I found a complete list of console commands herehttp://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/537/doom-3-doom-iii-complete-list-of-console-commands/,
My problem is only a little basic commands working in my OSX Doom3 Version 1.3.1.1304, for example ,when i type "editor", it says unkown command.

Why? and how can i use the commands like DOOMEdit?

maadiah wrote:

I found a complete list of console commands herehttp://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/537/doom-3-doom-iii-complete-list-of-console-commands/,
My problem is only a little basic commands working in my OSX Doom3 Version 1.3.1.1304, for example ,when i type "editor", it says unkown command.

Why? and how can i use the commands like DOOMEdit?

The tools, including the editor, only work on the Windows version.

Doom3 include tools in its open source, right? Can i compile them to get a DoomEdit?

They need the MFC framework which I believe is not available for OSX. There are some windows dependancies. I believe someone was working on a GPL version with tooling, but I'm really not sure if they also have OSX in mind. All in all, Doom editing is basically a windows affair. You might have better luck with a dual boot setup or a windows emulator than trying to run the tools on OSX.

But it's not really my expertise so I could be off.

You can recompile the code with ID_ALLOW_TOOLS, take out all the MFC tools, which will give you just dmap and a few others than use something like gtkradiant which I think works on osx.

Netradiant or DarkRadiant would be worth a try. I know that GTK/Netradiant is missing a lot of the Doom 3 specific functions though - there is no GUI editor and no light editor. Darkradiant probably has those. It's even worse with ETQW mapping - one probably really needs Windows for that.

I think that the built-in D3 editor requiring Windows is pretty lame.

gb_remake wrote:

Netradiant or DarkRadiant would be worth a try. I know that GTK/Netradiant is missing a lot of the Doom 3 specific functions though - there is no GUI editor and no light editor. Darkradiant probably has those. It's even worse with ETQW mapping - one probably really needs Windows for that.

I think that the built-in D3 editor requiring Windows is pretty lame.

Darkradiant is a great option I just didn't know if it worked on osx or not.

gb_remake wrote:

I think that the built-in D3 editor requiring Windows is pretty lame.

Just a thought.... but if it had been easy to do, don't you think it would have been done by now?
If not by ID then by other developers? D3 has been GPL'ed long enough now for somebody to create the tools for OSX yet nobody did it.

BloodRayne wrote:

gb_remake wrote:

I think that the built-in D3 editor requiring Windows is pretty lame.

Just a thought.... but if it had been easy to do, don't you think it would have been done by now?
If not by ID then by other developers? D3 has been GPL'ed long enough now for somebody to create the tools for OSX yet nobody did it.

I ported it from MFC to C#(front end only) but I really designed it for idtech 4 cdk(it's geared more towards VT), and I haven't had a chance yet to move it from CLR to Mono.

It was just an argument to point out that it's a difficult job and shouldn't be taken for granted.

Reality is no one cares about gaming on mac
search your feelings, you know it to be true

Except for Doom 3 itself, there is no option for the AF editor. I'm sure it could be done via text, but dark gradient doesn't have it, it has everything else though.

whitewolf wrote:

Reality is no one cares about gaming on mac
search your feelings, you know it to be true

My thoughts exactly, only reason why developers even care about osx is because of ios.

Bloodrayne, I know that, I just thought it would have been kind of id to go the extra mile to at least make it work on Linux back when they did that port. After all Radiant isn't restricted to Windows, either, so it can't be impossible to make the built-in editor work either (or add the new stuff to Radiant).

But I guess their enthusiasm for supporting modding was already waning back then.

Fact is, if it didn't require windows, I would work more on my WIP Doom 3 map. But my entire everyday workflow is on Linux and everybody making games knows how important workflow is.

jmarshall23 wrote:

whitewolf wrote:

Reality is no one cares about gaming on mac
search your feelings, you know it to be true

My thoughts exactly, only reason why developers even care about osx is because of ios.

Well, developers, the Mac is the ONLY growing segment in an otherwise free falling pc world.
Just look at the abysmal adoption rate of Win8 - only 4 million in 3 days on an installed base of 1.25 billion.

iOS of course is the current path to income for developers.

BNA! wrote:

jmarshall23 wrote:

whitewolf wrote:

Reality is no one cares about gaming on mac
search your feelings, you know it to be true

My thoughts exactly, only reason why developers even care about osx is because of ios.

Well, developers, the Mac is the ONLY growing segment in an otherwise free falling pc world.
Just look at the abysmal adoption rate of Win8 - only 4 million in 3 days on an installed base of 1.25 billion.

iOS of course is the current path to income for developers.

OSx still only less than 10% of the pc marketshare, consoles and mobile devices are the new target for games, PC versions are usually a afterthought and doing something for less than 10% of the pc marketshare doesn't make as much buisness sense since most studios can only choose between Windows and OSx.

The other problem truth be told is XCode is a nasty nightmare, so most developers don't care enough to deal with it's nasty UI except for doing ios apps.

jmarshall23 wrote:

OSx still only less than 10% of the pc marketshare, consoles and mobile devices are the new target for games, PC versions are usually a afterthought and doing something for less than 10% of the pc marketshare doesn't make as much buisness sense since most studios can only choose between Windows and OSx.

That's absolutely true - I was merely pointing out it's the sole growing segment in an otherwise shrinking market.

Since even games for the pc hardly make money to keep an appropriately sized boat afloat, I don't expect Mac gaming to suddenly take off

The future is phone/tablet and later on paired with a console, there's little chance things will evolve differently. However, I DO miss the times when the release of a game did justify a 3 grand system upgrade.

jmarshall23 wrote:

The other problem truth be told is XCode is a nasty nightmare, so most developers don't care enough to deal with it's nasty UI except for doing ios apps.

I also wish XCode would allow more productivity.

I don't believe in a singular future for this device or that.
I think the industry should finally come around to the fact that there is a place for both desktops and handheld devices, in whatever fashion.
Some people will always prefer a keyboard and mouse over touch and vice-versa, that's just how it goes.

And I don't think this is a 8 track v.s. casette, or vhs v.s. betamax thing either.
Those were direct competitors. Desktops simply form a completely different market than handhelds.
The 'people' may be jumping on handhelds. But I work for a company that sells business to business hardware, we make 150 million a year.
And about 0.5% of that business is handhelds including Ipads and such, the business market paints a completely different picture than the consumer market.

Of course, we're talking consumer market here, but even in that market Mac has it's own place besides Win based machines.
It's entirely uncommon to see users use either one or the other, unless they only use their platforms for one single dedicated job (e.g. photographers will mostly stick with Mac).

I think both have their place and uses and it will show in the end.

I also think that if these stubborn companies would work a little bit more on inter compatibility between platforms that we would all benefit from it, including and perhaps foremost the companies themselves.

BloodRayne wrote:

I don't believe in a singular future for this device or that.
I think the industry should finally come around to the fact that there is a place for both desktops and handheld devices, in whatever fashion.

Ironically it's the industry clawing their way out of a boiling pot after preaching there's a place for desktops and handheld devices (translate: handheld a fad, only desktop pro, consumers don't count, only business folks do).

Saying your company doesn't make much with mobile devices because you're a business to business hardware company is like saying bicycles haven't caught on in the truck business, there's no extrapolatable data point in it.

I'm willing to go out on a limp and say: the desktop as you know it will not exist in meaningfull numbers 10 years down the road.

If I would have gotten a buck for each time I've heard "not gonna happen" in the last 5 years I'd be wealthy - wait, that's exactly what happened.

Just look at the sad state of affairs at HP or MS. Stevs Ballmer claiming the other day Apple is just a low volume player in mobile devices shows a level of desperation and delusion not seen often in public.

BNA! wrote:

Ironically it's the industry clawing their way out of a boiling pot after preaching there's a place for desktops and handheld devices (translate: handheld a fad, only desktop pro, consumers don't count, only business folks do).

Saying your company doesn't make much with mobile devices because you're a business to business hardware company is like saying bicycles haven't caught on in the truck business, there's no extrapolatable data point in it.

I'm willing to go out on a limp and say: the desktop as you know it will not exist in meaningfull numbers 10 years down the road.

If I would have gotten a buck for each time I've heard "not gonna happen" in the last 5 years I'd be wealthy - wait, that's exactly what happened.

Just look at the sad state of affairs at HP or MS. Stevs Ballmer claiming the other day Apple is just a low volume player in mobile devices shows a level of desperation and delusion not seen often in public.

HP is doing great, trust me, I know, their root is the business market and that is doing just fine.
And Steve Ballmer really doesn't know a lot about the hardware business, he makes dumb statements all the time, he really is a clown.

I disagree, handhelds have held a very firm grip in the business industry from day one, even more so than for consumers.
Think Blackberry Enterprise server, used by millions of business users worldwide. Or the many projects that have launched (and failed) trying to migrate the entire business desktop to an Ipad. I've seen these projects first hand. Some of them worked, most of them worked half/half. The business is jumping for a handheld solution but the tech is certainly not mature enough to be as cheap and sturdy and longlived as desktops. The lifespan of a handheld is simply 1/10th of that of desktops, meaning so much more management.

That's not a very long limp, by the way. 'as you know it' is the crux, because you and I know that tech continually changes. That statement is about as easy to make as saying 'tormorrow there will be water on the planet, somewhere'.

Like I said, both have a place and I am convinced that both will continue to thrive in there own, specialized, form.

BloodRayne wrote:

HP is doing great, trust me, I know, their root is the business market and that is doing just fine.

Look, their business market branch is comparably fine, unfortunately a tree is much bigger than it's roots.
Numbers don't lie, doing fine would be mirroring the graph of reality:

Attachment:

Bildschirmfoto 2012-11-01 um 21.56.14.png [ 96.81 KB | Viewed 19 times ]

BloodRayne wrote:

And Steve Ballmer really doesn't know a lot about the hardware business, he makes dumb statements all the time, he really is a clown.

Well, short sightedness isn't limited to being a clown, sometimes it's corporate heritage which makes it even more dangerous (the surface looks like a pretty good response to the iPad by the way):

Attachment:

Bildschirmfoto 2012-11-01 um 22.04.32.png [ 53.9 KB | Viewed 21 times ]

BloodRayne wrote:

I disagree, handhelds have held a very firm grip in the business industry from day one, even more so than for consumers.
Think Blackberry Enterprise server, used by millions of business users worldwide. Or the many projects that have launched (and failed) trying to migrate the entire business desktop to an Ipad. I've seen these projects first hand. Some of them worked, most of them worked half/half. The business is jumping for a handheld solution but the tech is certainly not mature enough to be as cheap and sturdy and longlived as desktops. The lifespan of a handheld is simply 1/10th of that of desktops, meaning so much more management.

BloodRayne wrote:

And about 0.5% of that business is handhelds including Ipads and such, the business market paints a completely different picture than the consumer market.

Now what - is it important or not, is it a mere 0.5% or are they holding a firm grip in the business industry. Confused.

BloodRayne wrote:

That's not a very long limp, by the way. 'as you know it' is the crux, because you and I know that tech continually changes. That statement is about as easy to make as saying 'tormorrow there will be water on the planet, somewhere'.

I wouldn't consider a tablet plugged into a big screen, addressed via wireless mouse and keyboard a desktop as we know it. By saying this you should be able to measure the length of my limps more accurately.

BloodRayne wrote:

Like I said, both have a place and I am convinced that both will continue to thrive in there own, specialized, form.

Well, even a ratio of 1:100.000.000 would mean both have a place. I fail to express the essence of the idea or you refuse to give it a nod - in any case, so may be it.

If we're still around in 10 years I'd be most happy to come back and analyze todays exchange. Since I put my money where my mouth is I'll be either more wealthy or broke.

We don't sell blackberry, but we do sell IPads.

And I don't really know where you got those numbers from, but here's my picture.
Our company deals in 90% HP and our gross income went from 50m. to 150 in the last 5 years.

The ESSN numbers paint a pretty different picture:

Attachment:

6a00d83452e85869e2016766baf198970b-800wi.jpg [ 60.85 KB | Viewed 19 times ]

But HP is not even the point here. The point is that desktops have uses that handhelds don't and vice-versa.
They are not direct competitors, so I'd be more careful where I'd put my money if that was the bet.

But of course, that wasn't the bet you made. The bet you made was that handhelds would be successful regardless, which I'm sure they will and are.

BloodRayne wrote:

And I don't really know where you got those numbers from, but here's my picture.
Our company deals in 90% HP and our gross income went from 50m. to 150 in the last 5 years.

Where do I get my numbers from... HP and what you're looking at is the dysmal stock price after the business of HP fell off the cliff after 2010 (chart starts 10/2008). You do know that these companies give quarterly reports. What your company does with HP or does not with other companies is completely detached from this discussion. I know people making a very rich living supporting mythologic mainframes from last century living in university basements, but that doesn't mislead me to say there are positive business prospects in building 1990s hardware.

BloodRayne wrote:

The ESSN numbers paint a pretty different picture:

Attachment:

6a00d83452e85869e2016766baf198970b-800wi.jpg

You discuss handhelds by posting a picture of Enterprise Storage Servers as a validity point of healthy desktop sales?

BloodRayne wrote:

But HP is not even the point here. The point is that desktops have uses that handhelds don't and vice-versa.
They are not direct competitors, so I'd be more careful where I'd put my money if that was the bet.

I'm very careful and very successful in what I do and what I bet on and I do know what I am talking about on broad economic scale. To make a statement that desktops have uses hand helds don't and vice versa is as hollow as it could possibly be, sorry to be so blunt to you, nothing personal. Look, pocket watches are still around albeit some claim the wristwatch was more successful since it's inception.

BloodRayne wrote:

But of course, that wasn't the bet you made. The bet you made was that handhelds would be successful regardless, which I'm sure they will and are.

I also bet against desktops. No, absolutely no regrets.

I do not have to like the way the world is evolving, but that doesn't stop it from doing so.
Seeing PC games falling victim to that development is the downside. Looking ahead is about making predictions about the shape of things to come, not to justify a viewpoint or see what you want to see.
There is faith and there is science, pick your side and be happy, but don't waste your time showing scientific proof to believers or recite bible passages to scientists.

Quote:

I also bet against desktops. No, absolutely no regrets.

If your talking about gaming the future really isn't black and white as what your describing. I will agree the tradiational style of PC games is probably going to go down at some point if not already, but we will see PC gaming evolve. The new kinect for example, which will have a higher resolution camera, and more joint/better skeletal tracking we can see more games using the new kinect than the old one. At a studio I worked out we were trying to come up with awesome mechanics using the kinect, well holding say your hand up in the form of a gun and acting like your pulling the trigger with your index finger. Well the problem is the current kinect doesn't support a high enough fluid resolution to track fingers.

This is one of many possibilities, but you still have the line of sight issue with the kinect so well have to see how the new one plays out. The next possibility with PC gaming is going to be a few generations down the road, but take a look at this article http://www.theverge.com/2012/1/7/268863 ... -hologram- , Microsoft a few months ago actually made hologram, one that doesn't have to be projected on something. I picture in about 8-10 years we might see a "cyber zone" type thing and instead of laser tag you shoot the holograms, and years past that when it becomes cheap enough it might be able to be in your house.

That holographic stuff might seem like it's far off but someone between now and the times I projected could come up with a cheap way to do holographic tech similar to how the kinect is a cheap mo-cap device. But you are correct we will probably see a decline in the traditional style PC games(probably around the same time console games will go down), but that doesn't mean PC gaming is dead, it's just going to evolve. Mobile devices still have a huge performance gap between their PC/console counterparts so with stuff like kinect and holographic tech we won't see mobile devices using this tech for at least 10-15 years after the tech becomes usuable. So don't expect your ipad running iOS 17 to beable to do holographic tech in your lifetime.

.

Also check out Kinect Fusion

http://www.neowin.net/news/build-2012-m ... ect-fusion

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/pro ... facerecon/

Fusion mixed with a head monted kinect or depth camera and kinect to detect the players movement you can do a lot with that. The fact is PC's will always be more power than consoles, so you can do more with extra devices and still keep a fast frame rate.

jmarshall23 wrote:

If your talking about gaming the future really isn't black and white as what your describing.

I wasn't talking about a particular type of software, I'm talking about what will be the main computing device for most people in 10 years. I do not care about the niches where developers maintaining development environments, geeks being geeks or professional users of abnormally high computing power still being in need for more raw power (media creation and editing). Unfortunately "power users" distort their view of PCs and project them onto the majority - doing email, surfing the web and sorting pictures (and rotating them) is - against how it feels like after watching a commercial - not the area of need for the latest and greatest laptop or desktop.

jmarshall23 wrote:

I will agree the tradiational style of PC games is probably going to go down at some point if not already, but we will see PC gaming evolve.

Eventually gaming will end up like the food industry - we don't eat what's best for us, but what reaps the highest profit for the food companies.

jmarshall23 wrote:

The new kinect for example, which will have a higher resolution camera, and more joint/better skeletal tracking we can see more games using the new kinect than the old one. At a studio I worked out we were trying to come up with awesome mechanics using the kinect, well holding say your hand up in the form of a gun and acting like your pulling the trigger with your index finger. Well the problem is the current kinect doesn't support a high enough fluid resolution to track fingers.

The Kinect in my opinion is one of the greatest innovations in gaming since the hardware accelerated polygon came along.

jmarshall23 wrote:

This is one of many possibilities, but you still have the line of sight issue with the kinect so well have to see how the new one plays out. The next possibility with PC gaming is going to be a few generations down the road, but take a look at this article http://www.theverge.com/2012/1/7/268863 ... -hologram- , Microsoft a few months ago actually made hologram, one that doesn't have to be projected on something. I picture in about 8-10 years we might see a "cyber zone" type thing and instead of laser tag you shoot the holograms, and years past that when it becomes cheap enough it might be able to be in your house.

I do not fear for awesome technologies to not become available to us in the future, what I fear is the ability to economically survive the time in between. Right now mobile and consoles suck the oxygen out of the pc market, not only by higher returns, but partly also to considerably lower production costs.

jmarshall23 wrote:

But you are correct we will probably see a decline in the traditional style PC games(probably around the same time console games will go down), but that doesn't mean PC gaming is dead, it's just going to evolve.

We already do see a decline in traditional PC games, and we do not see it since yesterday. People like to pronounce PC gaming dead, but it's not - but it's dying and therefore does not attract the most future oriented funds.

jmarshall23 wrote:

Mobile devices still have a huge performance gap between their PC/console counterparts so with stuff like kinect and holographic tech we won't see mobile devices using this tech for at least 10-15 years after the tech becomes usuable. So don't expect your ipad running iOS 17 to beable to do holographic tech in your lifetime.

.

No, but I don't expect to see many games that utilizes computing power for anything more interesting than shiny pixels and bouncy physics either. And that's the main culprit.
If the availability of raw power and game quality would correlate, we'd be in heaven since quite some time - wouldn't we?

Quote:

If the availability of raw power and game quality would correlate, we'd be in heaven since quite some time - wouldn't we?

Right now that's because raw power is going into visuals and not game mechanics, my position is that's going to change with the stuff like the kinect and holographic devices coming out.

The current kinect is nothing more than a giant tease to developers, which the next kinect will hopefully rectify.

jmarshall23 wrote:

Quote:

If the availability of raw power and game quality would correlate, we'd be in heaven since quite some time - wouldn't we?

Right now that's because raw power is going into visuals and not game mechanics, my position is that's going to change with the stuff like the kinect and holographic devices coming out.

The current kinect is nothing more than a giant tease to developers, which the next kinect will hopefully rectify.

I was hoping more power would go into AI understanding physics and having it's own objectives in a world it would understand and change according to their objectives.

BNA! wrote:

jmarshall23 wrote:

Quote:

If the availability of raw power and game quality would correlate, we'd be in heaven since quite some time - wouldn't we?

Right now that's because raw power is going into visuals and not game mechanics, my position is that's going to change with the stuff like the kinect and holographic devices coming out.

The current kinect is nothing more than a giant tease to developers, which the next kinect will hopefully rectify.

I was hoping more power would go into AI understanding physics and having it's own objectives in a world it would understand and change according to their objectives.

All the more reason PC gaming isn't dead, advanced terminator like AI plus stuff like the next gen kinect, more reason to have more power.

Keep in mind the next four years aren't pretty graphics in terms of tech evolution it's mechanics and faster pipelines that's going to be the "in thing" for the next 4-6 years.

jmarshall23 wrote:

All the more reason PC gaming isn't dead, advanced terminator like AI plus stuff like the next gen kinect, more reason to have more power.

Keep in mind the next four years aren't pretty graphics in terms of tech evolution it's mechanics and faster pipelines that's going to be the "in thing" for the next 4-6 years.

There's my golden rule of how to treat "it's going to be awesome" predictions:
Not gone gold, not existing.

BNA! wrote:

BloodRayne wrote:

And I don't really know where you got those numbers from, but here's my picture.
Our company deals in 90% HP and our gross income went from 50m. to 150 in the last 5 years.

Where do I get my numbers from... HP and what you're looking at is the dysmal stock price after the business of HP fell off the cliff after 2010 (chart starts 10/2008). You do know that these companies give quarterly reports. What your company does with HP or does not with other companies is completely detached from this discussion. I know people making a very rich living supporting mythologic mainframes from last century living in university basements, but that doesn't mislead me to say there are positive business prospects in building 1990s hardware.

BloodRayne wrote:

The ESSN numbers paint a pretty different picture:

Attachment:

6a00d83452e85869e2016766baf198970b-800wi.jpg

You discuss handhelds by posting a picture of Enterprise Storage Servers as a validity point of healthy desktop sales?

BloodRayne wrote:

But HP is not even the point here. The point is that desktops have uses that handhelds don't and vice-versa.
They are not direct competitors, so I'd be more careful where I'd put my money if that was the bet.

I'm very careful and very successful in what I do and what I bet on and I do know what I am talking about on broad economic scale. To make a statement that desktops have uses hand helds don't and vice versa is as hollow as it could possibly be, sorry to be so blunt to you, nothing personal. Look, pocket watches are still around albeit some claim the wristwatch was more successful since it's inception.

BloodRayne wrote:

But of course, that wasn't the bet you made. The bet you made was that handhelds would be successful regardless, which I'm sure they will and are.

I also bet against desktops. No, absolutely no regrets.

I do not have to like the way the world is evolving, but that doesn't stop it from doing so.
Seeing PC games falling victim to that development is the downside. Looking ahead is about making predictions about the shape of things to come, not to justify a viewpoint or see what you want to see.
There is faith and there is science, pick your side and be happy, but don't waste your time showing scientific proof to believers or recite bible passages to scientists.

The stock market really does NOT reflect the health of HP as a company.
Revenues just grow and grow and grow, also in the IPS and PSG segments (desktops, notebooks, printers).
There is just growth and growth and growth. Damn.. Eastern Europe is just starting to grow as a market for us.

You're not being blunt, you're being a bit short-sighted. But that's your prerogative.

BloodRayne wrote:

The stock market really does NOT reflect the health of HP as a company.

Actually it does, that's the only function of the stock market - but the stock market is not an efficient market. So one may argue it's off xy % this or that way. This disagreement with the market and the investment decision based on that makes or breaks your performance.

BloodRayne wrote:

Revenues just grow and grow and grow, also in the IPS and PSG segments (desktops, notebooks, printers).
There is just growth and growth and growth. Damn.. Eastern Europe is just starting to grow as a market for us.

I'm so sorry, but that's just not true for HP:

Attachment:

Bildschirmfoto 2012-11-02 um 16.41.48.png [ 91.72 KB | Viewed 14 times ]

BloodRayne wrote:

You're not being blunt, you're being a bit short-sighted. But that's your prerogative.

Yes, if we all would only know what lays ahead. At least I can look at todays data and know - over 8 billion quarterly loss is NOT healthy for a company of any size. But it's your prerogative to interpret it as growth and growth and growth. Personally I think it's a shame what's happening to HP, they're a valley icon and shouldn't just go gradually under like that.

Quote:

The stock market really does NOT reflect the health of HP as a company.
Revenues just grow and grow and grow, also in the IPS and PSG segments (desktops, notebooks, printers).

You can never legitimately defend HP printers

.

I found a complete list of console commands herehttp://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/537/doom-3-doom-iii-complete-list-of-console-commands/,
My problem is only a little basic commands working in my OSX Doom3 Version 1.3.1.1304, for example ,when i type "editor", it says unkown command.

Why? and how can i use the commands like DOOMEdit?

maadiah wrote:

I found a complete list of console commands herehttp://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/537/doom-3-doom-iii-complete-list-of-console-commands/,
My problem is only a little basic commands working in my OSX Doom3 Version 1.3.1.1304, for example ,when i type "editor", it says unkown command.

Why? and how can i use the commands like DOOMEdit?

The tools, including the editor, only work on the Windows version.

Doom3 include tools in its open source, right? Can i compile them to get a DoomEdit?

They need the MFC framework which I believe is not available for OSX. There are some windows dependancies. I believe someone was working on a GPL version with tooling, but I'm really not sure if they also have OSX in mind. All in all, Doom editing is basically a windows affair. You might have better luck with a dual boot setup or a windows emulator than trying to run the tools on OSX.

But it's not really my expertise so I could be off.

You can recompile the code with ID_ALLOW_TOOLS, take out all the MFC tools, which will give you just dmap and a few others than use something like gtkradiant which I think works on osx.

Netradiant or DarkRadiant would be worth a try. I know that GTK/Netradiant is missing a lot of the Doom 3 specific functions though - there is no GUI editor and no light editor. Darkradiant probably has those. It's even worse with ETQW mapping - one probably really needs Windows for that.

I think that the built-in D3 editor requiring Windows is pretty lame.

gb_remake wrote:

Netradiant or DarkRadiant would be worth a try. I know that GTK/Netradiant is missing a lot of the Doom 3 specific functions though - there is no GUI editor and no light editor. Darkradiant probably has those. It's even worse with ETQW mapping - one probably really needs Windows for that.

I think that the built-in D3 editor requiring Windows is pretty lame.

Darkradiant is a great option I just didn't know if it worked on osx or not.

gb_remake wrote:

I think that the built-in D3 editor requiring Windows is pretty lame.

Just a thought.... but if it had been easy to do, don't you think it would have been done by now?
If not by ID then by other developers? D3 has been GPL'ed long enough now for somebody to create the tools for OSX yet nobody did it.

BloodRayne wrote:

gb_remake wrote:

I think that the built-in D3 editor requiring Windows is pretty lame.

Just a thought.... but if it had been easy to do, don't you think it would have been done by now?
If not by ID then by other developers? D3 has been GPL'ed long enough now for somebody to create the tools for OSX yet nobody did it.

I ported it from MFC to C#(front end only) but I really designed it for idtech 4 cdk(it's geared more towards VT), and I haven't had a chance yet to move it from CLR to Mono.

It was just an argument to point out that it's a difficult job and shouldn't be taken for granted.

Reality is no one cares about gaming on mac
search your feelings, you know it to be true

Except for Doom 3 itself, there is no option for the AF editor. I'm sure it could be done via text, but dark gradient doesn't have it, it has everything else though.

whitewolf wrote:

Reality is no one cares about gaming on mac
search your feelings, you know it to be true

My thoughts exactly, only reason why developers even care about osx is because of ios.

Bloodrayne, I know that, I just thought it would have been kind of id to go the extra mile to at least make it work on Linux back when they did that port. After all Radiant isn't restricted to Windows, either, so it can't be impossible to make the built-in editor work either (or add the new stuff to Radiant).

But I guess their enthusiasm for supporting modding was already waning back then.

Fact is, if it didn't require windows, I would work more on my WIP Doom 3 map. But my entire everyday workflow is on Linux and everybody making games knows how important workflow is.

jmarshall23 wrote:

whitewolf wrote:

Reality is no one cares about gaming on mac
search your feelings, you know it to be true

My thoughts exactly, only reason why developers even care about osx is because of ios.

Well, developers, the Mac is the ONLY growing segment in an otherwise free falling pc world.
Just look at the abysmal adoption rate of Win8 - only 4 million in 3 days on an installed base of 1.25 billion.

iOS of course is the current path to income for developers.

BNA! wrote:

jmarshall23 wrote:

whitewolf wrote:

Reality is no one cares about gaming on mac
search your feelings, you know it to be true

My thoughts exactly, only reason why developers even care about osx is because of ios.

Well, developers, the Mac is the ONLY growing segment in an otherwise free falling pc world.
Just look at the abysmal adoption rate of Win8 - only 4 million in 3 days on an installed base of 1.25 billion.

iOS of course is the current path to income for developers.

OSx still only less than 10% of the pc marketshare, consoles and mobile devices are the new target for games, PC versions are usually a afterthought and doing something for less than 10% of the pc marketshare doesn't make as much buisness sense since most studios can only choose between Windows and OSx.

The other problem truth be told is XCode is a nasty nightmare, so most developers don't care enough to deal with it's nasty UI except for doing ios apps.

jmarshall23 wrote:

OSx still only less than 10% of the pc marketshare, consoles and mobile devices are the new target for games, PC versions are usually a afterthought and doing something for less than 10% of the pc marketshare doesn't make as much buisness sense since most studios can only choose between Windows and OSx.

That's absolutely true - I was merely pointing out it's the sole growing segment in an otherwise shrinking market.

Since even games for the pc hardly make money to keep an appropriately sized boat afloat, I don't expect Mac gaming to suddenly take off

The future is phone/tablet and later on paired with a console, there's little chance things will evolve differently. However, I DO miss the times when the release of a game did justify a 3 grand system upgrade.

jmarshall23 wrote:

The other problem truth be told is XCode is a nasty nightmare, so most developers don't care enough to deal with it's nasty UI except for doing ios apps.

I also wish XCode would allow more productivity.

I don't believe in a singular future for this device or that.
I think the industry should finally come around to the fact that there is a place for both desktops and handheld devices, in whatever fashion.
Some people will always prefer a keyboard and mouse over touch and vice-versa, that's just how it goes.

And I don't think this is a 8 track v.s. casette, or vhs v.s. betamax thing either.
Those were direct competitors. Desktops simply form a completely different market than handhelds.
The 'people' may be jumping on handhelds. But I work for a company that sells business to business hardware, we make 150 million a year.
And about 0.5% of that business is handhelds including Ipads and such, the business market paints a completely different picture than the consumer market.

Of course, we're talking consumer market here, but even in that market Mac has it's own place besides Win based machines.
It's entirely uncommon to see users use either one or the other, unless they only use their platforms for one single dedicated job (e.g. photographers will mostly stick with Mac).

I think both have their place and uses and it will show in the end.

I also think that if these stubborn companies would work a little bit more on inter compatibility between platforms that we would all benefit from it, including and perhaps foremost the companies themselves.

BloodRayne wrote:

I don't believe in a singular future for this device or that.
I think the industry should finally come around to the fact that there is a place for both desktops and handheld devices, in whatever fashion.

Ironically it's the industry clawing their way out of a boiling pot after preaching there's a place for desktops and handheld devices (translate: handheld a fad, only desktop pro, consumers don't count, only business folks do).

Saying your company doesn't make much with mobile devices because you're a business to business hardware company is like saying bicycles haven't caught on in the truck business, there's no extrapolatable data point in it.

I'm willing to go out on a limp and say: the desktop as you know it will not exist in meaningfull numbers 10 years down the road.

If I would have gotten a buck for each time I've heard "not gonna happen" in the last 5 years I'd be wealthy - wait, that's exactly what happened.

Just look at the sad state of affairs at HP or MS. Stevs Ballmer claiming the other day Apple is just a low volume player in mobile devices shows a level of desperation and delusion not seen often in public.

BNA! wrote:

Ironically it's the industry clawing their way out of a boiling pot after preaching there's a place for desktops and handheld devices (translate: handheld a fad, only desktop pro, consumers don't count, only business folks do).

Saying your company doesn't make much with mobile devices because you're a business to business hardware company is like saying bicycles haven't caught on in the truck business, there's no extrapolatable data point in it.

I'm willing to go out on a limp and say: the desktop as you know it will not exist in meaningfull numbers 10 years down the road.

If I would have gotten a buck for each time I've heard "not gonna happen" in the last 5 years I'd be wealthy - wait, that's exactly what happened.

Just look at the sad state of affairs at HP or MS. Stevs Ballmer claiming the other day Apple is just a low volume player in mobile devices shows a level of desperation and delusion not seen often in public.

HP is doing great, trust me, I know, their root is the business market and that is doing just fine.
And Steve Ballmer really doesn't know a lot about the hardware business, he makes dumb statements all the time, he really is a clown.

I disagree, handhelds have held a very firm grip in the business industry from day one, even more so than for consumers.
Think Blackberry Enterprise server, used by millions of business users worldwide. Or the many projects that have launched (and failed) trying to migrate the entire business desktop to an Ipad. I've seen these projects first hand. Some of them worked, most of them worked half/half. The business is jumping for a handheld solution but the tech is certainly not mature enough to be as cheap and sturdy and longlived as desktops. The lifespan of a handheld is simply 1/10th of that of desktops, meaning so much more management.

That's not a very long limp, by the way. 'as you know it' is the crux, because you and I know that tech continually changes. That statement is about as easy to make as saying 'tormorrow there will be water on the planet, somewhere'.

Like I said, both have a place and I am convinced that both will continue to thrive in there own, specialized, form.

BloodRayne wrote:

HP is doing great, trust me, I know, their root is the business market and that is doing just fine.

Look, their business market branch is comparably fine, unfortunately a tree is much bigger than it's roots.
Numbers don't lie, doing fine would be mirroring the graph of reality:

Attachment:

Bildschirmfoto 2012-11-01 um 21.56.14.png [ 96.81 KB | Viewed 19 times ]

BloodRayne wrote:

And Steve Ballmer really doesn't know a lot about the hardware business, he makes dumb statements all the time, he really is a clown.

Well, short sightedness isn't limited to being a clown, sometimes it's corporate heritage which makes it even more dangerous (the surface looks like a pretty good response to the iPad by the way):

Attachment:

Bildschirmfoto 2012-11-01 um 22.04.32.png [ 53.9 KB | Viewed 21 times ]

BloodRayne wrote:

I disagree, handhelds have held a very firm grip in the business industry from day one, even more so than for consumers.
Think Blackberry Enterprise server, used by millions of business users worldwide. Or the many projects that have launched (and failed) trying to migrate the entire business desktop to an Ipad. I've seen these projects first hand. Some of them worked, most of them worked half/half. The business is jumping for a handheld solution but the tech is certainly not mature enough to be as cheap and sturdy and longlived as desktops. The lifespan of a handheld is simply 1/10th of that of desktops, meaning so much more management.

BloodRayne wrote:

And about 0.5% of that business is handhelds including Ipads and such, the business market paints a completely different picture than the consumer market.

Now what - is it important or not, is it a mere 0.5% or are they holding a firm grip in the business industry. Confused.

BloodRayne wrote:

That's not a very long limp, by the way. 'as you know it' is the crux, because you and I know that tech continually changes. That statement is about as easy to make as saying 'tormorrow there will be water on the planet, somewhere'.

I wouldn't consider a tablet plugged into a big screen, addressed via wireless mouse and keyboard a desktop as we know it. By saying this you should be able to measure the length of my limps more accurately.

BloodRayne wrote:

Like I said, both have a place and I am convinced that both will continue to thrive in there own, specialized, form.

Well, even a ratio of 1:100.000.000 would mean both have a place. I fail to express the essence of the idea or you refuse to give it a nod - in any case, so may be it.

If we're still around in 10 years I'd be most happy to come back and analyze todays exchange. Since I put my money where my mouth is I'll be either more wealthy or broke.

We don't sell blackberry, but we do sell IPads.

And I don't really know where you got those numbers from, but here's my picture.
Our company deals in 90% HP and our gross income went from 50m. to 150 in the last 5 years.

The ESSN numbers paint a pretty different picture:

Attachment:

6a00d83452e85869e2016766baf198970b-800wi.jpg [ 60.85 KB | Viewed 19 times ]

But HP is not even the point here. The point is that desktops have uses that handhelds don't and vice-versa.
They are not direct competitors, so I'd be more careful where I'd put my money if that was the bet.

But of course, that wasn't the bet you made. The bet you made was that handhelds would be successful regardless, which I'm sure they will and are.

BloodRayne wrote:

And I don't really know where you got those numbers from, but here's my picture.
Our company deals in 90% HP and our gross income went from 50m. to 150 in the last 5 years.

Where do I get my numbers from... HP and what you're looking at is the dysmal stock price after the business of HP fell off the cliff after 2010 (chart starts 10/2008). You do know that these companies give quarterly reports. What your company does with HP or does not with other companies is completely detached from this discussion. I know people making a very rich living supporting mythologic mainframes from last century living in university basements, but that doesn't mislead me to say there are positive business prospects in building 1990s hardware.

BloodRayne wrote:

The ESSN numbers paint a pretty different picture:

Attachment:

6a00d83452e85869e2016766baf198970b-800wi.jpg

You discuss handhelds by posting a picture of Enterprise Storage Servers as a validity point of healthy desktop sales?

BloodRayne wrote:

But HP is not even the point here. The point is that desktops have uses that handhelds don't and vice-versa.
They are not direct competitors, so I'd be more careful where I'd put my money if that was the bet.

I'm very careful and very successful in what I do and what I bet on and I do know what I am talking about on broad economic scale. To make a statement that desktops have uses hand helds don't and vice versa is as hollow as it could possibly be, sorry to be so blunt to you, nothing personal. Look, pocket watches are still around albeit some claim the wristwatch was more successful since it's inception.

BloodRayne wrote:

But of course, that wasn't the bet you made. The bet you made was that handhelds would be successful regardless, which I'm sure they will and are.

I also bet against desktops. No, absolutely no regrets.

I do not have to like the way the world is evolving, but that doesn't stop it from doing so.
Seeing PC games falling victim to that development is the downside. Looking ahead is about making predictions about the shape of things to come, not to justify a viewpoint or see what you want to see.
There is faith and there is science, pick your side and be happy, but don't waste your time showing scientific proof to believers or recite bible passages to scientists.

Quote:

I also bet against desktops. No, absolutely no regrets.

If your talking about gaming the future really isn't black and white as what your describing. I will agree the tradiational style of PC games is probably going to go down at some point if not already, but we will see PC gaming evolve. The new kinect for example, which will have a higher resolution camera, and more joint/better skeletal tracking we can see more games using the new kinect than the old one. At a studio I worked out we were trying to come up with awesome mechanics using the kinect, well holding say your hand up in the form of a gun and acting like your pulling the trigger with your index finger. Well the problem is the current kinect doesn't support a high enough fluid resolution to track fingers.

This is one of many possibilities, but you still have the line of sight issue with the kinect so well have to see how the new one plays out. The next possibility with PC gaming is going to be a few generations down the road, but take a look at this article http://www.theverge.com/2012/1/7/268863 ... -hologram- , Microsoft a few months ago actually made hologram, one that doesn't have to be projected on something. I picture in about 8-10 years we might see a "cyber zone" type thing and instead of laser tag you shoot the holograms, and years past that when it becomes cheap enough it might be able to be in your house.

That holographic stuff might seem like it's far off but someone between now and the times I projected could come up with a cheap way to do holographic tech similar to how the kinect is a cheap mo-cap device. But you are correct we will probably see a decline in the traditional style PC games(probably around the same time console games will go down), but that doesn't mean PC gaming is dead, it's just going to evolve. Mobile devices still have a huge performance gap between their PC/console counterparts so with stuff like kinect and holographic tech we won't see mobile devices using this tech for at least 10-15 years after the tech becomes usuable. So don't expect your ipad running iOS 17 to beable to do holographic tech in your lifetime.

.

Also check out Kinect Fusion

http://www.neowin.net/news/build-2012-m ... ect-fusion

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/pro ... facerecon/

Fusion mixed with a head monted kinect or depth camera and kinect to detect the players movement you can do a lot with that. The fact is PC's will always be more power than consoles, so you can do more with extra devices and still keep a fast frame rate.

jmarshall23 wrote:

If your talking about gaming the future really isn't black and white as what your describing.

I wasn't talking about a particular type of software, I'm talking about what will be the main computing device for most people in 10 years. I do not care about the niches where developers maintaining development environments, geeks being geeks or professional users of abnormally high computing power still being in need for more raw power (media creation and editing). Unfortunately "power users" distort their view of PCs and project them onto the majority - doing email, surfing the web and sorting pictures (and rotating them) is - against how it feels like after watching a commercial - not the area of need for the latest and greatest laptop or desktop.

jmarshall23 wrote:

I will agree the tradiational style of PC games is probably going to go down at some point if not already, but we will see PC gaming evolve.

Eventually gaming will end up like the food industry - we don't eat what's best for us, but what reaps the highest profit for the food companies.

jmarshall23 wrote:

The new kinect for example, which will have a higher resolution camera, and more joint/better skeletal tracking we can see more games using the new kinect than the old one. At a studio I worked out we were trying to come up with awesome mechanics using the kinect, well holding say your hand up in the form of a gun and acting like your pulling the trigger with your index finger. Well the problem is the current kinect doesn't support a high enough fluid resolution to track fingers.

The Kinect in my opinion is one of the greatest innovations in gaming since the hardware accelerated polygon came along.

jmarshall23 wrote:

This is one of many possibilities, but you still have the line of sight issue with the kinect so well have to see how the new one plays out. The next possibility with PC gaming is going to be a few generations down the road, but take a look at this article http://www.theverge.com/2012/1/7/268863 ... -hologram- , Microsoft a few months ago actually made hologram, one that doesn't have to be projected on something. I picture in about 8-10 years we might see a "cyber zone" type thing and instead of laser tag you shoot the holograms, and years past that when it becomes cheap enough it might be able to be in your house.

I do not fear for awesome technologies to not become available to us in the future, what I fear is the ability to economically survive the time in between. Right now mobile and consoles suck the oxygen out of the pc market, not only by higher returns, but partly also to considerably lower production costs.

jmarshall23 wrote:

But you are correct we will probably see a decline in the traditional style PC games(probably around the same time console games will go down), but that doesn't mean PC gaming is dead, it's just going to evolve.

We already do see a decline in traditional PC games, and we do not see it since yesterday. People like to pronounce PC gaming dead, but it's not - but it's dying and therefore does not attract the most future oriented funds.

jmarshall23 wrote:

Mobile devices still have a huge performance gap between their PC/console counterparts so with stuff like kinect and holographic tech we won't see mobile devices using this tech for at least 10-15 years after the tech becomes usuable. So don't expect your ipad running iOS 17 to beable to do holographic tech in your lifetime.

.

No, but I don't expect to see many games that utilizes computing power for anything more interesting than shiny pixels and bouncy physics either. And that's the main culprit.
If the availability of raw power and game quality would correlate, we'd be in heaven since quite some time - wouldn't we?

Quote:

If the availability of raw power and game quality would correlate, we'd be in heaven since quite some time - wouldn't we?

Right now that's because raw power is going into visuals and not game mechanics, my position is that's going to change with the stuff like the kinect and holographic devices coming out.

The current kinect is nothing more than a giant tease to developers, which the next kinect will hopefully rectify.

jmarshall23 wrote:

Quote:

If the availability of raw power and game quality would correlate, we'd be in heaven since quite some time - wouldn't we?

Right now that's because raw power is going into visuals and not game mechanics, my position is that's going to change with the stuff like the kinect and holographic devices coming out.

The current kinect is nothing more than a giant tease to developers, which the next kinect will hopefully rectify.

I was hoping more power would go into AI understanding physics and having it's own objectives in a world it would understand and change according to their objectives.

BNA! wrote:

jmarshall23 wrote:

Quote:

If the availability of raw power and game quality would correlate, we'd be in heaven since quite some time - wouldn't we?

Right now that's because raw power is going into visuals and not game mechanics, my position is that's going to change with the stuff like the kinect and holographic devices coming out.

The current kinect is nothing more than a giant tease to developers, which the next kinect will hopefully rectify.

I was hoping more power would go into AI understanding physics and having it's own objectives in a world it would understand and change according to their objectives.

All the more reason PC gaming isn't dead, advanced terminator like AI plus stuff like the next gen kinect, more reason to have more power.

Keep in mind the next four years aren't pretty graphics in terms of tech evolution it's mechanics and faster pipelines that's going to be the "in thing" for the next 4-6 years.

jmarshall23 wrote:

All the more reason PC gaming isn't dead, advanced terminator like AI plus stuff like the next gen kinect, more reason to have more power.

Keep in mind the next four years aren't pretty graphics in terms of tech evolution it's mechanics and faster pipelines that's going to be the "in thing" for the next 4-6 years.

There's my golden rule of how to treat "it's going to be awesome" predictions:
Not gone gold, not existing.

BNA! wrote:

BloodRayne wrote:

And I don't really know where you got those numbers from, but here's my picture.
Our company deals in 90% HP and our gross income went from 50m. to 150 in the last 5 years.

Where do I get my numbers from... HP and what you're looking at is the dysmal stock price after the business of HP fell off the cliff after 2010 (chart starts 10/2008). You do know that these companies give quarterly reports. What your company does with HP or does not with other companies is completely detached from this discussion. I know people making a very rich living supporting mythologic mainframes from last century living in university basements, but that doesn't mislead me to say there are positive business prospects in building 1990s hardware.

BloodRayne wrote:

The ESSN numbers paint a pretty different picture:

Attachment:

6a00d83452e85869e2016766baf198970b-800wi.jpg

You discuss handhelds by posting a picture of Enterprise Storage Servers as a validity point of healthy desktop sales?

BloodRayne wrote:

But HP is not even the point here. The point is that desktops have uses that handhelds don't and vice-versa.
They are not direct competitors, so I'd be more careful where I'd put my money if that was the bet.

I'm very careful and very successful in what I do and what I bet on and I do know what I am talking about on broad economic scale. To make a statement that desktops have uses hand helds don't and vice versa is as hollow as it could possibly be, sorry to be so blunt to you, nothing personal. Look, pocket watches are still around albeit some claim the wristwatch was more successful since it's inception.

BloodRayne wrote:

But of course, that wasn't the bet you made. The bet you made was that handhelds would be successful regardless, which I'm sure they will and are.

I also bet against desktops. No, absolutely no regrets.

I do not have to like the way the world is evolving, but that doesn't stop it from doing so.
Seeing PC games falling victim to that development is the downside. Looking ahead is about making predictions about the shape of things to come, not to justify a viewpoint or see what you want to see.
There is faith and there is science, pick your side and be happy, but don't waste your time showing scientific proof to believers or recite bible passages to scientists.

The stock market really does NOT reflect the health of HP as a company.
Revenues just grow and grow and grow, also in the IPS and PSG segments (desktops, notebooks, printers).
There is just growth and growth and growth. Damn.. Eastern Europe is just starting to grow as a market for us.

You're not being blunt, you're being a bit short-sighted. But that's your prerogative.

BloodRayne wrote:

The stock market really does NOT reflect the health of HP as a company.

Actually it does, that's the only function of the stock market - but the stock market is not an efficient market. So one may argue it's off xy % this or that way. This disagreement with the market and the investment decision based on that makes or breaks your performance.

BloodRayne wrote:

Revenues just grow and grow and grow, also in the IPS and PSG segments (desktops, notebooks, printers).
There is just growth and growth and growth. Damn.. Eastern Europe is just starting to grow as a market for us.

I'm so sorry, but that's just not true for HP:

Attachment:

Bildschirmfoto 2012-11-02 um 16.41.48.png [ 91.72 KB | Viewed 14 times ]

BloodRayne wrote:

You're not being blunt, you're being a bit short-sighted. But that's your prerogative.

Yes, if we all would only know what lays ahead. At least I can look at todays data and know - over 8 billion quarterly loss is NOT healthy for a company of any size. But it's your prerogative to interpret it as growth and growth and growth. Personally I think it's a shame what's happening to HP, they're a valley icon and shouldn't just go gradually under like that.

Quote:

The stock market really does NOT reflect the health of HP as a company.
Revenues just grow and grow and grow, also in the IPS and PSG segments (desktops, notebooks, printers).

You can never legitimately defend HP printers

.