Mike
|
 |
«
Posted
2011-11-23 07:08:43 » |
|
Hi all, If you're interested in an OpenGL game that used to be very nice looking compared to other games the source code for Doom 3 has now been made public under GPL https://github.com/TTimo/doom3.gpl
|
|
|
|
Mike
|
 |
«
Reply #1 - Posted
2011-11-23 07:09:18 » |
|
Double post, please remove.
|
|
|
|
Cero
|
 |
«
Reply #2 - Posted
2011-11-23 11:03:31 » |
|
yes - as announced by Carmack @ this years QuakeCon I understand he had to rewrite some code due to stupid licensing problems, but here it is I like it - although, its not like I can read it and understand it or stuff =D
|
|
|
|
Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
|
|
Mike
|
 |
«
Reply #3 - Posted
2011-11-23 12:24:22 » |
|
He had to add four lines and change two lines because of a patent of Creative...
Mike
|
|
|
|
ReBirth
|
 |
«
Reply #4 - Posted
2011-11-23 22:57:51 » |
|
I havent been understanding opengl... but this is one of my fav game and FPS that freaked me out for first time! 
|
|
|
|
gimbal
|
 |
«
Reply #5 - Posted
2011-12-08 16:27:32 » |
|
I'm always in awe of people that can take Carmack's code and actually make it do something else. There is just so much code in there (even the Wolfenstein3D code was huge), how would you even begin to comprehend it all?
|
|
|
|
|
Cero
|
 |
«
Reply #7 - Posted
2011-12-08 18:06:18 » |
|
I'm always in awe of people that can take Carmack's code and actually make it do something else. There is just so much code in there (even the Wolfenstein3D code was huge), how would you even begin to comprehend it all?
yeah try going back to even your own code after a year or so its hard
|
|
|
|
gimbal
|
 |
«
Reply #8 - Posted
2011-12-09 16:12:06 » |
|
I'm always in awe of people that can take Carmack's code and actually make it do something else. There is just so much code in there (even the Wolfenstein3D code was huge), how would you even begin to comprehend it all?
yeah try going back to even your own code after a year or so its hard Especially if you're still in that "less than 10 years Java programming experience" phase where after a year you go back to code that horrifies you 
|
|
|
|
sproingie
|
 |
«
Reply #9 - Posted
2011-12-09 17:40:03 » |
|
I don't even like C++, and avoid it wherever possible, but I find Carmack's code to be incredibly readable. The absence of idioms like virtual inheritance or template metaprogramming leads to some very straightforward code, and quite well-commented code at that. You want giant code hairballs, go read the source to libstdc++ sometime.
This isn't to say that I don't like the existence of clever idioms in languages (my language of choice these days is Scala, which is stuffed top to bottom with clever tricks), it's just that I appreciate them most when they make things clearer in the end.
|
|
|
|
Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
|
|
impaler
Senior Newbie 
|
 |
«
Reply #10 - Posted
2011-12-09 17:51:06 » |
|
What better way to learn than by reading the source code of a finished product?
|
|
|
|
gouessej
|
 |
«
Reply #11 - Posted
2011-12-09 18:15:05 » |
|
What better way to learn than by reading the source code of a finished product?
Making a finished product.
|
|
|
|
princec
|
 |
«
Reply #12 - Posted
2011-12-09 19:31:48 » |
|
Hehe that's ironic coming from you Julien  Cas 
|
|
|
|
ReBirth
|
 |
«
Reply #13 - Posted
2011-12-10 04:56:15 » |
|
What better way to learn than by reading the source code of a finished product?
try to make one by yourself and fix every errors. When errors are out, try something naughty 
|
|
|
|
ra4king
|
 |
«
Reply #14 - Posted
2011-12-18 04:45:00 » |
|
Hehe that's ironic coming from you Julien  Cas  Bahahahahaha 
|
|
|
|
gouessej
|
 |
«
Reply #15 - Posted
2011-12-18 10:09:02 » |
|
Hehe that's ironic coming from you Julien  Cas  Lol I wasn't ironic, I'm still far from having succeeding in making a finished product but I still think trying to do it is a nice way to learn a lot of things.
|
|
|
|
gimbal
|
 |
«
Reply #16 - Posted
2011-12-20 16:25:25 » |
|
What better way to learn than by reading the source code of a finished product?
You can learn programming this way, you are generally not going to learn the concepts behind what is programmed though, especially when dealing with something as complex as a 3D game. I can't speak for other people, but I certainly wouldn't be able to figure out how for example occlusion culling works just by looking at the code of a 3D FPS game, I need an article or book to explain the theory to me in detail (with many pictures) before I can even begin to understand code.
|
|
|
|
princec
|
 |
«
Reply #17 - Posted
2011-12-20 22:53:28 » |
|
Trying is the most important thing! Without trying no-one ever succeeds. Cas 
|
|
|
|
R.D.
|
 |
«
Reply #18 - Posted
2011-12-21 20:58:19 » |
|
Trying is the most important thing! Without trying no-one ever succeeds. Cas  I would go a little bit further and say, failing is even more important.
|
|
|
|
Roquen
|
 |
«
Reply #19 - Posted
2011-12-22 09:37:26 » |
|
The old "axe" about learning more from failures than successes is pretty true. My take on this stuff is that CS is applied mathematics. And the only way to truly learn either is to get off your a$$ and work problems.
|
|
|
|
princec
|
 |
«
Reply #20 - Posted
2011-12-22 10:16:04 » |
|
Pedant mode on but... I think I was saying, if you don't even try, you can't even fail either. Cas 
|
|
|
|
Roquen
|
 |
«
Reply #21 - Posted
2011-12-22 10:30:11 » |
|
Sure. And your position of telling people getting off their bums and coding stuff (even if in the stupidest way possible) rather than getting mired down in minutia is good advice. Only with a moderate amount of experience can you start to get a feel for when complexity is truly needed.
|
|
|
|
princec
|
 |
«
Reply #22 - Posted
2011-12-22 10:40:19 » |
|
I don't think I'll ever figure it out, myself. I've been doing it for over 30 years now and I still can't get the balance right. Cas 
|
|
|
|
Roquen
|
 |
«
Reply #23 - Posted
2011-12-22 10:44:01 » |
|
My thinking is that you're an expert programmer if you fit into either of these conditions: 1) You've forgotten more about CS than you currently know. 2) You realize that you'll never know all that much.
|
|
|
|
gimbal
|
 |
«
Reply #24 - Posted
2011-12-28 12:04:07 » |
|
I don't think I'll ever figure it out, myself. I've been doing it for over 30 years now and I still can't get the balance right. Cas  And nobody probably ever will, there are simply too many conflicting interests to ever get to a point where you can follow the mighty rule of "thou shalt engineer software". Conflicts of interest, changing requirements, money, deadlines- they all kill proper software engineering. And those murderers are always lurking, no matter what project you do.
|
|
|
|
|