No multi-gpu support, no anti-aliasing support, no ambient occlusion, no parralax occulusion mapping, 60fps cap, buggy megatexturing, generally below average performance, the list goes on. I will never buy another game running this engine.
ID Tech 5 is bad engine isn't it?
- Thread starter futurefields
- Start date
Way to go trashing an engine that hasn't been updated in many years. -_- I don't think you have to worry about too many games using it, we saw 2 this year probably because they were started back in 2010 and kept getting dropped and picked up again. No one else is releasing a game using it.
It's a very innovative engine that has been around for many years and powered a lot of very good games. The recent changes such as mega texture was designed largely in part to deal with the horrible lack of memory that consoles had, it's job was not to make the best looking game possible but overcome the texture limitations of aging or under powered systems such as consoles.
Things like the 60fps cap can be removed, and multi-gpu support is a problem with the vendors of GPUs and not the game engine, the game engine makes OpenGL calls which the GPUs service, if the vendors can't balance those calls correctly across multi-GPU then that their issue.
I think a generally below average performance is unfair considering the huge amount of texture data that goes into IDtech5 maps, we don't have anything to compare it against that uses the sheer volume of unique textures, so to say it has below average performance isn't really fair.
Things like the 60fps cap can be removed, and multi-gpu support is a problem with the vendors of GPUs and not the game engine, the game engine makes OpenGL calls which the GPUs service, if the vendors can't balance those calls correctly across multi-GPU then that their issue.
I think a generally below average performance is unfair considering the huge amount of texture data that goes into IDtech5 maps, we don't have anything to compare it against that uses the sheer volume of unique textures, so to say it has below average performance isn't really fair.
It's only powered two games, Wolfenstein and The Evil Within. Why do they keep using OpenGL rather than DirectX? Is it political?
Rakehellion
Lifer
- Jan 15, 2013
- 12,181
- 35
- 91
"OpenGL has had new versions released over the last few years, but where it has fallen behind is in innovation and features. Originally it set the bar, but DirectX caught up and then carried on innovating with every version. It has reached a point where OpenGL + extensions can still offer up a decent API, but DirectX is basically better.
If a number of respected figures in the games industry said this then it would probably pass under the radar of everyone except other developers. But when John Carmack talks about technology and preferences everyone listens because he has always been at the forefront of graphics technology. This is proven just by looking back at what Carmack and id have achieved with their own game engines and the forthcoming id Tech 5.
Microsoft shouldn’t start celebrating yet, though. Even though Carmack prefers DirectX he won’t be using it any time soon. Although he could easily port the final game executables of id titles over to the API, the engine and its tools are all using OpenGL and that’s not a code base Carmack wants to sit down and change over to DirectX just for the sake of it.
What this does suggest, however, is that id Tech 6 may be the first id Software DirectX-focused engine."
http://www.geek.com/games/john-carmack-finally-prefers-directx-to-opengl-1326739/
Welp there it is I suppose, has nothing to do with what is the better API. They continue to use OpenGL because they don't want to spend the time/resources changing their tools over.
If a number of respected figures in the games industry said this then it would probably pass under the radar of everyone except other developers. But when John Carmack talks about technology and preferences everyone listens because he has always been at the forefront of graphics technology. This is proven just by looking back at what Carmack and id have achieved with their own game engines and the forthcoming id Tech 5.
Microsoft shouldn’t start celebrating yet, though. Even though Carmack prefers DirectX he won’t be using it any time soon. Although he could easily port the final game executables of id titles over to the API, the engine and its tools are all using OpenGL and that’s not a code base Carmack wants to sit down and change over to DirectX just for the sake of it.
What this does suggest, however, is that id Tech 6 may be the first id Software DirectX-focused engine."
http://www.geek.com/games/john-carmack-finally-prefers-directx-to-opengl-1326739/
Welp there it is I suppose, has nothing to do with what is the better API. They continue to use OpenGL because they don't want to spend the time/resources changing their tools over.
Rakehellion
Lifer
- Jan 15, 2013
- 12,181
- 35
- 91
Not so much in this game. The physics engine requires a 60 FPS cap, and removing it throws all the timing off.
blake0812
Senior member
- Feb 6, 2014
- 788
- 4
- 81
I thought ID Tech 5 was pretty technically impressive. At least for Rage it ran fast and looked great. And the megatexture technology is pretty innovative, and was even adopted for directx.
Bateluer
Lifer
- Jun 23, 2001
- 27,730
- 8
- 0
DirectX is a Microsoft technology. OpenGL is not. OpenGL should be used over DX whenever possible.
Bateluer
Lifer
- Jun 23, 2001
- 27,730
- 8
- 0
Yes. Open standards are always better. OGL can do everything DX does, with lower overhead.
mmntech
Lifer
- Sep 20, 2007
- 17,501
- 12
- 0
OpenGL is still widely used for consoles and mobile. While the PS4 has some DirectX 11 support, it's only Xbox that uses it exclusively. A lot of non-gaming 3D rendered applications use OpenGL as well.
I'm not sure what the the visual advantages are between the two. Though apparently OGL puts devs closer to the metal. That's important with embedded systems like consoles and handhelds. Stuff that has a long upgrade cycle.
I'm not sure what the the visual advantages are between the two. Though apparently OGL puts devs closer to the metal. That's important with embedded systems like consoles and handhelds. Stuff that has a long upgrade cycle.
Fallen Kell
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 6,153
- 504
- 126
Cross-platform support. Writing in OpenGL means they don't have to change the code for Linux/OS-X/Android.
BFG10K
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2000
- 22,709
- 3,000
- 126
Artorias
Platinum Member
- Feb 8, 2014
- 2,218
- 1,523
- 136
Megatextures is more about aesthetics that super high resolution graphics. I think its a cool tech that has potential but as you say the massive file sizes make it a bit of a boon currently.
This video sums up everything I have to say about it,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiQCz2NjPR8&feature=player_embedded
Raduque
Lifer
- Aug 22, 2004
- 13,140
- 138
- 106
It's an interesting video. So, Megatexturing solves the problem of repeating textures. But what's going to solve MT's problem with pop-in and short-range blurry textures?
When I played Rage, I noticed a severe problem with that. The textures on barrel on the pile of debris right next to me had the same LOD as the building 2 miles distant. It was a blurry, low-resolution mess, and that pulled me out of Rage's game world quicker than any sort of repeating textures would have. Worse, if I looked away from the barrel and right back at it, for a half a second, it would have been even lower resolution, like I was looking at something without my glasses on!
It's less about that and more about the fact that they use Blu-ray and install to 500GB+ discs in both the PS4 and XboxOne. So they use uncompressed textures and other media to save CPU and GPU cycles.
StrangerGuy
Diamond Member
- May 9, 2004
- 8,443
- 124
- 106
When I think of great game engines it's used by games that brings great looking visuals regardless of rendering technicalities and also runs fantastically on modest hardware like Saints Row 4 and Sleeping Dogs, not laggy resource hogs like Far Cry 4 that looks good but that is only really because of the art direction.
Maximilian
Lifer
- Feb 8, 2004
- 12,604
- 15
- 81
Except of course that it can't - not even close.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/opengl-directx,2019.html
OpenGL is at the level of DX8
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 19K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter