-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
GTA V Comparison PC 4K vs PS4 vs PS3
- Thread starter bj00rn_
- Start date
Daffy Duck
Member
Those PS4 shots don't do it justice, I swear it looks better in game, and captures also look better.
Best of everything?
We spared no expense.
Best of everything?
We spared no expense.
Going by the standards Rockstar set with GTA IV,
These should suffice, barely.
Either in a distributed network, or on one supercomputer.
Snkfanatic
Banned
Huh my PS4 copy looks better to me than those shots...
Excited to get it on PC though, even though I wouldn' be able to push anything close to those 4k shots.
Excited to get it on PC though, even though I wouldn' be able to push anything close to those 4k shots.
I actually do think that it's going to run great on most machines. Rumors are it's done by the same team that did the Max Payne 3 PC Port. And that port was one of the best ports I've played in my life. Judging by recommended specs, which these days are needlessly inflated, and the delays, I do think this game will run well.
lukeskymac
Member
This comparison is strange. What is the point of showing off 4K when you don't give one of your main characters higher-resolution textures to go along with it? Open in a new tab and check it out.
Shark Attack
Banned
Max Payne 3 wasn't open world and didn't have huge amounts of NPCS to load.
PodcastFips
Member
My PS3 version looked better than most of the PS4 screenshots in that comparison. Something is really off here.
TheAdmiester
Member
Holy shit. The textures and foliage between PS4 and PC are like a two gen leap, far beyond the difference of PS3 to PS4.
I just hope their recommendation of a GTX660 is true and means running the game on max settings, and that it doesn't turn out that we need 970s and 980s for the higher settings.
I just hope their recommendation of a GTX660 is true and means running the game on max settings, and that it doesn't turn out that we need 970s and 980s for the higher settings.
And MP3 wasn't a port either.
Shark Attack
Banned
Uh, yes it was?
valkillmore
Member
And Vive . . . imagine playing it with the Vive . . . mmm gaming has never had a brighter future.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Dat image quality.This comparison is strange. What is the point of showing off 4K when you don't give one of your main characters higher-resolution textures to go along with it? Open in a new tab and check it out.
lukeskymac
Member
I'd agree with you if we were talking about a mod for 4K+ resolutions on an older game... not a to-be-released official product. Surely R* has some better textures than those, right? At least for his skin?
Why would a 660 suffice for max settings ? That would be incredibly disappointing.
Besides, recommended specs never aim for max settings.
Unlike you I really hope the game scales well to high-end GPUs. I can't believe you would be disappointed that high-end hardware is required for maximum settings, it just makes sense to me. A 660 is three years old.
There are more reasons to increase resolution than to be able to see high res textures.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
R* has always been terrible at skin texturing.
SuperEpicGuy
Banned
I know, right? 60 fps, 3D GTA V, absolutely can't wait. Will probably have to wait a bit until a 3D fix comes out, but it will be 100% worth it. I can almost taste it.
lukeskymac
Member
Älg;155951305 said:
IQ, we know, we've been through that, but it's still a waste. You are limiting the PC port to looking like an incredibly clean last-gen game with high draw distance, when it could easily be that and more.
NEOPARADIGM
Banned
They're not going to rewrite the code and redraw the assets. Despite whatever hype the PS4 and PC versions have brought with their (re)releases, it's ultimately still just GTA V and a last gen game.
Anyway, on topic: yup, that's higher res.
TheAdmiester
Member
Most people normally hope that high-end hardware isn't required because their hardware isn't high-end, you know.
I'd rather hope that it runs well and is scalable as opposed to just requiring top-tier hardware. No need to be so condescending.
They very rarely expand their PC ports over their console games, outside of Max Payne, but that is considered to be a PC-centric franchise first and foremost.
The only games I can think of that had real improvements were GTA III, San Andreas, IV, and Manhunt 2. GTA III and SA feature more in game assets that didn't exist in their PS2 releases despite both simultaneously missing assets from the original versions. IV had a slightly improved timecycle, extra car detail with a "dirt" feature, and retextured the ingame suits. I believe for Manhunt 2 they retextured the whole game and removed the kill filters, as it's really a far higher quality than the PS2, Wii, and PSP versions of the game. Each port comes with big catches that even make those versions a hard sell to get into.
Rockstar doesn't really try on PC to go above and beyond, so I don't believe they're a company you should be assuming this with. Maybe Eidos is a better example to use, especially with Hitman.
TheAdmiester
Member
GTA 4 also had those beautiful dynamic shadows from car headlights on PC, a feature I've rarely seen since.
I hope GTA 5 has them on PC. They definitely still support dynamic shadows because the flashlights on guns cast them for everything, even on the 360 version. I assume the reason cars lack them is because every car would be casting its own two sets of shadows, one for each headlight, which would probably hit performance badly.
You alluded to max settings though. It's not like there are other settings to chose from....Oh wait.
Don't flip the script : demanding maximum settings to be accessible to mid-range hardware is dumb as it goes against the principle of scalability. Max settings should require the absolute top end hardware available.
If you can't have it someone else should.
As for the "majority" who don't own high end hardware then rejoice ! Low, medium and high settings are there for you.
So I don't see ANY downsides in cutting edge GPU to be required for maximum settings, a 660 should do reasonably well but hopefully not for max settings as it will only prove that Rockstar have not even tried to push gaming PCs.
keltickennedy
Member
Max Payne 3 on PC wasn't a port. It was developed in parallel with the console versions.
TheAdmiester
Member
And there's evidence to suggest that GTA 5 has gone this way as well.
They (Xbone and PS4) were gimped to begin with. The CPU's are way behind and the GPU's are not that spectacular either. I don't really understand why both Sony and MS did not get a better CPU at the very least, especially since they are both x64 which is cheap as hell.Man consoles falling behind so fast
Yeah, that's the only way to get decent shots from it (and still compresses it a good bit). Definitely not as bad as the pics posted were making it out to be.
Nope.
lukeskymac
Member
They don't need to rewrite (much) code to do that. And I find it hard to believe that those are the original textures.
Wag
Member
PS3/PS4 can't render tractors confirmed.
No shit? That's what LoD does
Yeah, I know. I brought it up with pics to show it wasn't just a blurry texture no matter how close I got.
SuperEpicGuy
Banned
If I remember correctly, there was a guy who modded dynamic headlights for cars into watch dogs. Looked pretty good to me.GTA 4 also had those beautiful dynamic shadows from car headlights on PC, a feature I've rarely seen since.
I hope GTA 5 has them on PC. They definitely still support dynamic shadows because the flashlights on guns cast them for everything, even on the 360 version. I assume the reason cars lack them is because every car would be casting its own two sets of shadows, one for each headlight, which would probably hit performance badly.
GTA 4 also had those beautiful dynamic shadows from car headlights on PC, a feature I've rarely seen since.
I hope GTA 5 has them on PC. They definitely still support dynamic shadows because the flashlights on guns cast them for everything, even on the 360 version. I assume the reason cars lack them is because every car would be casting its own two sets of shadows, one for each headlight, which would probably hit performance badly.
I thought IV had that on consoles, too. I could be wrong though, as all I remember from what I played on 360 was how fucking hazy and blurry everything was, as this was many years ago.
I also forgot to mention SA had better shadows on PC, though that was one improvement against the five or so issues the port ended up producing. It blows my mind how a series as popular as this has consistently fucked up PC ports. You're really better off emulating some of these games over their official PC releases. ):
That salt... Not even surprised.