RAGE 2?

[Don Carlos]

Are we about to see a sequel to an innovative yet floored id game of yesteryear?

RAGE was released in 2011, so 7 years would be enough time to fix all of the issues with it and turn it into a grand old game, right? Apparently there is something brewing, and we might find out on May 14th what that is...

[Eraser]

I did enjoy Rage and I think it was judged unfairly back in the day. A sequel would be welcome.

[MKJ]

Meh
Doom2 pls

[MKJ]

https://screenrant.com/bethesda-rage-2-e3-2018/

[Lieutenant Dan]

I'd play some more Rage.

[Κracus]

I kinda got bored of it pretty quick...

[MKJ]

Well, there it is
https://www.xboxachievements.com/news/n ... Today.html

https://kotaku.com/bethesda-announces-rage-2-1826006193

[phantasmagoria]

Andrew WK

[phantasmagoria]

So I guess id have nothing to do with the development? Guess it might be an id engine.

Actually, watching the trailer again...I bet it's another Battle Royale.

[Captain]

This one will be developed by Avalanche Studios, the studio responsible for the 2015 open-world Mad Max game.

Mad Max was excellent, there's hope for this.

[Eraser]

So I guess id have nothing to do with the development?

I bet my left nut on id Software being preoccupied with the development of Doom 2

[phantasmagoria]

Gameplay trailer is out.

I dunno, it doesn't appeal to me much

[Eraser]

Looks like more of the same I guess
[youtube]0H_Fsyje2nA[/youtube]

[Don Carlos]

Looks OK

Nothing great, but worth a go.

[Don Carlos]

DOOM didn't look like it could live up to how it looked in the demo but it did

We can only hope...

[xer0s]

Still linear? Meh...

It says wide open world, but didn’t we get the same half-truth with the first one?

[Eraser]

That might be a good thing, actually.
Open world is such an over used hype term that it pretty much only triggers negative thoughts with me. For most games "open world" means endless stretches of nothing anyway.

[xer0s]

Really? I’m not sure what open world games you’re playing, but the ones I’ve played have action around every corner. Skyrim, Fallout, and Witcher 3 come to mind. Never a dull moment.

I just remember being really pumped for Rage and when it came out I was crushed. I wanted to explore the wasteland. Instead, I was strictly guided on a mediocre adventure...

[Κracus]

That might be a good thing, actually.
Open world is such an over used hype term that it pretty much only triggers negative thoughts with me. For most games "open world" means endless stretches of nothing anyway.

Depends who's crafting the world I think. Rockstar games have incredible open world games for example. Ubisoft, not so much. Bethesday has some decent ones like Skyrim... I really want to play skyrim now... great.

[shaft]

uhh...AC:Origins, Wildlands and Farcry 5 all had excellent open worlds.

[xer0s]

Yeah I can’t think of any open world games developed in the last 5-7 years that have endless stretches of nothing...

[Don Carlos]

Damn it Jerry

[Eraser]

Oh fuck you guyze

[Eraser]

Ok I'll not be like Gramps and admit defeat here. I haven't played a lot of the (newer) video games here so my opinion on this is largely based on what I played like 5 years ago. But let me say this:
I found that the appeal of the worlds built for games like Assassin's Creed (2/Brotherhood/Revelations), Far Cry 2 and 3 and Red Dead Redemption quickly waned because it pretty soon became a matter of just covering distance without it adding much to the game. Running into side-quests quickly starts feeling like chores. Especially AC was victim of this.
Having said that, I've always been more attracted to games with great storytelling and atmosphere (linear as they may be) than those with wide open worlds (where in most of the cases you end up running from A to B to C anyway because that's where the game wants you to go).

So in that sense, I liked how Rage felt like a pretty big world despite traversing it mostly linearly.

[vesp]

Yeah I can agree with that.. "Open World" to me mainly means no (obvious) loading screens between areas, Side quests peppered here and there and unscripted goal completion.
You're still following "the story" if you go along with the main quest(s) which essentially keeps you along a single path anyway, you just might have a bit more freedom with how you complete your goals. I feel it's a bit weird to see it as a big part of the marketing these days - the term "open world" doesn't have the same mystique it did back in early 2000s (woah, I can jump over these fences/rocks if I want to!)

Both timesI've played Skyrim, my interest in the game waned FAST when I realised I was just completing side quests for the sake of completing them - fast travelling from one area to another with no more story to drive you along gets boring



so was Rage 1 actually any good? I never picked it up after all the hype blew up, is it still worth a try today before 2 comes out?