Koki on 7/8/2009 at 17:47
So this is what passes as "post-apocalyptic" nowodays? Seems like another genre got fagged up all to hell.
june gloom on 7/8/2009 at 18:00
Yeah, it looks all cel-shaded and shit.
Renzatic on 7/8/2009 at 18:22
Yeah, might be the 360 version. It'll be the platform with the weakest resolution, since they have to render the megatexture down to fit on a couple (3?) DVDs. The PC and PS3 version should look a little crisper.
Quote Posted by Wormrat
Also, the comments there say that the lighting is mostly pre-baked and won't be fully dynamic. I suppose that doesn't matter as much for outdoor environments, though--there aren't too many moving light sources out in the desert.
Damn. I was hoping Id found a good way to fake radiosity. Oh well. Even at this point in time, it's still better to prerender your lighting than going all realtime. A good example of this would be to compare Source to Tech 4. T4 is a good bit beefier than Source on the tech specs, but HL2 and the like looked far more aesthetically pleasing than either Doom 3 or Quake 4 due to the baked lighting. A good mix of both worlds would be your best bet if you want a game to look as realistic as possible without requiring a supercomputer to play.
The only downside is you won't have as dramatic day/night transitions in Rage as you would in, say, Fallout 3, if it's all prebaked.
Muzman on 7/8/2009 at 21:23
I thought the rendering in those shots was kind of crap, to be frank.
Maybe I'm behind on what the big deal is about it, but the lighting in particular is kinda fake-o and cartoony; like someone photoshopped an hdr composite of real canyon photographs (particularly the ones with water in them).
The shadows are also really flat and dead with no secondary light in them at all.
I guess I was expecting a jump in more than scale.
lost_soul on 8/8/2009 at 18:32
I really enjoyed Doom 3. It doesn't matter to me if every FPS game is innovative, as long as it is put together well and it is fun to play. Just like platformers: you can never have too many of them to choose from.
I'm excited to see the Doom 3 engine released under the GPL. I don't know how successful it will be though, because it wasn't exactly a commercial boom. We already have engines like Darkplaces that can do many of the things Doom 3 can do (sans physics).
I wish id Software better luck with their new engine and for goodness sake, DON"T SWITCH TO DIRECT3D!!!
lost_soul on 11/8/2009 at 18:31
I wonder when Wolfenstein and Rage will be released. I doubt they'll release id Tech 4 under GPL until both of these happen. This is understandable because they would be kinda shooting themselves in the foot if they gave out their only current engine.
Renault on 11/8/2009 at 20:23
Interesting (and sad), on video 3 he talks about how games (like Rage) have become too complex to create mods for (about 1:30 in). :(
steo on 12/8/2009 at 18:24
He's so... blonde.
Ostriig on 13/8/2009 at 00:34
Quote Posted by Brethren
Interesting (and sad), on video 3 he talks about how games (like Rage) have become too complex to create mods for (about 1:30 in). :(
I dunno... Sure, the difficulty of making mods and even just maps has ramped up phenomenally, but I wouldn't say that we're at that point. Putting out modding tools is a considerable effort, and for whatever reasons, some companies do and some companies don't, but, in a non-critical way, I find it unlikely that Rage's level editor might be of
such a degree of complexity that it would be out of the grasp of ordinary modders, especially since Carmack had only just mentioned in one of the earlier vids that a considerable advantage of their new virtual texturing system was making it a lot easier for their level builders to paint gamespaces.
