New Rage trailer

[Shanoa]

Today at QuakeCon, ID software showcased a new trailer of their upcoming game Rage showing a little bit of gameplay. You can see the trailer here.

[khartael]

You know, it doesn't look too bad. Could id Software finally be back on track?

[Shanoa]

Indeed, to me Rage is the prototype game to test the possibility of their new engine Tech 5 before working on Doom 4. Also saying that, on the website where they announced D2 for XBLA they mentionned in a side article that they'll present Doom 4 at QuakeCon 2010. So by that time Tech 5 will have vastly improved.

[khartael]

Archvile78 said:

Indeed, to me Rage is the prototype game to test the possibility of their new engine Tech 5 before working on Doom 4.

I am hoping for dear life that this is just what it -isn't-. id Software hasn't made a game that isn't just a dressed-up tech demo since Quake II.

[kristus]

Archvile78 said:

Indeed, to me Rage is the prototype game to test the possibility of their new engine Tech 5 before working on Doom 4.

They've been working on Doom4 for quite some time now.

[Use]

Regardless, they're really making an effort with this one. I'm excited about Rage and Doom4.

[Shanoa]

You can always count on ID to try something new.

[Super Jamie]

Rage looks pretty cool. Like some cross between an FPS like Doom, a post-apocalyptic RPG like Fallout, and a racing game like Powerslide. Will be nice if they can pull it off well, but I'm not holding my breath.

[exp(x)]

Wow, that actually looks decent.

[TheeXile]

It's like the DNF we never had.

[pavera]

That actually looks really great, I just hope my PC won't choke on all those graphics! I'd rather not have to play on a console...

[ArmouredBlood]

I like :D

[DuckReconMajor]

Meh

[the_filthy_beast]

I tihnk it looks great. Still sad thst there wasn't any Doom 4 media. Not even any real tid bits of info.:(

[kristus]

They have so much else going on that is more relevant now. No point in distracting people with a game that won't be out for years.

[Naked Snake]

Looks great, but somehow that guy got a magical lefty AK that doesn't exist ;-P

[printz]

Looks generic.

[destx]

khartael said:

id Software hasn't made a game that isn't just a dressed-up tech demo since Quake II.

Oh fuck off.

Every time a discussion about a new id game comes up some insipid cunt rolls out this dumbass comment. Often people say every single game id has made was just a tech demo. Quake 3 was a multiplayer masterpiece and Doom 3's downfalls had nothing to do with showing off the engine.

I really like the look of that trailer, the action looks good. Nice weapons and lots of monsters attacking at once. But I think it could go either way.

[Enjay]

Use3D said:

Regardless, they're really making an effort with this one. I'm excited about Rage and Doom4.

All the indications were that they had been "making an effort" with Doom3 too and that turned out to be pretty mediocre.

[Enjay]

destx said:

Oh fuck off.

Every time a discussion about a new id game comes up some insipid cunt rolls out this dumbass comment.

Who's Mr Grouchy then. ;)

Q3... Well, I'm not much of a multiplayer fan these days but I thought Q3 was pretty sucky compared to UT and even compared to the multiplayer capacity of previous id games. Game wise, it was pretty basic with minimal content (ie easy to produce) and much of the press was about "the engine can draw curves or it can do X, Y or Z". ie, the technical capabilities of the engine which was then licensed by other people who actually made games with it.

D3, again I disagree. I think a great many of the decisions in the game design and gameplay department were done to show off engine capabilities. Other elements which did not show off engine capabilites but which, if done better, would have made the game more interesting, were not given the attention they deserve. Also, not quite on the same line, many of D3's limitations were as a direct result of what the engine couldn't do.

However, tech demos or not (and frankly I don't really care what the reason is becaue it won't be me who is addressing the issues, if anyone is) id's recent games simply haven't been particularly good.

[Shanoa]

I came across something interesting on a website. Here's the copy/paste of the article.

'' The Xbox 360 and PC versions of id's Rage sport higher framerates than the PlayStation 3 version, the latest issue of Edge magazine reveals.

In a ten-page reveal in its latest issue, Edge writes that the Xbox 360 version of Rage - which uses id's new Tech 5 engine - matches the 60fps framerate of the PC version, while PS3 runs at just "20-30fps".

Update: id Software has responded in the aftermath of the Edge article, saying: "The Edge Magazine article has caused quite a ruckus. We are committed to ensuring that gamers on all platforms have a great RAGE experience," on its official Twitter feed. Update Ends.

It's not mentioned whether the PS3 framerate will be addressed by the game's eventual release.

"The PS3 lags a little bit behind in terms of getting the performance out of it," John Carmack told Edge. "The rasteriser is just a little bit slower - no two ways about that.

"The RSX is slower than what we have in the 360. The CPU is about the same, but the 360 makes it easier to split things off, and that's what a lot of the work has been, splitting it all into jobs on the PS3," he said. The PS3 edition was thought to be the most technically capable of the console pair, thanks to id being able to squeeze the gigantic shooter onto a single-player Blu-ray disc, compared to Xbox 360's four DVDs.

Update: Edge has posted further details from its article saying that Carmack is confident that the PS3 version will match that of all other supported platforms: "Everything is designed as a 60 hertz game. We expect this to be 60 hertz on every supported platform.

"The work remaining is getting it locked so there's never a dropped frame or a tear, but we're confident that we're going to get that."

Am i reading well? 4 disks? o_O Thats one huge game.

Source: Clicky

[Enjay]

printz said:

Looks generic.

Having now watched the video, I agree. Of course, generic can be fun but, yeah, the style and content of that video looked very predictable.

Interestingly, my son's friends sitting watching it beside me were all full of comments like "cool, that looks really detailed". :/

[scwiba]

It looks very Fallout, but it also looks downright fun. The prospect of regenerating health still worries me, but it may be good in spite of that.

[printz]

What's with the German flag next to the logo? :) Rage's A in particular looks like "anarchy". Also, Apophis was the one that hit Earth? Darn, 2036 (Anti)Christ's Resurrection awaits.

I saw a sentrybot equivalent in the video (he was spiderlike and was shooting ahead). So is the game related to Doom 3? Many of the mutants look just like humanoid mancubi or fat zombies from Doom 3, complete with leap attacks. The car chases resemble console action games :) but I wish I could opt for a cockpit mode. Finally, the fat man (finally with hair!) is slimy.

[kristus]

destx said:

Every time a discussion about a new id game comes up some insipid cunt rolls out this dumbass comment. Often people say every single game id has made was just a tech demo. Quake 3 was a multiplayer masterpiece and Doom 3's downfalls had nothing to do with showing off the engine.

Yes. Thank you.

Enjay said:

Q3... Well, I'm not much of a multiplayer fan these days but I thought Q3 was pretty sucky compared to UT and even compared to the multiplayer capacity of previous id games. Game wise, it was pretty basic with minimal content (ie easy to produce) and much of the press was about "the engine can draw curves or it can do X, Y or Z". ie, the technical capabilities of the engine which was then licensed by other people who actually made games with it.

The press is always mostly interested in the visuals. But that doesn't make the players stay around for 10 years. If it really was just a tech demo a you so claim, then why would they still bother with it in 2009? I think you should check out some demos of people playing the game for real before you pass such nonsense judgement.

Enjay said:

D3, again I disagree. I think a great many of the decisions in the game design and gameplay department were done to show off engine capabilities. Other elements which did not show off engine capabilites but which, if done better, would have made the game more interesting, were not given the attention they deserve. Also, not quite on the same line, many of D3's limitations were as a direct result of what the engine couldn't do.

Yeah, because it's not possible they made the engine and the game together during several years to make this game they had in mind? Ignoring to make things in the engine that they didn't think they need. Doom3 wasn't perfect. But saying the game engine just couldn't do it is pretty stupid since the games after it showed that it obviously could. It's hardly a matter of that when you make a game like Doom3. They set out a goal of what they wanted to do and they made it. And from what it's been said, they had to throw out a lot of stuff just to get it done some time. So I suppose that narrowed the result down even more. Finally, you don't work for 5 years on a tech demo. Especially, when you don't even really push the engine to buyers. Only one other company licensed the engine to use and that was 3d Realms for Prey.
You could say that it was just a failure of the engine's popularity. But Doom3 was still a very popular game. And the engine was sold a early as 2001, long before people had got their panties in a twist about Doom3 not being the exact same game as Doom1.
Also, engine licensing isn't id's bread and butter. They don't make nearly as much on that as selling the actual games.
IIRC Doom3 sold over 3.5 Million copies. That's a lot of licenses you got to sell before you meet that quota.

Enjay said:

However, tech demos or not (and frankly I don't really care what the reason is becaue it won't be me who is addressing the issues, if anyone is) id's recent games simply haven't been particularly good.

That's a matter of personal opinion. But it's just stupid to go and throw shit around that they just make tech demos. If you don't like their new games. Fine, I can definitely see where people can find issues with their newer games. (But I can see the same where people do it with their old ones too)
But please get over this nonsense about the tech demos. It really isn't realistic. Just stupid.

BTW (facetious ranting follows): If Id is just making tech demos. They must really love making them. Because for IdTech4, they made 4 now. And one of them even got an expansion pack tech demo. SO I suppose that makes 5. It's a shame they only sold the engine once in 2001. How will they survive? Good thing they got acquired by Zenimax so they can keep making tech demos.

IdTech5 should be better off. They're making two tech demos at the same time. They've really staffed up to do this, over a hundred people working at Id now.. Good thing, they tend to take so much time to get done.
Strangely, they were working on one Tech demo for about a year called Darkness. But then they dropped it because they probably didn't it was techy or demoy enough for their tech demo workshop.

[Scuba Steve]

Yeah, you could call their games "bad"... but that "tech demo" shit people spew is so fucking retarded. Tech demo has a very specific term and it doesn't apply to a 20+ hour game like Doom 3.

[Lord_Z]

This looks great! It's definitely not what I expected to see. I hope the game play is as good.

[Kaiser]

Scuba Steve said:

20+ hour game like Doom 3.

What?

[david_a]

I'm a little disappointed that the cars all seem to be dune buggies. I know it's probably more realistic, but a game like this is crying out for some massive 70's muscle cars like in the Mad Max series. I wouldn't be surprised if one of the first mods ends up being The Interceptor.

[Dco16]

I don't know about 20 hours, but Doom 3 is pretty damn long.