id Software seriously needs to rethink their approach to making games

I have been a huge Id fan from back in the day, however going hiatus for a long time, all they came up with is a badly put together game, Rage. The concept was nothing special, but they could have done a far better job. The problem is id is tech minded developer than a entertainment driven, they should need to focus on the entertainment value in order to provide better experience. As a gamer, I couldn't care less how great Rage looks (has to be said, the texture streaming issues is the worst this generation has to offer), it must back those cosmetic beauty with inner substance.

There's nothing at all wrong with RAGE other than people expecting it to be some manner of Fallout clone which it clearly is not.

The game is graphically gorgeous and runs at a consistent 60 fps and the core mechanics are excellent; it's actually one of the better playing FPS on the market.

I'll happily take id's games over the vast majority of military shooters and COD wannabes currently choking the market.

The level design in Rage is bad. They did not take any innovation from this or last gen in level designs for shooters.

Gameplay-wise I don't think RAGE was bad, I just didn't like it. Technically it was disaster, at least on the PC when it came out. What a waste of 30 gigs of hard drive space.

Either way it's pretty obvious that id is no longer a leader in terms of putting out widely-acclaimed/highly-influential games or technology. I'm not really sure what they can do to fix it, since the games industry is no longer at a point where Carmack and a few other dudes can just hack together a AAA game.

Rage is garbage compared to Fallout 3 and NV. It's over before you know it, has nothing to build on in the game, the racing segments felt like filler, and the ending and lack of a final boss was a complete joke.

FPSs need to evolve more, kind of like Borderlands but with SP, if they want to keep up with deeper games in this modern day.

They should make Quake Arena II and Doom 4 and Doom 4 should take place on Earth like Doom II did and have great visuals and tons of enemies (old-school style shooter).

Of course the games should be developed for the PC first and foremost, with the console versions in 2nd plan.

That would please the fanbase imo (except for the CoD wimps, but screw them).

No they don't. Your upset you didn't like Rage? Boohoo, Rage was awesome and there next game will be great too.

Rage had the worst texture streaming issues i have encountered this generation so far, evertime I turn I see new textues pop up. The shooting mechanics is solid, as you'd expect from id. What Rage lacks is content: Depth, levels (they were only less than a dozen levels, which had different enemy conbinations, they used same level twice) and a proper progression. I had no idea the mission I was playing was the final mission, it felt like amiscellaneous mission design for a lot of other games.

I enjoyed Rage it was a fun shooter.

As with many games, I think Rage's primary problem was its hype. It was in development for far too long, and during that time people kept building it up. While I thought it was an alright game, Rage was a mixed bag. It had by far some of the best animations in a game and when they loaded, the textures were fantastic. That said, the game became stale half way through, the streaming issues were a constant problem and you could tell there were porting issues.

I have been a huge Id fan from back in the day, however going hiatus for a long time, all they came up with is a badly put together game, Rage. The concept was nothing special, but they could have done a far better job. The problem is id is tech minded developer than a entertainment driven, they should need to focus on the entertainment value in order to provide better experience. As a gamer, I couldn't care less how great Rage looks (has to be said, the texture streaming issues is the worst this generation has to offer), it must back those cosmetic beauty with inner substance.

Gamer_4_Fun

I suppose it comes down to a matter of personal preference. Rage wasn't a Doom or Quake redux but I liked it. It was interesting, the shooting action was good and it has replay value for me. I missed a lot of stuff in its open world the first time through, so I'm going to play it again after I finish everything else that's in the queue.

There's nothing at all wrong with RAGE other than people expecting it to be some manner of Fallout clone which it clearly is not.

Grammaton-Cleric

Rage is garbage compared to Fallout 3 and NV.

Bigboi500

Excellent. Excellent.

I agree. Graphics alone cant save the day anymore... Not in 2012 at least.

If they want to go back to PC gaming and give their all to make the big graphical difference , lets say a DOOM 4 title with full DX11 and advanced, next-gen graphix , take advantage of 8GB RAM and 64bit OS most PC gamers have already. Generally PC super capabilities.... they might have a chance to return to their old glory... But as they are now... no , graphix is not enough. I agree with you , they need to reconsider their approach.

I bought RAGE for $16 used and had the anarchy edition add ons on it and didn't feel cheated at all. I would have been happy paying $25 for it.

But I do feel bad for the people who payed $60 for it.

idsoftware needs john romero back plain and simple.

I really enjoyed Rage. I think most of the people that complain about it took the fact that it was promoted as RPG like and expected it to be a Fallout clone. If you look at it for what it is...a Shooter / Racer hybrid with some RPG elements you will find it to be a good game. People thought it was going to be open world with lots of stuff to do in between levels. Where as there really isn't much to do except drive from one area to another.

The wife was playing it the other day and I forgot how nice the game looks. Some people knock the graphics for some reason, but if you just sit back and look at it. It's impressive. The god rays, the heat coming off the torches, the views. Sure it's not Crysis, but it's no slouch either.

I really enjoyed Rage. I think most of the people that complain about it took the fact that it was promoted as RPG like and expected it to be a Fallout clone. If you look at it for what it is...a Shooter / Racer hybrid with some RPG elements you will find it to be a good game. People thought it was going to be open world with lots of stuff to do in between levels. Where as there really isn't much to do except drive from one area to another.

The wife was playing it the other day and I forgot how nice the game looks. Some people knock the graphics for some reason, but if you just sit back and look at it. It's impressive. The god rays, the heat coming off the torches, the views. Sure it's not Crysis, but it's no slouch either.

coasterguy65

At most they should do zoom view games like duke nukem forever.

They need american mcgee back too.

lol you can still strafe jump in rage like quake though doesnt fit iron sight really though.

Rage was a great game, But it did get really boring near the end.

id hasn't been relevant since 1999. They've long since been trampled by other FPS developers with better ideas. Well, developers with ideas, period.

You say they are tech focused yet barely any third party used the Doom 3 engine and I don't think anybody will use the RAGE engine. I personally think the RAGE engine is a horrible side step for id. nutcrackr

These days with Epic spending the vast majority of their resources on engine licensing, you can't just make a game and say "meh, I guess we'll license the tech too". It has to be something you're really devoted to, and I don't think that was ever the case for id.

They're not licensing their engine anyore, so you're pretty much guaranteed that nobody else is going to use it. :P

These days with Epic spending the vast majority of their resources on engine licensing, you can't just make a game and say "meh, I guess we'll license the tech too". It has to be something you're really devoted to, and I don't think that was ever the case for id.

Teufelhuhn

There's nothing at all wrong with RAGE other than people expecting it to be some manner of Fallout clone which it clearly is not.

The game is graphically gorgeous and runs at a consistent 60 fps and the core mechanics are excellent; it's actually one of the better playing FPS on the market.

I'll happily take id's games over the vast majority of military shooters and COD wannabes currently choking the market.

Grammaton-Cleric

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]They're not licensing their engine anyore, so you're pretty much guaranteed that nobody else is going to use it. :P

These days with Epic spending the vast majority of their resources on engine licensing, you can't just make a game and say "meh, I guess we'll license the tech too". It has to be something you're really devoted to, and I don't think that was ever the case for id.

nutcrackr

Rage was interesting until it came out. The game was a decent shooter but the world was useless

Something was off about Rage. It's a good game, but for some reason I didn't like it all that much. And that part in the supermarket I think where you get assaulted from all sides for like 30 minutes... Really? There's not a single article on the shelf why are they all shopping?!?

a developer living off past glories.

both rage and doom 3 were painfully average

id's demise was initiated by the shift to consoles as the dominant FPS market and the subsequent wussification of the average FPS player.

They can't make games with dynamic movement and weapons anymore because they won't function properly on a gamepad, and also because all of that frightens the current-generation shooter fan who just wants regenerating health and no more than two guns at a time, with the only movement options they have to consider being sprint or crouch.

The result was that they decided to go after graphics and engines full-time, seeing as how they have Carmack, but they couldn't make up for the loss of gameplay mechanics.

id's demise was initiated by the shift to consoles as the dominant FPS market and the subsequent wussification of the average FPS player.

They can't make games with dynamic movement and weapons anymore because they won't function properly on a gamepad, and also because all of that frightens the current-generation shooter fan who just wants regenerating health and no more than two guns at a time, with the only movement options they have to consider being sprint or crouch.

The result was that they decided to go after graphics and engines full-time, seeing as how they have Carmack, but they couldn't make up for the loss of gameplay mechanics.

syztem

They should make Quake Arena II and Doom 4 and Doom 4 should take place on Earth like Doom II did and have great visuals and tons of enemies (old-school style shooter).

Of course the games should be developed for the PC first and foremost, with the console versions in 2nd plan.

That would please the fanbase imo (except for the CoD wimps, but screw them).

nameless12345

On a technical level it was rather poor, although the game's visuals were somewhat saved by the interesting, colourful art design. In terms of gameplay, I thought it was absolutely terrific. The gunfights were a mix of FEAR and BioShock, with light tactical combat and tons of crazy weapons. The game's main problem is that it lacked a clear structure, and the open world element felt out-of-place. But in the end I really enjoyed the 20 hours I spent on it (including the new DLC), and I'm sure I'll replay it at one point.

[QUOTE="syztem"]

id's demise was initiated by the shift to consoles as the dominant FPS market and the subsequent wussification of the average FPS player.

They can't make games with dynamic movement and weapons anymore because they won't function properly on a gamepad, and also because all of that frightens the current-generation shooter fan who just wants regenerating health and no more than two guns at a time, with the only movement options they have to consider being sprint or crouch.

The result was that they decided to go after graphics and engines full-time, seeing as how they have Carmack, but they couldn't make up for the loss of gameplay mechanics.

capaho

[QUOTE="capaho"]What exactly are you saying? That they don't know how to code games for consoles?syztem