So apparently Rage is out tomorrow.

Well, at least I can run the bloody thing now.

Before the patch, even with all the tweaks under the sun, most of the time when I load a game it would just freeze completely. If, on the offchance, it did actually load, I either had that horrific screen tearing or microstuttering, or half of the time I would get about 10fps. If I was lucky enough to have it work properly, the next time it loads an area it would freeze again.

Now it works. Need to force vsync to get rid of the tearing (no stuttering with vsync now either)...unfortunately I'm obviously having it cut down to 30fps most of the time now. Which...really makes no sense, I should definitely be getting 60+ to look at the game. Infuriating...I either have to play it at 30fps or with horrible tearing and microstuttering.

Not impressed with this. Really not impressed. Even aside the technical issues, my initial impressions tell me this engine is a piece of crap. When Quake 3 came out, it revolutionised games in terms of graphics. Hell, there are games that still use that engine today. And Quake Live really isn't a bad looking game, despite that it's not setting the world on fire. Doom 3 had an excellent engine which brought a lot to the table too, but I guess too narrow in scope for what it could accomplish compared to UE3.

I'm really not sure WHAT it is this engine brings to the table though. The Witcher 2 and Crysis 2 are both far, far better looking games.
 
The crappy PC launch was all Nvidia's and AMD's fault, says Carmack.

The driver issues at launch have been a real cluster !@#$ We were quite happy with the performance improvements that we had made on AMD hardware in the months before launch; we had made significant internal changes to cater to what AMD engineers said would allow the highest performance with their driver and hardware architectures, and we went back and forth with custom extensions and driver versions.

We knew that all older AMD drivers, and some Nvidia drivers would have problems with the game, but we were running well in-house on all of our test systems. When launch day came around and the wrong driver got released, half of our PC customers got a product that basically didn't work. The fact that the working driver has incompatibilities with other titles doesn't help either. Issues with older / lower end /exotic setups are to be expected on a PC release, but we were not happy with the experience on what should be prime platforms.
Click to expand...

Another reason is the PC isn't the primary developing platform.

You can choose to design a game around the specs of a high-end PC and make console versions that fail to hit the design point, or design around the specs of the consoles and have a high-end PC provide incremental quality improvements. We chose the latter.
Click to expand...
 
Well, it works now with the patch...so, complete cluster**** as the release was, that's not the end of the world.

Now what I want to know is, why is my framerate no better than in Battlefield 3, when it's a distinctly average-looking game? The 50-odd fps wouldn't bother me so much if vsync wasn't necessary to make the game playable, but as it is it's just not good enough. id have always made incredibly slick, well-optimised engines which just feel "right". I definitely can't say that about this game at the moment.
 
Shakermaker said:
The crappy PC launch was all Nvidia's and AMD's fault, says Carmack.
Click to expand...

Putting the blame on others is easy. Games have bugs, I know that. Maybe Carmack is right, but I'm really perplexed. There are *a lot* of games with awesome graphics out there, and far less issues. Umh... maybe the new Id engine is seriously flawed?
 
Paulaner said:
Putting the blame on others is easy. Games have bugs, I know that. Maybe Carmack is right, but I'm really perplexed. There are *a lot* of games with awesome graphics out there, and far less issues. Umh... maybe the new Id engine is seriously flawed?
Click to expand...

Being industry veterans, you would expect these problems would of been tombstoned into the ground before they even arise. Overconfidence on Carmack's behalf, perhaps a little arrogant?
 
If the devs that have worked on quakelive are any indication of the rest of id, then definitely arrogance. Maybe with just a pinch of overconfidence for flavor. And if that's their view for pc/console, I'll be really sad if they decide to actually make another quake.
 
Ok, I got the game working properly now. Created a cache folder and linked to it in the cfg, all the framerate issues have disappeared. Played for a couple of hours, and it's actually a really good game. It does have that smooth, slick feel you would expect from an id game. And it's a lot of fun. Could probably do with a better story (or the existence of one full stop), but aside from that...so far I'd say it's shaping up to be the best singleplayer FPS I've played since Half-Life 2. Which probably says more about the lack of good singleplayer FPS games than it does about the quality of Rage, but...yeah. It's good. It will be particularly interesting to see what they do with Doom 4.

function9 said:
If the devs that have worked on quakelive are any indication of the rest of id, then definitely arrogance. Maybe with just a pinch of overconfidence for flavor. And if that's their view for pc/console, I'll be really sad if they decide to actually make another quake.
Click to expand...

Confused. What's wrong with Quake Live?
 
I'm really enjoying Rage, so if they manage to make Doom 4 as fun as this game, but minus the bugs, that would be great.

EDIT:

Finished Rage.

My reaction to the ending:

D:

WHAT?!

THAT'S IT?

...


So yeah, the ending is way too abrupt and anticlimactic for my taste. The resistance warns you that they don't know what to expect inside Capital Prime. However when you finally get there, you bulldoze your way through everyone, get to the Nexus, and that's it. WAT

I expected another boss fight with one of those giant mutants at least...

That being said I still enjoyed the game a lot and would play through it again.
 
Absolutely loving this game now that everything is fixed up. Feels like a less RPG-heavy DX:HR/FO3 with more emphasis on driving sequences and of course, shooting. Towns feel very alive, characters are animated well and show a lot of expression and the shooting sequences actually manage to be fun and avoid the simple point A to point B snorefest present in most shooters.

There's also the no limit inventory / upgrade everything / collect cars + car weapons and car upgrades element which is awesome. Also sidequests galore.

It's a great game. Lots of little easter eggs too. Credit where credit is due - the mayor's office in the first major town has a Vault-Tec bobble head that sells for quite a bit.
 
This review is hilarious.

http://www.ag***/reviews/rage_2011

(You don't have to know russian to get it.)
 
Holy shit, lol. I didn't even know that could be done.
 
I really like the game, except for the fact that I get a framerate drop (from 60 to 30fps, as vsync is mandatory for this game to be playable) whenever I turn around the retarded engine accesses the HDD to load in new textures. Nothing I've tried resolves the problem. That, and it's far, FAR too easy. But mainly the HDD thing. That's really infuriating.

Really, really weird graphics. Some places it looks amazing, and in others, absolutely dreadful.
 
repiV said:
That, and it's far, FAR too easy.
Click to expand...

Hahah, yeah I found myself having a ton of ammo on all the weapons at all time. Not that I'm complaining about the unlimited inventory or anything. Personally I went through the game mainly using the pistol (with high caliber rounds + binocular lens upgrade), or the shotgun with the "poprockets" ammo type.
The viper heat seeking rockets are useless, since you never fight other vehicles on foot. The crafted robots or sentry turrets are also unnecessary since you can easily take care of anything on your own. Plus the fact that later in the game you can resurrect yourself TWICE, without having to reload from a save.
The only enemies in the game that can become a serious problem in large numbers are the mutants, with their speed and agility.

Oh and BTW
The fight with that giant mutant in "Dead City" is disappointing as ****. I mean really, confine me to one room, and force me to shoot at it through a window? I would've preferred something like having to lure it to a trap by having it chase me down the streets. That would've been scary as ****. Sort of like the fight with the gargantua in the first Half Life.


repiV said:
Really, really weird graphics. Some places it looks amazing, and in others, absolutely dreadful.
Click to expand...

The main problem I have with the way the game looks is the low resolution of the textures. The are places, especially in the "Dead City" level, where the textures are a blurry pixelated mess. I mean come on...
As far as the engine is concerned, I'm sorry but Id is yet again outgunned by Unreal Engine and Cry Engine.
On the texture poping, Unreal Engine also uses texture streaming, but it's nowhere near as obvious or as broken as Id's "mega texture".
 
The game isn't challenging at all, even on nightmare. And I normally find singleplayer FPS games more difficult than I should do considering the level I've played online ones at. Crysis 2 was an absolute bastard of a game at times, on hard. The defibrilator is just more of a pisstake still! Hard Reset is really tough also.

Yeah, Dead City just looks abysmal. A lot of the indoor areas do, to be fair. I have a feeling the engine's potential has been severely gimped because of the need to run the game on consoles. I can only assume they originally intended for the final textures to be of a far higher resolution. The big open areas look spectacular. It's a fine engine for a racing game if nothing else...

When it does work properly though, it just feels right, in that way that id games do. It's a fairly intangible thing, but you can see it in all the Quakes, and in Doom 3 as well. There's just an inherent smoothness there I don't find in any other engine. Source, Unreal, Cryengine and all those things just feel clunky by comparison. When the kinks are ironed out, it would be a fine basis for a reincarnation of Q3.

I wish I could get rid of this slowdown-when-turning problem. I've stopped playing the game because of it. I've just got to Subway Town and it's bordering on unplayable, I guess there are more textures to load in there. It's a really, really fun and enjoyable game. It won't ever be remembered for breaking boundaries or redefining the genre, but damn, in terms of execution of the basics, it's a great game. Technical issues aside, with a better story which actually goes somewhere and a bit more of an expansive world, it could have been a truly exceptional game. But...this texture loading is killing it for me. I have 8GB of RAM and a high-ish end graphics card, I shouldn't need to get an SSD to have the game run smoothly. I got Metro 2033 off the Steam sale for like 3 quid the other day, I might play that but I want to finish Rage first! But I want it to work properly before I do. :(
 
I have 6 GB RAM, Intel quad core I5 2.67 GHz, and an Nvidia Geforce GTX 260. The game runs perfectly for me. The only problem I had was texture popping, which has been almost completely fixed with the patch.

My system is a bit weaker than yours, so I don't know why it doesn't run well for you. However I seriously doubt it's the hardware to blame.
 
Hah, believe it or not, after a week of trying, I've just managed to fix it!

Oddly enough, I DELETED the cache folder I'd previously created on the hard drive and the fs_cachepath config stuff and it runs perfectly now. Weird, huh? I think I'm going to start the game again from the beginning and enjoy it properly. :)
 
So, I beat the game yesterday.

The 'ending' if you can call it that has to be one of the shortest ones I've ever seen in a modern FPS.
 
The graphics are so damn lol.

Some of the textures, ***k me, what is this, a Wii game? And it seems washed out in places, like the contrast is too high between light and dark areas. Greys and browns for all my friends! I keep looking around at pretty vistas, because yeah, sometimes it's genuinely extremely pretty, but then you see the textures up close and I just laugh literally out loud looking at them and hearing Carmack's voice in my head when he said that ''We think RAGE has the best graphics of this generation.''

Err, no. No it doesn't mate.

Unless the PC has low textures as standard, until the high-res pack comes along, there are a laundry list of games prettier than RAGE.

I for one keep getting a bit of an fps dip from 50-60 to around 30 when initially firing some of the weapons after each load of a level, very noticeable and irritating. My PC is hardly crap though. I cant name a game I cant run on high settings.

The whole game just feels a bit deflated, a bit 'meh', and I now understand why it's getting 8's as a score.

I havent felt the desire to really get into it yet. I know there's still loads to do. Just picked up the new defibrillator. Then got owned by those greenish-blue puss-covered guys. Knowing my luck, Im half way through already.
 
Sometimes, though - and I'm completely honest here, the game looks like the biggest graphical triumph in gaming since Crysis.

The canyons, and the facial animation of the quest givers, is astounding.

Sure, it's loaded with low-rez models and lots of ugly too, but what counts is. p. sweet.
 
Turns out 2 things were killing my fps in the end.

1 - plug the laptop in, moron.

2 - RAGE seriously, seriously hates Fraps.

Running like butter now, and just seen I'm only 4 hours in and things have certainly gotten better. Ive started mixing the weapons up in the semi-dungeons. Quite fun now, they certainly got the shooting done perfectly.

BabyHeadCrab said:
Sometimes, though - and I'm completely honest here, the game looks like the biggest graphical triumph in gaming since Crysis.

The canyons, and the facial animation of the quest givers, is astounding.

Sure, it's loaded with low-rez models and lots of ugly too, but what counts is. p. sweet.
Click to expand...

There are definitely moments where it looks amazing, problem is it's almost always from a distance. I hate to keep banging on that point, but it's like a bloody elephant in the closet. Some of the textures you see on the walls and on the objects on shelves, you see them, run past, think 'wtf?', run back, look at them not even up close and cant help but think 'What the flying ***k were ID thinking? Did you really expect to get away with textures like THAT!?'

The characters are some of the best detailed Ive seen in gaming that's for sure. If they had better mo-cap it would be perfect, instead of the slightly sped-up movements they seem to have. Not jerky, but somehow not natural.

And the enemy detail is pretty impressive up close when you kill them. Bit too much blood though. And the hit-detection and reactions are realistic. I love when the body keeps going past as their head comes off. And I love Wingsticks.
 
The game could definitely benefit from a high resolution texture update.
 
So... is it any good gameplay wise? Does it have a good story? Should I get it?
 
Sheepo said:
Because 8 is the new 5?
Click to expand...
I thought 7.5 meant average for video games? It's up to eight now? Soon enough we'll have people saying "It only got 9.2, jesus it must be shit!"
 
Just finished this (yeah ok it took me a while, but I did start from the beginning again when I got it working properly...).

Good game. A frustrating game in many respects, because there's brilliance lurking in there somewhere but it never quite reached that potential (Human Revolution deja vu...). The game is completely, ridiculously easy, clearly designed to be played using a controller. Even if you took out the defibrilator and bandages, it would still be far too easy. Pop rockets ammo is almost an instant win button against most stuff. I'm sure I could finish the entire game in nightmare without ever dying if I wanted to (defibrilator deaths aside). And I found Crysis 2 really tough on the third of four difficulty settings.

The invisible wall stuff gets pretty annoying after a while, how you're only allowed to jump over stuff the game wants you to.

I don't think the game was too short though - it was starting to get a bit boring after a while, and I found it became a "play in 45 minute bursts and it's fun, but can't be arsed to play it any more" type of affair. Like most single-player shooters, to be fair. Apparently I finished it in 8 and a half hours. Didn't bother with the "go back to exactly the same place and run the mission in reverse" side quests after a couple.

The story could have been a lot more developed, and the final mission was as anti-climactic as I was led to believe. The setting was awesome though.

I changed my mind on the engine - the game looks - and runs - fantastic. Apparently they're going to use far higher resolution textures for Doom 4 and it should look about three times as good - now that's something I'd like to see. Crysis 2 kills my relatively high-end PC at times, and I'd say it's on a par graphically with Rage - better in some areas, worse in others. Crytek make really inefficient engines...if this technology becomes the norm though, we're going to see some ridiculous game sizes in the next few years.

Definitely the best singleplayer game id have ever made. Doom 3 was too long IMO, considering how repetitive it was. I enjoyed it a lot more than Crysis 2, and that's the only other recent SP shooter I've played. As per usual though, it would have been a lot better if it wasn't for bloody consoles. I did get Metro 2033 off the Steam sale the other week, I may have to try that out now...
 
Haven't played Metro 2033 yet? Definitely worth it.

Has Id actually stated that they're working on a high-def pack, or is that the wishful ranting of the Internet at large?
 
Yes, so I see...Metro 2033 is fantastic! I just got to chapter four. It's everything I love about gaming...the most immersive thing I've played since Thief 3/Chaos Theory. It looks incredible too. Total system hog mind, and the different mouse speed for X/Y axis is lame...but it doesn't really matter. It reminds me of FEAR, only infinitely better in every way.

They are working on a high-res texture pack, yeah.
 
So it just occurred to me that this is a Steam game, meaning patches are handled through Steam. This hi-def pack would be huge, many gigabytes perhaps? Are they going to pump that down Steam? I'd be happy to spend a buck on a DVD (or whatever medium would contain it, maybe a flash drive) that could be mailed to my house.
 
let this thread die already
 
The irony is staggering.

Might as well also post that there's not going to be an 'HD textures pack'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
bbson john
Hi everyone. I am new to this forum!
Replies
11
Views
6K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Half-Life's lost feature, glowing textures
Replies
0
Views
6K
Barnz
B
B
From Warren Spector to Arkane Studios: Half-Life 2's cancelled Ravenholm episode
Replies
2
Views
10K
Clan Wolf 2
Clan Wolf 2
Back
Top