Wait, what?
Oh, did you think you were posting positive or negative looking screens? Because from what it looks like those textures are terrible. Skyboxes are nice, and the textures look fine at a distance... unfortunately there's not much distance in a cave so the low res texturing is very apparent.
I don't know about anyone else but the new Patch from Steam released on 10/08/11 which provides some new graphic options also appears to have fixed any and all performance issues (texture popping) on my dual core 512MB VRAM 9800 GT.
http://www.neoseeker.com/news/17549-rage-pc-patch-adds-graphics-options-optimizations/
It is disappointing to me that I don't get the highest resolution textures even though I have much more VRAM than a console and only play at 1600x1200, as I didn't think I would need to upgrade for this game.
I had planned to wait another month before purchasing a new card for BF3, obviously.
Did you adjust the settings to run the textures on your gpu? Your cpu is weak, but a Cuda graphics card can take the pressure off.
I initially had the option to enable GPU Transcoding, which I did, but it has apparently been removed with this latest patch for my 2 X 9800 GT's in SLI.
I'm guessing you need a Geforce 400 or 500 series card to enable this now.
The release notes for this patch also describe better handling of multi GPU setups but the default rendering profile for Rage has SLI turned off.
These textures are disappointing to say the least when viewed at full size. Even the distant buildings look bland. They would probably look good @720p (consoles).
Are you running this at the highest settings? What's your video card?
Not my shots but presumably at the highest settings.
I'm honestly surprised at the response. I think these shots look absolutely phenomenal.
Compressed textures tend to look worse then the originals, but the original uncompressed program is 150gb and requires something more like a commercial computer then a desktop to run.
The complete uncompressed assets for Rage are 1-2 Terabytes, not 150GB. Look up the E3 interview with Carmack I believe.
Yea, I remember in the story he said his personal computer had like 24gigbytes of memory and I don't remember how many processors, but I think it was at least 4 physical ones. Hopefully most of that texture pack is dead city.My mistake. You're correct, the master program including unfinished levels is something like 10Tb and Rage was made from about 1Tb of that. However, you need an industrial computer to run that. The 150gb is, I believe, the least compressed version that will run on a desktop and Carmack hinted they might be releasing a 75gb texture pack.
The real mystery is how much vram you need to run that and how much of an improvement it provides. The Megatextures are huge and have to reside somewhere, but most graphics cards only have enough vram for Dx style games that use smaller textures. The thought of how much memory will be required to add ray traced geometry to the engine in the future is mind boggling. Still, its pretty obvious if people really want to move beyond Crysis style graphics and take it to the next level something like this required where sheer bandwidth and putting all those thousands of processors on a computer to work is the only way to go.
Yea, I remember in the story he said his personal computer had like 24gigbytes of memory and I don't remember how many processors, but I think it was at least 4 physical ones. Hopefully most of that texture pack is dead city.