Jump to content

VC vs. GTAIII performance.


flamemaster

Recommended Posts

It depends on your PC specifications. By and large, there'll be no noticeable difference. On consoles (PS2, XBox) there shouldn't be any difference.

 

As mentioned above, SA however requires much better systems to reach the same level of performance.

 

Topic title edited to better reflect contents. Please be more careful in your choice of titles in future. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wikipedia mentions that the PC port of GTA III suffered from stuttering gameplays which was resolved in Vice. That was because the GTA III engine rendered all textures and graphics which was in sight which was not the case in Vice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had both games, Vice City + III, for PC and i found that with the frame limiter off i did get alot more frames per second on Vice city - shame coz in my opinon GTAIII has better graphics biggrin.gifrahkstar2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeh vc runs better on my pc , III lags abit as vc doesnt lag at all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

also i didnt realise how much more performance you need to run San Andreas dontgetit.gif Especally round Grove and in the country side my game starts to lagg when GTA3 + VC ran more than perfect.

 

Im running a AMD 64 Anthlon X2, 1GB Ram, 256MB X1300 ATI and it laggs on 1024x768 on about medium/high. Should it run better? confused.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MattyDienhoff

Both run exactly the same for me, perfectly.

 

I've also seen mentions of the PC version of GTA3 being "a bad conversion" and "full of problems" but I never ran into anything noticeable. In my opinion, the only really buggy game in the GTA3 trilogy is San Andreas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I would still be playing GTAIII now but I got a crack in my CD cryani.gif Lent it to my brother you see.... Bad idea mercie_blink.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back when I had a slower computer, I noticed that III was usually giving me some headaches when VC would run fine. I remember doing lots of tests to find a good and playable resolution (I ended up with 800x600 because it would give me best mix of graphics and a playable frame rate). But VC was always OK, running flawlessly.

 

I think that one of the reasons that could explain this was mentioned by Pranjal, who said that "GTA III suffered from stuttering gameplays which was resolved in Vice. That was because the GTA III engine rendered all textures and graphics which was in sight which was not the case in Vice."

 

Most people now have much better systems than in 2001-2002, that's why III's problems are almost unnoticed. But for those of us who had to struggle with slower machines than those we currently own, III was a complicated port.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Complicated port yes, but when running fine I found GTAIII to be one of the best games in the seires. rahkstar2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

liesofsilence

 

Wikipedia mentions that the PC port of GTA III suffered from stuttering gameplays which was resolved in Vice. That was because the GTA III engine rendered all textures and graphics which was in sight which was not the case in Vice.

Actually, GTA III renders a vast area around the player whereas Vice only renders what the player sees. That is a huge difference - Back when I had my sh*tty GF 440 MX, I could play Vice on 1600*1200 smooth with only lag in interiors as the Pole Position Club and the Malibu and during big explosions while GTA3 sometimes lagged on 1024*786.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.