Make some room for the Rage PC specs

@Tradio
There's nothing wrong with a flexible engine. Now, if only the original Crysis knew that...

@Tradio

DAT OPTIMIZATION

@Tradio

You realize that's a good thing? I mean, a game programming god wrote this after all.

@Tradio
That's actually awesome. If Rage can look that good while running on only a 9800, that's a major blow to all the people claiming you can't get good visuals on a PC for less than a few hundred bucks. (9800 GTX is a $60 card now)

@Tradio
Unlike what Crysis would have you believe, you *can* have a game that looks amazing on top-of-the-line PC's, but still runs on just a decent PC.

@Tradio

In some cases, yes, low specs could mean it wont be as graphically awesome as we would expect. But seeing as how this is id, and John Carmack is basically the jesus of game programming, I think it's pretty safe to assume the game is just optimized to hell and back again.

@BlueRajasmyk

Yeah no kidding, anyone can implement every rendering technique in the book (Crysis), the hard part is making it not run like shit.

@Raffi256


But the Game doesn't have DX11, also why it doesn't need top of the like QuadSLI GTX 590s or whatever have you.

@Tradio I kinda agree actually. No matter how good id might be at optimizing engines, there are limits to what can be done.
Now, I assume that "recommended" specs meant to be able to run the game on average (averge-ish graphical settings at about 30-40fps on 1920x1080). So if the minimum performance requires cards 3 generations behind (correct me if I'm wrong) and average performance requires cards 2 generations behind, I'm going to extrapolate and assume that top performance would only really need a last generation card. Which is a bit disappointing for a supposedly cutting edge game, no matter how well it's optimized.

Now, who knows, maybe despite all that they nonetheless did achieve graphics that are richer, with more detailed textures, higher poly counts, mad draw distances and more shaders than any other game on the market now or in the near future, all the while only requiring a single Radeon HD 5850 to run (or the nvidia equivalent) - but I doubt it.

But even if they did, all it means is that they should've used all those optimizations to push the game even further, so that at maximum settings it brings any current generation system to its knees (or at least a slow limp walk), because at the end of the day, optimizations or no - that's what "cutting edge" suppose to do.

@Tradio

"for a game thats suppose to be cutting edge on graphics...awfully low rec specs."

The game requires a GPU that is several times faster than the ones found in contemporary consoles and it requires a CPU that makes Xenon or CELL look comparatively slow in terms of IPC. A game can be optimized for that specific hardware configuration and grossly exceed what the console iterations are capable of putting out.

@Raffi256
While he is a game programming god I feel sorry for the people who work for him. I've heard of him going in and breaking the game by updating the engine at random and not telling his programmers what he did.

@Tradio have you seen the gameplay?, it looks amazing!, having average specs has nothing to do with the quality of the final game, i's not like they took down the graphics so it could run on less powerful machines

@2late2die

Software and Hardware are in a perpetual state of "1Up"ing the other and have been since the inception of computing.

Welcome to the PC platform.

@BlueRajasmyk Except that Rage doesn't look as good as Crysis... don't get me wrong, I'm glad to see an optimized and good looking engine, but I have yet to see anything that looks as good as C or C2.

@Jennacide ...you can get a GTX260 for 69.99 now...screw a 9800GTX..they dont even sell those at most places I look. Also to all the people bashing on Crysis...that was 2007. It takes years of work to optimize graphics properly...and it ran fine on high with an 8800GT which isn't as good as these specs.

@DAmwake
Considering what the guys at Id managed to get running on a friggin' iPhone, it's not too surprising that the PC version of Rage would be optimized like woah

@Ellimem

Whatever it is, it sure is a fatty at 25 Gigs.

@CaptainProtonX

Remember how big the id Tech 5 demo was? It was a couple minutes long but terabytes in size. I'm surprised they figured how to compress it this much.

@CaptainProtonX Obviously they hate Canadian PC gamers.

@DarkSonata Ok? I wanna see your high specs!

@Supino
That's like a $50 graphics card for recommended...

@einhanderkiller

That would be REAL progress if a modern game can be coded to run well on a cheap card versus buying a $400 behemoth that needs 3 power plugs and needs a wind tunnel for ventilation.

Granted, you won't get "mad props" for the "rig" from the "homies".

@CaptainProtonX

That last line made me legitimately 'LOL'. Well done.

@iceytoa1

You can't contain the RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE!

@iceytoa1

Imagine if you met yourself from 10 years ago and told him you'd just put a 25 Gb game on your hard drive.

He'd kill you and reclaim your place in the present as his own.

Full sizes for some older games.

Duke Nukem 3D. 30MB
Half-Life. 200MB
Quake. 40MB
Doom. Around 10MB

Hell, Mario 64 was 8MB, and Conker's Bad Fur Day was one of the two largest Nintendo 64 games, at 64MB.

25GB is a tough amount to swallow, for a game like this.

@iceytoa1 It's not the size of Dragon Age Ultimate edition which was closer to 30 gigs, still I'm gonna have to clear a ton of stuff of my hard drive

@MrAlex

Disturbing but in no way creates a paradox.

+1

@Drakkenfyre funny your comparing old games file sizes to current generation file size... yeah um ok .. FYI my first gaming systems were atari then intellivision been pc gaming when it was all Dos and floppys

@Supino

What is a man, but a miserable pile of secrets?

@Copybass Ah jeez zombies

But enough talk! Have at you!

@CaptainProtonX

You guys make me LOL. And cry at the the same time since the REAL castlevania games are gone now... (sniffle)

@Copybass Ah jeez zombies

Mmm, sure, that and a pair of testicles.

@yab

I don't think it'll be more than an 9-10GB download... the rest is just unpacking the data on you HDD

@yab
Time to get a new ISP. I recommend BT or Virgin, they're available almost everywhere in the UK now and you get a connection between 40 and 50mbps. Everyone I know is on it now.

@Rain

Unless you have knowledge of him, he may not be in the UK.

@Steel Toad

Hope you're right, even with that it'll take a while and want to play it asap. And to the other guy, thanks for the recommendation, albeit I don't live in the UK.

@yab Yeah... im trying to get my parents to call our internet provider. We have basic DSL from AT&T at $15 a month, says we should get areound 768kb/sec (shit i know)... Heres the catch.

We only get 75kb/sec. ( Yes that is .075Mb/sec). Moral of story: AT&T sucks major ass and i will kill them all.