it is illegal to have. Same deal with 
Half-Life 2.

"Bootstrap Bill" <wrcousert@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:3B0jb.12277$ZH4.1705@twister.socal.rr.com: 

> 
> Is ID working on a next generation game?
> 
> 

I'm not sure if there is a next generation. I mean doom was 
revolutionary in pesudo-3-D, and quake brought real 3-D movement 
(along with some others). Q2 brought some advances to lighting and 
such. Q3 made rounded surfaces more practical, etc. Doom 3 seems to 
be taking lighting abut as far as possible, and supposedly has some 
physics package advances that will let players knock things off 
shelves and so on. There evidently aren't any games companies 
working on 4-D physical spaces, objects that are neither faceted or 
curved, and such. (Pity, I would love to see R'yleh rendered 
realistically). 

Artifakt wrote:

>There evidently aren't any games companies 
>working on 4-D physical spaces, objects that are neither faceted or 
>curved, and such. (Pity, I would love to see R'yleh rendered 
>realistically). 
>
The maths behind rendition of non-polygonal surfaces has been around for 
a while, but involves such a terribly high level of computation that 
we're not going to see computers/graphics cards capable of real-time 
processing of it for quite some years. Games companies have to use the 
technology of the marketplace, so they're stuck firmly in polygonal 
rendering for the foreseeable future.

I would say, though, that the equations involved in dynamic lighting are 
easily complicated enough to merit it being called a new generation of 
3D engine, but it's all semantic really. It really depends on the level 
of competing products.

Graeme Hawker <spam@meep2.thingyoucatchfishin.invalid> wrote in
news:bo9pv7$hvi$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk: 
 
> 
> I would say, though, that the equations involved in dynamic
> lighting are easily complicated enough to merit it being
> called a new generation of 3D engine, but it's all semantic
> really. It really depends on the level of competing products.
> 
Right in one, sport! The improvement hasn't stopped, but it's 
become more evolutionary rather than revolutionary, and just what 
counts as a generation will be increasingly ambiguous. Improvements 
such as volumetric fog are likely to only show at selected points 
in the games, rather than permiate them. And as Martha Stewart 
would say, "That's a GOOD thing". Improvements in rendering are 
likely to be more incremental in the future, at least for a while, 
which means knocking my socks off will take improvements in 
storyline, game feel, and other areas, often considered 
intangibles. There should be some good games come out of this. 

On 11/4/2003 3:59 PM Artifakt befouled our nation with:

> (Pity, I would love to see R'yleh rendered
>
>realistically). 
>  
>

Do you actually have that in your head somehow? 'Cause I sure don't.

-- 
"I thought I had an appetite for destruction, but all I wanted was a club sandwich."

Steve [Inglo]

Inglo <spehrson@flapjacksrus.net> wrote in
news:tJ9qb.633$1F5.489@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com: 

> On 11/4/2003 3:59 PM Artifakt befouled our nation with:
> 
>> (Pity, I would love to see R'yleh rendered
>>
>>realistically). 
>>  
>>
> 
> Do you actually have that in your head somehow? 'Cause I sure
> don't. 
> 
I even have the non-euclidian tee-shirt, but I can't wear it cause 
I don't have Pi arms. ;)

I think there is: http://gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/531883.asp

John Eckart wrote:
> Is there such a thing as a Quake 4? I've heard roomers that it's being made, but I don't know if it's BS or not.