Rage Against the (Benchmark) Machine

Rage came out a little over a week ago, and in the aftermath we’ve discovered some interesting pieces of information. I thought I’d chime in with some thoughts on the game itself, a look at various image quality settings, and a discussion of benchmarks with the title and why they’re virtually meaningless. First, let’s start with the game itself.

I know a lot of people have had issues getting Rage to run well, and that has certainly colored impressions of the game. Lucky for me, I’m not one of those unfortunate souls: with the NVIDIA 285.38 beta driver released at nearly the same time as the game, I updated drivers and never encountered any severe issues with stability or playability. I also tried Rage on an AMD HD 6950 system, which generally worked okay, but I did notice some texture flickering/corruption going on. I’m certainly running higher spec hardware than most people (i7-965 Extreme running at 3.65GHz with 12GB DDR3-1333 and a GTX 580/HD 6950 2GB), but with my gaming systems the experience has been remarkably stable and playable. What about the game play?

Here’s where things get a little shaky. First impressions are okay, but by the time you’re running around on an ATV in a wasteland environment 5 minutes into the game, it’s impossible to ignore comparisons with Borderlands. Both games are FPS titles with vehicular elements, set in a predominantly desert environment. Borderlands takes place on a different planet with some muddled background information and Rage is set in the not-too-distant future after an asteroid smashes into the Earth and scatters some new mineral that appears to cause mutations everywhere. Whatever the back story, however, both settings feel a lot like Mad Max’s post-apocalypse world of gangs, bandits, and vehicular mayhem. Then again, I loved the original Wasteland as an early teen (on my Commodore 64 no less!), all the Fallout games (including the oft-panned Fallout: Tactics), and the Road Warrior movies, so I’m okay with revisiting the wasteland.

Gallery: Rage

Delving deeper, Borderlands had a nice cell-shaded aesthetic with a rudimentary storyline, and most interactions with “NPCs” as such came in the way of talking robots, job boards, and vending machines. This may come as a bit of a shock, but I actually found the Rage storyline and NPCs to be superior to Borderlands. That’s right: the same people that brought us Wolfenstein, Doom, and Quake actually put some effort into the story this time! That doesn’t mean the story isn’t a bit cliché, but at least there’s something here other than a pure shooter. I think the best comparison would be that the story is presented much like the original Diablo (or maybe Diablo 2) in that you have NPCs in towns who serve as little more than quest givers and background providers, but they don’t go anywhere and your actions typically don’t affect the world around you other than ridding areas of bad guys. The story is also strictly linear with no chance for role playing; you’re here to save the wasteland from the power-mongering Authority, helping others along the way. Some of the side quests (e.g. from the job boards) are optional, but you either do the job(s) or you don’t.

So the story is okay if not great, but what about the game? I wasted more than a few days (weeks) playing Quake and similar titles in my college days, but I’ll be honest: I’m pretty much done with multiplayer gaming now. I haven’t even tried it in Rage, but unless it’s quite different from the single-player experience it’s not going to be the hyper-speed twitch shooter that Quake was. If you’re looking for a multiplayer title to test your mettle, I’ll defer to other opinions; as a single-player experience, though, this is a pretty major departure from previous id titles.

Your character moves at moderate speed with the option to sprint for a limited time, at which point you start panting and resort to regular speed. You have an (unlimited as far as I can tell) inventory along with various items to use, and you can sell and buy ammo, items, and other stuff at several shops scattered around the game world. There are likewise various components and ingredients strewn throughout the game that can be combined (engineered) into useful items. Yes, there were similar pseudo-crafting elements to Borderlands as well, though here most of the items are either ammo modifications or one-use items instead of permanent character/weapon mods. It’s a strange mix, really, where id Software has created a title that feels more like Deus Ex or System Shock in how you manage your equipment than Quake or Doom—but don’t let that comparison make you think the story or freedom to play as you want is up to the level of the DX/SS games.

The driving sections work well enough, providing a nice change of pace from walking around, but the races and vehicles don’t really do much other than provide you with something to do other than walking. They give you cash to upgrade your weapons/vehicles as well. Elsewhere, Rage is pretty standard shooter fare: there are ten weapons comprising the usual assortment of fists, pistol, shotguns, machine guns, sniper rifle, crossbow, and rocket launcher, and a “futuristic” weapon at the very end (a plasma gun/BFG). Most weapons also have a variety of ammunition available; typically these just do more damage, but one causes electrocution (shoot at water to kill multiple enemies), another lets you mind-control the target for a bit before they detonate/die, and others add explosion/penetration to your ammo. You can also lay out turrets and mobile turrets, though it’s hardly necessary (at least on normal difficulty). Overall, the variety of options for weapons and ammo is good, though my go-to weapons for most of the game were the sniper rifle and shotgun, with the pistol working well for the first half or so. I also hoarded my special ammo for far too long, thinking I’d need it later; hint: you won’t (again on normal difficulty).

I’m going to keep this short (too late?) and just give my overall impression of the game before we get to some talk about the technical aspects of the game. Rage is a fun distraction, and it looks quite nice overall. I grew up in the deserts of Utah and spent plenty of time out near the Grand Canyon, and Rage does an excellent job of capturing the feel of the place. That also means that it’s a very brown game, and the game itself even acknowledges this in their Quayola Quaons easter egg (a “very rare collection of Quayola’s Brown Spectrum Quayons”). The texturing may not always be as crisp as I’d like, but if there’s any straight repeating of textures in the environments it’s very hard to spot. Shadows on the other hand are practically absent; the environments are all pre-calculated lighting, with only characters and vehicles casting 1-light-source shadows. Basically, id traded dynamic lighting for performance, and it definitely shows on high-end PCs where numerous games look better.

My take is that Rage looks good if not exceptional, and at least in my testing it runs well. If you’re looking for a new shooter to while away ~15 hours, this will suffice, but be prepared for the equivalent of a summer action blockbuster. As a movie-type experience, I’d rate Rage at 2.5 stars; it’s fun and exciting, but you’re not going to have an emotional reaction or learn something new and insightful. If we’re going with letter grades, it’s somewhere in the B or B- range. Fans of Borderlands will also likely find something to enjoy here, though they might also be struck with a sense of déjà vu—did the two developers branch off from the same design document a couple years back? Rage makes me want to go back and replay Borderlands (a game I never did quite finish, despite playing for over 20 hours), just to see if it’s any better; right now, they’re basically a tie in my book. Also, the ending of Rage felt very anti-climactic; there were a couple big boss battles earlier and I expected one at the end, but it never came; weird. Anyway, that’s one man’s opinion; take it for what it’s worth.

Technical Discussion


View All Comments

  • cactusdog - Saturday, October 15, 2011 - link

    What is it with games these days? It seems like nearly every game, even highly anticipated games are broken, have features missing or have serious flaws when they're first released. Its like AMD and Nvidia dont give them any attention until they are released and people are complaining.

    Its like they dont care about PC gaming anymore.
  • Stas - Saturday, October 15, 2011 - link

    Try Hard Reset. PC exclusive of highest quality. Don't apply, if you don't enjoy a mix of Serious Sam, Painkiller, and Doom 3 :) Reply
  • cmdrdredd - Saturday, October 15, 2011 - link

    It's not AMD or Nvidia at all...blame the devs and bean counters at the big publishers for pushing for console releases. Reply
  • AssBall - Saturday, October 15, 2011 - link

    ^^ This Reply
  • ckryan - Saturday, October 15, 2011 - link

    Back when I was just knee-high to a bullfrog, I seem to remember having some technical difficulties with Ultima VII. In that case, it was certainly worth the aggravation. It's not a new phenomenon, but in fairness, games and the platforms they run on are much more complicated now. In between the time you spend with Microsoft for your Xbox version and Sony for your PS3 version, you have to find time to work with AMD/nVidia for your PC version. Technical issues are bad, but giving me a barely-warmed over console port is the worse sin. Sometimes the itchy rash of consolitis is minor, like some small UI issues (Press the Start Button!). Other times, it's deeply annoying, making me wonder if the developers have actually ever played a PC game before. Some games, like TES:Oblivion, have issues that can be corrected later by a dedicated mod community -- another important element for the identity of PC gaming.

    So while technical issues at launch for a game that's been in development for 3 to 5 years are inexcusable, there are some issues that are worse. Inane plots, bad mechanics, and me-too gameplay styles are making me question how committed some companies are to making PC gaming worthwhile (for consumers and therefore the industry as well). The PC is far and away the finest gaming platform, but some developers really need to try harder. Maybe PC gamers just expect more, but I say that we're a forgiving bunch -- but you have to bring your (triple) A-game.
  • JonnyDough - Monday, October 17, 2011 - link

    ^^ THIS! Reply
  • Snowstorms - Saturday, October 15, 2011 - link

    consoles have drastically influenced PC optimization

    it has gotten so bad that I have started to check if the game is a PC exclusive, if it's not I'm already on my toes
  • brucek2 - Saturday, October 15, 2011 - link

    id claims the problems were mostly driver incompatibilities, which is a story we've all heard before.

    I wish publishers would include the drivers they qualified their games on as an optional part of their release. In an ideal situation the current and/or beta drivers already on your system would be fine and you wouldn't need them. But in the all too common screwed up situation, you could at least install those particular drivers for this particular game and know it was supposed to work.
  • taltamir - Saturday, October 15, 2011 - link

    Why is it nvidia/AMD's job to fix games?
    they do it, but they shouldn't need to. The drivers are out, they exist, they are speced.

    And every single indie developer manages to make games that work without a driver update. Meanwhile major A titles ofter are released buggy and then nVidia and AMD scramble to hack it to so that the drivers identify the EXE and fix it. For example, Both companies gut the AA process included in most games and forces it to use a proper & modern AA solution for better quality and performance. (MSAA has been obsolete for years.)
  • JarredWalton - Saturday, October 15, 2011 - link

    Most major AA titles have the developers in contact with NVIDIA and AMD, and they tell the GPU guys what stuff isn't working well and needs fixing (although anecdotally, I hear NVIDIA is much better at responding to requests). This is particularly true when a game does something "new", i.e. an up-to-date OpenGL release when we really haven't seen much from that arena in a while. I agree with the above post that says the devs should state what driver version they used for testing, but I wouldn't be surprised if that's covered by an NDA with the GPU companies. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now