Support NeoGAF

[Doc Holliday]

Tell you one thing, I loved Bioshock but I'm enjoying RAGE a lot more. It's amazing what a little presentation can do to reviewers. If Rage had a slightly better told story a la HL2 or Bioshock it would blow them away imo. Because the core gameplay is a lot more satisfying in a lot of ways than both of them.

 

[Wallach]

Fallout is not primarily a shooter, so those people are retarded.

It doesn't matter what genre it is. The shooting element is badly done.

 

[Lothars]

It doesn't matter what genre it is. The shooting element is badly done.

I don't think it was that badly done, it was just based on the stats in the game. I never had an issue with the shooting with or without Vats.

 

[Wallach]

I don't think it was that badly done, it was just based on stats. I never had an issue with the shooting with or without Vats.

It's not so much that it is based on stats, that it is just not satisfying. Enemy reactions, enemy "AI" (there's really almost no AI in Fallout 3 or NV most of the time), the audio feedback is all pretty ancient.

 

[Solo]

Just finished the game. 19 hours total. If not for The Witcher 2's existence, Rage would unequivocally be my current GOTY. What a fantastic game - truly the best single player experience id has ever delivered. Its light on story and characterization like all of id's titles, but the greatest character of them all is the world they have lovingly hand-crafted, and it is gorgeous to behold. Truly a case of art direction scoring a big victory over the technical limitations of id tech 5. The oft-used descriptor of "Rage is like playing concept art" couldn't be more apt. And then there is the gameplay. My lord, the gameplay. True to their legacy, id has delivered simply the best playing, best feeling and flat out most fun first person shooter experience I can recall in at least the past decade. The weapons feel incredible, the level design and enemy encounters are excellent and the pacing is pitch perfect - Rage really knows when to keep sending hordes of enemies at you and when to hold back. Truly a master class in design from that perspective. Then there is periphary stuff like racing which is excellent in its own right and the overall charm and feel of the game strikes such a unique vibe which makes this game truly something special for me. Once again id, I bow to you.

 

[Kjellson]

I see ads for this game all over my town. I never see billboard ads for video games, so this is cool.

 

[Gvaz]

And Rage is not primarily an RPG, so why is it critiqued so heavily on its lack of deep RPG mechanics?

I personally wasn't doing that, but it does have a bit of things that are slightly rpg, but it's about as similar as bulletstorm was imo. Crafting =/= rpg feature

 

[Lothars]

It's not so much that it is based on stats, that it is just not satisfying. Enemy reactions, enemy "AI" (there's really almost no AI in Fallout 3 or NV most of the time), the audio feedback is all pretty ancient.

I guess I just didn't have an issue with any of those complaints but I can see where your coming from.

 

[Wallach]

I guess I just didn't have an issue with any of those complaints but I can see where your coming from.

I don't really care that much either, personally. New Vegas is probably my favorite game in the last ten years.

That whole discussion was more about the point of game reviews and how games get reviewed.

 

[Gravijah]

if rage were a fish what fish do you think it would be

personally i think it would be a snook

 

[Refreshment.01]

It's not a jab, I'm highlighting the fact that you seem incapable of fully understanding what I'm saying but are trying to use that to say my posts are bad.

Im blunt with the answers, don't resort to fall diplomacy to get sympathy, that's the type of BS we can leave in the real day to day interaction.

This caveman is understanding you alright don't worry about my deficient language skills, but the "Because of exactly what I said earlier - gameplay means less and less to reviewers nowadays" that's was coup out answer that gets thrown around when reviewers aren't favoring my favorite game. And to use it against Bioshock was the coup de grace. As a side note, yes, we shouldn't listen to most reviews we agree with that.

 

[Wallach]

Im blunt with the answers, don't resort to fall diplomacy to get sympathy, that's the type of BS we can leave in the real day to day interaction.

This caveman is understanding you alright don't worry about my deficient language skills, but the "Because of exactly what I said earlier - gameplay means less and less to reviewers nowadays" that's was coup answer that gets thrown around when reviewers aren't favoring my favorite game. As a side note, yes, we shouldn't listen to most reviews we agree with that.

I don't even understand what your problem with that answer is. You said yourself Bioshock is basically an XCOPY of System Shock 2 but worse - the game design is totally unoriginal. But it still reviewed amazingly well because that doesn't matter. Which is the whole fucking point.

 

[GrayFoxPL]

I love the amount of weapons in this. It's like there are at least 20 ways to kill each enemy.
I'm playing on hard and I feel like a totally overpowered mofo. Awesome.
Killing Authority with dynamite bolts is hilarious.

*plump* ... "Awww shieet" Booom! Splat!


I won all the races in wellspring is that it? I didn't get any trophy or anything.

 

[Gvaz]

It doesn't matter what genre it is. The shooting element is badly done.

It's effectively Oblivion with guns, from a company that doesn't make fps games, so I'm not sure what you expected to get.

Is the gunplay poor as fps games go? Sure, but I see it more as a 3D representation of the original fallout games. New Vegas greatly improves on this but doesn't fix the main issue.

 

[Solo]

if rage were a fish what fish do you think it would be

personally i think it would be a snook

Wild sea bass

 

[Metal-Geo]

I won all the races in wellspring is that it? I didn't get any trophy or anything.

More further ahead in the game!

 

[StuBurns]

if rage were a fish what fish do you think it would be

personally i think it would be a snook

 

[aristotle]

mutant bash was fucking great, but a question regarding it:

Spoiler

is it possible to dodge that tentacle move the big ogre looking guy uses? i swear i couldn't doge it for shit.

Hah, you'll feel dumb, but yep. Back up. That's it. Move to the side when he charges. It's a close-to-mid attack.

 

[GrayFoxPL]

More further ahead in the game!

Ah ok. Thanks. Gotta try online tomorrow finally.

 

[Gravijah]

Hah, you'll feel dumb, but yep. Back up. That's it. Move to the side when he charges. It's a close-to-mid attack.

to be fair i only had shotgun ammo. lol.

 

[Refreshment.01]

I don't even understand what your problem with that answer is. You said yourself Bioshock is basically an XCOPY of System Shock 2 but worse - the game design is totally unoriginal. But it still reviewed amazingly well because that doesn't matter. Which is the whole fucking point.

You keeping on with this, you ignore everything i posted before, center in a small fragment and build a counter point on it.

First, Bioshock shares some of the talent pool that created System Shock so for this fact alone similarities are warranted. Simplified doesn't always mean worse. Bioshock gameplay in all of its aspects was polished, extremely well done and didn't felt out of place. Games like System Shock are not common in the FPS genre, so even if Bioshock wasn't the innovator it also wasn't the run of the mill typical shooter circa 2007.

Now you'll ignore this, spin it around and recycle the discussion again. The topic has been side tracked enough my apologies.

 

[aristotle]

to be fair i only had shotgun ammo. lol.

Lol. Fair enough. I've seen people on other forums ask the same thing and when they find out they all go "d'oh!". It's a really simple fight if you do that. It's possible to beat him without getting hit even once on nightmare.

 

[Wallach]

You keeping on with this, you ignore everything i posted before, center in a small fragment and build a counter point on it.

First, Bioshock shares some of the talent pool that created System Shock so for this fact alone similarities are warranted. Simplified doesn't always mean worse. Bioshock gameplay in all of its aspects was polished, extremely well done and didn't felt out of place. Games like System Shock are not common in the FPS genre, so even if Bioshock wasn't the innovator it also wasn't the run of the mill typical shooter circa 2007.

No you'll ignore this, spin it around and recycle the discussion again.

Do you even remember how this discussion started? It was your assertion that derivative and/or unoriginal gameplay is what is responsible for RAGE's review scores. I brought up Bioshock as an example that clearly, that is not what reviewers care about, because Bioshock is both of these things. It's also sure as fuck not the only example we could be talking about when it comes to unoriginal game design being paired with critical success.

 

[Gravijah]

Lol. Fair enough. I've seen people on other forums ask the same thing and when they find out they all go "d'oh!". It's a really simple fight if you do that. It's possible to beat him without getting hit even once on nightmare.

yeah, i did move back a bit but i guess it wasn't far enough. i was down to only shotgun ammo, though.

 

[Refreshment.01]

The graphics are an interesting point, lots of people on GAF are blown away by the game visually, I think it looks like ass. Neither party are objectively wrong, they just look for different things in the visual appearance of games.

Indeed an interesting point. But from my experience the people impressed by the graphics tend to be the ones that are less technically minded in terms of videogame graphics. Users that are impressed not just by art direction but also every other aspects that contributes to a games graphical package tend to be less enthusiastic.

 

[plagiarize]

if rage were a fish what fish do you think it would be

personally i think it would be a snook

it'd be a cookiecutter fish.

HAW HAW.

seriously though, look up cookiecutter fish. they're fucking awesome.

Nah, we can't generalize like this. Reviews, when well done, are a good way to keep away potential buyers from crappy products.

i don't see why you need a number to do that though. review SCORES are needless. the headline of your review should carry that message and there is zero reason why it can't. instead, headlines tend to be more cryptic to get people to 'click through' to see what the score was, and to get the extra pageviews.

The graphics are an interesting point, lots of people on GAF are blown away by the game visually, I think it looks like ass. Neither party are objectively wrong, they just look for different things in the visual appearance of games.

i think lots of the reviews have praised the graphics... but it is interesting that Rage fixes a problem that many people didn't even see. texture variety. the number of people that bitched about low res Crysis 2 textures that just looked at me like a freak when i praised it for its texture variety.

'BUT THAT GROUND TEXTURE THEY REUSED FROM CRYSIS 1 IS BLURRIER'.

they didn't remotely mind that the game was reusing a recognizeable texture. talk about things to knock you out of the experience.

repeated textures are an issue we've just accepted. Rage proves that we shouldn't, and i'm glad that many are praising it's looks because i was worried that no one would notice.

yes, the sacrifices in 2011 are more than some are willing to make, but in 2013 that won't be the case. Rage has broken the ice, and i'm going to notice all the games that DON'T have a good degree of texture variety even more now.

 

[Gravijah]

60hz

 

[StuBurns]

repeated textures are an issue we've just accepted. Rage proves that we shouldn't

I think Rage proved the exact opposite.

 

[Gvaz]

You keeping on with this, you ignore everything i posted before, center in a small fragment and build a counter point on it.

First, Bioshock shares some of the talent pool that created System Shock so for this fact alone similarities are warranted. Simplified doesn't always mean worse. Bioshock gameplay in all of its aspects was polished, extremely well done and didn't felt out of place. Games like System Shock are not common in the FPS genre, so even if Bioshock wasn't the innovator it also wasn't the run of the mill typical shooter circa 2007.

Now you'll ignore this, spin it around and recycle the discussion again. The topic has been side tracked enough my apologies.

IMO just a little personal opinion story:

I was all excited about bioshock when it came out on the PC, I played the first one up to the trees part and got bored. Bioshock 2 came out and I beat that and went "combat is improved...but the story is shit". My friend had been really pushing me to play System Shock 2 and I thought it looked like shit and when I initially messed with the controls they were kind of poor, but I modded that sucker out with all the best mods for SS2 and stuck with it. When I got into the medical bay for the first time, I was looking at a model of a gurney when suddenly I heard a disgusting groan, I spin my character around and THERES THIS FUCKING MUTANT ALL UP IN MY SHIT and I almost screamed out loud. That's when I knew I'd enjoy the game. I stuck with it for hours, and finished the game in a couple days getting all the goodies and weapons and stuff. I fucking LOVED it. I went back to Bioshock 1 and completed it, and left with a feeling that neither of the bioshock games were in any way shape or form better than the game they were the spiritual successor to. Even with all the dated gameplay mechanics and UI and polish, it was still better in customization, combat, story, progression, music, tension, etc. You name it. Even today I can't stop saying good things to people about SS2, and every person I meet who says they like bioshock, I quietly slip them a little something

repeated textures are an issue we've just accepted. Rage proves that we shouldn't, and i'm glad that many are praising it's looks because i was worried that no one would notice.

I don't really care about reused textures, to be honest. Sure there's tons of variety in rage because of the megatextures, but I don't feel the positives outweigh the negatives of everything being so low res and space being so large.

 

[aristotle]

yeah, i did move back a bit but i guess it wasn't far enough. i was down to only shotgun ammo, though.

Next time

Spoiler

don't fire at him until after he charges and hits a wall. It'll give you a few good shots in with the shotgun & wingsticks. Back up while you're firing. If you're far enough away each time, he'll just keep charging you so just dodge it.

I beat him using that combo.

 

[plagiarize]

I think Rage proved the exact opposite.

i wasn't stating an opinion.

what i was getting at is that pre Rage i think we all just saw it as an issue that there was no way around. Rage has proven that there is a way around it, it's just the case that in 2011 to get around it on consoles, you have to lose a few things.

high end PCs could run this engine with higher resolution textures and dynamic lighting... but no one is going to make a game just for high end PCs again any time soon. Crysis was the last hurrah there... and i don't mourn the loss of that.

you don't like the trade off, and i absolutely get that. but that's only a tradeoff in 2011. we just need a tad more power, ram and diskspace and we can megatexture at a higher resolution without losing stuff we've come to expect.

though that's ignoring that pre-baked lighting is still pretty damn common, and that MOST UE3 engine games still use pre-baked lighting in MOST areas.

Indeed an interesting point. But from my experience the people impressed by the graphics tend to be the ones that are less technically minded in terms of videogame graphics. Users that are impressed not just by art direction but also every other aspects that contributes to a games graphical package tend to be less enthusiastic.

i disagree. Rage IS a technical achievement. it may be technically deficient in some areas, but that doesn't mean it isn't technically impressive in others. i call that Halo 3 and Alan Wake syndrome. both games did some things better than just about any other game, but because they were less than average in one or two areas no one gave them technical credit for the things they did incredibly well (well, apart from Digital Foundry and a couple of other places).

it'd be like saying Shadow of the Colossus wasn't a technical achievement on PS2 because at the time the PS2 wasn't powerful enough to run it properly. being deficient in some areas, doesn't negate the technical achievements in others.

 

[Refreshment.01]

Praises

So the game is perfection incarnated? Since you didn't make a single critic to the game. Why most people is so polarized, either be an apologist or a detractor? The game has obvious flaws and good qualities.

Wallach, man. It's all my fault, but there's something perplexing about a someone comparing Rage to Bioshock in terms of what achieves in regards to gaming and then accusing the bast majority of critics to be wrong about the game getting better scores than Rage. Even if you are right, most be hard being the lonely genius that its only capable of seeing that truth.

i disagree. Rage IS a technical achievement. it may be technically deficient in some areas, but that doesn't mean it isn't technically impressive in others. i call that Halo 3 and Alan Wake syndrome. both games did some things better than just about any other game, but because they were less than average in one or two areas no one gave them technical credit for the things they did incredibly well (well, apart from Digital Foundry and a couple of other places).
.

plagiarize, Rage is a technical achievement in consoles, and more than anything in regards to the visual part.

And you accuse me of writing a "cop out" argument. Stay free, seriously.

Keep ignoring everything i said for the last pages, that's your coup out right there Wallach. You keep insisting.

 

[Wallach]

Wallach, man. It's all my fault, but there's something perplexing about a someone comparing Rage to Bioshock in terms of what achieves in regards to gaming and then accusing the bast majority of critics to be wrong about the game getting better scores than Rage. Even if you are right, most be hard being the lonely genius that its only capable of seeing that truth.

And you accuse me of writing a "cop out" argument. Stay free, seriously.

 

[plagiarize]

Plagiarize, Rage is a technical achievement in consoles.

and on PCs. it just isn't all it could be on PCs. still, just like Dark10x, i absolutely appreciate an engine that runs like butter on PC.

Crysis 2. Dead Space 2. Rage. MT Framework games. say what you want about them on PC, but holy hell do they run well on a wide variety of hardware. IDs engines have always been beautiful in their efficiency. that's pretty much Carmack's secret sauce.

 

[Solo]

So the game is perfection incarnated? Since you didn't make a single critic to the game. Why most people is so polarized, either be an apologist or a detractor? The game has obvious flaws and good qualities.

Yes, the game is "perfection incarnated". Also, I don't know what the hell you are talking about.

 

[plagiarize]

and yeah, i appreciate the 'lulz' in me saying Rage runs well on a wide variety of hardware given the awful teething troubles, but i hope you get my point all the same.

 

[Mr_eX]

i really enjoyed Wolfenstein's hub design as well.great single player but many did they squander the MP opportunity so bad.

Wolfenstein's campaign was pretty good. It really surprised me. The multiplayer was super disappointing though. Return to Castle Wolfenstein is one of my favorite multiplayer games ever and then they follow it up with that.

Nailed it. Exactly what I felt when playing. Hell, racing here is better than in Blur, a game focused on racing combat ONLY.

If they were to spin off Rage Racing into it's own game I'd play it

if rage were a fish what fish do you think it would be

I don't know what it's called but that one awesome fish with the light on it's head

 

[plagiarize]

Yes, the game is "perfection incarnated". Also, I don't know what the hell you are talking about.

i'm sure his favourite game of all time is one that i haven't heard of, which has absolutely no faults.

or it's Resident Evil 4

 

[plagiarize]

Indeed an interesting point. But from my experience the people impressed by the graphics tend to be the ones that are less technically minded in terms of videogame graphics. Users that are impressed not just by art direction but also every other aspects that contributes to a games graphical package tend to be less enthusiastic.

angler fish.

and i say again, if you don't know what a cookiecutter fish is, you have to look them up.

edit: tip, they're sharks!

 

[dark10x]

Gotta post on the next page.

 

[StuBurns]

i wasn't stating an opinion.

what i was getting at is that pre Rage i think we all just saw it as an issue that there was no way around. Rage has proven that there is a way around it, it's just the case that in 2011 to get around it on consoles, you have to lose a few things.

There was always a way around it, and it's larger VRAM, or better texturing streaming. Rage is the extreme of extremes, it's like using bitmap when all we need is high quality jpg. They could still have used texture tiling. What it actually does is virtualize the texture budget and reduce the budget so the game can run faster.

Rage would have been a fairly perfect solution if they'd have released it much less compressed, and they could have. The PS3 version could easily have been 100GB if id had cared to do it.

I never play games and really notice repeated textures, in Rage I constantly notice low res textures, they've attempted to solve a problem that for me never existed, and created a much larger one in doing so.

 

[see5harp]

Nailed it. Exactly what I felt when playing. Hell, racing here is better than in Blur, a game focused on racing combat ONLY.

Oh stop it.

 

[Refreshment.01]

IMO just a little personal opinion story: Even today I can't stop saying good things to people about SS2, and every person I meet who says they like bioshock, I quietly slip them a little something

That's perfectly fine, SS2 does it like no other and i got the joy of playing it close to release, now a days it would be harder for me to get into it. But the fact that SS2 is the best game doesn't make Bioshock a bad game, doesn't make it common or undeserving of the praise it got.

I don't really care about reused textures, to be honest. Sure there's tons of variety in rage because of the megatextures, but I don't feel the positives outweigh the negatives of everything being so low res and space being so large.

Plus there are games that have good texture variety with high quality. id did a fantastic job spreading the word around the strengths of its technology. It got so engraved into people's mind to the point they are willing to ignore the obvious short comings. I think what saved the day for the game visuals is the strong art direction, really expertly done.

 

[Gvaz]

I wish my game looked like any of those screenshots

But the fact that SS2 is the best game doesn't make Bioshock a bad game, doesn't make it common or undeserving of the praise it got.
.

Regressing on your product is always a bad thing.

 

[dark10x]

I wish my game looked like any of those screenshots

Aside from image quality, it should. id focused more on the complete scene rather than individual elements. If you closely examine things, the illusion starts to break apart, but if you are simply playing as normal, you should experience the proper effect.

Indeed an interesting point. But from my experience the people impressed by the graphics tend to be the ones that are less technically minded in terms of videogame graphics. Users that are impressed not just by art direction but also every other aspects that contributes to a games graphical package tend to be less enthusiastic.

I disagree. I'm profoundly interested in the technical side of the visuals but I still find Rage to be a beautiful game. I recognize the artistry present even if it is often obscured by limitations of the engine, which, by the way, is quite impressive and ambitious regardless of its issues.

It's true that, when you step up close to the scenery it reveals its ugly side, but the overall it looks fantastic.

I mean, when you step back and take a look at some of the scenes you get this:

Reposted

 

[plagiarize]

There was always a way around it, and it's larger VRAM, or better texturing streaming. Rage is the extreme of extremes, it's like using bitmap when all we need is high quality jpg. They could still have used texture tiling. What it actually does is virtualize the texture budget and reduce the budget so the game can run faster.

Rage would have been a fairly perfect solution if they'd have released it much less compressed, and they could have. The PS3 version could easily have been 100GB if id had cared to do it.

no. really. no. the PS3 does not have enough vram for that. not even close. it doesn't even have enough vram to use the relatively low res textures we have everywhere in every scene.

I never play games and really notice repeated textures, in Rage I constantly notice low res textures, they've attempted to solve a problem that for me never existed, and created a much larger one in doing so.

for you... and i appreciate that. i'm not saying people are wrong to criticise the low res textures in Rage. people aren't wrong to criticise the graphics in SOTC. or Crysis 2. or Halo 3. or whatever.

when it comes to technical things, it isn't a matter of opinion. but the people praising Rage are the ones that whether they could put their finger on it before or not, do think that the increase in texture variety more than makes up for the fact textures don't hold up at close distances.

but this tech can happen next gen at a resolution that you'll be happy with. that's all i'm getting at.

i still don't know why they didn't make so things you have to interact with close up models rather than part of the environment though. doors that you open and close look fine because they need to move, and therefor need to be models, but the door to leave the level looks like crap because it's just a texture, and to use it you have to get near enough to it to make it look fugly.

 

[Refreshment.01]

I disagree. I'm profoundly interested in the technical side of the visuals but I still find Rage to be a beautiful game. I recognize the artistry present even if it is often obscured by limitations of the engine, which, by the way, is quite impressive and ambitious regardless of its issues.

It wasn't an absolute claim from my part, so obviously some people would think other wise. But it's a tendency regarding Rage graphics, which isn't pushing many complex effects by today's real time rendering standards.

And for what you wrote we seem to be in the same page, the art saves the game more than the "megatextures"

 

[Wallach]

That's perfectly fine, SS2 does it like no other and i got the joy of playing it close to release, now a days it would be harder for me to get into it. But the fact that SS2 is the best game doesn't make Bioshock a bad game, doesn't make it common or undeserving of the praise it got.

It doesn't mean Bioshock is a bad game in the slightest. It does, though, make the gameplay derivative.

 

[plagiarize]

the art saves the game more than the "megatextures"

but the megatextures make that possible. the two go hand in hand. if Rage had been built in UE3, it would look better up close and personal, but in screens like Dark just posted, it wouldn't look nearly as good.

and 30 fps.

 

[StuBurns]

no. really. no. the PS3 does not have enough vram for that. not even close. it doesn't even have enough vram to use the relatively low res textures we have everywhere in every scene.

It makes no difference, that is the point of virtualized texturing. The vram texture budget isn't affected by the source files. Carmack has already said he wanted to ship a 50GB build on PS3, and intends to on Doom 4, that will go some way to fix the shitty texturing.