f13.net

f13.net General Forums => Gaming => Topic started by: Azazel on September 29, 2011, 02:59:41 AM



Title: Rage
Post by: Azazel on September 29, 2011, 02:59:41 AM
OK so we've had some discussion on this thing in the Useless gaming chatter thread. I'm not sure whether to pick it up on release or whether to give it 6 months to a year and do my usual cheapass job.

Quote
Two-player co-op in Rage can take place either locally or online, and what's more, co-op takes place within the confines of Rage's core fiction.
What this means is that co-op missions offer slightly different takes on missions that already appear in the single-player campaign. At the time I witnessed a sampling of Rage's co-op, there were eight missions readied, though more can be forthcoming. For the time being, these missions must be unlocked in the single-player campaign before you can play them cooperatively, although this can change between now and when Rage finally launches this September. But don't worry about having to play what may at first strike you as redundant missions that you already tackled on your own. These missions will have added backstory, and should give gamers concerned with Rage's narrative a better understanding of certain events.
http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/116/1162311p1.html

The first part of the bolded section is what concerns me. I'm looking at playing the game co-op with my wife, and there's basically no chance she's going to solo her way through a FPS.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Malakili on September 29, 2011, 04:10:52 AM
If you are getting a console version will it unlock for anyone playing locally if you unlock them first? Still a bit on the lame side.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Azazel on September 29, 2011, 08:36:03 AM
I preordered 2 copies today from a local chain offering the whatever-bonus-shit-pre-order edition for only $5 more than my overseas sources would charge (without the 2 week wait). I did so via the phone when the guy on the other end told me he could do it without any deposit. So if it turns out to be garbage or co-op-unfriendly when the reviews hit, I'll just call them and cancel and go with the bargain bin single-player option sometime in 2012.

What's the release date in the US?


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Rendakor on September 29, 2011, 08:39:02 AM
October 4th.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Merusk on September 29, 2011, 09:03:06 AM
If you are getting a console version will it unlock for anyone playing locally if you unlock them first? Still a bit on the lame side.

It would have to, unless you're opening two save games on the same console to play co-op which would be so incredibly stupid that it's not worth thinking about.

That's probably where the requirement came from anyway.  It sounds very much like an old-school console feature rather than something that came from an understanding of PCs and PC gaming over networks.  (That's translated its way onto consoles these days.)


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: NiX on September 29, 2011, 09:36:09 AM
I preordered 2 copies today from a local chain offering the whatever-bonus-shit-pre-order edition for only $5 more than my overseas sources would charge (without the 2 week wait). I did so via the phone when the guy on the other end told me he could do it without any deposit. So if it turns out to be garbage or co-op-unfriendly when the reviews hit, I'll just call them and cancel and go with the bargain bin single-player option sometime in 2012.

What's the release date in the US?
Every indication is that it's not real co-op. You can't play through the full game with a co-op partner, it's just a handful of the missions retooled for co-op.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Azazel on September 29, 2011, 07:01:46 PM
Yeah, that's what I'm concerned about. Since it comes out a day and a half earlier in the US, I'm hoping there'll be enough detailed reviews out so I can decide if I want to cancel one or both copies.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Kail on September 29, 2011, 07:36:56 PM
Anyone know how sandboxy this game is?  I'd kill for more sci-fi open worldy stuff, but I'm not sure how this game is set up.  Game write-up on Steam says "An expansive experience – Beyond the first-person action and vehicle combat, RAGE offers a world open to explore, with unique characters, side quests, and a compelling storyline." which I'm not sure if it means we're looking at another Fallout, or if it's just a series of long hallways with guys to blow up and marketing thinks that "open world" means that some of the areas don't have ceilings.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Ingmar on September 29, 2011, 08:33:40 PM
Not fired up about this one personally. When was the last time id put together a game that was more than just a cool tech demo?


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Azazel on September 29, 2011, 10:00:44 PM
Anyone know how sandboxy this game is?  I'd kill for more sci-fi open worldy stuff, but I'm not sure how this game is set up.  Game write-up on Steam says "An expansive experience – Beyond the first-person action and vehicle combat, RAGE offers a world open to explore, with unique characters, side quests, and a compelling storyline." which I'm not sure if it means we're looking at another Fallout, or if it's just a series of long hallways with guys to blow up and marketing thinks that "open world" means that some of the areas don't have ceilings.

I've also heard conflicting reports about how it's both more and less RPG-ish than Borderlands.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on September 30, 2011, 02:14:40 AM
At this point I'm just hoping it'll be one of the oldschool FPSes. And by that I merely mean that it won't have the consolitis-inspired snap-to-structure crap. I'm betting on this not being the case since I've prepurchased it on steam, but if even id can't do this right, then I'm just giving up on FPSes.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Velorath on September 30, 2011, 02:22:13 AM
Not fired up about this one personally. When was the last time id put together a game that was more than just a cool tech demo?

I don't know, this is the first time I've actually liked the Art Direction in an id game at least, and I think it's pretty ballsy of them to focus their competitive multiplayer entirely around the vehicle combat.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Sky on September 30, 2011, 07:46:12 AM
Not fired up about this one personally. When was the last time id put together a game that was more than just a cool tech demo?
Never, imo. Quake 2 was good fun at the LAN party, but quickly got tired. Hell, my disdain of id goes back to everyone going nuts over Doom and I'm all "Guys, ULTIMA UNDERWORLD is the greatest 3d game ever made", predating Kanye by 15 years or so.
Anyone know how sandboxy this game is?  I'd kill for more sci-fi open worldy stuff, but I'm not sure how this game is set up.  Game write-up on Steam says "An expansive experience – Beyond the first-person action and vehicle combat, RAGE offers a world open to explore, with unique characters, side quests, and a compelling storyline." which I'm not sure if it means we're looking at another Fallout, or if it's just a series of long hallways with guys to blow up and marketing thinks that "open world" means that some of the areas don't have ceilings.
They don't say "open world". They say "a world open to exploration", which is completely meaningless marketing double-talk. Has an id engine ever been used for an open-world? I used to hate the limitations (again, back in Q2 era level building).


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Morfiend on September 30, 2011, 09:32:52 AM
At this point I'm just hoping it'll be one of the oldschool FPSes. And by that I merely mean that it won't have the consolitis-inspired snap-to-structure crap. I'm betting on this not being the case since I've prepurchased it on steam, but if even id can't do this right, then I'm just giving up on FPSes.

This, 100 times.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Malakili on September 30, 2011, 10:32:33 AM
At this point I'm just hoping it'll be one of the oldschool FPSes. And by that I merely mean that it won't have the consolitis-inspired snap-to-structure crap. I'm betting on this not being the case since I've prepurchased it on steam, but if even id can't do this right, then I'm just giving up on FPSes.

This, 100 times.

Seems like a tall order.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Morfiend on September 30, 2011, 11:56:53 AM
At this point I'm just hoping it'll be one of the oldschool FPSes. And by that I merely mean that it won't have the consolitis-inspired snap-to-structure crap. I'm betting on this not being the case since I've prepurchased it on steam, but if even id can't do this right, then I'm just giving up on FPSes.

This, 100 times.

Seems like a tall order.

A boy can dream can't he?


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: schild on October 01, 2011, 08:26:27 AM
At this point I'm just hoping it'll be one of the oldschool FPSes. And by that I merely mean that it won't have the consolitis-inspired snap-to-structure crap. I'm betting on this not being the case since I've prepurchased it on steam, but if even id can't do this right, then I'm just giving up on FPSes.
This, 100 times.
Seems like a tall order.
A boy can dream can't he?
A boy dreams of being an astronaut. A man dreams of PC Manufacturers not consolizing games.



Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 01, 2011, 08:39:21 AM
A boy dreams of being an astronaut. A man dreams of PC Manufacturers not consolizing games.
A boy is disappointed most of the time. Oddly enough, so is a man.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Ingmar on October 01, 2011, 10:50:15 PM
I don't play a ton of shooters, what do you mean by the snap to structure thing?


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Kail on October 01, 2011, 11:07:50 PM
I don't play a ton of shooters, what do you mean by the snap to structure thing?

I assume what he means is that in a lot of cover based shooters, you can hit a button to "get behind cover."  Like in the new Deus Ex game, you can hit the right mouse button to press up against the nearest wall.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 02, 2011, 04:00:44 AM
Yeah, exactly that. Instead of giving me the option to lean out from a corner, I have to snap to a structure and hope that I can hit where I want to aim. And I have to suffer the 0.1-0.2 second of no control while the game does its snapping animation. I've lost count of how many times it's snapped to the wrong thing as well, costing me even more precious time. I can go on, but the common thing is that they end up taking away control from me at what might be a critical moment. It's a piece of shit feature that needs to die in a fucking fire.

I've seen it in mass effect 2 as well, where you apparently were unable to jump over f.ex a crater, you had to duck behind it by pressing space, then press space again to actually jump over the crater. Then there's dumb shit like BC2 at least had (I hear they've removed it, but I can't be arsed to fire BC2 up to find out) some weird limitation on whether or not you could strafe while running. I tested out gears of war and lasted about 5 minutes before I deleted that game in frustration because all it did was snap to literally everything you could imagine, most often the completely incorrect structure as well, so imagine my frustration when that shit seems to be spreading to literally every game I might conceivably want to play.

As said, it's even in deus ex: human revolution, and while irritating it's actually less irritating than its boss fights. vOv


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Azazel on October 02, 2011, 04:26:55 AM
In BC2 you can't shoot while running (sprinting). Or do you mean you can't sprint sideways?


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 02, 2011, 04:46:34 AM
Heh. You can't even shoot while running? I haven't even hit upon that yet.

Yes, what I meant was that the last time I played BC2 you couldn't sprint sideways. It annoyed the piss out of me because I kept expecting it to work instinctively (because it's worked in every other FPS game I've ever played).


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Malakili on October 02, 2011, 06:08:16 AM
Heh. You can't even shoot while running? I haven't even hit upon that yet.

Yes, what I meant was that the last time I played BC2 you couldn't sprint sideways. It annoyed the piss out of me because I kept expecting it to work instinctively (because it's worked in every other FPS game I've ever played).

You can't shoot while sprinting, which seems true in a lot of games.  Running to me just means moving around in that game at the normal pace, and you can shoot while doing that.  Anyway, what you say is annoying, yes, it took me a while to get used to using the sprint key without being able to strafe at the same time.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 02, 2011, 06:20:51 AM
I keep thinking that most FPS games allow you to shoot while running, it's just inaccurate as fuck. I could be wrong and they're just slowing you to walking pace, but it's still better than just not doing the action the player expects.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Azazel on October 02, 2011, 09:49:14 AM
No, it's a sprint. You're being silly on both counts, and I also can't see how it has anything to do with the dreaded "consolitis". It's a nod to realism over older FPS games. I have no issue with it. It's not like older FPS games that had a useless "walk" function that no-one ever used because it was pointless and you'd always run. The default in BC2 is run. Walk (ie slow speed, quieter) is pretty much replaced by crouch-walking, and sprint is an extra. It's even got a whole different animation to the default "run".



Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 02, 2011, 10:16:09 AM
The only reason I was bringing it up (and by it, I assume you're talking about the strafing while running (or sprinting, if you must)), was that it was interfering with my mental expectation of what should happen when I try to strafe sideways while running, much like how most FPS/TPS games these days basically all have a stick-to-structure feature. In DX it sometimes sticks to the wrong side because I was looking at the wrong pixel when selecting the button, and sometimes I'm unable to hit something because they've just gone past an arbitrary limit which causes the game to go into "just look around the corner" mode instead, instead of giving me the option to manually lean around the corner.

Personally, I grade the speeds as walk, jog, run. Semantics. vOv


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Azazel on October 02, 2011, 10:21:29 AM
Yeah, we'll just call it a soft nod towards realism. Unless you have some YouTube footage of yourself running or sprinting sideways. Because that would be awesome.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 02, 2011, 10:38:02 AM
If anything, their "soft nod" should've been implemented in such a manner that if you were trying to run sideways, you automatically slowed down to a jog, and sped up again when you stopped trying to strafe sideways. That would've enraged me a lot less, because in the implementation the last time I played, all it did was piss me off because I pressed a button to go sideways and nothing happened.

Kind of like the "hit shift to start running until you release the forward button". Let me hold shift for as long as I want to run, then slow down to a jog the instant I release it. How hard can it be.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: kildorn on October 02, 2011, 11:04:17 AM
I actually far prefer the snap to cover mechanic (even with it's occasional odd choices of what cover to pick) over the oldschool shooter "just stand in the open and eat a hail of bullets" thing. I mean, I don't see how it's consolitis at all.

In my mind consolitis is more oversimplified inventories, single button has eight context sensitive functions, and small corridor based maps. Snap to cover may have gained popularity in console shooters, but it has nothing to do with being a console thing. It's an attempt to solve the gameplay illusion problems with "when under fire, everyone just.. stands there"

Even in older PC shooters, the NPCs took cover and shot from behind things, but the player couldn't. You were stuck with crouching behind things and hoping your player model didn't stick out.

All that said, I've seen no evidence of a cover system in the Rage videos. If anything, I assume someone said "we need a cover system" and the response was "and where do we fucking FIT it in this 21.5 fucking gig install?!"


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Malakili on October 02, 2011, 11:56:49 AM
I think the main problem with a cover system is that it basically needs to bring you into third person view, which can be a bit jarring, and is especially problematic in multiplayer where the difference between winning and losing is measured in milliseconds.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: kildorn on October 02, 2011, 11:57:40 AM
Oh, cover systems like DX:HR are hilarious. They work really well in third person shooters.

Switching me between first and third person mid combat? Stupid.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 02, 2011, 12:01:13 PM
Oh, cover systems like DX:HR are hilarious. They work really well in third person shooters.

Switching me between first and third person mid combat? Stupid.
I've no problems with that at all, it worked fine in mass effect etc, you'll notice that the only thing I've been whining about there has been the duck-before-jump over crates etc, instead of just bouncing right over it.

Edit: actually, that's a bit of a lie. I found gears of war too happy to stick to anything, most often the wrong thing.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Azazel on October 03, 2011, 07:26:59 AM
If anything, their "soft nod" should've been implemented in such a manner that if you were trying to run sideways, you automatically slowed down to a jog, and sped up again when you stopped trying to strafe sideways. That would've enraged me a lot less, because in the implementation the last time I played, all it did was piss me off because I pressed a button to go sideways and nothing happened.

Kind of like the "hit shift to start running until you release the forward button". Let me hold shift for as long as I want to run, then slow down to a jog the instant I release it. How hard can it be.

Just checked it. Ran sideways (strafing), hit the sprint button, no difference - kept running sideways (strafing).

Maybe you were doing it wrong?


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: murdoc on October 03, 2011, 07:41:41 AM
Switching me between first and third person mid combat? Stupid.

Rainbox 6: Las Vegas did this very well I thought.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 03, 2011, 08:51:41 AM
Just checked it. Ran sideways (strafing), hit the sprint button, no difference - kept running sideways (strafing).

Maybe you were doing it wrong?
Actually, no, you're testing the wrong thing because I explained it badly. I can't test it if they've changed this lately (I've got reports of them having done exactly this, however I haven't tested myself) because for some reason some games and programs won't start up now, but I'm in the middle of a battlefield series so I can't reboot yet.

Long story short, run (or sprint), try to keep running and go sideways. If DICE had done this properly, it would've just gracefully degraded the speed to a jog and let you go sideways, instead of just doing ... nothing.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Azazel on October 03, 2011, 10:05:32 AM
So anyway, Rage. Comes out tomorrow for you guys, right? Any reviews for this thing yet, or are they embargoed until after the release date?


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Velorath on October 03, 2011, 11:33:07 AM
So anyway, Rage. Comes out tomorrow for you guys, right? Any reviews for this thing yet, or are they embargoed until after the release date?

Embargoed until midnight Eastern time I think.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Surlyboi on October 03, 2011, 11:36:19 AM
Kotaku has a hands-on. Granted it's Kotaku, but hey, I preordered on Steam so we'll see in a few hours.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: kildorn on October 03, 2011, 12:51:26 PM
Kotaku has a hands-on. Granted it's Kotaku, but hey, I preordered on Steam so we'll see in a few hours. days when the servers finally decide to let you decrypt 21 gigs through the first day rush.

Not that I'm expecting anything like that :P


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: RUiN 427 on October 03, 2011, 11:46:39 PM
IGN's review is up along with extended gameplay with commentary and minor spoilers... the graphic engine is redonkulous. Sounds like the story is weak, but I'm still getting it cause it looks fun and I'm a sucker for post apocalyptic shit.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Surlyboi on October 04, 2011, 12:19:36 AM
Literally unplayable.

Game crashes on startup. Carmack's response on twitter, "update your drivers". Updated drivers do the exact same thing.

Steam forums are on fire with people raging over... Rage.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 04, 2011, 12:29:09 AM
Yeah, definitely looks like it'll be interesting on the PC. Sadly, they're using a 360 to record the videos on IGN, and it pains me to watch them flail about like they do, shooting wildly.

Fake edit: Uh. Crashes? Does it require the nvidia beta drivers, or might the beta drivers have a bug which RAGE is triggering?

Guess it's a good thing I won't get to play mine for another few days. :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: NowhereMan on October 04, 2011, 04:55:55 AM
If anything, their "soft nod" should've been implemented in such a manner that if you were trying to run sideways, you automatically slowed down to a jog, and sped up again when you stopped trying to strafe sideways. That would've enraged me a lot less, because in the implementation the last time I played, all it did was piss me off because I pressed a button to go sideways and nothing happened.

Kind of like the "hit shift to start running until you release the forward button". Let me hold shift for as long as I want to run, then slow down to a jog the instant I release it. How hard can it be.

Just checked it. Ran sideways (strafing), hit the sprint button, no difference - kept running sideways (strafing).

Maybe you were doing it wrong?

I think his point was that when sprinting forward, if you hit the sideways button you keep springint forwards. I'm assuming that's what it does because I can imagine that being something that would piss me off simply because it's stuff I can imagine doing from sheer habit and being annoyed that my last second jerk to the side didn't happen.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: KallDrexx on October 04, 2011, 05:53:13 AM
ArsTechnica (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2011/10/rage-is-the-gamiest-game-that-ever-gamed.ars) has a pretty scathing review.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 04, 2011, 06:18:31 AM
That wasn't very nice. :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Surlyboi on October 04, 2011, 06:40:12 AM
Better than the review I'll give it. At least he could play the fucking thing.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Xuri on October 04, 2011, 06:41:16 AM
The PC version suffers from some rather nasty texture streaming issues for a lot of people. I got the game running at a gazillion FPS, but the texture(it's just one, isn't it? MEGAtexture and whatnot? heh) that kept being reloaded every time I moved and every time I turned made it unplayable.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Miasma on October 04, 2011, 07:15:53 AM
I assumed it would just be a showpiece for their engine that looks great but sucks to play, same as Doom 3.  I hope you don't have to use that horrible flashlight in this one.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Amaron on October 04, 2011, 07:17:26 AM
So they made another tech demo and didn't even put in multiplayer this time?  


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: kildorn on October 04, 2011, 07:23:04 AM
Literally unplayable.

Game crashes on startup. Carmack's response on twitter, "update your drivers". Updated drivers do the exact same thing.

Steam forums are on fire with people raging over... Rage.

I had data execution prevention errors on startup (even though DEP is off.. which means it was doing something really really odd..), but a reboot cleared them up.

Both the updated ATI and the ATI Rage tuned drivers produce screen tearing, and HILARIOUS object flickering for me. Headache inducing object tear (that oldschool "oh hey one of my vertices MUST BE BEHIND YOU watch as I stretch to reach it!"), and items flickering out of the world for a second while you watch. Both my gun and random people. Objects would randomly turn white for half a second.

I don't know if it's just me, or my setup, or what.. but Rage is a technical disaster for me. I'm sure it pushes a lot of polygons or something, but it doesn't seem to do it on anything but iD's test lab.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Sky on October 04, 2011, 07:30:18 AM
ArsTechnica (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2011/10/rage-is-the-gamiest-game-that-ever-gamed.ars) has a pretty scathing review.
Usually bugs me when you have a stock 'Resistance fighting the evil Authority', because usually the 'evil' of the authority has some pretty sound reasons (at worst, lawful evil) and the resistance is usually just a bunch of slackers (with hearts of gold, of course). The majority of these lore setups has me wanting to ditch the slackers and join up with the authority (unthinkable, of course).


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Mrbloodworth on October 04, 2011, 07:37:21 AM
Why does this look so much like borderlands?


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: kildorn on October 04, 2011, 07:37:31 AM
ArsTechnica (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2011/10/rage-is-the-gamiest-game-that-ever-gamed.ars) has a pretty scathing review.
Usually bugs me when you have a stock 'Resistance fighting the evil Authority', because usually the 'evil' of the authority has some pretty sound reasons (at worst, lawful evil) and the resistance is usually just a bunch of slackers (with hearts of gold, of course). The majority of these lore setups has me wanting to ditch the slackers and join up with the authority (unthinkable, of course).

It's post apocalyptic, and you're some high tech guy who just popped out of a vault and have a bounty on ark survivors. I'm just waiting for the "twist" that all of the authority are really ark survivors trying to retake the planet, and you should have been one of the bad guys all along, but you're totally a free spirit! GO AMERICA!


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: kildorn on October 04, 2011, 07:39:37 AM
Why does this look so much like borderlands?

Because it really wants to be borderlands. It wants to be a darker more edgy borderlands. Without the random loot or multiplayer.

So.. it wants to be Fallout, without the branching conversation trees, options, or character building.

I guess it really just wants to be Fallout 3, distilled to just a good shooter. Amusingly, iD implied this was destined to be a new franchise for them, and there will be more Rages.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 04, 2011, 08:01:44 AM
So they made another tech demo and didn't even put in multiplayer this time?
I thought they had both coop and multiplayer, just the multiplayer was limited to driving?

Both the updated ATI and the ATI Rage tuned drivers produce screen tearing
Are the guys having issues with graphics nvidia users or ATI?

I'm not exactly encouraged over the problems mentioned, but I'm not convinced about the shooting aspect feeling bland. It doesn't look bland to me, it looks pretty weighty to me, but sigh, 2 days 9 hours till I can try for myself.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: kildorn on October 04, 2011, 08:10:02 AM
As I understand it, the game plays fine with nVidia cards.

There's a texture popin issue that may be related to this:
http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?p=25497361#post25497361

Basically, the game declares a cache directory, but forgets to create it. I've had no such issues though.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Mrbloodworth on October 04, 2011, 08:39:30 AM
ATI strikes again?


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Jherad on October 04, 2011, 09:01:23 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/T3STN.jpg)

Edit: Posted too soon! Anyway, some amazing textures there apparently, particularly on objects.

Also:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLuOtGwLnzQ

Fun pop-in. REALLY glad I held off on this for now at least.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: jakonovski on October 04, 2011, 09:05:00 AM
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/10/04/raging-about-rage-pc/

Really sad that id resorts to a shitty port for a pc version. I was excited about this game and was going to buy it day 1, but I have an ATI card... :uhrr:



Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Morfiend on October 04, 2011, 09:07:26 AM
I have nvidia card and I have had this odd situation where everything starts shaking very fast, almost like my character glitched out and is bouncing very fast on the terrain. If I run for like 10 seconds it goes away.

Also, the base sounds fucking horrible on my headphones. I could get better sound out of my iphone speaker. Gah, bit again by not waiting for release day reviews. Will I never learn.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Mrbloodworth on October 04, 2011, 09:11:58 AM
ATI was also responsible for the poor performance in Brink. ( Whos engine uses some very similar techniques )


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: jakonovski on October 04, 2011, 09:27:03 AM
ATI was also responsible for the poor performance in Brink. ( Whos engine uses some very similar techniques )


AMD/ATI doesn't force developers to make games that don't work on their cards. Id should've put a big disclaimer, "only supports Nvidia cards", on their game.

edit: Brink actually worked ok on my 4890, although patches improved performance quite a bit.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: kildorn on October 04, 2011, 09:29:43 AM
Brink ran more than fine on my ATI.

I mean, I loathe ATI's driver developers because they.. suck? But seriously, if you publish a game, you already KNEW this, because your QA department was running at the very least an nVidia and an ATI card, and had damned well better not be running some custom assed driver for the release QA pass. They should be running the latest published driver so you can go "hey, douchebags, this DOESN'T WORK"


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: jakonovski on October 04, 2011, 09:33:58 AM
From the RPS comments section:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-I91AG2BhcI


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Sky on October 04, 2011, 09:50:55 AM
Smokey Robinson wants to sing "Shoes of a Clown" for Carmack.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: kildorn on October 04, 2011, 10:02:37 AM
So apparently ATI bundled ages old OpenGL in their rage specific drivers. Fixed driver incoming tonight. Expect more hilarious clownshoes from it, since it's ATI working under a time crunch.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Mrbloodworth on October 04, 2011, 10:11:30 AM
ATI was also responsible for the poor performance in Brink. ( Whos engine uses some very similar techniques )


AMD/ATI doesn't force developers to make games that don't work on their cards. Id should've put a big disclaimer, "only supports Nvidia cards", on their game.

edit: Brink actually worked ok on my 4890, although patches improved performance quite a bit.

Except, you are forgetting. When engine advancements are pushed, there is cooperative work between the engine manufacturer, and card developers. Time and time again ATI falls behind in support, even with this cooperation. We are talking about two engines that push the capabilities of hardware and drive manufactures. The problem is not that ATI does not eventually get around to adding or improving support, its that with each flagship engine, they fail to provide that stability when the engine launches its flagship title, and many times, beyond.

From the RPS comments section:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-I91AG2BhcI

Running ATI, same issue brink had. Imagine that.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: jakonovski on October 04, 2011, 10:45:25 AM
Id is the one hawking a 50 euro game at me, carefully omitting the fact that it probably does not work.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Mrbloodworth on October 04, 2011, 11:07:30 AM
Id is the one hawking a 50 euro game at me, carefully omitting the fact that it probably does not work.

Very true. I'm just commenting that once again...ATI.  :uhrr:


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Xuri on October 04, 2011, 11:24:28 AM
From the RPS comments section:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-I91AG2BhcI

Running ATI, same issue brink had. Imagine that.
I'm running an Nvidia card on an Intel system, and I'm experiencing the exact same issue as in that video. It's not specific to any specific hardware vendor.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Jherad on October 04, 2011, 11:30:02 AM
Yeah, I've seen a number of people commenting about the same issue with Nvidia 5xx cards, so not an ATI specific problem.

It's an ID QA problem.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: kildorn on October 04, 2011, 11:49:10 AM
It may also be an id assuming everyone has at least a gig of onboard video memory. I've had no texture pop in issues at all, but I have a stupidly large card from this spring (I'm of the buy a huge card every 4-5 years school, this just happened to be the year)

Either way, ATI totally dropped the ball on their drivers, but id's QA should also have flagged this all for not working by cert date. You don't ship past QA's objections with the declaration of "oh don't worry, third parties we have no control over will totally have it fixed by the street date!"


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: KallDrexx on October 04, 2011, 12:10:44 PM
Or ID forgot that people can turn faster with a mouse and keyboard, and they designed the engine to stream textures assuming you were using a gamepad  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Sky on October 04, 2011, 12:23:30 PM
Or ID forgot that people can turn faster with a mouse and keyboard, and they designed the engine to stream textures assuming you were using a gamepad  :awesome_for_real:
This sounds like a contender...


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Engels on October 04, 2011, 01:35:57 PM
I'm surprised that people are surprised that the same people that brought us the dullest of games at the time, Quake, now dial it in with their next lazy game, Rage. Yes, the Quake engine was innovative, as is, apparently, if you have the hardware for it, the new Rage engine. Other than that, please realize that these are a bunch of coders writing the game, just as before, and it will therefore be bereft of all artistic personality.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Xuri on October 04, 2011, 01:51:36 PM
I hope you're not talking about Quake 1 - that would be blasphemous. The multi-player part of it, that is.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Engels on October 04, 2011, 02:16:33 PM
No no, I'm aware that Quake was a good multiplayer platform. So was Counter Strike once considered, using the engine that runs our hallowed Half Life series. That does not mean they were single player experiences, which is what the Ars Technica dude was kvetching about. He wanted a Bioware game and got CoD, rusty shack edition, and is gripping his silica infused nether regions in torment.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: sinij on October 04, 2011, 02:32:18 PM
I want to thank early adopters for saving me box price. I almost bought this then decided to check what f13 says. :heart:


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: jakonovski on October 04, 2011, 02:37:31 PM
Dredging GAF:

http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=351811
ATI fucked up their driver package, however it only supports Win7 and 5/6000 series. Failboat.

http://www.firingsquad.com/news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=23760
Carmack says developing on consoles was a mistake. No shit mr. Clownshoes.



Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Kail on October 04, 2011, 02:55:11 PM
I want to thank early adopters for saving me box price. I almost bought this then decided to check what f13 says. :heart:

Wish I'd done this instead of preordering.  I thought id would at least get the engine right, it's the one thing they're supposed to be good at.  Oh, well, decrypting now, fingers crossed...


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Threash on October 04, 2011, 02:57:19 PM
This game blows.  Looks nice though.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 04, 2011, 03:24:34 PM
2 more days till I find out if my setup apparently works (or carmack fixes whatever the problem is). If that doesn't go through, then I guess serious sam is the next hope, and if that doesn't go through, I guess I'm done with FPSes.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: kildorn on October 04, 2011, 04:55:46 PM
New drivers solved my texture stretching and object flickering!

And added pop-in and frequent crashes to desktop.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Kail on October 04, 2011, 05:42:35 PM
Game wouldn't start unless I updated my drivers, so I did, and now it runs, but I'm getting that texture pop-in and object jittering.

And since I updated the drivers, it's not just confined to Rage, either, my other games are having the same damn problem all of a sudden.  Thanks, ATI.

RAAAAAAAGE


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: KallDrexx on October 04, 2011, 06:30:35 PM
No no, I'm aware that Quake was a good multiplayer platform. So was Counter Strike once considered, using the engine that runs our hallowed Half Life series. That does not mean they were single player experiences, which is what the Ars Technica dude was kvetching about. He wanted a Bioware game and got CoD, rusty shack edition, and is gripping his silica infused nether regions in torment.

Um, what?  I don't know anyone that didn't enjoy the original Dooms and Quake 1 and 2 single player.  Sure they wouldn't be good if released today (ignoring the graphics) but it was a different time back then and they were considered good.  Not sure what you were smoking.

Also you clearly didn't read the review.  His problem wasn't that he wanted a Bioware game, it was iD software tried to make their game into a Bioware game (with shitty conversation and quest system, badly designed and un-fun quests) and massively failed.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: waffel on October 04, 2011, 07:04:10 PM
Graphic comparison:

(http://i.imgur.com/c8wzO.jpg)


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Engels on October 04, 2011, 09:54:40 PM
No no, I'm aware that Quake was a good multiplayer platform. So was Counter Strike once considered, using the engine that runs our hallowed Half Life series. That does not mean they were single player experiences, which is what the Ars Technica dude was kvetching about. He wanted a Bioware game and got CoD, rusty shack edition, and is gripping his silica infused nether regions in torment.

Um, what?  I don't know anyone that didn't enjoy the original Dooms and Quake 1 and 2 single player.  Sure they wouldn't be good if released today (ignoring the graphics) but it was a different time back then and they were considered good.  Not sure what you were smoking.

Also you clearly didn't read the review.  His problem wasn't that he wanted a Bioware game, it was iD software tried to make their game into a Bioware game (with shitty conversation and quest system, badly designed and un-fun quests) and massively failed.

Yep, I read the review, and you're forgetting the first Quakes. They were good because no one was doing FPS or graphics engines as well as they were, but they were not strong on story or questing, and that's exactly what the Ars Technica review complains about. To expect them to now turn around and make a Bioware game is stupid, because they aren't and never were story writers, they were FPS makers, game engine makers. They didn't 'massively fail', they were dialing that part of the game in, as anyone with any previous experience with the danged company would have expected.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: koro on October 04, 2011, 10:03:07 PM
No no, I'm aware that Quake was a good multiplayer platform. So was Counter Strike once considered, using the engine that runs our hallowed Half Life series. That does not mean they were single player experiences, which is what the Ars Technica dude was kvetching about. He wanted a Bioware game and got CoD, rusty shack edition, and is gripping his silica infused nether regions in torment.

Um, what?  I don't know anyone that didn't enjoy the original Dooms and Quake 1 and 2 single player.  Sure they wouldn't be good if released today (ignoring the graphics) but it was a different time back then and they were considered good.  Not sure what you were smoking.

Also you clearly didn't read the review.  His problem wasn't that he wanted a Bioware game, it was iD software tried to make their game into a Bioware game (with shitty conversation and quest system, badly designed and un-fun quests) and massively failed.

Yep, I read the review, and you're forgetting the first Quakes. They were good because no one was doing FPS or graphics engines as well as they were, but they were not strong on story or questing, and that's exactly what the Ars Technica review complains about. To expect them to now turn around and make a Bioware game is stupid, because they aren't and never were story writers, they were FPS makers, game engine makers. They didn't 'massively fail', they were dialing that part of the game in, as anyone with any previous experience with the danged company would have expected.

But wasn't Rage being billed as Borderlands-meets-Fallout during pretty much all of development? That would imply at least some level of competent storytelling that doesn't really exist in the final product.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: kildorn on October 04, 2011, 10:31:33 PM
Rage really just makes me want Fallout 4: the better shooting gameplay version. Like the ME1->ME2 style evolution of the combat piece while still staying an RPG at it's core.

Rage's gunplay isn't bad at all. It's just that there's absolutely nothing else to the game. All it's attempts to pretend it's an RPG with quests and crafting and money.. are not trying to tell a story and put you in a world. It's closer to an MMO's idea of RPGs than Fallout's idea of how you mix FPS and RPG.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Ginaz on October 05, 2011, 01:31:08 AM
It seems Rage was the perfect name for this game.  For all the wrong reasons. :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Malakili on October 05, 2011, 05:19:32 AM
First impression, lengthy, from TB: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IQ4FBXg8WY

for the people still on the fence, I guess.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: KallDrexx on October 05, 2011, 05:28:57 AM
Yep, I read the review, and you're forgetting the first Quakes. They were good because no one was doing FPS or graphics engines as well as they were, but they were not strong on story or questing, and that's exactly what the Ars Technica review complains about. To expect them to now turn around and make a Bioware game is stupid, because they aren't and never were story writers, they were FPS makers, game engine makers. They didn't 'massively fail', they were dialing that part of the game in, as anyone with any previous experience with the danged company would have expected.

You aren't reading because I most certainly are not forgetting the first quakes.  Again, I specifically mentioned that they were fun because of the time they came out in.

Regardless, again the issue is NOT that Rage doesn't have story.  The issue is that Rage tries too hard to have story when it really doesn't, and falls flat on it's face while TRYING to be story oriented, and annoying the player in the process.  The Ars Technica review critcises it because it TRIES to be a Bioware game but it fails in that regard. 

If they wanted a game with no story, they should have made a game with no story and it probably would have been much better off.  Instead they tried to mimic Borderlands/Fallout/etc.. and failed.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 05, 2011, 06:06:40 AM
What is best in rage?

To crash your vehicle, see it driven before you and to hear the lamentations of the otherwise mute protagonist!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6bmx30CqRQ



Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Mrbloodworth on October 05, 2011, 06:24:08 AM
lol that music.

Also, ATI and OGL don't mix.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 05, 2011, 06:45:41 AM
I keep thinking of Ice Age and Scrat every time he goes "aaaaaaaaaaaa oof!"


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Sky on October 05, 2011, 07:39:54 AM
What is best in rage?

To crash your vehicle, see it driven before you and to hear the lamentations of the otherwise mute protagonist!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6bmx30CqRQ
Wow, that looks like a fun driving component  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: sinij on October 05, 2011, 08:29:52 AM
First impression, lengthy, from TB: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IQ4FBXg8WY

for the people still on the fence, I guess.

Sounded like shilling. Started with minor critique of the game, then was repeating "this is fun" while driving around the desert.... OK?

Also no deathmatch?! WTF.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: jakonovski on October 05, 2011, 08:38:11 AM
TB isn't a shill, he's just a nerd with a penchant for fanboyishly strong emotions towards games.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: kildorn on October 05, 2011, 09:06:24 AM
TB isn't a shill, he's just a nerd with a penchant for fanboyishly strong emotions towards games.

Pretty much this. He tends to stumble upon things he likes in a game and talks about enjoying it. Basically, he's a commentator who doesn't take gaming too seriously to have fun.

Rage has some fun bits. The driving isn't FOR me, but I'm not going to say I'm not having fun with it. It's more that I'm constantly starting to have fun and it crashes or misbehaves in some way. Or I'm having fun, and the quest giver decides to make me go fedex some shit for no goddamned reason.

It really does make me want Borderlands 2, or Fallout 4.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Shrike on October 05, 2011, 10:55:48 AM
I've got mixed feelings about the game. It runs well enough on my machine (2500k/580GTX at 2560x1600), but can't help but thinking I'd have been better off buying it on the 360. The lack of texture detail (hello Dead City) and the draw-in weirdness are annoying. The control scheme screams 360 as well. I'm going to try a 360 controller on it, but--again--I'm thinking I should just have got the damned thing on the 360.

It's a decent enough shooter, but it does feel more than a bit schizophrenic. I like it OK, but really I'm having more fun in my third playthrough of Fallout: New Vegas. Looking forward to a real implementation of idTech5 in Fallout 4...

My advice: wait for the inevitable Steam sale in about 3 months. Or just get a used 360 disk (or three  :awesome_for_real: ) and save yourself some hassles. Or skip it altogether. Oh, almost forgot (it's that memorable) the coop mulitplayer is pure L4D.  :uhrr:


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: KallDrexx on October 05, 2011, 11:29:04 AM
ArsTechnica (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/10/rage-on-pc-is-a-mess-but-you-can-fix-some-of-it.ars) has an article up about how to help with performance and issues on the PC side of things.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Xuri on October 05, 2011, 12:13:37 PM
Quote from a tweet by Pete Hines, VP of PR/Marketing at Bethesda:
Quote
Let me be clear. The game is not horribly broken. The game isn't even buggy. We have some video card issues we have to help sort out
I would argue that when you release a game that relies on non-existing video-drivers (at the time of release) to work properly, and when playing the game without those non-existing drivers causes issues that make it unplayable - then you are releasing a buggy game since it doesn't meet the criteria to work set forth by the CURRENT drivers.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Teleku on October 05, 2011, 01:33:29 PM
(http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/i-rMx83pR/0/L/i-rMx83pR-L.jpg)

/obligatory


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: kildorn on October 05, 2011, 02:39:44 PM
Quote from a tweet by Pete Hines, VP of PR/Marketing at Bethesda:
Quote
Let me be clear. The game is not horribly broken. The game isn't even buggy. We have some video card issues we have to help sort out
I would argue that when you release a game that relies on non-existing video-drivers (at the time of release) to work properly, and when playing the game without those non-existing drivers causes issues that make it unplayable - then you are releasing a buggy game since it doesn't meet the criteria to work set forth by the CURRENT drivers.

He's technically right in that the game may not have any technical bugs or require any patches to work right... the game IS a mess, because they shipped something that QA should have never let out the door. Their issues or not, it was not playable in the state it was released.

edit: From bethsoft's "how to fix performance issues in rage" thread:

"If the graphics driver supports a so called "swap-tear" extension then RAGE will use it and RAGE will V-sync when running >= 60 FPS and RAGE will tear when < 60 FPS. Unfortunately at the release of RAGE, none of the graphics drivers have the "swap-tear" extension enabled."

Yes, the solution for not having a vsync option is "well in theory someday video drivers will have this OTHER option, so we don't let you use vsync!" Thanks!


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: sinij on October 05, 2011, 04:13:22 PM
/obligatory

I remember when PA actually ripped into bad games for being bad, now they tiptoe around so much you'd think they get paid for... oh, I see.

Quote
Let me be clear. The game is not horribly broken. The game isn't even buggy. The game simply doesn't work on any video card with drivers released prior 2012.

What, you actually expected to play it or something?!


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Kageru on October 06, 2011, 12:23:04 AM

So it combines ID's inability to deal with story or character, an engine designed to cover up for aging console hardware and Betheseda's skill in quality control.

.... I *never* saw that coming.




Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 06, 2011, 12:27:42 AM
I'm ~so annoyed~ with the whole staggered regional release crap right now. I want to see if the game really is as shit as is eluded to, with my own eyes.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: sinij on October 06, 2011, 08:49:21 AM
 :facepalm:

By buying it despite knowing its a shit title you are encouraging release of even shittier titles. If they can get away with shitting in a box and selling it to you, they will! Every time!


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: jakonovski on October 06, 2011, 08:50:37 AM
I kinda want to buy the PS3 version. Sure it has the occasional resolution drop to maintain 60fps, but at least the textures work and you don't have to change discs. It's out tomorrow here so it's going to be a test of willpower when I get off work.



Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Azazel on October 06, 2011, 09:03:23 AM
I'm ~so annoyed~ with the whole staggered regional release crap right now. I want to see if the game really is as shit as is eluded to, with my own eyes.

I'm quite happy with the staggered release (2 days is acceptable). It let me cancel my pre-order early! I'll pick it up in the usual manner on 360, down the road.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Jherad on October 06, 2011, 09:14:31 AM
I may end up picking this up down the road.

Once (if) it has been seriously patched, and moved to the bargain bin. You get one chance to charge $50-60, and increasingly for me that window is narrowing.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Daeven on October 06, 2011, 11:10:22 AM

"If the graphics driver supports a so called "swap-tear" extension then RAGE will use it and RAGE will V-sync when running >= 60 FPS and RAGE will tear when < 60 FPS. Unfortunately at the release of RAGE, none of the graphics drivers have the "swap-tear" extension enabled."

Yes, the solution for not having a vsync option is "well in theory someday video drivers will have this OTHER option, so we don't let you use vsync!" Thanks!

And here I thought it was because I was running it on an old 8800 GTS. Huh. I guess the important noteworthy bit is that, well, it runs on an 8800 GTS better than most newer cards apparently.

Rock on Id.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Kageru on October 06, 2011, 03:42:12 PM

That card would be fairly similar to what is running inside an xbox360 so that might not be a surprise.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: jakonovski on October 07, 2011, 11:43:56 PM
Welp, I got the PS3 version and it's ok. Texture pop-in is rather noticeable but oddly enough you get used to it. After a couple of hours play, the game is very intriguing, but the on foot areas are so linear and dumb that I'm pretty sure the plot will not live up to the expectations set by the visuals. Gameplay is 60fps and incredibly crisp and responsive, so if the mp is any good there's a real chance I won't trade this in the moment the last boss is down.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: AcidCat on October 08, 2011, 10:30:03 AM
Welp, I got the PS3 version and it's ok. Texture pop-in is rather noticeable but oddly enough you get used to it. After a couple of hours play, the game is very intriguing, but the on foot areas are so linear and dumb that I'm pretty sure the plot will not live up to the expectations set by the visuals. Gameplay is 60fps and incredibly crisp and responsive, so if the mp is any good there's a real chance I won't trade this in the moment the last boss is down.

Yeah I picked it up on the 360 and the game is a lot of fun. While yes the combat areas are linear, they still aren't quite as bad as the narrow corridors you are funneled through in CoD campaigns. I like that there's no blinking GO HERE handholding once inside the "dungeons", I actually got a bit turned around in the Wasted Garage for example, I had missed a stairway and wandered around lost for a bit wondering where to go next.

I like the way the game uses RPG conventions without being anything like an RPG at heart. Things like travel time, voiced quest npcs, sidequests, inventory, crafting, all exist to provide context to your actions and add atmosphere, and broaden the experience without bogging down the action.  I appreciate immersion and ambiance even if you're a stock-standard Mute Protagonist and the storyline is a vague excuse to keep you moving (Far Cry 2 comes to mind, which I loved). There is just enough freedom of choice in the gameworld that I feel like I have agency, even though of course it's not a true open world game, there is enough going on to suspend disbelief.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: jakonovski on October 08, 2011, 10:38:45 AM
I'm loving the side missions, they make the world come alive with their little stories. Defending the water pipe repair dude with a sniper rifle was totally Mad Max.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: AcidCat on October 08, 2011, 02:15:47 PM
Dang I've failed that mission twice. Need to work on my mutant sniping skillz.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 08, 2011, 02:39:23 PM
Uh.

Right...

(http://mindriot.as/clownshoes/2011-10-08_00010.jpg)

I'm sorely disappointed. My view on id Software is hereby degraded to "shit".


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Tarami on October 08, 2011, 02:45:29 PM
Just enter the code that came with your copy of Rage. Those are part of the first-owner incentives, or atleast Willits said so in an interview. I haven't had time to install my own copy yet...

It being like Far Cry 2 is a good sign for me. I fuckin' loved that game. If Rage is like it but more fleshed out/complete, I'll have a grand time.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 08, 2011, 02:57:30 PM
I probably won't see it since I bought Rage through steam, but a friend of mine (who took that screenshot) bought it retail. He's even less impressed than I am.

I'm going to just assume that we'll see the same sort of bullshit in Skyrim. Sigh.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: AcidCat on October 08, 2011, 06:10:21 PM
It being like Far Cry 2 is a good sign for me. I fuckin' loved that game. If Rage is like it but more fleshed out/complete, I'll have a grand time.

It is not a big open world like FC2, just know that going in. But it has more variety in terms of missions, weapon customization, crafting, and racing/vehicle combat/customizing your ride.

It also has nice enemy AI/behaviors, which I've come to appreciate as I get further into the game.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Engels on October 09, 2011, 09:54:28 AM
I'm wagering that the first DLC is going to be the multiplayer FPS arena.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: jakonovski on October 09, 2011, 10:57:50 AM
6 hours played and I just got into the Dead City. So atmospheric I want to cry.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Rokal on October 10, 2011, 01:17:29 AM
I didn't see that message (enter code) when I did the sewers with my Steam copy. So far, I'm digging the game and it runs flawlessly on my 5870. Haven't had any crashes or weirdness yet, so maybe they've fixed most of the issues with the recent patch. Texture pop in was much less visible when I increased the texture cache, which was a regular option in the settings menu. Gorgeous game. The gameplay is pretty simple so far, but the speed of the combat is pretty spectacular.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: tgr on October 10, 2011, 02:09:41 AM
The option to increase the texture cache came a day or two after the initial game release here in Europe, and it more or less removed all texture popin beyond the first time I see it. Now, the only thing I wish for, are crisper textures. An awful lot of them are just too compressed, which ends up making the whole game look sort of bleh-ish compared to what I was hoping it would. I realize this is a disk space issue, but it would be nice if there'd been a HD version.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Severian on October 10, 2011, 10:11:13 AM
it would be nice if there'd been a HD version.

How To Unlock Rage's High Resolution Textures (http://www.geforce.com/News/articles/how-to-unlock-rages-high-resolution-textures-with-a-few-simple-tweaks) (GeForce.com)

"Be aware, however, that you will almost certainly require a video card with 1.5GB of Video RAM to enable 8K textures, other graphical niceties and GPU Transcoding, though it may also work on systems with just 1GB of VRAM if said options are toned down"


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Mrbloodworth on October 10, 2011, 12:12:55 PM
So, why play this over borderlands?


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: jakonovski on October 10, 2011, 12:20:11 PM
Because we played Borderlands two years ago?


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Kail on October 10, 2011, 12:35:05 PM
Haven't had any crashes or weirdness yet, so maybe they've fixed most of the issues with the recent patch.

Not for me.  Still crashes to desktop, plus I get jittering polygons and flickering textures when it does run.  It seems more stable than it used to, but I still get a 100% consistent CTD every time I try to drive my buggy out of the garage.

I'm kind of concerned about my video card drivers, now.  The new "Rage hotfix" ones seem to have fucked things up with my other games, so I tried to reinstall the old ones, but things remain persistently fucked in an upwards direction.  Uninstalling and reinstalling two or three times a day isn't fixing anything.  Frustrating.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: kildorn on October 10, 2011, 01:40:26 PM
So, why play this over borderlands?

Gunplay and world art direction seem better in Rage. NPC character development is actually decent.

Borderlands has far better rpg elements, equipment development, PC character development, and (yes, seriously) vehicle sections.

Rage makes me want Borderlands 2 more.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Rokal on October 10, 2011, 03:06:14 PM
So, why play this over borderlands?

Shooting feels a bit better, graphics and art direction are better. Ultimately I'll probably prefer Borderlands, but that doesn't mean I won't enjoy Rage.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Nightblade on October 14, 2011, 01:55:20 PM
http://www.ag.ru/reviews/rage_2011


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Azazel on October 15, 2011, 04:18:17 AM
Don't post naked links. Especially to shit in Russia or China.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Surlyboi on October 15, 2011, 10:04:48 AM
Don't post naked links. Especially to shit in Russia or China.

Normally, I'd agree, but that was well worth it.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Tarami on October 15, 2011, 11:24:39 AM
I don't know in what sense it was worth it? He's unimpressed. It's not even an entertaining rant, it's indifference.

That's not to say I don't agree. Rage is pretty, smooth and has some rather great shooting sections. The rest is obnoxious though. They could have removed everything but the shooting and had a much better game. The racing, the "mutant bash," the economic system (although the crafting is sort of nice) are all superflous and in the way for the fun (killing shit.)

What amazes me the most is that someone can design something this bland and not take notice. There's nothing characteristic about it.

Rage is rather unique in one way though: It's one of very few FPSes I've started that I know I won't finish.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Surlyboi on October 15, 2011, 12:53:39 PM
You obviously missed the joke...

Protip: try scrolling up and down the article a couple of times.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Tarami on October 15, 2011, 01:46:25 PM
NoScript. :P Ok, that's pretty funny eventhough I never had the issue myself. :)


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: Ginaz on October 30, 2011, 06:03:23 PM
I'm having a bit of a graphical error whenever I turn or move.  When I do it, theres a bit of a blur type effect (hard to describe) going across the screen in a straight line.  I've tried to make adjustments to my settings but I haven't had any luck yet.  Anyone know what causes this or how to fix it?  Thanks.


Title: Re: Rage
Post by: rk47 on October 30, 2011, 09:01:13 PM
All this raging has made me buy Borderlands GOTY at $7.50 on Steam instead. Cry more, Carmack!