[dumb/wannby's nerd topic] Why not a CF 3D card?

by **damian** » Apr 26, 2003 @ 2:00am

No, James. Doom used raycasting, which is a technique where all the walls are drawn by vertical line. First, the floor pixels are drawn, with the proper measures taken for textures; then, the wall pixels, and then the ceiling pixels. The monsters/weapons/rockets/powerups/dead guys/skulls/whatever are then drawn as sprites, with the necessary scaling done. That's it. No triangles involved. Of course, this tech has its limits; looking up/down, for example, causes great distortion. Play zdoom and you'll see.

In real 3D, triangles (everything's made of triangles) are oriented, scaled, and then drawn.

Big difference there...

Oh, I KNOW! Try zdoom, and then jDoom, and compare the differences. Turn mouselook on preferrably.

by **James S** » Apr 26, 2003 @ 2:07am

Okay, so I was off on the technical process, but never the less the Doom engine is 2D, just like Wolfenstein 3D. Quake is the first 3D game that I know of, unless there is another that I'm forgetting about.

by **damian** » Apr 26, 2003 @ 2:33am

Doom isn't 2D... it's just pseudo-3D... or something. It's not true 3d but it's not Pacman.

Didn't Starfox come out before quake? But then it wasn't textured, so I guess it doesn't count.

Actually wait... an arcade game called "I, Robot" was released by Atari in 1983, featuring TEXTURED graphics... google for that. It's supposed to be the first "real" 3D game.

by **James S** » Apr 26, 2003 @ 2:53am

I'm not saying it's pacman :roll:

The terror of ... *duh duhm DAHHHH!*

Doesn't look textured to me.

by **damian** » Apr 26, 2003 @ 2:54am

The point is it's not a "true" 2D game.

by **James S** » Apr 26, 2003 @ 2:56am

No no no... the point ran off with the spoon a couple pages ago.

by **damian** » Apr 26, 2003 @ 2:57am

No no no... MY point, not the point. Who gives a rat's ass about the point of a thread?

by **James S** » Apr 26, 2003 @ 3:03am

"Not I," said the cow.

by **damian** » Apr 26, 2003 @ 3:05am

Yeah exactly, so shut yer trap and continue arguing.

by **James S** » Apr 26, 2003 @ 3:13am

Ohh, right. Dang.

Well it's not "true" 3d either!

by **damian** » Apr 26, 2003 @ 3:16am

Yeah, but it's pretty damn close, and that cyberdemon is beautiful as hell...

by **James S** » Apr 26, 2003 @ 3:17am

What is he, 70x70 pixels? Yah ... right. A beautiful piece of scaled 2D, but most definitely not 3D.

by **damian** » Apr 26, 2003 @ 3:19am

Yeah, but definitely better than Pacman.

by **James S** » Apr 26, 2003 @ 3:22am

Nope, Pacman has WAY better gameplay, thus it's better. I mean, come on, for real. I'd rather play pacman and that same level over and over again ... and again with the same little ghosties each level again and again than some huge complex game like Doom. That's like the lamest comparison ever. Pacman is so hizzle, you can't compare it to anything. It's up there on a class it's own, it's in orbit, yoh. Nothing touches Packuh man!

by **damian** » Apr 26, 2003 @ 3:25am

Yeah, but Pacman doesn't allow you to shoot John Romero, now does it?

[dumb/wannby's nerd topic] Why not a CF 3D card?

Sort

Forum Description

Moderators:

Forum permissions