It's called an error?What. The. FUCK!?
What is the point of this other than making their PC version better than it seems? I haven't had severe frame rate issue so it can't be that.
'Buy the PC version even though we false advertised the console version'
Less deformation on the front bumper. But that's about it. :/watch the video if you have not already, it also affects the awesome car damage and tones it down a lot.
lol You think the gaming industry revolves around NeoGAF?Really? This thread has been going on for hours and Rockstar hasn't fucking said anything? Fuck them.
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.
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.Basically this. People keep claiming how it was a bad port because it asked a really good PC... but for what settings ?
The truth is, GTA IV can even run on a tablet nowadays... the truth is, if you wanted to run GTA IV on console levels, aka sub-HD, lower draw distances and such, you could do it on a modest computer.
Fuck me, the mental gymnastics by some people on here are incredible.
People reason that R* downgraded the console version because it had some extremely sporadic framerate drops, limited to high-traffic in cities and huge explosions. The drops are far fewer and further than those experienced on the previous-gen consoles. This makes the game 'broken', a downgrade this severe 'justifiable', and is evidence that devs can't release good looking games for this generation of consoles. Ignoring that it ran fine on launch, looking far better!
On the other hand, the abomination that was GTA IV day one on PC is now said to have 'run fine'. Absolute revisionism.
Want to know why console gamers and PC gamers just don't get along? Shit like this. Get off your high horse.
(This doesn't apply to all, just a specific few, too many however to quote all of them. Also, let it be said that I think this is all just incompetence from R*, and will be reverted in the next patch.)
'Buy the PC version even though we false advertised the console version'
Course not. But I'd expect a response at least.lol You think the gaming industry revolves around NeoGAF?
It is not historical revionism.
GTAIV on PC isnt the prettiest game, but its options made it scalable. Unfortunately this is the same time period where people complained about crysis being so heavy all day without realizing that you do not need to run the game at Very High. A very similar situation happened with GTAIV.
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.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.
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.
That's what they said about the trees too.Error my ass. Toning down many different graphical settings at this point is not just caused by a mysterious error.
I mean, to me, it doesn't look that huge of a downgrade and I would have never noticed if while playing.
Crappy as it may be to Graphics Queens I don't think I can realistically throw up my arms for this.
Heist is fun and it's working moderately. I think that's what matters mostly right?
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.It is not historical revionism.
GTAIV on PC isnt the prettiest game, but its options made it scalable. Unfortunately this is the same time period where people complained about crysis being so heavy all day without realizing that you do not need to run the game at Very High. A very similar situation happened with GTAIV.
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?
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.Course not. But I'd expect a response at least.
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.
The PC version had problems on the CPU side if you maxed the sliders (every light cast shadows, massive draw distance, etc..). That was about it really. Uninformed people had problems, that is it.
I think this is a developer facing the reality that "next gen" console hardware came out of the gate criminally underpowered, and as a result games cannot run as originally anticipated. It's not an accident that they toned down the detail.
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.
Course not. But I'd expect a response at least.
Yes, I remember.I feel like we hear this every gen.
Remember Kojima with MGS4 on PS3?
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 think this is a developer facing the reality that "next gen" console hardware came out of the gate criminally underpowered, and as a result games cannot run as originally anticipated. It's not an accident that they toned down the detail.
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.
All i know is that online looks better after the heist patch/update.
I feel like we hear this every gen.
Remember Kojima with MGS4 on PS3?
So you've tested it and haven't seen any notable performance increase?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 think this is a developer facing the reality that "next gen" console hardware came out of the gate criminally underpowered, and as a result games cannot run as originally anticipated. It's not an accident that they toned down the detail.
I think this is a developer facing the reality that "next gen" console hardware came out of the gate criminally underpowered, and as a result games cannot run as originally anticipated. It's not an accident that they toned down the detail.
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".
If performance is better than why is this a big deal to some here? Aren't some here already critical of devs who ship out games that have issues? The game already looks better and it seems like the performance is better so mission accomplished. I already have the PC version pre-order but this is something of a good move in my opinion.
No, it really isn't. If it stabilizes performance then I see no issue. Unless it hurts someone's soul.
I'd presume this is either for performance reasons, or a bug relating to a recent update.
Not going to get out my pitchfork.