Sirenum Digital has released some new screenshots for its Unreal Engine 4-powered game, The Lost Pisces. Despite the fact that The Lost Pisces looks stunning, its Kickstarter campaign failed. The reasons are still unknown, however Sirenum Digital aims to launch an IndieGoGo campaign for it.
This IndieGoGo campaign will have a goal of $40K so that the team can create a full demo for the game. The IndieGoGo campaign will be launched on May 11th, and the team aims to bring this game afterwards -once and if funded – to Steam Early Access.
Enjoy the screenshots and kudos to OnlySP for sharing them!
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
wow
I can smell the taurine from here.
It looks alright, nothing special, and I would not use the word beautiful to describe a war torn urban city. Maybe the U.S government would but not me.
What can be more breathtaking and beautiful then a war torn country?
A peaceful country.
Peace breeds weakness and ugliness. Instead of the strong, the weak, the ugly and the fat survive and breed more of their kind.
You totally sound like Villain there. lol.
Using logic here.
The world is overpopulated and most “people” are stupid, fat, lazy, ugly, feminist, SJW, ignorant, needy, perverted and basically degenerates.
We NEED a global war, but not a small one, small ones are bad (because only the strong and the honorable die and the degenerates are safe at home), no we need something catastrophic that will wipe out 50-70% of the worlds population (especially in the hmm less productive and overly religious countries).
Nice enviroments
Looks better than most of the AAA crap we see these days.
For a character with so much hair, Hairworks is a must, not even an option.
The world is still missing elements, it’s empty. And probably will be in the final stage.
pure hair.. much better
John/Thomas/Matt/Spencer: “We think this is beautiful”.
Comment section:No, it’s not!
Really sad but inovative games dont have a chance this gen.
Meanwhile COD rehashed games come out every year. =/
Looks Great.
Looks like kerigan. Love it.
omy.. i like the model
I agree. It annoyed me a lot whenever I see a awesome looking game cover splashed on the Steam store but only to discover that in reality it is another game with 8-bit, 16-bit, retro, pixel art graphics. People complained that AAA games are beautiful looking games that lacked any new exciting gameplay but indie games have flooded the PC market with clones of one another with not-so-beautiful graphic.
The updated version of the main character definitely looks a lot better now than before.
I backed on Kickstarter last year and it was a shame that they never reached their $200k goal, So now the new goal is much lower hopefully they will get funded and I will continue to still support them over at IndieGoGo.
Im getting sick of the sight of UE4 based games already. Looks so lifeless, cardboard like and as if its got one of those terrible reshade presets that crush contrast slapped all over its chevy chase.
Its going to be a repeat of last gen where everything has that UE sheen to it.
Textures on these rocks(1st image) are DX9,shadows are weak/low,fxaa&bloom sucks.Well the devs need to go back to re-work this game.
What are DX9 textures? You mean they’re not very high res?
DX9 Textures? Please understand, I don’t want to be mean. But seriously?
I’m disappointed with UE4. Little or no visual difference compared to UE3, but much, much higher system requirements. It’s like the only thing UE4 has over UE3 is chromatic aberration.
I know it’s up to developers, but I haven’t seen anything visually stunning yet.
If I’m not mistaken, the UE4 improvements where more in terms support, efficiency and being more powerful rather than visuals. Also better and easier tools.
Speaking of little or no difference the screenshots for The Lost Pisces looks a bit familiar. The bluish, muted tone in some scenes and the smoke effects reminded me of Strike Vector and Hawken while the brownish tone in some reminded me of any other Unreal 3 third person games.
Yes, I noticed that too. Recent Ultimate Edition of Gears of War also look very similar to this.
In a lot of ways it’s similar, a continuation even, to Unreal 3, in a lot of ways it’s different, but yeah, the real comparisons can only happen “under the hood”, since visually Unreal 3 was already capable of extremely stunning things, just nobody was actually using it for that purpose (ex; see the old Samaritan Demo).
The main focus of Unreal 4 wasn’t “upping the level of shine” as much as refining it – they introduced considerably better lighting systems (yes, they did remove one too, but even so), sped up the entire workflow by moving on from outdated 2004-era technologies that were hard-coded into Unreal 3 (you no longer need to waste hours “baking” Lighting in every time you change something, for example), & focused a lot of effort on reducing development costs, in response to the Industry’s constant problems with “increased development costs” with the PS3-X360 Generation.
They also integrated a lot of 3rd Party Software into Unreal 4, even more so than Unreal 3 I think, with far better documentation, etc. Default Texture Packs are also a LOT better, far more varied, & considerably more detailed.
All-in-all, Epic didn’t take the same easily noticeable “leaps” forward that DICE’s Frostbite tech did between 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, & 3.0, but that’s only largely because Unreal 3 was already (partly) ahead of its time when it first launched, & continued to be routinely updated as much as possible over the years, adding to its already vast capabilities. It wasn’t CryEngine 2 when it first launched, but by the time Crytek had CryEngine 3 going, Unreal 3 could more often than not completely rival it (some older Tech still bogged it down to the end).
Well, I think Arkham City on PC was actually quite close to Samaritan, and it came out in less than a year after the demo. Of course it cannot be as detailed as Samaritan, since it’s just a short cutscene compared to an open world game.
Anyway, I don’t know much about the leaps of the Frostbite engine, because I don’t play EA games almost since their golden pre-Origin era to be interested in it (although I know what guys from DICE are capable of, just see Mirrors Edge on UE3) , but I was quite pleased how Epic developed UE3 over the years. Basically we had UT3 and Mass Effect (2006-2007), then Bulletstorm and Arkham Knight (2011), and then the last leap Hawken, DMC, Outlast, Killing Floor 2 (2013-2015). I know there were many version inbetween, but this is how I was able to separate them.
The problem is, UT3 was quite a leap compared to UT2004, while it’s been 2 years since the release of UE4 and I haven’t seen anything that can be called as a “leap”. Certainly UE4 might be capable of showing better visuals (see Infiltrator), but the consoles… well, you know.
And I actually believe console manufacturers paid a hefty sum for removing SVOGI, otherwise anyone would be able to simply turn it on on PC, and achieve much better visuals (but it’s obviously for monster specs). This is just bullsheet.
As for 3rd party software, I think companies need to move away from it. That’s why Valve cut off Havok from Source 2 and developing their own physics engine. It is a pain for an indie developer to license Source because you also need to pay for Havok.
Arkham City cut a lot of corners to look the way it did, though. I’d be willing to compare Arkham Knight to Samaritan (if it only worked properly at decent FPS), since yeah, if you can get all the effects to function correctly, the PC version does look grand.
That’s because we’re talking about two completely different Video Game generations; UT2004 was running on Unreal 2.5, but U2.5 was really just piggybacking on Unreal 2’s technology, which was basically “updated” Quake 3-era technology, as Unreal 2 made its debut in January 2001.
Look at Battlefield 2, same deal; Refractor 2 is a v2 of the same Refractor Engine DICE was using since Battlefield 1942 in 2001.
Another thing to keep in mind is the massive Resolution jump between the 6th Generation Consoles (PS2/Xbox – the end of the SD Era), & the 7th Generation (PS3/X360 – the start of the HD Era) which in itself was a major technological leap forward, requiring an increase in development budgets in order to make so many HD Textures, & is something the 8th Generation doesn’t have to deal with/compare to, technically speaking. 4K is a big step, but it’s not “of the same magnitude”, so to speak, since many Developers have already been doing 2-4K Textures, if not even more.
Then of course there’s the landslide in Hardware advancements ever since Y2K (especially in the 2006+ window), & most notably the launch of DX11 6 years ago, of course. As I recall when it first launched (Dec 1999), Quake 3 was crippling Voodoo GPU’s everywhere, & the PS2 launched with similar Hardware less than a year later. In the subsequent years however, Video Games went from “5 guys in a garage” to 20-50 people in an actual office building, to 200+ people once HD hit.
The “giant leaps forward” associated with the HD Era have slowed down now though, since everyone’s getting caught up (yes, a large part of that was Consoles holding back the “full force” of HD – Developers could always only milk those old boxes for so much power), & things are evening out, but at the same time we’re experiencing an ever-greater push with “clones” (ex: Ubisoft), which are less about looking good & more about being cheap, & netting quick returns (likely to cause another Video Games Market Crash, but that’s another thing entirely).
Likewise, Photorealism (I.E. Hollywood-level CGI) is still quite a bit down the line, so the focus is turning to other things, like increasing the detail on objects instead, ironing out Anti-Aliasing tech, etc. I wouldn’t be surprised if by the end of this generation we have a single, dominant AA technique that’s used across all AAA Titles – & about time, too. There’s also die-shrinking issues with CPU/GPU manufacturers to keep in mind as well, etc. & a major focus on VR Tech now that a bunch of investors are convinced it’s “the next big thing.”
It’ll pass, but for now it’s taking up a lot of resources & focus. Afterwards, there’ll be a shift back to focusing on 4K, so adoption for that will start to pick up (UHDTV adoption rates by then will help a lot too), so there’ll be another (minor, by comparison) “push for texture detail” which will benefit the PC Master Race (;D).
As for SVOGI, I’m not sure. Even Crytek is still struggling with SVOGI tech, it’s extremely complex stuff. Regardless, I’m sure EG’ll be re-introducing it sooner or later. (Not to say their story isn’t a little weird, but eh).
I’m beginning to think the way CoD-ripoff shooters & desaturated filters defined the last Generation, Lighting Systems are going to be the “staple” of this one, out of all things – I can’t watch a single Trailer without noticing the Lighting system anymore. Granted, it’s nice to be moving away from Hollywood’s “shine on me” approach to more “natural” light sources – so long as we don’t end up with another DOOM 3 “Flashlight Corridors” thing.
The approach to Middleware’s shifted considerably since 2006, though; these days they’re integrating stuff like SpeedTree directly into the Engine, rather than “as a wrapper” so to speak, & it’s been standard for years now with Cry & Unreal to license the Engine & get the entire “package deal.” Unreal 4’s also got a nifty new Plugin feature, which is a nice approach.
Valve always took a different approach with Source’s development, anyway (“Source was created to evolve incrementally with new technology, as opposed to the backwards compatibility-breaking “version jumps” of its competitors. Different systems within Source are represented by separate modules which can be updated independently.”). Though, it seems like EG may be jumping on a similar train with Unreal 4’s “version updates” now, but I suppose time will tell. Besides, one of Source’s staples always was how difficult it was to use its Tools, anyway. It was never very “Indie-suited” in that regard either.
But we again have a new generation right now, yes? UE3 was introduced more than 10 years ago, with even a larger gap between first and final versions (2001-2005 for UE2 compared to 2005-2015 for UE3, which basically means UE4 came out after nearly 10 years since UE3). So, it’s only natural that you’re expecting a leap in visuals.
Maybe there’s no leap because larger companies who were responsible for those UE leaps are now using their own in-house built engines instead of UE. Or maybe because consoles are simply trying to catch up with 1080p and 60fps (and still weren’t able to). And even Epic itself didn’t make any game to show what UE4 is capable of.
The last generation required at least two sets of textures, for consoles and PC (at least most of the time) same as 6th generation (although I admit that the deeper we go, the less multiplatform games we have compared to modern days, where exclusives are mostly remain on PC), while this generation uses only one, and will use for many years since consoles now have an impressive memory pool compared to the last generation. Hell, they even removed texture settings, so they won’t have to create low res textures for weaker PCs.
It means that they supposed to have more free hands for a technological leap (since they don’t need to create another set of textures, and all that). Although we we’re talking about UE4 leap, so I’m not sure why I’m saying all this. I’m confused. I would like to say that it’s not just UE4, but that’s not true. EA for example offered great visuals with Battlefront on PC, and was able to maintain 60fps on consoles.
Moreover, I think creating two set of textures (for the last generation) is more expensive than creating one single HD set (for this generation), and I don’t think the development costs increased only because of HD. There are many factors, and graphics aren’t the biggest. I actually think that increasing team sizes to such ridiculous numbers (up to several thousands) is what leading us to another game industry crash, but that’s for another time…
I’m not really sure where all these “4K textures” talks came from. 4K doesn’t mean you need textures with higher resolution. It all depends on a visuals style of a game. Moreover, textures look better when you scale the image down. I’m talking about “scaling down” because screen sizes with remain more or less the same, while the pixel density will increase. Thus, you will basically have cleaner picture with more crispier textures when you will be playing in 4K, while having more or less the same screen size.
For example, I have 22 inch display right now, but when I replace it with 4k display, it won’t have 44 inches. It will be 27′ at max. I hope you understand what I’m saying.
And this is what going to kill every AA technique. It will be simply thrown away because more or less serious AA resembles downsampling, but since 4/8K resolution will be a standard in a distant future, you will basically have downsampling by default.
Anyway, I wanted to comment something else, but the post is already too epic (lol), and if you’re going to answer, for the love of dog, try to make the next post smaller, not bigger.
Smaller? Bah! 😛 But yeah, I tend to wander off, I know….. ^^
I finally found the words I should have used last time; To put it simply, the Graphical leap this time didn’t occur “all at once” the way it did when we switched over from the PS2/Xbox Generation to the PS3/X360 Generation – it occurred throughout the PS3-X360 Generation, incrementally.
Unreal 3, considerably unlike Unreal 2, was actually being continuously updated throughout the last 10 years (Unreal 2 saw SOME updates, but even 2.5 was nothing compared to Unreal 3 for a reason). At the time of Unreal 3’s last update (February 2015), it was still a very advanced piece of software, exactly because of the continuous updates done to it over the last 10 years. Yes, it WAS bogged down by older source code, but it also had the capability to look amazing. It’s also worth noting that Unreal 3 development also started very soon after Unreal 2 debuted, so they knew it wasn’t a long-term solution, unlike Unreal 3, which only saw Unreal 4 development start in recent years.
Hence, the purpose & development approach of Unreal 4 was considerably different to the one used when moving from Unreal 2 to Unreal 3; This time around it was really just about cleaning up legacy coding, while introducing a host of new features,
& ensuring the software itself is going to be viable & compatible for at least another 7+ years, etc. etc. etc. (Take EVE Online for example – it was coded right at the turn of the millennium, & today it STILL suffers from that, as did Call of Duty for so long, since until Modern Warfare 3, they were still using modified Quake 3 tech).
Arkham City v2011 would have been impossible on the 2006 version of Unreal 3 for example, regardless of GPU power at the time (needless to say, CryEngine 2 was something considerably ahead of its time, as we can even see from Crysis Warhead; even after extensive optimizations to the Engine, it still crippled GPU’s at the time, & for good reason).
Technically Epic’s working on a new Unreal Tournament, & it does look great, big step forward to Unreal Tournament 3. Anyway, as far as internal vs. licensed;
To be fair, Engine licensing in the 6th Generation & earlier was a lot scarcer. I think it really only went as “mainstream” as it did with BioWare, Rocksteady etc. all taking up Unreal 3 for their projects because of the associated development costs of creating a 7th Generation Game Engine entirely from scratch (compared to Pre-7th, wherein a few guys could handle the bulk of it in a few months time). It was always an arguable inevitability that (ex) BioWare & DICE would eventually revert to using their own Internal Tools once they’d had enough time to properly make them.
I think, as the 8th Generation begins to form this “AA” “Middle-Class” between AAA’s & Indie’s, we’re going to see Engine licensing shift from AAA’s to AA’s primarily (I mean, take Alekhine’s Gun for example – it’s absolutely NOT Indie, but it’s definitely not an AAA either) – but that’s leading into another, completely separate conversation.
Texture Packs are “on break” for now, but they’ll return eventually, & that’s the problem; The PC-Console gap will once again begin to open wide soon enough, & when it does, we’ll be right back to where we were a few years ago. Hell, even now “Platform Equality” is holding back the PC from its true potential, it’s just not as evident as it was in say Fall 2012’s lineup.
Battlefront offers great visuals (even on Consoles) at the cost of size, however; Anything more than 40 players, & they’d have had to drop from 60 FPS to 30 FPS on Consoles. By extension, when you’re not doing 64 players, you don’t need to do 64 player-sized maps, so you also have less overall hardware stress. That’s coupled with EA-DICE’s extremely well optimized Frostbite Engine, too. Most other studios would have had to cut it down to 32 players just to equal these visuals, if not less. DICE’s Battlefield 3, 4, & Battlefront Games are basically a perfect case study in “trading Gameplay for visuals.” (See Battlefield 3 Consoles being capped at 32 players, for example, unlike the PC 64 players). The various disgraces of EA-DICE however are yet another completely separate discussion, so I won’t get into it here.
4K will definitely reduce the need for AA considerably, yes, but it won’t kill it entirely IMO, hence we’ll still need to figure out one “standard” algorithm to default to meanwhile, unlike now.
Otherwise, yeah, I understand perfectly; I’m on 27″ 1080p right now, moving to either 144Hz-1440p or 4K soon (though not much for 4K just yet), & at best, I would go for 30″, anything more would be ridiculous.
P.S. So, I measured. Technically, it’s shorter! HA! Feel free to make yours as long as you want though, no problem 😛 On my end, sorry, yeah, I know, I make REALLY long posts – not even intentionally really, they just…. happen. >.<
It’s simply doesn’t matter how you look to this, UE4 is in the much better position to make a leap. In fact, from 2003 to 2014 they had all means to write a completely new engine from a scratch without any legacy issues. Moreover, Epic received a huge amount of investments in that time, when UE3 was so popular.
Eve Online is a “launched” game, I mean people are already playing it, so adapt it to a new technologies is a more difficult task (and I think they already rewrote most of the code).
As for the Source 2 (from your previous post), making it more use friendly is one of the cornerstones of this engine. I actually really hope that it will replace Unity.
I think it won’t be a problem. The gap between the amount of video memory on a middle end PC and a console is not that big, compared to 2006, when both consoles had 512mb of memory, while middle end PC had 2GB of RAM + 256 of VRAM.I actually want devs to work more on lighting (SVOGI! Why? WHY?! EPIC $#%^#%@#!!!) and AI, rather than pushing textures, which are already pretty detailed as they are. And EVEN if you want to go even higher, you can simply use texture streaming more aggressively on consoles.
SMAA + DSR / Downsampling. You won’t find anything better.
Also, wtf is “Doom 3 “Flashlight Corridors””?
Also, attached some Eve Online shots.
Should’ve been more specific; EVE struggles with certain outdated coding issues (specifically), like the advertisement boards around Stargates; The Devs have repeatedly gone on record stating they’d have removed them years ago, if only the coding around them wasn’t so badly maintained & documented because of how old it is. They’ve tried repeatedly, but every time they’ve just ended up breaking a whole range of other things, so to this day they continue to just work around the issue by leaving these 2001-era really-really-low-def boards there advertising the same soft drink in the same low-resolution font.
Visually CCP’s managed to keep up just fine, their newest Textures & Lighting Systems are amazing, yeah, but internally, the Engine itself, much like WoW’s, could have really benefited from a complete reworking as of a long time ago.
Doom 3 – “Flashlight Corridors” – really dark corridors requiring you to switch back & forth between the flashlight & the weapon (as was required Pre-BFG Edition) because the lighting sucked – ergo, by design. So yeah, I’m guessing this Generation will be defined by the Lighting Systems we’re beginning to see, but I can’t help but hope we never go anywhere near DOOM 3’s style again.
On the 2003 thing; “Until mid-2008, development was exclusively done by Tim Sweeney, CEO and founder of Epic Games.” A full-scale production period spanning ~4 years (mid-2008 – May 2012) sounds about right for a Game Engine.
I suppose there is a possibility that they originally intended to launch Unreal 4 much earlier (in a different form), but didn’t, considering Unreal 3’s ever-increasing adoption rate, Console manufacturers dragging things out, or whatever, so they just opted to wait it out until the New-Gen Consoles, & then launch everything together, if that’s what you mean, but; If so, that was most likely an internal decision, not affected by Sony/Microsoft threats/bribes.
Regardless, Unreal 3’s continued development over the years ensured it didn’t lag behind visually, just internally (much like EVE), hence like I mentioned before, Unreal 4 was more about “cleaning up a bloating mess” rather than creating a visual leap.
Picture this; Unreal 3 2004-2006 is Unreal 3 as it was originally made, then in the 2008-2011 period, Unreal “4” begins to take over, just not AS Unreal 4, rather as Unreal “3.5.” It’s not marked as “4” because it’s technically still the same base Engine, but it’s unfair to call it Unreal “3.0”, because it’s not. It’s more. It’s better. We’ve seen it with the later Unreal 3 games as well; visually, Arkham Knight (when it works properly) can hold up just fine to any Unreal 4 game – because the Unreal 3 Engine was maintained throughout the years, instead of just “completed, distributed, patched up, & moved on from” as most other Software (in general) is.
You can see the same thing with Source 2; the Source-powered DOTA 2 looks great visually, but when you switch over to the Source 2-powered DOTA – Reborn, it’s not like you just switched from Starcraft to Starcraft 2; it looks slightly better, but it’s not a really big difference, most of the benefits are “under the surface” since Valve kept updating Source over the years – they just had to get rid of the outdated Source Engine bloating, much like Unreal 3.
As for Unity, I expect it’ll keep most of its market share, but I do absolutely expect Source 2 to gain quite an audience of its own, yeah.
Nice looking game but (low)-bit = complain
Not nice looking game but (high)-bit = also complain
Wtf is wrong with people nowadays?
This is nothing new I’ve realized, it just spread thanks to the internet.
Getting a strong MGS4 vibe!
It looks pretty nice. But apparently kinect is pretty important to this game. Also looking their old failed kickstarter. PC version was only for 8 and 10, not 7. Can’t say i’m surprised how hard time they time they seem to have getting money to the project
People fund crap like Bear Simulator and other junk but not great games like these. What a shame.
game is looking great but i have no idea what kind of game is this. need some gameplay footage.
I like the look of the character.
Yeah, shortly after my last post, I found myself wondering – what the hell were we even talking about, originally?
I still don’t fully remember >.<
But yeah, EVE's progressed considerably, technically & visually, thanks to CCP's long, hard battle on outdated badly documented coding. WoW's been updated quite a bit over the years, but it's still been showing its age for a long time now, which is not surprising really; IIRC the WoW Engine was originally a modified Warcraft 3 Engine.
It's funny how well id Tech 3 (Quake 3) & id Tech 4 (DOOM 3) have aged. I wonder if we'll be able to say the same for id Tech "6" in a few year's time.
Ever taken a look at "For Each Our Roads of Winter"? Granted it's an exploration, but regardless it looks fantastic.
As for legacy coding – complicated subject. Depends on how they did Unreal 3 originally, how much they actually invested in its active development over the years, etc. etc. etc.
With the amount of profits Blizzard received over the years, WoW should be smooth as baby’s @ss, and have next gen graphics. Instead, it took them years just to update the models. Blizzard reminds me of a fat lazy cat that simply eat too much.
The leaked Doom 3 alpha back in 2002 destroyed almost every PC, and blew everyone’s mind with its visuals. Not even saying how scary it was.
It also depends on the openness of the engine. id Tech 4 (as the id engines before) allows a simple textures / sound / etc. replacement (that’s why it look so glorious with the amazing Wulfen texture pack). You can open configuration files and change stuff as you like. For example, the slightly upgraded models do not work well with self shadowing, so I had to disable dynamic shadows on characters (this can be done by simply changing 1 line in the ini txt files). This is how games should be like, instead of closing everything behind hundreds of locks.
You can really tell these days, Blizzard has no vision, no real foresight or planning with WoW, nothing. They’re just blindly slamming themselves into the fanbase over & over, killing another massive portion each time. Really, you should hear them talk, it’s hilarious how out of touch they are.
The worst thing that ever happened to WoW was the massive subscription numbers early on. They managed to stick with the plan for a few years even then, but eventually they couldn’t resist the greed anymore, & turned it into this sick joke.
Good point, & yeah, unfortunately Mods lead to long-term communities, which some idiot tied to reduced sequel sales numbers (instead of formulaic gameplay, which apparently is only a good thing? :D)…. Not to mention id Software’s moronic decision to give us these idiot-proof “Map” making Tools in this moronic reboot – because who doesn’t like excessive hand-holding?
Well, MMO genre is pretty much dead anyway. After the failure of SWtOR and then ESO it’s obvious that no one will spent another 300-400 millions just to see if it will turn into another WoW. I have a feeling that what we see right now is exactly what happened to arena shooters back in the days, when all of the casuals ran away to more simple games like CoD. With MMO though people are running away to the games like Division, Destiny, various MOBAs, online survivals and that kind of cr@p that doesn’t require huge time investments (compared to MMO).
I haven’t played RAGE, so I have not idea how id Tech 5 looks compared 4, but I assume Zenithesda will try to “lock” id Tech.
The reboot is pretty much moronic indeed. Remember what Doom did to the gaming industry? The original iconic cover art of Doom 1? The technical progression and the design of the monsters from Doom 3 (especially Pinky)? What does Doom 4 has compared to it? Visuals are mediocre, monsters are uninspired and cartoony, and Doomguy looks like Master Chief. Typical sequel without a soul.
RAGE is really not something to judge id Tech 5 by, the texture work is just horrible, but unfortunately nobody seems to have made anything “epic” with the extensive Mod Tools we got either, so yeah, shame. Oh well.
DOOM – Even without bringing up the hilarious colour filters, there’s such a distinct lack of satanic elements, it’s pathetic. Why don’t they just put up a banner that says “Welcome to the SJW Era.”