Official Review Thread: - As they come in post them here!

[bes]

I have a friend that is on the fence about this game and wont get anything unless there are reviews of 80 or above...

I would like to play co-op with him ... but I cant find any reviews yet...

Anyone have any links with reviews?

[Cut2TheChase]

Dude, I for one do not hold out much hope for this game, it might be good but I fear it will suffer from consolization like almost every other game I have seen this year. The COOP is 2 player and no campaign coop.
Bleh,
http://www.co-optimus.com/article/6745/rage-system-requirements-revealed-first-co-op-trailer.html

[DJ Cryotek]

I see no reason to think this game has been "consolized" more than any other game out there. Relax.

On the other hand, I want some freaking reviews. What is with this crap where they can't release review until, well, it's too late.

[JKflipflop]

I broke down and got it just because it's iD. I can't say I'm happy with what I've heard about it so far, but oh well.

[Cordliss]

I see no reason to think this game has been "consolized" more than any other game out there. Relax.

On the other hand, I want some freaking reviews. What is with this crap where they can't release review until, well, it's too late.

I wouldn't be surprised if the reviews don't start coming till tomorrow when its official released its just not something bethesda does. I don't remember them releasing early reviews on Fallout 3 and Brink.

[JKflipflop]

That's because Brink was a huge let-down.

[viehrea_siili]

I love brink! Only issues are the some performance problems and that the game is dead :/

[Ergates]

If I remember rightly, there was no early review for Doom 3...

[mudflaps]

was the engine not created to be multi platform? I think it was. But hopefully Id have done a stella job, even the chief was hinting at a proper texture pack for pc gamers. The game is gunna be good for it laughs and its sillyness, if it is a game like mw where you run from a to b kill everything then move on from a to be, then the game will suck.

BRINK SUX ♥♥♥♥ thats why it is dead.

[mudflaps]

lol when hitboxes dont work in sp....

each to their own i suppose

[deazydoo]

waiting for review so its good enought

Yo get in mind that this game is the most expected games of 2011, It will be on TOP LIST of games of 2011 and you waiting for a ♥♥♥♥in review so that is good enought

[rmaverick]

pc gamer early reviewed Doom 3 and gave it a 94%, which was highly overrated.

that review really got the hype machine rolling...

[bes]

I already have RAGE ..its already pre-loaded ...ready to play tonite ....my friend though always waits for reviews before he will purchase..

To me a lot of good games have a lower than 80 review score and they are really good ..so I wouldn't base my decision on just reviews..

I only made this thread because I wanted to get him to buy it before the games release...but im guessing there are NO reviews yet..

[Cordliss]

pc gamer early reviewed Doom 3 and gave it a 94%, which was highly overrated.

that review really got the hype machine rolling...

Sorry to break your bubble but the game was great for the time that it came out, looking back on history and saying that it was overrated is just bulls**t when games still looked like garbage in comparison. Doom 3 required some pretty high hardware at the time and helped push the genre forward. Considering the game could be played on the original xbox Id say it was pretty amazing for the time. About the only other game that looked as good was Half Life 2 so please stop with the nonsense.

[rmaverick]

even pc gamer admitted publicly that they jumped the shark on that review. The game was gorgeous, but at its heart it was a very repetitive corridor crawl with monster closets. Not interesting enough for a second play thru, and I love all things shooter related...

[Cordliss]

even pc gamer admitted publicly that they jumped the shark on that review. The game was gorgeous, but at its heart it was a very repetitive corridor crawl with monster closets. Not interesting enough for a second play thru, and I love all things shooter related...

So was every other shooter at the time, people didn't really bother with open world shooters until Far Cry made it successful, the tech just wasn't quite there yet. I played through the game about 4 times and still find it to be great and even better after modders started bringing shader and paralex occulsion mods for it.

[HydrantHunter]

Sorry to break your bubble but the game was great for the time that it came out, looking back on history and saying that it was overrated is just bulls**t when games still looked like garbage in comparison.
Well, sorry to burst *your* bubble, but good graphics don't mean the game was great. DooM 3 was *not* great - it was OK - and compared to Doom 1 and 2 it was a letdown (because they were more fun, regardless of the graphics).
...About the only other game that looked as good was Half Life 2 so please stop with the nonsense.
Half-Life 2 was nowhere near the graphical fidelity of DooM 3. HL2 was a great looking game, but saying it 'looked as good' is a long stretch of the imagination.

[mikeopam]

I don't know some are upset there is no review before the game comes out. If you just have to buy a game the day it comes out, then you take your chances. That's the decision you make when you get in a hurry. I have plenty of games to play, I can wait for awhile and don't need to buy a game on day one.

[Cordliss]

Well, sorry to burst *your* bubble, but good graphics don't mean the game was great. DooM 3 was *not* great - it was OK - and compared to Doom 1 and 2 it was a letdown (because they were more fun, regardless of the graphics).

Half-Life 2 was nowhere near the graphical fidelity of DooM 3. HL2 was a great looking game, but saying it 'looked as good' is a long stretch of the imagination.

My bad wasnt sure why I was thinking Half Life 2 I meant the Far Cry game >,<. Yes I do agree graphics dont make a game good but when compared to other games it was way ahead of what other people were doing imo.

[PewPew Dude]

waiting for review so its good enought

Yo get in mind that this game is the most expected games of 2011, It will be on TOP LIST of games of 2011 and you waiting for a ♥♥♥♥in review so that is good enought

I'm not so sure. Granted it will be quite high on the list, i dare say Portal 2 will be number one. But all we have hear is Fan talk from the both of us =P

my "Reviews" are nothing more than Youtube videos and from them i hope i made a good purchase with Rage. But iD software has been top notch products to me for more than 20 years, so I doubt i will be disappointed. That and my odd love for post apocalyptic games...

[Wigg1es]

even pc gamer admitted publicly that they jumped the shark on that review. The game was gorgeous, but at its heart it was a very repetitive corridor crawl with monster closets. Not interesting enough for a second play thru, and I love all things shooter related...

Isn't that exactly what a Doom game should be?

That and my odd love for post apocalyptic games...I love everything post-apocalyptic. Books, movies, games... There's not enough of it in my opinion.

[Inarborat]

Supposedly, there's an exclusive review coming today and then the reviews will be at 12:01 am Tuesday. If you've paid attention to ANY Bethesda released game the past 6 years, none of their games get reviewed until the release date.

[A. James]

It will receive a 92/100. Mark my words and trust me on this. Go ahead and pre order. I will be within 1 point.

[HydrantHunter]

My bad wasnt sure why I was thinking Half Life 2 I meant the Far Cry game >,<.
FarCry was gorgeous - but in a different way than DooM 3, imo. I think CryTek's big achievement was the ability to provide good detail while rendering *huge* vistas and providing eye pleasing effects. The use of rich color helped FarCry stand out from pretty much everything else at the time, as well.

Yes I do agree graphics dont make a game good but when compared to other games it was way ahead of what other people were doing imo.
I agree, CryTek was ahead of its time in many ways - and FarCry was definitely ahead of the curve in large space, graphic fidelity. The game itself, although a bit repetitive at times, was also a bit more fun and engaging that I expected. I can't say if it was ahead of everyone else at the time, but FarCry was definitely ground breaking when it released, imo.

[OurSacrifice]

Reviews are embargo'd until midnight. Not a good sign IMO.

[Supernautilus]

It will receive a 92/100. Mark my words and trust me on this. Go ahead and pre order. I will be within 1 point.

I'm convinced.

[HighPopalorum]

At $59.95, I'll wait for some reviews, but I have a feeling I will buy it tomorrow.

[txfeinbergs]

Isn't that exactly what a Doom game should be?

I love everything post-apocalyptic. Books, movies, games... There's not enough of it in my opinion.

I don't know, I am on hour 75 on Fallout New Vegas, and am starting to get enough of it! :)

FYI, if you have not read The Road, you are missing out on one of the best Post Apocolyptic books ever. You will probably want to slit your wrists by the time you get to the end of it though.

[ZhugeLiang]

So we can keep ♥♥♥♥ing to all the 85-100's the game will surely have.:D


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNp7quk68iQ

Review! ^^^^

He sounds monotone, but he is saying it has amaizng graphics, but that the gameplay is even more fun and incredible. yet sounds un-excited while he talks. he's just a boring guy to review the game. haha

[zen_anarchy]

what if it is this generations daikatana:p

[TimM]

What if it gets 47?

[nprose]

what if it is this generations daikatana:p

Say it ain't so :eek:

[Arthur Hucksake]

what if it is this generations daikatana:p

Don't think anything could fail that badly. lol

[JK_DC]

None yet?

[Vincii]

None yet?

No reviews for at least another 6.75 hours man! :)

[ZhugeLiang]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNp7quk68iQ

Review! ^^^^

He sounds monotone, but he is saying it has amaizng graphics, but that the gameplay is even more fun and incredible. yet sounds un-excited while he talks. he's just a boring guy to review the game. haha

[mtndewme]

I'm giving it a 13...















































Out of ten.

[Alien1099]

Sorry to break your bubble but the game was great for the time that it came out, looking back on history and saying that it was overrated is just bulls**t when games still looked like garbage in comparison. Doom 3 required some pretty high hardware at the time and helped push the genre forward. Considering the game could be played on the original xbox Id say it was pretty amazing for the time. About the only other game that looked as good was Half Life 2 so please stop with the nonsense.

You are smoking crack. I have been playing PC games since around 1992. There have been many games since then that have called to me and had me go back and play them many times over the years. Games like System Shock 1 & 2, X-Com, Deus Ex, Half-Life 1 & 2, etc. Doom 3 was not one of those games. I stopped playing it about half way through after losing interest on my first play through. A year or two later I FORCED myself to go back and play/beat it because I'd spent $40 or $50 on it on release day.

Mediocre is the best description of that game's fun factor. It just wasn't all that fun and didn't bring anything new to the table other than excellent visuals. I'd have given it an 80% personally. I am going to give id another chance with Rage since I LOVE sandbox style games (I especially like Bethesda RPGs like Oblivion, Fallout 3, and New Vegas) and hope this will be similar but refreshing.

FarCry was a much better use of my money. I played that one several times over the years and recently purchased it AGAIN on Steam during a recent sale just to have it available via digital download.

[RonixEnclave]

From just what I've seen, Rage seems pretty fun. It looks much better than Borderlands, and I did enjoy that game.

[scubs]

Bethesda is pretty pathetic about letting people review or post videos about the games they publish.. every video gets deleted within seconds. they are morons for doing this..

[DJ Cryotek]

even pc gamer admitted publicly that they jumped the shark on that review. The game was gorgeous, but at its heart it was a very repetitive corridor crawl with monster closets. Not interesting enough for a second play thru, and I love all things shooter related...
I was totally pumped for DOOM 3... and I never even finished it. So boring. It just wasn't DOOM at all.

[JK_DC]

I was totally pumped for DOOM 3... and I never even finished it. So boring. It just wasn't DOOM at all.

Hopefully with the SDK coming out modders can add 3x more monsters. Then it will be like Doom.

[Vincii]

I was totally pumped for DOOM 3... and I never even finished it. So boring. It just wasn't DOOM at all.

While I agree that the game wasn't like the old Dooms, you have to understand that it wasn't meant to be. It was meant to be what they originally wanted to do with Doom in the beginning but didn't have the technology to do it. I think they did a damn fine job on Doom3. It's scary as hell with headphones on in the dark... and that's still Doom to me!

P.S. They could have left out a lot of the flashlight parts...:p

[obisean]

Mediocre is the best description of that game's fun factor.

I'd have given it an 80% personally.


Kinda high for a mediocre game isn't it?

[DJ Cryotek]

While I agree that the game wasn't like the old Dooms, you have to understand that it wasn't meant to be. It was meant to be what they originally wanted to do with Doom in the beginning but didn't have the technology to do it.
Even taken on its own terms it was a slow, painfully generic shooter.

[schism84]

People need to remember what the first Doom was like when it was actually released. Sure many years later when Doom 3 came out and nowadays even moreso, Doom is perceived as pure corridor fun. When it shipped it was in your face and extremely aggressive in a budding genre and SCARY to a lot of people.

Doom 3 was the in your face scary equivalent they made with the new tech. Both games have the same intentions, with different means. It's easy after several years to think of the first Doom as pure fun action, just like on your 20th playthrough of Dead Space all you think of is blood and gore with weapons and forget that the very first time, you didn't know that monster closet was there.

[CultDJ]

Well, sorry to burst *your* bubble, but good graphics don't mean the game was great. DooM 3 was *not* great - it was OK - and compared to Doom 1 and 2 it was a letdown (because they were more fun, regardless of the graphics).

Half-Life 2 was nowhere near the graphical fidelity of DooM 3. HL2 was a great looking game, but saying it 'looked as good' is a long stretch of the imagination.



Doom 3 is the most critically acclaimed and highest selling game id has made up to this point. I don't know how you can interpret that at all as a letdown.

[MrPotatoman]

what if it is this generations daikatana:p

We already had one of those this year: Duke Nukem Forever

[wuliheron]

Doom 3 was a solid game, but nothing to write home about. Too dark and they compromised too much on the graphics and fps just to ensure it would run on wimpy PCs. What good are improved textures and fancy shadows in a dark room filled with monotone gray monsters?

With Rage it looks like they learned their lesson. Instead of endless dark corridors its often outside and so bright it makes you squint. Instead of one setting for textures, it adjusts them dynamically according to the needs of the moment allowing the game to be played on wimpy PCs without compromising the graphics and fps of stronger computers. If anything I consider Doom 3 a dry run for what they intended to do with the Id tech 5 engine.

However, the rest of the games they plan to make with the Id tech 5 are all supposed to be 30fps which makes me wonder if we'll see some of those same kind of mistakes being made again. Hopefully they've learned the biggest lessons about how to work with the megatexture engine, but I think I won't be pre-ordering the next release.

[Xentch]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNp7quk68iQ

Review! ^^^^

He sounds monotone, but he is saying it has amaizng graphics, but that the gameplay is even more fun and incredible. yet sounds un-excited while he talks. he's just a boring guy to review the game. haha

Not an official review, just some kid on youtube.

[endersgame]

We already had one of those this year: Duke Nukem Forever

Don't forget brink also from bethesda, and hunted that again is from bethesda.
It seems bethesda is terrible at shooters

[cart000]

Don't forget brink also from bethesda, and hunted that again is from bethesda.
It seems bethesda is terrible at shooters

and none of those are developed by Bethesda and hunted wasnt a shooter..

[HydrantHunter]

Doom 3 is the most critically acclaimed and highest selling game id has made up to this point. I don't know how you can interpret that at all as a letdown.
Fair point - I should have been more clear. It was a letdown to me - it wasn't DooM, imo. It had most of the elements, but it relied too much on some elements of DooM 1 & 2 (e.g. contrasty lighting) and abandoned others - DooM 3 was more of a crawler than a fast paced shooter. I know someone will want to light me on fire for saying it, but...monster closets.

Beyond that, critical acclaim doesn't mean a game is good - it just means reviewers and/or others like it. I liked 'The DaVinci Code' in theaters, but compared to the book it was mediocre. DooM 3 deserved quite a bit of praise for what it represented in its time, but compared to DooM 1 & 2 it wasn't as good of a DooM game.

[DoomMagnet]

Don't forget brink also from bethesda, and hunted that again is from bethesda.
It seems bethesda is terrible at shooters

bethesda meybe are but id made the game not bethesda.
besides by that review the game indeed has a flawless AI

[Kadin]

Anyone know when the official embargo is lifted so sites can post their reviews?

[jmc8888]

When it comes to reviews, the numbers they give aren't a very good indicator. Well obviously one that scores a 20-50 on many 'reviews' does indicate something. But 60's-100 in reviews can still be an enjoyable or horrible game based on the player.

Generally I look for specific things that might make or break, or alleviate ones fears about a game.

Do the controls suck. Is there lag on mp. So on and so forth. We all have different make or break points.

So I like to read the reviews of many to see those types of comments. The score is subjective, and even then, if you've taken business in college, you realize scoring systems are inherently flawed, and the way you break things up into sections, there should be a big enough difference to actually mean something. Is there a difference between a 2 or 3 star game (or 3 or 4) via Xplay standards...yes. Is there really a difference between a 73 and a 77. Or even a 72 and a 88?

You should tell your friend that 80 is a very subjective thing, that may or may not mean anything. Plus on places like metacritic, I've seen some early reviews come in, and a game is a 40, only for more to come out and it's a 70, or vice versa, early reviews showed in the 90's, but by the time more came out it was a 65-75.

The best way imo is to know what you like and dislike in a game, and look for those things in reviews, and use the number as a rough guesstimate, where anywhere over 60 or so gives you a chance at an enjoyable game. Even then some sub 60 games might be worth a bargain bin shot.

Overall I think the whole review embargo is something that should be illegal, at least in America. Especially given return policies on games.

They let their propaganda videos out to entice you, and offer free swag with in-game stuff only available for pre-orders, but in the end you go in blind by design and there is much that is inherently wrong with that.

Reviews should be published whenever their author has an opportunity to publish it. Anything else is just a gestapo tactic geared around getting more money in the door before anyone truly finds out whether or not it is a turd of a game. It's a currently legal yet blatant deceptive practice. The reviewers know, but can't tell until the release date, or some other agreed upon quid pro quo exclusive.

[deazydoo]

Rage isnt from BETHESDA , bethesda its only the publisher , this game its from iD Software , its 2 different things

Don't forget brink also from bethesda, and hunted that again is from bethesda.
It seems bethesda is terrible at shooters

[Jvlk]

Here is a guy who has a short review about it on his youtube channel.
For the 360
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNp7quk68iQ

[WalkenOwns]

even pc gamer admitted publicly that they jumped the shark on that review.

Id like a source on that.

[WalkenOwns]

Im sort of amazed at all the revisionist history about Doom 3. When it came out it was enormously well received by everyone except 4 whiners on internet forums.

[bes]

You guys do realize you have been off topic since like the first page right? ...was asking for RAGE reviews if any :-P

Jvlk linked to one..sort of :-P ... I do understand though that I guess no one is allowed to put out reviews yet until the game is released...

[rmaverick]

No, it wasn't.

Beautiful but dark game that was a one-trick-pony gameplay wise.

It didn't help that pcgamer lauded it in an exclusive early review that built up unrealistic expectation.

Really though, just an o.k. game.

I can almost always find reasons to go back and play a game (especially shooters, especially years ago before they were starting to feel stale) more than once.

Gorgeous bones, just not much meat on them...

[WalkenOwns]

Yes it was.


See how easy that is?

[Majestacal]

EGM gave it a 9.5 you can read the review here.

http://www.egmnow.com/articles/egm-review-rage/

[JKflipflop]

Even taken on its own terms it was a slow, painfully generic shooter.

I think the consensus will be the same for rage in the end, sadly. I see a lot of people have built up the expectation that it's like fallout or borderlands or "fallout meets borderlands". When they realize there's no little xp bars to grind away on, they're going to be awefully letdown.

[rmaverick]

EGM gives it a 9.5

well written review

THE GOOD: Stellar shooting, addictive multiplayer, RPG elements
THE BAD: Lackluster ending, no FPS multiplayer, occasional design hiccups
THE UGLY: Not even the apocalypse can stamp out evil corporations…

Electronic Gaming Monthly

[TimM]

What is EGM?

[arizonachris]

:confused:Linky please?

[preorderthis]

http://www.egmnow.com/articles/egm-review-rage/

SUMMARY: All things considered, Rage is one hell of an experience. It would be easy to knock this game for some of the elements it lacks, but what is here in is easily on par with some of the best titles in the genre. If you’re a fan of FPS gaming and the kids at id, you won’t be sorry you picked this one up.

[Majestacal]

http://www.egmnow.com/articles/egm-review-rage/

I posted it alittle awhile ago in the looking for reviews thread

[rmaverick]

They aren't IGN or eurogamer, but this is a very good sign considering how little I've heard about the final product

[MrPotatoman]

THE GOOD: addictive multiplayer
THE BAD: no FPS multiplayer



??
5char

[cart000]

EGM was the ♥♥♥♥ before internet game sites like IGN and gamespot came. just in case youre wondering whats EGM.

[terryjameboy]

Some Review on youtube, seem's real http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNp7quk68iQ reviewer seems he hit all the points but just a little boring lol

[Wigg1es]

"Though the dev team downplayed these elements prior to release, all are expertly implemented and add layer of depth to Rage that most modern shooters save for multiplayer, giving the game a novel feel that really sets it apart from other shooters of its ilk."

I can't adequately express how satisfying that line is. Hopefully the game is a success (pretty confident about that) and more publishers take note of the importance and ability for Single Player to still sell games.

[5killer]

The complaint is the reviewer was hoping for a regular Quake deathmatch. Which was something id didn't want to do for this game. But I would expect to see it very soon given the mod tools.

[BoomSlang]

Supposedly, there's an exclusive review coming today and then the reviews will be at 12:01 am Tuesday. If you've paid attention to ANY Bethesda released game the past 6 years, none of their games get reviewed until the release date.

Any chance you know who is reviewing it early?

To know they usually don't let anyone put out early reviews actually comforts me in a way. If you've got a good game, what is there to hide? However, at the same time, it sounds like it's just a publishing company's policy.

BRINK was a game I should've avoided. It really wasn't that bad but it wasn't good enough for full price.

EGM gave it a 9.5 you can read the review here.

http://www.egmnow.com/articles/egm-review-rage/
+rep

Great review here. A lot of information I already knew but some that I didn't. This really reaffirms my hype for this game. I really doubted id would disappoint. I'd say that people should ignore Borderlands or Fallout comparisons and just get ready to play a solid FPS that has light RPG elements (including robust crafting?), minigames, sidequests, and impressive car combat gameplay that nearly rivals others in that genre like Twisted Metal. I'm psyched!

[wits]

Well, there was already a playthrough on the PS3, so I'm surprised a review didn't pop-up sooner.

[A. James]

It will receive a 92/100. Mark my words and trust me on this. Go ahead and pre order. I will be within 1 point.



I'm convinced.


Well I am super happy that you're convinced!! (I'll ignore the sarcasm in the comment and pretend you truly mean it). Hey, you will see. If I am off more than 4 points from the metacritic score from 2 weeks after release, I will buy you this game.

If I am within 2 points, then you buy me BF3.

Deal? Thought so. Thanks for playing.

[Graveslave]

"It’s not the sort of multiplayer I’ve come to expect from id, but it’ll undoubtedly cause gamers to consume countless amounts of playtime after they’ve demolished the 12-hour campaign"

skipping until $20.

/edit
Striiiiiike. two.

[BoomSlang]

skipping until $20.

/edit
Striiiiiike. two.

That's your choice but we've heard 15-20 more than 12. I have a feeling 12 would be playing through on easy, as most critics do, and spending little time with the sidequests/minigames/arena/racing.

[BoomSlang]

Great review here. A lot of information I already knew but some that I didn't. This really reaffirms my hype for this game. I really doubted id would disappoint. I'd say that people should ignore Borderlands or Fallout comparisons and just get ready to play a solid FPS that has light RPG elements (including robust crafting?), minigames, sidequests, and impressive car combat gameplay that nearly rivals others in that genre like Twisted Metal. I'm psyched!

Also check EGM's review: http://www.egmnow.com/articles/egm-review-rage/

[Graveslave]

I'll pay a dollar a gig. no more. not getting burnt on this one.

[A. James]

So we can keep ♥♥♥♥ing to all the 85-100's the game will surely have.:D

I'm actually trying to figure out what the censored expletive is in that sentence.

♥♥♥♥ing...no doesn't make sense
♥♥♥♥♥ing...no, too many letters
♥♥♥♥ting...no, too many letters again
pissing? Doesn't make sense
maybe jacking? Is that really an expletive?...it kind of makes sense.

Could someone give me a hint?

[JasonPowersmile]

EGM gave it a 9.5 you can read the review here.

http://www.egmnow.com/articles/egm-review-rage/


I don't get the "no FPS multiplayer" comment. It's that exactly what the co-op mode is?

[Rogersdead]

I'm actually trying to figure out what the censored expletive is in that sentence.

♥♥♥♥ing...no doesn't make sense
♥♥♥♥♥ing...no, too many letters
♥♥♥♥ting...no, too many letters again
jarateing? Doesn't make sense
maybe jacking? Is that really an expletive?...it kind of makes sense.

Could someone give me a hint?

Self fun perhaps ;)

[WalkenOwns]

Theres already people complaining it isn't 60 hours long like Fallout. *sigh*.

[czerro]

The complaint is the reviewer was hoping for a regular Quake deathmatch. Which was something id didn't want to do for this game. But I would expect to see it very soon given the mod tools.

RAGE is a big departure for iD and sorta a new paradigm for them. I don't think it will feature fps multiplayer at any point. iD has already stated that a new Doom is on the way using the new idtech engine. This will undoubtedly feature a robust multiplayer experience. They would be shooting themselves in the foot to feature fps multiplayer in RAGE. Why would anyone buy the new Doom?

[WalkenOwns]

Why would anyone buy the new Doom?

Seriously?

[Sir Lemmiwinks]

i traded a soldier medal and some earbuds for Rage so....I am quite happy with the transaction. A game for some virtual items is win in my book. Anywho, I hope that these early reviewers rushed themselves thru the game in order to get their reviews out first and as a result decreased the true length of the game if you invest a bounch of time in it. Also, I dislike the idea of vehicle combat in the place of just standard deathmatch, I feel like ID should have given what the fans would have preferred. and, honestly, can you say ID fans prefer vehicular combat over FPS multiplayer combat?

[Angrypyro]

Sorry to break your bubble but the game was great for the time that it came out, looking back on history and saying that it was overrated is just bulls**t when games still looked like garbage in comparison. Doom 3 required some pretty high hardware at the time and helped push the genre forward. Considering the game could be played on the original xbox Id say it was pretty amazing for the time. About the only other game that looked as good was Half Life 2 so please stop with the nonsense.

Yeah i actually loved doom 3. *shrug* :confused:

[brimley]

I'm not buying this because the campaign isnt 150 hours waaaaaaahhh

[Obli]

Game Reactor Sweden - 8/10
http://www.gamereactor.se/recensioner/29348/Rage/

They gave Dark Souls 7/10 which is well below average - tough cookies to please?

[A. James]

I'm not buying this because the campaign isnt 150 hours waaaaaaahhh

You, sir, have some low standards. I wouldn't buy if it had anything less than one MILLION hours (in a Dr. Evil voice).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l91ISfcuzDw&feature=related

[Wigg1es]

Theres already people complaining it isn't 60 hours long like Fallout. *sigh*.

When I hear someone mentioning how long a campaign is, particularly a reviewer, I automatically assume they are only playing main missions just to get through the game and see the end.

Fact of the matter is, no one really knows how long side missions will take or how engrossing the mini-games will be. A full clear could easily stretch the hours way out. Time will tell.

[buzzfunk]

Even taken on its own terms it was a slow, painfully generic shooter.

Thats your own opinion. Personally, I loved it. The end.

[buzzfunk]

Review: http://www.egmnow.com/articles/egm-review-rage/

[Graveslave]

Q&A

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/6500/the_creative_intent_of_rage.php?page=4

[schism84]

http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/119/1197972p1.html

[BoomSlang]

Gamespot 8/10:
http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/rage/review.html

G4TV 4/5:
http://www.g4tv.com/games/xbox-360/46600/rage/review/

Looking great so far.

[SLowrAM]

GiantBomb QuickLook: http://www.giantbomb.com/quick-look-rage/17-4996/

[Sian]

Game Reactor Sweden - 8/10
http://www.gamereactor.se/recensioner/29348/Rage/

They gave Dark Souls 7/10 which is well below average - tough cookies to please?

7/10 is below average? Is this some stupid inflated rating system where if a game doesn't get a 9 or 10 it's crap?