STOP THE FILTER!

[[email protected]]

ok ok, so every thead about graphics and filters ends up in a big argument and abuse being thrown back and forth. so sorry if i started anything, this is just my opinion.

 

"Everything that is more than 50 feet down the street from you starts to pixelate and distort strangely, as if filtered through a haze of tiny droplets of vegetable oil."

 

critics who have tested the game said that the filter, first seen on this screenshot http://media.gtanet.com/images/3947_gta4_screenshot.jpg is part of the game. according to someone, it covers up all imperfections and glitches that the game may have. look at the all of the screens before that, and the trailers, they all look noticably better.

 

WHY BOTHER MAKING AN AMAZING GAME AND SPOILING THE AESTHETIC AND GRAPHICS WITH A RUBBISH FILTER!!! even if you can see the odd glitch, I dont think its worth spoiling every square inch of the screen with an oldschool oil-painting type filter.

 

if anybody has noticed, they did the same with vice city. that looked more blurred then the rest of the series, and as a result, graphics where noticabaly worse then gta3.

 

maybe the graphics arn't as important as the gameplay to some people, but to me they are paramount, and the gameplay will be complimented vastly with sharper graphics.

 

a filter is an easy way out. please rockstar, dont filter us. peace.

[atix]

if the filter is for a GOOD reason why would u complain?! geeez!

 

and btw allways good to complain now that the game is 100% finished and sent to stores...

[K^2]

I hope that R* has enough sense to make the filter optional. I've seen something similar in Deus Ex: Invisible War. Fortunately, it allowed you to disable it, so it wasn't a big deal.

 

R* will catch a lot of bad rep if they don't allow people to disable it.

[.Up&Coming.]

Did you accidentally put the email address in the username slot?

Sorry, it's really bugging me.

 

On Topic: Well. I really have nothing to say since I have no problem with it.

[Crab Tactics]

ok ok, so every thead about graphics and filters ends up in a big argument and abuse being thrown back and forth. so sorry if i started anything, this is just my opinion.

 

"Everything that is more than 50 feet down the street from you starts to pixelate and distort strangely, as if filtered through a haze of tiny droplets of vegetable oil."

 

critics who have tested the game said that the filter, first seen on this screenshot http://media.gtanet.com/images/3947_gta4_screenshot.jpg is part of the game. according to someone, it covers up all imperfections and glitches that the game may have. look at the all of the screens before that, and the trailers, they all look noticably better.

 

WHY BOTHER MAKING AN AMAZING GAME AND SPOILING THE AESTHETIC AND GRAPHICS WITH A RUBBISH FILTER!!! even if you can see the odd glitch, I dont think its worth spoiling every square inch of the screen with an oldschool oil-painting type filter.

 

if anybody has noticed, they did the same with vice city. that looked more blurred then the rest of the series, and as a result, graphics where noticabaly worse then gta3.

 

maybe the graphics arn't as important as the gameplay to some people, but to me they are paramount, and the gameplay will be complimented vastly with sharper graphics.

 

a filter is an easy way out. please rockstar, dont filter us. peace.

The filter compensates for the fact that there is such a large amount of detail which needs to be rendered.

 

1. It is accurate to real life, as most people can't see 1 mile down the road in sharp-as-razors vision.

2. Without it, you would equally complain about how in the background you can see poorer models and detail. It's there to make everything look better numbnuts.

[badthug]

stop complaining

 

the games not even out yet, how do you know the graphics, just shut up

[GamerShotgun]

Firstly, they didn't use any "filters" on vice city, just LODs and a draw distance setting.. just like in GTA 3 - except there was a trails feature for it on PC too.

 

Secondly, you are an idiot.. This is needed for the stable FPS count... if you don't like it, simply don't play the game.. It's still better than the pop-up objects, like in SA where you fly in the forest and bang, a tree comes in front of you, and your hydra blows up....

[j_kelly23]

wow.. if the graphics are so improtant to you then just buy a f*cking racing game.. I mean jesus, I do not play GTA because it looks nice, I play it to get into isane and intense police chases, after having sex with a hooker, killing her and stuffing her in my trunk. I don't know why graphics would be so important to you, but GTA is known in the gaming industry as the game where you can do almost anything in an open sandbox environment, not for looking pretty.

Edited April 21, 2008 by j_kelly23

[[email protected]]

yeah true, but if you look at the first batch of screenshots, they are amazing. i just think its a shame, thats all.

[K^2]

1. It is accurate to real life, as most people can't see 1 mile down the road in sharp-as-razors vision.

2. Without it, you would equally complain about how in the background you can see poorer models and detail. It's there to make everything look better numbnuts.

1. Actually, a healthy eye can see any distance forward equally sharp. Human eye has evolved to accommodate to distances between a few inches and "infinity" (completely parallel rays from source). The maximum eye resolution is about 1/1000. Or being able to see "pixels" 1mm across from 1m away. That's pretty much the limit for the TV anyways. So with TV in focus, you will see the picture exactly as you'd see it in reality.

 

2. That's true. But making it optional would satisfy everyone.

[badthug]

yeah true, but if you look at the first batch of screenshots, they are amazing. i just think its a shame, thats all.

if the graphics are amazing then why are you complaining?

[ryuclan]

Well if you've watched the trailers and commercials the effect doesn't look as prominent in motion...

[[email protected]]

no i mean the graphics in the first screens are, but if you look at the recent screens, then the filter comes into play.

[Crazy Asian]

Maybe it's just me, but when viewing the trailers...I don't see any type of filter. Maybe it's a still image thing, like...when in motion it's hardly noticeable. Then again...I'm not a graphics whore and I really don't care, I just want to play the bloody game.

[[email protected]]

yeah, thats true. you wont be able to notice it as much when your setting someone on fire or chain-sawing someone to bits.

[.Up&Coming.]

yeah, thats true. you wont be able to notice it as much when your setting someone on fire or chain-sawing someone to bits.

Ooh.

I like those ideas.

Think there'll be chainsaws?

[dCeption]

if u dont kno sh*t about making video games or computer simulation, I highly suggest u stop making retarded criticsizations

[Magic_Al]

Remember the "trails" effect in GTA3 and VC? It was on by default but you could turn it off and it was not in SA. They've always wanted to use a filter to hide the seams, but trails wasn't that good because the technology wasn't good enough to make it subtle. The idea remains though, that rather than let you see rough edges in the graphics, they'd rather hide those edges with filters, so you imagine that stuff far away looks as good as stuff up close and can't see otherwise.

[Crazy Asian]

Oh dear, that trails effect in GTA III was HORRID!

[RidingHigh]

Maybe R* worked it into that story that distant objects and buildings appear blurred because Niko is near-sighted, but refuses to wear contact lenses.

 

 

[azndvl]

Isnt that screenshot a zoomed in portion of something far away? Cause i doubt you'd actually notice that kinda stuff ingame.

[Faggio_Racer]

wow I can't even tell what the hell you're talking about. The screenshot looks fine to me. And they had it in the previous games? Didn't even notice. But I guess if you can't enjoy the game, well, that's your deal. It's like saying a chick's t*ts are too big.

[FiendishDog]

I made this pic for all you filter haterz.

 

 

 

[xer0er]

Those that would disable the filter are the same people that would create thousands of threads asking why their PS3/360 crashed..

[lastmanonearth]

As long as there are no pop-ups even a downgrade in graphics is welcoming.

[Elsparko]

Yeah, I checked out the screenshot and honestly, it looked fine to me too. A stated previously, once everything is in motion I highly doubt those little things would even matter anyways (if it's a concern in the first place).

[K^2]

Those that would disable the filter are the same people that would create thousands of threads asking why their PS3/360 crashed..

Au Contre. These are the people who already know why their PS3 crashes.

 

If I can disable the filter, I will. If I can't, I'll complain about it for a day or two and then forget about it.

[Gog]

Someone want to point out the filter effect in the screenshot (in the original post) for me? I don't notice anything. I'm serious.

[DDR Midian]

I'm gonna give Rockstar the benefit of the doubt. It's their game and they spent about 4 years making it look beautiful. If they say it looks best with the filter, I trust them.

[nikobitch]

stop complaining

 

the games not even out yet, how do you know the graphics, just shut up

hey badthug hw u doin , aernt u the guy whos gonna sleep with the game

 

on topic: man stop compalining