This is amazing stuff. I've always been a big id fan (and a Raven Software fan), and all of things like this help remind me why.
The 360 thing is interesting. It makes sense though. I wonder what 2GB of stuff MS is having developers put on the discs.
If Rage does what they're promising it's a game that will consume a lot of my time.
I'm just glad they're steeping away from the standard Doom / Quake setting and trying something a little different. The post-apoc Mad Max style looks interesting.
EDIT: Oh man, I'm watching the John Carmack interview now. I hope the PS3 fanboys don't get wind of this video.
EDIT EDIT: And done. Carmack has a lot of interesting stuff to say about the industry. It was also interesting to hear about Quake Wars at the end there.
It is always so interesting listening to Carmack. Not just that, but he can communicate really, really well. It is very rare for him to pause mid-sentence, use an "um" or "ah".
Props to Shawn Elliott for asking those questions, though. It seemed like Carmack enjoyed digging into the meat of the earlier ones in particular regarding the technical points between PS3 and the 360.
Ok, I know it was mentioned but Teen rating? Seriously? It's a first person shooter/racing thing, by definition you will be SHOOTING PEOPLE. It's a bit late in the Genre to have a lack of blood and limb loss. All those bleedy, burny, choppy chunks are kind of an industry standard now. I don't see how you can make an FPS without them. A good FPS anyway.
Evil-Pants on
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
It is always so interesting listening to Carmack. Not just that, but he can communicate really, really well. It is very rare for him to pause mid-sentence, use an "um" or "ah".
Yeah, during that 1up interview he knew what he wanted to say. There were a few times where his eyes darted around in thought but it was dismissable. I like his sincerity.
It is always so interesting listening to Carmack. Not just that, but he can communicate really, really well. It is very rare for him to pause mid-sentence, use an "um" or "ah".
Yeah, during that 1up interview he knew what he wanted to say. There were a few times where his eyes darted around in thought but it was dismissable. I like his sincerity.
That's cause John Carmack knows more about game development than anyone.
Someone once said of him that he makes people lazy. Why spend 2 days bug fixing and coding when you can go to John and he can solve all your problems in 15 minutes.
So how many people are actually going to be able to tell the difference on SDTVs? You know, the still gigantic share of the console market?
Answer: Nobody.
Look I dont know what it's like in America but here in the UK two things:
1) HDTVs are not as niche a purchase as you think. You can't buy SDTVs in stores anymore, or if you can it is not cost effective.
2) SDTVs aren't like from the 50s. They are still quality and you can definitely still appreciate decent graphics and polish on games.
Well, yeah.
1) You can still buy SDTVs in the US. You can buy TVs that have the component inputs and are still 480i. (ie, both of my brothers' TVs), After the changeover in 2009, they're STILL going to be selling SDTVs, just with a builtin digital tuner.
2) the max resolution is still 640x480, no matter the quality of the set, meaning having higher res textures than the other console won't matter much, if at all, since there's a set amount of texture resolution where it stops making a difference.
So how many people are actually going to be able to tell the difference on SDTVs? You know, the still gigantic share of the console market?
Answer: Nobody.
Look I dont know what it's like in America but here in the UK two things:
1) HDTVs are not as niche a purchase as you think. You can't buy SDTVs in stores anymore, or if you can it is not cost effective.
2) SDTVs aren't like from the 50s. They are still quality and you can definitely still appreciate decent graphics and polish on games.
Well, yeah.
1) You can still buy SDTVs in the US. You can buy TVs that have the component inputs and are still 480i. (ie, both of my brothers' TVs), After the changeover in 2009, they're STILL going to be selling SDTVs, just with a builtin digital tuner.
2) the max resolution is still 640x480, no matter the quality of the set, meaning having higher res textures than the other console won't matter much, if at all, since there's a set amount of texture resolution where it stops making a difference.
I know, why bother. Might as well just go back to using VHS tapes while we are at it.
So yeah there is a heap of new information on this game coming out of Quakecon.
- Game will mix FPS and Driving genres. - Open world gameplay.
- PS3 version will be graphically superior to XB360 counterpart.
- Rage to feature coop gameplay.
Though the world will be large, it is not a sandbox title or traditional "open world" game--players will need to complete the game's story quests in a linear fashion.
That's one of the things that we want to try and address - the game is a first-person action game that has a variety of gameplay that is no longer just run-and-gun. It focuses on story-driven missions. It's not this huge mindless open world. But it is a first-person action game that has a variety of gameplay built upon id Tech 5. That's really our key message.
I think I like this better, sounds more like Mass Effect without the uncharted planets. In terms of it's linearness anyway. It simulates this huge open world, but really your on path the entire way.
I think I like this better, sounds more like Mass Effect without the uncharted planets. In terms of it's linearness anyway. It simulates this huge open world, but really your on path the entire way.
It's okay, you can say fuck here.
Also, I'm excited about this since I'm an id fanboy and I think these guys have learned from past games what people like and dislike (Doom 3 is dark, ololol) and this could turn out to be incredible and not just another tech demo with a game slapped on it.
Darmak on
0
Options
HalibutPassion FishSwimming in obscurity.Registered Userregular
So how many people are actually going to be able to tell the difference on SDTVs? You know, the still gigantic share of the console market?
Answer: Nobody.
Look I dont know what it's like in America but here in the UK two things:
1) HDTVs are not as niche a purchase as you think. You can't buy SDTVs in stores anymore, or if you can it is not cost effective.
2) SDTVs aren't like from the 50s. They are still quality and you can definitely still appreciate decent graphics and polish on games.
Well, yeah.
1) You can still buy SDTVs in the US. You can buy TVs that have the component inputs and are still 480i. (ie, both of my brothers' TVs), After the changeover in 2009, they're STILL going to be selling SDTVs, just with a builtin digital tuner.
2) the max resolution is still 640x480, no matter the quality of the set, meaning having higher res textures than the other console won't matter much, if at all, since there's a set amount of texture resolution where it stops making a difference.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say about SD versus HD TVs. Sure, you might have an SDTV, and you might have a 360 and not a PS3, so therefor you might not care about this issue with high-resolution textures. But does that mean that developers shouldn't take advantage of the fact that both the 360 and PS3 can output HD resolution graphics?
And when one version has an obvious limitation (at least according to Carmack), are we not supposed to care simply because a lot of people won't be able to notice on their own TVs? If that was the case, then no one should care about graphics ever again.
No, a lot of people have SDTVs. I am a developer, I keep on top of statistics.
It is not our fault that MS decided to force everyone to render at 720p while not upgrading the specs of their machine to account for it.
If a lot of developers had had the choice, they would rather run at 480p widescreen than be forced to run at 720p widescreen. Bungie got away with rendering Halo 3 at 640p but they were also first party.
Lighting, architectural design and intricacy, draw distance, colour depth, poly count and framerate all transcend TV resolution.
Gears of War still looks incredible in SD. It just looks more incredible in HD.
Rage could be played through an iPhone and still look better than half the games out there.
If I could find it, some dude managed to scale back Doom3 to run on an old Voodoo card. It actually performed really well too.
I was gonna mention the Oldblivion mod that runs Oblivion on like 10 year old machines.
My point though was that yeah, I'm sure running a 480p is better for performance than 720, or whatever. If your game is fucking The Adventures of Flat Grey Box Guy in Flat Grey Box Land then it makes diddly squat difference.
Lighting, architectural design and intricacy, draw distance, colour depth, poly count and framerate all transcend TV resolution.
Gears of War still looks incredible in SD. It just looks more incredible in HD.
Rage could be played through an iPhone and still look better than half the games out there.
More resolution = more RAM used to render screen.
Although it doesn't matter on PS3, since they already reserve 256 for video RAM.
You're posting but not saying anything.
Yeah, more resolution means more ram. So what? So you are saying developers should sacrifice resolution for other features because it will be easier on the system and engine? Well it depends on too many factors to make such a blanket statement.
Halo 3 runs at 640p while Gears of War runs at 720p. Halo looks like ass compared to Gears, even in SD. Again, so what? The game design warrants the change of resolution. Halo is pushing more on screen than Gears is.
Furthermore, as I mentioned, games can still look great on SD sets regardless of resolution. I for one would like my games to not cater for the lowest common denominator all the time, especially when that denominator is obsolete technology that is harder to buy these days than the newer stuff. HD adoption may be slow, but it is adoption. No-one is going to buy an SD TV again from this point on, certainly not in numbers to warrant any kind of push for SD being the de facto standard.
720p is a target set by Microsoft. Good. If developers lack the talent to produce a game that looks good at that resolution than boo hoo. Just about every game out there runs at that resolution, sometimes upscaled sometimes native.
There is more to a games look than pure resolution. Say you sacrificed 720p for better lighting (a la Halo 3). Well that isn't a get out of jail free card. Sure the game looks good but it is very far from even close to top end.
If Rage can push 60fps and look like it does, then I have no doubt it will also run at 720p. Carmack is just better at coding games than most. So there is no cause for the 'why bother then the majority of the player base dont have HD sets'. The point is that for those that DO have HD TVs, they get the massive bonus of a crisp image and a nice resolution. But even for those without, the game has so many other aspects which are pushing boundaries that it will still look good, lik I said, poly count, view distance etc.
Heck, this is purely from a technical side. Depending on the art direction games can ignore resolution even more. Geometry Wars looks shit hot at SD but at HD it looks like eye sex.
You have posted a few times now that resolution is important. Well yeah, it is. That's not exactly a newsflash. But you don't have to sacrifice resolution to have a good looking game. I trust Carmack knows more about game development than you (no offense, he knows more than most) and when he says 60fps, 720p on all platforms than I for one believe him.
ID is great though for making Q III for browsers, so no worries here.
It doesn't exactly inspire confidence when before Rage is already out they say Doom 4 will look 3 times as good.
I think that has more to do with what doom does. It is not a giant racing game with a shooter attached. When they throw you in a tiny hallway with far less on screen and drop the fps by half of course it will look better. Not to mention Rage is the first id tech 5 game. Of course later games will look better. I think Rage looks fuck awesome, seriously. Of course I took a vacation day for the release of Doom 3 and don't regret it one bit.
Then people will bitch at how tired and formulaic it is.
Yea but anything is better then the bullshit monster closet fest that was doom3. "Whats this a cache of ammo before a door? I bet that monsters are going to appear behind me in there."
Lighting, architectural design and intricacy, draw distance, colour depth, poly count and framerate all transcend TV resolution.
Gears of War still looks incredible in SD. It just looks more incredible in HD.
Rage could be played through an iPhone and still look better than half the games out there.
If I could find it, some dude managed to scale back Doom3 to run on an old Voodoo card. It actually performed really well too.
Actually, it was two Voodoo2s in SLI. It was basically done as a joke, but it did actually work.
When you scale back the bump mapping, normal mapping, per pixel shaders, reflection maps, dynamic lighting and shadowing, the Doom 3 engine becomes a slightly modified Quake 3. THere is still quite a bit of the original code in there.
Posts
I'm just glad they're steeping away from the standard Doom / Quake setting and trying something a little different. The post-apoc Mad Max style looks interesting.
EDIT: Oh man, I'm watching the John Carmack interview now. I hope the PS3 fanboys don't get wind of this video.
EDIT EDIT: And done. Carmack has a lot of interesting stuff to say about the industry. It was also interesting to hear about Quake Wars at the end there.
Props to Shawn Elliott for asking those questions, though. It seemed like Carmack enjoyed digging into the meat of the earlier ones in particular regarding the technical points between PS3 and the 360.
Yeah, during that 1up interview he knew what he wanted to say. There were a few times where his eyes darted around in thought but it was dismissable. I like his sincerity.
Oh fuck no. Fucking furries.
Battle.net: Fireflash#1425
Steam Friend code: 45386507
That's cause John Carmack knows more about game development than anyone.
Someone once said of him that he makes people lazy. Why spend 2 days bug fixing and coding when you can go to John and he can solve all your problems in 15 minutes.
Answer: Nobody.
Look I dont know what it's like in America but here in the UK two things:
1) HDTVs are not as niche a purchase as you think. You can't buy SDTVs in stores anymore, or if you can it is not cost effective.
2) SDTVs aren't like from the 50s. They are still quality and you can definitely still appreciate decent graphics and polish on games.
Well, yeah.
1) You can still buy SDTVs in the US. You can buy TVs that have the component inputs and are still 480i. (ie, both of my brothers' TVs), After the changeover in 2009, they're STILL going to be selling SDTVs, just with a builtin digital tuner.
2) the max resolution is still 640x480, no matter the quality of the set, meaning having higher res textures than the other console won't matter much, if at all, since there's a set amount of texture resolution where it stops making a difference.
I know, why bother. Might as well just go back to using VHS tapes while we are at it.
Remember John, breathing is allowed between sentences.
o_O
You going to comment on his dress sense next? Haircut not up to scratch maybe?
But this is an old annoyance of mine ever since I've heard him talk years ago, I still think he's awesome.
Minor correction here
More Rage details from Quakecon
I think I like this better, sounds more like Mass Effect without the uncharted planets. In terms of it's linearness anyway. It simulates this huge open world, but really your on path the entire way.
It's okay, you can say fuck here.
Also, I'm excited about this since I'm an id fanboy and I think these guys have learned from past games what people like and dislike (Doom 3 is dark, ololol) and this could turn out to be incredible and not just another tech demo with a game slapped on it.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say about SD versus HD TVs. Sure, you might have an SDTV, and you might have a 360 and not a PS3, so therefor you might not care about this issue with high-resolution textures. But does that mean that developers shouldn't take advantage of the fact that both the 360 and PS3 can output HD resolution graphics?
And when one version has an obvious limitation (at least according to Carmack), are we not supposed to care simply because a lot of people won't be able to notice on their own TVs? If that was the case, then no one should care about graphics ever again.
It is not our fault that MS decided to force everyone to render at 720p while not upgrading the specs of their machine to account for it.
If a lot of developers had had the choice, they would rather run at 480p widescreen than be forced to run at 720p widescreen. Bungie got away with rendering Halo 3 at 640p but they were also first party.
Lighting, architectural design and intricacy, draw distance, colour depth, poly count and framerate all transcend TV resolution.
Gears of War still looks incredible in SD. It just looks more incredible in HD.
Rage could be played through an iPhone and still look better than half the games out there.
If I could find it, some dude managed to scale back Doom3 to run on an old Voodoo card. It actually performed really well too.
I was gonna mention the Oldblivion mod that runs Oblivion on like 10 year old machines.
My point though was that yeah, I'm sure running a 480p is better for performance than 720, or whatever. If your game is fucking The Adventures of Flat Grey Box Guy in Flat Grey Box Land then it makes diddly squat difference.
More resolution = more RAM used to render screen.
Although it doesn't matter on PS3, since they already reserve 256 for video RAM.
You're posting but not saying anything.
Yeah, more resolution means more ram. So what? So you are saying developers should sacrifice resolution for other features because it will be easier on the system and engine? Well it depends on too many factors to make such a blanket statement.
Halo 3 runs at 640p while Gears of War runs at 720p. Halo looks like ass compared to Gears, even in SD. Again, so what? The game design warrants the change of resolution. Halo is pushing more on screen than Gears is.
Furthermore, as I mentioned, games can still look great on SD sets regardless of resolution. I for one would like my games to not cater for the lowest common denominator all the time, especially when that denominator is obsolete technology that is harder to buy these days than the newer stuff. HD adoption may be slow, but it is adoption. No-one is going to buy an SD TV again from this point on, certainly not in numbers to warrant any kind of push for SD being the de facto standard.
720p is a target set by Microsoft. Good. If developers lack the talent to produce a game that looks good at that resolution than boo hoo. Just about every game out there runs at that resolution, sometimes upscaled sometimes native.
There is more to a games look than pure resolution. Say you sacrificed 720p for better lighting (a la Halo 3). Well that isn't a get out of jail free card. Sure the game looks good but it is very far from even close to top end.
If Rage can push 60fps and look like it does, then I have no doubt it will also run at 720p. Carmack is just better at coding games than most. So there is no cause for the 'why bother then the majority of the player base dont have HD sets'. The point is that for those that DO have HD TVs, they get the massive bonus of a crisp image and a nice resolution. But even for those without, the game has so many other aspects which are pushing boundaries that it will still look good, lik I said, poly count, view distance etc.
Heck, this is purely from a technical side. Depending on the art direction games can ignore resolution even more. Geometry Wars looks shit hot at SD but at HD it looks like eye sex.
You have posted a few times now that resolution is important. Well yeah, it is. That's not exactly a newsflash. But you don't have to sacrifice resolution to have a good looking game. I trust Carmack knows more about game development than you (no offense, he knows more than most) and when he says 60fps, 720p on all platforms than I for one believe him.
Actually, it was two Voodoo2s in SLI. It was basically done as a joke, but it did actually work.
ID is great though for making Q III for browsers, so no worries here.
It doesn't exactly inspire confidence when before Rage is already out they say Doom 4 will look 3 times as good.
I think that has more to do with what doom does. It is not a giant racing game with a shooter attached. When they throw you in a tiny hallway with far less on screen and drop the fps by half of course it will look better. Not to mention Rage is the first id tech 5 game. Of course later games will look better. I think Rage looks fuck awesome, seriously. Of course I took a vacation day for the release of Doom 3 and don't regret it one bit.
They should make Doom 4 be more like Serious Sam: The First/Second Encounter.
Yea but anything is better then the bullshit monster closet fest that was doom3. "Whats this a cache of ammo before a door? I bet that monsters are going to appear behind me in there."
Sounds good to me.
Three ain't bad though.
When you scale back the bump mapping, normal mapping, per pixel shaders, reflection maps, dynamic lighting and shadowing, the Doom 3 engine becomes a slightly modified Quake 3. THere is still quite a bit of the original code in there.
Tumblr