RAGE announced too early? “At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter,” says id’s Willits

Wednesday, 5th October 2011 12:41 GMT By Johnny Cullen

Was RAGE announced too early? It “doesn’t matter,” according to id Software’s Tim Willits. So there.

The studio’s creative director told VG247 at Eurogamer Expo a couple of weeks back that, regardless of when it was announced or not, it comes down at the end of the day to the game’s fun factor. Which he says there’s plenty of.

“The thing is John [Carmack, id tech boss] loves talking about cool stuff,” Willits said to us in London a couple of weeks back when the early announcement question was posed to him.

“At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter. For us, now we’re right around the corner and doing these events, the game’s looking great, plays great. Whetever you’re talking about it early or you talk about it late or you announce this or you announce that or you have this campaign or that campaign, all it comes down to is the game’s fun. And the game’s a heck lot of fun.”

RAGE was announced at QuakeCon 2007 as part of John Carmack’s keynote blowout on id Tech 5, but launched yesterday in the US. So far, consumer reaction is too soon to call, but Willits insists he isn’t worried if the four year wait has dampened expectations, reiterating it will change gamers perception of the company.

“This game is not much different than when we released DOOM 3, Quake III, Quake II. People’s anticipations of what the game is, people’s expectations of what id Software does and has done in the pas – yeah, we don’t let those things like that stress us out,” said Willits.

“But I can tell you I do think RAGE will definitely change people’s perceptions of the company. It’s a really different type of experience that we’ve done in the past. Yes, it’s a first-person shooter, but it’s a lot different. I’m proud of the fact we don’t do exactly the same formulate game every single time. Lots of game companies do that all the time, we don’t. So it’s very exciting to work on something new and exciting.”

Our full interview with Tim Willits will go live on Friday morning along with RAGE’s UK launch.



  1. YoungZer0

    “But I can tell you I do think RAGE will definitely change people’s perceptions of the company.”

    Indeed it did. Just goes to show that living in a bubble for that long doesn’t pay out.

    #1 3 years ago
  2. HauntaVirus

    I know one thing for damn sure, rage on pc was released too early.

    #2 3 years ago
  3. DSB

    It makes Crysis 2 look like outstanding engineering, and that was one terrible launch.

    @1 I’m pretty sure we’ll remember this and half of the last decade as the one where all the great developers suddenly decided to turn shit.

    #3 3 years ago
  4. YoungZer0

    @3: Agreed.

    #4 3 years ago
  5. Phoenixblight


    I agree though I am not getting the issues of pop ins, screen tearing or not loading, what I am seeing is a nice looking game for environments somewhat but the textures for the individual items or the local are just shitty looking and horrible. Once you get to Dead City it looks nothing like the picture. I would have postponed the PC version for a month, so they could release the High texture pack and fix the huge issues that people experiencing especially for ATI users. This engine does look good but only so much, there is no dynamic lighting, all the lighting is prebaked into the environment. Then whats up with overpowering green shadows? Thats really annoying, at first I thought it was for a stylized look right until you see cutscenes of enemies coming to you and they all are covered in green film.

    #5 3 years ago
  6. Edo

    Did you forgot your roots and patform that made you so called “the inventor of the FPS”!?And this is how you repay us!?!?

    #6 3 years ago
  7. DSB

    @6 Bioware, Epic and Crytek all chimed in to answer that on behalf of id software, and the answer was a resounding yes. And fuck you, we’re rich biyatch!

    #7 3 years ago
  8. Phoenixblight

    Money > Fanbase

    THat has always been the case if you believed otherwise you are diluted.

    #8 3 years ago
  9. Fin


    And the way it always should be. It’s more important to make a lot of money and a pissed off userbase than no money and a happy userbase.
    Look at Psychonauts.

    #9 3 years ago
  10. DSB

    I don’t mind people getting rich, but personally I’ll take two games like Startopia and Psychonauts over all the Crysis 2′s and Dragon Age 2′s and Mass Effect 2′s of the world.

    I won’t even remember the latter 10 years from now, but I’ll still be playing the former.

    #10 3 years ago
  11. YoungZer0

    @9: You mean the one that has been bought back and is getting a sequel?

    #11 3 years ago
  12. Edo

    #9 But why not both?Isn’t Valve the best example that it can be done?

    #12 3 years ago
  13. Fin


    I personally think it’s more important for developers to release games and be profitable than to release one game that everyone likes, but subsequently causes the company to go bust.


    No, there’s no sequel in development. It caused massive trouble for the publisher because it sold so little.


    I didn’t say companies can’t do both – the best (Valve, Rockstar, Blizzard) can – but if it’s a choice between the two, money should always win. If you sell a million copies with 100,000 pissed off people, who gives a fuck. If you sell 100,000 copies and that’s it, well you’re going to have a lot of unemployed people aren’t ya?
    People’s jobs are more important than whatever loyalty people feel companies owe them.

    #13 3 years ago
  14. DSB

    @13 Well I couldn’t disagree more, if releasing a great game and going bust means leaving us with a great game, then I vastly prefer that to all the developers currently filling their wallets by releasing mediocre efforts.

    The shovelware giants can keep it. I’ll be over here playing the good games from developers who chose the better part of valor.

    Which isn’t mentioning the fact that there’s no reason why you wouldn’t be able to sell a great game. People have managed to do it for the better part of 30 years. The idea that you have to make everything into a Gears of War- or CoD-alike is just idiotic.

    #14 3 years ago
  15. YoungZer0

    @13: So? They could look for a different Publisher. There is a reason why they decided to buy the name back and patch the game after so long.

    #15 3 years ago
  16. Fin


    Well I think that’s a bit selfish – if I had to choose one, I’d prefer to see companies release average games, than one great game and subsequently be run into the ground, everyone losing their jobs.

    #16 3 years ago
  17. DSB

    @16 Well, consuming is nothing if not selfish. I buy stuff, for me, with my money, that I like.

    I’m not saying I want developers to fail though, I’m just saying I’m thankful for those who actually go somewhere and fail, over those who go nowhere and succeed.

    Developers like Mucky Foot and Introversion are my heroes.

    #17 3 years ago
  18. Kabby

    He’s very right about people thinking differently about the company after this launch. Unfortunately it’s not in a good way.

    #18 3 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.