Gravijah said:man what the hell i've put nearly 5 hours in and i'm still in wellspring.
JaseC said:In the garage, just to the right of the exit to the wasteland. There's an inconspicuous lift underneath the floor that activates as you approach it.
Alligatorjandro said:Just got this yesterday and I;m really enjoying it so far.
Guts Of Thor said:Only a few hours in but I am liking what I've played.
One question I have is is it even worth to drive around to explore or should I just go from one point to the other? Is the world that open?
Most of the hate seems to be directed at the PC technical issues. The reviewers, on the other hand, seem to find it slightly above average. For me? One of the best games I've played all year. It's doing just what I wanted.Gravijah said:i honestly don't understand the hate this game is getting.
eh. is it though? i don't think the reviews of this have been anything like as rough as what Alice got earlier this year. that's really the only time i can think of when it seemed like everyone on GAF who gave the game a chance thought it was much better than the reviews suggested, aside from a couple of people that agreed with them.Gravijah said:i honestly don't understand the hate this game is getting.
CitizenCope said:Is the Anarchy edition the regular edition? I didn't pre order and paid $59.99. Did they hand me something I wasn't supposed to get?
All first run copies are anarchy. Which is good, because you get the fists of rage, which are fucking RIDICULOUS.CitizenCope said:Is the Anarchy edition the regular edition? I didn't pre order and paid $59.99. Did they hand me something I wasn't supposed to get?
People like Jeff Cannata and Brad Shoemaker love the game. That's all I care about.Gravijah said:hate probably wasn't the right word, but i dunno. reviewers seem to be reviewing it based on what they want it to be, and not what it is.
and what is it? some of the best pure gameplay around.
Solo said:Yes. There are 11 races in Subway Town.
Gravijah said:hate probably wasn't the right word, but i dunno. reviewers seem to be reviewing it based on what they want it to be, and not what it is.
and what is it? some of the best pure gameplay around.
The most recent Rebel FM has Arthur Gies, one of the more negative reviewers of Rage, get plowed by the other podcasters for his vague and unfair critiques of the game. It was nice to hear.Gravijah said:hate probably wasn't the right word, but i dunno. reviewers seem to be reviewing it based on what they want it to be, and not what it is.
Derivative or unoriginal gameplay don't go well with some reviewers.Wallach said:Gameplay doesn't matter that much to reviewers anymore. The big difference is that this game doesn't hide behind RPG tropes so reviewers don't immediately try and apologize for all its flaws.
Sorry im not following, could you be more specific.Wallach said:Looking at metacritic, I can't say I agree with that.
Refreshment.01 said:Derivative or unoriginal gameplay don't go well with some reviewers.
Regarding Rage, isn't what Rage is doing? Employing very superficial RPG elements.
Systems that are typically featured on RPG's. Looting, crafting, upgrading, character enhancing, optional quests. Of course handled very superficially in the game.Wallach said:Where?
I asked in the edit, but what you mean here?Wallach said:Looking at metacritic, I can't say I agree with that.
What are those games that "hide behind RPG tropes"?Wallach said:The big difference is that this game doesn't hide behind RPG tropes so reviewers don't immediately try and apologize for all its flaws.
No, that's pretty much it. But some parts are better than others so maybe you'll enjoy what's to come a bit more.T Primex said:So does it get more varied later on?
Yes. Some people are more concerned with pigeon holing it and comparing it to every other game instead of judging it on its merits.Gravijah said:hate probably wasn't the right word, but i dunno. reviewers seem to be reviewing it based on what they want it to be, and not what it is.
and what is it? some of the best pure gameplay around.
Hela said:Just finished the game and I can't say that I expected much in terms of a plotline, but what a non-story with a nonsense abrupt ending.
At least the core mechanic, shooting, feels just right, though aside of the automatic shotgun I didn't really use the other weapons much.
Refreshment.01 said:Systems that are typically featured on RPG's. Looting, crafting, upgrading, character enhancing, optional quests. Of course handled very superficially in the game.
I asked in the edit, but what you mean here?
What are those games that "hide behind RPG tropes"?
Dead Space seemed to do pretty well with critics.Refreshment.01 said:Derivative or unoriginal gameplay don't go well with some reviewers.
Regarding Rage, isn't what Rage is doing? Employing very superficial RPG elements.
Sorry im not following, could you be more specific.
Fallout 3, Mass Effect and Deus Ex have terrible shooting mechanics and feel, but that's OK because "they're RPGs." They are unfair excuses, like "It looks OK...for a Wii game" is an excuse for a shitty looking game, or "It's relatively bug free...for an open world game" is an excuse for a really buggy, janky game.Refreshment.01 said:What are those games that "hide behind RPG tropes"?
Not much of a good counter argument. I cited a group of elements (Looting, crafting, upgrading, character enhancing, optional quests) that are associated to RPG's that are present on Rage. You replayed centering just on one.Wallach said:I don't consider a lot of these things RPG elements. Looting, crafting and upgrades are things that don't really tie back specifically to RPGs. Wolfenstein 3-D had about as much looting as this game does.
Thanks for citing the games, it's more clear now what you are trying to say.Wallach said:Two games that come to mind immediately are Mass Effect and Fallout 3. Both of them scored around ~90 Metacritic average and both of them enormous gameplay problems that were largely ignored just because they were called RPGs.
This is really interesting. Will you please answer me the following question with a straight answer.Wallach said:As far as unoriginal gameplay, let's use Bioshock as an example since you brought it up earlier. That game doesn't do anything new from a gameplay perspective whatsoever. 96 metacritic average. Reviewers don't care.
DaBuddaDa said:Fallout 3, Mass Effect and Deus Ex have terrible shooting mechanics and feel, but that's OK because "they're RPGs." They are unfair excuses, like "It looks OK...for a Wii game" is an excuse for a shitty looking game, or "It's relatively bug free...for an open world game" is an excuse for a really buggy, janky game.
You shouldn't get a pass on bad mechanics because you're trying something different. If you want to incorporate shooting into your RPG, good luck, I hope you pull it off well, but it will be compared to the best in the shooter genre because like it or not, it's the same mechanic you're playing with. Bioware themselves have said the exact same thing: they know they need to improve their combat because they know their game is going to be compared to the best shooters on the market and they need their game to have parity.Derrick01 said:I don't see why it's unfair. They're setting out to be RPGs first and have many more important and complex things to work on besides shooting people. We're slowly getting to even ground but I always expect RPGs to work on the RPG side first, otherwise we end up with games like ME2.
the first Dead Space didn't have the best controls or gameplay. it's one of my favourites, so i'm not bagging on it, but horror games traditionally get a bit of a pass for having janky gameplay IF they're scary since many of us that buy them don't buy them for fun minute to minute gameplay, but we buy them for the interactive frights.Mr_eX said:Dead Space seemed to do pretty well with critics.
FO3 is as much of a shooter as Rage is an RPG, if you can shit on FO3 for being a bad shooter, people can shit on Rage for being a bad RPG.DaBuddaDa said:You shouldn't get a pass on bad mechanics because you're trying something different. If you want to incorporate shooting into your RPG, good luck, I hope you pull it off well, but it will be compared to the best in the shooter genre because like it or not, it's the same mechanic you're playing with. Bioware themselves have said the exact same thing: they know they need to improve their combat because they know their game is going to be compared to the best shooters on the market and they need their game to have parity.
Refreshment.01 said:Not much of a good counter argument. I cited a group of elements (Looting, crafting, upgrading, character enhancing, optional quests) that are associated to RPG's that are present on Rage.
This is really interesting. Will you please answer me the following question with a straight answer.
Why would Bioshock a game from a lesser known studio than id, with a lot smaller marketing campaign get superior ratings and more critical acclaim than Rage then?
I think a lot of them are people who never had much affinity for any classic id game and want to be contrarian to prove some sort of point on the passage of time, like a film school kid taking a puff on a cigarette and proclaiming "Well, I don't think Citizen Kane is very good at all!"bloodydrake said:I think some people are just down on it and have been from the beginning. Everything from those people about the game is jaded and cynical, the best they can do is backhanded compliments.
I look at the quest system, the hub system as a more creative way to add context to a traditional shooter. Some have observed its very Zelda like in how the game world works.
When an action fighting game like Darksiders uses that formula to round out its design the overall impression wasn't so negative it was generally positive.
Rage does something something similar as a shooter and some are so down on it..just seems like they just want to focus on the flaws and not the whole thing.
Its the same issue with lack of highres textures.. most of the time this game looks stunning,Art direction,animations,world assets..so many WOW moments.
But if you go by some of the haters its like this game cameout looking like quake2.
of course, but i think his point is that reviewers DIDN'T shit on FO3 for being a bad shooter.StuBurns said:FO3 is as much of a shooter as Rage is an RPG, if you can shit on FO3 for being a bad shooter, people can shit on Rage for being a bad RPG.
Then he's wrong, I saw that criticism a lot.plagiarize said:of course, but i think his point is that reviewers DIDN'T shit on FO3 for being a bad shooter.
This.plagiarize said:of course, but i think his point is that reviewers DIDN'T shit on FO3 for being a bad shooter.
I completely disagree. FO3 has mostly optional real-time shooting, it has a quite traditional command based combat system they encourage you to use. And those are things that define RPGs, not those alone, but they're certainly factors.DaBuddaDa said:This.
And Fallout 3 was trying much harder to be a shooter than Rage is trying to be a RPG. Loot, NPCs and quests are not the defining characteristics of an RPG.
ya but the critisim went like this..."even tho the shooting leaves something to be desired this game is awesome 9.5/10"StuBurns said:Then he's wrong, I saw that criticism a lot.
jett said:I'm not sure how many hours I'm into the game, but I just finished Mutant Bash and I gotta say this is one awesome game, and probably the best FPS game I've played this generation, I can't think of any other I like better. And that's considering I'm playing a gimped version of the game with a crappy framerate thanks to borked AMD drivers.
Maybe they think the game is much better than Rage, I certainly do. The same with BioShock.bloodydrake said:ya but the critisim went like this..."even tho the shooting leaves something to be desired this game is awesome 9.5/10"
not "omg this shooters rpg elements are so superficial!I should menionthe shootings the best all year " I guess I'll be nice and give it a 7/10