Rage: Settings Patch/Carmack On PC Probs

By Alec Meer on October 9th, 2011 at 11:48 am.

Looks lovely... from a distance

id’s legendary robo-brain John Carmack has broken the developer’s rather inadvisable silence about the mucky state of Rage at launch on PC last week. Apology? Nah? Accepting blame? Nah. It’s all ATI’s fault that id released a game designed for future rather than existent drivers, he says. Oh, and the reason the game, once working, is still not as super-shiny as we might have hoped is because “We do not see the PC as the leading platform for games.” Here we go again.

In happier news, the first Rage patch is out, and thank the god of textures, it introduces a much-needed graphics settings menu to the game.

All this and more was told to Kotaku, by the way, whose piece here you should read for the full picture of the C-talk.

Here’s his take on the driver issue:

“The driver issues at launch have been a real cluster !@#$. We were quite happy with the performance improvements that we had made on AMD hardware in the months before launch… We knew that all older AMD drivers, and some Nvidia drivers would have problems with the game, but we were running well in-house on all of our test systems. When launch day came around and the wrong driver got released, half of our PC customers got a product that basically didn’t work…

“Unfortunately, we have had video driver issues that have caused problems and frustrations with our PC fans. Everyone at id Software is very upset by these issues which are mostly out of our control. We are working with both AMD/ATI and Nvidia to help them identify and fix the issues with their drivers.”

OK – but I still don’t understand why the driver wasn’t released before the game, given some version of it must have been used in-house at iD to develop/test Rage on. I still don’t understand why id and Bethesda were happy for a game to launch knowing that 50% of their PC players probably would’t be able to play it. I don’t understand why they didn’t do their best to ensure it was at least playable on older ATI drivers, even if some whizz-bang was missing. Obviously, I’m being an armchair analyst not privy to the real inner workings of what went down, but at the very least this could have been communicated a whole lot better than it was.

Then there’s the other bit, where Carmack admits the entirely unsurprising news that consoles are now more important to id than PCs. I’m not irked because it’s to be expected – if expensive games want expensive promotion, they need to have consoles front and centre in their mind. However, when a game really takes off on PC it can huge, wildly huge – and I do think too many companies see it as too much of a gamble and don’t invest as much as they could/should to seriously increase the chance of high returns. Battlefield 3 is going to be very interesting in that regard.

Anyway, here’s Carmack’s platform-mulling:

“You can choose to design a game around the specs of a high-end PC and make console versions that fail to hit the design point, or design around the specs of the consoles and have a high-end PC provide incremental quality improvements. We chose the latter. We do not see the PC as the leading platform for games. That statement will enrage some people, but it is hard to characterize it otherwise; both console versions will have larger audiences than the PC version.

“A high end PC is nearly 10 times as powerful as a console, and we could unquestionably provide a better experience if we chose that as our design point and we were able to expend the same amount of resources on it. Nowadays most of the quality of a game comes from the development effort put into it, not the technology it runs on. A game built with a tenth the resources on a platform 10 times as powerful would be an inferior product in almost all cases.”

I agree with him, broadly, for what it’s worth, but I don’t think it excuses the sloppy state of Rage’s launch or irritations such as how lousy some of the game’s textures are close up or the mouse moving at twice the speed in menus. Is it really not possible to do a bit more incremental PC work after making the console version tip-top than they actually did here?

Hopefully, id are indeed on the case now – a patch landed last night which added the much-missed graphics options to the game. It’s basically a friendlier way of activating the config file tweaks people came up with last week, so if you’ve held off from doing that from fear and confusion, let Steam update Rage now and you’ll find easy options for texture caching (to fix the pop-in), anisotropic filtering (to fix the blurry distant textures) and Vsync (to semi-fix the screen tearing). Hopefully there’ll be more patches with more options further down the line.

Full patch notes here.

I should add that, since tweaking and driver-fiddling, I’ve been enjoying Rage an awful lot. As I said here.

__________________

« | »

, , .

191 Comments »

  1. byjimini says:

    Once again, the release date for PC games only refers to the date it’ll be available, not the date that it’ll actually be fit to play.

    See From Dust, Civ5, et-al for details.

    • Christian says:

      Well…see DX:HR, Just Cause 2 or The Witcher 2 on how this rule does not apply to all games..

    • Rii says:

      Don’t know about JC2 but both DX:HR and Witcher 2 were in dire need of patching on release…

    • Unaco says:

      I wouldn’t say ‘dire need’, for either of them. Both had some issues, but they weren’t the show stopper, game breaker type issues that RAGE has had… the games were both perfectly playable for the vast majority. TW2 had some issues for SLI/Crossfire (but a lot of games have those issues on release), and the DRM slapped on at the last minute by the publisher caused some problems. DXHR had poor performance for a small number of users. But neither of these was the same as anyone-with-an-ATI-card-is-going-to-get-a-migraine like it was with RAGE.

    • 12kill4 says:

      Good work Unaco; I was just about to ask what problems DX:HR had at launch, and in the time it took to refresh after logging in to RPS- your reply popped up and completely answered my query.

    • xGryfter says:

      That’s funny because I played DX:HR, Just Cause 2 and The Witcher 2 from day one without any problems.

      If your going to play games on the PC expect to have issues, especially if you use ATI, that’s just the nature of the beast. Just because you may be unlucky enough to be experiencing said issues doesn’t mean the game is a buggy mess it just means the developer didn’t have infinite time and money to test infinite configurations. I’m not saying this is always the case but a lot of the time it is.

    • frenz0rz says:

      Uhm, Witcher 2 was not perfect on release. The game absolutely did not support 4:3 and 5:4 aspect ratios, so my poor little 1280×1024 monitor had literally 1/4 of the screen taken up by ugly black bars. This most definately impacted upon my otherwise brilliant experience with the game, and a fix was not patched in until just over two months later.

    • Unaco says:

      @frenzorz…

      I’m not saying TW2 was perfect and that it didn’t have issues, nor am I saying DXHR didn’t have issues. Both games needed, and benefitted from, patches… But neither game was in ‘dire need’ of a patch. Neither was unplayable for a large number of users without the patch, as it appears RAGE is. The black bars weren’t a show stopper… an inconvenience, yes… distracting from the experience, yes… but I don’t think they prevented large numbers of people from playing, and enjoying, the game.

    • Lord Byte says:

      And Civ 5 still has the god-awful city-advisor bug that certain cities, with anything else than food focus, will starve themselves, even though you can manually set them to not to (that means every time a citizen arrives you have to go through all your cities, every time you want to change focus, same deal…
      And if you want the AI to be any decent you need Thal’s mod (which also balances out a lot of the game) http://civmodding.wordpress.com/

    • ColOfNature says:

      Just Cause 2 still has this issue, apparently introduced in a patch, that causes it to CTD at random, fairly short intervals, which only seems to affect a small number of us, and which I still occasionally bitch and moan about because I really would like to play that game.

    • aircool says:

      I’m still waiting for them (who are they? The Wizards!) to fix BF2…

    • 1R0N_W00K13 says:

      The Witcher 2 DEFINITELY needed patching immediately. I couldn’t run it until the third day after release; it physically refused to run until they patched it.

    • jdwohlever says:

      I think Old Mr Carmack better re-think his “PC isn’t a viable form of gaming” part a bit. Some of us are old enough to remember where he got his start, what made him a superstar. Without us “nonviable” PC gamers, you Mr Carmacky-tacky, wouldn’t have a job or a history worth repeating.
      So take your elitist cow feces and ingest them into your mouth, if you can get around your foot that chewing on as well. Console gamers, for the MOST part, are very non-loyal to a brand, developer or game, much less a developer who hasn’t produced anything dazzling in over 10 years.
      So before you go snuggling up to the easy console crowd, just remember, they’d soon as stick a shank in your gut then let you call their platform any names. Not out of loyalty of the platform, mind you, but out of ego, which you seem to me in plenty of supply of.

  2. CaspianRoach says:

    Rage is a good game but I found it surprisingly short. Only 10 hours of gameplay with all secondary missions and races? On 20 GBs? When did the games start to be so big?

    And I don’t know if it’s me who’s that good but the game seemed pretty easy even on ‘hard’ difficulty. It felt like a direct copy of a console shooter, and you know how much easy their kind becomes when you throw that certain piece of plastic away and take a real controller in your hands.

    • StingingVelvet says:

      I’m at 8 hours and am still in the first half wasteland, so 10 hours to do everything is quite misleading.

    • CaspianRoach says:

      Well not really, second half has only about 5 or 6 missions or so and that’s it, game over. I really thought that they made about 3-4 big mission hubs with tons of missions when I saw the game size.

    • rebb says:

      Megatextures.
      They’re mega.

      How long was The Force Unleashed btw ?
      I never got it because it was so huge.
      About 25gb iirc, two years ago.

    • StingingVelvet says:

      @rebb

      The Force Unleashed was that big because it used uncompressed 1080p videos for the cutscenes, which I wish more games did. People complained about the size so the sequel used heavily compressed 720p videos instead, like most games.

      People complain about compressed videos and they complain about file size when you go the other way. Yet another example of how you can’t win with everyone.

    • Devenger says:

      StingingVelvet: there’s always the option of not being so heavily reliant on cutscenes. I haven’t played The Force Unleashed, but would you say that every cutscene was necessary (and couldn’t be rendered well enough in-engine)?

      Games which don’t have the option to employ pre-rendered cutscenes in a lot of circumstances (like Mass Effect, since the player’s character can be customised in appearance as well as capabilities) seem to do just fine. Is this prohibitively expensive for most games? I don’t know.

    • Dexton says:

      @Devenger Force Unleashed 1&2 had incredibly detailed movie-like cutscenes, the sum of which added up to a small Star Wars film in itself, and one probably better than the recent movies.

    • Geralt says:

      I had about 18 hours logged in my save file when I finished the game. I did do all the side quests that I found, played a bunch of mini-games and completed all the races. I also tried to loot everything.

      Sure it might feel like a short game if you just run from mission to mission until you’re done. But for someone like it me who likes to take his time and see everything there is to see then it’s definitely not the same length as your average shooter. I personally was satisfied with the games length.

    • LostViking says:

      I’m with you Geralt. I also spent 18 hours on my first play-through, and I am pretty sure I will be back for seconds.
      The shooting elements are just so good I can see myself playing the game many times over, even though there are no different classes to chose, different story lines to follow or anything like that to increase replayability.

    • ASBO says:

      @StingingVelvet : I don’t think so. Uncompressed 1080p runs to approximately 7 GB/min.

  3. sk2k says:

    Oh, it runs completly smooth now here (Radeon 5850) and the texture pop in is gone for me. Nice surprise.

    EDIT: Banners still flickering.

    • JiminyJickers says:

      Can you play Minecraft still? After I installed the Rage AMD drivers, a bunch of my games, including Minecraft, won’t start.

      I just bought my 6870 not that long ago, but may need get an nVidia card again.

    • dr.castle says:

      I have a 5850 with the Rage performance driver update installed and Minecraft runs fine for me.

  4. StingingVelvet says:

    Consoles do sell more, way more in some cases, so it’s hard to argue with them being the focus. That said there is a difference between a copy and past quickly to the PC and making a real PC version, and from what I have read recently PC sales have risen again to a point where we should be getting more of the latter and less of the former.

    It’s really not hard to please PC customers. We want a healthy options menu, a modified UI and mod tools if the genre lends itself to them. Do those three things along with healthy quality assurance and you would be amazed how well the game will sell on PC. And since it’s mostly digital now on PC, that’s direct profit.

    So… yes, it’s not the lead platform, he’s right. That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be treated with respect. Battlefield Bad Company 2 was, Fallout New Vegas was, Dragon Age was, Batman Arkham Asylum was… all of them had tremendous sales and customer satisfaction success on PC.

    • LostViking says:

      I totally agree. I don’t really care if the graphics is held back a little by it being a console port, but is it really that hard to make a UI that works with keyboard and mouse?
      I would imagine it would take a couple of programmers a couple of weeks to implement, assuming they have made their engine fairly flexible (which I would assume when JC is involved).

      Assigning weapons and items to the quick slot thing in Rage is the perfect example of what happens when you don’t make any changes at all. Using a mouse/keyboard it is annoyingly counterintuitive.
      The other games everyone compares them to, Fallout 3 and Borderlands, have similar UI issues.

    • Nesetalis says:

      I think they are fools for bending will to the console… highly outdated hardware that doesn’t look to be updated any time soon.
      As for the console porting bit… the game played alright, but god I hated the driving controls, still have hand cramps from trying to use boost while holding w and a or d to turn.. :| plus i had to get a different keyboard, because NOT EVERY KEYBOARD HAS N-KEY ROLLOVER. seriously guys, you can NOT expect the average keyboard to be able to hold more than 2 keys at once.

      my other complaint, they expect an X-box controller… I don’t have one, instead i have a generic gamepad and a PS2 controller hooked up to my computer.. neither would work and I couldn’t bind the buttons.

    • Big Daddy Dugger says:

      @ nesetalis you should set up motionjoy, it allows you to use a ps3/ps2/generic gamepad in any game that supports xbox controllers or generic gamepads. It only takes about 5 minutes to get it ready and it’s not hard to use once you have it set up you just choose emulate 360 controller and hit enable.

      http://www.hardcoreware.net/how-to-playstation-3-controller-64-bit-windows-7-vista/ is the guide i used to set it up

    • roxahris says:

      “Assigning weapons and items to the quick slot thing in Rage is the perfect example of what happens when you don’t make any changes at all. Using a mouse/keyboard it is annoyingly counterintuitive.”
      Why not use the number keys, then? Most, if not all of the weapons are on them. And what’s so unintuitive about binding items to the function keys?

    • psyk says:

      “I think they are fools for bending will to the console… highly outdated hardware that doesn’t look to be updated any time soon.”

      This is where pc games are going untill the next consoles are released (I don’t see any advances while the current buyers are around) so I would get used to it.

    • InternetBatman says:

      I wouldn’t say Arkham Asylum was a great port. It was a good game that wasn’t buggy, but that’s it. I had a hard time in some spots with a mouse and keyboard. It played like a console game that happened to be running on a PC.

    • Strontium Mike says:

      Having just finished this on the 360 I’d say the UI is just badly designed, it’s awkward and clunky with a controller.

  5. RvLeshrac says:

    The problem is that they keep claiming that the “wrong” driver was released. The hell does that even *mean*? Why, exactly, are developers demanding driver releases? They should be working within the framework of the existing drivers, unless they’re working under AMD/nVidia.

    This is like an aftermarket auto parts manufacturer complaining that Ford released the wrong car.

    • Sami H says:

      Congrats, you know nothing. Developers – especially when pushing new tech – work very closer with driver manufacturers to ensure that it runs as fast as possible and it works. Something new like megatexturing which will absolutely punish uploads and transfers to the graphics card will need a lot of testing, as most if not all of the drivers prior to this game would not have been written with this kind of usage in mind.

      Drivers are not perfect, and they are by no means one size fits all. A developer who doesn’t work with driver makers to ensure their game runs as perfectly as possible is a bad developer.

    • RvLeshrac says:

      So, then, you’re saying that the existing DX9/DX10/11 tech was insufficient to handle RAGE despite it being developed simultaneously for the pre-DX10 360 on which it works perfectly?

      That’s inane, at best. You can argue that there are more features in use on the PC version, but that leads us back to it being *entirely* iD’s fault, as they failed to implement any video options. Had there been a way to disable the broken functionality, people would still be complaining–but at least they’d be able to play the damn game.

      Megatexturing has been around for 5+ years now. We’ve been using it for nearly that long, with no issues. Yet, suddenly, drivers “can’t handle” it?

    • Sami H says:

      Console manufacturers have 1 set of hardware (okay, with revisions maybe 2) to develop drivers for. You can test it against that one configuration. That, and console manufacturers also ship updates for their consoles to add new stuff and fix it if need be. PCs are completely different – you have every permutation of CPU, GPU, Ram, Motherboard, OS, etc to deal with.

      Megatexturing has been around for years, but it has never been used on this scale. idTech4 games used it for terrain and the maps (in comparison to Rage) weren’t that huge. IdTech5 uses it for absolutely everything. You’ve gone from having to manage 1 surface (and with terrain, there are plenty of hacks available to determine which chunks to load) to running the entire game through it, and having to make the system generic.

      If id had been working to a set of ATI drivers which they were assured would be released for the game, you really can’t blame them for being rather annoyed when ATI dropped the ball on releasing them. It takes far too much time and resources to test against every driver, which is why most devs suggest you upgrade to the latest ones when their game ships (as it would’ve been tested against them while the drivers were still being built).

      I will agree – much like with everyone else – that even if it all worked perfectly having no graphics options was a dumb idea for a PC game in general, let alone something like this which is so performance intensive that sometimes its best to let the users decide what trade-offs they prefer.

      Interestingly, I’m wondering how well this game runs (in regards to texture loads) on SSD compared to regular HD. Seek and read times are hugely important – the slower the HD, the longer it takes for the textures to load. The speed of SSDs could make most of the artifacts when rotating vanish completely.

    • sharkh20 says:

      Blame it on AMD/ATI all you want, but my problems were not solved until this patch was released. I was getting terrible texture popping and stuttering and was unable to adjust settings not because of AMD/ATI, but because of id. I hadn’t been able to play the game until now.

    • Lewie Procter says:

      I am still getting pretty bad texture pop up both pre and post the most recent patch (although it improved after the patch), and I’ve got it installed on an SSD. Ati graphics (2×5870).

    • sharkh20 says:

      Did you go to the new settings and turn texture cache all the way up? I did that and it seems to have fixed the popping.

    • 4xis.black says:

      Well, what it means is that ATI seems to have accidentally released a set of outdated drivers when they actually intended to release a different, more recent set of drivers. It was apparently an accident of some sort.

      So, here is the thing with graphics cards. OpenGL stands for ‘Open Graphics Library’. What it essentially does is specify an interface that games and other software can use to control any graphics card that supports it without worrying too much about what specific graphics card it is. The actual implementation of this interface is handled by drivers, which translate the various OGL function calls into GPU instructions. This you probably already knew. What you may not know is that much of the stuff that is technically supported by ‘OpenGL’ is not implemented consistently or correctly across all graphics cards.

      Now, I would guess that one reason for this is that OpenGL as a specification leaves some ambiguities as to how certain things should work in certain cases, and these ambiguities can be resolved slightly differently by different drivers while still technically adhering to the spec. More confusingly, though, the spec also permits something called ‘extensions’ (the building blocks of the various OpenGL ‘versions’) which are sometimes just a part of ‘OpenGL x.xx’, but are sometimes specific to only one kind of graphics card. In other words, different cards can do different shit, the same shit in different ways, more shit, less shit, et cetera. The more interesting your graphics technique, the more permutations of shit you need to deal with to make sure it will go sufficiently fast and look right on whatever percentage of PCs you can afford to target (because it sure as hell isn’t going to work on all of them).

      Now take a look at the various interests involved. Both ATI and id want their game to run fast on your machine, of course, but secondly, ATI wants id’s game to run faster on their cards than on nVidia’s. nVidia has been way ahead of them in terms of R&D pretty much forever; how is it, then, that AMD always seems to come out with cheaper cards that run games as fast and often faster than nVidia stuff? Well, my understanding is that they get in touch with people like id and DICE, and they set up partnerships. They get build of the game, and then, in collaboration with the devs, start tweaking their drivers until the thing runs faster. I believe they also do this for games with which they aren’t even affiliated, assuming the game is popular enough to be widely benchmarked. Sometimes one tweak breaks a bunch of other tweaks, but then sometimes you can put another tweak on top of that to fix it. Incidentally, if you don’t happen to be one of the parties AMD tests their drivers with, you are kind of screwed.

      So games like Rage have to ship with proprietary drivers just to make what they’re doing even remotely possible; if they didn’t, they would be outcompeted by other games. And if ATI’s drivers were at all reasonable, they wouldn’t be fast enough. Everything is kind of a mess right now. Everybody wants more frames, more polys, and more pixels than the other guy. All the fingers are in all the pies, and the separation of concerns is totally borked.

      The plus side? 5 extra FPS.

    • alundra says:

      @4xis.black
      “Now take a look at the various interests involved. Both ATI and id want their game to run fast on your machine, of course, but secondly, ATI wants id’s game to run faster on their cards than on nVidia’s. nVidia has been way ahead of them in terms of R&D pretty much forever; how is it, then, that AMD always seems to come out with cheaper cards that run games as fast and often faster than nVidia stuff? Well, my understanding is that they get in touch with people like id and DICE, and they set up partnerships. They get build of the game, and then, in collaboration with the devs, start tweaking their drivers until the thing runs faster. I believe they also do this for games with which they aren’t even affiliated, assuming the game is popular enough to be widely benchmarked. Sometimes one tweak breaks a bunch of other tweaks, but then sometimes you can put another tweak on top of that to fix it. Incidentally, if you don’t happen to be one of the parties AMD tests their drivers with, you are kind of screwed.”

      Consider the bad cases of rebranding nvidia has committed along the years, saying that nvidia has been ahead of amd in R&D is blatant bunch of fanboi crap. And funny how you mention “partnerships” when almost all the game I’ve played have a little “the way it’s meant to be played” advert at the start.

      Stop swallowing ID excuses, the game was released in a pathetic state and only they are to blame.

    • aircool says:

      The Wrong Drivers (a film by nick park) has happened a few times before. Can’t remember which games have been affected by this situation, but it’s definately happened before.

      As for consoles being the leading video game platforms, well yeah, I guess so considering that’s what they were designed for. Carmack has always struck me as a guy who takes on a challenge, and in this case, it was to deliver a 60fps game engine that looked great on a console. He succeeded. It seems that the driver issue has mostly blown over, so we can forget about it now, eh?

      As mentioned before, the wrong driver issue has happened with plenty of other games.

    • 4xis.black says:

      For the record, nVidia does the same stuff; their drivers are simply a little less horrible.

  6. Sami H says:

    Amusing, especially as more and more multi-format developers are treating the PC as the lead platform and down-scaling for consoles as the power of the PC continues to push ahead.

    • MiniMatt says:

      To be fair, the quote out of context is indeed atrocious. RPS have thankfully given the full quote; whilst this action effectively rules out Mr Meer of ever landing a job at the Daily Mail it does give us the full context and we can kind of see that as poor as it can be interpreted there is a grain of truth in what he says.

      Personally I almost prefer target performance being set at console levels rather than bleeding edge PC levels as it means I don’t have to maintain a bleeding edge PC all the time, my two, three, even four year old hardware can play games at good or even great settings and I don’t have to buy a new graphics card every quarter.

      None of the above excuses lazy porting of course. As more eloquently outlined above, regardless of target performance there are some features that simply must be present at launch of a PC title. Get controls working with mouse/keyboard, remove “Press Start” and “Don’t turn off your console” messages, add AA / AF, vsync, resolution, shadow & texture settings, test on the last half dozen driver releases from ATI & Nvidia, job done.

    • paterah says:

      This is quite wrong, you mean more and more big publishers are moving to console gaming. So Carmack is quite reasonable in that remark.

    • malkav11 says:

      But Rage is anything but a lazy port. It takes advantage of PC capabilities, maps controls appropriately, looks amazing, etc. The lack of graphics options is not because they assumed a one-size-fits-all approach would work on PC like some console ports I can mention (Stranglehold, for example), but because they made a deliberate design decision to engineer a real-time graphics management system to optimize framerate by adjusting those settings behind the scenes as and when they’re needed, a system which clearly has much less utility on console.

      Now, do I agree with that decision? No. I’m firmly in the camp that wants to be able to easily tweak that stuff myself with my own priorities (I’m perfectly fine with a consistent 30 fps frame rate as long as things look as good as possible.) But it was in no way a console holdover.

    • yourgrandma says:

      Really wish i knew what developers you where talking about. BF3 is the only game to do it in YEARS. It happened last console generation but not this one. Pc’s don’t get ANY exclusives or games that truly take advantage of latest hardware from any of the top developers.

    • Srethron says:

      I’m sure this will anger *someone* as it is the internet, but Blizzard, Valve, Eidos Montreal, Irrational, Relic, Avalanche, Tripwire and Fred Wesker CEO of Paradox come to mind. Also Mother PC’s redheaded stepchildren who still try but sometimes fail: Bethseda, Bioware, Maxis, Obsidian, Volition and Rockstar. Rockstar is a sort of. GTA IV aside–which is usually a performance complaint and/or stylistic complaints about the nature of the content and/or story, Rockstar usually delivers PC ports that are late, yes, but nevertheless show sufficient care and consideration to the PC’s strengths. Refusing to port Red Dead Redemption at all also hurts my argument.

      I’d include devs like 4A Games (Metro 2033), Frictional Games (Amnesia, Penumbra) and GSC Game World (STALKER), but 4A is still new while Frictional and GSC seem to be repositioning to target consoles as lead platforms.

      Sami H is probably talking about the recent announcement by Epic that PC will be their next unknown title’s lead platform unless someone comes out with a new console that isn’t off in the Wii’s artificial bubble.

  7. Kill_The_Drive says:

    Texture popup is almost gone after updating, but game looks AWFUL. It’s almost like it’s 10 years old. What now?

    e: Never mind this, I just had to make a rageConfig.cfg and all is good now.

  8. AbyssUK says:

    “Et tu, Carmack ??”

  9. razzafazza says:

    played this and resistance 3 on a friends PS3 each for about 2 hours and while rage looks absolutely gorgeous especially for a console game …… funnily enough resistance 3 despite being a PS3 exclusive feels like a good old PC shooter …. whereas rage s gameplay was really pretty damn mediocre.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeEOX9_MV1s

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cg7__CLI-7c

    not sure what people see in this game other than great graphics.

    • subedii says:

      Why do devs keep doing this?

      Why do they KEEP putting in Boss fights but don’t bother making them actual fun experiences? A Boss encounter is supposed to test you on all the cool stuff you’ve learned, and be a fun and different gameplay experience to the rest of the game.

      ABNORMALLY LARGE HEALTH BARS ON THEIR OWN ARE NOT FUN!

  10. obvioustroll says:

    I do not see id as the leading developer for games.

    • Juan Carlo says:

      Last time they were the lead on anything was Quake 3.

      Doom 3 was mediocre and Quake 4 sucked.

    • drewski says:

      Quake 4 was developed by Raven, not id.

      id haven’t developed a game since Doom 3 in 2004.

    • sharkh20 says:

      I remember when it was all HL2 vs DOOM3. Think we all know who won that battle.

    • alundra says:

      yeah all they have done after the doom age is develop swallow tech demos and call them games.

    • diebroken says:

      “I remember when it was all HL2 vs DOOM3. Think we all know who won that battle.”

      Eh? Although both games came out in 2004, they were released months apart. IMO, by the time either HL2 or DOOM3 were released, Far Cry had already won the first half that year, and CoR: EfBB won the second half.

    • ceriphim says:

      Just played RAGE for the first time, about 15 minutes or so. Been biding my time with Dark Souls on PS3 until all the bs release issues were resolved with this and I must say:

      I agree, neither do I, anymore.

      Maybe I need to play further in than the first 15 minutes, but the feel and gameplay left me thinking, “What the hell have they been DOING for 5 years?”

      Seriously?
      -Shitty Borderlands-knockoff theme and art direction
      -Why the hell do starting enemies take TWO headshots? (I thought that was my terrible aim until I got the monocular but, nope, un-helmeted enemies take TWO pistol rounds right through the noggin to die)
      -Charging enemies die and fall *through* you? What? Who the hell cares that they’re charging at me when they pass through like a ghost the second their last HP is gone
      -No weight or feel to the pistol or movement – I feel like I’m moving too quickly (ever try sprinting in your living room?)
      -Regenerating health, that “nano-tech regen” trope was old for me when Crysis did it
      -Mouse speed issue in menus
      -Loaded up all the fixes to play, and the first time I launched it I got a black screen and CTD
      -Intermittent just-barely-perceptible lag/stutter
      -Terrible stop-on-a-dime vehicle feel and just plain bad controls (at least to the 4-wheeler)
      -Dated, dated, dated, I’ll say it once more, DATED UI

      I’m so bummed I bought this game, I wish there was some way I could return it for a refund if I signed something saying I wouldn’t so much as piss on its ashes for the rest of eternity…

  11. Kohlrabi says:

    The whole problem of the PC losing shares is not inherent to the platform, but more a self-increasing problem induced by the publishers:

    They release a technically very poor ports of their console version. PC gamers cry out in pain and anger, and sales are not too good. Publisher says “See, PC platform has poor sales and a bad user base”. Rinse, repeat.

  12. Miodrag Kovachevic says:

    I don’t think there’s any excuse for releasing a game in the state RAGE was. Of course, developers will continue to do so for the PC because if you do it on a console, you answer to MS and Sony. If you do it on the PC, you don’t answer to anyone. But as long as people pre-purchase games blindly for some virtual items, we’ll be seeing companies continue this practice…

  13. Gnoupi says:

    It’s a bit sad to read that kind of statement from Carmack, though…

    I mean, I understand the idea behind it. Yes, it’s easier to make software for a unique platform than one from which you don’t know the content. That’s also the main argument for Mac stability for more than a dozen years.

    But it’s sad that it comes from a guy who was a pioneer of high level 3D on the same PCs, 15 years ago.
    Compatibility issues were even worse then, 3D was only at the basics. You had even 3 programming bases, DirectX, OpenGL, and 3dfx. You had to deal with things on a much lower level, so you were subject to differences of behavior between the different hardware configurations.

    Sure there are compatibility issues happening with some new games. But somehow, they don’t seem to happen to everyone. Somehow the source engine runs flawlessly, and there are close to no issues on releases. Somehow the UE3 is also working on most computers, with a lot of options to scale down. (Yes, I agree that they are both in a mature state, so it’s normal to have close to no problems. Yet I don’t remember problems with UT3, even on a computer way below specs. I don’t remember issues with HL2. They just worked).

    The problems I had this year were with Brink. The common point with Rage? They both work on an engine from id.

    Go figure.

    • mangrove says:

      Hl2? Well there was that stuttering problem where the fps would drop to single digits and sound would loop at random. It was around a week or two before valve fixed it. But that was 7 years ago!

      I just surprised myself with how old hl2 is!

    • Gnoupi says:

      Hm, ok, I didn’t have such issues at launch, so I don’t remember.

      And yeah, 7 years, ouch.

    • zeroskill says:

      Agreed Half-life 2 had quite some trouble on release day, not for me personally (other then big load times) but quit some people had issues with it, most of them likely related to people having rigs that actually couldnt run Half-life 2 very well at the time, granted.

    • phenom_x8 says:

      “… We do not see the PC as the leading platform for games. That statement will enrage some people, but it is hard to characterize it otherwise; both console versions will have larger audiences than the PC version.

      That statement make me very sad, not enrage, but SAD! PC version of BFBC 2 clearly have more audiences than its console counterpart because DICE have will to make it for us.
      Its seems that he forgot who was give him money so that he (and the rest of Id’s crew) can live a life all this time and, even, set up his own rocket company (before acquisition)! Its just sad he’s not expecting us to be his audiences anymore after what we’ve shown to him before!

  14. Revisor says:

    I don’t understand one thing:
    How exactly did they test the game in-house if the video drivers were not ready up until a few days ago?

    Did they use custom drivers? What’s the point of testing when you don’t use the configuration your users are going to have?
    Did they use old drivers? Then they should have spotted the problems.

    What am I missing?

    • Sami H says:

      ATI’s internal developer/beta drivers?

    • Dozer says:

      I’m talking out my arse here, but I imagine the drivers id were working with had all the new features needed by RAGE’s new technology, but weren’t integrated with the older features needed by the stuff which came before. And public drivers need to be able to work with everything. And ATI only integrated the new driver features into the public drivers days after RAGE had been released.

  15. Stevostin says:

    Well the thing is that there are other games released on PC, some being also tech landmarks, some being also console ports, and some being both. And most of them do better than rage when it comes to who delivers, and who miss the spot.

    To me console doesn’t really exist (playing on a console doesn’t convey more excitement to me as buying some bread) but as harsh it is to hear an historic PC dev disregarding the platform, it’s his right. But he’s fooling himself if he hopes we won’t notice that this time, he’s way below the competition on the tech front, which is something new to id. Maybe it’s time to retire and hire people who are actually at the top of their game now, not were ten years ago. Doom III already failed to impress as much as other id titles dis, now it’s quite clear that JC lost it, at least on PC.

    EXTRA RANT : I am also really tired of dev making excuse of PC being a smaller market to cut down on the basic expense. Fact is the dev every PC user is asking for (options in the menu, UI for grown ups…) aren’t a big expense compared to the market it’s aiming. Professionnal just consider how much they shall spend to reach an audience. It’s clear here decent PC port are a real bargain. Only lazyness can account for the constant lack of the basics in so many console ports.

    • drewski says:

      You’re missing the point of Carmack’s criticism. The graphics menu wasn’t left out of the PC version because of money, it’s out because id believe, rightly or wrongly, that their auto-detecting software would provide the best, smoothest, 60 fps gameplay possible on any machine. It was no doubt vastly more time consuming and expensive to implement that kind of system then it would have been to include a graphics menu.

      Carmack means that the reason Rage doesn’t work and look better on PCs is that it’s designed to be a console experience primarily, and that the PC version is an afterthought.

    • Stevostin says:

      Yup, I read that but to me that’s dev narrow scope on production. According to this way of thinking, that also comes natural to the regular customer, such a menu is just dev cost (be it there or replaced by “smart” settings). Actually, such a menu, like nearly anything, is decision cost first. Whether you decide by iteration (the cost being everything you made that has to be remade) or via planification (the cost being the planification itself), you quickly realise that eveything you see has cost that goes far beyond the lines of code.

      It illustrates perfectly well by what someone said on kotaku : would id have paid even a little attention to the PC crowd reaction @ crysis 2 release, Carmack wouldn’t have been surprised at all. Actually, they would have known that option in the menu are a strong request by the communauty. Note that it’s not a request of mine. I am quite all for simplification there (provided it works, which it spectacularly doesn’t). But IF I was in a company like them I would be hugely pissed off that there is not even one full time guy responsible for the PC audience. It’s still hundreds of thousands of sales, and there is no one to simply establish a reference list of common feature request by the customer base. *This* is where the money and professionalism is lacking. Not ten or fourty days on one single dev.

    • Milky1985 says:

      If you want simplifcation ofthe graphics settings then go ahead, am all for it AS LONG as i can override it.

      Just have a “automatic scaling” option, default it to on, but when you turn it off the rest of the options appear, its very simple.

      Of course that means that you have to accept that your auto detection might be wrong………

  16. Robin says:

    I read on multiple sources (NeoGAF and other forum) that now the game is issues-free.

    I don’t know if it is for real, but people should check it. Maybe this whole technical-boom will end being only a storm in a tea cup (because it was an “id game”).

  17. Christian says:

    So if they put their focus more on developing the game itself than focusing on more pretty (like he said with “Nowadays most of the quality of a game comes from the development effort put into it, not the technology it runs on”), why do I keep reading in reviews that the story is sort of boring and the gameplay is mostly ‘shooter on rails’?

    Shouldn’t something more positive and innovative come out of an attitude like that?

    p.s.:
    Oh..and shouldn’t at least the console-versions be running fine (which they don’t seem to do, seeing the reviews on Giant Bomb / D’toid / Ars)?

    • drewski says:

      I’m afraid “innovation” doesn’t mean “exactly the game you want”.

      Rage’s shooting mechanics are as innovative, fun, fluid and, well, tight, as anything I’ve seen for a while.

      If you care about story and “innovation”, whatever that is in a pure, blast-em-in-the-face-until-you-hit-the-credits FPS, then don’t play id games because that’s not what id do.

    • Christian says:

      See, that didn’t come out very good in the reviews (as this is the only opinion I can have about the game, a summary of all the reviews I’ve read, not having bought it..and even the RPS one seemed a bit apologetic and although it sounded quite favorable didn’t really mention that many good aspects of the game).
      So maybe I’ll check this out after all when it’s sold for 10 to 15,- €.

  18. televizor says:

    I’m pretty amazed how well this runs on my laptop (Intel i3 @ 2 ghz, 3 gigs of ram and Geforce GT 420M).
    The texture pop-in is not that noticeable sometimes (or maybe I just got used to it) but there’s some impressive tech under this game.
    That said, the game’s so-so, I mean it’s decent and all but apart from the going out of the Ark-chamber-stuff in the beginning and drooling at the screen, there aren’t any other jaw dropping moments (I’m only 3-4 hours in, though).

  19. Paul says:

    By releasing wrong driver Carmack means that they tested the game internally on the driver that was supposed to get released, and when it was, someone at AMD fucked up and included old opengl libraries with it instead of correct ones. That is why most AMD people had bad graphics with the first driver released along with the game.

    As for me, game works perfectly since release (on gtx560ti), looks and plays great.

  20. Devec says:

    Implies that they want to design one of the best looking experiences possible.

    Designs game primarily for consoles.

  21. LGM says:

    “We do not see the PC as the leading platform for games. That statement will enrage some people, but it is hard to characterize it otherwise; both console versions will have larger audiences than the PC version. ”

    WRONG.

    Companies like Id and others keep saying that consoles are where the money’s at, and that may be true, in the short term, but in the long term, which platform will deliver the most sales? It’s obviously PC, as console kiddies will buy the game up when it first comes out, then sales of it will drop withing a couple months and never pick up again. On pc, the game will sell for YEARS on Steam and other services.

    Consoles = moderate amount of money at first, none later

    PC = small amount of money at first, steady amount for years.

    • Jimbo says:

      No. Just… no.

    • drewski says:

      PC games would need to sell three or four times as many copies over their lifetime as they did on consoles to match the revenue generated on those machines, even after the fee to Sony/MS.

      Digital distribution provides a great tail of revenue for publishers, no doubt, but it’s nowhere near the revenue from a blockbuster console launch.

    • MadMinstrel says:

      Sure! Years. At $4.99.

    • paterah says:

      Games from big publishers on PC aren’t going to reach the console sales even in 3 years. It’s just how it is.

    • LGM says:

      Is Rage going to sell COD numbers on console? Of course not. In the long term, it’ll sell more on PC, guaranteed. And even at 5 bux two or three years from now, that’s still a revenue stream from the title on PC whereas there will be no revenue stream at all from the console versions in a few years. Long term revenue stream > short term revenue stream.

    • SmoothUK says:

      Even a game like RAGE is only likely see 10-20% of total sales come from the PC market.

      Edit: And the longer term revenue stream is going to be PDLC :x

  22. Sauceror says:

    This just in: Doom 4 to be released on consoles!

  23. Juxtapox says:

    What Carmack and iD says is just not important anymore. They used to be the shit, but now.. they’re just some studio that releases mediocre stuff once in a while. Soon to be forgotten. The generation they’re aiming for will never see them as the previous generation did and therefor they’re digging their own grave.

    • Baines says:

      I wish Carmack would leave the graphics tech engine bandwagon and instead focus on something else, like the AI bandwagon.

      Graphics are going to advance with or without Carmack. Companies are quite happy to funnel large sums of money and resources into something they can see, and gamers are going to buy the prettier titles. As for tech engines, iD isn’t even relevant anymore.

      However, AI needs a champion. Publishers don’t seem to care about AI because the results aren’t immediately obvious. Some developers believe the player will assume the computer is cheating regardless, so there is no reason to even bother. And even basic believable AI seems to be something that is beyond many developers anyway. I don’t mean complex flanking and teamwork behaviors. I mean being willing to use cover, or having more than three extreme states (hide behind cover, charge the player like a maniac, and stand around oblivious).

  24. The Mechanical Aggressor says:

    You know what? I don’t give a crap about leading platforms or anything like that. I think it’s completely irrelevant to developing a game that the majority of users can run without problems. When I buy a game, I expect it to work without too much hassle. I’m not averse to messing around with config files and drivers, but for me, RAGE has been the worst game launch in years. I bought it on the strength of the RPS review and I really wish I hadn’t. Firstly, because I haven’t been able to play it yet and secondly, because I don’t think id is the kind of company I want to support anymore. I’m really beginning to hate the attitude of most big developers and publishers towards PC gamers.

    • drewski says:

      I pine for the days when PC gaming meant fiddling with drivers and config files for hours to get a game to work at all, and a smooth launch meant it was dumbed down for consoles.

    • subedii says:

      And this snide response is supposed to mean… what exactly?

      That he’s NOT supposed to expect the game to work properly when he buys it? I mean he was pretty direct in saying that it doesn’t matter to him which platform is the primary release, just that it works.

      Yes, things are better than “the old days”. That’s not what he was saying, and we should have higher expectations than that to begin with.

    • drewski says:

      It’s a comment about my impression that people on the internet will always find something to complain about.

      He’s entitled to expect it to work, of course. But if it wasn’t him complaining, it’d be someone else. I just hate all the negative comments about everything these days. Nobody seems to ever just enjoy gaming these days – everything’s always a massive drama. It annoys me.

    • subedii says:

      There’s always going to be naysayers to any product, and that’s always been the case to every game. What matters isn’t “if it wasn’t him complaining,,,”, it’s “is his complaint legitimate?”

      As far as I’m concerned if it doesn’t work for him, he has every right to complain. The reason I responded was frankly, you say you’re irritated by constant negativity. Fine. I get irritated by snide remarks when people talk about a legitimate problem. And this is by no means an isolated incident, and the patches still haven’t solved it for everyone.

      Just because I used to have to rewrite autexec.bat and config.sys for games in order to get EMM working doesn’t change that.

    • Srethron says:

      If people complain, this means they care enough to complain. People caring about your product is a good thing.

  25. Prime says:

    ““You can choose to design a game around the specs of a high-end PC and make console versions that fail to hit the design point, or design around the specs of the consoles and have a high-end PC provide incremental quality improvements. We chose the latter. We do not see the PC as the leading platform for games. That statement will enrage some people, but it is hard to characterize it otherwise; both console versions will have larger audiences than the PC version.”

    And of course we all know why this statement wasn’t made prior to launch, don’t we? All we’ve heard from them for months is “PC is AWESOME!”, meaning they’ve manipulated us to increase sales. They’ve stroked our egos, letting us hope based on their past history, while quietly not mentioning that we’re the afterthought in their business plans. This is also reflected in the lack of PC-focus work on the game itself. Patch in a graphical options menu? Why wasn’t it there in the first goddam place?

    Y’know, call me an idealistic fool but I’ve had it with companies who feel the need to lie or spin their information in order to maximise profits. The old maxim holds true; if it needs to be sold, then it ain’t worth buying. Truth is self-evident. Anything else is manipulation. You’ve lost a sale, Id.

    • cliffski says:

      wot prime said,
      I think I might start putting “designed for the PC platform” on my games.

    • Bob says:

      Yeah, well said Prime. Someone else can buy the copy I was going to purchase for damned near $90 Australian. I don’t mind a bit of spin, but intimating one thing and delivering another isn’t right in my opinion. I do hope they patch it further so the ones who’ve purchased it at least get some value for money.

    • malkav11 says:

      It wasn’t there because they believe their graphics autodetection tech will do a better job of making the game run smoothly while looking good than the end user. You’ll note that every option that they patched in comes with paragraphs of explanatory text and “this may fuck up your framerate and/or cause the game to crash or not start due to insufficient vram on your graphics card.”

  26. shaydeeadi says:

    Interesting how AMD rammed a fix for this gridding out the door so fast, didn’t Brink have this problem back in may? Does that mean that Brink works on Radeons properly now as a knock on effect?

  27. Nova says:

    I guess it’s pretty clear how this happened then.
    Consoles were the lead platform for Rage, and they didn’t care much about the PC version.
    They finished the console version polished it, and gave it to MS/Sony for certification. The release date was set. After that they started working on the PC version, but there wasn’t enough time to polish it properly, and they didn’t want to delay the release.
    Ta-da!

    • drewski says:

      That is, frankly, hysterical nonsense.

    • Nova says:

      “Hysteric”, huh?
      Just my take on this case, and not that wild of a guess considering what Carmack said.

    • SmoothUK says:

      Between first submission and release there can be around 2-months where a lot of PC-specific work will be done, alongside the day-1 updates for consoles but even they require a few weeks lead time.

      That’s not to say all PC work will have been left until then, they still have to develop the game on (super-high end development) PCs. It’s just likely that compatibility and low-end optimisation work will be taking place in the last two months before release.

    • Srethron says:

      Right, seems as if the PC version got 1-2 months of polish, whereas the console versions got an unknown amount of months of prior polish, presumably a lot more than 2.

  28. Blue88RPS says:

    Call me crazy, but this marks the end of id as a serious PC game company. Not necessarily a technology company, or a console game company, but I’ve bought all their games since (and including) Spear of Destiny because they always put gaming on the PC first. I’d say they’re out of the PC game business (as more than just a MS ‘studio’) in 2 years, 4 at the outside.

    It sounds really unbelievable for a game company that always put the PC first (Linux AND Windows) to blame the PC because they designed for a 6 year old console, then couldn’t get the same engine to fly with the latest graphics drivers.

    • drewski says:

      id will always be in the PC game making business, because the costs of a 360 port are relatively minor compared to the revenue even an average PC post of a decent game will make.

      Very few companies are completely abandoning PC because consoles are only getting closer, technically, to PCs, so it makes no sense to cut off a valid, if smaller, revenue stream if the cost of entry to that market is low.

      And the problem with the drivers is that they *weren’t* the latest drivers – AMD mistakenly included old libraries with the driver release which Rage wasn’t designed to work with.

  29. roryok says:

    Ok, I’ve just bought Rage, and I currently have a Radeon HD5770, which I’ve just upgraded to from a 9600GT last month.

    I still have the nvidia card. Should I switch back to it or fiddle with drivers?

    PS: I Should add I’ve installed and patched the game on the ATI card, but I am getting texture problems

  30. roryok says:

    ok, my comment disappeared.

    MY question was, should I swap out my ATI card for a 9600GT I have on a shelf to play rage? or should I suffer through the driver updates etc for the extra power of the HD5770?

  31. Coldini says:

    Forcing vertical sync on fixed the tearing for me which was pretty bad to begin with. Still a shame i had to spend half an hour researching solutions. I tried putting vsync on through the game settings first but it would never save so now do it from nvidia controls.

  32. Jimbo says:

    It doesn’t look great even with the fix / patch / drivers. Disappointing.

  33. Demiath says:

    The patch notes are priceless; “Unfortunately, it is not possible to anticipate all possible graphics driver issues in combination with unique end user hardware and software configurations.” ….and isn’t that exactly the reason why you include graphics options in PC games in the first place?

  34. Zarunil says:

    These consoles are holding me back, yo.

  35. Yosharian says:

    Game still doesn’t work…

    Stupid id.

    • Yosharian says:

      Got it working!

      Still jerky here and there, in combat, but it’s much better than it was.

      No thanks to id and their complete lack of documentation of console commands, tossers.

  36. kyrieee says:

    Comments like that are not a great way to get people to buy your game

  37. oceanclub says:

    That’s a crass statement from Carmack. A man not known for empathy or social skills, so one wonders what the hell Bethesda are thinking of when they get him to break silence on this issue. Boiled down: “It’s someone else’s problem, not ours and besides, we don’t care about you guys anyway”. It’s frankly irrelevant as to whether Rage PC is a niche product or not; one cannot disclaim responsibilty for a product based on that.

    To be honest the statement doesn’t enrage me at all as, frankly, I had no intention of buying it. It’s become a cliche to say it, but iD’s products in the last decade have become tech demos with the semblance of a game wrapped around them. Every so often, Carmack comes up with some technological wizardry, and they use it as the basis for the game. I’m reminded of the refreshingly challenging interview done by Gamasutra (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/6500/the_creative_intent_of_rage.php) where, asked why people would play this game, they answer “It’s the only game that has uniquely textured environment” as if people _honestly care about this stuff as the main reason for choosing a game_.

    P.

  38. Mark says:

    This patch pretty much fixed the major texture pop-in for me, aside from when entering out of/into new areas. The v-sync isn’t working when switched on, which is weird, but it maybe because I’m using the Nvidia beta drivers. As far as I’m concerned now, the game is in a playable state.

    It also runs great, too. 60 FPS, with all the options turned on, on a fairly average spec’d PC. I don’t think its graphical ground-breaking – sometimes it looks downright mediocre – but it’s a pretty looking game in most parts.

    On the game itself, it’s pretty much a templated iD shooter, like Doom 3, like RTCW, Wolfenstein and Quake 4 (despite some of those being developed by Raven). It’s fun, simply. It has no real aspirations beyond its solid combat gameplay. That’s fine; it’s how it’s always been.

    • Coldini says:

      you can force vsync in the nvidia control panel (right click on your desktop > nvidia control pane) and in applications, find rage.exe in the steam folder and add a rule for it to force vsync on.

      That did the trick for me with the tearing.

  39. xGryfter says:

    You guys need to understand that this game was started 6 years ago and at that time PC specs and console specs were very, very similar in terms of what they could do so technically Carmack wasn’t completely wrong, just too slow and a bit narrow minded. The biggest mistake he made wasn’t developing for the consoles it was not building in the room needed throughout development to easily add updated graphical features (to a point) as the PC technology grew. though his biggest mistake was probably making the choice for all gamers of high frame rate over graphical fidelity. He should have known his PC audience better and planned accordingly.

    I’m not saying the game didn’t have it’s issues because it did but for a huge majority of people none of those were game breaking in any way.

    Sometimes I think some PC gamers are just console gamers with more money than sense (or maybe their need to complain overrides their logical thought). I understand how aggravating it his to have a PC that for some reason is having issues with a game and needs a patch to fix it but the expectation that all PC games will run perfectly on all gaming PC configurations is a bit ridiculous and naive. I’m not excusing all release day issues with all games but not everything is some conspiracy against PC gamers because of the existence of consoles nor is everything the fault of the developers. Sometimes, shit just happens.

    For anyone who knows anything about gaming PCs and has been building their own gaming PCs for more than a few years should know that ATI drivers generally suck and they have for a very, very long time and their Open GL drivers are even worse than their DX drivers (though they have improved greatly over the years on both fronts). That being said, I don’t see how a borked driver released by ATI is any way id’s fault. There are still some really annoying mechanical and graphical issues with RAGE that should have been taken care of before launch but the ATI issues is not one of them.

    Don’t get me wrong, the ability to release day one patches has been an issue for game quality since the early days of the internet and there are developers who use that crutch to the detriment of their games and the gamers who buy them which is a shady, underhanded thing to do to their customers if it could have been avoided but that’s not always the case. Just because a game doesn’t work on your machine doesn’t mean the developers weren’t doing their jobs it just means that they didn’t have infinite time and money to check every possible PC build.

    I also wanted to say that RAGE’s texture quality issues as well as a few seemingly dated gameplay design decisions really threw me at first but once I got over those things and passed the first couple missions I found the game opened up and is really a hell of a lot of fun, especially if you enjoy id’s style of FPS. If you’re generally not a fan of id then RAGE, while (IMO) being one of their best games yet, probably won’t change that opinion.

    • pupsikaso says:

      Just because a game doesn’t work on your machine doesn’t mean the developers weren’t doing their jobs it just means that they didn’t have infinite time and money to check every possible PC build.

      Listen, buddy, when I pay $60 for a product I damn well expect it to work as advertised. If it doesn’t, then I feel cheated and have every right to complain. I’d also say I have every right to a refund or some sort of compensation, but of course we don’t live in a just or fair world.

      When developers start to develop for consoles it makes them very lazy when it comes to making sure the game works on a wide variety of PCs.

    • wodin says:

      A very long post, sadly with little thought put into it.

      It seems your forgetting beta testing…and him insulting those who put him there…and PC gamers are console gamers with more money is downright stupid statement.

      Many of the genres I love would never grace a console…I’m not into car racing\beat em ups\platformers or football\sport games…thast why i wouldn’t own a console.

    • andrewdoull says:

      “A very long post, sadly with little thought put into it.”

      It’s a lot better than your short response with no thought at all.

      “It seems your forgetting beta testing…”

      How is beta testing going to fix a 6 year old design decision? Please – I’d love to know.

      “and him insulting those who put him there…”

      Again, how is the truth insulting?

      “and PC gamers are console gamers with more money is downright stupid statement.”

      I’ll give you that…

    • seattlepete says:

      Again, how is the truth insulting?

      Now then. If a man is fat, and is also into scat, and I say “I punched that slob in his bitch tits for being a turd muncher”, is that insulting? It’s true…isn’t it?

      I have spent a lot of money on id games in the past. In fact, I have purchased them all, retail, for full price. Right back to SoD, when I was 17 and ordered the floppies through mail order (I was living in the Caribbean at the time). id took a big steamy pile on people like me with this release. This is the last id game I will spend money on.

  40. bill says:

    Why the hell do we need updated drivers for every game anyway? Aren’t drivers supposed to be generic? Isn’t that the whole sodding point.

    Every time they update the drivers for some new game, they break them for some old game. And some cards don’t get updates (like mobile cards) either at all, or for a long time, or without googling for some 3rd party hack.
    -
    I have no real problem with them targeting the main market first if that’s true – but that doesn’t mean they can treat the other market like crap and then, rather than apologise, say: “it’s cos you arn’t as important so we don’t really care”.

  41. Freud says:

    We do not see id software as the leading developer for shooters anymore. Hope you enjoy your stay in mediocre developer land, where you can party with the guys from Techland.

  42. Shooop says:

    Well thanks for saving me $40 John. Would have seriously considered buying this when the price dropped but comments like this make it a not-now, not-ever sale.

    Only hope for FPSs on PCs now lie in the hands of Tripwire and Croteam.

  43. Roshin says:

    Initially I had pretty bad problems with texture streaming and screen tearing. How bad was it? Well, I considered shelving it until they patched it into a decent state. However, adding “+vt_maxPPF 16″ to the launch options more or less fixed all those problems and now it runs fast and smooth and looks amazing.

    Compare this to DX:HR, which runs like fucking balls on the same system, even with most options turned way down or disabled. Turn your attention to the state of that game instead, because they really deserve it.

    • pupsikaso says:

      DX:HR had graphical options at launch, which meant you could tweak them to make the game run as smooth as you want it to. Of course you’d have to trade quality for it, and that’s not excuse for a game that looks very dated even at max settings.

      But the point is that Rage had NO graphical options to speak of when it released, and there is ABSOLUTELY no excuse for that considering the game has been advertised as a PC game since the very start. Only now that the game is out, all the pre-orders and day 1 sales done (which is all the publishers care about) does Carmack say “Oh hey, we lied, tough luck boohoo”

    • Roshin says:

      “DX:HR had graphical options at launch, which meant you could tweak them to make the game run as smooth as you want it to. Of course you’d have to trade quality for it…”

      It does have graphics options, but that doesn’t mean I can make it run smooth. Like I said, just about every setting is turned way down or off and it still performs like crap. There simply is no more ‘quality’ to trade in.

      On the other hand, I solved my problems with Rage by adding one line to the launch options, a line that was available the day after release and it took me less than thirty seconds to type in.

  44. Shakermaker says:

    I’ll wait for the inevitable Christmas sale on Steam. Might not even get it then, since I will be busy with TOR around that time.

  45. alundra says:

    Wow, just fucking wow, the dead island guys offered an apology to the pc community for their poor release and these fucks instead turn to placing the blame on others and denigrating the same community that helped build their fortunes, now I know which game I’m getting next.

    Short version of the story:

    “we developed rage for the consoles and did a poor, awful, pathetic and untested port to the pc, but hey, we are id software, we can’t be at fault.

  46. 2late2die says:

    Carmack’s ego is out of control.
    “You can choose to design a game around the specs of a high-end PC and make console versions that fail to hit the design point, or design around the specs of the consoles and have a high-end PC provide incremental quality improvements.”
    Except that you didn’t provide incremental improvements now did you. What you provided is a crappy port full of bugs and driver issues. And don’t go blaming ATI for the driver issues, the problems were there before the initial driver release (which admittedly they screwed up), i.e. it wasn’t working with existing drivers which you had plenty of time to test for. I bet there are no ATI machines in id’s offices at all.

    Anyway, as it should be obvious to everybody, id screwed up and now they’re just coming up with excuses. Oh and Carmack, how about you look at Eidos Montreal, a new dev group working on their first project, and learn from them how to do a proper console AND PC release, with both feeling like proper games and not crappy ports.

  47. asshibbitty says:

    Some bewildering comments in here. I’ve got an ATI card so when I saw the glitches I googled “ATI Rage drivers”. Took me back.

  48. MoG says:

    Tbh I’m pretty appalled at this game (like everyone else ofc) but its not so much the having to do tweaks to get it to run as intended. That’s becoming more and more common place.

    What I can’t get my head around is that after I’ve done all the tweaks the textures on everything look completely and utterly shit. If this is what the 8k textures look like then what the hell do the 16k textures look like? It’s a complete joke and I don’t understand why more people aren’t picking up on this.

Comment on this story

XHTML: Allowed code: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>