[–] Bobsentme 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I remember playing Wolfenstein 3D and Doom on my Tandy 1000 and thinking "Man, there needs to be a jump button!!!" Now I know exactly why there's not. Pretty neat.
Now that I know how doom's engine was rendering everything, I'm actually shocked that it ran so well (for back then) on my tandy!
[–] RaiFighter 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I'd heard a whole bunch about how in code, Doom was a 2D game, but it's nice to see a breakdown of how this tech works that a layman can understand.
[–] smeezekitty ago
In my opinion, this doesn't mean that it can't be called "3D". It looks 3D and it has apparent depth - just like any other "3D" game. While it doesn't use 3D rendering techniques compared to modern games, it is still valid to call it "3D" since it is visually 3D.
I believe Quake is a true 3D renderer. It would run on Doom era hardware (486s) albeit marginally. So saying the hardware wasn't capable is a lie
[–] CarpetDime 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Totally agree. Every single 3d game is drawing a 2d grid of pixels, it's all an illusion even today.
[–] TiagoTiago 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
If you liked that video, you might also like this one: https://youtu.be/HQYsFshbkYw
[–] TiagoTiago 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I'm sure the demoscene folks disagree with the statement that the hardware couldn't handle drawing things in 3D...
[–] [deleted] 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
[–] TiagoTiago ago
This video gets into a little more detail (though it seems to focus more on the slightly more advanced Duke Nukem 3D style engines).
[–] HoocOtt ago
So what was the game Marathon doing?