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

Regularly scheduled events

id: User Content "Not a Huge Consideration"

There's a Q&A with Matt Hooper on Next Generation (thanks Computer and Video Games) talking about Rage, Tech5, and other areas of interest about id Software. One point seems particularly interesting given one of the cornerstones of id's past successes has been support of user-generated content. While acknowledging this has an appeal, Matt indicates that support for such content is not a high priority for them in Rage:

What are your thoughts on user-created content?
As a game player, I love it. But that doesnt mean at the same time I cant love a BioShock or a Call of Duty 4. You can have a focused game, and do that really well. I think thats the important thing doing something really well. What the other games mentioned do as far as user created content, and just on that side of things, its like a different focus. I think there can be a separation, almost like movie genres. Its okay to make a comedy, or a really hardcore, serious documentary. I think there are different fits.

For us personally, our biggest goal is you can see it right now were pushing on the fidelity, visually. Were also pushing on the gameplay fidelity. Those two things are huge. For us, were doing things that weve never done before. Thats already a lot of eggs in the basket. As far as user-generated content, its not a huge consideration for us right now.

id games have always had mods, but what Spore and LittleBigPlanet have done is make it automatic, and networked. You can get other peoples creatures, without doing anything at all. Have you ever thought about automatically connected maps and a user ranking system for maps in Rage?
Yeah, we thought about all of that, but I cant say weve specifically implemented it right now. Again, were concentrating more on just making a great game with this new tech. But those conversations happen all the time.

38. Re: No subject Jun 24, 2008, 16:56 sponge
Uhm there is a big difference between "technology licensed from id software" on a box and using the graphics engine of iD from Doom3. For all you know the licensed tech is some networking or sound code that has nothing to do with graphics at all. For that matter, it might not even be part of a game engine, it could just be some dev tools that they licensed from Id.

Please point out where I said that Doom3 had anything to do with CoD4?

All the points you make about filesystem, comments looking the same and such are completely superficial and have absolutely nothing to do with a graphics engine.

Please point out any quote that mentioned a graphics engine? nin's original post said nothing about graphics. I said nothing about graphics.

The fact that you didn't even bother to read a damn word I said shows me that I really shouldn't bother responding. But I've never been known as someone who listens to what I SHOULD do. Go back and read my post, and read what I was responding to, and then reply if you still disagree. The quote was about engine, not graphics engine, and I said Quake3, not Doom3.

I don't give two shits what some developer says, as the box and the evidence says differently. I also specifically pointed out that CoD4 using the Doom3 graphics engine was an ignorant statement, but yet it was completely ignored like it never happened.

These comment threads are becoming increasingly lame to be a part of. It's simply a circle-jerk of wrong information and some sort of PC vs console conspiracy nowadays.

It's one thing when a message board says something uninformed (CoD4 is Doom3 engine) but it's another when the developer itself spreads a bald-faced lie.
It's one thing when a message board says something uninformed (CoD4 is Doom3 engine) but it's another when the developer itself spreads a bald-faced lie.
It's one thing when a message board says something uninformed (CoD4 is Doom3 engine) but it's another when the developer itself spreads a bald-faced lie.

Maybe you'll see it this time.

This comment was edited on Jun 24, 17:01.
Previous Post Next Post Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
    Date Subject Author
  1. Jun 24, 10:25 id's offerings Efflixi
  3. Jun 24, 10:48  Re: id's offerings maldoror
  4. Jun 24, 11:02  Re: id's offerings manic half
  5. Jun 24, 11:28  Re: id's offerings CrimsonPaw
  6. Jun 24, 11:49   Re: id's offerings Valtyr
  8. Jun 24, 12:13  Re: id's offerings DanL
  9. Jun 24, 12:21   Re: id's offerings PointlesS
  10. Jun 24, 12:25    Re: id's offerings the_culture
  14. Jun 24, 12:51    Re: id's offerings Rosco
  2. Jun 24, 10:41 No subject ^mortis^
  7. Jun 24, 11:57 No subject Veinman
  11. Jun 24, 12:28 ... theyarecomingforyou
  12. Jun 24, 12:33  Re: ... MMORPGHoD
  13. Jun 24, 12:38 No subject beigemore
  16. Jun 24, 12:53  Re: No subject Overon
  15. Jun 24, 12:51 No subject dryden555
  17. Jun 24, 13:22  Re: No subject manic half
  18. Jun 24, 13:26   Re: No subject Joss
  20. Jun 24, 14:07  Re: No subject Krovven
  19. Jun 24, 13:31 No subject mag
  21. Jun 24, 14:10 Manufactured Controversy >U
  22. Jun 24, 14:21 No subject Pigeon
  23. Jun 24, 14:46  Re: No subject Armengar
  30. Jun 24, 15:38  Re: No subject Jerykk
  24. Jun 24, 14:47 No subject Dreagon
  25. Jun 24, 15:02  Re: No subject Krovven
  26. Jun 24, 15:04 No subject bubba ray
  27. Jun 24, 15:06  Re: No subject PHJF
  28. Jun 24, 15:06  Re: No subject Krovven
  29. Jun 24, 15:08  Re: No subject nin
  31. Jun 24, 15:45   Re: No subject sponge
  32. Jun 24, 15:51    Re: No subject sponge
  34. Jun 24, 16:08     Re: No subject Pedle Zelnip
  35. Jun 24, 16:24      Re: No subject PHJF
  36. Jun 24, 16:24      Re: No subject the_culture
  37. Jun 24, 16:30      Re: No subject nin
>> 38. Jun 24, 16:56      Re: No subject sponge
  39. Jun 24, 17:19       Re: No subject sponge
  43. Jun 24, 17:44       Re: No subject Krovven
  45. Jun 24, 17:49        Re: No subject sponge
  58. Jun 24, 21:16       Re: No subject Pedle Zelnip
  61. Jun 24, 21:46        Re: No subject sponge
  62. Jun 24, 23:24         Re: No subject manic half
  70. Jun 25, 22:39          Re: No subject Kash
  71. Jun 26, 04:18         Re: No subject Pedle Zelnip
  33. Jun 24, 16:01 No subject loomy
  40. Jun 24, 17:21 ... theyarecomingforyou
  42. Jun 24, 17:43  Re: ... sponge
  48. Jun 24, 17:55   Re: ... Kash
  50. Jun 24, 18:00    Re: ... sponge
  51. Jun 24, 18:05     Re: ... Kash
  53. Jun 24, 18:11      Re: ... sponge
  52. Jun 24, 18:11     Re: ... Kash
  54. Jun 24, 18:19      Re: ... sponge
  55. Jun 24, 19:02       Re: ... Jerykk
  56. Jun 24, 19:38        Re: ... sponge
  46. Jun 24, 17:50  ... Animals for Crackers
  41. Jun 24, 17:43 No subject fujiJuice
  44. Jun 24, 17:47  Re: No subject sponge
  47. Jun 24, 17:52 No subject fujiJuice
  49. Jun 24, 17:56  Re: No subject sponge
  57. Jun 24, 20:54 No subject space captain
  59. Jun 24, 21:36 Hmmmm Creston
  60. Jun 24, 21:45 ... theyarecomingforyou
  63. Jun 25, 00:08 ... theyarecomingforyou
  64. Jun 25, 01:57  Re: ... sponge
  65. Jun 25, 07:50   Re: ... nin
  66. Jun 25, 11:44    Re: ... Muscular Beaver
  69. Jun 25, 21:16   Re: ... Kash
  67. Jun 25, 11:54 No subject dryden555
  68. Jun 25, 16:04  Re: No subject sponge


Blue's News logo