RAGE Gameplay Performance and Image Quality @ [H]

Well, you're just assuming there's a compromise if the game didn't turn out how you'd hoped, that doesn't actually prove the point

Just played it..

Thought the graphics were fine, and to me, graphics don't make or break a game. Control and ambiance do.

This game seems like some sort of failed cross at fallout and borderlands. I felt like an errand boy and had to turn it off. There's no attitude in the game... its just "Do this, do that" and has a very basic interface plopped on.

My stock i2600k ran it fine with my stock GTX470 @ 1920x1200 with no AA (I don't need no freakin AA).

But when a game lacks substance, why bother playing it? I'm not sure if it's just the changing of the weather, or what, but now I have a headache.

kcthebrewer said:

So you are fine with a developer making a sub standard (graphically) game for pc because of console limitations and then recompiling it for consoles? I personally am not 'ok' with it but that is all that is available currently (there are exceptions such as metro). I am not against Valve, I am actually a large supported of them, but they haven't attempted to push forward pc gaming since they implemented HDR into the source engine back in 2005.

Click to expand...

Valve has never been a leader in engine technology. The engine used in the original Half-Life was outdated at the time (it was a modified version of id Tech 1, when id Tech 2 was already available), and Source was also technically inferior to other engines of that time, such as id Tech 4 and CryEngine 1. The current version of Source is woefully lacking in features compared to just about any other modern engine, but that's because of the way they handle development, not because of consoles.

and yet despite how old and basic the engine is, games produced on it still look very good, and have the lowest hardware demands of any current popular titles.

when HL 2 came out it looked stunning even in DX7 where my lowly mx440 could still play it great on high settings. good luck having much more than a pixelated slideshow in Far Cry or especially Doom 3 with a gpu like that.

samuelmorris said:

and yet despite how old and basic the engine is, games produced on it still look very good

Click to expand...

That's a matter of opinion, which I and many other people would disagree with. If you know where to look, the graphical limitations of the Source engine are very evident.

Half Life 2 was something else. It was one of the best looking games I'd played at the time when I first got my 30" and yet my X1900XT could run it maxed out, no issue. A single card. You don't see that happen too often these days!

WARNING: TANGENT APPROACHING!

Zero82z said:

That's a matter of opinion, which I and many other people would disagree with. If you know where to look, the graphical limitations of the Source engine are very evident.

Click to expand...

The limitations are plain for all to see, but that doesn't make the games look bad, just simple, and clean, which is no bad thing. I'd rather have simple crisp graphics than blurry or fuzzy complex ones.

Seems they are using the PC community as their actual alpha, beta, and wtfe testing. That is beyond lame! I'd rather see a pc game come out 2-3 months after the console launch with proper patching, texture upgrades, sound, etc, so that it's playable right outta the box.

You'd think 4+ years would be enough time for them to get it right. That said, look at Duke Nukem Forever...

First off, while I thought Rage's graphics were underwhelming in many areas, overall it had enough good art to be pleasing if you played it and didn't analyze it. However, what stood out most to me was the performance. It runs like a new game on low settings but with med-high graphics. That's where id games have always been great, bang for your buck engines. I would much rather have that than b.s glorified tech demos like Crysis turned out to be. Good engines can create visually pleasing scenes with creative shortcuts rather than pure brute processing. Half life 2 is a great example along with id's other engines. Remember how when Modern warfare + Crysis hit we all looked at the two and said, "MW is close enough and I get 10x the performance". That's what Rage could have been without the money grab (I.e. Dump the console textures in).

To be fair to Crysis, it was very scaleable. The game still can't be maxed out at 2560x1600 by today's cutting edge hardware, yet I could run it on high with my old X1900XT at 800x600, and when I actually played the game through I was only using an HD3870 - still at 2560x1600, it ran fine with the shadows and shaders dropped down to low, and it didn't exactly look terrible doing that either.

The story sucked, the game played sucked, the ending sucked, the multi-player sucks, and the graphics suck.

I'm perplexed people defend this shit at all

doesn't even matter horrible ending

Climber said:

The story sucked, the game played sucked, the ending sucked, the multi-player sucks, and the graphics suck.

I'm perplexed people defend this shit at all

Click to expand...

I think some pc gamers finally lowered their expectations to console standards, which in that case it's fantastic!

After a few nights of the Rage co-op, my friend and I were quick to pull out our old copies of Borderlands, and replay using classes that we had not tried before we stopped playing last time. Vehicle control is better, better weapons, not as linear play, etc, plus if you throw your last grenade and then pick another one up, you can still throw it with the same control --it doesnt switch to bandaids once it runs out --and this is from another game which was itself a console port (which had limited graphics ablity like using AA) but still what a difference. Also, the co-op "Legends" style short missions really comes up short when compared to Borderlands, in which the whole game is open to co-op.
I wish I had waited to buy it, but oh well BF3 is close.
In my opinion not only was RAGE disapointing from a visual standpoint, but also the game play is mediocre. I still play CSS, so I dont always need to stress my GPU if the game play is fun.
So thanks RAGE for reminding me that Borderlands was so fun, and getting me to try some new classes in the game. Maybe we'll buy some of the Borderlands DLC that we passed on before.

semiconductorslave said:

I still play CSS, so I dont always need to stress my GPU if the game play is fun.

Click to expand...

I broke out the original Quake a few days ago ... they don't make 'em like they used to. Now it's all flashy graphics and too much attempted realism imho.

xorbe said:

I broke out the original Quake a few days ago ... they don't make 'em like they used to. Now it's all flashy graphics and too much attempted realism imho.

Click to expand...

I have the metal boxed linux version of Quake displayed on my shelf above my PC

ICOM said:

I agree. That's no reason to regress technologically. What a colossally disappointing product from one of the stalwarts of the PC gaming industry.

This is what we have to look forward to? Hilariously idiotic game play and weak graphics for the benefit of people who game on "easy bake oven computers" that they purchased from Toys-R-Us?

Click to expand...

QFT and sigged

cannondale06 said:

a high res texture pack is being worked on right now


"We have a bicubic-upsample+detail texture option for the next PC patch that will help alleviate the blurry textures in Rage."

Click to expand...

Not like that matters. If iD's already relegated us to second-class citizen status, then they're now second-class developers. /endgame

In short, if they think they no longer need us...I'll spend my dollars with someone who thinks pc gamers matter.

Spire3660 said:

This is why i never bothered with a SLI/Xfire setup.

Click to expand...

Heh. I said screw SLI etc when a single 8800gtx outclassed both of my 7800gt's.
(which was coming from SLI'd 6800gt's -which was rape). Never again.

Not even getting started on driver issues or games that supported (or lack thereof)...

Okay been reading these forums for years but was timmid to apply and post, you guys can be real dbags sometimes. j/k

Okay i aquired Rage through a good friend works at a gaming store, so didn't pay the inflated price, thank goodness. First impression, feels like a console, plays like a console, the graphics is krappy like a console. 2 hours into it, wtf with the texture popping, why do I feel like I'm lead not only in linear play but like I'm riding on rails where I should never get lost ? I hate VIA Railed gameplay...

I attacked the configuration files, reduced the popups, toned down the accel mouse, up the graphics, left it at 2x AA seems to blurry any higher. Played some more. The story interesting sort having fun on the weapons... still hate the "on-Rails" linear gameplay and doesn't large boss monster in a round room gamplay getting old Carmack? Really??

Deleted game.

I gave it a try, 7 years new engine, Carmack... I didn't get my money back Kyle but I did only pay half retail price.

As for Carmack, I knew after Quake3 let alonr Q4 and him moving to cellphone/tablet + console route he'll soon realize his mistake. With reading between the lines in his various interveiws and ignoring your people cuttin out a few catch lines make him look bad... I understood that Carmack admitted he made a mistake, he realized the consoles are limited to what he wants to do, he hated making sacrifices let alone comprimises, which we seen and experinced with the PC version of Rage. I believe the next interation of iD engine will be different, and Carmack humbled. I welcome Carmack back to PC Game developement... lets encourage him?

Agreed, it's not as if Carmack has said 'this is how we'll make games in the future' - latterly he's clearly vocalised that he regrets taking the design route that they did, and that there'll probably be a rethink for upcoming titles.

SO HELP YOU GOD IF YOU SCREW UP DOOM 4

Time for a PC gamer version of occupy wall-street?

But on the topic of RAGE. I wasnt impressed either...

I just listen to Kyle.. easier that way..
Nobody gets hurt and nobody cries..
Might as well go for a soda..
Nobody drowns and nobody dies

I am not sure why you guys ever idolized Carmack... hearing you guys bitch about "needing to find a new hero" is quite sad, especially when you turn around and insult <insert name here> fan-boys.

I dont know.. maybe Im just the odd ball but ive been playing it and the story is kind of fun and I find myself just stopping at times and looking around.. its a pretty detailed world if you don't just fly through it..
Yea it doesn't look great up close but looking out windows and stuff and the outside areas someone spent a lot of time detailing it.. you really get the feel like you are in a wasteland.

Im enjoying the game.. on the PC..

Frozen8950 said:

I dont know.. maybe Im just the odd ball but ive been playing it and the story is kind of fun and I find myself just stopping at times and looking around.. its a pretty detailed world if you don't just fly through it..
Yea it doesn't look great up close but looking out windows and stuff and the outside areas someone spent a lot of time detailing it.. you really get the feel like you are in a wasteland.

Im enjoying the game.. on the PC..

Click to expand...

I feel the same way, you're not alone

Doom 4 better be designed with hardcore PC gaming in mind...in my mind, id Tech 5 should be like all of its predecessors - at the very forefront of graphics technology, so gloriously detailed that even the fastest rigs can barely play it, yet able to be scaled down to lower-mainstream hardware.

bwang said:

Doom 4 better be designed with hardcore PC gaming in mind...in my mind, id Tech 5 should be like all of its predecessors - at the very forefront of graphics technology, so gloriously detailed that even the fastest rigs can barely play it, yet able to be scaled down to lower-mainstream hardware.

Click to expand...

You are prolly going to be disappointed. This engine, and this game, were aimed squarely at the consoles, it is doubtful they will change their focus for their next engine or game.. Especially since iD is owned by Zenimax, and no longer free to do whatever they want.

GORANKAR said:

You are prolly going to be disappointed. This engine, and this game, were aimed squarely at the consoles, it is doubtful they will change their focus for their next engine or game.. Especially since iD is owned by Zenimax, and no longer free to do whatever they want.

Click to expand...

Considering the regrets that Carmack admitted upon Rage's release, don't count future id titles out just yet...

samuelmorris said:

Considering the regrets that Carmack admitted upon Rage's release, don't count future id titles out just yet...

Click to expand...

The guy flops back and forth more than a politician. From not happy how rage turned out, to the pc is not a lead platform, to we should have focused on the pc more, to aww hell we just do what Zenimax tells us. It leaves little room for hope.

they used CUDA which benefits Nvidia cards

I just beat this game, and holy crap was this bad. Wasn't as bad as people claimed in game play, but the PC port was just junk. Took me a week to realize that the game wouldn't start cause I had OpenGL triple buffering enabled. Once the game started I saw a ton of flashing glitches all over the place. Even with the Catalyst 11.11 drivers, I had to get a atioglxx.dll and place it into the rage folder which fixed the glitches. Then to get the game to look nicer I made myself a rageconfig.cfg, which hardly did anything.

On to gameplay. The weapons were pretty cookie cutter to me, as you've seen them in nearly every FPS game in existence. When I beat the game, I was expecting a huge enemy to fight, and saved and never used a lot of powerful ammo and weapons. The game was too easy, even though I did play it on normal. For the most part, you can get through the game with the shotgun and machine gun, while rarely needing to use bigger weapons. Honestly, the bigger weapons are a luxury.

There are 6 fucking types of enemies. I shit you not.

1. Human with a gun. They change in tactics from weapons to armor, but pretty much all the same thing.
2. Human with melee weapon. They die easy to shotguns.
3. Mutants, which are melee and bounce around the play for a bit.
4. Juggernauts, which are enemies who walk slowly, carry large weapons, and have big armor.
5. Mini bosses, which are rarely seen.
6. Super looking mutant which spits crap at you and charges at you. Rarely seen in the game.

The graphics blow ass. I'm sure the graphics were crisper in Doom 3 then this. Constantly seeing blurred textures, which is probably the LOD crap working. The animations look nice, but everything looks washed out, due to blurry textures. This is not a game with eye candy.

They like to reuse levels in this game. You'll find yourself entering a zone more then once, and for some reasons all the enemies are back. The best part of the game is driving, and that is limited. So yea, this game is a pile of crap.