SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic

Posted: Mar 30 2007 07:03 pm

I hope everyone has seen the trailer released yesterday, I cannot wait for this one.

Posted: Mar 30 2007 07:26 pm

Do you play as like, a Turkish or Armenian guy or something? I don't get it. He looks like a goddamn mongoloid frankenstein. But, it should be fuckin' awesome.

Posted: Mar 30 2007 07:45 pm

This is it, for those who hadn't seen it ^^

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

Thanks Bomberman. Sweet graphics. He sounds Eastern European or Russian . Or at least I'm hoping he is.

Posted: Mar 30 2007 11:07 pm

yea, the visuals look pretty impressive. i cant even imagine the vastness of this game, its probably gonna be at least double the size of san andreas, with sick graphics. i hope i can skateboard in this game haha

Posted: Mar 30 2007 11:37 pm

What would be humorous is if they occasionally have people on the sidewalks riding on segways. And, then you can clothesline them off of it, pick it up, and then when your character is just about to ride away on it, he changes his mind, kicks it over, and walks away.

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

i thought he was native italian.

Posted: Mar 31 2007 02:50 pm

That youtube video is really YuckTub quality. You should check out the trailer on the official site.

http://www.rockstargames.com/IV/trailer_splash.html

Posted: Apr 01 2007 05:30 pm

Thanks for the links.

I knew they would update the graphics from those marshmallow cartoony designs, but those graphics are actually a step down from what I expected. The trailer looks like a commercial for a new Spider-Man game using the "Matrix Online" map.

But graphics don't make a GTA game. The writing, acting, and gameplay does.

But I'm still pissed there wasn't any Chicago footage in that trailer. Crying

Posted: Jun 19 2007 03:37 pm

If you were hoping to play downloadable episodic GTA IV content on your PS3, you’re out of luck. Microsoft, in true gangsta fashion, has strong-armed Take Two into making it exclusively for the Xbox 360 - to the tune of $50 million. The first 25 is for the first episodic content package that’s supposed to go out in March of ‘08. The second 25 will be for the second episode, later in fiscal ‘08.

With downloadable content coming only to the 360 and with the price difference between the two consoles, Microsoft’s system may see the larger sales boost. This is of course what Microsoft wants to buy with that money: the idea that the best version of Grand Theft Auto IV with the most content is coming home to the 360.

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

Hopefully they'll make downloadable content for the PC too. As an original fan of GTA since its first game on the computer, I still prefer the PC versions over the consoles.

Posted: Jun 19 2007 05:47 pm

That would be really funny if Take Two releases a London Stories-esque update for PS3 GTA IV. Making Xbox pay to have downloadable content and making money for actual updates in game form on PS3.

Posted: Jun 19 2007 06:35 pm

Cattivo wrote:

Hopefully they'll make downloadable content for the PC too. As an original fan of GTA since its first game on the computer, I still prefer the PC versions over the consoles.

Are you kidding? PC gets shafted when it comes to Downloadable content.

The Rainbow Six: Vegas mappack, only for x360.

The three car packs for Test Drive Unlimited. Only for X360.

And, at the moment I don't even know if they anounced if they are going to release GTA IV on PC.

I hope so, because GTAs are way better to play on the PC. Better graphics, longer view distance, and far better controls. (Don't need a stupid lock on, when you can target with a mouse. Wink

)

Posted: Jun 19 2007 07:13 pm

I yearn for the day PC games become a platform unto themselves, when shoehorned bullshit is a non-issue and games are fun again.

I miss the days when my PC gave me a unique and equally fun experience from my consoles, but the two were not in competition or damaging one another with their success.

Posted: Jun 19 2007 08:11 pm

It won't ever be like that, because console developers enjoy not having to worry about differing specs on the machines they develop for.

Posted: Jun 19 2007 09:49 pm

Yeah, but that's what DirectX is for. A universal set of drivers so it works on every computer. It is only the responsibility of the programmer to make sure their software is DirectX compliant. It is the responsibility of the end user to make sure their hardware meets up to current DirectX Hardware demands.

If you think about it, DirectX has basically the same life cycle and equivilent to the consoles:

DirectX 10 = PS3 / Xbox 360
DirectX 9 = PS2 / Xbox / Gamecube
DirectX 8 = PSX, N64, Dreamcast

The problem is that there are too many PC gamers who bitch about the current games needing the top of the line systems to run well. What they fail to understand, is that is the price you pay to be a PC gamer. You have to upgrade your system about once every 9 - 12 months to keep up with the gaming market. The reward is, that you have a gaming platform that is superior to the consoles for 90% of the current console generation's life cycle.

Posted: Jun 19 2007 09:51 pm

What about amount of RAM and processor speed?

Posted: Jun 19 2007 10:06 pm

Uhh...I think what he said directly pertains to your question, if not answers it. Processor speed and RAM, well. Processor "speed" is really not a good term to use, only because of how vague it is. Processors are constantly changing, what with dual and multi-core CPU's coming out, as well as new motherboards with new chipsets. You can't just isolate the CPU, especially not just on a GHZ to GHZ basis. For example, my 2.1 ghz athlon is faster than a 3.0 ghz Pentium 4. RAM is the same, you can get "more" ram but that has no bearing on the seek time in nanoseconds, the PC-number, whether or not it's DDR ram, etc.

The thing is, the best idea is to buy the whole GOOD computer at once, not buy a shitty video card or CPU and "upgrade later". That's a bad philosophy for a gaming PC, and extremely short sighted.

I build an entirely new PC once every four years and I get a good run of gaming on it. Sure, it may cost 1500 bucks for top of the line shit, but whatevs. I ain't no poor ass bitch Cool

Posted: Jun 19 2007 10:11 pm

I will do that later in life, once I actually have a job. For now, it's getting shitty or mid-spec comps and upgrading them.

Posted: Jun 19 2007 10:13 pm

Get a job this summer and save the bucks. Right now is a pretty good time to upgrade as far as prices go. I dunno how much technology will jump in the coming months and years, though, so I always worry about upgrading too soon.

Protip: Never, ever, EVER upgrade your computer just for one game.

I decided on a new phenomenon, it's called F.E.A.R. syndrome. That game was awesome. The engine is great. The netcode is spectacular. The physical feel of the gameplay is very organic and well done. The only reason the game didn't get popular, as popular as Half Life 2, is because it wouldn't run on grandma's e-machine. Maybe that was because it was actually making hit detection checks with its netcode, or maybe that was because it actually had some AI, unlike Half Life 2. I dunno. The game was fantastic, the engine was superb, but it never caught on because it was ahead of its time.

It pains me to think of how much better a GTA game could be if it was a PC exclusive.

Posted: Jun 19 2007 10:15 pm

That and never try to upgrade your Apple II.

Posted: Jun 19 2007 10:18 pm

Those components would be considered a part of Hardware, no? And, also need to be upgraded at least once every 12 - 18 months.

If you read the specs before downloading DirectX from Microsoft, there are System Requirements listed.

In theory, you can run any DirectX 9.0c game, as long as you meet the system requirements. You may have to set everything to "LOW", and still only get 5 fps, but it will run.

Let's take for example, the system requirements for Half Life 2:

Minimum System Configuration
1.2 GHz Processor
256MB RAM
DirectX 7 capable graphics card (64 MB or higher)
Windows 2000/XP/ME/98
Mouse
Keyboard
Internet Connection
CD or DVD rom drive

Preferred System Configuration
2.4 GHz Processor
512MB RAM
DirectX 9 capable graphics card
Windows 2000/XP/ME/98
Mouse
Keyboard
Internet Connection
CD or DVD rom drive (retail version only)

There's quite a gap between Minimum and Preferred. And, even the Preferred is only good for 800x600 at Medium details to keep around the 60 fps "Sweet Spot."

The preferred System, in real hardware would be:
AMD Athlon XP 2400+ ($67 brand new. About $40 used.*)
512Mb 133MHz SD-RAM ($37 brand new. About $15 used.*)
ATI 9600 Pro 128Mb AGP 8x card ($65 new. About $30 used.*)

(*Used prices based on ebay.com averages.)

So, if you cannot afford $85 to upgrade your system to Prefered specs, then you also can't afford 2 games for your console either.

How about another comparison?

PS3 ($600)
2 Game ($120)
2nd Controller ($50)
Total Cost $770.00

AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+ Windsor 2.6GHz Socket AM2 Processor Model ADA5200CSBOX ($159.00)
EVGA 122-M2-NF59-TR Socket AM2 NVIDIA nForce 590 SLI MCP ATX AMD Motherboard ($100.00)
EVGA 320-P2-N811-AR GeForce 8800GTS 320MB GDDR3 PCI Express x16 HDCP Video Card ($260.00)
CORSAIR XMS2 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model TWIN2X2048-6400C4 ($131.00)
POWMAX 519 XMAN CPXMAN-02 Black All Metal Construction (SGCC) ATX Mid Tower Computer Case w/ 480W Power Supply ($45.00)
Western Digital 2500KS SATA300 16Mb Cache 7200RPM 250Gb Hard Drive ($70.00)

Total Cost = $765.00

I just built a complete brand new computer, capible of running just about any game at max settings, and getting 60 fps. (At a resolution of 1280x1024) And, it cost me about the same price as buying a PS3 with two games and a spare controller.

Posted: Jun 19 2007 10:22 pm

That's why the PS3 fucking sucks. It tries to beat the other consoles by being a "computer", but you could just buy a computer for the same price and run games that aren't made of 100% brown and light bloom.

Posted: Jun 19 2007 10:34 pm

I am getting a job in either July or September. I plan to upgrade my comp out the ass. Right now my main concern is getting a graphics card that isn't a 64mb Radeon VE. (Oh, I'm getting a 512MB memory upgrade for my laptop, by the way. That thing will run waaaaay faster).

Posted: Jun 19 2007 10:48 pm

Dude you gotta upgrade so you can be a ProKid at specialists Cool

By the way, TS 3, the full version, is out.

Sorry for straying from the topic of GTA so far. I just want to say in closing, in an attempt to keep this thread even slightly on-track, that I fucking love GTA 1 and I still play it from time to time. GTA as we know it now is missing something essential that it once had. There was a depth to GTA coupled with an arcade element that was just perfect. I could pick up GTA 1 and INSTANTLY be having a blast playing it, doing any sort of random fuckery, or I could get engrossed in the missions for hours and hours. The new GTA's are a travesty and have completely forsaken this vision of gameplay. Grinding for stats so I can swim? Shitty RPG-esque grinding and dress-up games are the last things a new GTA needed. People have been bitching about GTA 4's "smaller" scale, but I have faith in Rockstar, and would like to believe that this game may eschew the feature-bloat style gameplay in favor of a fun game.

What GTA needs:
Cool guns, good shooting, good movement for your character (I.E. dives and rolls, leaning against walls, improved stealth, better interaction with the environment), and good driving physics. At present it has none of those things.