• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

New RAGE gameplay trailer from PAX

subversus said:
/goes to gamersyde
/checks framerate
/30 fps? pass
original.jpg

if you say so.....
 
I have this preordered on PS3 and I'm really looking forward to it. I just hope that version is up to snuff. It's kind of depressing that I won't be able to see this in 60fps until the game is out because of Bethesda's stubborness but I guess that'll just make it all the more glorious once I play.
 
DaBuddaDa said:
This shit is so dirty it makes Gears of War look like a field full of flowers. Damn the RAGE world is disgusting.

I love the beautiful, old school gib splatter everywhere.

Yep, but you wont find the same splatter twice
(hopping this is even close to true)
 
Wow quite a few problems with this video.

Either the person playing it is just bad and not a console player, or watching that guy turn like a zombie with his head locked onto his shoulders.....This is the new Oblivion horse that drives like a jeep imagery. Improve that body turning before you go down corridors, free up that neck from the main base of the body.

Then when he is killing the first big armoured boss guy going up the muddy incline, after hei s dead and walking over his body you look and it has the same exact tatoo and forhead style of the sheriff who gave you the mission....Please explain that to me. Are we lacking many different body styles that they are being recycled in your promo video already?

Very cool looking grahpics though the coloring hits the right tone I really liked that.

but i'm such a pervert when that girl in the helmet said hey tough guy I woulda stopped and tried to chat her up for the next 30 minutes and I know damn well this corridor closed world type of game won't have that kind of crazy distraction. So what I'm trying to say how is this game any different then a corridor rails shooter when you create all this imagery if I cannot stop to get distracted and check out something else besides going to that room to talk to the sheriff...I dunno typical of todays game we are on rails man.

and yeah my eyes were getting fuzzy when he was turning and the screen was blurring I did not like that one bit. Bad bad video imo.
 
I 'am in the same boat about the textures, what bothers me the most is that art-wise these are the most detailed and richest textures I have ever seen in a game, and It really annoys me me the fact that many of the details are lost because the low resolution. .
 
When I heard that first guy start talking, I was all "O_O I know that voice..." And I couldn't figure it out until someone said something in this topic about Campbell. Thanks Gaf.
 
omnomis said:
Are you joking? This video is the PC version where there isn't a compromise, and the textures look pretty insane. I personally think that in the actual console videos the textures look acceptable for 60fps though.

It looks jaggy as all fuck, I'd be willing to bet that was console footage.
 
It thought this was going to be a brainless shooter like Bulletstorm but you actually visit cities and receive quests there, kinda like in Borderlands, but minus the rpg elements.
 
thesoapster said:
This game looks great. Reminds me a bit of Bioshock, but combat looks sooo much better.

Spot on. I'm getting a massive 'Shock vibe in terms of combat, mostly due to things like setting traps and diverting enemy fire. I love that shit.

The shotgun seems a bit whimpy, though.
 
Yep. Lot's of bioshock reference. Looks fucking great.
Nice how they build up the hype for this game. It just keeps getting better.
I wasn't that interested at fist. Now it's a must have.
 
Looks absolutely killer.

I can forgive the lack of texture fidelity up close due to the sheer variety of the textures being presented. Most games with "high resolution textures" rely heavily on tiling to achieve that effect. Sure, they can place other layers on top to create the illusion of unique detail, but you can still see through that. Rage truly does offer real texture variety in a way we've never seen before.

What's most important is the quality of the overall scene. The effect is similar to Killzone 2 in that regard and I just find it to be beautiful on the whole. If this were 30 fps on consoles it would still be one of the best looking shooters out there but at 60?! Just insane. CoD doesn't even hold a constant 60 fps (not even close) but Carmack is claiming that this is a rock solid 60 fps 99% of the time at 1280x720.
 
Like I said in a previous thread: like Doom 3, Rage will be awesome and like Doom 3, it will be underrated as hell.
 
Doom 3 is shit, but I am concerned about how well this is going to sell. I'm sure it's not going to bomb, but I can't imagine it'll have been worth doing. They haven't shipped a game is a very long time.
 
It's a very bad FPS, but what it actually is, is a good horror game. And I think being a bad shooter is kind of required for that actually, I've never played a mechanically great game that is scary, it's too empowering. FEAR for example, outclasses Doom 3 in combat and encounter design, but it's never scary.

Shit might be a tad harsh, I'm not one for the horror genre in any medium, and the compromises to gameplay for it to work in gaming is pretty extreme.
 
StuBurns said:
It's a very bad FPS, but what it actually is, is a good horror game. And I think being a bad shooter is kind of required for that actually, I've never played a mechanically great game that is scary, it's too empowering. FEAR for example, outclasses Doom 3 in combat and encounter design, but it's never scary.

Shit might be a tad harsh, I'm not one for the horror genre in any medium, and the compromises to gameplay for it to work in gaming is pretty extreme.
A tad harsh? FEAR is a game that FEELS like dog shit. The animation and appearance of the weapon in the players hand is a joke. It looks absolutely terrible.

Doom 3, on the other hand, FEELS incredible. The feeling of actually firing your weapon is extremely well done. Blasting an Imp with a shotgun at close range is always a blast.

Doom 3 has a lot of design problems to be sure, but it still plays very well.

I absolutely hate FEAR, however, but I won't suggest that the game is terrible. I think it FEELS awful to play, but I can see why some people would love it.
 
dark10x said:
A tad harsh? FEAR is a game that FEELS like dog shit. The animation and appearance of the weapon in the players hand is a joke. It looks absolutely terrible.

Doom 3, on the other hand, FEELS incredible. The feeling of actually firing your weapon is extremely well done. Blasting an Imp with a shotgun at close range is always a blast.

Doom 3 has a lot of design problems to be sure, but it still plays very well.

I absolutely hate FEAR, however, but I won't suggest that the game is terrible. I think it FEELS awful to play, but I can see why some people would love it.
I can only weep for you.
 
Game looks great. At first I didnt really give a crap about it but the more media I see the more im intrigued. Will probably get it next year when its half the price.
 
I'm really starting to see the benefit of the megatexture technology now. While everyone else is harping on texture resolution, I am astounded at the amount of variety and detail that is packed into every single little nook and cranny in the scenes. It's visually overwhelming and contains a level of unheard of texture customization.

I'll take endless, unique environments filled with specific details over loads of endlessly repeating super-high-res-but-still-fake-looking-because-its-a-fucking-videogame textures.
 
Is Doom 3 really that good still? I tried replaying it a bit and it was kinda meh, although I didn't get very far. The enemies take a retarded amount of bullets to kill, annoyingly. SFX for the guns are pretty poor too, so the gunplay doesn't feel all that great to me either. :P
 
jett said:
Is Doom 3 really that good still? I tried replaying it a bit and it was kinda meh, although I didn't get very far. The enemies take a retarded amount of bullets to kill, annoyingly. SFX for the guns are pretty poor too, so the gunplay doesn't feel all that great to me either. :P
Install the expansion and play till you get the double-barrel. It's like in the second level and doesn't take too long to get.

Also, the initial weapons in D3 are kinda on the weak side.
 
Loved the trailer. I've always been sold on the game but now it's a lock.

And those visuals at 60fps... alot of other developers should be taking notes.
 
Phonomezer said:
Loved the trailer. I've always been sold on the game but now it's a lock.

And those visuals at 60fps... alot of other developers should be taking notes.
Problem is...id is rarely at development conventions.I'm sure alot of devs would find alot of meaningful stuff if they were to release tech papers.
 
jett said:
Is Doom 3 really that good still? I tried replaying it a bit and it was kinda meh, although I didn't get very far. The enemies take a retarded amount of bullets to kill, annoyingly. SFX for the guns are pretty poor too, so the gunplay doesn't feel all that great to me either. :P
If the enemies are taking too many bullets, you're playing it wrong. :P

Seriously, you should be able to down most enemies very easily. One shotgun blast should be enough to take out all of the base enemies, for instance, as long as you land the shot properly.
 
Stallion Free said:
Install the expansion and play till you get the double-barrel. It's like in the second level and doesn't take too long to get.

Also, the initial weapons in D3 are kinda on the weak side.

I guess I'll give it another try. Visually it still holds up, so there's that.

dark10x said:
Seriously, you should be able to down most enemies very easily. One shotgun blast should be enough to take out all of the base enemies, for instance, as long as you land the shot properly.

Nah it was taking forever to down those things.
 
I remember being burnt by Doom 3 the game. It worked only in screenshots.

FPSes have thankfully gone places since and id could obviously, never take them anywhere. They might make the best engines, but yet to see a good ride from them.

Also, does this game have no melee at all?
 
Really glad to hear that they will still be working on the PC release all the way until the steam release to try and improve the quality (from the linked QuakeCon address posted in this thread). I hope that there is another layer of higher LOD texture data that eventually is made available for PC players that shows up what the artists originally drew (or as damn close to it as is feasible) - I appreciate that games need to target the consoles because of the size of the market, but it seems like a real shame to waste some of the potential of the PC.
 
mhayze said:
Really glad to hear that they will still be working on the PC release all the way until the steam release to try and improve the quality (from the linked QuakeCon address posted in this thread). I hope that there is another layer of higher LOD texture data that eventually is made available for PC players that shows up what the artists originally drew (or as damn close to it as is feasible) - I appreciate that games need to target the consoles because of the size of the market, but it seems like a real shame to waste some of the potential of the PC.
Actually the potential is as limited by the PC, in fact given the bluray drive, the PS3 should have the best textures in this case, they just didn't want, or have the time, to do so.
 
mhayze said:
Really glad to hear that they will still be working on the PC release all the way until the steam release to try and improve the quality (from the linked QuakeCon address posted in this thread). I hope that there is another layer of higher LOD texture data that eventually is made available for PC players that shows up what the artists originally drew (or as damn close to it as is feasible) - I appreciate that games need to target the consoles because of the size of the market, but it seems like a real shame to waste some of the potential of the PC.
I don't think that's the case at all. They needed to be realistic with file sizes in order to ship a disc and be reasonable with the standard digital download. It seems that their textures require an enormous amount of space. If this were PC only, I don't think we'd see all that much of a difference.
 
omnomis said:
Are you joking? This video is the PC version where there isn't a compromise, and the textures look pretty insane. I personally think that in the actual console videos the textures look acceptable for 60fps though.
Well it's not the upcoming high res texture pack, so there are actually still some sacrifices. Apparently they will be eventually releasing a true HD texture pack for PC owners. I'm sure it will require a TON of VRAM though.

StuBurns said:
Actually the potential is as limited by the PC, in fact given the bluray drive, the PS3 should have the best textures in this case, they just didn't want, or have the time, to do so.
Actually the blu ray was a limiting factor as well. Lots of room but slow or something like that. Carmack has spoken about his dislike for Bluray in the past.
 
Ulchie said:
Well it's not the upcoming high res texture pack, so there are actually still some sacrifices. Apparently they will be eventually releasing a true HD texture pack for PC owners. I'm sure it will require a TON of VRAM though.
There is a potential 'texture pack' coming for a level as a test. Not for the complete game. And it shouldn't take any additional memory if my understanding of virtualized textures is right.
Ulchie said:
Actually the blu ray was a limiting factor as well. Lots of room but slow or something like that. Carmack has spoken about his dislike for Bluray in the past.
Those two things aren't connected. He doesn't like it because it's slow seeking. He blamed a lack of time on not producing higher res assets for PS3. Which I think is kind of bullshit, because he's been talking about doing it for like three years.
 
StuBurns said:
Actually the potential is as limited by the PC, in fact given the bluray drive, the PS3 should have the best textures in this case, they just didn't want, or have the time, to do so.

The PS3 is limited by the Blu Ray drive speed and also only supports textures up to 4096x4096. Both PC and 360 support up to 8k x 8k (megatexture requires holding a very large texture in memory).
 
NBtoaster said:
The PS3 is limited by the Blu Ray drive speed and also only supports textures up to 4096x4096. Both PC and 360 support up to 8k x 8k (megatexture requires holding a very large texture in memory).
Megatextures require a very small memory footprint, that is the whole point of the concept. It's true the PS3 doesn't support 8k by 8k textures, but all three platforms will be getting the same assets, on PC because id don't want a game on 'a stack of eight DVDs', but Carmack did specifically say he wished he'd had used the complete bluray for less compressed assets.

And actually, I imagined that's what would have happened, and that would have been an alt version on PC for those who wanted it. It's what id did with Rage on iPhone. There are two versions, one heavily compressed to save space, one not. Carmack has already said Doom 4 will use the complete bluray disc though I believe, so we should see a potential 'high res' PC version next time hopefully.
 
Top Bottom