!!**Official RAGE Thread**!!

I found the races rediculously easy :P

Yeah they really are. First lot can be close but once you get the upgraded engine and boost you can leave all the opponents in your dust. The odd shield when you get out in front, some drop mines in bottlenecks and you can be way out in front or they just run out of ammo.

Wtf are the field goals in the ATV? I seriously don't have a clue what it means.
 
Disappointly soon. ~20ish hours of campaign gameplay is abismal for a game that pretty much revolves around single player content.

It depends on how you view value for money.

You can get through Portal 2 in ten hours, but it's some of the best time you can spend in a game, yet it cost £25-30 on it's release.

I think 20 hours out of a SP game is pretty good going. I bet Half Life 2 isn't much longer on a furst play through.
 
Well, within reason. But many people would never be satisfied regardless and always think a game should be longer.

I get that reasoning but I just don't agree with people saying that this is somehow worse value for money due to being shorter "than average". It's not. It's just sadly the state we're in with games these days.
 
How does Rage play on 1gb cards guys? Are there graphical problems with only 1gb vram? (sorry if I'm late to the party).
 
You're late :p

GTX460 will play it perfectly fine constant 60fps at all times at 1920x1200 4x/8xfsaa transcoding on etc.
 
Plenty single players are less than that.

Quality >>>> quantity.

I imagine we will see DLC soon enough :)

Some single player modes for other games may be shorter than this, granted, but those games often have a decent multiplayer, which I cannot say for Rage.

I agree that quality is definitely better than quantity, but whats to say we can't expect both, escpecially given the hype and praises this game was given. There certainly are elements of this game that are great, but I would be lying if I said I wasn't expecting better quality gameplay, especially when it came to the direction and flow of the storyline - repetitive and linear.

As for the DLC, considering we just payed £30 for the game only to have completed it within such a short space of time I'm certainly not impressed we have to pay more to keep interest in the game.

It's a matter of opinion of course.
 
I managed just under 9 hours gameplay on Normal mode doing all the side quests I seen and along the way. Ending was pathetic lol.

570GTX 60fps stable:

Story: I found it alrght and managed just under 9 hours gameplay on normal doing all side missions I seen. Some good missions but its very linear but that didnt bother me at all. I found myself taking a few breaks from this game as I wasnt exactly hooked but I persevered and it got progressively better.

Gameplay: I have read a few posts raving about the gameplay, I'm sorry but its really not that good. It is about the minimum I would expect, still fun in parts but the aiming is very poor and seems slow and clunky. The enemies are a nice touch when they get hit and they move at a good pace but the aiming sucks so hard, think it was to do with being at 60 fps :/ It was so much more fun to just throw wingsticks about and decapitate heads as it was so much smoother and faster paced. Could have used a few more bigger bosses as they were fun but I felt there wasnt enough.

Vehicles were good fun and I found myself liking the handling and upgrades and the same few tracks didnt bother me as much as I thought it was going to.

Graphics: Character detail was very good and so was the scenery detail when entering certain areas but what made it really poor was the texture quality such as pipes painted on and cans and boxes at extremely low detail. They were so bad they stood out way to much, after a few hours I stopped noticing them but as soon as I would talk to an NPC I quickly realised all the poor background boxes and books that were extremely low quality.

Sound:Amazing sound that is very atmospheric and is actually quite scary in certain places. It could be made even scarier with enemies grabbing a hold of you and a shake of the camera. Gets a little repetitive at times like when racing and a few other soundtracks that were drilling on

Menu/Interaction: This is what I hate about all recent PC games. They have poor support for a mouse, I struggled very hard to click on certain items and navigate throughout the different tabs as I had to move my mouse very fast to get it the assign button. I had to up my dpi from 450 -950 to something like 1800+ just to be able to smoothly click on items that made it too fast for aiming and gameplay. It would just not pick up slow/small movements on the menu making it pointless to even use the ctrl shortcut to select ammo, I was just double tapping my weapon binds

Why do all new games have really bad settings for mice? They have acceleration forced on and the mouse feels so poor. I play a really old game and aiming is awesome and browsing through the menu is a dream its just like I am back on the desktop.

The game got better as it went on but I found myself forcing to play through it and with the poor mouse/menu support it was grueling to continue however some gameplay bits were quite fun but like I mentioned earlier it was still nothing to the likes of quake and other fps games where its so much fun to move and shoot. I found it pointless to aim down the sight as it slowed movement and was even less accurate than being hipshot/unscoped!

Games uninstalled but it was enjoyable in parts, huge letdown however!
 
Excellent. Thanks Tart ;-) (Pretty sure this has just sealed my 560Ti order from OcUK).

No prob :)

You may want to consider getting a 2gig card anyhow to be honest. I think we're starting to see more and more (well, 'more and more' than zero) games take advantage of more than a gig of vram. In the next year or so it may be quite beneficial to have.
 
Considering games like Rage don't even use 600MB of VRAM, a 2GB card still isn't required unless you're gaming in extreme widescreen with high FSAA levels!
 
You got to the end? I couldn't even complete the demo on normal. That game's insanely difficult. Serious Sam's got nothing on it :o

I loved Hard Reset - id could do with taking a look at it! A great no-nonsense old-school shooter.

I played it through at least 4 on insane difficulty. I actually have the global highscore for that game :D (I'm ****hawk).
 
Considering games like Rage don't even use 600MB of VRAM, a 2GB card still isn't required unless you're gaming in extreme widescreen with high FSAA levels!

It used 1050mb vram for me yesterday when using max settings with 8xAA.(1150mb with 16xAA)

GPU useage also has hit 85-90%.

It probably uses less than 600mb at same settings without AA though like you said.

By the way does anyone have the odd texture drawing/polygon glitch whilst driving fast?(not talking texture pop up here :p)
 
I'm not sure if this helps anyone, But the game for me is running perfect 1920-1080, 16AA high everything else, all I had to do was disable SLI, with SLI enables it was choppy as hell but once I disabled SLI it's now working like a charm..
 
Last edited:
I play with 4xfsaa and it uses 270~ MB of VRAM, that's at 1920x1200 and with 8K textures. Transcoding is enabled too.
 
That's odd, i am not using a config though due to patch which seems to be working good and also using 285.38s

From your vid though it seemed to be working fine for you.(the fov was a bit too high i think :p)

Does the patch enable 8k res textures when maxed anyway?
 
Back
Top Bottom