GTAIV looks amazing, runs well. Himu shits on all your faces.

[demi]

Maybe they shouldnt be so shitty then.

[Vizzys]

I read it more like "LEAVE ROCKSTAR ALONE!!!"

[Raban]

I read it more like "LEAVE ROCKSTAR ALONE!!!"

except you crazy bitches do it to every game that's popular, and if it isn't, Himuro liking it is reason enough

[demi]

Ain't it the troof

[AdmiralViscen]

I'm being quite reserved, actually. I try to watch my posts here, since so many are met with sarcasm rather than rational thought, but the ceaseless criticism of games at this site is getting a little old hat.

It's a fair point.

But you shouldn't avoid making a real post because you worry about the response, there are those here who will give a proper response.

I felt the same way when I first started posting here. I think I acted like you and lowered my standards, instead we should go ahead and make substantive posts.

I post this rather than PM it with full knowledge that I am now a fagurt like y2kev.

[y2kev]

OH GOD IT GOT SO MISINTERPRETED

[tiesto]

I'm being quite reserved, actually. I try to watch my posts here, since so many are met with sarcasm rather than rational thought, but the ceaseless criticism of games at this site is getting a little old hat.

I praise just as many, if not more, games than I criticize... GTA is just a series that I've never warmed up to, even after countless attempts at trying to, and I've expressed why exactly I dislike it so many times that now, at this point, it's completely redundant.

[demi]

OH GOD IT GOT SO MISINTERPRETED

suckle suckle :*

[Van Cruncheon]

mana-khemia

[demi]

i winnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn suckle my teat

[Raban]

I'm being quite reserved, actually. I try to watch my posts here, since so many are met with sarcasm rather than rational thought, but the ceaseless criticism of games at this site is getting a little old hat.

It's a fair point.

But you shouldn't avoid making a real post because you worry about the response, there are those here who will give a proper response.

I felt the same way when I first started posting here. I think I acted like you and lowered my standards, instead we should go ahead and make substantive posts.

I post this rather than PM it with full knowledge that I am now a fagurt like y2kev.

thanks for posting this

I praise just as many, if not more, games than I criticize... GTA is just a series that I've never warmed up to, even after countless attempts at trying to, and I've expressed why exactly I dislike it so many times that now, at this point, it's completely redundant.

shouldn't it be a goal to avoid threads like this rather than repeat yourself every time a thread about it pops up? it's one thing to get bothered by the mass volume of threads about popular games as they come up.

I get that sort of feeling when it happens as well (we have like five GTA4 threads right on the front page), but it's another beast entirely to post in those threads simply to express your hatred and re-open previously inflicted wounds, that needn't the re-opening.

[Grecco]

fagurt? ill be honest ive never heard that one before.

[Beezy]

EB Smash fans > EB GTA fans

[AdmiralViscen]

fagurt? ill be honest ive never heard that one before.

It's one of my own.

[Raban]

EB Smash fans > EB GTA fans

at least you rabid bitches kept it to one thread, you get props for that

[bluemax]

Gamefly total. Not worth $60.

[Don Flamenco]

I'm caving into the hype.  Say what you will about the gameplay, each GTA game has been well worth about 20 hours of exploring and murderous rampages. 

Hopefully this time there WON'T be that one mission that sucks so hard and has such a distinguished mentally-challenged objective that makes it near impossible to beat.  Because that has happened to me in all of the previous games.

[Beezy]

EB Smash fans > EB GTA fans

at least you rabid bitches kept it to one thread, you get props for that

rabid bitches?

We didn't bitch and cry when a game we like got trolled. We just ignored them for the most part.

EDIT: what I don't understand about game bashing is, sure, okay, if you can tell the game is some low budget piece of drivel that the devs popped out for a quick buck, fine. But a game like this, Rockstar put a fuckload of cash and effort into turning out something for us to play, and people can't shut the fuck up about how much it sucks because other people like it. I mean seriously, folks, say what you want about the series, but own up to how many nights of sweet love-making sessions with their wives that most of the Rockstar staff willingly gave up to make this game.

Honestly, who gives a fuck? You guys glorify developers way too much.

Since when does cash + effort immediately = great game? Why does it bother you so much that a few people don't like your favorite game when you know millions of others will?

Forget this, I'm going back to sleep. People who take shit seriously on the internet, especially videogames, are fuckin weird.

[Raban]

rabid bitches?

We didn't bitch and cry when a game we like got trolled. We just ignored them for the most part.

check your sarcasm detector, I believe it is broken.

Honestly, who gives a fuck? You guys glorify developers way too much.

Since when does cash + effort immediately = great game? Why does it bother you so much that a few people don't like your favorite game when you know millions of others will?

Forget this, I'm going back to sleep. People who take shit seriously on the internet, especially videogames, are fuckin weird.

When did I ever say you should think GTA4 is the second coming of the messiah simply because people put effort into it? It's not my favorite game, but I guess you were on a roll with idiotic assumptions so it didn't make sense to stop.

The whole point of my post is, sure, express that you dislike GTA4, I don't give a shit, but own up to the fact that people put alot of effort and time into the game, moreso than many of the games that have come out so far this gen. I never went around and flamed games before with at least admitting that people dedicate a big portion of their lives to this shit.

I'm not trying to be all serious master debater about this, I really shouldn't have even went back to add that paragraph in my post. It was simply my opinion, but I guess because this is EB, I get trolled for that.

 

[demi]

bump

y2kev found giving white washings to anuses down the road

himu found with shit on his face

[demi]

the ownage is astronomical... brutal

[MrAngryFace]

haha thanks for the bump, demi. this is awesome

[Grecco]

/Bow Demi

[Narag]

Wow.

[cool breeze]

Well, this thread purpose and message is still right for the most part.  GTA4 does look good and run relatively well.  It is the gameplay that is fucked.

[Beezy]

 

[Bildi]

(I just read most of the thread wondering what the fuck is going on - then I saw it's a bump. )

[The Sceneman]

yeah thanks for the bump demi

kev got so owned

[Himu]

Well, this thread purpose and message is still right for the most part.  GTA4 does look good and run relatively well.  It is the gameplay that is fucked.

agreed

[Tigerriot]

I don't know why I'm bothering saying this, but this game does look and run significantly better on the PS3. 

I played both versions on the same HDTV, and was honestly surprised at how big the difference was.  Most of the reviews said there were small differences, but they seemed quite noticeable to me. 

Smoother framerate on the PS3 version.  360 version may have more "high points", but it's low points are far more noticeable than they are on the PS3.  The PS3 version seems to be locked around 30, while the 360 seems to bounce from 40 to 20 on a regular basis.  The 360 version also has textures popping in almost constantly.  Even small grass chunks will pop in as you walk around in a field.  This is simply not as noticeable on the PS3.  Lastly, the shadows are really not good on the 360.  Much better on the PS3.

Anyway, the game isn't gorgeous on either system, but I just felt it should be said, that if you want to fairly judge the game's graphics, do so while looking at the PS3 version.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Before you go making some dumb comment about how I just love the PS3, I'd be glad to point out a recent game where the gaming media said both versions look about the game, and I think the 360 version looks significantly better.  GRID.

[close]

[MCD]

ok...

[WrikaWrek]

I don't know why I'm bothering saying this, but this game does look and run significantly better on the PS3. 

I played both versions on the same HDTV, and was honestly surprised at how big the difference was.  Most of the reviews said there were small differences, but they seemed quite noticeable to me. 

Smoother framerate on the PS3 version.  360 version may have more "high points", but it's low points are far more noticeable than they are on the PS3.  The PS3 version seems to be locked around 30, while the 360 seems to bounce from 40 to 20 on a regular basis.  The 360 version also has textures popping in almost constantly.  Even small grass chunks will pop in as you walk around in a field.  This is simply not as noticeable on the PS3.  Lastly, the shadows are really not good on the 360.  Much better on the PS3.

Anyway, the game isn't gorgeous on either system, but I just felt it should be said, that if you want to fairly judge the game's graphics, do so while looking at the PS3 version.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Before you go making some dumb comment about how I just love the PS3, I'd be glad to point out a recent game where the gaming media said both versions look about the game, and I think the 360 version looks significantly better.  GRID.

[close]

My head hurts from the hangover and even i know you're nuts. The game runs SLOWER on the PS3, how is that running better? Sometimes you are driving around speeding, and the game has these "little stops". To top it all, the Ps3 version has this vaseline look, this low rez look that is just unpleasant to the eyes.

Only thing that is better in the Ps3 version are the shadows, which are ugly on the 360, but they don't bother.

[Hitler Stole My Potato]

I don't know why I'm bothering saying this, but this game does look and run significantly better on the PS3. 

Smoother framerate on the PS3 version.  360 version may have more "high points", but it's low points are far more noticeable than they are on the PS3.  The PS3 version seems to be locked around 30, while the 360 seems to bounce from 40 to 20 on a regular basis. 

Bullshit.  I own the game on both systems and went back and forth between the two and the framerate on the PS3 was noticeably worse.  Try driving over one of the bridges at full speed with heavy traffic on the PS3 and then do the same on the 360.  The PS3 drops to N64 Perfect Dark levels of framerate.  Locked at 30?  Pfft. Only if you're fucking high.

The texture pop-in is worse on the 360 and the shimmering shadows are more pronounced as well but the game does run at a higher resolution and honestly it was a refreshing change to go back to the 360 GTA4 after playing the PS3 version for its visual clarity.  The jaggy vasoline filter thing on the PS3 is just too much after awhile.

[The Sceneman]

Im pretty sure tigerriot is a joke character

[AdmiralViscen]

I already saw some lunatic who ran tests on the PS3 and 360 versions and proved that 360 had the better frame rate.

[cool breeze]

I bought the PS3 version of GTA4, but the bits I played of the 360 version definitely were better visually and ran more smooth.  I still think they are a lot alike to the point where unless you are forcing yourself to really see the difference (like I was at that time), you won't really care too much.  Also, loading after you died seemed to take longer on the 360, yet the initial load up was faster.

I already saw some lunatic who ran tests on the PS3 and 360 versions and proved that 360 had the better frame rate.

Some people are insane about this stuff.  There is that one poster on gaf who doesn't seem like he actually has ever played a game, yet he goes on like he is the authority on graphics in a game.  I don't give a fuck if a pixel on the upper right corner of the screen is slightly low res compared to the others if the game is fun and looks amazing to me.

[AdmiralViscen]

if you're talking about who I think you are, he's here

[y2kev]

i can't believe i made this thread

the shame

[CajoleJuice]

oh kev

so many shameful posts

spoiler (click to show/hide)

"halo 3 is a fabulous game"

[close]

[Tigerriot]

I don't know why I'm bothering saying this, but this game does look and run significantly better on the PS3. 

Smoother framerate on the PS3 version.  360 version may have more "high points", but it's low points are far more noticeable than they are on the PS3.  The PS3 version seems to be locked around 30, while the 360 seems to bounce from 40 to 20 on a regular basis. 

Bullshit.  I own the game on both systems and went back and forth between the two and the framerate on the PS3 was noticeably worse.  Try driving over one of the bridges at full speed with heavy traffic on the PS3 and then do the same on the 360.  The PS3 drops to N64 Perfect Dark levels of framerate.  Locked at 30?  Pfft. Only if you're fucking high.
 
The texture pop-in is worse on the 360 and the shimmering shadows are more pronounced as well but the game does run at a higher resolution and honestly it was a refreshing change to go back to the 360 GTA4 after playing the PS3 version for its visual clarity.  The jaggy vasoline filter thing on the PS3 is just too much after awhile.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.  Don't know what more to tell you.  I bought the PS3 version, and wasn't that excited about the game, but the framerate never cought my attention.  My friend brings over his 360 version a couple weeks ago, and I was shocked at how much I was noticing the framerate, and the shadows, and the texture pop in.  I didn't play for more than 15 minutes, but those three things stuck out like a sore thumb to me, while they never did so in the 5 hours I spent on the PS3 version.

Also, your "vaseline" comments are silly.  No, it's not as sharp as the 360 version, but only a fanboy would want to take it as far as using that word to describe it.

I have to say, it was really funny seeing that gaf thread about the graphics comparison of this game.  When the reviews hit they were nearly unanimous that the PS3 version looked and ran the best.  Well, 2 weeks later I check into that thread to find the gaf Xbots had beaten that thread to a pulp, and declared the "winnar" the 360 version.  I guess 2 weeks time improved things for the 360 version. 

I guess all those reviewers were wrong, and so was I when I saw them both on my own tv.

[TVC15]

I think you'll find little argument with the statement that reviewers were wrong about GTA4.

[Tigerriot]

I think you'll find little argument with the statement that reviewers were wrong about GTA4.

Yeah, they were definitely wrong about GTA4, but not in the ways you're trying to make it seem.

[Vizzys]

gta4 is lower res on ps3, which means it loses by default

10/10 graphic whores agree

[AdmiralViscen]

Why is tigerriot taking the multiplatform high road vs HSMP

Why is this discussion even happeningggg

[chronovore]

One thing that stuns me is that they didn't get the object pop-up fixed from previous games. Part of me wishes that they'd just design it so "if you can't see it, you can drive through it." Plenty of races have been rudely interrupted by a piece of non-destructible geometry that just hasn't bothered to render yet.

I was cool with that in the PS2 version because it seemed like they were really stretching an old engine to its limits, but with this change to a brand new engine and architecture, I'd assumed they'd get this right. I mean, why not make the LOD-limited items all destructible?

[chronovore]

One thing that stuns me is that they didn't get the object pop-up fixed from previous games. Part of me wishes that they'd just design it so "if you can't see it, you can drive through it." Plenty of races have been rudely interrupted by a piece of non-destructible geometry that just hasn't bothered to render yet.

I was cool with that in the PS2 version because it seemed like they were really stretching an old engine to its limits, but with this change to a brand new engine and architecture, I'd assumed they'd get this right. I mean, why not make the LOD-limited items all destructible?

that would mean they would have to be rendering the collision under the terrain at all times, but not the stuff on top of it, which would mean the renderer would need to further render a whole other collision type, slowing it down further.

I guess I was visualizing "destructible" as being "negligible" so that if you were in an area where the LoD hadn't kicked in, it wouldn't even check for the destructible objects; you can plow through boxes and dumpsters before they render, I think -- but it's the iron posts and trees and stuff that stop a car dead then show up. But you're saying it would be two collision checks instead of one at all times, right?

Slightly unrelated: I wonder what kind of weird stuff they're doing with ground collision, because I see cars do some weird stuff from time to time, popping in sideways, or falling to the ground. It's sometimes immersion breaking, but I had one trip across a bridge that looked a lot like the freeway scene from The Matrix Reloaded.