🚀 go-pugleaf

Walter Mitty wrote:
> knight37 wrote:
> >
> >
> > You use quotes on those words but I never did use that phrase, so I
> > would appreciate it if you didn't "quote" me with shit I never wrote.
> >
>
> Apologies : it was a misquote : here's your original -
>
> "Aside from that, it's debatable whether or not Quake 3 is of any use
> besides FPS games. And not only that, it takes a LOT more than just
> source code to make a game. And Quake 3 is really outdated now, so any
> game that used that technology, unless they do a lot of tweaking,
> probably isn't going to be commercially viable."
>
> And sensible too : either though I do get the idea that you're not JC's
> biggest fan :;

I'm not his biggest fan, no. I admire his accomplishments in 3D gaming
engine technology. But I am no Carmack fanboy. I fail to see how
stating my opinion about the value of Quake 3's engine today betrays
anything about my views of Carmack himself, however. All I said in this
thread was something to the effect of -- he could have written Quake 4
in the time it took to do this speech. That was supposed to be a joke,
BTW. He did kind of ramble a bit in his speech, and I was merely poking
a little fun at it.

I see value in Quake 3's source release for modders and such,
especially for the educational value, but I don't see it as all that
valuable for commercial endeavors. I mean, lets say you get that code
today. By the time that you could write a game around it it's probably
18 months or possibly 2 years later. In 2007, do you think that a
Quake-3 Engine game is going to be commercially viable? I doubt it, but
of course, I suppose anything is possible. :)

Knight37