RAGE : It Deserves its own thread now!

Status
Not open for further replies.
The current rumor is that royalties increase with the number of discs. Something like 5-10-15-etc or so. Mind you this is not confirmed at all, but would explain id's hesitation. Maybe even how GTA4 ended up on a single DVD...
 
There's that same interview already posted in this thread, too ;). Edit : I think this interview is actually the Horse's mouth, rather than a journo's reporting.
 
It looks quite good, but we definitely need some direct feed video, as these camera videos always tend to look better than the 'real thing'.
In fact I'm thinking about how to simulate the same effect as in game post processing effect :)

Please elaborate!?! :mrgreen:

Do you mean the handle video camera effect that gives you the perception that a game has an ungodly amount of free anti-aliasing, life-like washed out colors, and the captured natural lighting or indoor interior lighting giving the higher contrast ratio & detailed look, all produced/captured by video camera itself, thus giving the perception the video game has an higher IQ, rather than the videogame itself, in real-time? :idea:
 
I think we're glossing over a fundamental issue here. No one wants to swap discs in the middle of an action game. Moreover, developers don't want to be tasked with divvying up content between multiple discs. I'm surprised that no one here is talking about how having to swap discs at various points in the game might affect the flow of RAGE. MGS4 didn't have disc swapping, but it did have hard-disk swapping -- making you wait through installs if you wanted to change acts. Not so much of a problem with the game being linear, but is RAGE going to be linear?

Perhaps the solution Carmack is working on is mandatory installation. He could essentially compress the game onto one disc with procedural generation of mega textures on the first load. But I think mandatory installation is another one of MS's no-nos that he's gonna have to petition against. It's received so much negative press when PS3 games have had it, that MS would not want to come under such fire, plus not every 360 owner has a hard drive.
 
For all we know it's three zones across three disks. Unless it's totally open-world, separating the content into disks according to the flow of the story isn't much of an issue.
 
That would seem unlikely--DVDs are pennies to press and it is akin to id Software asking Sony to pony up for the extra development effort they had to put in on the PS3.
I was considering that pennies a disk at millions of disks adds up quite a bit, and if such a game will only require a third disk because "developers lose upwards of 2 gigs of space per a disc because of information Microsoft requires developers to put on the discs" then I can see why they would want to persuade MS into covering that cost. After all, that alone makes their engine less atractive to license, where as the extra development costs put into optimizing their engine for the PS3 does the opposite.

However, having seen the acutal interview on 1up now, I see he does specificly mention "an extra licensing fee per-disk".
 
developers lose upwards of 2 gigs of space per a disc because of information Microsoft requires developers to put on the discs"

What does this mean? I assume he's referring to whatever it is on the discs that knocks the capacity down from the 8.5 GB theoretical of DVD-9 to the 7.2 we know on 360 DVD's.

But thats less than 2GB difference..

It doesnt seem like he could be referring to an ADITTIONAL 2GB, as that would knock capacity down to ~5 GB!

Wonder what he is referring to, and what that data is, copy protection stuff?
 
wolfenstien use something called Id Tech 4 plus, which is a upgrade doom 3 engine basically.

It's actually the *same* engine as Doom3, just with a few upgrades. RAGE is the first title to utilize IdTech5, Doom 4 is apparently the next to use it, unless licensing is already underway with other devs ready to beat Id to the punch (which I seriously doubt).
 
What does this mean? I assume he's referring to whatever it is on the discs that knocks the capacity down from the 8.5 GB theoretical of DVD-9 to the 7.2 we know on 360 DVD's.

But thats less than 2GB difference..

It doesnt seem like he could be referring to an ADITTIONAL 2GB, as that would knock capacity down to ~5 GB!

Wonder what he is referring to, and what that data is, copy protection stuff?

I thought the 8.5->7.2 loss was already copy-protection stuff. He could just be exagerating numbers for effect, to get more of a rise out of those of us who don't know the truth and have to rely on 'people in the know'.
 
I thought the 8.5->7.2 loss was already copy-protection stuff. He could just be exagerating numbers for effect, to get more of a rise out of those of us who don't know the truth and have to rely on 'people in the know'.

You just have to take a look at the illegal Iso Images, 7GB is the limit not 5.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top