Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

RAGE Interview

Ars Technica's RAGE review is online, giving id's just-released shooter a pretty good savaging. There's also an interview on Gamasutra on "The Creative Intent of Rage," discussing RAGE with id Software CEO Todd Hollenshead and artist Andy Chang and asking some pointed if not hostile questions about it being similar visually to Borderlands and Fallout, the oddly artistic bandits, its linearity, the lack of meaningful choices, the main characters lack of dialog or context, and more. Thanks ^Drag0n^.

View
82 Replies. 5 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Older >

82. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 6, 2011, 06:37 xXBatmanXx
 
damn.....I guess I ordered RAGE at newegg for 42.99.....forgot about it.....that sucks....  
Avatar 10714
 
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. / Few men have virtue enough to withstand the highest bidder.
Playing: New dad
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
81. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 6, 2011, 02:28 KilrathiAce
 
Creston wrote on Oct 5, 2011, 17:51:
Slashman wrote on Oct 5, 2011, 17:45:

Did it make sense to have the mediocre story, the not-really-open open world, the lack of meaningful choices etc.?

You're forgetting that this game is 100%, completely, utterly focused on the consoles. It's id's foray into the console world, and let's be honest, most console players couldn't give two shits about story, or open-world, or choices. They want it to be pretty and they want it to play well. And (for a console) Rage delivers those two things in spades.

That the PC version looks like ass for a lot of people, and is likely broken, and has shitty-ass textures? And that PC players expect MORE out of a game like this? Yeah, I doubt id really cares.

Creston

Problem is that ID at same time wants to rape PC gamers to pay 60 bucks for this half assed product. roffle waffle.
 
Avatar 7413
 
"On 2646.215 I myself attacked & destroyed TCS Tiger's Claw in my Jalthi heavy fighter"
Bakhtosh Redclaw Nar Kiranka
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
80. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 17:51 Creston
 
Slashman wrote on Oct 5, 2011, 17:45:

Did it make sense to have the mediocre story, the not-really-open open world, the lack of meaningful choices etc.?

You're forgetting that this game is 100%, completely, utterly focused on the consoles. It's id's foray into the console world, and let's be honest, most console players couldn't give two shits about story, or open-world, or choices. They want it to be pretty and they want it to play well. And (for a console) Rage delivers those two things in spades.

That the PC version looks like ass for a lot of people, and is likely broken, and has shitty-ass textures? And that PC players expect MORE out of a game like this? Yeah, I doubt id really cares.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
79. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 17:45 Slashman
 
^Drag0n^ wrote on Oct 5, 2011, 16:26:

It's funny, but I was talking about this topic just the other day with one of the programmers I used to work with. We went on a tangent talking about the merits of making a new engine versus using an old one beyond the scope of design that it was limited to when it was written...take, for example, the Quake 3 or Doom3 engine: Today, those things are beasts even on a Netbook; you can add bigger textures, more geometric detail, higher bit depth to the color palettes, and really not suffer too much on a modern rig at all (barring some coding tweaks that may be required to allow them).

True. The Source engine continues to see a lot of use in the industry.

The short version? Given how far hardware has come, you can really make a great looking game with an engine that's long in the tooth yet still looks amazing BECAUSE of the hardware changes. The idTech5 engine is suffering not because it can't do some amazing things, but rather because some talented teams out there have come up with amazing ways to make older engines look almost as good.

Right here is where the problem is. The Witcher 2 is running a brand new engine that CD Projekt made from scratch. It isn't an old engine tweaked to look amazing despite its age.

That's exactly why I chose TW2 as my example and not Borderlands or Fallout:NV.

Now here's what I find amusing. id, according to what folks have been saying, isn't planning to license their idTech5 engine out. Just use it til they decide to release it as open source. What, then, is the point of making a game that runs more like their tech demo efforts of the past? Why not expand on all the things that they seem to setup in the game and then leave hanging?

Did it make sense to have the mediocre story, the not-really-open open world, the lack of meaningful choices etc.?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
78. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 16:26 ^Drag0n^
 
Slashman wrote on Oct 5, 2011, 16:09:
I dunno...I kind of think that The Witcher 2 looks better and I don't have everything turned up in it. The screenshots of RAGE that I have seen look OK, but they never particularly impressed me.

It's funny, but I was talking about this topic just the other day with one of the programmers I used to work with. We went on a tangent talking about the merits of making a new engine versus using an old one beyond the scope of design that it was limited to when it was written...take, for example, the Quake 3 or Doom3 engine: Today, those things are beasts even on a Netbook; you can add bigger textures, more geometric detail, higher bit depth to the color palettes, and really not suffer too much on a modern rig at all (barring some coding tweaks that may be required to allow them).

The short version? Given how far hardware has come, you can really make a great looking game with an engine that's long in the tooth yet still looks amazing BECAUSE of the hardware changes. The idTech5 engine is suffering not because it can't do some amazing things, but rather because some talented teams out there have come up with amazing ways to make older engines look almost as good.
 
Avatar 55075
 
"Never start a fight, but always finish it."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
77. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 16:09 Slashman
 
^Drag0n^ wrote on Oct 5, 2011, 15:41:
I'm basing it on the technical aspect. I fully agree that the PC release, in it's current state, is borderline inexcusable; be that the fault of id/Beth QA or a lack of timely driver support by nvidia/AMD. That just plain has to get fixed. Assuming that it does (and given the track record here, that's probably a safe assumption) I expect that the visual aspect of this engine will live up to expectations eventually in Rage.

Granted, I'm probably thinking of the things that bug me, like how one can see tiling in Fallout and other open vista games; something that isn't here. That bugs me as much as the toolbox textures are bothering you, but I do agree that Rage may not be the best vehicle to showcase those benefits in it's current state.

But, I have to admit, seeing the game actually run on my Ion2 Netbook kinda blew me away.

I dunno...I kind of think that The Witcher 2 looks better and I don't have everything turned up in it. The screenshots of RAGE that I have seen look OK, but they never particularly impressed me.


Back on the topic of the interview: I think that the thrust of the interview is that here is a game with so much potential that id never took advantage of.

What people seem to be saying is that it seems kind of pointless to build a world that expansive and not fill it with more interesting things to do and choices to make.

If id's stance is that this isn't an open world game with RPG elements and lots of exploration...why create a world that seems to scream that it is? That's almost sure to make people want the type of things that they are told they can't have.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
76. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 15:41 ^Drag0n^
 
I'm basing it on the technical aspect. I fully agree that the PC release, in it's current state, is borderline inexcusable; be that the fault of id/Beth QA or a lack of timely driver support by nvidia/AMD. That just plain has to get fixed. Assuming that it does (and given the track record here, that's probably a safe assumption) I expect that the visual aspect of this engine will live up to expectations eventually in Rage.

Granted, I'm probably thinking of the things that bug me, like how one can see tiling in Fallout and other open vista games; something that isn't here. That bugs me as much as the toolbox textures are bothering you, but I do agree that Rage may not be the best vehicle to showcase those benefits in it's current state.

But, I have to admit, seeing the game actually run on my Ion2 Netbook kinda blew me away.

This comment was edited on Oct 5, 2011, 15:47.
 
Avatar 55075
 
"Never start a fight, but always finish it."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
75. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 14:33 Creston
 
^Drag0n^ wrote on Oct 5, 2011, 13:37:
I will go on record saying that the Rage engine *is* the most advanced engine

Based on what, exactly? I'm sure the technology underneath is nice, but the consumer doesn't care about that. The consumer cares about results, and what it looks like and plays like on their machine.

Rage looks nice on good hardware, but it's not spectacularly nice. There have been far more beautiful games. The low res texture nonsense (which is clearly a design decision to keep the game running smoothly) is ridiculous, and goes directly against Carmack saying "Our artists can add UNLIMITED detail to any scene without a cost in framerates!" unless he meant unlimited detail in 4x4 textures.

So how is it the most advanced engine? Its greatest supposed feature either plain doesn't work or it comes with so many caveats that it becomes meaningless, and it doesn't do anything else that other engines don't do as well or far, far better.

Yes, the landscapes are pretty. In return, I get low res textures for most of the interior environments. To me, that's not "advanced", nor a worthy tradeoff.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
74. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 14:19 Creston
 
Verno wrote on Oct 5, 2011, 13:06:
I don't have anyone to blame but myself for the price thing, I should have waited. It's fun but not $60 fun and the technology fluff is far less impressive than I thought it would be.

Ditto.

Oh well, Skyrim is almost here.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
73. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 13:37 ^Drag0n^
 
Beelzebud wrote on Oct 5, 2011, 13:22:
Ok to the guy comparing this situation with Quake... Where to begin...

Quake was using the most advanced engine in history. Period. At the time of its release there was nothing that came close to it. It was rendering everything in 3D, and not using sprites. People were willing to soldier on through the bugs and growing pains because it was revolutionary for graphics.

This isn't 1994. Rage was designed for consoles which can't even compare to the horsepower of modern PC's. And yet, people with those PC's are struggling to play a game that runs fine on the consoles. There is no comparison at all between this and Quake. Rage isn't bringing anything new to the table that makes it worth $60.00, or makes it worth suffering through the growing pains.

Your quip to me aside, I will go on record saying that the Rage engine *is* the most advanced engine, same as with Quake was in 1997 (keeping in mind that System Shock and Ultima Underworld had done the freelook 3D thing prior in 1993 and 1994, respectively). People are having problems due to a development decision id made that even John acknowledges was a mistake (read Carmack's quote in my previous post, or go to the source here, or watch the full interview here).

My point? From Doom2 all the way up to Doom3, People ranted about something on release. The games went on to be patched, and every one of them is now considered a milestone in the development of the genre and technology driving the FPS.

I guess Adam Jensen was right, "If you want to make a few enemies, go to an id software release thread." Or something like that.

(edited for clarity, references)

This comment was edited on Oct 5, 2011, 14:44.
 
Avatar 55075
 
"Never start a fight, but always finish it."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
72. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 13:23 ^Drag0n^
 
The more interesting part:

On PC vs Console performance:

"It is a little bit of a shame that, despite the raw horsepower, we are hampered by kind of the arms-length API interface. Because it is... unhappily true that we have the consoles here running at sixty frames per second, and we could have these massively more powerful PC systems that struggle sometimes to hold the framerate because of unnecessary overheads. Where, if we were programming that hardware directly on the metal the same way we do the consoles, it would be significantly more powerful. But there are a lot of moves afoot to be improving that, and we are working closely with all of the vendors to kind of address that."
-John Carmack
 
Avatar 55075
 
"Never start a fight, but always finish it."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
71. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 13:22 Beelzebud
 
Ok to the guy comparing this situation with Quake... Where to begin...

Quake was using the most advanced engine in history. Period. At the time of its release there was nothing that came close to it. It was rendering everything in 3D, and not using sprites. People were willing to soldier on through the bugs and growing pains because it was revolutionary for graphics.

This isn't 1994. Rage was designed for consoles which can't even compare to the horsepower of modern PC's. And yet, people with those PC's are struggling to play a game that runs fine on the consoles. There is no comparison at all between this and Quake. Rage isn't bringing anything new to the table that makes it worth $60.00, or makes it worth suffering through the growing pains.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
70. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 13:19 ^Drag0n^
 
God, I wish I had John's PC:

(from the article KA mentioned):

"My development system now has twenty-four threads and twenty-four gigs of memory, and we can start putting on half a terabyte of solid state drives, and these are the things that are gonna drive the development process on the PC. So, Im actually as excited about how were developing tht titles in this coming generation as the graphics enhancements and things that Im gonna make."
-John Carmack
 
Avatar 55075
 
"Never start a fight, but always finish it."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
69. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 13:06 Verno
 
I don't have anyone to blame but myself for the price thing, I should have waited. It's fun but not $60 fun and the technology fluff is far less impressive than I thought it would be. Oh well, I've spent money worse ways I suppose - fucking Brink.  
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Divinity Original Sin, Destiny, Fire Emblem
Watching: Continuum, Star Trek TNG, Haunt
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
68. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 12:49 KilrathiAce
 
Not sure if anyone mentioned this interview from june where Carmack admits that developing RAGE for consoles first was a mistake in regards to PC:

http://www.firingsquad.com/news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=23760

After various reviews, high price and this, its clear to me this game is not worth to own as PC gamer. Maybe once the price drops and I have friends playing mp but not before.
 
Avatar 7413
 
"On 2646.215 I myself attacked & destroyed TCS Tiger's Claw in my Jalthi heavy fighter"
Bakhtosh Redclaw Nar Kiranka
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
67. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 12:30 ^Drag0n^
 
HAHAHAH! Probably.  
Avatar 55075
 
"Never start a fight, but always finish it."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
66. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 12:22 Creston
 
I would expect it to run, yeah. It runs on a frakking 360 too, and that's probably even worse than your netbook.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
65. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 12:02 ^Drag0n^
 
Creston & Crovven-- Thanks for the console / config tips. I'm going to give those a shot tonight when the wife is on Ladies night out...<g>

On a sidenote: I installed Rage on my ion2 netbook last night after upgrading to nVidia's latest drivers (bf3 build). It actually ran...pop-up textures all over, but it ran.

Insane.
 
Avatar 55075
 
"Never start a fight, but always finish it."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
64. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 11:56 eRe4s3r
 
I don't think thats how this works...

They indeed have to high-res every texture per level, and re-bake the entire level.

Ah whatever, i understand too little about mega-textures to really judge whats wrong here or what isn't. But fact is that for a 20gb game, it looks like true and utter shit, and on PC there is no excuse for that, ID released this like this for PC, a half-assed console port that looks horrible and lacks any modern features (i am not even gonna mention theres no dynamic light-sources in this game, no day and night changes, no parallax mapping, no DX10/11 features (SSAO/HDR/GI/Color mapping) no dynamic destruction...)

/Revised this post 3 times now ~.~

This comment was edited on Oct 5, 2011, 12:13.
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
63. Re: RAGE Interview Oct 5, 2011, 11:55 ^Drag0n^
 
Y'know, I'm reminded of this game that was released that practically demanded a CPU upgrade, running like a dog at high resolutions, and it's networking code was total shit for the internet. Additionally, it had no matchmaking capability internally, requiring that you know what server you wanted to play on before the community came out and made external matchmaking programs.

On top of all that? It wasn't even windows native, and you had to run additional software to make IP traffic tunnel through winsock properly.

There was hellfire, brimstone, flaming, and much calling for heads.

God, how did that game EVER make it?

I am, of course, talking about Quake.

Most people seem to remember the Quakeworld experience, forgetting how different the initial release was, and how frustrating it was for some playing over dial-up, and those that had 486 chips.

And yet it's still the high-water mark of shooters.

And its also why I'm pretty sure that as the weeks develop, we will see better things emerge from this game.

Now, all that said, I still think that today's id is way different than the id of 1997; you don't hear about howling challenges of manhood between employees like there were when American and Romero were there. Maybe that's part of the reason we see less action than we did back in the day. They do appear to be making an effort to be more artistic, but seem to struggle with how that relates to their paternal relationship to the visceral Deathmatch FPS.

Others have caught up, and now they are in a position where they have to show that daddy still has game.

Personally, my only real complaints with the game at this point are the mouse acceleration (which, apparently, can be rectified by a console command), and the invisible walls (which I blame on Fallout allowing me to pretty much roam anywhere). I haven't gotten in to the vehicular combat yet, but, based on what I've heard form others playing it, it's pretty damn fun.

I know Carmack will make the engine work. He always has. As Blue, myself, and a few others lurking here can personally attest to, John put in more hours than you can imagine tuning Quake/Quakeworld to make sure that the code was uber-stable before passing it on to Zoid.

I expect no less from him with Rage.

This engine is a huge leap; unfortunately that part is getting lost in the traffic of initial release issues, and the me-too-isms that the press is throwing at the game. I hope it gets to show that off at some point here.

This comment was edited on Oct 5, 2011, 12:07.
 
Avatar 55075
 
"Never start a fight, but always finish it."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
82 Replies. 5 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo