Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 10 Oct 2011.
So - they did not allow people to adjust the settings because the hardware people are using would not conform to one standard? Isn't the point of having adjustable settings to allow people to have the best performance for their particular system?
I didn't have much of an issue last night when I played it.
Looked pretty, played reasonably. That said, there were some graphical errors, and some crashes, but eh. I feel more saddened that I've come to expect that of a new game than it happening.
still not been able to play with my amd 5770
I thought it might be worth it to let you know about my experience with the game based on all the issues everyone is having.
So far I haven't had any issues. My hardware is as follows: Q6600, 2 gigs of DDR2, 9800gt. The game runs really well, at a constant 60. I occasionally have issues with screen tearing. I don't experience any texture pop in and the game looks very good as well.
I suppose I could patch my game but there isn't much of a point for me.
Gameplay wise I'm really liking the game as well. The pacing could use some work though and I'm not sure what the main plot is yet and I feel like I should. Racing portions are pretty fun. Gunplay is satisfying but it's killing the same enemy over and over can get a little old.
Also I'm using whatever the current official nvidia drivers are as of today. I rolled back the beta drivers required for the BF3 beta.
well every other developer seems to manage just fine with adjustable settings so whats the issue ID ??
They probably rushed the PC version in order to get the console games out on time, or something like that. Yes I know it's conjecture, but Id clearly seems to be making consoles their priority now.
Not conjecture, Carmack has already said as much.
The problem many have with this view is, on one hand they say the games don't sell as well on PC, but then, they don't really put the development special effort/ polish in that would push up interest amongst PC gamers. So it becomes a self fulfilling thing.
The issues that drove them from PC to consoles have largely been mitigated in the intervening years, some Studios are even coming back to PC as a primary platform like Epic ...yet there are others still pushing out console -PC ports, with the implication that things are still exactly the same.
Reading into it, it seems id Tech 5 is designed to automatically adjust the quality of the graphics on the fly based on how much grunt is available to maintain a steady FPS.
Manual settings are therefore supposed to be irrelevent, as the engine will always find the best graphics in order to ensure 60FPS.
Unfortunately it seems the system that calculates what graphic settings to use itself uses so much horse-power, it's creating a downward spiral and trashing the FPS. It's also what's causing the slow pop-ups.
On a personal note, I'd always prefer to run at 30FPS in a single-player and have better graphics. Forcing me to use worse graphics to ensure 60FPS is just mean.
I had issues with the game locking up every few seconds with my 6850, then I found a fix.
Set Rage Launch Options -
Once it was running smoothly I installed the Rage patch via Steam which allowed me to switch V-sync on to fix most of the tearing and then switched the texture cache to high which fixed the horrible texture pop in's.
In now looks great and runs smoothly, peachy.
Shame it didn't work out of the box on PC but I'm happy it's working now.
ah cool mikey.. yeah been playing it but only at 30fps on a old driver to get around that issue- thats a forced update in steam
tweaked the hell out of my ragecfg.cfg, you can do the vsync and fix the texture popins in the cfg too.. been a non issue since launch for most.. the games good looking in a lot of ways- but ati really needed to fix that
I'll give it a shot later
is it just me or has the handling on the cars changed... it seems that the turning has become less responsive.
lucky that I didn't bother installing Rage on my main gaming rig (with an AMD gpu) and instead on the HTPC. although I can't set the AA to 16x(my fps halves to 30 or lower), I can set everything else at max settings at HD res with a GTS 450. looks nice enough since I get a steady 60fps.
I suppose that's one thing that ID Dev's didn't account for, each person has a different level of comfort. I have some buddies that won't play a game unless they can max the refresh rate on their monitor. But Bauul likes his frames slower. I've found that I'm usually fine as long as the frames don't drop below 40 in most games.
I'm going to wait until this is a bargain ($25 or less) price and all worked out. Mostly because I'm penny pinching. I'm curious to try this one out though.
Did ID forget that PC gamers have been happily tweaking settings for about 30 years?
I am a PC user so I demand that I can do things like I want to do. I do not want to run 60fps with low graphics. I want to run 30fps with all eye candy. And if It is to low in frame rate I want to adjust any graphics settings there is possible to set. Seems to me ID thinks that in 2011 PC users === Console users.
I am not a stupid console user that only knows what the start/reset button is. I know how I can optimize EMM386 settings in the config.sys of DOS to run DOOM for christ sakes. I wish to be treated as a PC user that has a brain and knows his way around Game settings and not like a console moron.
Hey hey hey, calm your passion! We can all live in harmony?!
At the moment I'm playing Rage on the PC and Gears 3 on the 360. Having fun with both..
I agree with obi- pretty lame you have to edit cvars to fix the game..
posted some more pics in the gaming section- you can see how compressed some of the textures are.. especially the floor and walls in the factory there- can even see it on the zombie
Separate names with a comma.