Grand Theft Auto V announced, first trailer on November 2

By +Frank B.
in Gamers' Hangout

 Share

Recommended Posts

Proficient

nyolc8

Posted
Posted

GTA5 map is bigger than San Andreas map........

I know, but imagine if SF, LV, and the whole san andreas map would made too with the size-rate of this new LS...

Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted

Just as I feared, the graphics are really weak. The narrative looks decent but without any indication as to what the gameplay is like we still know pretty much nothing about the game, other than that PC users are getting screwed over again. I'm really surprised that GTAV and Assassin's Creed 3 both went for last current-gen rather than first next-gen, especially when it's easy to scale down games so they can still benefit from the massive install base of the current consoles.

As for the issues you experience... I know it isn't a popular opinion round here, but that is what you get with PC games. I learnt that they were more trouble than they are worth a few years ago now.

What are you talking about? I was complaining that Max Payne 3 had cutscenes that were pre-rendered at console graphics levels and that it looks terrible in comparison to PC quality graphics. Unfortunately, that's what you get when bad developers put out half-assed ports - even the console versions of GTAIV suffered from slow down and the resolution for the PS3 version had to be lowered as well. Consoles can't render at 2560x1600, let alone 60fps, let alone with anti-aliasing, let alone with hardware physics, let alone with high resolution textures, etc. Even the bad PC ports are better than the console versions - it's just they terrible in comparison to how they should have been. Consoles are great if you don't care about graphics or accurate consoles and you're on a budget. That may sound elitist but it's like comparing McDonald's to a fancy restaurant - they both provide good food, it's just aimed at people with different tastes.

Grand Master

Lamp0

Posted
Posted

oh man! what a trailer!

Meh, cinematics again. Some gameplay would have been nice.

It's not all just cinematics, some of is gameplay just with the camera switched, and Rockstars cinematic are always rendered in game

I mean you didn't really expect raw gameplay footage from a Rockstar trailer did you...

Just as I feared, the graphics are really weak.

You say that like it's a huge blow. I think the game looks technically brilliant considering it's on console, but more importantly the art direction looks incredible.

  • IceBreakerG
  • Like 1
Mentor

Slammers

Posted
Posted

Just as I feared, the graphics are really weak. The narrative looks decent but without any indication as to what the gameplay is like we still know pretty much nothing about the game, other than that PC users are getting screwed over again. I'm really surprised that GTAV and Assassin's Creed 3 both went for last current-gen rather than first next-gen, especially when it's easy to scale down games so they can still benefit from the massive install base of the current consoles.

The graphics aren't weak. Considering the size of the game and the systems it is on, I think they are pretty impressive. Unless i've missed something, there is no claims of it every coming to pc anyway right?

Even if it does, you should keep in mind, that GTA4 with some small mods is one of the best looking games you can currently run on your PC. This would only look better.

Grand Master

Fourjays Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

Trailer looks great. (Y) Makes GTA IV look really boring and dull, and as I already said, I didn't find that as bad as some did.

What are you talking about? I was complaining that Max Payne 3 had cutscenes that were pre-rendered at console graphics levels and that it looks terrible in comparison to PC quality graphics. Unfortunately, that's what you get when bad developers put out half-assed ports - even the console versions of GTAIV suffered from slow down and the resolution for the PS3 version had to be lowered as well. Consoles can't render at 2560x1600, let alone 60fps, let alone with anti-aliasing, let alone with hardware physics, let alone with high resolution textures, etc. Even the bad PC ports are better than the console versions - it's just they terrible in comparison to how they should have been. Consoles are great if you don't care about graphics or accurate consoles and you're on a budget. That may sound elitist but it's like comparing McDonald's to a fancy restaurant - they both provide good food, it's just aimed at people with different tastes.

As I said, this is what you get with PC gaming. To be fair it is as much of (if not more of) a problem with the gamers as the developers. Why would you expect cutscenes to work on such an uncommon resolution? If I stick any of my old PC games in, the cutscenes are smaller than my resolution because they were rendered for common screen sizes of the time. I have never come across a game where pre-rendered cutscenes are upscaled for higher resolutions. Is no wonder developers can't be bothered with PC gaming - too much hassle to code for the platform so loads of bugs, then they get slated by the elitists who expect games to work with every weird and wonderful feature/peripheral/hardware PC gamers can throw money at and then they sell fairly small numbers anyway. I still play a couple of PC games, but I don't miss it at all. Spent more time fixing problems than playing games and since I switched I've found myself enjoying gaming much more as a whole. If you're happy with PC gaming then fine, but don't expect the ridiculous.

Anyway going off-topic so will leave it there.

Grand Master

Crisp

Posted
Posted

People who base their purchase of a GTA game on graphics quite clearly shouldn't buy it. The GTA series has never been about how it looks, but how it plays. After all you can't get the best graphics out of such an open world sand box game. To be fair on Rockstar, what they've shown so far seems to be mind blowing, espeshally on how old the hardware is within todays consoles.

Also, by now you should expect a PC release to be delayed for 6 months + as it's the way Rockstar works. So wipe thoughs tears Q_Q

This game is going to be amazing! - Tommy Vercetti in San Andreas = the ultimate win.

As long as they have a Decent radio Im happy to roam around the map messing about, San Andreas was the best for this.

Never played Vice City? :/

V-Rock / Wave 103 > all.

  • Victor Rambo and red.
  • Like 2
Grand Master

Yusuf M. Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

And once again no PC........amazing.

Although it hasn't been officially announced yet, I highly doubt they'll ignore the PC platform. I'm sure it'll be released after the console versions.

Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted
As I said, this is what you get with PC gaming. To be fair it is as much of (if not more of) a problem with the gamers as the developers. Why would you expect cutscenes to work on such an uncommon resolution?

Pre-rendered cutscenes should be rendered at maximum settings and scaled down. It wouldn't be as bad if they used anti-aliasing and were rendered at 1080p. The real issue is that if they were rendered in-game it wouldn't be an issue.

If I stick any of my old PC games in, the cutscenes are smaller than my resolution because they were rendered for common screen sizes of the time. I have never come across a game where pre-rendered cutscenes are upscaled for higher resolutions.

But the most common gaming resolution now is 1080p and developers should want their game to look as good as possible. I understand that the X360 has a limited capacity storage but the PS3 has Blu-ray and can easily store videos at 1080p. So the issue is bad development decisions.

Is no wonder developers can't be bothered with PC gaming - too much hassle to code for the platform so loads of bugs, then they get slated by the elitists who expect games to work with every weird and wonderful feature/peripheral/hardware PC gamers can throw money at and then they sell fairly small numbers anyway.

You say that as if most games aren't ported to the PC when that simply isn't the case. I don't know what you have against PC gamers but the reality is that the PC offers the best gaming experience out there and developers should want their games to be enjoyed like that.

Spent more time fixing problems than playing games and since I switched I've found myself enjoying gaming much more as a whole. If you're happy with PC gaming then fine, but don't expect the ridiculous.

It's great that you enjoy that but I expect more from gaming and certainly can't stomach playing at 720p with such low visual fidelity - if I wanted that I could have just kept my PC from 6 years ago. It's not "ridiculous" to expect a PC version released at the same time. It's not "ridiculous" to expect cinematics that are rendered at a sensible resolution and with graphics comparable to in-game visuals. It's not "ridiculous" to want PC gamers to be treated with respect. The issues you listed are design issues, not PC issues - most games don't suffer from them, so I won't tolerate them from Rockstar. If Rockstar isn't up to producing proper PC ports then I'm not up to handing over money for them.

Grand Master

soniqstylz

Posted
Posted

But the most common gaming resolution now is 1080p and developers should want their game to look as good as possible. I understand that the X360 has a limited capacity storage but the PS3 has Blu-ray and can easily store videos at 1080p. So the issue is bad development decisions.

Stop right there: no it's not. Most AAA games run at 720p if not less (many at an upscaled 640p).

Again, you're not looking at cost v. reward. GTA4 sold 700k on PC. Which is great, until you compare it to nearly 25 million on 360/PS3.

It's better to build for consoles where you'll make your money, then go about rebuilding the port to deal with all sorts of resolutions, video cards, processors, and the variables and bugs involved.

That may not be the case for all developers, but this particular generation, even the major developers that catered to PC gamers (Epic, Bioware, Crytek, etc.) seem to be aiming their games for consoles where you only have to variables to worry about -- 360 build or PS3 build.

Grand Master

Pupik

Posted
Posted

Stop right there: no it's not. Most AAA games run at 720p if not less (many at an upscaled 640p).

Again, you're not looking at cost v. reward. GTA4 sold 700k on PC. Which is great, until you compare it to nearly 25 million on 360/PS3.

It's better to build for consoles where you'll make your money, then go about rebuilding the port to deal with all sorts of resolutions, video cards, processors, and the variables and bugs involved.

That may not be the case for all developers, but this particular generation, even the major developers that catered to PC gamers (Epic, Bioware, Crytek, etc.) seem to be aiming their games for consoles where you only have to variables to worry about -- 360 build or PS3 build.

Where did you get that 700k number and from what period of sales was it exactly?

Grand Master

soniqstylz

Posted
Posted

Where did you get that 700k number and from what period of sales was it exactly?

Up through current.

http://www.vgchartz.com/game/25503/grand-theft-auto-iv/Global/

I can't say whether or not this counts Steam digital copies.

  • 2 weeks later...
Community Regular

azspeedbullet

Posted
Posted

No PC version?

**** this ****

Seriously man. Come on. Damnit.

^&%^&%$%

^%*&%(*)&%

$*&^%(*

or it will come 6 months later with Rockstar Social, Games for windows live, ubisoft uplay, steam and a bunch of retarded useless 3rd party apps required to play a game

  • 4 weeks later...
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • I Can't Wrap My Head Around This Number - Google to buy computing from SpaceX at $920 million per month

      By +TRS-80 · Posted

      Alphabet Raises $84.75 Billion To Feed Its AI Compute Hunger https://www.techtimes.com/articles/317953/20260607/alphabet-raises-8475-billion-feed-its-ai-compute-hunger-warren-buffetts-berkshire-buying.htm
    • New Outlook for Windows and Web is getting a simple but very useful email feature

      By +TRS-80 · Posted

      Good point Anti-spoofing protection for cloud mailboxes Anti-spoofing technology in Microsoft 365 specifically examines forgery of the From header field (also known as the 5322.From address, From address, or P2 sender), because email clients show the From header value as the message sender. When Microsoft 365 has high confidence the From header is forged, the message is identified as spoofed. https://learn.microsoft.com/en...g-protection-spoofing-about
    • DWARF mini review: the world's smallest smart telescope for night and day sky captures

      By Nick H. · Posted

      I sort of agree with you on that. I had a telescope - a real hefty thing, although only around 500CHF - that got me so fascinated about the stars and planets. I would stare for hours, amazed that I could see the craters of the moon or the rings of Saturn in "realtime" (quotations because, y'know, speed of light and whatnot). A friend of mine has a telescope like the one mentioned in the review, and the pictures are amazing to look at. But there is something missing for me. I may as well just go to NASA's website and look through their gallery.
    • Halo: Campaign Evolved is out next month with new prequel missions

      By +pmrd · Posted

      As opposed to catching bad press because it's the engine's fault? The engine has all the tools a dev needs to optimize their game, Epic isn't gonna hold their hand to make sure they use them. Also, Epic isn't forcing anyone to use Lumen, Nanite or super high resolution meshes and textures. Just because Nanite can render meshes with millions of polygons doesn't mean you should use it like that, in fact, Epic recommends you avoid doing that. Most of the stuttering can easily be fixed by cutting down on unique materials by using master materials, using instanced meshes, generating a PSO cache, pre-compiling every shader before loading the game and also managing what must be loaded and unloaded at runtime. It's up to the developer to set all that up properly.
    • DWARF mini review: the world's smallest smart telescope for night and day sky captures

      By Malisk · Posted

      I think it depends on what you're looking for to do, and the time you have to spare. With my Dwarf 3, I easily spend 3-4 hour sessions; half an hour driving to an un-light polluted place, another half hour unpacking and setting up the smart scope + tripod for equatorial tracking, then 15 more minutes mucking around with settings and shooting calibration frames, spending a few hours shooting, merging with past photo sessions, etc. It's crazy how time flies and I often get home later than I expected. It's something I still need to set aside a good part of an evening to do, all in all. For one session, where you often need like four for best results when it comes to deep space objects. Even with a smart scope like Dwarf 3, regular non-astro photography is still way more approachable to people getting into photography. I find this is a time consuming niche no matter how I go about it. With practice, I can probably begin cutting time here but I think where smart scopes find their home is among people who love to shoot the night sky but don't have the spare time to go deep with the "navigator level" attunement to the night sky itself in addition to everything else. Having said this, _if_ you have even more time to spend on this hobby, it will probably be even more rewarding to do it more by hand and learn the skies and the details of how it all works.

  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      493
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      246
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      72
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      68
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!