LOS ANGELES--John Carmack is known to PC gamers as the lead programmer behind classics such as Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, and Quake. His latest project is Rage, a post-apocalyptic action game coming to PC, Xbox 360, and PS3 later this year. An iOS prequel, called Rage HD, was released last year, redefining what the iPad and iPhone were graphically capable of.
I spoke to Carmack during E3, and here's what he had to say about some of the most pressing current issues for game makers, including the state of PC hardware, the growth of mobile, casual, and social games, and the future of streaming games through services such as OnLive.
On making the iOS version of Rage
John Carmack: The only way Rage HD [for iOS] could have come out the way it was was by leveraging years ofwork on the high-end stuff. It was a profitable game for the iPhone because it was ableto basically be a parasite onto this much larger project. It couldn't have been developedfrom scratch and look like that.
If you want to do something that's that media-rich, there are a few cases where you canjustify doing that, but you wouldn't be able to do that on one game after another, becauseso much of the iOS market is scattershot. You throw a lot of things out there and seewhat sticks.
On technology versus gameplay
Carmack: I can recognize the knee in the curve where I can do things that make the graphicsbetter than what they are right now, but not as much better as if we put all thatengineering effort into things that make it more fun.
I could have been more exotic with the graphics [on Rage] and made a 30 frames-per-secondgame like our competitors out there, but I think we're going to stand out good enoughwith our graphics, so that we can run at twice the frame rate and get that really silkysmooth subtle feeling of instant responsiveness. That actually matters morethan which pixels I'm drawing on-screen.
Related linksE3 and the video game bubble Nintendo Wii U, Sony Vita, and the dangers of complexity Why isn't Apple at E3? E3 2011: Complete coverage
On Intel, AMD, and Nvidia
Carmack: The Intel story has been interesting. A year or a year and half ago, it was all up inthe air. Could Intel sweep the field with Larrabee-based parts? Of course, AMD's gotFusion, and Nvidia has all the Cuda-based stuff, obviously. But it was interesting to seeIntel go through this, and it turned out to be harder than they thought to make a productthat could compete in there.
There's no doubt they've got some of the very best engineers in the world working on it.But the thinking that you didn't need the [GPU] specialization turned out to be incorrect.On the other hand, Intel's integrated parts are getting better, and we're working prettyclosely with them for the first time, and we believe by the time Rage ships, we'll berunning at 30 frames-per-second on Intel integrated Sandy Bridge graphics, and it's onlygoing to get better from there.
In a couple of years, the integrated graphics parts are going to be good enough forthe 90-percent solution, and that's going to put a serious pinch on the high-end graphicscards.
Hard-core versus casual gaming
Carmack: We've got the hard-core people who look down their noses at the casual gaming stuffand say, "That's not a real game. Real games require $500 GPUs." So much of whatI've done has been a driving force for those people buying $500 video cards, and alot of people look at it as a failure of this generation that you don't need a $500 videocard to play a new game.
It seems like "serious gamer" is a lifestyle decision, and I'm not a serious gamer, I'man engineer, and I'm not spending 20 hours over the weekend playing games. I have alot of empathy for the people who just want to play a fun game on their phone for a littlewhile.
On OnLive and streaming games
Carmack: I've played the OnLive stuff and a lot of people have just enough technical knowledge tocount it out for the wrong reasons. When you talk about having a 50ms ping, that doesnot invalidate the process. One of the points that I make is that if you take a lot of the console games out there, and you're playing with yourwireless controller, going through your post-process TV, the games themselves oftenhave multiple frames of latency.
You get an event, you pipeline an animation, and it goes to the render thread andthe GPU. A lot of games have over 100ms of latency in them right now. Now it's truethat adding latency is always bad, and with OnLive, you're adding a compression stepand two transmit steps.
But the laws of physics do not guarantee this to be a bad idea. I don't necessarily thinkany of the current players will live to see the pot of gold at the end of this rainbow, but I'dsay it's almost a foregone conclusion that five or ten years from now, that's going to bea significant marketplace.
From a raw technical standpoint, it has too many positives going for it. There are negatives, but a lot of times, people will accept a big negative for a much biggerwin. And the win for convenience and managing your library is huge. And the win forpublishers and developers--zero piracy, instant patching, all that data gathering--arestrong advantages. I don't think it's the big thing next year, but I think it's coming.