-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
GTA V PS4/XONE Downgrade - Version 1.00 Vs 1.08 Comparison [edit: BUG]
- Thread starter Blastoise
- Start date
paragonpro
Banned
Can we reach out to rockstar on Twitter about this? If enough of us bring it up they have to respond right?
TheAdmiester
Member
It's called an error?
Vegetation swaying was missing in 1.00. Everyone thought that was on purpose too and suddenly hated Rockstar, then it was fixed in the first patch.
Roberto Larcos
Member
Yes, the PC port. The only game in recent history where the countdown to release keeps going up instead of down.
Less deformation on the front bumper. But that's about it. :/
lol You think the gaming industry revolves around NeoGAF?
Error my ass. Toning down many different graphical settings at this point is not just caused by a mysterious error.
No you could not. GTA IV was a fucking terrible port when it came out and it's still pretty bad today. Last time I tried the game would have the exact fucking framerate (5-6) , no matter the settings. Could be at the highest, could be at the lowest, same shit. It's a shit port, lets not do revisionist story here.
Phreakuency
Banned
You get off your fucking high horse, thinking you can tell others how to react.
I played the game from start to finish and then some, no frame rate problems at all in any situation.
I also paid full price for a product. You can't then simply accept some of that can be taken away.
You pay for a burger with bacon, lettuce and tomato and in the middle of eating it the waiter comes and replaces your tomato with cucumber... I don't think so.
Rockstar are pricks if they did this 1. On purpose and 2. Without advising it.
Backfoggen
Banned
"There is a product for people who want POM and car deformation and it's called GTA 5 PC."
Course not. But I'd expect a response at least.
Roberto Larcos
Member
Look at Crysis. Look at GTA IV. Crysis, graphically, holds uo today. You coukd tell someone that it camd out in January, and they'd likely believe you.
That port is dog shit, everyone knows it. Just no-one's allowed to say it now, for some reason.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
The hell?
Dictator93
Member
Crysis is also CPU limited these days, just as GTAIV was back then. You seriously do not unddrstand how GPU effects and cpu based simulation are different from one another? There is a reason why GTAIV "ran poorly" on rigs at certain settings, and it has nothing to do with its graphical splendor.
Roberto Larcos
Member
TheAdmiester
Member
That's what they said about the trees too.
This could also be a single file messing up different things. For all we know there's a Config line telling the game what distance it should start loading nicer textures and POM details at, and that was set wrong. It's a complex game and even fixing one big can cause another. It's absolutely not on purpose, it WILL be acknowledged and fixed, just not quickly I assume.
EDIT: And in GTA games, car deformation is simply a value in the handling file between 1.0 and 0.0 telling the game how much a crash, a punch, a bullet, etc will deform the car. With adding new vehicles and vehicle features in heists, it's very possible that the handling file was messed with unwittingly and it wasn't noticed because it isn't game breaking, or just had to be pushed out on time.
hemo memo
Gold Member
Huge or not its the idea that a developer downgrade a game with a patch after release without including that in the patch note? Why?
benicillin
Banned
Game still looks great even with the "downgrades," and until Rockstar makes an official comment this could easily be a bug or something weird. It's sad how many people grab their pitchforks immediately without giving any time to get actual information and the hyperbole here is ridiculous.
No, people had issues no matter how much they would scale down. It's a bad bad port and let's not pretend it isnt. This wasn't a Crysis case in the slightest.
Well that explains why staring at the ground in first person isn't as cool as I remember it being on launch day.
It's quite disappointing. People need to step back from the "give and take" argument and look at the basics here. We're supposed to trust that patches do nothing but improve. Any sort of "give and take" needs to be an informed deal between the dev and the player, but since that's not really possible on consoles, it just shouldn't happen.
It's quite disappointing. People need to step back from the "give and take" argument and look at the basics here. We're supposed to trust that patches do nothing but improve. Any sort of "give and take" needs to be an informed deal between the dev and the player, but since that's not really possible on consoles, it just shouldn't happen.
Roberto Larcos
Member
Especially for a game where the main selling point was; 'look, prettier'.
funkystudent
Member
Post purchase watch_dog-ing your game seems like a real dumb idea.
I am going to assume this is a glitch because the random AF downgrade makes zero sense. Removing the tessalation / POM? I could see a performance boost but AF?
I am going to assume this is a glitch because the random AF downgrade makes zero sense. Removing the tessalation / POM? I could see a performance boost but AF?
C'mon now. How often does a thread complaining about something on NeoGAF get a direct response within hours by the developer? It typically takes some time unless its a game where there's a dev member on the board or if its a properly major issue.
Dictator93
Member
It scaled with core amount AND with clock speed.
CPUs were just not very powerful back then in comparison to the consoles. True story.
Birgitte2004
Member
Yes, I'm sure Rockstar was giving out interviews on the numerous problems GTA 4 had on PC at launch because their users were uninformed.
Textures not loading at all? Totally a slider issue, and if the users simply knew better there was no issue. Just set that "Texture on/off slider" to on! Problem solved! /rolls eyes.
Dictator93
Member
We are talking about performance and optimization, not bugs.
For there to be even a chance, the gaming media needs to report the video. The video appearing on forums like Neogaf is just the first step.
Yes, I remember.
The only difference is both consoles have particularly weak CPU's and GPU's that have already lost their bragging rights (hell, the CPU's were never good to begin with) -- what baffles me is because they are both based on x86 (PS4 and Xbone that is), it would have been easier now more than ever before to get stronger hardware in the box.
If memory serves the CPU performance in these consoles are the same as a Core 2 Quad Q6600 or something. Cell is actually better in some regards if I'm not mistaken. To me, that's a huge oversight. You don't ship a console in late 2013 with gimped hardware and call it "next gen".
I don't buy this simply because it worked without issue before. Disabling it doesn't seem to have gained them anything (at least based on what we'be seen).
I'd bet it's an issue similar to the tree bug it launched with.
I hope this is the case. What a time for consoles where a game you buy doesn't perform the same as the day you bought it. This is why I don't like the idea of patches. Fix your game before you release it.
Hoho for breakfast
Member
This really annoys me since I just bought the game last week. I would not have bought it if I knew this was going to happen.
If it's a bug and they fix it, great. Otherwise I'm going to have issues with this.
If it's a bug and they fix it, great. Otherwise I'm going to have issues with this.
Summer Haze
Banned
Did you mean to type runs better? Because myself and a few others have noticed that the visuals online looked slightly worse after the latest update, and the performance slightly improved.
Not a good example. Kojima consistently developed above what SONY provided for the specs of their systems. He complained about this regarding MGS2, also.
So you've tested it and haven't seen any notable performance increase?
I think you could put a pretty quick end to the 'compromise or error' discussion for us.....
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
How can you come up with that when the game has already been in the hands of gamers and ran fine?
Ravensmash
Member
I'd presume this is either for performance reasons, or a bug relating to a recent update.
Not going to get out my pitchfork.
Not going to get out my pitchfork.
Roberto Larcos
Member
I'd get that if this was a launch game.
This was a remaster. It came out a year after the consoles launched, and R* would have had access to specs well before then. They had examples from launch of open-world games (Assassin's Creed, Dead Rising 3, Watch Dogs later) that ran perfectly fine on the hardware. And remember, this is a remaster, far less time / effort than Ubisoft spent on Unity.
So I don't believe the excuse that consoles being equivalent to mid-range PCs is why R* are incompetent.
Unity I can almost understand / pity. As I understand, it was in development for a long time. Maybe they thought CPU tech would've advanced more than it did in its time before release, when really it stalled and focused on efficiency. They genuinely would've had no clue as to what the console hardware would have been. R* have none of these excuses to fall back on.
martino
Member
That is because there is no definition of what next gen is when you use expectations to define it.
Temporal consideration is the only objective one that work
The framerate doesn't feel more stable. Maybe someone can prove me wrong, and it has hiked up a few frames, but it doesn't feel worth it.
If they downgraded in order to put the swaying trees back in, that sucks.
If it's a bug, which I kind of doubt, Rockstar needs to stop breaking something every patch. I wouldn't be surprised if things were downgraded in the last gen versions, too. Because occasionally something didn't feel right. You didn't notice it, but your brain did.
Dictator93
Member
They sure had a lot of bugs then which reduce graphical effects by accident. AF, POM, draw distance, and collision modelling?