id software's Tech 5 powered game 'RAGE' has the best-lookingreal-time visuals I've ever seen

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/37824.html?type=wmv

RAGE looks just completely awesome.

Two reasons why it looks so good, IMO:

1.) RAGE has a very pre-rendered CGI-look to it, even if it's only
comparable to older, low-budget CGI. Yet RAGE is 100% real-time.
Blows away anything I've seen using Unreal Engine 3 or even Gears of
War 2 on the upgraded UE3.

2.) RAGE runs at 60 frames per second from the start, unlike say,
Crysis. id made the (right) decision to go with a 60fps engine after
scrapping a different prototype engine designed around 30fps.


Amazingly, RAGE will look and run almost exactly the same across all 4
platforms:
PC - Xbox 360 - PS3 - Mac


I can only imagine what a RAGE 2 might look like on id's next-next
generation Tech 6 engine, for next-gen PC/MAC/Consoles. By then I am
sure id will have achieved graphics that are even more CGI-like.

Even before RAGE is released, I have to thank:

1.) id software & John Carmack
2.) Nvidia & ATI for their awesome graphics processing units
3.) IBM & Intel for their awesome CPUs

On Aug 9, 7:16*pm, "JLC" <jc@nospam> wrote:
> "parallax-scroll" <parallaxscr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2254b42e-42cf-4c00-bd8b-...>http://www.gametrailers.com/player/37824.html?type=wmv
>
> > Amazingly, RAGE will look and run almost exactly the same across all 4
> > platforms:
> > PC - Xbox 360 - PS3 - Mac
>
> How can any company/person say something like this and expect to be beloved?
> The same on the consoles OK, but on the PC and Mac? That's just plain
> ridicules considering how many configurations there are on the PC side of
> gaming. JLC

Beloved? I don't think anyone in the group is beloved. The best
standing you'll likely achieve here is "mildly despised".

On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 14:53:14 -0700 (PDT), parallax-scroll
<> wrote:

>http://www.gametrailers.com/player/37824.html?type=wmv
>
>RAGE looks just completely awesome.
>
>Two reasons why it looks so good, IMO:
>
>1.) RAGE has a very pre-rendered CGI-look to it, even if it's only
>comparable to older, low-budget CGI. Yet RAGE is 100% real-time.
>Blows away anything I've seen using Unreal Engine 3 or even Gears of
>War 2 on the upgraded UE3.
>
>2.) RAGE runs at 60 frames per second from the start, unlike say,
>Crysis. id made the (right) decision to go with a 60fps engine after
>scrapping a different prototype engine designed around 30fps.
>
>
>Amazingly, RAGE will look and run almost exactly the same across all 4
>platforms:
>PC - Xbox 360 - PS3 - Mac
>

Nope.

Not on the Xbox360.

See:-

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/53976

Seems as if Microsoft's decision to stick with antique hardware is
finally catching up with them. Well, Rage is due to ship circa 2010,
so Microsoft has plenty of time to fix the problem with a new console
-- Xbox720?? Fully backward compatible with existing Xbox360 titles,
of course.

And current Xbox360 owners will have plenty of time to shovel their
hardware on to Ebay.

John Lewis

( Disclaimer: I own none of the current generation of consoles, and
have zero intent of purchasing any before at least 2010)
>
>I can only imagine what a RAGE 2 might look like on id's next-next
>generation Tech 6 engine, for next-gen PC/MAC/Consoles. By then I am
>sure id will have achieved graphics that are even more CGI-like.
>
>Even before RAGE is released, I have to thank:
>
>1.) id software & John Carmack
>2.) Nvidia & ATI for their awesome graphics processing units
>3.) IBM & Intel for their awesome CPUs

On 10 Aug, 06:29, john....@verizon.net (John Lewis) wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 14:53:14 -0700 (PDT), parallax-scroll
>
>
>
>
>
> <parallaxscr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >http://www.gametrailers.com/player/37824.html?type=wmv
>
> >RAGE looks just completely awesome.
>
> >Two reasons why it looks so good, IMO:
>
> >1.) RAGE has a very *pre-rendered CGI-look to it, even if it's only
> >comparable to older, low-budget CGI. Yet RAGE is 100% real-time.
> >Blows away anything I've seen using Unreal Engine 3 or even Gears of
> >War 2 on the upgraded UE3.
>
> >2.) RAGE runs at 60 frames per second from the start, unlike say,
> >Crysis. * id made the (right) decision to go with a 60fps engine after
> >scrapping a different prototype engine designed around 30fps.
>
> >Amazingly, RAGE will look and run almost exactly the same across all 4
> >platforms:
> >PC - Xbox 360 - PS3 - Mac
>
> Nope.
>
> Not on the Xbox360.
>
> See:-
>
> http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/53976
>
> Seems as if Microsoft's decision to stick with antique hardware is
> finally catching up with them. Well, Rage is due to ship circa 2010,
> so Microsoft has plenty of time to fix the problem with a new console
> -- Xbox720?? Fully backward compatible with existing *Xbox360 titles,
> of course.
>
> And current Xbox360 owners will have plenty of time to shovel their
> hardware on to Ebay.

How many PC owners will still be playing on the same hardware they
bought in 05/06 by then? I don't see the difference, all hardware
becomes obselete. No need to be so elitist about it.

"parallax-scroll" <> wrote in message
news:2254b42e-42cf-4c00-bd8b-...
> http://www.gametrailers.com/player/37824.html?type=wmv
>
> RAGE looks just completely awesome.
>
> Two reasons why it looks so good, IMO:
>
> 1.) RAGE has a very pre-rendered CGI-look to it, even if it's only
> comparable to older, low-budget CGI. Yet RAGE is 100% real-time.
> Blows away anything I've seen using Unreal Engine 3 or even Gears of
> War 2 on the upgraded UE3.
>
> 2.) RAGE runs at 60 frames per second from the start, unlike say,
> Crysis. id made the (right) decision to go with a 60fps engine after
> scrapping a different prototype engine designed around 30fps.






but what's the point if the game turns out to be a FPS ? - they all look the
same to me with the same aims.



--
Gareth.

that fly...... is your magic wand....

On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 01:39:20 -0700 (PDT), ManBearPig
<> wrote:

>On 10 Aug, 06:29, john....@verizon.net (John Lewis) wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 14:53:14 -0700 (PDT), parallax-scroll
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <parallaxscr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >http://www.gametrailers.com/player/37824.html?type=wmv
>>
>> >RAGE looks just completely awesome.
>>
>> >Two reasons why it looks so good, IMO:
>>
>> >1.) RAGE has a very *pre-rendered CGI-look to it, even if it's only
>> >comparable to older, low-budget CGI. Yet RAGE is 100% real-time.
>> >Blows away anything I've seen using Unreal Engine 3 or even Gears of
>> >War 2 on the upgraded UE3.
>>
>> >2.) RAGE runs at 60 frames per second from the start, unlike say,
>> >Crysis. * id made the (right) decision to go with a 60fps engine after
>> >scrapping a different prototype engine designed around 30fps.
>>
>> >Amazingly, RAGE will look and run almost exactly the same across all 4
>> >platforms:
>> >PC - Xbox 360 - PS3 - Mac
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>> Not on the Xbox360.
>>
>> See:-
>>
>> http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/53976
>>
>> Seems as if Microsoft's decision to stick with antique hardware is
>> finally catching up with them. Well, Rage is due to ship circa 2010,
>> so Microsoft has plenty of time to fix the problem with a new console
>> -- Xbox720?? Fully backward compatible with existing *Xbox360 titles,
>> of course.
>>
>> And current Xbox360 owners will have plenty of time to shovel their
>> hardware on to Ebay.
>
>How many PC owners will still be playing on the same hardware they
>bought in 05/06 by then? I don't see the difference, all hardware
>becomes obselete. No need to be so elitist about it.

Actually while I didn't buy this PC in May of 06 (a few months after),
2 years later, with no upgrades whatsoever it still tears through all
the games I play, maxxed out, at smooth framerates, except for Crysis
which I have to bump down a bit to play smoothly enough for my
discriminating tastes. Granted it was at the upper end of the price
scale at the time, but CPU speeds have not grown phenomenally since
the Core2Duo chips were introduced, quad-core still doesn't add much
over dual-core in most games, and only the most recent nVidia cards
have provided enough gains over the 8800 GTX to get my attention.

I can see myself potentially doing a video upgrade between now and
2010, but otherwise there is a very good chance I will still be using
this same PC, otherwise unmodified, in 2 years.

I'm usually only prompted to buy a video card when a game comes out
that's over-the-top fun, but just doesn't play well enough on my
current system. When that happens I tend to get another couple of
years out of a system.

But, from what I can tell that time is still a bit in the future. The
trend I think we are seeing now is games are being written that can
run "well enough" on an Xbox 360, which means they are ultra-smooth
and with better graphics on the PC. I guess that's one favorable
outcome (maybe the only one) of the trend of games being written for
all platforms.

On Aug 10, 4:43 am, "The dog from that film you saw"
<d...@removethisbitbtinternet.com> wrote:
> "parallax-scroll" <parallaxscr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2254b42e-42cf-4c00-bd8b-...
>
> >http://www.gametrailers.com/player/37824.html?type=wmv
>
> > RAGE looks just completely awesome.
>
> > Two reasons why it looks so good, IMO:
>
> > 1.) RAGE has a very pre-rendered CGI-look to it, even if it's only
> > comparable to older, low-budget CGI. Yet RAGE is 100% real-time.
> > Blows away anything I've seen using Unreal Engine 3 or even Gears of
> > War 2 on the upgraded UE3.
>
> > 2.) RAGE runs at 60 frames per second from the start, unlike say,
> > Crysis. id made the (right) decision to go with a 60fps engine after
> > scrapping a different prototype engine designed around 30fps.
>
> but what's the point if the game turns out to be a FPS ? - they all look the
> same to me with the same aims.

Id decided to do a driving game this time. It is first and foremost a
driving/racing game, but will have FPS elements.

In regards to the 360, if Id is forced to do stuff to get it to fit on
only 2 DVDs, due to Microsoft's cost per disk issue, the 360 version
will end up looking worse.

Well, apparently according to Id now, they did manage to get around
the memory issues regarding the 360 and Carmack is now complaining
about Microsoft's licensing issues per disk.

- Rich