ZaneWane said:
osamanobama said:
seems like ign glossed over a lot a faults in this game that eurogamer wasnt so kind to.
like having to manually save, and a lot of the graphical deficiencies/faults.
"the technology isn't perfect, mind you. There's a noticeable degree of pop-in as you sprint into new locations, alleviated somewhat by installing to your hard disk but disruptive all the same. This isn't a hugely interactive world either - perhaps the price you pay for so much fidelity - and so that in-jokey photo frame of creative director Tim Willits you found on a desk in Dead City isn't going to fall to the ground when you whack it with the butt of your rifle.
The knee-high piles of rubble at the extremities of your path are often invisible walls and rarely obstacles to be vaulted in search of a bonus, too, but then Rage has plenty of other secrets. There are shrines to old id Software games to uncover, collectable bobble-heads and even a trio of goalposts through which to propel your avatar by crashing your buggy and flying through the windscreen."
also unlike the very informitve review on gamereview, ign makes no mention on the difference in qualtiy when you install it on xbox compared to when you dont, gamereview made it seems like its VERY VERY beneficial to instal, ign needs t inform readers more
|
Still doesnt change the fact that its open area, 720 native running at 60 frames
|
... yeah... once everything looks pretty why should anyone desire anything like a great degree of interativity in the environment?
