John Carmack Interview
nowgamer.com
John Carmack Interview
1–10 of 24 posts
Re: John Carmack Interview
#2"I just turned 40 and I can be programming for another 40 years; there’s a lot yet to do!"
I love John Carmack.
Re: John Carmack Interview
#3I'm always happy to hear when developers optimize for refresh rate over graphical complexity, especially if competitive play will be involved.
Re: John Carmack Interview
#4I'm always happy to hear when developers optimize for refresh rate over graphical complexity, especially if competitive play will be involved.
Do you think 60Hz is the right rate? Just seems like such a huge jump over 30. Does 48 make more sense?
Re: John Carmack Interview
#5I'm always happy to hear when developers optimize for refresh rate over graphical complexity, especially if competitive play will be involved.
Do you think 60Hz is the right rate? Just seems like such a huge jump over 30. Does 48 make more sense?
You can't control the actual refresh rate of the monitor or TV. The display refreshes at 60hz, you can draw every frame, or every other frame and have twice the time.
And yet, like he says, Rage looks better than most 30hz games.
Re: John Carmack Interview
#6I had the great pleasure of meeting Mr. Carmack recently (here's the photo proof: http://jacoblear.com/carmack.jpg ) and was able to listen to him talk casually, as opposed to in an interview or speaking event. He doesn't turn his brilliance on and off, it's there all the time.
When I was a kid, I wanted to do 2 things, make video games and go to space. Here we have a man who is a legend in the games industry, and also started a company sending rockets into space. He's awesome.
Re: John Carmack Interview
#7This is why Carmack keeps shipping incredible products:
"I am more excited about what I’m doing and what I’m working on than ever before."
Great advice to those of us building companies, along the lines of the "do something you love and you'll never work a day in your life" quote banging around here recently
Re: John Carmack Interview
#8I'm always happy to hear when developers optimize for refresh rate over graphical complexity, especially if competitive play will be involved.
Do you think 60Hz is the right rate? Just seems like such a huge jump over 30. Does 48 make more sense?
Depends on the game. For really twitchy FPSs, you'll want at least over 40. UT2k4 players (and others... just I had a lot more interactions with them) would bitch and moan about sub-60 fps.
The scary thing is that they weren't always bullshitting about that.
Also, as sister reply said, going at 60 means no screen tearing on -anything-. Don't need to vsync, or anything nasty. TVs, computer monitors, projectors, cellphones, whatever, one whole new frame per refresh. yum.
Re: John Carmack Interview
#9I'm always happy to hear when developers optimize for refresh rate over graphical complexity, especially if competitive play will be involved.
Do you think 60Hz is the right rate? Just seems like such a huge jump over 30. Does 48 make more sense?
In competitive play it makes a big difference.
Each frame of a 60Hz game spans 16.66ms, while in a 30Hz game it's 33.33ms. Depending on how well the engine is coded, there will be at least one frame of latency between input and reactions, and maybe more. So we could be looking at the difference between 33 and 66 milliseconds of input latency, at least. This doesn't even consider latency from input to the computer, or from the computer to the display.
Now consider that we react to events within about 200-300ms. 66ms of latency on top is going slow things down considerably, and when games are poorly coded and dump a few additional frames on top - which could happen because of propagation through events and subsystems, network latency, or animation concerns - the control starts to feel "wrong" in a hard-to-identify way.
Re: John Carmack Interview
#10[deleted]