More Rage

[Tsakali]

My amazement about people complaining that Rage doesn't look good continually grows...

the problem here is, and maybe wrongfully yet fairly, that rage is compared to games like Fallout 3 and DE:HR and that's when it opens up the floodgates for immense criticism. Being that I would categorize GoW games as a rail shooter like all CoD's it's like comparing apples to oranges. The minute you start offering "side quests" , world charcters and the illusion of choice to an otherwise straight shooter, it's only fair that you're going to get alot of people confused and frustrated as to what it is you are bringing to the table as a video game.

[Κracus]

Pretty sure that's the most sense you've ever made. EVER.

[Mogul]

I personally think Deus Ex looks like shit. Rage has blurry, low-res textures indoors, but Deus Ex: HR's textures look like Metal Gear Solid 2. Also, their art direction and character models are awkward at best and disfigured-looking at worst. Every character's arms have strange proportions. Also, the neo-renaissance look doesn't work for me.

Not that Rage's art direction is everyone's cup of tea, but I find the characters' gear to be reminiscent of some of the best designs in entertainment, as a whole.

[Κracus]

Deus Ex does look like shit compared to Rage, but it's fucking fun.

[brisk]

DX:HR's textures are higher res than Rages, especially on the environment art. It's only the character models/textures that let it down. Both have good overall art direction.

Rage has wonderful source art and id software has some of the most talented artists in the industry. Shame it's completely wasted due to crappy compression.

As a game though, it is fucking terrible. id is a 2011 studio, working with a 90s mentality. 1 guy makes the engines and 99% of the staff are artists. Noone is there to actually make a decent game. This used to work 20 years ago, but it doesn't cut it anymore, sorry. I've been playing Arkham City and that game is just a million and one miles away from anything id could achieve. id should stick to what they do best: multiplayer-only shooters, that emphasise competitive play. It's all they can do.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/rage says it all really. RAGE was a massive disappointment.

[diego]

I find Rage to offer a far more memorable experience than the incredibly bland Gears of War 3 or the mediocre Modern Warfare 2.

++;

I just played a tiny little bit of it and I enjoyed it. Other than that all overcriticals are faggots.

[diego]

DX:HR's textures are higher res than Rages, especially on the environment art. It's only the character models/textures that let it down. Both have good overall art direction.

Rage has wonderful source art and id software has some of the most talented artists in the industry. Shame it's completely wasted due to crappy compression.

As a game though, it is fucking terrible. id is a 2011 studio, working with a 90s mentality. 1 guy makes the engines and 99% of the staff are artists. Noone is there to actually make a decent game. This used to work 20 years ago, but it doesn't cut it anymore, sorry. I've been playing Arkham City and that game is just a million and one miles away from anything id could achieve. id should stick to what they do best: multiplayer-only shooters, that emphasise competitive play. It's all they can do.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/rage says it all really. RAGE was a massive disappointment.

reads like you're an intern. fag.

[DRuM]

I think Rage is awesome. It's everything I personally want in an FPS and it's quite varied with the car stuff and side missions. Only thing I can't be bothered with is the card games.
So the card games can go fuck themselves. The rest is great fun and while a lot of the textures are rubbish, there are some epic looking buildings and landscape areas. I feel sorry for id, they're getting a bit of a bad rap on this game, and I don't think they deserve to.

[Eraser]

As a game though, it is fucking terrible. id is a 2011 studio, working with a 90s mentality. 1 guy makes the engines and 99% of the staff are artists. Noone is there to actually make a decent game. This used to work 20 years ago, but it doesn't cut it anymore, sorry. I've been playing Arkham City and that game is just a million and one miles away from anything id could achieve.

And here is where I think id Software isn't being judged fairly. Just look at the biggest shooter titles of the past few years. The Gears of War series, the Call of Duty Series (and all those other modern military shooters), the Serious Sam series, Duke Nukem Forever, etc etc. What do they offer that Rage doesn't? I don't think that Rage's gameplay is any less interesting than the mentioned games.

Also, even if you could say Rage still builds on a "90's mentality", whatever that may be, why is that such a big problem? Do all games have to have 16 layers of depth and all kinds of tacked on extras to be enjoyable? I've been negative about Gears 3 and the COD series in my last posts, but I have seriously enjoyed all of the Gears games and COD4/MW2 even though their gameplay consists of literally nothing more than hovering your reticule over the enemy and pushing the fire button. I'm enjoying Rage for what it is as well and I don't think it needs an XP levelling system or any of that RPG nonsense to be an enjoyable game. What you're doing is almost like saying that New Super Mario Bros is a shit game because it plays exactly the same as a game that was made in 1985.

Thirdly, I wonder if you'd be just as negative about the game if it was developed by another developer. I doubt that if this game was delivered by an upcoming, unknown studio you'd be all over it and saying how awesome it is.

It just sounds to me that you expected Rage to be something it isn't, and are just bitter because Rage isn't the game you expected it to be.

id should stick to what they do best: multiplayer-only shooters, that emphasise competitive play. It's all they can do

Yes, because in their hugely succesful and critically acclaimed 20+ gaming portfolio, one of them is a multiplayer only shooter.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/rage says it all really. RAGE was a massive disappointment.

Dunno, but a 79/100 score isn't bad, especially not if you consider the amount of jadedness the game has been reviewed with.

[brisk]

I found the gameplay in COD, Gears of War, and DNF to be just as dull as RAGE actually, so it's interesting that you point the comparison. I fully admit that these kind of linear shooters do nothing for me anymore, but RAGE at least gave the illusion of choice/free-roaming and RPG-style elements. Like Tsakali said above, as soon as you include those features, it's not going to be judged purely as a straight FPS any more and when you compare it to recent titles in that vein, it fails spectacularly.

You do expect a certain level of quality from id software, but this game offers nothing more than Hard Reset did earlier... and that was by a new, indie developer, ticking all the right boxes from a pc-development perspective. However, after playing both games, they were both rubbish.

Oh and RAGE was exactly how I said it would be in that thread from months ago on Q3W. I can't be bitter about a game I fully expected to be a bit shit (and turned out to be 100% spot on). Too many superb games were/are released this year to worry about the poor ones. And yes, I realise the irony of me posting in this thread, moaning about a game I don't like, but despite my negativeness, I did actually want it to succeed, if only because Q3A is the greatest MP shooter ever and id holds a special place in my gaming heart.

Speaking of which, since 1993, all of id's titles (thats uh... Doom and Quake) have had a focus on competitive, mp gameplay. That is what people remember about their games and it is what they're remembered for. They did invent the deathmatch afterall. They perfected this with Q3A but since Doom 3, they have seemed to focus on the SP experience, which is an odd decision considering most people buy games exclusively for the online aspect now. id software doesn't have anyone on board to write a decent story or make memorable characters you care about, which are essential for a SP game. It's no surprise that their games have suffered as a result.

Oh and 79/100 isn't a bad score indeed. However, the 3.9 userscore tells a completely different story. People are obviously very disappointed in RAGE. Oh and before you say it's the PC crowd moaning, you might want to check http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/rage too.

[brisk]

DX:HR's textures are higher res than Rages, especially on the environment art. It's only the character models/textures that let it down. Both have good overall art direction.

Rage has wonderful source art and id software has some of the most talented artists in the industry. Shame it's completely wasted due to crappy compression.

As a game though, it is fucking terrible. id is a 2011 studio, working with a 90s mentality. 1 guy makes the engines and 99% of the staff are artists. Noone is there to actually make a decent game. This used to work 20 years ago, but it doesn't cut it anymore, sorry. I've been playing Arkham City and that game is just a million and one miles away from anything id could achieve. id should stick to what they do best: multiplayer-only shooters, that emphasise competitive play. It's all they can do.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/rage says it all really. RAGE was a massive disappointment.

reads like you're an intern. fag.

Oh and hi diego

[o'dium]

Metacritic is fucked up the arse to be fair, because I remember a shit load of butthurt steam guys moaning on their forums. "ZOMG MY TEXTURES TAKE A SECOND TO LOAD, LETS GO ON META CRITIC AND FUCK THIS UP". So yeah, theres your 3.9 average.

Its no 10 out of 10, sure. Its got a lot of faults, its basic, it could have had a lot more content plus lets be honest, that ending was the biggest pile of wank you could ever even try and include in a game, but the game is a solid 8, AT LEAST, if just for the fact its sexy as fuck and has some pretty solid combat.

[axbaby]

Drum .when the game does not work on most all pc's after installation id deserves a slap on the wrist. I still have video issues with distacting pop in textures and purple maps leaving the towns.

[axbaby]

Drum .when the game does not work on most all pc's after installation id deserves a slap on the wrist. I still have video issues with distacting pop in textures and purple maps leaving the towns.

[feedback]

Look at the user review score.

I'm disappointed that Rage is so easy mostly, id games have always offered a challenge.

[fKd]

pistol only mode! scope allowed.

[brisk]

Metacritic now ban users who "bomb" titles with 0/1 votes without a written review.

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/31 ... reviewers/

So the 3.9 user score is due to people genuinely pissed off with the game, mostly from a technical standpoint. They're valid concerns and if Dead Island wasn't released only a few weeks earlier, it would have easily taken the crown for most botched-up PC launch ever.

[Eraser]

Werent 80 percent of the problems caused by drivers ?

[GONNAFISTYA]

reads like you're an intern. fag.

send me that tune you recorded or I'll eat this dog. fag.

[r3t]

Spoiled cry babies, I remember when Quake 3 and Unreal Tournament were released, I had to dig up customized OpenGL miniport drivers for my Voodooo 2's to even get both games to start. Yes, it's been 10 years since then and *most* games now work decently out of the box, but people should just man up and simply download a new driver. Big deal.

[Tsakali]

or leave PC gaming to real PC gamers

[feedback]

You know what was gay, I couldn't even play Quake 3 for 4 years because it required a 3d card. Unreal engine could run in software, and if I used interlaced then at 320 x 240 it could run at a smooth 14-22 fps.

[Tsakali]

lol@ poor people's problems, etc.

[feedback]

I wasn't old back then so I didn't have a job and I used whatever computer my dad gave me. It was a mac, too. Powerbook 2400c, 10.4" screen.

[Grandpa Stu]

finally finished rage last night. i enjoyed it.

my single largest criticism though is that this doesn't feel like the complete game. the final mission feels more like the lead up to the next 4 or 5 missions that should ultimately conclude the game. i did all the side-quests as soon as they came up too, so once i finally got the bfg the only place for me to use it was in the last mission which had not practical use for it. i hate to say it, but the ending to doom3 was 10x more satisfying than this. even the universally accepted shit ending of borderlands felt more resolved.