It's a great game for those who grew up with Doom and Quake. It's beautiful, well realized and great AI which made an already solid shooter even more enjoyable.
Also no one makes a shotgun fire like I.D. does. Enough said.

However, for a generation that grew up with Mass Effect, Half-life 2 and portal... I think many expected more from the experience.
Like 40 hours of game play, actual decisions with consequences, deep meaningful characters and cake.

And I also think that many potential fans came from Bethesda's Fallout and also expected Free Roaming open world exploration.

So they bought Rage expecting anything but a shooter. An I.D. shooter.

What do you guys think?

(Like in the description: Apart from Technical difficulties and the ending)

Definitely agree. Many of the people who bought the game went into it thinking it was another Fallout or Borderlands.

I suppose you're right. As a "story game", it would be a failure. As the Ars Technica reviewer complained, you start killing bandits half a minute after you realize all your loved ones are dead, and don't really get to choose anything.

But RAGE doesn't really want to be a story game. I mean, the story is there if you look for it, and it's not even half bad. But at its essence, it's a typical id shooter - their best to date, for me at least. The action is fast, furious and plentiful. It's a shooting gallery with second-to-none art direction... every piece of scenery oozes character and atmosphere, it's easy to see they've poured years upon years of work and love in there. The technology is great when it works... I've never had such a rock-solid framerate with graphics that lush and detailed.

I'm a few hours in and loving the game so far. But then, I also loved Doom3... id's games just aren't for everyone, and I hope their commercial success doesn't suffer too much because of it.

Can't say I agree. Reason being most whom complained are PC players whom have a long history with id games and know what to expect from them. Those are players that know an id game is still going to be primarily a shooter, even though it has RPG elements.

Most of the complaints were regarding blurry textures from Nvidia based PC players, and technical graphic issues from ATI based PC players, the latter being largely ATI's responsibility, not id's.

Many also felt the ending was lackluster though. We've probably yet to see all those come in because I suspect many haven't even finished the game yet. The complaints about the ending don't seem to be platform specific either.

Then you have many complaining about the ridiculous file size of the game too, especially considering the blurred textures. Expect more complaints to come even after the HD texture pack is released, because even though it may bring the textures up to the level shown in the promo screenshots, it's probably going to be at the very least a 50GB download.

The funny thing is, the last complaints will likely come from some of those complaining about people complaining about the game's textures, because after those on consoles that think the game looks plenty good see screenshots from the PC version with the HD pack installed, they'll be whining about not getting textures that good on console. :rolleyes:

Being that you come out of an ark which is just like a fallout vault and go to wellsprings which sounds like goodsprings in Fallout New Vegas and you fight mutants which are like ghouls in Fallout no wonder.

People are confused because ID is trying to make a shooter with a good amount of role play elements.

-Merchant system/money system.

- Mini games.

-Side quests (Doom, Quake did not have side quests)

-Craftable items.

-Open explorable world.

Yet people get sooooooo upset when people talk about the RPG elements of the game...I don't understand that.

I think we're seeing some confusion over Carmack and co's decision to go back to what made Doom so good ...



http://doom.wikia.com/wiki/Uncapped_framerate

I think 35fps was high for when classic Doom came out. It's one of the reasons that it was, still is, so immersive. The psychology of immersion is a strange beast. The in game look is determined by the framerate as well as textures so showing hires screenshots and trying to match the look in game is a bit misleading. Textures can look more realistic once framerate and immersion is achieved even when they are not necessarily extremely hires (should prob put a link to some psychology paper here :biggrin: ). So apart from the beta driver teething problems its a case of forgetting it all and letting the game do its thing. It also gets forgotten that almost every game in the last decade had teething problems especially on first release before patches, etc. It's also a question of focus. Why focus on all those little niggling glitches which simply go away once "control freak" mode is turned off ? But saying that feedback, even negative feedback, is good for a developer ... keeps them on their toes :hubbahubba:.

John Romero said in an interview that Wolfenstein 3D ran at 70fps. :ahhh: