Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

What was wrong with the port of GTA IV on the PC?

140 replies to this topic
lord sh...t-head
  • lord sh...t-head

    Lord

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2009

#61

Posted 21 June 2014 - 06:00 PM

I'm playing through the game again right now. Just finished Blood Brothers.

 

I have to say, the only really big thing that's wrong with it is the optimization. And also the mouse movement could use some work. 

 

It does run like total f*cking arse on a GTX 560 Ti and AMD Phenom II Quad Core 3.2 GHz, though. I mean, my PC is pretty low-end by today's standards. But a nice GPU from 2011 coupled with a quad core shouldn't be having the choppiness I have. Heck, even TBOGT and TLAD run better. It's just IV that's giving me this problem. 

 

After Max Payne 3 however, I'm sure that the only way to go is up. Even if MP3 wasn't a massive OWG with an insanely detailed map, the advancements made with the RAGE engine should not go unappreciated. 

 

We have similar PC rigs but i can run gta IV maxed with 40 average fps when only the draw distance is set to something like 30.....strange

 

 

I'm undecided which one is the worst port for PCs from all the time, Devil May Cry 3 or GTA IV :S

 

Srsly, sometimes Devil May Cry 3 is unplayable when a battle starts, FPS goes down from 60 to 6, and the game has poor textures, arghh, this is the first PC game I've seen that's graphically inferior to consoles...

 

GTA IV has nice textures too, but it becomes unlayable for me when it's raining or at night, it's worse when both's happening even at 800x600 with almost everything maxed out :S

 

 I also played dmc 3 on my old pentium never had problems with it other then the keyboard because it performs far worse then controllers in those types of games 

 

The worst port of all time has to go to Dark souls 1....that thing would run better if it was emulated. 
 


Skreedi
  • Skreedi

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Feb 2014
  • European-Union

#62

Posted 21 June 2014 - 06:33 PM Edited by Skreedi, 21 June 2014 - 06:34 PM.

 

 

We have similar PC rigs but i can run gta IV maxed with 40 average fps when only the draw distance is set to something like 30.....strange

 

That's the problem with this game, you can have two the same or similar rigs but you'll get two different scenarios. First I had HD4870 and it was playable, heck, it was nice but after upgrade to GTX460 and now to HD7950 I can't play this game properly...


Vercetti42
  • Vercetti42

    I have moved to a new account.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 13 May 2013
  • India
  • Best Contributor [Gaming] 2012

#63

Posted 21 June 2014 - 06:53 PM

To put it simply it was/is sh*t:

 

basically the game wasn't optimized at all. It was rushed. Rockstar promised a "great" PC version but ended up giving the opposite. their excuse later was that it was mean't for future PC's (back in 2008 obviously).

 

So basically not only did the game run like crap, it was just... terrible overall. Have you ever tried opening up and checking the graphics options for IV without the patch?

 

these are what are present:

 

resolution

shadow density

vehicle density

view distance

detail distance

Texture quality (or something similar I think)

 

this itself shows how lazily the game was ported. even now pc's still have problems running it though albeit not as much as before. I have a;

 

core i5 3210m 2.5 ghz

amd radeon hd 7650m 1GB

4gb ram

windows 8.1

 

Firstly the game took a MILLION times to install and to finally get it to work. 

 

Secondly what was weird was how suddenly the memory usage shot up. I'm running at very high settings getting 30 fps most of the time @ 1366x768 and it takes up 800 MB of my GPU memory but if I change something to a little higher it immediately shoots up to 1000 which is weird.

 

Then the game lags at some places, like sometimes while driving in algonquin I got some lag but while driving broker I got 60 fps. (yeah I know)

 

In all fairness though, the game runs well now with the 1.0.4.0 patch but it never really reached it's potential in terms of looks unless you mod it and throw in ENB/Icehancer and another thing I noticed the game looks amazing during day but a bit ugly during the night.

 

2008 wasn't a great year for performance in games though, from what I heard SR 2 was unplayable on pc, so was CoD; world at war and fallout 3 was a minefield of bugs across all platforms.

 

max payne 3 runs really well for me. High settings 40 fps @ 1366x768 with no drops whatsoever. the mark of a nicely optimized game. I'm sure V will carry on the tradition of MP3. (It should, they have no other choice really)


65536
  • 65536

    Prankster

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2012
  • Bulgaria

#64

Posted 21 June 2014 - 06:53 PM

Until you've played GTA IV 1.0 to 1.0.3.0 you can't really get an idea of what a mess it was. It was bad.

Hey, there 1.0.3.0 was first good version about performance, I think the only versions has bad performance was only 1.0.0.0 up to 1.0.2.0, but since 1.0.3.0 game was lots better as performance, however for some reason game became again little laggy with patches 1.0.6.0 and 1.0.7.0.


Njale
  • Njale

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Oct 2011

#65

Posted 22 June 2014 - 12:45 AM

Some systems perform better with 1.0.7.0 while other are much better with 1.0.4.0 It still confuses me to this day

  • BlackScout likes this

Bolcksta
  • Bolcksta

    The Protagonist

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2013
  • None

#66

Posted 22 June 2014 - 02:00 AM

It's optimization, I mean honestly the game is a wreck and like others stated, it was literally the FIRST Time R* worked with R.A.G.E.....

 

But there is hope that GTA V will work great, and the proof is Max Payne 3, it runs very well in many different setups.... :)


BlackNoise
  • BlackNoise

    Ghetto Star

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2011
  • None

#67

Posted 22 June 2014 - 02:33 AM

I got it pretty late, so I didn't have any noticeable visual problems, but I'm pretty sure the framerate should be higher. The only issue that bugs me is DRM. Too many layers before you even get into the game. If I haven't played it for awhile, I know I will deal with some sh*t when I start it up again. 


P2FX
  • P2FX

    I ain't no hipster.

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2009
  • None

#68

Posted 22 June 2014 - 03:33 AM

Back in the days I heard someone on this forum say that GTA IV is emulated, there is a layer that converts PPC instructions to x86 instructions, that's way it has horrible performance.


Ash_735
  • Ash_735

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Nov 2005
  • None
  • Contribution Award [Mods]
    Most Knowledgeable [GTA] 2013
    Best Map 2013 "ViceCityStories PC Edition"

#69

Posted 22 June 2014 - 04:08 AM

It's optimization, I mean honestly the game is a wreck and like others stated, it was literally the FIRST Time R* worked with R.A.G.E.....
 
But there is hope that GTA V will work great, and the proof is Max Payne 3, it runs very well in many different setups.... :)


GTA IV was actually on the second RAGE build if I recall.

Table Tennis was the first. GTA IV, MCLA, TLAD/TBOGT were second. RDR was a better version of two but not counted, so we'll say that was like a 2.5. MP3 and GTAV are using the third.

Xerukal
  • Xerukal

    Kind ol' Trev

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2013
  • None

#70

Posted 22 June 2014 - 04:28 AM Edited by Xerukal, 22 June 2014 - 04:28 AM.

Yeah. I remember Table Tennis.

 

In regards to PC though, GTA IV was indeed RAGE's first appearance on PC. Max Payne 3 being the second. They improved it quite a bit for MP3. On PC especially. I imagine V's PC version will be the current pinnacle of RAGE on PC as we know it. 

 

There's no sense in going back down, right? 


Vercetti42
  • Vercetti42

    I have moved to a new account.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 13 May 2013
  • India
  • Best Contributor [Gaming] 2012

#71

Posted 22 June 2014 - 04:32 AM

So LA Noire is the only rockstar game this gen (yes it is a rockstar game) to not use RAGE engine?


icey701
  • icey701

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Jan 2014
  • United-States

#72

Posted 22 June 2014 - 04:42 AM

Also Gta Iv On alot of pc's had errors and constant freezing if you could play it, it would crash at least once every 30 mins. Sometimes not for a few hours sometimes every five mins. 


Ash_735
  • Ash_735

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Nov 2005
  • None
  • Contribution Award [Mods]
    Most Knowledgeable [GTA] 2013
    Best Map 2013 "ViceCityStories PC Edition"

#73

Posted 22 June 2014 - 04:48 AM

So LA Noire is the only rockstar game this gen (yes it is a rockstar game) to not use RAGE engine?


Correct, L.A.Noire does not use RAGE.

TheFoxRiverFugitive
  • TheFoxRiverFugitive

    Sly Fox

  • Facade Corporation
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2012
  • United-States

#74

Posted 22 June 2014 - 04:55 AM Edited by WhatsStrength, 22 June 2014 - 04:57 AM.

I'm getting 70fps on my rig when I benchmark it. I have a 670 and an i5-3570k with 8GB of memory. Over 120 hours logged on it according to Steam and it's only ever crashed when I have several mods installed.

Xerukal
  • Xerukal

    Kind ol' Trev

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2013
  • None

#75

Posted 22 June 2014 - 05:05 AM

I'm getting 70fps on my rig when I benchmark it. I have a 670 and an i5-3570k with 8GB of memory. Over 120 hours logged on it according to Steam and it's only ever crashed when I have several mods installed.

Well, IV is just gonna remain the biggest mystery of a PC port ever. Whether or not it performs optimally on two identical high end PCs is a thing of pure luck and star alignment, apparently. 

  • Kampret likes this

Vercetti42
  • Vercetti42

    I have moved to a new account.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 13 May 2013
  • India
  • Best Contributor [Gaming] 2012

#76

Posted 22 June 2014 - 05:11 AM

I heard Fallout: New Vegas on PS3 and Skyrim on PS3 are far worse, technically. To be fair most of the early PS3 games up to 2010/2011 were worse than PC ports because of the complex hardware. Even IV had issues on it I heard.


Ash_735
  • Ash_735

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Nov 2005
  • None
  • Contribution Award [Mods]
    Most Knowledgeable [GTA] 2013
    Best Map 2013 "ViceCityStories PC Edition"

#77

Posted 22 June 2014 - 05:23 AM

I heard Fallout: New Vegas on PS3 and Skyrim on PS3 are far worse, technically. To be fair most of the early PS3 games up to 2010/2011 were worse than PC ports because of the complex hardware. Even IV had issues on it I heard.


All RAGE 2 and 2.5 games ran worse on PS3 compared to the Xbox 360 versions. RAGE 3 games have been fine though running at 720p.
  • Vercetti42 likes this

IcePwrd
  • IcePwrd

    Child of GabeN

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Jan 2008
  • Australia

#78

Posted 22 June 2014 - 06:30 AM Edited by zacmobob, 22 June 2014 - 06:30 AM.

It was nowhere near as bad as most people attempt to make out. If you've been a PC gamer for more than 10 minutes, you realise that sometimes optimisation can come down to the user. People in this thread are crying about having to use additional shortcut parameters... really? Well, boo-f*cking-hoo. If that's the worst that you have to go through then you'll be doing alright.

 

GTAIV suffered from GFWL, nothing more.

 

I may be mistaken, but my belief is that a good PC port does not require you to restrict memory usage to prevent memory leaks raping your machine

  • PaddyM likes this

Spadge
  • Spadge

    Low Rider

  • Members
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2013
  • Olympics

#79

Posted 22 June 2014 - 09:37 AM Edited by Spadge007, 22 June 2014 - 09:38 AM.

gta 4 ran like crap. Patch 4 and 7 really helped. It ran perfectly good on those patches at max settings.

 

Where can I get those patches ?

 

Were episodes from LC better ported ?


poland stronk
  • poland stronk

    Gib money pls

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 May 2014
  • Poland

#80

Posted 22 June 2014 - 11:21 AM Edited by poland stronk, 22 June 2014 - 11:21 AM.

What was wrong with GTA IV port on PC?

 

1. sh*tty DRMs. It was available on Pirate Bay few days before the launch and normal players were forced to make two accounts on laggy Social Club and that retarded Games for Windows LIVE. It was even more pain in the ass for people from Eastern Europe since back in 2008 Games for Windows LIVE and Xbox LIVE were NOT available there. So in order to play multiplayer I had to make account on international site (and check if it worked). Not to mention many errors player got when they launched the game while being logged on Social club.

 

2. sh*tty graphics. It didn't have anti-aliasing, shadows were stuttering, THERE WERE WRONG REQUIREMENTS ON GAME BOX. Come on. I had to buy additional RAM in order to play things properly despite the fact I met all requirements. It was reported game wasn't loading textures for many players with better rigs. So yeah, it was poorly optimized.

 

3. sh*tty controls. You couldn't bind keys the way you prefered. Covering system was laggy and retarded most of the times. Player character was clumsy. Do you know how many times I have cursed because Niko couldn't walk in straight line to a f*cking ladder? Jesus!

 

4. sh*tty multiplayer. Console multiplayer on PC? Few months later, because the game was boring as hell (also in single) people started to play with trainers. Most of the Deathmatch arenas were too large so players had to run few kilometers to face each other. Oh, and there was no competetive and nothing to do in Freeroam. They could leave the game without it, maybe it would be better made with less bugs and fanbase would do better job at it. (vide SA-MP, MTA:SA,  MTA:VC, VC-MP)

 

5. Stupid policy regarding making videos with Video Editor. You have to upload the video to Rockstar Games page in order to be able to edit it with external programs. And there was this unremovable Social Club logo.

 

 

That's why I think GTA IV was the worst game in history of GTA franchise. Not only because of ridiculous port but also because it has lost many nice features that previous games have and that were reintroduced in GTA V. And because of that port I won't buy the game immediately after it's released. I don't want to be screwed again.


MisterEd
  • MisterEd

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Jun 2005

#81

Posted 22 June 2014 - 12:25 PM

 

gta 4 ran like crap. Patch 4 and 7 really helped. It ran perfectly good on those patches at max settings.

 

Where can I get those patches ?

Grand Theft Auto IV Patch 7 -- Title Update v. 1.0.7.0 (English) / 1.0.6.1 (Russian) / 1.0.5.2 (Japanese)
https://support.rock...0-5-2-Japanese-

Grand Theft Auto Episodes from Liberty City Title Update 1.1.2.0 ("Patch 2")
https://support.rock...-1-2-0-Patch-2-

Grand Theft Auto IV Files > Official Patches
http://www.gamefront...fficial_Patches


MisterEd
  • MisterEd

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Jun 2005

#82

Posted 22 June 2014 - 12:34 PM

 

It was nowhere near as bad as most people attempt to make out. If you've been a PC gamer for more than 10 minutes, you realise that sometimes optimisation can come down to the user. People in this thread are crying about having to use additional shortcut parameters... really? Well, boo-f*cking-hoo. If that's the worst that you have to go through then you'll be doing alright.

 

GTAIV suffered from GFWL, nothing more.

 

I may be mistaken, but my belief is that a good PC port does not require you to restrict memory usage to prevent memory leaks raping your machine

 

Are you talking about the Graphics settings? I found that if you you tried to configure things so that resource usage was too close to the maximum then the game would eventually crash.


Ruscris2
  • Ruscris2

    Snow Storm

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2009
  • European-Union

#83

Posted 22 June 2014 - 01:58 PM Edited by Ruscris2, 22 June 2014 - 01:59 PM.

Let's be honest guys, GTA IV was sh*t not only on PC but on consoles too. If i remember right the PS3 version of GTA IV was running at 630p and on some rare occasions the fps were dropping below 20. We gotta forgive them about this, it was their first time with the engine (Table Tennis doesn't count since that games is made out of several models and animations, not a whole city that needs to load/unload models and lod's all the time).


Jenia
  • Jenia

    I pee like HowToBasic.

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2013
  • Spain

#84

Posted 22 June 2014 - 03:17 PM

Wait, I have a Intel Core Duo 2,3 GHz with TWO GB OF RAM, nVidia 9800 GT and it runs pretty good with low-to-medium settings, even with a sh*tload of script mods (including LCPDFR).

Something isn't right...

 

Spoiler


ddyoung
  • ddyoung

    Get freaky... Not that freaky

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2010
  • England

#85

Posted 22 June 2014 - 04:57 PM

Wait, I have a Intel Core Duo 2,3 GHz with TWO GB OF RAM, nVidia 9800 GT and it runs pretty good with low-to-medium settings, even with a sh*tload of script mods (including LCPDFR).

Something isn't right...

 

Spoiler

This is because of the bad port. The game would run very smoothly for a bit, then for some reason, the game would go crazy and drop to like 5 fps.


Aleph-Zero
  • Aleph-Zero

    ...

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jan 2014
  • None

#86

Posted 22 June 2014 - 05:19 PM

You're all forgetting how bad GTA IV was on consoles too. It ran at 720p with low to medium settings @ 30 fps with some really bad frame drops. It's the programming of the engine itself which was unoptimized. Not the port for PC. We were just used to run games at much higher settings than consoles and when we couldn't do that with IV there was a major outcry.

 

They certainly improved the engine. It's gonna be a really good version for pc and the next-gen consoles.

  • DaRkL3AD3R likes this

Vicetopia
  • Vicetopia

    Factory Overclocked

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 May 2003
  • United-States

#87

Posted 22 June 2014 - 06:44 PM

It ran at 720p with low to medium settings @ 30 fps with some really bad frame drops

So it ran like every other console game???


RisingRedWolf
  • RisingRedWolf

    Someone who loves games.

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 May 2011
  • Australia

#88

Posted 23 June 2014 - 12:12 AM Edited by XBlade1X, 23 June 2014 - 12:13 AM.

Good:

 

> Video editor

> High-res textures

> no pop-in

 

Bad:

 

> Poorly optimized. Even if you had a rig that greatly surpassed the reccomended specs you still couldn't get a strong consistent frame rate. During heavy action scenes it would shoot down to even 10 fps sometimes.

 

It wasn't designed to take advantage of the PC at all. If it was, even an ATI Radeon 4350 should be able to run it at 1152x864 and get a decent looking game and a smooth experience.

This. The fact that still I can't max out a game from 2008 with a gtx 780ti and 1440p without going under 60fps should pretty much sum up how badly it was optimized. I have seen a few hacks that improve performance and have used them in the past for older cards, but there is absolutely no excuse that I cant get 60fps maxed out in this resolutioin with the current most powerful gaming video card in a game that came out 6 years ago. Everything else in the PC version was fine.


Vicetopia
  • Vicetopia

    Factory Overclocked

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 May 2003
  • United-States

#89

Posted 23 June 2014 - 02:29 AM Edited by Vicetopia, 23 June 2014 - 02:30 AM.

GTA 4 will always be a CPU-bound game.

The GTX 280 in 2008 was enough for GTA 4, adding more GPU horsepower isn't going to help.

  • DaRkL3AD3R likes this

Delta India Echo
  • Delta India Echo

    f*ck crate drops

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 08 Jun 2014
  • Somalia

#90

Posted 23 June 2014 - 02:36 AM

And there was this unremovable Social Club logo.

You CAN remove the logo. What f*cking rock do you live at?





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users