pinky Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 OK, it's obvious we're dealing with a nutter. I'm having flashbacks from Rain man and Dustin Hoffman. There are a few with this attitude. Still can´t understand how can they be pleased of running this "game" at 30/40 fps with those rigs... They, myself included are pleased the game runs at 30-40 FPS. It deosn't mean we are pleased that our performance isn't higher on our rigs. Some of us have f*cking jobs to pay for our rigs, daddy deosnt buy them. Although technically in my case he did because I used some of his life insurance money to build it. He like making PCs and overclocking, and now so do I. Son becomes father. Even on the lowest of the low settings it still looks as good as any of the console versions, I know because my PS3 is plugged into the same monitor as my PC and I can run the 2 at the exact same time and switch inputs to compare them. Wish there was a HDMI capture card so I could STF the console looks better bandwagon. Anything in excess of 30FPS is same or higher than the console version's FPS anyway. The drops below are poor though, no one in their right mind can deny it. The game deos need f*cking sorted but just because someone is enjoying the game, and you are not due to harware/software issues deosnt make them a retard. Stop being bitter twats and let those who are enjoying the game enjoy it, hopefully it will be sorted within a week and everyone can have some fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malik Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Ah if it isnt the number 1 r* fan didnt expect anything else from you then a lick-behind topic OK, it's obvious we're dealing with a nutter. I'm having flashbacks from Rain man and Dustin Hoffman. Thank god, at least Im not the only one thinking that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexmachine Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 i agree after i got it working (was a bitch) this game is just so great to play again visually the 360 was so bad because i was playing on a PC monitor and you could see all the sh*tty graphics now the visuals are top notch i really don't know what people are talking about - you can't expect crysis like graphics for a game this detailed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkey82 Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 They, myself included are pleased the game runs at 30-40 FPS. This is perfectly fine and only a stupid person would resent you for that. It is because of statements as bad posts here. Bad port, bad multiplayer and so on. Really well done. but if you expect to play this game with a 8600 series card its your fault. new weapons and cars. The first time you load it creates cache files that makes the game a bit choppy at first but after the tutorial the game should be fine. I consider this guy to be crazy. Are these statements realistic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livilaNic Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Me love IV long time! This game is the sh*t! Haven't played a game this good since...Age of empires back in the day. A few things need to be looked into sure, as most games do. But I will play this game for months. With or without a patch. "this detailed" - is an understatement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinky Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 They, myself included are pleased the game runs at 30-40 FPS. This is perfectly fine and only a stupid person would resent you for that. It is because of statements as bad posts here. Bad port, bad multiplayer and so on. Really well done. but if you expect to play this game with a 8600 series card its your fault. new weapons and cars. The first time you load it creates cache files that makes the game a bit choppy at first but after the tutorial the game should be fine. I consider this guy to be crazy. Are these statements realistic? There are new weapons and new cars though. Granted I think only one weapon is trully new to the GTA franchise, the MP5 replacing SP10. Still really only an MP5 dressed up as something else. Car wise, there are sh*tloads more new ones. Lots of the old favourites are either gone or unrecognisable too. There is a lot of new cars though. Driving physics is completely revamped as well, some will like it and some wont. Dunno about the reall well done, its justy the same old sh*t in a new frock. The beating down on 8600 card owners, bit low but you do have to undersand that when you are using older less powerfull hardware that you aren't by any means gonna get great performance. Surely they play more than just GTA and can see that? Previous to my Ultras I was an 8600 user, tried it out for the PhysX recently, and I soon learned that I was playing at the lower end of the scale back then. I didn't exept to do great with my rig as the GFX cards are still old, especially when I found out no SLi. I got lucky as it seemed the processor is the key here. I think most of his statements are true enough, just maybe could have been more subtle so the people having problems (and that is a f*cking lot of people granted) wont get pissed and jump down his throat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Th3 ProphetMan Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Graphics are awesome but demanding ofcourse, but if you expect to play this game with a 8600 series card its your fault. Wrong! Its R*'s for saying it's the recommended spec. Then its probably a typo and they meant an 8800, which still plays the game like crap. The game is great but technically, the PC conversion has turned out to be full of sh*t. It needs SERIOUS!!! optimization. End of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knife Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 (edited) There are new weapons and new cars though. The OP sounds like he is comparing the 360 & PS3 versions to the PC: The multiplayer is awesome and has tons of new stuff like new clothing, new models, new weapons and cars. But maybe he didn't mean that. but you do have to undersand that when you are using older less powerfull hardware that you aren't by any means gonna get great performance On reccomended spec, performance should always be high. It should be high on the lowest spec. On minimum spec, the game should run nice and smooth, but with all the settings turned down. Recommended spec should be able to play the game smoothly with most of the features (shadows, draw distance) turned up at least half way. I bought the game, used the default recommended settings and it's undoubtedly choppy quite often. Edited December 5, 2008 by Knife Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medfreak Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 It needs SERIOUS!!! optimization. End of story. I'll go even one step further, it needs to be properly PORTED to the PC, instead of emulating an Xbox 360 on the PC. It needs a serious overhaul, and utilize the PC environment like a proper PC game. Rockstar has the money to do it, and it is inexcusable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avean Posted December 5, 2008 Author Share Posted December 5, 2008 Your specs? 8Gb Memory, 2.4 Ghz Quad, GTX280, 2x Raptor in Raid 0, Vista 64. So i have an extreme system, but what so many people are doing wrong is that they are adjusting View Distance. It is a killer ! Even with my GTX280 with 1gb of video memory i am only allowed to do 30% view distance. So if people are adjusting this over what auto config is recommending you are begging for low fps. But 30% in the PC version is extreme, its like 10x longer than console. You can literally see several miles on a rooftop. I can understand that people with low spec computers have trouble, but it aint the game itself. Its really demanding but try auto configuration and actually play the game more than 2 minutes. The first time you load it creates cache files that makes the game a bit choppy at first but after the tutorial the game should be fine. Your dad must be a owner of some company or oil rig you spoiled little kid. Try auto configure my stinking ass. The game is EXTREMELY NON OPTIMIZED! You cant tell people to lower View distance. WITH WHAT? Geforce 7 or 8 series. I'll be damned if i spend a cent on new hardware just because Rockstar SOLD out and became very sloppy! Read the Poll on GTA 4 Site ffs!!!!!!! No i am an adult with a job Thats why and i also work with computers for a living. The game is fine but demanding. You cant expect to play this game with 8600 series card even if the readme says it. Its not possible. This game is 10x the size of Far Cry 2 with 100 times more details to the enviroment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knife Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 The game is fine but demanding. You cant expect to play this game with 8600 series card even if the readme says it. Well, this is why people are pissed. They're not pissed about the actual game, it's the fact they can't play it! Even when they were told they could! And I believe fully that this game could be more optimized. You're okay, fantastic, why are you on here when you could be playing? For the people who can't play or find the game very laggy, this is an issue and they have every right to complain about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notsofrisk Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Your specs? 8Gb Memory, 2.4 Ghz Quad, GTX280, 2x Raptor in Raid 0, Vista 64. So i have an extreme system, but what so many people are doing wrong is that they are adjusting View Distance. It is a killer ! Even with my GTX280 with 1gb of video memory i am only allowed to do 30% view distance. So if people are adjusting this over what auto config is recommending you are begging for low fps. But 30% in the PC version is extreme, its like 10x longer than console. You can literally see several miles on a rooftop. I can understand that people with low spec computers have trouble, but it aint the game itself. Its really demanding but try auto configuration and actually play the game more than 2 minutes. The first time you load it creates cache files that makes the game a bit choppy at first but after the tutorial the game should be fine. Your dad must be a owner of some company or oil rig you spoiled little kid. Try auto configure my stinking ass. The game is EXTREMELY NON OPTIMIZED! You cant tell people to lower View distance. WITH WHAT? Geforce 7 or 8 series. I'll be damned if i spend a cent on new hardware just because Rockstar SOLD out and became very sloppy! Read the Poll on GTA 4 Site ffs!!!!!!! No i am an adult with a job Thats why and i also work with computers for a living. The game is fine but demanding. You cant expect to play this game with 8600 series card even if the readme says it. Its not possible. This game is 10x the size of Far Cry 2 with 100 times more details to the enviroment. Agree with you on this. the main problem is that R* should have kept it *real* when they typed up the recommended settings. I run it fine, no probs..... FINALLY,,,,, but really...... quad CPU and 8800GTS or X should be recommended setting for people to be able to have some graphics up... my dime of info..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinky Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 It needs SERIOUS!!! optimization. End of story. I'll go even one step further, it needs to be properly PORTED to the PC, instead of emulating an Xbox 360 on the PC. It needs a serious overhaul, and utilize the PC environment like a proper PC game. Rockstar has the money to do it, and it is inexcusable. How can it be, since when was the Xbox Quad Core? Otherwise I would have a reduntant core going on. I think it is a PS3 emulator, they are octocore and the octocore i7 users are having great success. Hmmmmm, coincedence maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medfreak Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 It needs SERIOUS!!! optimization. End of story. I'll go even one step further, it needs to be properly PORTED to the PC, instead of emulating an Xbox 360 on the PC. It needs a serious overhaul, and utilize the PC environment like a proper PC game. Rockstar has the money to do it, and it is inexcusable. How can it be, since when was the Xbox Quad Core? Otherwise I would have a reduntant core going on. I think it is a PS3 emulator, they are octocore and the octocore i7 users are having great success. Hmmmmm, coincedence maybe? Funny you mentioned that. When I tried it on my Q6600, I noticed that the first 3 cores were around 80-90% usage, and the fourth core was around 50%. I'll try to get some screens when I get back to my primary machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Ruthless Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 I don't understand why this game lags on dual cores. I have a single core processor and it runs perfectly! (on low of course). If only there wouldn't be that damn texture problem, I would be playing right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr.Mad Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 (edited) Your specs? 8Gb Memory, 2.4 Ghz Quad, GTX280, 2x Raptor in Raid 0, Vista 64. So i have an extreme system, but what so many people are doing wrong is that they are adjusting View Distance. It is a killer ! Even with my GTX280 with 1gb of video memory i am only allowed to do 30% view distance. So if people are adjusting this over what auto config is recommending you are begging for low fps. But 30% in the PC version is extreme, its like 10x longer than console. You can literally see several miles on a rooftop. I can understand that people with low spec computers have trouble, but it aint the game itself. Its really demanding but try auto configuration and actually play the game more than 2 minutes. The first time you load it creates cache files that makes the game a bit choppy at first but after the tutorial the game should be fine. Your dad must be a owner of some company or oil rig you spoiled little kid. Try auto configure my stinking ass. The game is EXTREMELY NON OPTIMIZED! You cant tell people to lower View distance. WITH WHAT? Geforce 7 or 8 series. I'll be damned if i spend a cent on new hardware just because Rockstar SOLD out and became very sloppy! Read the Poll on GTA 4 Site ffs!!!!!!! No i am an adult with a job Thats why and i also work with computers for a living. The game is fine but demanding. You cant expect to play this game with 8600 series card even if the readme says it. Its not possible. This game is 10x the size of Far Cry 2 with 100 times more details to the enviroment. Now tell me this. Why did Rockstar posted THIS: Minimum Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo 1.8Ghz, AMD Athlon X2 64 2.4Ghz Memory: 1.5GB Free Hard Drive Space: 16GB Video Card: 256MB NVidia 7900 / 256MB ATI X1900 DirectX 9 compatible Stereo Sound Card Keyboard Mouse ??????????????????????????????????????????????? Explain this! My specs: AMD Athlon 64 × 2 Dual Core Processor 4200+ 2.2 Ghz Memory: 2GB Video: 256mb Nvidia 7600GT GTA 4 doesn't work at all. By my guess, Rockstar decieved and manipulated people around the world so they got berserk and frantic and purchased or preordered GTA 4 with hope their systems will run this game. Well to bad, i say this is decieving the customers. PEople shal speak soon enough. Oh and obvious Geforce 8 series can run GTA 4 normally: Recommended Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad 2.4Ghz, AMD Phenom X3 2.1Ghz Memory: 2GB (Windows XP) 2.5GB (Windows Vista) Free Hard Drive Space: 18GB Video Card: 512MB NVIDIA 8600 / 512MB ATI 3870 DirectX 9 compatible Surround Sound Card Keyboard Mouse Well, can they??? I believe the game itself is excelent, for those who can play it and enjoy. I just think it is extremely rude and unfair of R* to make selecetion of people to those who can play it normal and those who can't play it at all. Well guess what Rockstar, over 70% people can't play the game at all. Well it's your money Rockstar, people are allready returning the game to the stores. I read like 10 forums so far. Not a good start for a game of this statue, not good at all. By the way, read your own latest poll. This game is destined to doom. A quote from other forum: ....following a poll of one of the biggest german pc magazines, Gamestar, just 5% are able to play the game perfectly, 8% slowly, 11% bad and it crashes from time to time, 2% good, but it crashes from time to time and 74% who are not able to play the game at all.... Edited December 5, 2008 by dr.Mad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nillansan Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Graphics are awesome but demanding ofcourse, but if you expect to play this game with a 8600 series card its your fault. Just wanted to write this thread since so many posts here are bad which must be because the author has a bad system or has downloaded the game. I give this a 10/10. This is my rig, Q9550 @ 2.83 Ghz OC'ed to 3.2 Ghz CellShock 4GB DDR2-1066 Asus Maximus Formula Motherboard ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 OS Windows Vista 64 bit Business Edition I do not have a bad system, neither do I have any pirated games at ALL! I buy all my games! GTA 4 runs like sh*t. So what are you trying to tell me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NIPSEN Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Its not a problem with the game (patched it will be very good) it's an engine problem, the recommended spec isn't playable, so they suck ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malik Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 The first time you load it creates cache files that makes the game a bit choppy at first but after the tutorial the game should be fine. I consider this guy to be crazy. Are these statements realistic? I think this person (?) has to justify all the loans he put in to buy a rig just to play this one game. The game ended up CRAP like every sane person admits but yet he still needs to fuel that feeling that he made the right choice with his money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camdean Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 OK, it's obvious we're dealing with a nutter. I'm having flashbacks from Rain man and Dustin Hoffman. There are a few with this attitude. Still can´t understand how can they be pleased of running this "game" at 30/40 fps with those rigs... I am far from happy, I am happy with the gameplay, I got 5 hours of bliss last night and then .. And then .. REC10 - out of memory crash. So here I go again with a new method, I managed to get the -nomemrestrict command to work, I will use the auto configure settings, as it sets it almost twice as good as the console anyway, but will it crash me out, thats the main problem, watch this space Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr.Mad Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Graphics are awesome but demanding ofcourse, but if you expect to play this game with a 8600 series card its your fault. Just wanted to write this thread since so many posts here are bad which must be because the author has a bad system or has downloaded the game. I give this a 10/10. This is my rig, Q9550 @ 2.83 Ghz OC'ed to 3.2 Ghz CellShock 4GB DDR2-1066 Asus Maximus Formula Motherboard ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 OS Windows Vista 64 bit Business Edition I do not have a bad system, neither do I have any pirated games at ALL! I buy all my games! GTA 4 runs like sh*t. So what are you trying to tell me? Some people are just to smart. They can't accept the fact that Rockstar f*cked up big time. They are playing GTA 4 on 1500 euro/dollar machines, they don't give a f*ck about others. So that's why they say the game is 10/10. Well guess what, 75% of the people who own GTA 4 say otherwise. GTA 4 is a big no no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkey82 Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 The first time you load it creates cache files that makes the game a bit choppy at first but after the tutorial the game should be fine. I consider this guy to be crazy. Are these statements realistic? I think this person (?) has to justify all the loans he put in to buy a rig just to play this one game. The game ended up CRAP like every sane person admits but yet he still needs to fuel that feeling that he made the right choice with his money. I think you have something there. I know such people in real life. Guys who spend a lot of money on various stuff (gaming systems, DVD and CD collections) and are willing to say anything as to justify their purchase. If I manage to get it running on above 30 FPS (without any dipping below that) on medium to high settings I'll be OK with but I shall not be pleased and will continue to bitch and moan about it . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0p'0v Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 (edited) Ok, so we all know that 8600 GT 512 MB is Recommanded to play the game (according to official requirements). I have 8600 GT on 256 MB, I don't ask to play the game even on medium, I just want to play it on LOW. But I can't do that if I get tops 20 fps (even in menus ) : Something happend to the water, yesterday it looked better (I didn't change any settings), but even like this, FPS are very low The lowest possible settings. I mean come on, even San Andreas on Max. settings looks better.... So am I asking to much, if I want to play the game on low with a card that's between Minimum and Recommanded ? Edited December 5, 2008 by p0p'0v Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Th3 ProphetMan Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 It needs SERIOUS!!! optimization. End of story. I'll go even one step further, it needs to be properly PORTED to the PC, instead of emulating an Xbox 360 on the PC. It needs a serious overhaul, and utilize the PC environment like a proper PC game. Rockstar has the money to do it, and it is inexcusable. How can it be, since when was the Xbox Quad Core? Otherwise I would have a reduntant core going on. I think it is a PS3 emulator, they are octocore and the octocore i7 users are having great success. Hmmmmm, coincedence maybe? Funny you mentioned that. When I tried it on my Q6600, I noticed that the first 3 cores were around 80-90% usage, and the fourth core was around 50%. I'll try to get some screens when I get back to my primary machine. 2 cores to emulate de 360 + 2 cores to run the actual game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malik Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 (edited) Ok, so we all know that 8600 GT 512 MB is Recommanded to play the game (according to official requirements). I have 8600 GT on 256 MB, I don't ask to play the game even on medium, I just want to play it on LOW.But I can't do that if I get tops 20 fps (even in menus ) : That first screen I think you have something there. I know such people in real life. Guys who spend a lot of money on various stuff (gaming systems, DVD and CD collections) and are willing to say anything as to justify their purchase. If I manage to get it running on above 30 FPS (without any dipping below that) on medium to high settings I'll be OK with but I shall not be pleased and will continue to bitch and moan about it biggrin.gif. Yea they're called fanboys and who likes a fanboy anyway we have the right to bitch and moan about this not being the game we were promised since we got put on hold so many times and we were questioning if it was going to come at all... and then at the end of the ride (just in time for christmas) we get thrown this piece of ....garbage Edited December 5, 2008 by Malik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMhardKy Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 (edited) To everyone still defending the game: This is my system with 2x [email protected]/1500/1225 etc. with different partitions containing XP32, [email protected] tweaked to squeeze the absolute maximum of the hardware performance, which runs every game flawlesly (even Crysis runs very well), kills about 95% of other gaming rigs in the world, yet it's IMPOSSIBLE to run GTAIV with a non-sh*tty framerate (regardless of resolution or detail settings). Need any other proof? Normaly I don't even post specs of my system (which I paid for myself) just to show off, but it's absolute MADNESS how bad this game runs considering what you are actually seeing on the monitor and it needs to be said to everyone: it's not your PCs fault that this game runs bad. There is no PC in the world that would run GTA4 appropriately. EDIT: Oh, and the game stopped working yesterday (error DD3D90 etc.) so I had to uninstall. That is the first time ever that happened on my recent system with any game. Not one single game even froze on my system yet! Edited December 5, 2008 by MMhardKy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smiley_ie Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 (edited) Nice setup MMhardKy im running 3 screens SoftTH ? Im running it on a Q6600 @ 3ghz, 4 gig, GTX280 and vista 64 and this game is not optimized, People that are getting 25fps seem that its fine but from the previews ive read and screen shots i expected A LOT MORE Face it R-star FXXked us on this one. Edited December 5, 2008 by Smiley_ie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calebchosen Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 i think this is the first game that relies on videocard memory. i have a 1gb memory card, and i can play the game in high setting. but the games has so many bugs and glitches..they really did a poor job on this sucker.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malik Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 To everyone still defending the game: user posted image This is my system with 2x [email protected]/1500/1225 etc. with different partitions containing XP32, [email protected] tweaked to squeeze the absolute maximum of the hardware performance, which runs every game flawlesly (even Crysis runs very well), kills about 95% of other gaming rigs in the world, yet it's IMPOSSIBLE to run GTAIV with a non-sh*tty framerate (regardless of resolution or detail settings). Need any other proof? Normaly I don't even post specs of my system (which I paid for myself) just to show off, but it's absolute MADNESS how bad this game runs considering what you are actually seeing on the monitor and it needs to be said to everyone: it's not your PCs fault that this game runs bad. There is no PC in the world that would run GTA4 appropriately. +1 Fanboys. Your turn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyc2u Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 The OP is obviously trolling. Or else he actually believes that every single complaint on these boards is a lie just to put down R*. I can play the game too but its pitiful. The graphics are not even close to other games i have like Crysis, CoD:WaW, or Tomb Raider Underworld. YET, this game has the worst FPS of them all. I get 20fps in this game and 70FPS in Crysis??? Are you freaking kidding me? I get 100+ FPS in the other 2 games i mentioned. Ive knocked this games settings down as low as im willing to go. 1024x768, shadows on 0, view distance at 15% all textures and renders at medium. A big whopping 20FPS if i stare at the ground. About 10-15 if running or driving. UNACCEPTABLE! From what I read, R* made the graphics this way for future PCs. How much sense does that make if the game is released NOW??? Who gives a rats left peanut about a future PC? Its like they are telling us not to buy this game for 5 more years. To R*, LAY OFF THE GODDAMN DRUGS!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now