We waited all this time and this is all we get?

[Death2Drugs]

Hello Jace26 a new guy to the gtaforums as you can tell by now stirring the guys up on these boards is the fastest way to have your guts ripped out and handed back to you, in a manner of speaking. It's always good to hear a different point of view, just try not to stir up to much of a fuss at the same time.

 

O.T.

Personally I don't mind the graphics in GTA V sure its been years since our last tast of GTA goodness, but let's face it the graphics where not that bad in IV I'd say they where pure awesome. As for Rockstar choosing los santos well... like me you clearly love GTA SA so what better place than a location from one of the best GTA game ever!.

 

Peace out Jace26

Hey, well I wouldn't say I'm new to this forum. I've been readin here for over a year, and its only in the last few months I decided to join.

I find it funny that just because I dislike GTA 5 from what I've so far seen, people decide to internet bash me. I have no problem with people disagreeing with me, it makes the forums more alive that way, but theres no need to call me names like dumbass and retard (in the words of GTAKing).

 

No the graphics were not bad in 4 in fact they were a major improvement to San Andreas, I just thought 4 was boring as hell.

 

GTA V hasn't shown anything new, the graphics look the same as in 4 which isn't a good thing considering its been 4 years since then. Having V set in San Andreas wasn't what I wanted, I would have preferred a new city, but I'm sure they'll make it work.

 

I just hope that by GTA 6 they chose a fresh location and not Vice.

I feel the opposite of you. I wanted to see how they could re-imagine Los Santos. I definitely wanted to see a new Los Santos and got really tired of the old one and fast.

[Algonquin Assassin]

Gta 4 is the worst game i have ever played

 

You see here the worst game not in the series but the worst of all games

 

Boring as hell - free roam dead ,weird ,boring, Sh*t, Nothing to do, this is not gta to me.

 

problem people ???

 

 

I like the GTA V trailer and hope its good

If GTA IV is the worst game you've ever played you must....

 

A) Not play very many games at all.

 

B) Are talking sh*t and like it more than you let on.

 

Either way it doesn't deserve to be given a label like that.

 

[leik oh em jeez!]

Well yes you should, they had plans for GTA 5 even before GTA 4 was released making it over 5 years now.

Oh God, just shut the f*ck up and stop your bitching. Planning and developing are two entirely different things, you over dramatic elitist cockmongler. You can't expect as big a jump in graphics as we had from SA to IV with every new release. If you don't think GTA V is "up to your standards" then stay the f*ck home and don't buy it. Don't come on here starting a topic to bitch about how it's not good enough for you.

 

Time taken to develop VC or SA after a previous release means nothing now. Those were the 3D era games. I takes a lot less time to make a low detail map covering all of three square miles than it does to make one as detailed and massive as IV's.

[Algonquin Assassin]

 

 

GTA IV first trailer.

 

 

 

GTA V first trailer.

 

Honestly how can anyone say GTA V's graphics aren't an improvement? leik oh em jeez! is right. Expecting a massive leap like SA to GTA IV every single game is just stupid. It's an evolution like VC and SA were to GTA III.

 

I guess everyone has a different perspective, but I would call GTA V's graphics anything, but "terrible".

[Jace26]

 

Well yes you should, they had plans for GTA 5 even before GTA 4 was released making it over 5 years now.

Oh God, just shut the f*ck up and stop your bitching. Planning and developing are two entirely different things, you over dramatic elitist cockmongler. You can't expect as big a jump in graphics as we had from SA to IV with every new release. If you don't think GTA V is "up to your standards" then stay the f*ck home and don't buy it. Don't come on here starting a topic to bitch about how it's not good enough for you.

 

Time taken to develop VC or SA after a previous release means nothing now. Those were the 3D era games. I takes a lot less time to make a low detail map covering all of three square miles than it does to make one as detailed and massive as IV's.

Actually people have already corrected me that its not 5 years but 4. So I admit I made a mistake there, however, I'm not complaining still after 4 years we should expect a vast improvement to the graphics of GTA V. I t may still be in its early stages, but once the first trailer is out, it normally means they are close to (graphical) completion.

 

Theres no way to currently know if GTA V is going to great, since it hasn't come out yet. I'm only criticising the graphics, anything else is still just hypothetical at the moment.

It may take more time to develop a map as detailed as 4 than it did with Vice for example, but also remember game engines have vastly improved since then and what they can support is superior to anything from the early years.

But thanks for calling me a "cockmongler" just because I have a different opinion to you.

Edited March 11, 2012 by Jace26

[Cole Phelps Gta]

f*ck go play IV for a month and i'm not talking about playing it once a week either. I'm talking about playing it for a few hours every couple of days atleast.

 

Then go play san andreas. Not only will you notice the difference it's IMPOSSIBLE to ignore. I normally dont care about graphics and even when their bad i can adjust in a few hours. Well after playing iv for a month san andreas was AWFUL to look at seriously it was ugly as hell it hurt my eye's. Then i turned the brightness up and it helped abit. But i still tolk me a good week of solid playing to adjust to the graphics now their ''good'' again

 

my point is people talking a sh*t on iv have clearly NEVER played the game.

 

f*ckING HATERS

[Jeeebuuus]

Are you expecting Crysis 2 graphics for V? What are wanting that you are not seeing? The graphics look incredible for the type of game it is. I'm struggling to not call you a prick.

[Cole Phelps Gta]

You guys sound like those wwe fans who keep bitching about the current product and wanting the attitude era back.

 

It's pathetic

[Jace26]

f*ck go play IV for a month and i'm not talking about playing it once a week either. I'm talking about playing it for a few hours every couple of days atleast.

 

Then go play san andreas. Not only will you notice the difference it's IMPOSSIBLE to ignore. I normally dont care about graphics and even when their bad i can adjust in a few hours. Well after playing iv for a month san andreas was AWFUL to look at seriously it was ugly as hell it hurt my eye's. Then i turned the brightness up and it helped abit. But i still tolk me a good week of solid playing to adjust to the graphics now their ''good'' again

 

my point is people talking a sh*t on iv have clearly NEVER played the game.

 

f*ckING HATERS

I never said GTA 4s graphics were bad, because compare the leap that was made between San Andreas and 4 and there is a huge improvement.

I have played GTA 4, and I didn't like it.

The storyline was great but the world just felt like everything was built around the player, it really was "lifeless" and with nothing to explore I traded it in very quickly.

 

So get your facts right before you call people haters.

[Gtaghost22]

Gta 4 is the worst game i have ever played

 

You see here the worst game not in the series but the worst of all games

 

Boring as hell - free roam dead ,weird ,boring, Sh*t, Nothing to do, this is not gta to me.

 

problem people ???

 

 

I like the GTA V trailer and hope its good

You are CLEARLY a 13 years old who likes stupid unrealistic games like taints row: the turd and call of sh*tty... GTA IV is one of the best games this gen (with Unharted 2,3) i actually i think its on a tie with San Andreas as the best one in the GTA series, if you think GTA IV is a bad game! Then you are stupid. PERIOD

[Algonquin Assassin]

Lets keep in mind RDR was built on the same engine as GTA IV and came out only a couple of years later. Graphically it was superior IMO.

 

There's only so much they can do with a game that's built on the same engine. I'm not saying it's a leaps and bounds improvement, but it looks better than GTA IV and RDR infact.

[HeNDo6750]

IV graphics compared to V's graphics are a massive improvement. But i have to admit, when i first saw the trailer, i was wondering if that was GTA V with those graphics at first, and a bit shocked of what R* had done. But now i'm liking the graphics of V even more

[Jeeebuuus]

Lets keep in mind RDR was built on the same engine as GTA IV and came out only a couple of years later. Graphically it was superior IMO.

 

There's only so much they can do with a game that's built on the same engine. I'm not saying it's a leaps and bounds improvement, but it looks better than GTA IV and RDR infact.

Your right. Why someone would question something so obvious makes them either really dumb or someone who enjoys pissing people off.

[Finn 7 five 11]

Well yes you should, they had plans for GTA 5 even before GTA 4 was released making it over 5 years now.

Oh God, just shut the f*ck up and stop your bitching. Planning and developing are two entirely different things, you over dramatic elitist cockmongler. You can't expect as big a jump in graphics as we had from SA to IV with every new release. If you don't think GTA V is "up to your standards" then stay the f*ck home and don't buy it. Don't come on here starting a topic to bitch about how it's not good enough for you.

 

Time taken to develop VC or SA after a previous release means nothing now. Those were the 3D era games. I takes a lot less time to make a low detail map covering all of three square miles than it does to make one as detailed and massive as IV's.

Actually people have already corrected me that its not 5 years but 4. So I admit I made a mistake there, however, I'm not complaining still after 4 years we should expect a vast improvement to the graphics of GTA V. I t may still be in its early stages, but once the first trailer is out, it normally means they are close to (graphical) completion.

 

Theres no way to currently know if GTA V is going to great, since it hasn't come out yet. I'm only criticising the graphics, anything else is still just hypothetical at the moment.

It may take more time to develop a map as detailed as 4 than it did with Vice for example, but also remember game engines have vastly improved since then and what they can support is superior to anything from the early years.

But thanks for calling me a "cockmongler" just because I have a different opinion to you.

I don't really think anyone should have expected too large a leap in graphics from iv to v, simply because it is on the same hardware, and considering the scale of gta games, I am sure the content within game will be Ewell worth the wait, you should never judge a book by its cover.

 

@Cole Phelps I always think of the graphics in the 3 era games as not as good, but they expressed the desited feel, San Andeeas felt like a ghetto, III felt gritty, and vice felt lile a colourful fun place to be, but regardless of graphics the games were fun as hell, so graphics aren't really a big deal.

[leik oh em jeez!]

Actually people have already corrected me that its not 5 years but 4. So I admit I made a mistake there,

That wasn't the point. The point was that they can plan it for years before they actually start development. So you're talking four years since planning was started and we have no idea when that actually moved to a development stage.

 

 

after 4 years we should expect a vast improvement to the graphics of GTA V.

It's the same game engine running on the same hardware. Other aspects of the game take a lot longer to develop than they used to, so you can't go by the same time scale you did five to ten years ago.

 

 

Theres no way to currently know if GTA V is going to great, since it hasn't come out yet. I'm only criticising the graphics, anything else is still just hypothetical at the moment.

Firstly, see above. Secondly, it's a sandbox game. Stunning graphics aren't the main focus. So you can't really compare it to games that do focus greatly on graphics.

 

 

It may take more time to develop a map as detailed as 4 than it did with Vice for example, but also remember game engines have vastly improved since then and what they can support is superior to anything from the early years.

Greater support means nothing as far as development time. Supporting more features actually means there's MORE to program, test, and more bug fixing. For example destructible objects now need physics or animations programmed, tested, and tweaked for perfection. Whereas in an older game that might have been a static object that just needed to be modeled.

 

 

But thanks for calling me a "cockmongler" just because I have a different opinion to you.

Anytime.

[Hurrikane]

do what you want with it!

http://tecnoinformers.com.br/2012/03/11/ru...em-na-internet/

[Supernutz40]

do what you want with it!

http://tecnoinformers.com.br/2012/03/11/ru...em-na-internet/

Looks fake to me.

[CrazyWare]

Stunning graphics aren't the main focus. So you can't really compare it to games that do focus greatly on graphics.

 

He's right, there has to be BOTH a good engine plus good graphics, that's what makes a good game. Also, don't pressure Rockstar, they are still working on it. But these guys are a right, if you don't like it, then well, skip it. I've played GTA 3, and well I got used to the graphics pretty quick.