"We do not see the PC as the leading platform for games," Carmack added. "That statement will enrage some people, but it is hard to characterize it otherwise; both console versions will have larger audiences than the PC version. A high end PC is nearly 10 times as powerful as a console, and we could unquestionably provide a better experience if we chose that as our design point and we were able to expend the same amount of resources on it. Nowadays most of the quality of a game comes from the development effort put into it, not the technology it runs on. A game built with a tenth the resources on a platform 10 times as powerful would be an inferior product in almost all cases."
WaltC wrote on Oct 8, 2011, 09:27:Creston wrote on Oct 7, 2011, 22:44:
...
Edit : In fairness, after installing the latest AMD driver AND restoring the 8192 tweaks, it seems as if the texture flickering is finally gone. Hurrah.
Creston
Every time I dial in these forums I keep reading the same old crap about it being only a problem for AMD cards--good grief, and how many times does it have to be repeated? nVidia is the company--not AMD--who put out a faq for nVidia users to use the 8192 tweaks so that the damn game would run right on *nVidia* cards! Sheesh. The game might have run *marginally* better on nVidia cards without the 8192 tweaks--but nowhere near how it should have run. Just like the AMD cards. I read post after post on the Steam forums (where I actually first found out about the tweaks) written by nVidia users having horrendous texture pop-in problems and who were also unable to get the game to function in SLI. What's happened is that some nVidia fans have been spreading the word that it's "only ATi products having problems with RAGE" and ATi users, of course not having access to nVidia cards (and apparently unable to read other forums like I was able to do), have believed it! Hook, line, and sinker.
The truth is that the game in its released state sucked for both PC platforms. Also, the console version reviewed by Ars Technica was rife with its own texture pop-in problems to the degree that Ars gave the console version a great big FAIL--and promised to get to the PC version later. Graphical problems weren't the only thing Ars didn't like, of course, but the main point here is that they existed on the console versions, too!
The fact of the matter is that this is a crap game released by a crap company that is trading solely on past-accrued goodwill. The PC is what put Carmack on the map. Yeah, he's a damn sell out, but more than that--he's as friggin' lazy as they come these days--he could have substantially revised the PC version of this game to take advantage of the "ten-times more power" as Carmack puts it, but he's just not interested anymore in doing that level of work. A few years ago, Carmack worked his butt off doing it right for the PC. I guess the truth is that he's pushing up against his limits as a programmer these days. Who the hell is he kidding? Console technology is almost a decade old and the fact that he'd rather program for it than for the "10 times more powerful PC" speaks volumes.
I am so glad I did not buy this game. Maybe in a few years in the bargain bin for $5. Maybe. Or when it hits GoG...;)
I think I'm about 1/3 of the way through the game, so my opinion could change, but I jsut don't see that this game is as bad as so many people claim, some of whom clearly haven't bought the game.
eRe4s3r wrote on Oct 8, 2011, 07:02:
If with innovate you mean downgrading the graphics on a PC back to 1997 while required 3gb of Vram and 22gb of HD space to do it.. then yeah
He hasn't innovated or influenced anything the past 5 years - in fact other game developers truly innovated like Frostbite 2 or the CryEngine 3 for example. He simply invented a way to waste texture memory with 0 gains in gameplay while making everything a blurry mess upclose.
Carmack made a console game, and with that he is no longer influencing pc gaming, in fact the only thing hes good for now is a bad example on how not to do it.
WaltC wrote on Oct 8, 2011, 11:17:
Hopefully, Bethesda is not being a *ick with refunds...;)
Fibrocyte wrote on Oct 8, 2011, 05:54:DNForever wrote on Oct 7, 2011, 23:26:
I'm usually playing 2 games, and nearing the end of DXHR it's like No Country For Old Men, and Rage is like Scott Pilgrim vs. The World.
It is clear you've seen neither of those movies.
WaltC wrote on Oct 8, 2011, 11:00:Zuckuss wrote on Oct 8, 2011, 10:29:
What game devs always fail to realize is that it's PC gamer's wallets that fund the tech evolution that they are able to put into consoles. If we weren't upgrading every 2 years, consoles would suck that much more.
True, and the fact is that even when Blues runs stories about how Valve and EA both, in recent weeks, have gone on record stating that the PC--not the console--is their overall chief revenue driver, some people are so conditioned to thinking that "PC gaming is dead" that they ignore these public statements and continue to support their weird console biases in their posts.
It depends on the publisher and on the developer as to "which platform" is their largest revenue driver. For some it is consoles, for others it is iPhones/Android phones, and for still others it is, and always has been, the PC.
You read it wrong. He's saying that, if Rage had been PC exclusive, it would have had a much smaller budget, and that he'd rather have the budget to realize his team's vision, even if it means a rough launch like this one.
You can agree or disagree, but at least read what he's saying before doing so.
Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Oct 8, 2011, 06:45:Overon wrote on Oct 7, 2011, 22:32:
RAGE sucks and no amount of driver issues is going to fix the fundamental GAME DESIGN PROBLEMS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GRAPHICS.
If RAGE is any indication, John Carmack and id can just go over exclusively to the console market and PC gamers will not be worse off. Let's just face reality: After years of development id's newest game is so full of terrible design decisions that graphics issues are just the icing on the shit cake.
But I have to give props to Carmack for being so honest about id's failure so soon after the game is released, of course he can only talk about the graphical failures not the game design failures, they are not his fault.
This.
And the random "*shrug* I'm enjoying RAGE and everything runs fine" people should catch on fire.
Zuckuss wrote on Oct 8, 2011, 10:29:
What game devs always fail to realize is that it's PC gamer's wallets that fund the tech evolution that they are able to put into consoles. If we weren't upgrading every 2 years, consoles would suck that much more.
Kevin Lowe wrote on Oct 8, 2011, 09:10:
You read it wrong. He's saying that, if Rage had been PC exclusive, it would have had a much smaller budget, and that he'd rather have the budget to realize his team's vision, even if it means a rough launch like this one.
You can agree or disagree, but at least read what he's saying before doing so.
A game built with a tenth the resources on a platform 10 times as powerful would be an inferior product in almost all cases.*Looks at Rage, Looks at Hard Reset, Looks at Rage, Looks at John Carmack*
Creston wrote on Oct 7, 2011, 22:44:
...
Edit : In fairness, after installing the latest AMD driver AND restoring the 8192 tweaks, it seems as if the texture flickering is finally gone. Hurrah.
Creston
Bhruic wrote on Oct 8, 2011, 04:40:You read it wrong. He's saying that, if Rage had been PC exclusive, it would have had a much smaller budget, and that he'd rather have the budget to realize his team's vision, even if it means a rough launch like this one.No, that's not what he's saying at all, try reading the article again.
I did. He specifically said they didn't put the same amount of resources into the PC version. And then he specifically said that a game built with a tenth of the resources is inferior. If he didn't mean to imply that they spent a tenth of the resources on the PC version, he shouldn't have brought it up. Because there's no other reason to use that stupid "tenth the resources" line.
Or, to put it differently, if you spend the same amount of resources on all platforms, and one platform is 10 times as powerful, the one that is 10 times as powerful should be the best platform.