Gully State
Member
ezekial45 said:
It's not a defective copy if everyone receives the same defective game.
-
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.
PC : Grand Theft Auto IV, Who's playing it ? And how?
- Thread starter lowrider007
- Start date
It's not a defective copy if everyone receives the same defective game.
Sucks to hear all these performance issues as the game is great. I played GTA3, Vice City, and San Andreas on PC and had a lot of fun. I bought GTA4 for Xbox 360 since I knew my PC would never be able to handle the game. GTA4 runs beautifully when installed to the hard drive, and I've gotten back into the game because of that feature. Great game, sucks to see the PC version marred by these problems. Looks like the port job was done with future hardware in mind.
EvilDick34
Banned
Hey potato head, you are a moron sir. Someone posted earlier in this thread from the manual that if pc gamers set their options to medium that it would be of a higher quality then what was on the consoles..anything lower then medium is well, LOW.
Haunted
Member
While I was being a bit facetious, I just looked at some of the console screens and yeah, you're right. Still considering the difference in power between a beefy PC and the consoles, this is hardly an acceptable port.godhandiscen said:
Future-proofing the settings. Eh.... can't really hate on that, although seeing a "very high" setting is akin to taunting for some. >_<TheExodu5 said:
And looking at some of those pictures - cranking the car density up to 100 seems to result in constant traffic jams. :lol
Chiggs said:
Did you try playing the game at console settings (mix of low/medium, I presume) for kicks?
This sounds like one fucked up port, definitely going to wait and see how this develops.
(neutral) Mr.Potato HeadMr.Potato Head said:
slurp slurp
(11-20-2008, 03:01 AM)
Someone trying to be the 360's Gahigiddy? :lol
infinityBCRT
Member
GTA4 is 6.7GB according to it's install size on NXE. Compare that to what, 15 gigs on the PC version? Its clear that they increased the max texture size big time. Put that on top of the fact that they have given the option to put the view distance and the distance detail far higher than what was on the console versions, and it doesn't surprise me the game chugs.
I think it would be a good idea for Rockstar to release the equivalent detail settings for the 360 version, because people are going mad. I don't have the game but someone did post a snippet of either a FAQ or the readme where they state the highest settings are intended for systems in the future.
The 360 only has 512MB total system memory (shared with the GPU) and was running at 1280x720 with anti-aliasing and NO AF, and it's frame rate was in the mid-20s.
The PS3 has only 256MB memory for the GPU, and separate 256MB system memory, and it ran at around 600p without anti-aliasing and with some AF, and it's frame rate was in the low-20s.
I doubt those consoles were running anything near the medium settings let alone high. That being said, I'm not slighting the console versions at all. Its a technical marvel that they were able to get the game looking like it did on the current generation of consoles-- on most TV sets you wouldn't notice a further detail increase anyway. And the people that just need to turn on and play without having to fidget with graphics settings are better off because of it.
I think it would be a good idea for Rockstar to release the equivalent detail settings for the 360 version, because people are going mad. I don't have the game but someone did post a snippet of either a FAQ or the readme where they state the highest settings are intended for systems in the future.
The 360 only has 512MB total system memory (shared with the GPU) and was running at 1280x720 with anti-aliasing and NO AF, and it's frame rate was in the mid-20s.
The PS3 has only 256MB memory for the GPU, and separate 256MB system memory, and it ran at around 600p without anti-aliasing and with some AF, and it's frame rate was in the low-20s.
I doubt those consoles were running anything near the medium settings let alone high. That being said, I'm not slighting the console versions at all. Its a technical marvel that they were able to get the game looking like it did on the current generation of consoles-- on most TV sets you wouldn't notice a further detail increase anyway. And the people that just need to turn on and play without having to fidget with graphics settings are better off because of it.
infinityBCRT said:
as has been said, when crytek said this - you only had to look at the game they'd made and see what they were talking about. and people were comfortably running that game on high settings almost from it's release.
this however is just a smash and grab port. with this scorched earth disclaimer inserted as the calling card of a lazy developer.
BakedPigeon
Banned
Well after reading every single post in this thread it sounds like Rockstar has served up a real nice pile of shit port.
Will steer clear for at least 4 years.
Will steer clear for at least 4 years.
infinityBCRT
Member
ghst said:
Its a different game though. I wouldn't expect it to look like Crysis.
a) it was developed for the resources of the PS3/360 so unless they redid all of the game models its NOT going to look significantly better, all the maximum settings do is render stuff in the distance at insane detail so its not going to pop out at people
b) I'm not sure if you would be able to render a city littered with pedestrians and cars at the detail level that is present in Crysis on current generation hardware... GTA has to make some hits in visual quality to have all of those buildings, cars and pedestrians rendered
Look, I'm not absolving Rockstar of guilt here. As far as I'm concerned, PC games should be tweaked to work on lower end systems because most people don't have their target system requirements. But if they locked the max settings to what the 360 was locked to, I'm sure we wouldn't be seeing as many complaints as the top systems would be running the game at 60 FPS.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Point -> .infinityBCRT said:
ZombieSupaStar
Member
Mr.Potato Head said:
CRTL + F "True Gamer", .......no results found, .........youre slipping potato man.
Ill take your crown.
edit: and the 360 doesnt have Dwarf Fortress, so it loses by default
SIP YEK NOD
Banned
I'm happy with the end result and how it runs on my system, and that down the road with a newer system i'll be able to jack everything up and have an amazing looking game.
What i don't like is the fact that they(likely temporarily) locked out modding, and force you to install all the social club and GFW bullshit and all that.
What i don't like is the fact that they(likely temporarily) locked out modding, and force you to install all the social club and GFW bullshit and all that.
infinityBCRT said:
I wonder if R* release the option with caption like "original" - "enhanced" - "enhanced++" or something alone those line people would still react like it is now.
It's that time again. The time when you realize your super-duper-powerfull-alwaysmaxsetting-pc is now barely able to keep up with a new game even in medium setting.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
->infinityBCRT's head
ZombieSupaStar
Member
psy18 said:
yeah, but imo gta4 didnt look THAT impressive.
Then again vampire bloodlines, can STILL bring top of the line pcs to its knees in 2008 depending on whats going on and that came out in 2004...so :lol
brain_stew
Member
Mr.Potato Head said:
What is your point exactly? Are you actually claiming that the IO Xenon is a match for a Core 2 Duo? Do you even know what an IO processor is?
I've owned a 360 since launch, have about 30 games but that doesn't change the fact that IO processors went out of style in the mid 90s.
My god, how the fuck did I miss this thread.
WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON IN HERE.
I can't believe what's going on with this port.
I almost want to buy it just to see how it runs on my Q9550 @ 3.8, 8GBDDR2, 4870x2.
I just finished Warhead @ 1920x1200, enthusiast settings with max motion blur and was fluctuating between 30-60 fps, with average fps in the mid 40's.
I wonder if I can run this thing maxed out?
WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON IN HERE.
I can't believe what's going on with this port.
I almost want to buy it just to see how it runs on my Q9550 @ 3.8, 8GBDDR2, 4870x2.
I just finished Warhead @ 1920x1200, enthusiast settings with max motion blur and was fluctuating between 30-60 fps, with average fps in the mid 40's.
I wonder if I can run this thing maxed out?
ZombieSupaStar
Member
brain_stew said:
... in order?
im not an software engineer, nor did I stay at a holiday inn,......I just like watching john carmack keynotes....
chespace said:My god, how the fuck did I miss this thread.
WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON IN HERE.
I can't believe what's going on with this port.
I almost want to buy it just to see how it runs on my Q9550 @ 3.8, 8GBDDR2, 4870x2.
I just finished Warhead @ 1920x1200, enthusiast settings with max motion blur and was fluctuating between 30-60 fps, with average fps in the mid 40's.
I wonder if I can run this thing maxed out?
judging from performance id say mebbe save your money for that OTHER SANDBOX GAME that shall not be named, coming out in Jan for PC, I mean i cant imagine that one running any worse.....
Mohonky
Member
chespace said:My god, how the fuck did I miss this thread.
WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON IN HERE.
I can't believe what's going on with this port.
I almost want to buy it just to see how it runs on my Q9550 @ 3.8, 8GBDDR2, 4870x2.
I just finished Warhead @ 1920x1200, enthusiast settings with max motion blur and was fluctuating between 30-60 fps, with average fps in the mid 40's.
I wonder if I can run this thing maxed out?
Nobody can.....
Haunted
Member
Do it, man.chespace said:My god, how the fuck did I miss this thread.
WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON IN HERE.
I can't believe what's going on with this port.
I almost want to buy it just to see how it runs on my Q9550 @ 3.8, 8GBDDR2, 4870x2.
I just finished Warhead @ 1920x1200, enthusiast settings with max motion blur and was fluctuating between 30-60 fps, with average fps in the mid 40's.
I wonder if I can run this thing maxed out?
Do it for GAF.
CabbageRed
Member
I'm throwing in the towel. Deleted and reinstalled the game, and even uninstalled/reinstalled SP1, still GTAIV gives me the "upgrade to XP SP3" error message.
Hopefully this works better (or, you know, *at all*) on my son's machine. It is installing now and I'll head over to his place tomorrow to help him get it up and running, but his performance is going to be dissapointing. I really wished I hadn't built him up for this so much.
Grumble.
Hopefully this works better (or, you know, *at all*) on my son's machine. It is installing now and I'll head over to his place tomorrow to help him get it up and running, but his performance is going to be dissapointing. I really wished I hadn't built him up for this so much.
Grumble.
brain_stew
Member
After soaking up various reports it seems the game WILL run a fairly decent amount better on my current PC than my 360 but that still doesn't stop this from being terribly optimised. I'll wait till I can get it cheap as by that time it should be patched up and running a little better as well.
Chiggs
Member
Haunted said:
I absolutely did, and even when I "cranked" things up, I didn't push the engine as far as it would let me; a lot of the individual options were still at fairly moderate settings.
I'm seriously outraged by the lack of effort put into this port. Rockstar should be fucking ashamed. I hope this game is pirated to hell and back, and then somehow Jack Thompson discovers Hot Coffee 2 hidden in the files and leads a devastating lawsuit against Rockstar that threatens their very existence.
FUCK YOU, ROCKSTAR.
Edit: Did I mention that the loading still sucks?
I found it on System Requirements lab, mine fails the recommended specs because I have a duo rather than a quad :lol
Check yours here: http://www.systemrequirementslab.com/bonus/t/sysinfo_intro.tmpl?registration_option_id=7966&submit2.x=57&submit2.y=27&submit2=Go
Check yours here: http://www.systemrequirementslab.com/bonus/t/sysinfo_intro.tmpl?registration_option_id=7966&submit2.x=57&submit2.y=27&submit2=Go
If I wasn't morally opposed to piracy, I would seed any and all torrents purely as a big fuck you to Rockstar.Chiggs said:
Instead, I'll just return it first thing tomorrow.
Nail in the coffin for me was definitely HAVING to sign in online just to SAVE MY FUCKING GAME. A complete joke.
Artofwar420
Member
Gully State said:
If you actually give them (STEAM) a good reason they'll refund you, a reason like not being able to play the game.
Here's some hilarity from Rockstar:
THE GRAPHIC SETTINGS OF GRAND THEFT AUTO IV PC
Most users using current PC hardware as of December 2008 are advised to use medium graphics settings. Higher settings are provided for future generations of PCs with higher specifications than are currently widely available.
Graphics settings are limited by system resources by default. 256MB video cards force minimum settings by default. If a user bypasses these safety measures using command line arguments and exceeds their system resources, the users gaming experience may be compromised.
Video Mode
Resolution scaling effects water, reflections, shadows, mirrors and the visible viewable distance. The resolution settings relate to the amount of available video memory. At 2560*1600 the game will require 320MB of video memory in addition to all the memory required for content. At 800*600 the game will require 32MB of video memory in addition to the content. Medium resolution settings are recommended for most users as higher settings are only usable if there is available video memory.
Texture Quality
Texture quality affects the visual quality of the content of the game. High setting for textures will require 600MB of video memory at a setting of 21 View Distance in addition to the memory taken by the Video Mode. A medium texture setting is recommended for most users.
Render Quality
Render quality is the texture filter quality used on most things in the world rendering. Most people would know this as anisotropic filtering. Medium settings are recommended for most users and will provide filtering beyond what the console versions can execute.
View Distance
View distance scales the distance in which different objects in the world such as building and cars are seen. Raising this option increases the distance in which high quality objects must be loaded and will increase the memory it requires. Restrictions are established to ensure the game runs optimally for most users. A setting of 22 or more will provide PC users an enhanced experience over the console versions.
Detail Distance
Detail distance scales aspects of the environment that the View Distance setting does not including vegetation, trash and other moveable objects. A setting of 10 would be the equivalent to the performance on a console. This setting has little effect on memory.
Vehicle Density
Vehicle density scales the traffic density of the traffic in the game. It has no effect on the mission vehicles or difficultly of the game, but can have a significant impact on CPU performance
Shadow Density
Shadow Density controls the number of shadows generated for positional lights in exterior environments. These shadows are exclusive to the PC version and can have a major impact on CPU and GPU performance.
Crossfire/SLI
With the latest ATI driver (8-11 series) the game supports crossfire modes (ie. 4870x2)
SLI is currently unsupported. Support will be added through a future game patch as well as an updated Nvidia driver.
NOTE: Background Processes
Certain background processes can have a detrimental effect on system performance when playing GTA IV, especially on systems with minimum required system memory. Users should ensure they disable their Virus scans (especially on-access type scans) when running the game to maximize performance.
High is for future computers? Are you fucking kidding me? :lol
Source: http://www.rockstargames.com/support/req_support_detail.php?product=275%2C3%2CGrand+Theft+Auto+IV%2CPC%2CRockstar_Games%2Cgta4&submit=Submit
THE GRAPHIC SETTINGS OF GRAND THEFT AUTO IV PC
Most users using current PC hardware as of December 2008 are advised to use medium graphics settings. Higher settings are provided for future generations of PCs with higher specifications than are currently widely available.
Graphics settings are limited by system resources by default. 256MB video cards force minimum settings by default. If a user bypasses these safety measures using command line arguments and exceeds their system resources, the users gaming experience may be compromised.
Video Mode
Resolution scaling effects water, reflections, shadows, mirrors and the visible viewable distance. The resolution settings relate to the amount of available video memory. At 2560*1600 the game will require 320MB of video memory in addition to all the memory required for content. At 800*600 the game will require 32MB of video memory in addition to the content. Medium resolution settings are recommended for most users as higher settings are only usable if there is available video memory.
Texture Quality
Texture quality affects the visual quality of the content of the game. High setting for textures will require 600MB of video memory at a setting of 21 View Distance in addition to the memory taken by the Video Mode. A medium texture setting is recommended for most users.
Render Quality
Render quality is the texture filter quality used on most things in the world rendering. Most people would know this as anisotropic filtering. Medium settings are recommended for most users and will provide filtering beyond what the console versions can execute.
View Distance
View distance scales the distance in which different objects in the world such as building and cars are seen. Raising this option increases the distance in which high quality objects must be loaded and will increase the memory it requires. Restrictions are established to ensure the game runs optimally for most users. A setting of 22 or more will provide PC users an enhanced experience over the console versions.
Detail Distance
Detail distance scales aspects of the environment that the View Distance setting does not including vegetation, trash and other moveable objects. A setting of 10 would be the equivalent to the performance on a console. This setting has little effect on memory.
Vehicle Density
Vehicle density scales the traffic density of the traffic in the game. It has no effect on the mission vehicles or difficultly of the game, but can have a significant impact on CPU performance
Shadow Density
Shadow Density controls the number of shadows generated for positional lights in exterior environments. These shadows are exclusive to the PC version and can have a major impact on CPU and GPU performance.
Crossfire/SLI
With the latest ATI driver (8-11 series) the game supports crossfire modes (ie. 4870x2)
SLI is currently unsupported. Support will be added through a future game patch as well as an updated Nvidia driver.
NOTE: Background Processes
Certain background processes can have a detrimental effect on system performance when playing GTA IV, especially on systems with minimum required system memory. Users should ensure they disable their Virus scans (especially on-access type scans) when running the game to maximize performance.
High is for future computers? Are you fucking kidding me? :lol
Source: http://www.rockstargames.com/support/req_support_detail.php?product=275%2C3%2CGrand+Theft+Auto+IV%2CPC%2CRockstar_Games%2Cgta4&submit=Submit
infinityBCRT
Member
My guess is its because texture resolution was increased (pretty sure at the highest settings the texture resolution is much higher than the console versions). Its possible that the audio/movies are less compressed as well.tabsina said:
Chiggs
Member
Tisan said:
HEY, YOU HAVEN'T SIGNED INTO THE SOCIAL CLUB! SIGN INTO THE SOCIAL CLUB TO UPLOAD YOUR SICKEST AND ILLEST VIDS!HEY, YOU HAVEN'T SIGNED INTO THE SOCIAL CLUB! SIGN INTO THE SOCIAL CLUB TO UPLOAD YOUR SICKEST AND ILLEST VIDS!HEY, YOU HAVEN'T SIGNED INTO THE SOCIAL CLUB! SIGN INTO THE SOCIAL CLUB TO UPLOAD YOUR SICKEST AND ILLEST VIDS!HEY, YOU HAVEN'T SIGNED INTO THE SOCIAL CLUB! SIGN INTO THE SOCIAL CLUB TO UPLOAD YOUR SICKEST AND ILLEST VIDS!
DrBo42 said:
What a joke. I wish they would have commented on the variety of rendering errors.
infinityBCRT
Member
Tisan said:
You can make an offline only profile or a gamertag. At least thats how it was before the recent GFW update. What I wonder is if your profile from Fallout 3 (or other GFW games) carries over. If so its not that bad since you only have to do the process once.
As for the game defaulting to signing into live, whether its stupid or not, its there so that you can see your friends list and see what your friends are playing or chat with them. Steam basically does the same thing.
SIP YEK NOD
Banned
I just played around with all 3 versions of the game, and the PC version is by far the best.
keep in mind this is with a 3ghz intel C2Q/9800gtx/3gm memory
-better framerate(obviously)
-ps3/360 textures look a little sharper than the PC on medium, but not by much. for example, the taxi pricing is readble but blurry on the PC version, fairly sharp on ps360, not really noticeable unless you're really looking
-many many many more vehicles on screen
-much much much better draw distance and detail distance(makes the biggest difference)
-less texture pop-in
-some graphical glitches. (flashing trees in some areas)
-trees look like trees rather than watercolor green and yellow blobs.
i suck at off-screen pics, but here is one comparison, all 3 just came out of the ped tunnel and stopped in the street.
keep in mind this is with a 3ghz intel C2Q/9800gtx/3gm memory
-better framerate(obviously)
-ps3/360 textures look a little sharper than the PC on medium, but not by much. for example, the taxi pricing is readble but blurry on the PC version, fairly sharp on ps360, not really noticeable unless you're really looking
-many many many more vehicles on screen
-much much much better draw distance and detail distance(makes the biggest difference)
-less texture pop-in
-some graphical glitches. (flashing trees in some areas)
-trees look like trees rather than watercolor green and yellow blobs.
i suck at off-screen pics, but here is one comparison, all 3 just came out of the ped tunnel and stopped in the street.
brain_stew
Member
SIP YEK NOD said:I just played around with all 3 versions of the game, and the PC version is by far the best.
keep in mind this is with a 3ghz intel C2Q/9800gtx/3gm memory
-better framerate(obviously)
-ps3/360 textures look a little sharper than the PC on medium, but not by much. for example, the taxi pricing is readble but blurry on the PC version, fairly sharp on ps360, not really noticeable unless you're really looking
-many many many more vehicles on screen
-much much much better draw distance and detail distance(makes the biggest difference)
-less texture pop-in
-some graphical glitches. (flashing trees in some areas)
-trees look like trees rather than watercolor green and yellow blobs.
i suck at off-screen pics, but here is one comparison, all 3 just came out of the ped tunnel and stopped in the street.
Ah, that puts my mind at rest, I think I'll end up buying it then, as the PC version looks considerably better there.
I've only got a C2D but its clocked at 3.7ghz so that shouldn't be too much of a problem, the better GPU and double the amount of memory in my system won't hurt either I would assume.
MaddenNFL64
Member
DrBo42 said:
Reading all that, the performance issues make absolute sense. People are jacking up everything to 100.
fizzelopeguss
Banned
Rockstar can't code for toffee