There are a few things that I look back on as my mistakes in the early days

https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/2069799283369345247

by shadowtree • 28 days ago

571 275 28 days ago

twitter.com

https://xcancel.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/2069799283369345247

s20n• 28 days ago

xcancel link: https://xcancel.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/2069799283369345247

epistasis• 28 days ago

Thank you, this link allows clicking through to see Sandy's original thread, which is very informative and very necessary context.

curiousObject2• 28 days ago

Thanks. Here’s a direct xcancel link to the complete chain of Sandy’s posts that John Carmack replied to.

https://xcancel.com/SandyofCthulhu/status/206959220964578529...

Interesting to hear about the conflicts and real personal suffering. In spite of that, they built a classic genre-defining game together

entropicdrifter• 28 days ago

My hero. Thanks

not_a_bot_4sho• 28 days ago

Thanks!!

distances• 28 days ago

There's also a XCancel Firefox extension to redirect all your browsing: https://addons.mozilla.org/android/addon/toxcancel/

ChrisMarshallNY4• 28 days ago

I pushed everyone too hard. I didn’t appreciate how maturing companies need more slack, and that running people at startup intensity constantly will wear them out.

Sounds like wisdom many companies might consider...

bigmattystyles2• 28 days ago

Of course, some people never learn this but for those that do, I wonder if this sort of wisdom only comes with age and/or wealth. It’s easier to be nice/benevolent/decent when your back is not against the wall. When you’re in it, you might not even have your back against the wall but think you do.

bluefirebrand• 28 days ago

I'm of the opinion that people will be more successful if you don't act like their back is against the wall even if it is

You can only wring so much out of people with stress and panic. Driving people to burn out is not the answer. Probably an unpopular take here though

ChrisMarshallNY4• 28 days ago

Well, founders run themselves that way, so they often feel as if they are “leading from the front,” with the notable exception, that they reap founder rewards (which often still come, even with failure), and the folks they are driving, will never reap those rewards.

rectang• 28 days ago

More likely it will be taken as a plan for "how to win at any cost and then humanize yourself later".

gtowey• 28 days ago

Wisdom is not appreciated in our industry. Everyone in tech with a modicum of status or power thinks they got there because they're smarter than everyone else and there is nothing of value to be learned from others. Thus, our leaders blunder in to the same mistakes everyone else is making over and over again. We never learn.

analognoise• 28 days ago

This is more an age thing, and it's fixed by experience. Which is why there's such a focus on youth - who else can you get to sacrifice themselves with the whisper promise that it will make them rich, who else is easily goaded with "You're so smart you should work more"?

We learn, but that's not what The Machine optimizes for, so when you realize it you leave. Other bodies throw themselves on the gears, the cycle repeats.

schmuhblaster• 28 days ago

This somehow resonates with me and I feel this is one of the negative side effects of a CS/Maths dominated culture and mindset that strongly emphasizes intellectual achievement, but hasn’t yet matured enough to appreciate the more messy and irrational parts of our existence.

palmotea2• 28 days ago

Wisdom is not appreciated in our industry. Everyone in tech with a modicum of status or power thinks they got there because they're smarter than everyone else and there is nothing of value to be learned from others. Thus, our leaders blunder in to the same mistakes everyone else is making over and over again. We never learn.

It's not just people "with a modicum of status or power," it's almost everywhere in tech. Just look at all the software engineers that contemptuously look down on other fields (except maybe hard science and economics), or talk like they're experts because they read a couple of papers.

IIRC there was a recent blog post or article (I wish I could find it) that had a nice section just running through a series of software-engineer ideas (like Effective Altruism), and pointing out they're basically re-inventing wheels that were already better explored by Philosophy. And the people who do that think they're brilliant innovators.

_doctor_love6• 28 days ago

We never learn.

To my mind, the key is that it's leaders who never learn. The sad thing is that the system gives them no incentives to do so. If you look into the work of Bob Emiliani, this seems to be the tragic conclusion he's come to in recent years. We "know" all the right things to do, but time and time again, management dehumanizes the floor staff and refuses to listen. It's often not even out of malice but because that leader simply has no reason whatsoever to change.

jurgenaut23• 28 days ago

This is so true. It is a direct result of the American dream and the (misdirected) idea that one’s success is a direct (and inevitable) consequence of hard work, talent and intelligence. Flash news: it is not, and success is massively dependent on luck and initial conditions. Dumb, lazy a$$holes with a rich/powerful dad will beat smart, hard working poor bastards almost every time, barring some black swan events. Now of course lots of people will jump to my throat with tons of counter examples, to which I respond: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias

Upvoter332• 28 days ago

this is true in all human endeavors. Tech is not special in this regard, alas.

JohnBooty• 28 days ago

    because they're smarter than everyone else and
    there is nothing of value to be learned from others

Yeah. It's absolutely unreal how often this is seen in our industry.

Especially since everybody in the industry tends to be pretty smart.

When two people with intelligence within a single standard deviation of each other, each of them is going to have competencies and expertise the other does not. There are going to be specific skills where one truly is 10x or even 100x the other, but not too many efforts boil down to one specific narrow skill.

dilyevsky• 28 days ago

Pretty sure Carmack's idea of slack is what many companies would call "working as hard as possible"

steveBK1232• 28 days ago

Part of it is the upside / skin in the game aspect changing from small startup days to big company with 100s or 1000s of employees.

You hire differently as well when you are hiring 100s of people instead of a cracked team of 5.

There is a world of difference between "work nights & weekends maybe we become millionaire/billionaires together!" and "work nights & weekends so that you get an exceeds expectations and eligible for a 5% increase on the annual review cycle".

As a leader, it is unreasonable to have the same expectations before & after that transition.

AndrewKemendo• 28 days ago

In my experience what I see happen is that executives look at comments like this as proof that grinding people into the ground actually work

They don’t care about whether or not a company lasts for 30 years or whatever they care that stuff gets shipped and point to this as:

“the best programmer in the world was only successful because he pushed his people super hard”

So I wouldn’t be hopeful that this is an effective warning

somecontext• 28 days ago

In the linked thread that John Carmack is responding to, Sandy Petersen agrees:

So if my theorem is correct, and Quake gutted id Software, was it worth it? Well I'd say yes absolutely.

https://x.com/SandyofCthulhu/status/2069592330152362034

princevegeta89• 28 days ago

And yet, that is what they do, meaninglessly and stupidly enough.

stvltvs• 28 days ago

Not enough thought goes into safely transitioning from scrappy startup to mature enterprise. Attitudes, culture, and practices have to change. It gets super awkward, and it's a rare CEO that does both well.

Practically speaking, I spend a lot of time paying down technical debt incurred during the startup years, and practices are only just maturing to where we're not digging ourselves a deeper hole anymore.

torben-friis• 28 days ago

It's a fascinating period to learn to navigate.

It is very rare for a startup leader (usually very hands-on and practical minded) to be able to delegate and think strategically well enough to survive the transition.

Sometimes they even lack breadth in their experience (because, well, their experience was the company's startup phase).

What to do, then? replace them with outsiders? That would not be fair, and it destroys company culture. Leave them be, knowing that they're not up to the task? That's even worse, the people under them will suffer.

It sucks that the most common answer is that eventually there's a crisis, heads roll, corporate suits take over. Thus starts the period where the graph goes up and the product goes down.

darth_avocado• 28 days ago

Tell that to Elon, Zuckerberg and the like

phaser• 28 days ago

They could. But they rather get their "wisdom" from Steve Jobs trivia romanticizing the grind and being an asshole.

Like Elon Musk, who once wrote in a company-wide email in 2018: "Walk out of a meeting or drop off a call as soon as it is obvious you aren't adding value"

ninkendo2• 28 days ago

Walk out of a meeting or drop off a call as soon as it is obvious you aren't adding value

I’d be interested to hear more about the context for this, since it sounds perfectly reasonable, enough that it’s triggering some cognitive dissonance with my general hatred for Musk.

It’s a truism in most companies that meetings tend to have too many people for no good reason. It’s just too easy to add extra people “just in case”, or adding whole teams when you only really needed one person, etc… and as an IC I’ve been in roles where I was in back to back meetings literally all day, leaving no time to actually get my work done. A policy of “if it’s obvious to you that a meeting doesn’t need you, feel free to walk out” sounds very reasonable to me.

malnourish• 28 days ago

Supergiant games appears to have taken these lessons to heart given their output cadence and apparent low rate of turnover.

aurareturn• 28 days ago

Many founders/bosses often think that their employees are lazy because they don't work as hard as they do. They usually forget that their employees are usually paid a lot less or have magnitudes less equity.

Not everyone owns 15% of the company. I will grind too if I'm paid well enough and the potential reward is worth it.

manphone• 28 days ago

Yeah, this is my favorite one, the number of CEOs I’ve had tell me that they were frustrated how little everyone else was putting in compared to them while they’ve had hundreds of times of the return is hilarious.

zasz• 28 days ago

That and also employees don't have the same power. Employees fundamentally have less autonomy. If you have to work inside someone else's box all the time, you're not going to want to work as hard.

dietr1ch• 28 days ago

The MBAs don't care about the long term. Burnt out employees are an externality they can just lay off. Also, since there's a lot of risks in many dimensions, nailing work-life balance, but failing in another aspect will also end your company, so why not make them try their best in the short term while there's some runway left.

sidewndr462• 28 days ago

unless I'm mistaken John Carmack is unbelievably wealthy. Like give away a Ferrari and start a rocket company for fun wealthy. There's a number of people who read this and conclude that the message is you can't push someone hard enough, it's impossible to fail if you just push hard enough.

georgemcbay2• 28 days ago

unless I'm mistaken John Carmack is unbelievably wealthy.

Depends upon how you define unbelievably wealthy, which has rapidly expanded in recent years.

According to "the internet" (which is, of course, going to be wrong, but probably not by orders of magnitude) he's worth ~$50 million, which is an awful lot of money from my perspective, but still places his net worth a lot closer to us plebs than it is to all of the centibillionaires and the one trillionaire who briefly existed.

There's a number of people who read this and conclude that the message is you can't push someone hard enough, it's impossible to fail if you just push hard enough.

It is, of course, possible to fail no matter how hard you push. Working very hard sets you up for the possibility of success, but does not guarantee it.

avaer• 28 days ago

Also worth considering if there is survivorship bias in this wisdom.

Would Carmack be in a position to give advice on how to make Quake if id slacked itself into shutting down before Quake was finished?

Remember that Carmack also started a rocket company. You probably wouldn't take his advice about how to run successful rocket companies.

(this isn't shade on Carmack, he's my hero)

Goronmon• 28 days ago

Though it is interesting how many old-school game developer stories from the employee side can be summarized as "I worked out of college for low pay, long hours and I basically lived at the office with little/no outside personal life."

sbarre• 28 days ago

I think you can say that for any nascent / figuring-it-out industry.

The early days (late 90s / early 00s) of web development and web agencies was pretty much the same thing.

We were all learning as we went, there were very few senior people, and the company owners/leaders certainly didn't know any better than we did.

But we felt lucky to be doing this exciting and cutting edge work, so being at the office working was often the thing we _wanted_ to be doing the most.

The inmates ran the asylum, as they say..

InitialLastName• 28 days ago

Young people often have low expenses, few external demands on their time, and poor living conditions. If they are smart, motivated and lucky they can sometimes take advantage of that situation to do extraordinary work.

Note that a growing range of professions (law, medicine, finance, journalism,, politics) have developed career paths such that they take advantage of that condition and demand that level of commitment out of their entry-level employees.

stephbook• 28 days ago

Ironically you're only listening to his words of wisdom because the team created an incredible game.

tejohnso• 28 days ago

Quake III Arena was pretty entertaining. Doesn't seem like it came from a company that had been ruined for years.

I definitely noticed something around the Doom 3 release many years after Quake III Arena. The new game just didn't seem to have the same industry pushing, genre changing energy. Or maybe I was just older and had moved on, and didn't care as much.

TheGRS• 28 days ago

Being someone who was glued to this stuff at that time, I thought Doom 3 had that energy, but they were also clearly taking their time to get it right. And that time spent ended up giving Valve the chance to slip in with Half-Life 2 and steal some of their thunder. Otherwise I felt like they were setting out to do some amazing new things with the tech and game design and they (mostly) accomplished that.

rzzzt• 28 days ago

Shadow volumes were the big feature in that one, but this is a rendering, non-gameplay advancement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_volume

account426• 28 days ago

Shadow volumes turned out to be a dead end technology though because they can only do unrealistically hard shadows.

kridsdale1• 28 days ago

Doom 3 was pretty huge of a step forward in many ways and had no competition for being SOTA except for Far Cry (1). I remember that summer as it was when I had my first job and I saved up to buy a GPU.

Not just graphics but character acting and animation, interactive world elements, deliberately dramatic scenarios in the levels (Half Life pioneered this, but Doom3 had a lot of really good ones).

It was years ahead of what was on consoles at the time.

nehal3m2• 28 days ago

I feel like the Source engine for Half-Life 2 had some industry shaking physics due to their Havok implementation, which released in the same year. Doom 3 had cool gritty horror looks, but HL2 blew it out of the water SOTA wise, in my opinion.

kllrnohj4• 28 days ago

I think you might be misremembering Doom 3 a bit. Both it and Half Life 2 came out in the same year, and, well... just compare:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTJ1weGimZQ

and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_3vMUOayyc

Doom 3's fully real time lighting and bump mapping was technically impressive, and the live interacting UI was very trick, but the character acting and animation was definitely not SOTA. That was Half Life 2. And if we consider impact on the gaming landscape, Doom 3 was if anything a dud. Elements from that game were not taken along, including not even in subsequent Doom games. Meanwhile Half Life 2's approach to storytelling & world building, animations, physics system - those practically defined the next generation.

badsectoracula• 28 days ago

Doom 3 was SOTA in terms of realtime lighting and shadows, but that's basically it. In terms of visuals, Half-Life 2 with its baked lighting in directional lightmaps (essentially calculating three lightmaps for each surface for lighting coming from different directions, then using those with normal maps during rendering) with radiosity indirect lighting did a much better job with how good environments looked (and it scaled much better than Doom 3 which in lower settings looked worse than Quake 3). Doom 3's character rendering was also subpar compared to Half-Life 2 - let alone character animations mentioned elsewhere (Source/HL2's facial expressions were SOTA for several years after the game was released). Doom 3's physics were also not as complex as HL2's and the game didn't use them much (the expansion did better use of the physics engine and IMO the Grabber feels superior and more seamless in its use compared to the Gravity Gun but the expansion came later and while the Grabber is nice, the rest of the expansion suffered from focusing too much on gimmicks).

In general while Doom 3 has the better (and probably more forward thinking) rendering tech, HL2 also had some very good tech for its time and did a much better use of the tech they had available than Doom 3 did.

That said, personally i enjoy playing Doom 3 much more than HL2 but that is largely because Doom 3 plays more like a traditional shooter with very little scripting / storytelling to get in your way (and the little there is you can ignore it without losing anything) - you just shoot demons, find keycards/PDAs to open doors and that's it for the most part. I often just put it in low volume and play some podcast in the background :-P.

As for Far Cry, the game looked too plastic IMO, i remember playing the game and the characters' muscles had specular reflections :-P.

anthk• 28 days ago

HL2 just on physics wins over Doom 3 any day. It's far superior in every aspect.

nsxwolf• 28 days ago

I have attempted to play Doom 3 on three separate occasions in my life, and each time I gave up before ever having a chance to fire a weapon.

CamouflagedKiwi2• 28 days ago

In the original thread Carmack was replying to, Sandy Petersen said Q3 was the only other great game they produced after that: https://xcancel.com/SandyofCthulhu/status/206959226489744192...

Honestly I think Doom is where it came together the best, Quake was technically better (of course) but it was not a better game.

somenameforme• 28 days ago

Rocket. Jump.

rvba• 28 days ago

The true successor of ID software is Half-life 1 with its goldsrc engine... but that simply was made by another studio.

HL1 took both the engine and the genre further + continued the modding culture that brough Counter strike and other mods

(Note I know very well that Half life is not an ID software game, it only took the engine that was auper heavily modified / updated- but it my opinion this is the successor)

AtNightWeCode4• 28 days ago

Quake was better for multiplayer though. Personally I enjoyed Quake 2 the most. Quake arena was designed for multiplayer but you had to practice with the cheating bots so it was kinda boring.

bartread2• 28 days ago

I agree. I loved DOOM: it was so over the top. Tons of monsters to kill, loads of great weapons, enough ammo around that you didn’t have to worry about it too much, and it was all so colourful and gore.

Quake felt much more subdued to me. Not enough to shoot, the weapons weren’t as fun, ammo was tighter, and although in many ways it was incredibly atmospheric it was also just so brown and grey.

To me Quake always lacked the OTT fun factor of DOOM. Technically, it’s vastly superior - and an incredible achievement - but just not as good a game.

I think it’s telling that I’ll still play DOOM every so often, but I haven’t touched Quake since the 1990s.

nakedneuron• 28 days ago

Same feeling.

Quake and Quake III Arena was were the magic happened.

Demiurge• 28 days ago

Yet, Quake III Arena had no single player. It was a fun MP game, I spent years playing. It's not really the same as Quake and Quake 2.

boredemployee• 28 days ago

Exactly. And I didn't see anyone here talking about QuakeWorld, which changed the gaming experience in an unmatched way.

pizza234• 28 days ago

Quake III Arena was pretty entertaining. Doesn't seem like it came from a company that had been ruined for years.

It's not that the company was ruined, but that it had lost some of its creative direction after Romero left (while retaining technical excellence).

blt2• 28 days ago

There was a spirited debate about Quake III Arena versus Unreal Tournament. Both were praised, but UT had more creativity in game modes (Assault, Domination) and weapons, better bot AI, and more polished sound/art assets. Reading the Gamespot reviews (below) is fun.

Each had standout maps that made you want to own both, such as Q3A's Longest Yard and UT's Facing Worlds. I ended up playing more hours of UT because I had slow internet and its bots were better.

Point being: Q3A was great, but in 1999 it became clear that id Software had lost their head start over other FPS developers. They were still elite, but in the early-mid 90s they were alone at the top.

https://www.gamespot.com/reviews/quake-iii-arena-review/1900...

https://www.gamespot.com/reviews/unreal-tournament-review/19...

modeless• 28 days ago

Both The Longest Yard and Facing Worlds can now be played instantly on the web:

https://thelongestyard.link/q3a-demo/ (instant, even works on phones)

https://dos.zone/mp/?lobby=ut (scroll down and click Create on CTF-FACE)

They even have multiplayer support.

I hope someone ports UT2K4 someday so I can play ONS-Torlan.

colkassad• 28 days ago

I was deep into the worlds of Quake 3 and UT99 back then. I made maps for Weapons Factory Arena, a popular spin on Team Fortress but much faster and frenetic (more like Overwatch). I also created all the weapons and some maps for the port of Weapons Factory to Unreal Tournament, which did well but was no where near as popular as the original. UT was by far the easier game to mod but there was something about the physics in Quake 3 that just lent itself better to that type of mod.

As for id drama, there was plenty after Quake 3. I remember a .plan update from John where he talked about people leaving and people getting fired...I think one of them was John Steed (rest in peace), one of the player modelers who was very active in the modeling community and well liked. Felt like a disaster at the time. I just think there was a lot of conflicting personalities at the company and it was doomed to fail (no pun intended).

georgeecollins• 28 days ago

Quake III Arena was super fun!

I think the point is that Quake (1) came out within months of Activision launching Mech Warrior 2, Blizzard doing Warcraft, and even a couple years before Valve did Half Life. And Quake / Doom were so much bigger.

They had terrific success but if you were handicapping US video game companies in 1995 it would be like EA, iD (and maybe Sierra Online!). Point is they were way ahead at that point.

davkan• 28 days ago

I have very fond memories of playing the quake 3 arena demo in our high school computer labs in the late 2000s. I would install it every time i sat down at a computer and sometimes half the class would be in the lobby. It was dated by the time I found it but it was still incredible fun. I particularly loved the level with the platforms out in space.

Our photo teacher got fed up with the whole class playing one day so he froze everyone’s inputs with the monitoring software and went around killing everyone before simultaneously shutting off all the computers.

I really miss simpler games without progression systems and loadouts and gimmicks. l would imagine the gameplay probably still holds up today, it was very fast paced.

CamperBob24• 28 days ago

I agree with one of the comments: "'Coulda been Doom++' hides how everyone wanted the leap back then."

Doom++ was already well under way in the form of Ken Silverman's Build engine. Duke Nukem 3D beat Quake to market by ~6 months as I recall. A shorter timeline on the latter would have put them in direct competition with each other, damaging both.

It was Carmack's job to assert technological dominance and give the industry its next generation of game engines. He did just that, and shouldn't apologize or second-guess himself.

jorl17• 28 days ago

Sandy might remember.

CamperBob24• 28 days ago

Fair point, I'm going to retract that remark.

paulryanrogers• 28 days ago

Id software would've benefitted from the income of another release. I thoroughly enjoyed Build games before and long after Quake.

Demand was high. I doubt they'd have suffered even if released on the same day.

somat• 28 days ago

It is also a case of different focus. in retorspect Id had a rather narrow focus. They made solid top tech engines and their games were fun. But very simple. The build engine and later the unreal engine the focus was more on having more fleshed out systems for the game makers to take advantage of. Id's engines feel quite sterile by comparison.

zaphar• 28 days ago

I think it's quite fine to acknowledge that you pushed someone or some group of people to hard as a leader. A genre defining game is not the sort of thing that deserves wrecking someone. We may appreciate the game that came out the other end while acknowledging that it may not have been worth the cost.

twoodfin• 28 days ago

Interestingly, as I read the thread that spawned this reply, Sandy appears to argue that in fact it was worth it, despite being personally “wrecked” and believing it might have been done differently.

ekelsen• 28 days ago

Might matter a lot to sandy. I think it says a lot that decades later one of the things he remembers is someone he (or the larger company) hurt.

efficax2• 28 days ago

from my memory of the time the whole promise of quake was that it was going to be a huge technological innovation. that’s what we wanted, that’s what kept my interest and had me playing the leaked alpha and buying on day one. this is an interesting perspective they have because quake was a huge success. nobody at the time thought it fell short of doom. so maybe it broke id’s internal culture, but it put them in a position to continue to succeed. quake 2 was the misstep, it just wasn’t that great of a game, or that’s how it looked from the outside

vkazanov• 28 days ago

Quake 1 was an unbelievable tech breakthrough: full 3d, quakec vm, overall engine design held up really well. It was not a perfect game but it was ok.

I still hack on the engine and its derivations from time to time.

Quake 2 was a development of that, will a deep focus on multiplayer. And it won at that. As a singlr player game it was boring but LAN play was just amazing.

So quake 3 did rethink the engine but went all in on multiplayer.

As funny as it may sound but in the end, it is quake 1 that just keeps going thanks to its easy moddabilty.

nickpeterson• 28 days ago

It’s always interesting when people who excel at an activity express regrets about certain decisions. I find it reassuring that being great at something doesn’t mean flawless.

ipython• 28 days ago

It is super refreshing to hear someone saying sorry. Honestly. In a manner that actually seems sincere and self reflective.

Yes carmack may have been an asshole, but it takes a real man to recognize and own up to your own human flaws. Kudos. We need more of that in this world.

raverbashing2• 28 days ago

It was Carmack's job to assert technological dominance and give the industry its next generation of game engines.

Did they really?

Did ID make more money with engine licensing than with game sales?

They needed to ship. I think Quake Engine could wait, and have Doom++ would have given them some slack

This is the opposite to the Boeing problem (shipping the rehashed product instead of the brand new thing)

CamperBob24• 28 days ago

There was this obscure indy game called Half-Life, maybe you've heard of it.

iD's engines were famously known in the industry as tech demos first, first-party game platforms second. I'm not sure how the revenue picture ended up looking, though. They obviously made a lot of money from their 'tech demos.'

pornel2• 28 days ago

I was interested in Quake only because of the breakthrough 3D graphics, architecturally stunning levels, and later QuakeC.

I don't care for the story, and I wouldn't play Doom++. Electric polar bears and some Shrub lava mule, whatever. But swimming in deep underwater ruins with full 3-axis freedom was awesome.

I couldn't play multiplayer back then. Dialup sucked and was more expensive than AI tokens. Ethernet was still rare. Lugging a CRT monitor to friend's house was a chore reserved for a once-a-year LAN party.

georgeburdell• 28 days ago

Exactly. This sort of retrospective is a soft pulling up of the ladder, a do-as-I-say-not-as-I-did mea culpa where the conscience is assuaged but the spoils remain where they always were. We should accept that there is a season to burn the candle at both ends, to exploit youthful energy and to do great things.

Current Carmack would not have been capable of making Quake.

legohead• 28 days ago

Clicked on link, it tried to upsell me on twitter prime or whatever it is. Closed the promotion, now I'm just sitting on twitter, not on the link I clicked on.

That is sad.

CamperBob24• 28 days ago

Use xcancel, not Twitter.

pornel2• 28 days ago

It's a shitty way to read anyway. An adventure game of finding the context and putting pieces together.

I didn't see Carmack was replying to Sandy until the end of the post, and then I could only find 1/3rd of Sandy's post without having to click a "153 replies" button.

lokimedes5• 28 days ago

Young energy shouldn’t be apologized. Apparently Bill Gates had that psycho energy too, Jobs and many others too. On a civilizational scale it seems like a net benefit that young, eager and driven people give a bit more than they wanted to in retrospect. It do indeed change things for the rest of us. The patriotic call of armed forces has been driven by this for millennia. At least Carmack and Co. chose their own missions, most soldiers are not so lucky.

Daishiman• 28 days ago

He's not apologizing for young energy. Young energy is a wonderful thing but without accompanying wisdom and restfulness for the vast majority of people is just spinning your wheels in place burning out and not achieving anything of importance.

lokimedes5• 28 days ago

Yeah. My point is that this is the double edged sword of youth vs. experience. We’ll never know if the world would have been better of Id software were managed by more tempered, middleaged people, but (since I was merely the gamer) I’d rather not risk it. That said, it is completely natural to reflect, as Carmack does, on what could have been different. I simply assume there’s a strong correlation between the result and the naivety of the people behind it.

mikeocool3• 28 days ago

I’m not sure it’s necessarily a given that what Jobs, Gates, and Carmack created are net-positives when talking on a civilizational scale.

Though Carmack certainly gets credit for keeping me entertained for a good portion of my youth.

And gates probably gets some civilizational credit for what he’s done with his wealth after he made it.

lokimedes5• 28 days ago

I’m sitting here in Denmark having been affected by these geeks. They may not have built the Pantheon, but surely they have channeled a group of people’s creativity towards something we have integrated into our society?

spongebobstoes• 28 days ago

personal computing is inseparable from technological progress, and has been wildly positive for humanity

MyHonestOpinon4• 28 days ago

I am under the impression that a big part of the current AI progress is the result of the availability of chips that were created for gaming.

nilirl2• 28 days ago

Why not? What if it did bad?

lokimedes5• 28 days ago

At least it was just a game company :)

I find that initiative and grit combined is an exceedingly rare commodity, and it do power progress. We can always be picky about the worth or risks of the projects these souls end up realizing, but the function this provides to our society is critical.

thaw13579• 28 days ago

That's literally treating people as means to an end, when it's not clear if the "end" even required sacrificing young people's lives. In the grand scheme of things, why not spend an extra year to build at a pace that doesn't burn people out? If you look at the careers of the people who subsequently left, by Sandy's account, they went on to to run their own great game studios, so it's not clear that a grind was necessary.

lokimedes5• 28 days ago

I have not reason to defend these people or their actions, but can we know their future success was not formed by their formative experiences at Id? I think we undervalue hardship and struggle as accelerants.

grim_io• 28 days ago

Maybe peak excellence is simply not sustainable.

logicchains• 28 days ago

Let's let GTA6 be the judge of that.

bigstrat2003• 28 days ago

We don't need to wait for GTA 6. RDR 2 was already a serious letdown from the first game. Rockstar has lost sight of the fact that they are making games, not movies, and that games need to be fun to play. RDR 2 is significantly less fun to play than its predecessor because they are constantly trying to shove cinematic moments and immersion into the game.

c-hendricks• 28 days ago

Well there was no "id Wives Letter"

tombert4• 28 days ago

One of my favorite non-fiction books is Masters of Doom. I have no idea how accurate it is, but I did leave with the impression that John Carmack is an amazingly smart guy, who also has the potential to be a colossal asshole.

I was only five when Quake came out, so obviously I couldn't really have worked on it, but I'm pretty sure that (if Masters of Doom is to be believed) I would have probably told Carmack to go fuck himself about midway through the project. Quake is my favorite FPS from that era, and my favorite id game in general, but it sounded like a pain in the ass to work on.

stuxnet792• 28 days ago

One of my favorite non-fiction books is Masters of Doom.

Loved this book as well. Convinced me more than anything to stay out of game dev. It was also cool getting the inside story on why Ion Storm went belly up. I have huge respect for the games that the Austin office put out and IMO Warren Spector is one of the top game designers of our generation. But it seems like the Daikatana flop was one of those rare career ending failures. It took down the Dallas office which was the main HQ, left a black mark on many people's careers and was also ill timed with the popping of the Dot Com Bubble. Funding for new, risky ideas was essentially gone in the aftermath.

tombert4• 28 days ago

I do find it amusing, since I really don't think Daikatana is that bad. It's not great, but at least with the PC version I think there's some fun to be had. It was just way over-budget and overhyped with an extremely questionable marketing campaign. Also, the GBC version is a legitimately pretty decent game.

Deus Ex is of course much better, but to be fair most games fall short of Deus Ex.

OnionBlender• 28 days ago

If you haven't already, you should read John Romero's autobiography "Doom Guy: Life in First Person". There are some details from "Masters of Doom" that Romero disputes.

tombert4• 28 days ago

It's been on my list, but I haven't read it yet.

I also stalked Scott Miller from Apogee Software to ask him how accurate Masters of Doom was, and he told me to checkout the book "Shareware Heroes", as he claims it's more accurate [1]. I still haven't read it but that's the next thing I plan on reading.

[1] https://sharewareheroes.com/

ameliaquining• 28 days ago

Both Carmack and Romero have praised Masters of Doom as a good picture of what things were like, which seems like a good sign since a lot of it is about a time when the two were at odds.

carabiner• 28 days ago

Yeah Romero said they signed an agreement saying that it was accurate: https://qr.ae/pFH291

bibabaloo• 28 days ago

For anyone who wants more books that dig into the games industry, all of Jason Schreier's books are fantastic.

bdamm2• 28 days ago

It's remarkable how often I hear about brilliant products being released by asshole personalities who were hard to work with, but still stayed engaged.

The other two extremes tend not to produce much of interest; the committee of people pleasers who have nothing passionate to argue about, and the group of absolute psychopaths, don't ever seem to be the origin story for industry-changing products.

jacobgold5• 28 days ago

It's a little silly to revisit your mistakes like this, as if you could have done anything better. Most companies are poorly managed and produce nothing of value. The team at id Software changed the world and produced an absolute masterpiece.

Quake 1 was, in many ways, where id Software peaked. But the time Carmack spent optimizing Quake Live, based on Quake 3, ultimately made it his twitch FPS magnum opus.

Even 20 years later, there's no FPS game that comes close to the speed, mechanics, smoothness, and just overall quality: https://youtu.be/tU6v8C1pw8Y?t=675

nehal3m2• 28 days ago

I disagree, even for successful projects retrospection toward mistakes is worth the pain to learn.

john_strinlai• 28 days ago

It's silly to revisit your mistakes like this

revisiting mistakes (in a healthy, non-obsessive way) is not silly at all. it is great for self growth, and in this case, is a great way to pass on wisdom.

jacobgold5• 28 days ago

The actual quote is "It's a little silly to revisit your mistakes like this, as if you could have done anything better."

What you're saying sounds very nice and correct, except it isn’t necessarily true.

It's extremely easy to draw wrong lessons in retrospect. There are so many variables, including personalities, market conditions, timing, constraints, and accidents of history. You can't recall or even really understand these things with any level of accuracy.

What ends up being most useful is the way experience fundamentally changes you as a person, not your regretful shower thoughts posted on Twitter.

So it may seem counterintuitive, but if John Carmack wants to create another breakthrough technology, he might be better off re-creating id Software’s in 1995, including the chaos, rather than trying to avoid it by applying all his "lessons learned".

madduci• 28 days ago

Frankly, Unreal Tournament got a lot of that energy and peaked gameplay. Very new fresh ideas like capture the flag back then was really cool. And the speed and stability was also great.

jacobgold5• 28 days ago

Unreal was great single player and fun for multiplayer but there's no comparison in terms of the way the game played competitively vs Quake.

And CTF originally was from Quake 1, the threewave CTF mod by Zoid which made it into Quake 3.

Threewave: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFg2PPOmA74

georgemcbay2• 28 days ago

The interesting part of reading through the various threads Sandy Petersen's tweet spawned is that a lot of people seem to see Quake as the last great id Software game, and as someone who played a ton of their games back in the day, for me Quake 2 was the first great one and Quake III Arena was the last great one.

Of course I'm not trying to claim their opinion is wrong, it is just a matter of what you value. I was very into the online multiplayer aspects of the series (random aside that will mean nothing to most: I was the programmer for the GXMOD tournament mod for Quake 2) and while the original Quake had network multiplayer, Quake 2 really nailed it to a degree Quake 1 didn't in terms of things like multiplayer map design and weapon balance (from a multiplayer perspective).

In any case, I respect Carmack's reply here not so much for the insight (which is also nice) but for the clear, direct empathetic apology at the end. He could have leaned on the fact that he was 24-25 when this all happened and that would have been a perfectly reasonable explanation, but the simple and direct apology is much more respectable.

_doctor_love6• 28 days ago

Great read. Further proof that we are all victims of each others learning experiences.

starkparker• 28 days ago

"Sorry, Sandy"

Sandy Petersen's side of it comes out in a few interviews, like https://medium.com/@unkndoomer/back-to-the-past-e3c421fb2e70 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUeu96TKQwU (especially 14:17 onward)

jpadkins• 28 days ago

also this post was a reply to Sandy on X.

iAmAPencilYo• 28 days ago

(not a Twitter user) I saw the post linked below Carmacks post and I had assumed it's a comment to his post!

JeremyNT3• 28 days ago

The rest of the context leading up to "Sorry, Sandy" has me a little confused, can anybody who knows more explain this bit?

One real problem that I don’t accept the blame for is that we were insisting that level designers be not just game designers, but also have strong visual design esthetics. They needed to make things that not only played well, but looked awesome, and it got more challenging as the technology provided a richer palette. Romero covered that well, which set our company expectations early on.
We should have figured out how to pair up artists and designers earlier, but there was infighting among the designers, and the ones that could manage the visuals were happy to disparage the ones that couldn’t.
Sorry, Sandy.

Is he saying that it was a mistake (but not his mistake... Romero's perhaps?) to demand that game designers were also artists? And that this resulted in a loss of talent ("Sorry, Sandy") versus just encouraging more collaboration between artists and designers?

pgl• 28 days ago

The missing context is that he was quote-tweeting a thread by Sandy Petersen titled "How Quake ruined id software":

https://x.com/SandyofCthulhu/status/2069592209645785294

How Quake ruined id Software.
There has been a lot of praise of Quake of late, with its 30th anniversary, and it's deserved. Quake is an amazing feat of art, programming, and design. I worked on it, and everything came together almost perfectly from all of us. We ended up with a free-wheeling, frenetic action game with enough of a visible world to grip the imagination.
... [thread continues] ...

jpgvm• 28 days ago

So from what little I know of the history there were some serious personal issues going on in the team that led to ~7 of the 11-12 folk on Quake eventually leaving.

Sandy has gone into it on various podcasts and mediums. It's pretty clear he doesn't consider Carmack responsible but rather someone he refuses to name (but is quite obviously Tim Willits) that caused pretty much all the problems.

My read is Carmack is saying he is sorry he lacked the awareness and experience to manage the people stuff.

He lost his dream team, I'm sure it's something he has thought about a lot.

silotis• 28 days ago

From various interviews with designers who were at iD during that period, it seems there was a fair amount of conflict between them. One in particular seems to be severely disliked by Sandy and others to this day. Presumably Carmack wishes he had done a better job managing those conflicts.

urbnspacecowboy• 28 days ago

Seems to me Carmack's saying that Romero had a better grasp of visuals than Sandy Petersen, and that Petersen was needlessly disparaged for this.

krautburglar• 28 days ago

Id was technical excellence paired with artistic blindness. As the machines progressed, the value of the technical excellence faded. What was left? A test case for OS & compiler development.

groundzeros2015• 28 days ago

Doom 3 doesn’t look like artistic blindness.

CuriouslyC• 28 days ago

The issue wasn't artistic blindness, the id art was solid. The issue was a lack of game design. Doom worked because it was crazy fast and you could have a lot of sprites on the screen at once, so it had this crazy hectic quality. Quake's 3d engine meant you couldn't be so fast and couldn't anywhere close to the number of enemies on screen at once, so the game wanted a more soulslike design, but they stuck with the run and gun design but with spongier enemies, which just didn't feel great.

everyone• 28 days ago

I've actually been playing some Quake mods recently..

Arcane dimensions

Brutalist Jams 1,2,3

Call of the Machine

Alkaline

But when it came out I found Quake dissapointing. I still feel that DOOM is a more fun game. It's just always way more fun to kill 10 weak enemies rather than one super tanky one. Also the art style of DOOM is more varied and vivid and fun and heavy metal.. Quake is so dull and dour and brown. Even the movement in Quake seems a bit off imo, its too easy for your great honking non-rotating cube hitbox to get hung up on tiny bits of geometry (I know its actually a point, but it works out the same a non rotating cuboid).. Also making new maps and enemies and content just seems so easy in DOOM.. There is some great modern Quake content (mentioned above) but the amount of stuff for DOOM dwarfs it.

hooo• 28 days ago

Why are folks still submitting so many twitter.com links?

ElijahLynn• 28 days ago

It will always be Twitter...

ryandvm• 28 days ago

because X is a dumb name

furyofantares• 28 days ago

Yeah but it's a lot easier to turn an x.com link into an xcancel link so you can actually read it logged out .

shadowtree• 28 days ago

Because that is where Carmack posted his thoughts, not anywhere else. Original source.

Wether you like it or not, X/Twitter is still a primary posting ground for many key people in our industry.

jimbob45• 28 days ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10845832

Some more reading on his work ethic from John himself on this very site.

hiddencost• 28 days ago

This was just a long winded way of insulting Sandy but making it look professional, from what I can see. He is saying directly that Sandy was a bad designer with a poor sense of visual aesthetics.

Seems pretty gross and catty to me.

LarsDu882• 28 days ago

Didn't Adrian Carmack (the art guy; no relation) get something like 10x more equity in the company than Carmack and Romero b/c of how badly they botched their cap table?

efficax2• 28 days ago

he had a 41% stake which led to some legal conflict https://www.eurogamer.net/news280905carmacksues

ibejoeb• 28 days ago

Wow. Can anyone recommend a good write-up on that history?

41%... I suppose these were non-voting shares. Imagine owning nearly half the company and being denied access to company documents.

FartyMcFarter• 28 days ago

Quake 1 was worth it even if just for the multiplayer. It was so good that people were having fun online even on just the "start" map with the shareware version. Quakeworld was especially great and very playable even with a modem. Then you add the moddability (including QuakeC) and the groundbreaking renderer, it's one of the biggest technical achievements in gaming history.

The single player was weaker than the multiplayer, but still enjoyable with its strange variety of map atmospheres.

I'm glad Quake happened even if it made id Software a worse company thereafter. I would understand if the people involved feel differently though.

supertroop2• 28 days ago

Weird. Quake 1 was amazing. All my peers were counting the days for the release and the soundtrack hit right when nin was breaking huge. Sure the end of the game was lame, but the environment was magical. Unfortunately for a lot of people FPS games just became straight up redundant as we aged out of the genre.

KellyCriterion2• 27 days ago

IIRC, NiN was already huge before this?

supertroop2• 24 days ago

Yes. The downward spiral exploded into the pop scene in 94 from a goth niche to sorority girls going to nin concerts just to get drunk and scream “I want f you like an animal”. It was a weird time for us goths watching our secret club become pop. Nin rode the wave for years. The Music arc moved much more slowly then.

AtNightWeCode4• 28 days ago

Quake is easily the most groundbreaking game released. Not only was it the first popular game with real 3D. The game play was the first that really took the precision from old games and transformed it into 3D. An excellent piece of tech that many games as of today still are children of.

casey2• 28 days ago

They could have, I'm not convinced they would have. It's very difficult for designers to come up with something novel and good. Most of the amazing things you with old tech are backports of ideas that only exist because people using new tech had them.

rustyhancock• 28 days ago

So if my theorem is correct, and Quake gutted id Software, was it worth it? Well I'd say yes absolutely. Games are more important than game companies, and Quake is an iconic titan of the gaming world.

Sandy's quote here buried unfortunately by X.

JeremyNT3• 28 days ago

Sandy's original post to which John was replying: https://xcancel.com/SandyofCthulhu/status/206959220964578529...

dekdrop• 28 days ago

Is the domain twitter.com has problems? I am getting DNS_PROBE_FINISHED_NXDOMAIN.

pipeline_peak• 28 days ago

What ruined the company was refusing to turn ID Tech into an ecosystem to compete with Unreal and Source Engine.

orliesaurus• 28 days ago

Was john carmack the elon musk of that time (minus the political baggage Era)?

fatbird• 28 days ago

No, Carmack is actually an incredibly smart and talented engineer.

BiscuitBadger2• 28 days ago

After reading those IdSoft histories, Quake shipped a new client server networking layer, a new quake C scripting engine, the new fully polygonal engine …

This was far too ambitious and bottlenecked everything on Carmack’s graphics work. The rest of the team was left to create Doom II and Ultimate doom while Carmack worked, but even then it wasn’t enough to ease the bottleneck.

doom II could have been a quake C scriptable, client server game that shipped slightly later as a step between Doom engine and Quake engine instead of the four or so year technical delay between Doom and Quake

BiscuitBadger2• 28 days ago

And this burnt the team out, made quake’s development a compromised scramble and led to Romero’s departure. That’s no way to run a company.

Anyway, listen to Xalavier Nelson of strange scaffold talks on sustainable indie game development. It makes no sense to compromise a company for the sake of shipping a single game.

stephc_int13• 28 days ago

The trajectory of id software is interesting.

The company was successful, had one of the most prestigious brand in the game industry, was early enough to capitalize on the rise of PC gaming, incredible talents and tech.

Yet it didn't transform into a Blizzard or Epic.

And it seems that both the early success and stall were the responsibility of one very talented but somewhat obtuse nerd.

sunrunner• 28 days ago

Yet it didn't transform into a Blizzard or Epic.

Now what was that thing about living long enough to become the villain.

vor_5• 28 days ago

The loss of the original team was a tremendous blow. After Quake, a common criticism of id was that they put out tech demos instead of games.

AdmiralAsshat• 28 days ago

Carmack is a godly programmer, but he's largely a technical guy. Everything he releases is a feat of technical engineering ("real 3D!"; "curved surfaces!"; "realistic lighting!"; "the Megatexture!"), not so much artistic achievement. We could really see that after Doom 2 when all of the creatives at Id started jumping ship. The level design that you need to reinforce the technical leaps just wasn't there anymore.

vor_5• 28 days ago

The technical innovations also began to have no impact or even an adverse one. Doom 3's push for 100% real-time stencil shadows was practically ignored by the industry when HL2 and other competitors came out. MegaTexture was actually removed from the engine in Doom Eternal.

kllrnohj4• 28 days ago

While MegaTexture was removed from Doom Eternal because it's just not necessary in a small level-based game like that, the general idea was carried on. It's a big reason you could basically describe the entire PS4 era as the era of texture pop-in. Virtual texturing made it very easy to build massively large worlds, using GPU "page misses" to figure out what textures to stream in.

The problem is, well, the player sees it. As ugly as fuck texture pop-in.

account426• 28 days ago

Stencil shadows never had a chance as the primary technique for games targeting realistic graphics as they inherently cannot do soft shadows.

bluedino• 28 days ago

ID dominated the PC shooter scene for 4.5 generations in a row. Insane.

Wolf, Doom, Quake, Quake II, Quake 3 Arena

Dark Forces was great, but that tech was too late so it never went anywhere. Duke3D showed up, and while it was entertaining, it was clearly a level below what ID could do. 3D Realms fumbled that tech, then got caught up with the ultimate vaporware, Prey, and it took Epic stepping in with Unreal that finally dethroned ID.

Sandy talks up the people that left ID during that time, but did anyone (other than him) do anything noteworthy in the gaming industry? Romero was responsible for Daikatana of all things, Michael Abrash was never a 'game programmer', despite having a very successful career in Xbox, VR, etc. No idea about the other guys.

lobf3• 28 days ago

Prey was vaporware? It sold a million copies on release and got a sequel... Are we talking about the same game?

Dilettante_2• 28 days ago

You actually aren't: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prey_(2006_video_game)

vor_5• 28 days ago

Prey was infamously in development in various forms for over a decade.

curiousObject2• 28 days ago

Quake was an incredible leap forward in desktop games.

But Sandy Peterson is probably right, saying that it ‘Ruined’ the company - as an artistic creative force anyway.

The breakup of the brilliant and well-balanced ID Software team was caused by the trauma of developing Quake.

Romero and others were forced out or quit. This cut the heart out of the team, despite all of Carmack’s drive and technical brilliance

That is why the next leap ahead in games was not Quake 2 (1997), but Half Life (1998) which was, tellingly, based on the older tech Quake 1 engine

account426• 28 days ago

That is why the next leap ahead in games was not Quake 2 (1997), but Half Life (1998) which was, tellingly, based on the older tech Quake 1 engine

How is that telling? Source is based on Q1 instead of Q2 because Valve decided to keep working on the HL1 engine (GoldSrc) which already had extensive modifications from Q1 instead of rebasing all that work on Q2 or another engine. It's a perfectly valid decision irrespective of the quality of the Q2 engine.

cubefox2• 28 days ago

One thing that happened much later, after Carmack himself left, was that id software stopped pushing the boundaries of engine development. Their last great innovation was magatextures, or virtual texture streaming in its more modern form.

Now cutting edge graphical features are mostly pushed by Epic and their Unreal engine. Like ray-traced global illumination, virtual shadow maps, virtual geometry, and fast ray-traced direct illumination.

But id software's games themselves arguably improved after Carmack left, despite not pushing technical boundaries. Doom 2016, Doom Eternal, and Doom TDA all were received very favorably at the time. Not sure whether this had anything to do with Carmack leaving though.

vor_5• 28 days ago

Megatexture caused a lot of problems. In fact, it was such a hindrance that it was removed from the engine in Doom Eternal.

cubefox2• 28 days ago

I believe it was merely replaced with virtual textures, which is a very similar texture streaming technique. Most modern games use it now.

hugodan• 28 days ago

Their more recent works are amazing pieces of entertainment: DOOM, Eternal and Dark Ages

ChrisArchitect• 28 days ago

Thought about this last week during discussions on the Bobby Prince (RIP)...

Someone surely has to make a movie about id. Maybe around the visionary development and growth around Wolfenstein and then Doom and mix in some of the industry response and mainstream media drama/backlash/violence fears etc. Like in the style of the Social Network, Blackberry movie whatever (the latter which spoofed/recreated the iconic id team photo in the film). I mean there's plenty of source material/books to pull from. Maybe Carmack and Romero are holding on to the rights for their later years.

Waterluvian• 28 days ago

I don’t believe the ends justify the means and I respect his perspective on these regrets. I wonder if he’s kind of looking back from a position of assumed success. Would Quake have succeeded on a Doom++ engine?

I remember feeling that Quake was something remarkably different from Doom, mainly because it felt actually worth using the mouse with. Marathon II on the Mac introduced me to mouse movement but it was very limited and kind of fisheyed and weird. Quake just felt good with the mouse.

_jackdk_• 28 days ago

Speculation, as someone who grew up with some of those games:

We could use Heretic/Hexen as the most direct contemporary example of a "Doom++ engine": it had keyboard look up/down, inventory, and the ability to fly up/down. Wiki reckons Heretic sold 500k units and Doom 2 sold 1.2M. Hard to say in hindsight if that was caused by less enthusiasm for a fantasy aesthetic or the decline in enthusiasm for Doom-level tech.

We can also look at how far BUILD-style engines were able to push environments in 2.5d engines of the day. Duke3D had sloping floors and wildly changing terrain that was revolutionary for the time. (Remember the second level in the shareware version, where you basically blew up a building halfway through the level?) Other contemporary BUILD-style titles like Eradicator were able to add crude room-over-room by declaring floating platforms and other special entities without having to build them into truly 3D world geometry.

A third point on the triangle might be Rise of the Triad, which pushed the Wolf3D engine well beyond anything a normal person would expect. Apogee were able to add keyboard look up/down and flight up/down, more verticality in levels by adding floating discs and floors (again outside of the standard level geometry).

And to stretch the triangle metaphor to a tetrahedron, there's also a lot stuff from the Doom source port universe that might have been invented if Carmack & Co. had to push the Doom engine as far as it could go. When you can add new things and linedef/sector actions, that allows a lot of flexibility when you don't have to build the engine from scratch.

All that makes me think that 1994 iD could probably have had a commercially successful game on a Doom++, especially if Carmack kept learning all the portability and networking stuff that made Quakeworld work during the shift to Windows 95. What's much less clear to me is whether they'd be able to catch and/or drive the wave of 3D accelerator development, and whether Epic MegaGames would have just leapfrogged them completely with Unreal. I think the Quake-on-Doom++ timeline might end with Unreal becoming the engine more people built on through the 2000s (instead of all the Q3/idTech3-based games). The talent retention could mean that iD stays competitive on worldbuilding and feel (the Doom Bible shows they had some of those ideas, but the tech wasn't ready for them), and Carmack+Abrash+... could probably catch up with Sweeney+.... We probably don't get American McGee's Alice in that timeline though.

EDIT: The other thing to consider is that Descent was also bringing 6DOF (degrees of freedom) to PC gaming. While it was a portal-based engine like BUILD, it had 3D-modelled polygonal enemies etc. It was a beloved but niche title because it was so challenging to play, but it shows that there's a bunch of technical innovation around at the time, and maybe it gets a larger market share and the technical innovation happens with or without iD?

fasterik• 28 days ago

I think the question isn't whether (DOOM + 1) would have succeeded, but what they would have been able to accomplish with the Quake team if they'd all had the stamina and job satisfaction to make several games over the following decade. DOOM was already a massive success and they had the money to do whatever they wanted. It's undeniable that Quake was id's most groundbreaking game, but maybe (DOOM + 5) with the same team would have been even more so.

zftnb666• 25 days ago

Regret is just experience that arrived too late to help.

There are a few things that I look back on as my mistakes in the early days

Related Stories