id's Rage

P

PyroHoltz

Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
601
Has anyone heard anything about a release date for id's new game, RAGE? I've seen a few of the videos but since the game is still in it's infancy I don't think anyone really knows.

Thoughts?
 
Officially "when it's done".

I think 2010 is a reasonable guess, maybe late 09.
 
I keep hearing late '09. Q3 or Q4. But, with id, you never really know...
 
It's id...what do you expect? Carmack doesn't give himself release date type targets. It's business as usual for them to tell us all to cram both thumbs up our asses while we're waiting.

It should be noted that my personal opinion of id is that they haven't made a game worth a shit since Q3A, and that's damn near 10 years now. Of course, 3DRealms has them beat by a good 5 years or so.
 
I don't really care too much for this game based on what we've seen so far...

....come give me a nudge when Doom 4 details are available.
 
I have to be honest, Rage really seems more like a tech demo to sell id Tech 5 to partners rather than something we should bother with. Who knows though, maybe it'll rekindle the feelings I used to get from all their old titles...
 
Likely PS3 too.

Id's gameplay innovation has slipped but so far Rage looks decent to me.
 
sabregen said:
It's id...what do you expect? Carmack doesn't give himself release date type targets. It's business as usual for them to tell us all to cram both thumbs up our asses while we're waiting.

It should be noted that my personal opinion of id is that they haven't made a game worth a shit since Q3A, and that's damn near 10 years now. Of course, 3DRealms has them beat by a good 5 years or so.
Click to expand...

+1 to that.

Q3A's my favorite game so far. Everything since then has been 'meh'.
 
archevilangel said:
Well, I personally thought Doom III was average, Quake 4(Though not made by id) was a bit better. I have a little hope for a rage though. Kind of interesting that after so many years of championing opengl that they're using direct x 9.
Click to expand...

:confused: it won't be released until late 09 to early 10, and they're using nine?
 
Always love to see what cards Carmack's got up up his sleeves but sadly like most others I think the guy is passed his prime.

I'm sure it will be a sweet ass game engine though...
 
I will always buy every id game because of:

1. They release the source of the previous game when the next step comes out (ie Doom3 source when rage comes out)

2. Quakecon is amazingly awesome and I really appreciate id for it.

3. The games usually come out for linux because of the opengl.
 
if it's by 2010, if it's anything like the tech demo they released, I think it's going to look dated

it might even look dated by 2009 or at least provide nothing amazingly new
 
^

Yeah, I would agree.

Doom3 looked "dated" right about the time that HL2 came out with big open levels, more realistic and tolerable lighting, as well as better character animations.

I saw a preview of rage like 2 years ago and here it is still in dev. with no timeline for release?

wtf.

Gimmee the odds on the last game that used that ploy and was well-liked, well-purchased, and actually a good game?...3-4 years in dev. then unspecified release.

Crysis, maybe?

I know it didn't work for UT3...
 
Half life 2 didn't have better lighting....It also didn't look "dated" when it was released.

Some of Doom 3's screens don't even look dated today. HL2 may have been a better game, but I don't think it can match Doom 3's engine prowess.
 
Comparing HL2 and Doom3 is apples and oranges.

I think the problem with id Software, and why I'm not interested at all in Rage, is that they tend to build games around the engine rather than the other way around. They come out with fantastic engines surrounded by mediocre games. Q3A excepted. id jumped the shark long ago.
 
tekmet said:
Gimmee the odds on the last game that used that ploy and was well-liked, well-purchased, and actually a good game?...3-4 years in dev. then unspecified release. Crysis, maybe?
Click to expand...
Yeah, there's Crysis. Doom 3 was in development for four years as well, and while the game certainly had its shortcomings, it was still a pretty good game.

Zinn said:
I think the problem with id Software, and why I'm not interested at all in Rage, is that they tend to build games around the engine rather than the other way around.
Click to expand...
I think it's actually the opposite. id never implements engine features that they don't use in their games. Doom 3, for instance, needed no water, so the engine didn't even really support water. Engine licensees would eventually have to come up with their own water/swimming systems (the Doom 3-based mod I worked on for a short time did).

I think Tech 4 was built around Carmack's vision for Doom 3. I don't think they designed the game around the feature set of the engine.
 
Let me guess, you can tell from some of the pixels and from seeing quite a few shops in your time? :rolleyes:

If those screenshots are shopped, why did they leave in the aliasing on the edges of the models, the jaggy polygons and the blockiness on close-up textures?

id have never been in the habit of doctoring screenshots. Go find some promo screens of Doom 3 or Quake 4. They look exactly the same as in-game.
 
meatfestival said:
Let me guess, you can tell from some of the pixels and from seeing quite a few shops in your time? :rolleyes:

If those screenshots are shopped, why did they leave in the aliasing on the edges of the models, the jaggy polygons and the blockiness on close-up textures?
Click to expand...

They altered the colours and lighting to make the images look more vivid. To give you a recent example of a similar situation, Sony did the same thing with the Killzone 2 promo shots, except they didn't admit it. Anyways, that wasn't my point. You can clearly see that the textures and models aren't all that impressive from today's standards. What makes the image look good (aside from the colour and lighting touchups) is the bump-mapping and shaders, rather than the assets themselves.
 
You were able to easily compare the Killzone 2 promo shots to the video. You can't in this case, so where lies the evidence of doctoring?

You're suggesting that they altered colors in the screenshots to increase the vividness, but you don't have any reference point for that. What gives?
 
I'm not seeing a shop. I am seeing a lot of depth of field blurring. Great models, but possibly crappy background textures. We'll see.
 
ixnay said:
Always love to see what cards Carmack's got up up his sleeves but sadly like most others I think the guy is passed his prime.

I'm sure it will be a sweet ass game engine though...
Click to expand...

The man puts out the best engines, so I'd think hes in his prime and has been for quite a while. With that said, ID should stick to making engines and not games.
 
Quake 3 Arena is to this day one of my most favorite gaming experiences. I still enjoy playing it. Doom 3 not so much. It looked fantastic, but the gameplay was sorely lacking. I was hoping for more scripted events, less teleporting monsters and better AI. A faster pace might have been a good idea as well.

ID is fully aware that Doom 3 did not live up to many fan expectations. They did post for game designers some time ago. Hopefully, they have hired some new people. Modern gameplay mechanics are what they need to focus on.

I really haven't seen enough of Rage to pass judgement on how well it will play. It sure does look amazing. I just hope it might have some of the magic in it that was Quake 3. Because of Quake 3, I will always be interested in ID games.

And for crying out loud, I wish ID would stop farming out their IPs. Raven absolutely butchared Quake 4. Don't get me started on that one. And Splash Damage, how can you have a quake game with no gib, no BFG and pussy sounding vehicles. Uhhhhhh.
 
phide said:
You were able to easily compare the Killzone 2 promo shots to the video. You can't in this case, so where lies the evidence of doctoring?

You're suggesting that they altered colors in the screenshots to increase the vividness, but you don't have any reference point for that. What gives?
Click to expand...

Okay, it looks Photoshopped. I admit that I have no proof of that, but having seen a lot of touched-up shots and real in-game images over the years, I think I have a pretty good eye for this sort of thing. I am fully prepared to eat my words if I am proven wrong though.

Either way, that wasn't the point I was trying to make. The point was that the actual assets shown in that screenshot are pretty standard compared to the better-looking games of today, so if the game is actually released in 2010, it will look dated.
 
I think the models & textures in those shots look pretty great. Need to bear in mind this game is designed primarily for the consoles and we're now at the point in those machines' lives where graphics aren't going to get a lot better. The hardware is pretty much at its full potential now, especially the 360.

I'm interested to see how Doom 4 will look because they're aiming for 30fps instead of 60, with a massive increase in detail as a result.
 
meatfestival said:
I think the models & textures in those shots look pretty great. Need to bear in mind this game is designed primarily for the consoles and we're now at the point in those machines' lives where graphics aren't going to get a lot better. The hardware is pretty much at its full potential now, especially the 360.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying the models and textures look bad, I'm saying that they will look bad in two years compared to the other games that will be around at that time. In other words, if the game is delayed until 2010, it won't look all that great compared to the competition.
 
I'm not expecting too much, id haven't made a better than "meh" game since Q3, they are all about the tech.

I'm much more interested to see what their Partners/Licensees do with the engine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top