View Full Version : The old and unwieldy GTA4 thread*
woundingchaney
20-Apr-2008, 14:20
I personally dont see why it would be all that unheard of. MS did forward 50 million for the creation of this content and there have been statements of the dlc being large and taking up gigs worth of space. I doubt the cities would be near the size of Liberty City but at the same time they could be a large suburb or even an island location. Every time I imagine what the dlc will be like I usually consider it to be the equivalent of a GTA "Shivering Isles". Shivering Isles was another region in Oblivion that offered a considerable amount of additional playtime.
The episodic model has been done by various other publishers in the industry and I dont see why R wouldnt follow in their steps. Instead of having a new game release every few years they simply create additional content to keep the revenue coming in. Creating dlc has no where near the overhead that creating a new title does. They can use the same storyline, assets, engine, sounds and various other aspects that are already being used in the base game.
I personally dont see why it would be all that unheard of. MS did forward 50 million for the creation of this content and there have been statements of the dlc being large and taking up gigs worth of space. I doubt the cities would be near the size of Liberty City but at the same time they could be a large suburb or even an island location. Every time I imagine the what the dlc will be like I usually consider it to be the equivalent of a GTA "Shivering Isles". Shivering Isles was another region in Oblivion that offered a considerable amount of additional playtime.
It´s supposedly only a loan, how does a $50 million dollar loan convert into what can be compared to complete games in terms of content creation?
Rockstar could sell complete games instead and make a hell of alot more money that way.
If you can find anything official out of Rockstars mouth or PR machine then i believe it. A Microsoft sponsored special edition of CVG that just happens to hit the stands around the time where GTA4 goes on sale and can make a real difference when it comes to choice of platform smells.
Of course this is video games, when it comes to rumors anything goes. To often it´s just blatant lies made up by websites that would sell their family for "add clicks".
If this rumor doesn´t hold true it looks like a Microsoft sponsored lie. That would be special.
This is the only official thing i could find, it reads like the EDGE interview:
IGN: And I assume also to make sure it feels like a natural extension of the game as well, so that it doesn't feel artificial?
Houser: Oh yeah... In general, if it's a very tight story game, as opposed to an open world game, there's often nothing you can really add. Add an extra level. Why? It's done. It's a story. With an open world game there's a little more maneuverability there, but we're super conscious that we want the games to be treated as serious medium. We take it very seriously. We love what we do. It's up to you guys to say if it's art or not. We try really hard. We're not in it just to go, "Here's an extra way of making a dollar." That's going to make all the people who already spent $60, half of them feel redundant. If there's anything that we're selling, we want it to be useful for people.
The game that you buy on the disc is the game. The extra stuff doesn't exist yet, but it exists in our heads... It's cool stuff. It doesn't undermine the individual game.
woundingchaney
20-Apr-2008, 15:20
It´s supposedly only a loan, how does a $50 million dollar loan convert into what can be compared to complete games in terms of content creation?
Rockstar could sell complete games instead and make a hell of alot more money that way.
If you can find anything official out of Rockstars mouth or PR machine then i believe it. A Microsoft sponsored special edition of CVG that just happens to hit the stands around the time where GTA4 goes on sale and can make a real difference when it comes to choice of platform smells.
Of course this is video games, when it comes to rumors anything goes. To often it´s just blatant lies made up by websites that would sell their family for "add clicks".
If this rumor doesn´t hold true it looks like a Microsoft sponsored lie. That would be special.
Supposedly the loan was to guarantee the creation of dlc for the platform and is to be paid back via revenue from the sales of the dlc.
Here is a link for info on the deal:
http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6023&Itemid=2
Rockstar "could" sell more full games with while years lapses between each game and little to no revenue coming in. Also its not as if T2 is doing well financially. I dont see why they couldnt develop a new title while using dlc to fund the development (which is surely what they plan on doing). The former CEO of T2 has stated the intention for using dlc to provide additional revenue streams.
Where as I doubt that the dlc is going to massive new cities the equivalent of the main city I dont see any reason why the dlc cant contain new areas and adventures within these areas.
Just what is it that you are expecting the content to be the equivalent of??
Just what is it that you are expecting the content to be the equivalent of??
I expect it to be heavily relying on current assets using side characters in the main game as new lead characters.
I am sure it will be worth the price but i find it very hard to believe it will move any special ground in the DLC world.
And i expect myself to be somewhat envious of 360 owners but not so much that i would ever consider buying it for the 360, or buying a 360 to begin with.
If this game turns out to be like other GTA games, the main game itself will be a challenge for me to actually finish anyway :-)
RobertR1
20-Apr-2008, 20:34
lol at this still downplaying and dismissing the DLC.
Seeing that CoD4 maps alone did over 1 million downloads in the first week, I expect GTA4 to easily surpass that number even if the price tag is higher.
DLC isn't "i didn't get 100% completion in the game yet anyway so why do I need dlc!?" There no such written rule. DLC, depending on the content, can go a long way to freshen up the game and add the initial purchase excitement back to the game. The number of people who'll get the DLC AND have 100% game completion will be a very small figure.
lol at this still downplaying and dismissing the DLC.
Seeing that CoD4 maps alone did over 1 million downloads in the first week, I expect GTA4 to easily surpass that number even if the price tag is higher.
DLC isn't "i didn't get 100% completion in the game yet anyway so why do I need dlc!?" There no such written rule. DLC, depending on the content, can go a long way to freshen up the game and add the initial purchase excitement back to the game. The number of people who'll get the DLC AND have 100% game completion will be a very small figure.
Whats with the "lol"? The orginal link says:
GTA 4 DLC Includes Entirely New Cities
Where does "downplaying" come into play here? You think the rumours are true, then say so instead of making crappy "lolzor" cheap shot posts only meant to provoke.
Or is this:
I am sure it will be worth the price but i find it very hard to believe it will move any special ground in the DLC world.
And i expect myself to be somewhat envious of 360 owners but not so much that i would ever consider buying it for the 360, or buying a 360 to begin with.
What you consider downplaying, or do you expect me to pickup a 360 just for GTA4 DLC´s ?
digitalwanderer
20-Apr-2008, 21:26
Well so long as the DLC is available for the PC platform it's all good to me. ;)
AlphaWolf
20-Apr-2008, 21:29
lol at this still downplaying and dismissing the DLC.
Seeing that CoD4 maps alone did over 1 million downloads in the first week, I expect GTA4 to easily surpass that number even if the price tag is higher.
DLC isn't "i didn't get 100% completion in the game yet anyway so why do I need dlc!?" There no such written rule. DLC, depending on the content, can go a long way to freshen up the game and add the initial purchase excitement back to the game. The number of people who'll get the DLC AND have 100% game completion will be a very small figure.
Microsoft certainly has to expect it to surpass that on the basis of their advance of $50 million. At $50 million, they'd need to sell at least 5 million (total for 2 episodes) if they charge 800 points.
has there been any mention of sequels to GTA4 yet?
like with GTA3 u had vice city,san andreas
+ if so, (well the possibility of that not happening is akin to bush admitting that invading iraq was a mistake :) ) when, middle 2009 + 2010 perhaps?
has there been any mention of sequels to GTA4 yet?
like with GTA3 u had vice city,san andreas
+ if so, (well the possibility of that not happening is akin to bush admitting that invading iraq was a mistake :) ) when, middle 2009 + 2010 perhaps?
If the past is anything to go by, Rockstar will do it´s best to reap the rewards of the GTA franchise on this generation. A follow up within 12-18 months and another one just before the generation dies.
Microsoft certainly has to expect it to surpass that on the basis of their advance of $50 million. At $50 million, they'd need to sell at least 5 million (total for 2 episodes) if they charge 800 points.
The money is mostly refundable, thus it's difficult to speculate size, popularity or price of the DLC based on that.
AlphaWolf
20-Apr-2008, 23:30
The money is mostly refundable, thus it's difficult to speculate size, popularity or price of the DLC based on that.
The money is was and always has been an advance on sales of the DLC. MS wouldn't advance $50 million if they didn't think they were going to get it back.
The money is was and always has been an advance on sales of the DLC.
and?
AlphaWolf
20-Apr-2008, 23:38
and?
and its clearly possible to speculate as to what MS thinks will be the minimum sales for the DLC.
and its clearly possible to speculate as to what MS thinks will be the minimum sales for the DLC.
What part of refundable makes this speculation valid?
MS may be expecting $25M worth of DLC plus $20M payback of the rest.
Scott_Arm
21-Apr-2008, 00:54
What part of refundable makes this speculation valid?
MS may be expecting $25M worth of DLC plus $20M payback of the rest.
Is it just me or is $25 million a hell of a lot of money to develop a game, let alone some extra downloadable content. $50 million .... what could possibly cost that much? Wouldn't $20 million be in the upper range of development for brand new AAA titles?
AlphaWolf
21-Apr-2008, 00:56
What part of refundable makes this speculation valid?
MS may be expecting $25M worth of DLC plus $20M payback of the rest.
and I might be a chinese jet pilot.
Is it just me or is $25 million a hell of a lot of money to develop a game, let alone some extra downloadable content. $50 million .... what could possibly cost that much? Wouldn't $20 million be in the upper range of development for brand new AAA titles?
Yes it would, but it's not necessarily the development cost of the DLC.
and I might be a chinese jet pilot.
Now, that reply explains a lot.
AlphaWolf
21-Apr-2008, 01:43
Now, that reply explains a lot.
It's really all your ridiculous supposition deserved, but I'll give this one more try.
MS advanced $50 million to rockstar. An advance is a loan that is expected to be repaid via sales. The DLC is the security for the advance/loan. Yes, MS could just be flushing money down the toilet (the DLC could tank and not sell at all) but the DLC is their security for the advance/loan, so they clearly have expectations that they will do well on the sales of the DLC.
I also don't expect the advance was used to finance just the DLC, but the game and the DLC.
It's really all your ridiculous supposition deserved, but I'll give this one more try.
Don't bother next time.
MS advanced $50 million to rockstar. An advance is a loan that is expected to be repaid via sales. The DLC is the security for the advance/loan. Yes, MS could just be flushing money down the toilet (the DLC could tank and not sell at all) but the DLC is their security for the advance/loan, so they clearly have expectations that they will do well on the sales of the DLC.
Maybe to people with "creative reasoning", the other possibilities may look like flushing money down the toilet, but unless that toilet throws the money back, refundablity, exclusivity and advertisement rights make the deal pretty sweet for MS in any case.
I also don't expect the advance was used to finance just the DLC, but the game and the DLC.
Good to know.
Scott_Arm
21-Apr-2008, 04:03
Yes it would, but it's not necessarily the development cost of the DLC.
It can't be the development cost of the DLC. That amount of money is just too big. So, what else are they working on? Even with DLC for GTA4 and another game, they'd use up maybe half of that money. So, are we going to see DLC, an exclusive and something else? I can't see Microsoft allowing their money to be spent on development for the PS3 or Wii, unless it's cross platform and payed back with a good deal of interest.
AlphaWolf
21-Apr-2008, 04:08
It can't be the development cost of the DLC. That amount of money is just too big. So, what else are they working on? Even with DLC for GTA4 and another game, they'd use up maybe half of that money. So, are we going to see DLC, an exclusive and something else? I can't see Microsoft allowing their money to be spent on development for the PS3 or Wii, unless it's cross platform and payed back with a good deal of interest.
Think of it this way. MS loaned 50 million to rockstar, which rockstar will/has use/d for GTAIV development + the 2 GTAIV episodes, the interest is essentially MS' payment to R* for the exclusivity of the DLC.
Scott_Arm
21-Apr-2008, 04:14
Think of it this way. MS loaned 50 million to rockstar, which rockstar will/has use/d for GTAIV development + the 2 GTAIV episodes, the interest is essentially MS' payment to R* for the exclusivity of the DLC.
I get that, but how could development of GTA4 + 2 episodes cost 50 million? Why not 30 million. Certainly 30 million would cover their efforts, and I would think Rockstar is rich enough to fund some of the development with their own money. Of course, I'm just some hack on the internet that has no idea what he's talking about, but it just seemed like a really excessive loan to me.
AlphaWolf
21-Apr-2008, 04:28
I get that, but how could development of GTA4 + 2 episodes cost 50 million? Why not 30 million. Certainly 30 million would cover their efforts, and I would think Rockstar is rich enough to fund some of the development with their own money. Of course, I'm just some hack on the internet that has no idea what he's talking about, but it just seemed like a really excessive loan to me.
Didn't rockstar just recently have to pay out a large settlement regarding hot coffee? Its not inconceivable that there's $50 million invested into GTAIV, given what we know about the development costs of some other games.
It can't be the development cost of the DLC. That amount of money is just too big.
It's very unlikely that the DLC costs $25 million to develop. But who says it's?
So, what else are they working on?
Nothing else is included in the deal as far as public knowledge goes, besides two episodic contents.
Even with DLC for GTA4 and another game, they'd use up maybe half of that money. So, are we going to see DLC, an exclusive and something else? I can't see Microsoft allowing their money to be spent on development for the PS3 or Wii, unless it's cross platform and payed back with a good deal of interest.
DLC may be very important in the end, who knows.
It will be a marketing point, and possibly MS's tool to attract more people to Live.
joker454
21-Apr-2008, 06:24
I get that, but how could development of GTA4 + 2 episodes cost 50 million? Why not 30 million.
Because maybe Sony bid 35 million, and Microsoft had to outbid them. We'll never know for sure. What is sure though is that money is always flying around behind the scenes, in numerous deals of which the public at large never finds out about. With a bid as large as 50 million, I suspect Microsoft were not the only company attempting to grease the Rockstar wheel.
My take on it is really simple. With the current battle being what it is, Rockstar likely approached both MS and Sony and asked "what have you done for me lately?". The bidding war began, and Microsoft won. Simple as that. It's certainly not the first time something like this has happened in games.
Because maybe Sony bid 35 million, and Microsoft had to outbid them. We'll never know for sure. What is sure though is that money is always flying around behind the scenes, in numerous deals of which the public at large never finds out about. With a bid as large as 50 million, I suspect Microsoft were not the only company attempting to grease the Rockstar wheel.
My take on it is really simple. With the current battle being what it is, Rockstar likely approached both MS and Sony and asked "what have you done for me lately?". The bidding war began, and Microsoft won. Simple as that. It's certainly not the first time something like this has happened in games.
Afaik Sony dropped the ball on this game, maybe they had to much on their hands or more likely, at that time they didn´t expect to be so much behind as they are now. Arrogance is dangerous.
aaronspink
21-Apr-2008, 08:32
It can't be the development cost of the DLC. That amount of money is just too big. So, what else are they working on? Even with DLC for GTA4 and another game, they'd use up maybe half of that money. So, are we going to see DLC, an exclusive and something else? I can't see Microsoft allowing their money to be spent on development for the PS3 or Wii, unless it's cross platform and payed back with a good deal of interest.
The elephant in the room is the development cost for GTA4 itself. I'm assuming that 50 mil either covers it completely or comes close. If that is correct, then the assumptions for the DLC are pretty large.
with that assumed, that would relate to DLC approximating the complexity of the game itself with sell through on a roughly equal level as the initial sell through for the xb360 version itself. With that in mind it isn't hard to see expectations from both side of DLC on the order of VC or SA themselves. Assuming that there is a time delayed exclusivity involved, it then allows R* to later publish the DLC as stand alone titles or as part of a later platinum edition for other platforms.
Assuming 6 month intervals between release and DLC releases it also allows R* a significant amount of streaming income to offset the normal spike oriented incoming of the game biz.
Further, it can be viewed as part of a strategy by MS to eventually move the GTA franchise from the original PS exclusive, to multi-platform, to XB exclusive (or timed exclusive) which would be a fairly large win for MS.
Whether or not the DLC contains new cities or not it is possible to see how the DLC could allow R* to explore the same game world but from a different perspective or timeline using the existing major and secondary characters in the game and doing their life story instead of the main one, but regardless one would expect that they would at least add/add to the existing city by possibly putting in the various NYC burroughs that are currently not in LC or are not fully fleshed out. Or possibly add in say a boston analog to expand the landmass like SA had both SF and LA analogs.
And there is nothing to stop R* from using the new city for other expansions getting maximal reuse of assets for future games.
Aaron Spink
speaking for myself inc.
In any case, isn´t 50 million dollars almost a drop in the ocean compared to the amount of money that this game will bring in to everybody?
archangelmorph
21-Apr-2008, 11:56
The DLC isn't likely going to be "new cities" IMO purely because I find it hard to see how anyone could afford the HDD space nor the download time to pull a 6-9GB~ file down the wire..
Not to mention the fact that a new city would have to be populated with content & as such, require a much longer time investment in terms of development.. & if you're going to spend another 2 years developing that kind of content then you're better off shipping on disc to the widest possible audience (360 & PS3)..
IMO it's much more likely to assume it would be a competely new content set but using the same assets (a la Liberty/Vice City Stories..)
aaronspink
21-Apr-2008, 12:11
In any case, isn´t 50 million dollars almost a drop in the ocean compared to the amount of money that this game will bring in to everybody?
not really, it depends on the sales rate. For example, 360 would need roughly a 25-30% attach rate to make MS 50 mil assuming the rumors of a $10 per copy royalty rate is correct. So 50 mil is a sizable chunk of change. It roughly the same amount of money as T2 will make on ~2 million copies of GTA4, so likely 20% of the revenue they will make on the game.
aaronspink
21-Apr-2008, 12:19
The DLC isn't likely going to be "new cities" IMO purely because I find it hard to see how anyone could afford the HDD space nor the download time to pull a 6-9GB~ file down the wire..
Assuming large scale texture reuse the size of a new city would be a lot smaller than that. Most of the audio (radio and generic audio) can be reused as well. So you are looking at primarily new geometry and mission specific audio, so maybe about 2-3 GB which can be downloaded by most people in 2-3 hours.
Not to mention the fact that a new city would have to be populated with content & as such, require a much longer time investment in terms of development.. & if you're going to spend another 2 years developing that kind of content then you're better off shipping on disc to the widest possible audience (360 & PS3)..
but a lot of the content has already started production for the DLC. Also I expect a fairly wide range of DLC: new mission packs, alternative character packs, vehicles pack, and finally city/mission pack over a 6-15 month schedule with likely a total combined end user cost of around $40-$50. The city pack may or may not be an entirely new city but will at least likely expand the borders of LC.
Also I expect a fairly wide range of DLC: new mission packs, alternative character packs, vehicles pack, and finally city/mission pack over a 6-15 month schedule with likely a total combined end user cost of around $40-$50. The city pack may or may not be an entirely new city but will at least likely expand the borders of LC.
Very uninspired if they go this route, of course i would most likely end up buying everything if i could :-)
ShadowRunner
21-Apr-2008, 15:27
If the DLC is to be similar to VC or SA then why not make exclusive standalone games instead? Surely this would be better for all involved (not Sony :wink:). It would surely make MS and rockstar a lot more money, and obviously MS having exclusive full GTA games would do a lot more for them than mysterious DLC that nobody knows about.
Same goes for the idea that the DLC would be $50mil worth of content, why not use that to fund a whole standalone GTA game for MS instead?
Eurogamer interview with GTA art director Aaron Garbut (http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=133192)
Eurogamer: Living next to the sea myself, my very first impression of GTA IV was that you had captured the character of water under sun, metal and glass - the range of colours and their interaction with dynamic surroundings. Can you tell us a little bit about that process?
Aaron Garbut: A large part of this is down to programmers with a great eye. Most of what is going on with the water is very clever and creative code. The only influence we have as artists is obviously creating the world that's being reflected and then setting the lighting up to get this looking as nice as possible.
There are some lovely things going on in the water FX. From the way it reflects the surroundings and distorts that reflection, to the real-time physics on the surface (drop a car into the water and actual waves will distort the surface, which will affect nearby boats). There's even foam wherever the water gets shallower and simulations of viscosity around the edge. It's an insane level of detail, but you can see this when the water laps up and down a wooden post or jetties. All that is done in the FX code.
On top of that, we have global control for each time of day and each weather type to alter the way it fades with depth, which can help to make it look really murky. We can tint it subtly, but mainly it's the time of days, sunlight and sky colouring that has the biggest effect. But as artists we're just tweaking what is already at its base level a bloody nice effect.
Eurogamer: Are there any other effects in the game of which you're particularly proud, or which threw up particular design challenges that you feel others have yet to overcome?
Aaron Garbut: I think the lighting system in general is pretty amazing. There are no hard limitations on the number of active dynamic lights around the player. The real-time shadows are working across every object and surface in the game with everything self-shadowing and casting onto everything else, there's ambient occlusion and emissive lighting on top of that. And then your standard next-gen shenanigans - light shafts, bloom, depth of field and motion blur, and of course it goes without saying everything's rendered with HDR.
The net result is a fully dynamic, real-time lighting system that is consistent across every surface in the game and has the subtlety and solidity of prebaked lighting. We've always had to make compromises in GTA's lighting because we had dynamic time of day. You make a trade-off with this essentially between variety and quality. There's a lot of stuff you simply can't do because the lighting needs to gradually fade between hours and weather types. With the system we have now though, there really aren't the same trade-offs. We get amazing almost prebaked quality combined with a constantly changing world. Where you can stand at the same spot and the combination of weather and moving time will mean you will probably never see it look the same twice.
If the DLC is to be similar to VC or SA then why not make exclusive standalone games instead? Surely this would be better for all involved (not Sony :wink:). It would surely make MS and rockstar a lot more money, and obviously MS having exclusive full GTA games would do a lot more for them than mysterious DLC that nobody knows about.
Same goes for the idea that the DLC would be $50mil worth of content, why not use that to fund a whole standalone GTA game for MS instead?
I could see GTA's DLC including cities or areas that aren't big enough for a full fledge game flesh out Liberty City surrounding areas.
VC and SA were considered expansions of GTA3 probably due to the fact that LC, VC and SA were all part of GTA1. If memory serves me correctly GTA2 was just some big noname city broken down into three parts.
Maybe, GTA4 will be to GTA2 what GTA3 was to GTA1 and the DLC will be additions to Liberty City. However, I would love additional cities like AC or philly. Maybe the inclusion of Bloomfield NJ area where the Sopranos takes place and where the real NJ mafia is located.
AlStrong
21-Apr-2008, 19:39
I could see GTA's DLC including cities or areas that aren't big enough for a full fledge game flesh out Liberty City surrounding areas.
I wonder if they might release a compilation of the cities later on, if that is what the DLC entails. I wouldn't expect the downloads to be small, and with entire cities, that may be problematic for the majority of users who at best, start out with 14GB to use for XBLM and ripped music.
Essentially, they would be resorting to episodic releases followed by a retail compilation rather than having longer waits in-between. For example, take the restricted areas in any of the GTA3 series and release them over time.
Rockster
21-Apr-2008, 19:53
The DLC isn't likely going to be "new cities" IMO purely because I find it hard to see how anyone could afford the HDD space nor the download time to pull a 6-9GB~ file down the wire...
There is already a lot of content on XBox Live in those size ranges (HD Movies 3-6GB, XBox Originals 5-9GB, etc.) Rumor has it the new standard SKU will be 60GB, and for us Elite owners, its no problem. And besides, you don't have to keep the content on your hard drive, once you have paid for something, you can download it over again as often as you need to.
AlphaWolf
21-Apr-2008, 21:16
Here's an interesting piece (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/i-d-struggle-to-make-a-game-for-less-than-50-million-says-jones) regarding the cost of making a game.
If there's enough interest in discussing cost a mod could spin it off in its own thread, but I posted it here as some were wondering about the possible cost of GTAIV and where the $50 million loan could have been used.
I wonder if they might release a compilation of the cities later on, if that is what the DLC entails. I wouldn't expect the downloads to be small, and with entire cities, that may be problematic for the majority of users who at best, start out with 14GB to use for XBLM and ripped music.
Essentially, they would be resorting to episodic releases followed by a retail compilation rather than having longer waits in-between. For example, take the restricted areas in any of the GTA3 series and release them over time.
I wouldn't suspect that incoporating new cities will require large amount of space. If the DLC relies on the majority of its art assets coming from GTA4 disc, one could minimize the space needed on the HDD. The majority of the game could be recycle assets with the HDD reserved for non recycled material.
Scott_Arm
22-Apr-2008, 20:20
Here's an interesting piece (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/i-d-struggle-to-make-a-game-for-less-than-50-million-says-jones) regarding the cost of making a game.
If there's enough interest in discussing cost a mod could spin it off in its own thread, but I posted it here as some were wondering about the possible cost of GTAIV and where the $50 million loan could have been used.
Crazy. I had no idea. Independent developers are screwed. Looks like it's going to end up like the film industry, with only a few major players that own 99% of the small studios.
Here's an interesting piece (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/i-d-struggle-to-make-a-game-for-less-than-50-million-says-jones) regarding the cost of making a game.
If there's enough interest in discussing cost a mod could spin it off in its own thread, but I posted it here as some were wondering about the possible cost of GTAIV and where the $50 million loan could have been used.
I think that $50 million dollars cost revolves around MMO development. He said Crackdown cost 20 millions to make but Crackdown represented the first game released by Realtime Worlds that now has 225+ employees, which is pretty large for a dev that has released only 1 game and that was just a year ago.
Mintmaster
23-Apr-2008, 00:12
What if MS basically said, "okay, we'll give you $50M for DLC, but we get all the revenue". Rockstar gets guaranteed revenue for their efforts, and MS takes all the risk. Maybe they get more than that or maybe not, but the exclusivity makes up for it in the latter case.
Maybe they get 1M users paying $30 for DLC, 1M paying $15, and the rest is more than made up for in long term software sales on the extra consoles they move.
ShadowRunner
23-Apr-2008, 04:16
What if MS basically said, "okay, we'll give you $50M for DLC, but we get all the revenue". Rockstar gets guaranteed revenue for their efforts, and MS takes all the risk. Maybe they get more than that or maybe not, but the exclusivity makes up for it in the latter case.
Maybe they get 1M users paying $30 for DLC, 1M paying $15, and the rest is more than made up for in long term software sales on the extra consoles they move.
It just seems like too much of a gamble without the great gains to go with it. They could potentialy lose millions just so that they can market the fact that the 360 has exclusive DLC, and the amount of benifit to MS of having the DLC is debateable in the first place. Do the potential gains outweigh the risks? its impossible to say, nobody knows how viable DLC is on such a scale and the effect it will have on 360 sales is no more than guesswork either. Too many variables if you ask me.
As mentioned by someone else, it seems to me like a sort of intrest free loan where MSs intrest comes in the form of exclusive content and rockstar get to use the $50mil however they see fit, as long as they meet MSs requirements for the DLC. This would be very low risk to both companys and thus the potential gains are likely to outwiegh the risk.
You don't have to think it in a complicated way, the DLC development cost doesn't equal $50m. Why Take2 decided to release an exclusive DLC is because MS paid pure incentive. So what you should speculate is what percentage of $50m is actually the incentive money that covers hypothetical profit raised by multiplatform + Microsoft's goodwill. If the percentage was not strictly arranged by MS and Take2 in the contract, Take2 would just run off with money by making a sub-par content.
GTA4 is gaining incredible momentum helped by MS and Sony..
http://www.game.co.uk/PS3/Hardware/HardwareBundle/~r334572/Sony-PlayStation-3-with-Grand-Theft-Auto-IV/
http://www.wtfuxman.com/img/bestbuygtaiv3.jpg
With people receiving their games early i think the street date will be broken.
Ads:
http://home.pacbell.net/devar79/gta1.jpg
http://home.pacbell.net/devar79/gta2.jpg
http://home.pacbell.net/devar79/gta3.jpg
http://home.pacbell.net/devar79/gta4.jpg
http://home.pacbell.net/devar79/gta5.jpg
http://home.pacbell.net/devar79/gta6.jpg
http://home.pacbell.net/devar79/gta7.jpg
http://home.pacbell.net/devar79/gta8.jpg
Giant add:
http://www.gta-series.com/it/newssite/data/upimages/gta4_billboard_la.jpg
All have the PS3 signature
Thanks to Neogaf.
And a Sam Houser interview from 1up:
http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager.offset=0&cId=3167500
It actually touches on the differences and challenges between 360 and PS3, nothing new though.
And more solid stuff on the DLC:
For me, though, the combination of what we're doing with multiplayer and what we're doing with the [downloadable XB360] episodes is the start of us putting our toes in this water and seeing how our audience...adapts to online. Is episodic content the way forward for them? These are things we're going to find out. I'm very excited about the episodes. I think they're going to work beautifully well, particularly if you played the single-player experience -- how they connect. Again, without giving too much away, we're absolutely going to head down that path. We're already kind of on it....
“Both titles have generated great interest on the Asda website, with strong pre-orders, and the PS3 version is selling three times that of 360, which is surprising and not in line with what we’d expect,” said Asda’s head of games Duncan Cross.
Comet’s games buyer Debbie O’Neill also feels the PS3 will benefit most from GTA’s release on April 29th. “We have great expectations and believe it is going to be a massive hardware driver – especially on PS3.”
However, HMV’s Tim Ellis has seen more interest for the 360 version: “Demand for both formats is high, but our 1,000 Xbox points offer generated a huge amount of interest.”
Who sells more games and consoles between ASDA and HMV?
http://www.mcvuk.com/news/30297/Son...or-GTA-IV-sales
Galduta
23-Apr-2008, 19:49
http://www.dailymotion.com/Yoxux
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x56ik3_gta-iv-3eme-video-de-gameplay_videogames
is already in the P2P - and fast , the firsts "reviews" ;)
Scott_Arm
23-Apr-2008, 19:55
http://www.dailymotion.com/Yoxux
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x56ik3_gta-iv-3eme-video-de-gameplay_videogames
is already in the P2P - and fast , the firsts "reviews" ;)
That sucks.
Scott_Arm
23-Apr-2008, 21:55
Until release, I refuse to watch any videos of GTA4 gameplay. I've come this far without seeing anything of the gameplay other than extremely short clips available in the teasers/trailers. At this point, I only want to see it when I've got the game. I know it'll be like the other GTA games, but I still feel like the game is somewhat of an unknown. It'll have been a long time since I played a game that way. So I'm going to skip all these leaked gameplay videos and give myself a surprise. Anyone else with me on this?
pjbliverpool
23-Apr-2008, 22:23
http://www.dailymotion.com/Yoxux
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x56ik3_gta-iv-3eme-video-de-gameplay_videogames
is already in the P2P - and fast , the firsts "reviews" ;)
Looks absolutely awsome in those vids. Man i'm gonna have a hard time holding out for the PC version of this. Normally it wouldn't be an issue but GTA is my all time fav game!
Thankfully I have plenty of games to keep me going for the time being.
Galduta
23-Apr-2008, 22:49
Yes , looks awersome in the videos of youtube with shacky cam . But realy , the game has the same filter of the screens - noisy or watercolor ;) , and a very agresive lod .. poping ... .
Who sells more games and consoles between ASDA and HMV?
http://www.mcvuk.com/news/30297/Son...or-GTA-IV-sales
I think Asda is the bigger of the two. I cannot even give away money off vouchers for HMV :lol:
Anyway, is it really surprising they are selling more of the 360 version considering they are also giving away 1,000 xbox points.
So despite all the adverts, all the promotions saying xbox 360 and not mentioning PS3 it all amounts to nothing in the UK :lol:
...
So despite all the adverts, all the promotions saying xbox 360 and not mentioning PS3 it all amounts to nothing in the UK :lol:
yes, great deduction sherlock :roll:
This one is clearer.
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/206894.html
AlStrong
24-Apr-2008, 03:26
heh... *anecdote* one of my friends didn't even know the game was coming to the 360. Other friends of his even told him it was PS3 exclusive. :| After I told him it was coming to the console he owned, he was a lot happier. ;)
shiznit
24-Apr-2008, 10:38
gameplay videos of the leaked version are being removed EVERYWHERE it's insane.
yes, great deduction sherlock :roll:
How many retailers do you need as proof?
The PS3 version was the first that retailers couldn't guarantee pre-orders with, now Asda and Comet confirming there is more demand for the PS3 version, and only one retailer says they are selling more 360 versions but are giving away 1,000 xbox points with it.
Not really much a deduction, more looking at the evidence and forming the correct opinion, something I believe is beyond you in this case.
gameplay videos of the leaked version are being removed EVERYWHERE it's insane.
They cant keep up anymore, to many copies was send out early from the "interweb" shops.
The old school shops are getting the short end again because they know how to keep a street date. What i dont understand is, why not release the game now, where most shops already have it in stock and avoid chaos and pirate copies.
BoardBonobo
24-Apr-2008, 13:21
The 360 PAL version is available on torrent... Already. What is the point?
The 360 PAL version is available on torrent... Already. What is the point?
The point is that if someone wants this game there should be an option to buy it instead of downloading it.
A friend of mine doesn´t have neither console and saw the iso. I wouldn´t be surprised if he picked up a 360 now.
heh... *anecdote* one of my friends didn't even know the game was coming to the 360. Other friends of his even told him it was PS3 exclusive. :| After I told him it was coming to the console he owned, he was a lot happier. ;)
Does you're friend have no eye's? Its advertised for 360 in the window of every game store, one billboards, on TV (exclusively AFAICS) and in a lot of other retailers. It would be very hard not to know the game was coming to 360. In fact it would be easier to believe its exclusive to 360..
How many retailers do you need as proof?
The PS3 version was the first that retailers couldn't guarantee pre-orders with, now Asda and Comet confirming there is more demand for the PS3 version, and only one retailer says they are selling more 360 versions but are giving away 1,000 xbox points with it.
Not really much a deduction, more looking at the evidence and forming the correct opinion, something I believe is beyond you in this case.
ASDA and Comet?..... The majority of gamers will have had the game pre-ordered at there local game store. Or why not take a look at Amazon, 360 version is number 1, PS3 version number 2. They seem to be selling pretty evenly at the moment.
No doubt GTA is seen as a Sony franchise from last gen (which is why there are so many 360 adds for the game). This perception won't last long however..
AlStrong
24-Apr-2008, 16:53
Does you're friend have no eye's? Its advertised for 360 in the window of every game store, one billboards, on TV (exclusively AFAICS) and in a lot of other retailers. It would be very hard not to know the game was coming to 360. In fact it would be easier to believe its exclusive to 360..
Before insulting my friend, you do have to consider that not every city gets that sort of in-your-face advertisement. There are no billboard ads here for the game. The only place he might conceivably find an advertisement for the game would be at Best Buy or Futureshop, which he doesn't go to often. He also doesn't watch much television.
Nevermind that he doesn't keep up with the latest in gaming. It was the fact that his friends thought the game was PS3 exclusive that was incredulous.
Shifty Geezer
24-Apr-2008, 17:05
Indeed. I've seen no adverts for GTAIV outside of gaming websites. This is because the adverts are being placed in media I have no interest in. The fact I go to gaming websites means I'd be clued up on availability. Lose that interest and I'd be clueless. I know other folk who also aren't at the receiving ends of some advertising barrages, because those particular PR volleys are either fired over their heads or in completely the wrong direction, for that audience.
How many retailers do you need as proof?
The PS3 version was the first that retailers couldn't guarantee pre-orders with, now Asda and Comet confirming there is more demand for the PS3 version, and only one retailer says they are selling more 360 versions but are giving away 1,000 xbox points with it.
Not really much a deduction, more looking at the evidence and forming the correct opinion, something I believe is beyond you in this case.
GAME, stopped 360 preorders a fair while ago, both standard and SE versions. Further the bundle deal they were offereing were snapped up within days. You can still order the SE on the PS3 and off course the bundles are available. Really the main highstreet players and Amazon the 360 is outselling the PS3 version.
archangelmorph
24-Apr-2008, 19:33
Indeed. I've seen no adverts for GTAIV outside of gaming websites. This is because the adverts are being placed in media I have no interest in. The fact I go to gaming websites means I'd be clued up on availability. Lose that interest and I'd be clueless. I know other folk who also aren't at the receiving ends of some advertising barrages, because those particular PR volleys are either fired over their heads or in completely the wrong direction, for that audience.
The london underground is plastered with GTAIV ads..
Fu3lFr3nzy
24-Apr-2008, 19:56
Im practically a walking ad where I work at. I constantly remind people that GTAIV is coming out this tuesday and funny how many of them dont know prior!
I remember one of them asking if its available for PS2. Must...keep...straight...f...:lol:
AlStrong
24-Apr-2008, 20:09
I remember one of them asking if its available for PS2. Must...keep...straight...f...:lol:
Did the person ask why not when you said no? :p
Shifty Geezer
24-Apr-2008, 20:14
The london underground is plastered with GTAIV ads..Which I'm sure are seen by lots of City commuters and tourists. If the majority of the British population passed through the underground during the advertising period, including myself and AlStrong's friend, then it'd be fair to say some of us are just plain unobservant... ;)
Fu3lFr3nzy
24-Apr-2008, 20:21
Did the person ask why not when you said no? :p
Yes. I told him *in laymans terms to avoid confusion*
Me: The makers wanted better graphics so they decided to make it for new consoles only.
Him: Oh... I see.
Sorry, I just had to :lol:
Scott_Arm
24-Apr-2008, 21:20
I honestly didn't know you couldn't pirate gomes on the 360 until a week a go. Consider me naive. Kind of sucks. Piracy might actually help Microsoft move consoles, but it's probably a good incentive for developers to focus on the PS3. I've got a 360, so hopefully developers don't get too pissed. I'm assuming this piracy existed even when Halo3 and COD4 came out, so I'm hoping that's a sign it won't make too much of an impact on big titles.
RancidLunchmeat
24-Apr-2008, 21:51
I never really thought about it, although I always work under the assumption that everything can be pirated it just depends on how much effort you want to put into it.
So what I've learned recently is just how easy it was to pirate games for the 360.
However, their simply remarkable attach rate would seem to indicate that pirating games isn't hurting them one tiny bit.
I do think it's absurd that there are people who will have completed GTAIV before its actually available because they were willing to steal the game. Once games are leaked to this extent, they should release the B&M stores from their previous obligations to withhold sales.
deepbrown
24-Apr-2008, 21:57
I honestly didn't know you couldn't pirate gomes on the 360 until a week a go. Consider me naive. Kind of sucks. Piracy might actually help Microsoft move consoles, but it's probably a good incentive for developers to focus on the PS3. I've got a 360, so hopefully developers don't get too pissed. I'm assuming this piracy existed even when Halo3 and COD4 came out, so I'm hoping that's a sign it won't make too much of an impact on big titles.
You mean could pirate games on 360?
I honestly didn't know you couldn't pirate gomes on the 360 until a week a go. Consider me naive. Kind of sucks. Piracy might actually help Microsoft move consoles, but it's probably a good incentive for developers to focus on the PS3. I've got a 360, so hopefully developers don't get too pissed. I'm assuming this piracy existed even when Halo3 and COD4 came out, so I'm hoping that's a sign it won't make too much of an impact on big titles.
With constant online and multiplayer as an important seller pirate copies have devaluated strongly...
Galduta
24-Apr-2008, 22:20
http://www.gamesajare.com/2.0/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/carta1.jpg
AlStrong
24-Apr-2008, 22:27
lol Awesome
woundingchaney
24-Apr-2008, 22:32
It is ashame no retailer around me has broken street date.
Scott_Arm
24-Apr-2008, 22:33
You mean could pirate games on 360?
I meant couldn't not .... ;)
Scott_Arm
24-Apr-2008, 22:34
Hey, maybe I'll hit the mall after work and see if they're selling copies. Then I'll be able to mug someone on their way out of the store.
infinity4
24-Apr-2008, 22:50
I hope my delivery gets delayed so I can concentrate on Saints Row. ;)
joker454
24-Apr-2008, 22:55
Cool, so the game is being sold early. Now someone needs to hurry up and do a good 360/PS3 comparison, I want to know which version to get :)
PenguinJim
24-Apr-2008, 23:01
Sorry, guys, that letter is a fake (http://kotaku.com/383724/that-release-gta-iv-early-letter-its-not-real). Rockstar confirmed it. :)
Galduta
24-Apr-2008, 23:11
jeje , very good strategy of the fans :mrgreen:
AlStrong
24-Apr-2008, 23:24
Cool, so the game is being sold early. Now someone needs to hurry up and do a good 360/PS3 comparison, I want to know which version to get :)
Keep a look out for a special Eurogamer article. Hopefully, it comes in a timely manner. :)
digitalwanderer
24-Apr-2008, 23:25
Sorry, guys, that letter is a fake (http://kotaku.com/383724/that-release-gta-iv-early-letter-its-not-real). Rockstar confirmed it. :)
Thank you Mr. Crazyman for dashing my dreams today. :yep2:
:razz:
Cool, so the game is being sold early. Now someone needs to hurry up and do a good 360/PS3 comparison, I want to know which version to get :)
Loading time, popup and framerate i am betting PS3.
DLC, 360
Wild guess.. i know
Shifty Geezer
24-Apr-2008, 23:48
Eurogamer are doing a head-to-head, and every time they do one of these, XB360 trumps PS3. So to keep to standards, PS3 will be mostly the same but with inferior draw distance, less people, and far worse frame-rate :p
Jesus2006
24-Apr-2008, 23:50
Eurogamer are doing a head-to-head, and every time they do one of these, XB360 trumps PS3. So to keep to standards, PS3 will be mostly the same but with inferior draw distance, less people, and far worse frame-rate :p
PlanetGTA spreads more rumors of PS3 version being superior:
http://planetgrandtheftauto.gamespy.com/
Interesting indeed, I myself - who is a big fan of the Xbox 360 - will be getting the PlayStation 3 version, as I've read and heard personally from people who have played the game already that this version is undoubtedly superior to the Xbox 360. Granted, not as much that I would recommend going out to buy a PS3 console if you have a 360 already. Too bad that episodic content is Xbox exclusive, is Take-Two/Rockstar regretting that decision now?
;)
Eurogamer are doing a head-to-head, and every time they do one of these, XB360 trumps PS3. So to keep to standards, PS3 will be mostly the same but with inferior draw distance, less people, and far worse frame-rate :p
Haha so true... nothing wrong with being optimistic :-)
Scott_Arm
25-Apr-2008, 00:19
PlanetGTA spreads more rumors of PS3 version being superior:
http://planetgrandtheftauto.gamespy.com/
And not spreading rumours one way or the other:
http://forumplanet.gamespy.com/news_feature_comments/b49785/19790124/p1/
I expect both versions to be nearly identical. If the PS3 version were better, I'd expect texture resolution or sound fidelity more than framerate or draw distance, only because Rockstar complained of the DVD size limitation and may have cut corners on the 360.
And to be clear, I've never played either and that is 100% a guess.
SugarCoat
25-Apr-2008, 01:11
http://www.gamesajare.com/2.0/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/carta1.jpg
spell checking is your friend.
deepbrown
25-Apr-2008, 11:37
I meant couldn't not .... ;)
Lol.
deepbrown
25-Apr-2008, 11:39
Sorry, guys, that letter is a fake (http://kotaku.com/383724/that-release-gta-iv-early-letter-its-not-real). Rockstar confirmed it. :)
Aye...if you saved the file and looked at properties...you'd see the program that created it was Photoshop :grin:
deepbrown
25-Apr-2008, 11:41
How many retailers do you need as proof?
The PS3 version was the first that retailers couldn't guarantee pre-orders with, now Asda and Comet confirming there is more demand for the PS3 version, and only one retailer says they are selling more 360 versions but are giving away 1,000 xbox points with it.
Not really much a deduction, more looking at the evidence and forming the correct opinion, something I believe is beyond you in this case.
In woolworths they have a whole wall containing GTA4 and GT5p...GTA4 isn't even on the small Xbox 360 stand...they're featuring Army of Two on there. I remember when they had a big 360 stand and like one line of PS3 games.
djskribbles
25-Apr-2008, 17:15
PS3 GTAIV bundle in Europe (http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10757762&postcount=1)
Grand Theft Auto® IV to be bundled with 40GB PLAYSTATION®3
April 23rd 2008: Sony Computer Entertainment Europe (SCEE) today confirmed the release of an official Grand Theft Auto IV bundle exclusively for PLAYSTATION®3 (PS3™).The bundle, available on April 29, 2008, will consist of a PLAYSTATION®3 40GB model, a SIXAXIS™ wireless controller and a copy of Grand Theft Auto IV, the latest title in the genre-defining Grand Theft Auto franchise, all for just €439 (RRP).
“We are delighted to offer the millions of PS3 and GTA fans the ultimate gaming package,” said David Reeves, President, Sony Computer Entertainment Europe.
Grand Theft Auto IV (GTA IV) is the eleventh, upcoming installment of the best-selling Grand Theft Auto video game franchise.
sorry if this is old news.
Sony has some nice bundles... GT5P, GTA4 and MGS4.
Galduta
25-Apr-2008, 19:52
This guy was playing and sharing the video of the GTA of his gameplay in live .. Famous in all world. Then this happens ...
http://www.justin.tv/portuguese1
http://cache.kotaku.com/assets/resources/2008/04/ClickOut.jpeg
desmond
25-Apr-2008, 21:35
is that a fake?
is that a fake?
Yes. http://forums.maxconsole.net/showthread.php?t=82016
Edit: The GTAIV stream RRoD thing is fake.
RobertR1
25-Apr-2008, 21:44
Sad what lenghts people will goto for their 15seconds of e-fame.
Sad what lenghts people will goto for their 15seconds of e-fame.
Aparently this started as a "what if" and a guy made some fun stuff for a .nl forum.
Then the internet took over and made him famous and a "loser". He didn´t try to actually fake this for any purpose. It´s all in the minds of those that read the letters.
Of course it could all be wrong and an actually Rockstar letter, this is the web.. nothing is true.
And not spreading rumours one way or the other:
http://forumplanet.gamespy.com/news_feature_comments/b49785/19790124/p1/
I expect both versions to be nearly identical. If the PS3 version were better, I'd expect texture resolution or sound fidelity more than framerate or draw distance, only because Rockstar complained of the DVD size limitation and may have cut corners on the 360.
And to be clear, I've never played either and that is 100% a guess.
Why would you expect higher texture resolution? Whats ever packed on bluray still has to fit within the RAM of the PS3 and the 360 has a smidgen more of RAM to play with.
Why would you expect higher texture resolution? Whats ever packed on bluray still has to fit within the RAM of the PS3 and the 360 has a smidgen more of RAM to play with.
In this case it could be a question of getting the texture to fit on 7GB vs 25GB that made a difference.
Scott_Arm
25-Apr-2008, 23:22
In this case it could be a question of getting the texture to fit on 7GB vs 25GB that made a difference.
That's what I was thinking. It's not so much that the 360 couldn't handle the textures as well, it's fitting them on the disc. Space will be a factor with the huge amount of audio in t he game. From all the spoken dialogue, random sounds, pedestrian dialogue and music for the car stereo, space on a 7GB disc could be very limited. Rockstar already complained. The most obvious things to me to save space are texture/audio compression.
I've got a 360, so I hope that's not the case, and it's really just a guess at what differences MIGHT be IF there are any differences at all. But it looks like future titles from Rockstar will probably be multi-disc on the 360
Ben-Nice
26-Apr-2008, 00:59
IGN Liked it :wink:
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/869/869381p1.html
10 Presentation
The story is Oscar quality. The use of the phone as a gaming portal is genius. There's really nothing more that could be asked for from GTA IV.
10 Graphics
The level of detail is astounding. Liberty City feels alive and lived in. While there are some technical issues, the artistic merits push the score to the max. A true marvel.
10 Sound
The dialogue makes the story. Without the excellent writing and the stellar voice acting, the story would fail. And the soundtrack kills -- more than 200 songs and almost all are great choices.
10 Gameplay
The cover and targeting system work great. Blind firing with an RPG is a thing of beauty. Everything works in harmony and not a single one of the missions is bad. The most fun I've had in years.
10 Lasting Appeal
The story will take anywhere from 25-45 hours to complete, depending on your skill level and attention span. There's plenty more to do once you finish the story, such as excellent multiplayer.
10 Masterful OVERALL
Higher quality, UK edition, extended (1min): http://www.gamersyde.com/stream_6869_en.html
Not to complain about the ad, but I couldn't help but want to hear Bittersweet Symphony in my head when I saw it. :p It could have been in the style of the Gears of War commercial.
I just wanted to say this ad is brilliant (and the GTA4 advertising I've seen so far seems to be flawlessly executed, starting with the original teaser and its music). No way they could've gone with Bittersweet Symphony! It's springtime, the song has to be upbeat, and it even has an 80s vibe that reminds me of Vice City (not a bad trigger). And I'm not sure they could've shown off the improvement in the visuals and animation, highlight the locations, and summarize GTA's main themes any better in less time.
Funny to see the price shed 40 pounds b/w the short and long versions of the commercial.
trinibwoy
26-Apr-2008, 01:15
IGN Liked it :wink:
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/869/869381p1.html
Wow, no kidding.
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/869/869381p5.html
Past GTA titles have had mild-to-serious framerate issues and technical glitches, because the games were trying to do far more than the PlayStation 2 could handle. While GTA IV is pushing the PS3 and 360 to the limit, it also runs amazingly well. Sure, there are framerate hitches here and there and (particularly on 360) there is some texture pop-in, but it actually runs better than I expected. That a game with great AI, an awesome physics engine and a detailed open world runs so well and with such short load times is a technical marvel. For that, I can forgive framerate issues and some noticeable aliasing.
For those wanting to know which version looks better, the edge goes to the PS3. The textures and framerate are comparable, but the PS3 has far less pop-in. The 360 has richer colors, but the PS3 has better anti-aliasing making it look a little cleaner. Because GTA IV can preload onto the PS3 hard drive, the in-game loads are faster.
Look like the PS3 version is the version to get!! :mrgreen: :twisted:
pjbliverpool
26-Apr-2008, 01:28
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/869/869381p5.html
Look like the PS3 version is the version to get!! :mrgreen: :twisted:
Why is it that installation to a HDD was always a bad thing until a console could do it? :wink:
Why is it that installation to a HDD was always a bad thing until a console could do it? :wink:
Strange isn't it? :wink4: Especially considering how many installs you can make while you wait for the single console game install to finish.. hehe!
almighty
26-Apr-2008, 01:36
Why is it that installation to a HDD was always a bad thing until a console could do it? :wink:
There is abit of a difference between a console HDD install and a PC one :wink:
deepbrown
26-Apr-2008, 01:40
IGN Liked it :wink:
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/869/869381p1.html
First 10 from IGN...for about 10 years. No joke.
There is abit of a difference between a console HDD install and a PC one :wink:
Yes the PC one is 3-5 times faster to install... ohh /but offtopic! :wink:
First 10 from IGN...for about 10 years. No joke.
Huh 10 across all categories? :shock:
Must be really good then if they are to be believed (lol)!
I am counting on you guys to give me your impressions :-P
Galduta
26-Apr-2008, 01:58
http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/4812/img0024fw7.jpg (http://imageshack.us/)
http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/5869/img0025xa7.jpg (http://imageshack.us/)
Some opinions about the two versions in a forum
- more poping in the PS3 :mrgreen:
- framerate and jaggies , horrible in the two consoles :mrgreen:
And the game looks very well in the video in HD of IGN, but the mayority of the scenes are dark , and maybe the video has a sharpen filter . But looks better than in the screens
IGN video review (http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/objects/827005/grand-theft-auto-4/videos/gta4_review_042508.html)
Heinrich4
26-Apr-2008, 02:29
Why IGN dont retrieve or retired 0.50 in version x360 in graphics (pop up,frame rate problens,less AA etc) as the same way they do it with version ps3 in many multiplatform games?
(if does it happen with ps3 :its 9.50 certainly)
djskribbles
26-Apr-2008, 02:53
its usually Hilary (IGN Xbox team) that does it, too, when he reviews multiplatform games. theres probably a little bias there because of this.
Rangers
26-Apr-2008, 02:58
its usually Hilary (IGN Xbox team) that does it, too, when he reviews multiplatform games. theres probably a little bias there because of this.
Yes, towards PS3.
Hilary doesn't like 360, he has gone off on IGN 360 podcast with long rants about why PS3 is superior (http://n4g.com/gaming/News-108049.aspx).
Oh gosh, if both versions are within 95% visually of each other as it sounds like, it comes down to other things such as control (subjective), sound, content, MP, etc.
Inquisitive_Idiot
26-Apr-2008, 03:45
This seems to be a game in which hard-drive streaming would make a difference, so I guess thats why the PS3 has less pop-in and stuttering according to IGN. I have watched well over 30 minutes of the streams that have been up over the past couple of days, and I have to say the pop-in, and stuttering really seem to be minimal on the 360 version so for the Playstation 3 version to have less is really an great achievement.
woundingchaney
26-Apr-2008, 03:48
Give it a day or so and we will see numerous comparisons between the two. I am at a standstill almost as I would greatly appreciate the opportunity for DLC and Live, although less pop-in and 7.1 support matter as well.
Rangers
26-Apr-2008, 04:00
The thing is 80-90% of 360 owners probably have the hard drive, I wonder why not allow an optional, but not mandatory, install on 360?
Seems MS has a strict no install policy I guess. Which might be a good thing in general.
Inquisitive_Idiot
26-Apr-2008, 04:17
The thing is 80-90% of 360 owners probably have the hard drive, I wonder why not allow an optional, but not mandatory, install on 360?
Seems MS has a strict no install policy I guess. Which might be a good thing in general.
Yeah, but the option to install does not hurt anyone, so I really do not understand why they would not allow it.
AlStrong
26-Apr-2008, 04:27
So is it confirmed at all that the 360 version doesn't cache onto the hard drive when it's present? :|
Inquisitive_Idiot
26-Apr-2008, 04:34
So is it confirmed at all that the 360 version doesn't cache onto the hard drive when it's present? :|
I am not sure, but I have heard the PS3 version has a mandatory install of around ~3GB. I would not be surprised if the 360 version does use hard drive caching, but I do not think it requires you to permanently place 3GB of data on your hard drive.
Have cache. Some people have done tests without the hard drive, and has cache. Without disk is the experience is bad;).
A person who has two versions - the colector versions ;) -, did not mention differences in streaming. In fact, is clear for this person that the PS3 has more poping
hmm...
That is completely the opposite of what IGN has said, so I guess we will have to wait for people to directly compare them. Anyway, this game sounds pretty awesome regardless of the platform you own.
Galduta
26-Apr-2008, 04:34
Have cache. Some people have done tests without the hard drive, and has cache. Without hard drive the experience is bad;).
A person who has two versions - the colector versions ;) -, did not mention differences in streaming. In fact, is clear for this person that the PS3 has more poping
joker454
26-Apr-2008, 05:00
more poping in the PS3
PS3 has far less pop-in
Ok, now I'm totally confused :(
Have cache. Some people have done tests without the hard drive, and has cache. Without hard drive the experience is bad;).
A person who has two versions - the colector versions ;) -, did not mention differences in streaming. In fact, is clear for this person that the PS3 has more poping
Come one... I have read several reviews all pointing to PS3 looking better and even the president of Rockstar confirmed the PS3 looked better in an interview. I am not gonna believe what some guy in a forum said who is most likely unreliable considering it goes against what everyone else is saying.
AlphaWolf
26-Apr-2008, 05:20
Come one... I have read several reviews all pointing to PS3 looking better and even the president of Rockstar confirmed the PS3 looked better in an interview. I am not gonna believe what some guy in a forum said who is most likely unreliable considering it goes against what everyone else is saying.
That's not what Sam Houser said.
Both have plusses and minuses. As far as I'm concerned, they're neck and neck now.
That's what Sam Houser said.
I'm leaning towards going with the PS3 version. But does anybody know if you customize the layout of the controls? I would really like to remap lock-on and shoot/attack to L1 and R1.
Galduta
26-Apr-2008, 05:39
I have more confidence in a person with that profile, than in 20 reviewers that does not show to me a good collection of screens in a comparative.
the president of Rockstar
Sam Houser ?
http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager.offset=3&cId=3167500
There's a slight difference in the way they look. I think that's to do with really low-level technical stuff that I'm not the guy to explain. The 360 games have a certain look to them; PS3 games have a certain look to them. I like the way [the PS3] renders. There's a certain kind of softness without being blurry -- some warmth to it -- and then there's a certain more clinical element to how the 360 looks. Both have plusses and minuses. As far as I'm concerned, they're neck and neck now. That's very much our goal; we do not want to get in the middle of that rather heated, fervent debate.... These guys who wanna defend their systems, you know what? Good on 'em, and let them do it. We just didn't want to give them something that would in any way fuel it....
Well, my english is very bad
I am not sure, but I have heard the PS3 version has a mandatory install of around ~3GB. I would not be surprised if the 360 version does use hard drive caching, but I do not think it requires you to permanently place 3GB of data on your hard drive.
It's 3340Kb (i.e., only 3 Mb).
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a26/liamabob/DSC03013.jpg
joker454
26-Apr-2008, 09:23
It's 3340Kb (i..e, only 3 Mb).
I wonder if thats a typo. 3MB wouldn't make any difference on load times, plus it would seem odd that 5 minute install would only copy that much data.
Dot50Cal
26-Apr-2008, 09:24
I have a friend who is a reviewer. He says that even after he loaded the disc onto his XDK's sidecar (the HDD) pop-in still happens quite a bit. Disappointing to hear that :\ Makes me wonder if the PS3 version will still have it as bad even with the install.
I wonder if thats a typo. 3MB wouldn't make any difference on load times, plus it would seem odd that 5 minute install would only copy that much data.
The pop-ins might be for small objects ? Or could be due to other reasons (Stream directly from anywhere on Blu-ray instead of outer rings of DVD9 ?)
Dot50Cal
26-Apr-2008, 09:35
The pop-ins might be for small objects ?
Its large buildings. The entire facade of them. Textures pop in as well as higher detail geometry.
I wonder if thats a typo. 3MB wouldn't make any difference on load times, plus it would seem odd that 5 minute install would only copy that much data.
That's probably the minimum requirement when HD has less space, not the installer does by default when there is enough.
Seems MS has a strict no install policy I guess. Which might be a good thing in general.
why?
It's 3340Kb (i.e., only 3 Mb).
After the install that would be the minimum required for save games.. that is my guess.
GTA4, the most important game this generation (in more than one aspect), multiplatform and aparently extremely high quality in every aspect. And from the outlook it seems that this game plays to all the PS3 strenghts. Mandatory Harddisk, Blu-Ray with lots of space and free online gaming.
This could be very good news for Sony.
Wow. all 10's from IGN! I was waffling on purchasing GTA4 on launch day, but now, and especially after watching the video review, this game looks fantastic.
Jesus2006
26-Apr-2008, 12:49
That's what IGN UK says about those two versions:
For those wanting to know which version looks better, the edge goes to the PS3. The textures and framerate are comparable, but the PS3 has far less pop-in.
While GTA IV is pushing the PS3 and 360 to the limit, it also runs amazingly well. Sure, there are framerate hitches here and there and (particularly on 360) there is some texture pop-in, but it actually runs better than I expected.
The 360 has richer colors, but the PS3 has better anti-aliasing making it look a little cleaner. Because GTA IV can preload onto the PS3 hard drive, the in-game loads are faster. Don't worry Xbox owners, the load times are rarely more than 30 seconds and don't occur very often. The slight visual edge goes to PS3, but the 360 is no slouch.
http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/869/869381p5.html
Rangers
26-Apr-2008, 13:18
That's what IGN UK says about those two versions:
http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/869/869381p5.html
That is the same thing the regular IGN (American?) review says.
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/869/869381p5.html
BTW, does it bother anybody the IGN review seems to be the only one out? I'm just wondering if they were allowed to debut their review early because it was so positive. Similar to ubisoft waiving NDA for 9+ reviews.
deepbrown
26-Apr-2008, 13:29
That is the same thing the regular IGN (American?) review says.
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/869/869381p5.html
BTW, does it bother anybody the IGN review seems to be the only one out? I'm just wondering if they were allowed to debut their review early because it was so positive. Similar to ubisoft waiving NDA for 9+ reviews.
Nah. IGN paid for exclusive rights. You can see why - they get massive traffic for being the first. They get exclusive rights for a lot of previews/reviews.
I'm very impressed that all the voices (must be hours of dialogue), seperate TV channels, internet sites, videos etc. fit into 7GB. Very impressive. What's more impressive, is that reviewers haven't mentioned any obvious repetition of dialogue (something which killed Assassin's Creed for me).
Can't believe people might be upset over some pop-in - a game without pop-in (and huge draw distance) is very rare these days...and to have an open world game without pop-in would be nigh on impossible until ps4/720. As long as it has a nice fade effect I'm a happy chappy.
Nah. IGN paid for exclusive rights.
No, seriously media does not pay to get the coverage.
Dot50Cal
26-Apr-2008, 15:54
One might consider a 10/10 payment... :)
No, seriously media does not pay to get the coverage.
Whatever the case, the official embargo lifts Sunday. So IGN did something to be allowed the first review, right? I mean it could also be just a favor to the most important online reviewers, but who knows?
Dot50Cal
26-Apr-2008, 16:41
Usually the publisher will shop the exclusive around, trying to see what the outlets are giving it and make their decision based on whichever one gives it the highest review. Some outlets stick to their guns and either dont reveal the score at all, or give a range of what the score is.
My guess is IGN just flat out said it was getting a 10, and that made up Take 2's mind. Undoubtedly if they were to give it a lower score that would decrease their chance for getting the exclusive review, so you really have to take such exclusive reviews with a grain of salt. Especially when the game gets a 10 in the graphics department.
I'm very impressed that all the voices (must be hours of dialogue), seperate TV channels, internet sites, videos etc. fit into 7GB. Very impressive. What's more impressive, is that reviewers haven't mentioned any obvious repetition of dialogue (something which killed Assassin's Creed for me).
Can't believe people might be upset over some pop-in - a game without pop-in (and huge draw distance) is very rare these days...and to have an open world game without pop-in would be nigh on impossible until ps4/720. As long as it has a nice fade effect I'm a happy chappy.
Just wait, there will be comparisons on the sound as well, did they 360 have to do with 64kbit AAC while the PS3 got 128kbit :-)
Mintmaster
27-Apr-2008, 01:28
Ok, now I'm totally confused :(Makes sense to me. There really is no reason for either the PS3 or 360 to be faster. Heck, even the HDD shouldn't make a big difference in this game if the HDD-less code is written well.
A hard-drive has no reason to reduce pop-in unless you are streaming bandwidth bound, e.g. travelling at 300 mph through a dense city. This myth keeps getting repeated again and again. Reduced loading times makes sense, as the initial dataset is large and must be accessed ASAP, but not pop-in unless the data is poorly organized on the disc.
Even with caching there is little basis for a harddrive to make a big difference. You can't get data in time for the current frame even with a harddrive, so you need to predict a few frames ahead. Making that prediction 50 frames ahead to accomodate an optical drive is really no harder.
AlStrong
27-Apr-2008, 01:41
*sigh*.... and now try to explain that even "more in-depth" to the rest of the internets. :(
Even with caching there is little basis for a harddrive to make a big difference. You can't get data in time for the current frame even with a harddrive, so you need to predict a few frames ahead. Making that prediction 50 frames ahead to accomodate an optical drive is really no harder.Maybe they allocated idle SPEs for decompression of read-ahead data?
Even with caching there is little basis for a harddrive to make a big difference. You can't get data in time for the current frame even with a harddrive, so you need to predict a few frames ahead. Making that prediction 50 frames ahead to accomodate an optical drive is really no harder.
What happens if the "look ahead" is not far enough when the action gets heavy ? What kind of issues would the viewer see ?
A hard-drive has no reason to reduce pop-in unless you are streaming bandwidth bound, e.g. travelling at 300 mph through a dense city. This myth keeps getting repeated again and again. Reduced loading times makes sense, as the initial dataset is large and must be accessed ASAP, but not pop-in unless the data is poorly organized on the disc.
I don't think you need to be traveling at 300mph, you just need to do something different to what the game engine expect you to do to cause pop in.
I agree with you I think poorly organized data is probably the main culprit of pop in. Fragmented hard drive or not having enough space on the DVD to organize your data optimally is probably the main cause of pop in. Still fragmented hard drive can be defrag, if you run out of space on DVD to organized your data the solutions are less desirable.
Well maybe they could have more RAM in the next generation to attack these kinds of situations with brute force.
Yeah right.
I'm still waiting for some members comparision, I remember site pretending the ps3 rendition of DMC4 being better than the 360 one...
We know that the 360 version is 720P AAx2, I'm not sure that the ps3 can do better.
For pop up it sound strange to me too due to memory architecture of the 360.
For me something doesn't add up.
Betanumerical
27-Apr-2008, 11:14
I'm still waiting for some members comparision, I remember site pretending the ps3 rendition of DMC4 being better than the 360 one...
We know that the 360 version is 720P AAx2, I'm not sure that the ps3 can do better.
For pop up it sound strange to me too due to memory architecture of the 360.
For me something doesn't add up.
http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q111/scape13/29zbk3d922.gif
Thats, apparently a gif of the 360's pop up. I say apparently, because I didn't make it.
http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q111/scape13/29zbk3d922.gif
Thats, apparently a gif of the 360's pop up. I say apparently, because I didn't make it.
YOP, hugly... really hugly.
I posted more about that on the "multi platform devs etc." thread.
As I am not sure this is the good place to discuss the issue ;) (my bad between)
EDIT I've seen your response (but don't want to post something that could be a PM), you're right but may be it could be a good idea to chose one of these threads for coherency, may be mods should give their opinion on that matter, no?
Betanumerical
27-Apr-2008, 11:19
YOP, hugly... really hugly.
I posted more about that on the "multi platform devs etc." thread.
As I am not sure this is the good place to discuss the issue ;) (my bad between)
Well it is kinda related to both threads.
Thats, apparently a gif of the 360's pop up. I say apparently, because I didn't make it.
After watching a few of those GTAIV Xbox 360 streams for a while, I doubt that's a common occurrence in either version. Pop up seems fairly minimal .
quest55720
27-Apr-2008, 12:10
After watching a few of those GTAIV Xbox 360 streams for a while, I doubt that's a common occurrence in either version. Pop up seems fairly minimal .
Yep very little pop up from what I have seen except that gif. If I were to guess someone took out the hard drive to make that gif or a very poorly burned copy.
I can't wait to play it the game looks incredible. I just hope they improved the gun play. That has always been what drives me nuts about the console GTA games horrible gun play.
If I were to guess someone took out the hard drive to make that gif or a very poorly burned copy.
I would assume as much, too.
http://vimeo.com/941075
Here is a 4 minute 720p gameplay video from the 360 version and pop-up is certainly acceptable, I would compare it to Crackdown or Assassin's Creed which were just fine in that regard.
Anyway we have to wait for the ps3 rendition to do proper comparisons.
I don't question Betanumerical honesty at all, but it's clear that some reviewers and obviously people on Internet have pretty busy agenda... (once again DMC4 was outstanding in this regard...).
Anyway might be true even if there is no obvious technical reason for this (I understand Joker astonishment)
http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q111/scape13/29zbk3d922.gif
Thats, apparently a gif of the 360's pop up. I say apparently, because I didn't make it.
I have the game, that kind of pop in doesn't happen..
Saw a Circuit City ad on TV.
They will give you a $10 gift card if you purchase the game at their stores.
It's a little something.
I have the game, that kind of pop in doesn't happen..
How is the audio quality, does the music and voices sound heavily compressed?
The Eurogamer review is now up, but the site is getting absolutely hammered! I managed to get to the front page after a while, but now the challenge is pulling up the actual article, which I haven't managed yet! Ah, now I'm getting something!
10/10! Yep, Eurogamer concurs with everyone else it seems.
Rockster
27-Apr-2008, 17:26
The Eurogamer review complains about the ps3 install time and sites frame-rate issues but isn't specific as to which version. Teamxbox also gave a 10/10. Gametrailers review is up 9.8/10. A+ from 1UP.
How is the audio quality, does the music and voices sound heavily compressed?
No not as far as I can tell, but I'm no audiophile. I mean I like my music but I'm usually just about happy enough with 128k MP3 :)
The Eurogamer review complains about the ps3 install time and sites frame-rate issues but isn't specific as to which version. Teamxbox also gave a 10/10. Gametrailers review is up 9.8/10. A+ from 1UP.
In the comments it seems to be suggested that the 360 version indeed lacks a HDD install option and suffers pop-in, whereas the PS3 has a 7 minute install time and has slightly more frame-rate issues. EDIT: here's kotaku's take: http://kotaku.com/384422/which-version-of-gta-iv-should-you-buy-we-compare-the-ps3-and-360-versions
I'm very much interested in seeing a good compare though - in the IGN HD video that contained both 360 and PS3 footage the bit of clearly identifiable PS3 footage looked great (2:20, walking into the bowling alley). Also, I got the impression some bits (in the 360 but maybe in both) looked upscaled, even though they probably aren't. It'll be interesting to see the final analysis (and game itself of course).
woundingchaney
27-Apr-2008, 18:23
http://kotaku.com/384422/which-version-of-gta-iv-should-you-buy-we-compare-the-ps3-and-360-versions (sorry is already posted, ok it is already posted)
Seems both versions have issues.
Still at a standstill here.
Wow
Swedish Gamereactor just published their review (gamereactor.se). They were very suprised that 360 version is lacking so much technically. According to them PS3 version has better colours, framerate, less pop-in, loadtimes and texture resolution.
Yeah so they say.
http://www.gamereactor.se/recensioner/13716/Grand+Theft+Auto+IV/
"Playstation 3-upplagan av Grand Theft Auto IV är snyggare beträffande färgdjup och kontrast, laddningstiderna är betydligt kortare och texturerna ser aningen mer högupplösta ut. Det är också lite skarpare och innehåller jämnare skärmuppdatering än Xbox 360-spelet."
"Playstation 3 version of GTA 4 looks better regarding color depth and contrast. loading times are noticably shorter and the textures looks slightly more high-res. Overall it also looks a little bit sharper and it has a smoother framerate than the xbox 360 version."
It's crazy to see how people can be biased... evan pretended journalists.
We will have to wait to know the truth as we 're everything and its opposite.
Yeah so they say.
... (http://www.gamereactor.se/recensioner/13716/Grand+Theft+Auto+IV/)color depth and contrast
purely subjective based on the set up and evidently there are a ton of image adjustments available in game
I'm sure the head to heads by a million users will prove very little playable difference
It's crazy to see how people can be biased... evan pretended journalists.
We will have to wait to know the truth as we 're everything and its opposite.
Yeah we will have to wait for a true and correct visual comparision made of both versions. Atleast we will se which reviewers/sites are trust worthy in the future! :wink:
purely subjective based on the set up and evidently there are a ton of image adjustments available in game
I'm sure the head to heads by a million users will prove very little playable difference
I agree, thats something that can be configured.
purely subjective based on the set up and evidently there are a ton of image adjustments available in game
I'm sure the head to heads by a million users will prove very little playable difference
It looks like DMC4 again and again it took time to really know which version was better, and by the way the truth came too late (not that I care that much but for the sake of discussion) a lot of people are still stating that the ps3 version is better or equivalent.
At some point it was my opinion (from read only and low quality video don't help)till I decided to download the HQ videao Dot50cal provided!! And anybody with good eyes not seeing the difference... goes straight to my ignore list (ie you will never manage to have a not too biaised discusion with them...).
Scott_Arm
27-Apr-2008, 19:29
These comparisons are suggesting to me that the two versions are 99% identical. Kotaku says better framerate on 360 and Gamereactor says better framerate on the PS3. I've read better colour and contrast on 360, and gamereactor says better colour and contrast on PS3. I've heard people say the PS3 looks muddy or blurred, while others say it looks smooth and the 360 is too sharp.
Most reviewers say there is more pop-in on the 360, so I believe that to be true, but reviews are reporting various degrees of difference.
To me, if you've got a PS3 and a 360, just buy the version that most of your friends or going to have so you can share in multi-player. That would be a much bigger differentiator than any of the "technical" differences in the game.
My brother has a PS3 and I have a 360, so I'll be able to play both and see what I think.
from UK Gamespy (http://uk.ps3.gamespy.com/playstation-3/grand-theft-auto-iv/869750p3.html) who have a good reputation IMO....
RE: PS3 version ...Although it's got a few problems that pop up from time to time, Grand Theft Auto IV (http://ps3.gamespy.com/playstation-3/grand-theft-auto-iv/) is still an absolutely gorgeous game. Like the previous games in the series, it suffers from some texture pop-in and draw distance issues, although these should in no way affect your enjoyment of the game. It's easy to just consider those technical flaws the price you've got to pay for admission to the most impressive game world ever created. There's so much going on that you'll only really notice the flaws if you look for them, and if you're doing that there's a good chance you're missing out on something spectacular. The overall art design and visual aesthetics are extremely pleasing to the eye, and they aren't hurt by the technical issues. ...
For those who have to decide between the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions, we should mention that these flaws are slightly less noticeable in the PS3 game. There are a few other minor differences as well, the biggest being the PS3 game's Sixaxis controls. You can use the controller's tilt feature to perform wheelies on motorbikes or control your helicopter, but it just ends up feeling forced. You're much better off just turning them off and sticking with the default control scheme. The Xbox 360 version, on the other hand, has Achievements and features a more intuitive controller (though that may just be this reviewer's personal opinion). Both versions are excellent, so you really can't go wrong.
It looks like DMC4 again and again it took time to really know which version was better, and by the way the truth came too late (not that I care that much but for the sake of discussion) a lot of people are still stating that the ps3 version is better or equivalent.
At some point it was my opinion (from read only and low quality video don't help)till I decided to download the HQ videao Dot50cal provided!! And anybody with good eyes not seeing the difference... goes straight to my ignore list (ie you will never manage to have a not too biaised discusion with them...).
People like Eurogamer?
You seem to have heard something different that they didn't mention.
Speaking of bias, you seem to be running a one man crusade telling people the reviews aren't to be trusted.
AlphaWolf
27-Apr-2008, 19:41
People like Eurogamer?
You seem to have heard something different that they didn't mention.
That said, while the 360 game does tend to have a shimmering effect on its most intricate textures, personally I think it's the better-looking game
Seems like he heard right, but honestly all this which version looks better crap is overplayed as long as they are pretty close (as DMC4 is). Most of the recent titles certainly have fallen on that side.
GuestLV
27-Apr-2008, 19:50
a lot of people are still stating that the ps3 version is better or equivalent.
Look at ice monsters in the demo,compare them
infinity4
27-Apr-2008, 20:04
If I remember correctly there were differences between xbox and ps2 ver of san andreas, people still enjoyed from both version.
I guess because people are saying its next gen and you spend a lot of money, performance comes into play.
Seems like he heard right, but honestly all this which version looks better crap is overplayed as long as they are pretty close (as DMC4 is). Most of the recent titles certainly have fallen on that side.
I couldn't have said better, My one man crusade is not here to prevent people discussing this great game ;)
DJ12 it's not a one man crusade as I will stop after this post but reviews have importance, the slight differences will become bigger and bigger as one give its opinion to another etc.
Snowballing effects.
The trend is that the ps3 is slightly better, but there are discordant voices here and there and I feel like the trend is already set while nobody knows for sure.
EDit (sorry i stated it was my last post... :lol: ) I can't acces the review now but as an example some site states that the ps3 has a better AA our dear Qartz51 told us the 360 runs @720p AAx2, shall I think that the ps3 version runs with AAx4?
joker454
27-Apr-2008, 20:44
So to summarize, the 360 version has better frame rate, but the PS3 version has better frame rate. 360 has more pop in, but PS3 has more pop in. PS3 looks muddy, however 360 looks muddy. White equals black, and 3 equals 4. Does that sound around right? Man, my head hurts :(
Seems like he heard right, but honestly all this which version looks better crap is overplayed as long as they are pretty close (as DMC4 is). Most of the recent titles certainly have fallen on that side.
That is his opinion and it refers to something he finds better in the PS3 version. He doesn't offer any technically superiority for his opinion, he just prefers it.
Hardly making a liar of all the reviewers that preferred the PS3 version. (it seems there were judging from liolio's comments)
I am not really concerned about how a game looks, I have a PS3 so will get the PS3 version, but liolio is talking about a massive difference that makes everyone that liked the PS3 version of DMC 4 more than the 360 version clearly wrong which isn't the case at all from what I can tell.
Shifty Geezer
27-Apr-2008, 21:09
So to summarize, the 360 version has better frame rate, but the PS3 version has better frame rate. 360 has more pop in, but PS3 has more pop in. PS3 looks muddy, however 360 looks muddy. White equals black, and 3 equals 4. Does that sound around right? Man, my head hurts :(Looking at this from a purely logical perspective instead of technical one, one can't help but see evidence for totally different factors. How many comparisons are comparing like-with-like, instead of just playing the game a bit on one console, than the other, and having a 'feeling'? How many are using proper scientific method to compare the same situation in repeated instances, to show it's not just a background function stealing a little processing at a busy spot which might not repeat itself again frequently? Does it point to a game that's identical on both platforms and the differences are down to individual hardwares even? One PS3 is a little more choppy than another, enough to cause a discrepancy against in a platform comparison? Or is there a psychological effect, people seeing what they're expecting to see, to wanting to see?
I doubt anyone will provide the answers. Unless you can absolutely rule out potential, even if improbable causes, you'd need multiple consoles running the same point of the game with exactly the same input, video captured and reviewed, to know for certain. If you wanted to be lackadaisical about it you could accept 'close enough' input and just look for bigger differences. No-one going to do that. You'll have one PS3, one XB360, someone playing the game, and reporting their opinion. You'll then get conflicting reports from all over the web with no way to consolidate all the evidence and whatever facts there are into a comprehensive body of material fit for study.
So end of the day, it's a moot debate that'll keep the fanboys happy, but I don't see any point arguing it myself! The game's good (if you like that sort of thing) on either platform. Who cares if one has a minor edge over the other? ;)
That is his opinion and it refers to something he finds better in the PS3 version. He doesn't offer any technically superiority for his opinion, he just prefers it.
Hardly making a liar of all the reviewers that preferred the PS3 version. (it seems there were judging from liolio's comments)
I am not really concerned about how a game looks, I have a PS3 so will get the PS3 version, but liolio is talking about a massive difference that makes everyone that liked the PS3 version of DMC 4 more than the 360 version clearly wrong which isn't the case at all from what I can tell.
Ok you force me into a new post out of topic on top on that :lol:.
I prefer the dmc4 version because for me it looks way clearer, I find the difference really noticable (even if doesn't make the game less enjoyable on the ps3). And I found tough to not notice the difference / prefer the ps3 rendition.
And I agree to disagree, I've taken more than my share of posts on this topic ;)
So to summarize, the 360 version has better frame rate, but the PS3 version has better frame rate. 360 has more pop in, but PS3 has more pop in. PS3 looks muddy, however 360 looks muddy. White equals black, and 3 equals 4. Does that sound around right? Man, my head hurts :(
Yes sounds about right!
If you have a 360 and a PS3 toss a coin..
EDIT: Removed "If your new to this generation, PS3 all the way" way to of topic
Jesus2006
27-Apr-2008, 22:00
I think the only thing that these two version really differ noticably in is the pop-in which all reviewers seem to notice more on the 360.
Everything else seems a more subjective matter (color, contrast, etc...).
Edit: plus loading times
I´m still looking forward to someone checking the sound. On the PSP games the dialog is very rough compared to the music, they cut corners on that to save space.
Betanumerical
27-Apr-2008, 23:28
I have the game, that kind of pop in doesn't happen..
Thats good to know, I would not wish that kind of pop up upon anyone.
All the Gametrailers footage is from the 360 version and I noticed some nasty pop-in when viewing this video.
0:12
1:14
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/33336.html
AlphaWolf
28-Apr-2008, 03:45
Kotaku answers some questions about the game (http://kotaku.com/384503/everything-you-wanted-to-know-about-gta-iv-so-stop-asking)
No split screen, no soundtrack customization, no option to remap controllers (but there is a classic option).
Dr. Meaty
28-Apr-2008, 03:56
I wonder if you can save replays again, like the xbox version of San Andreas. Sharing replays online ala- Halo 3 might be pretty cool, but it hasn't really been mentioned as far as I know, so I'm guessing probably not.
You can use the controller's tilt feature to perform wheelies on motorbikes
That sounds cool:razz:
It's crazy to see how people can be biased... evan pretended journalists.
We will have to wait to know the truth as we 're everything and its opposite.
I find it crazy that when a game on the PS3 has some advantages (even in this case it seems to very minor) over the 360 it is like that the sky is falling down and now all those review are biased. It something I've been witnessing on different fora since the release went up on ign.
Sometimes I have the feeling that allot of people where expecting to see a big difference between versions (in favour of the 360) and now that it isn't not the case they are for some strange reason upset.
And come on, the game (regardless of version) seems to be a jewel.
deepbrown
28-Apr-2008, 10:34
IGN head to head
http://www.rockstarwatch.net/news/469/IGN-Compares-GTAIV-for-the-PS3-and-360/
PS3 gets nod in AA, better load times, less pop-up, better controls for driving(possibly preference, though the guy comparing played the game on 360 first, and then went to PS3 and still found it better there) and Sixaxis controls. 360 gets more vibrant colours (just calibrate your TV), better lock-on in shooting and DLC.
It will be interesting to see what Quaz51 says about the AA then.
Seems pretty clear though, the PS3 version is the best version to buy, the only reason to get the 360 version (if you have a PS3 and 360) is the DLC.
Although stella sales of the PS3 version will likely mean DLC for the PS3 also, just different DLC than the 360 gets.
I find it crazy that when a game on the PS3 has some advantages (even in this case it seems to very minor) over the 360 it is like that the sky is falling down and now all those review are biased. It something I've been witnessing on different fora since the release went up on ign.
Sometimes I have the feeling that allot of people where expecting to see a big difference between versions (in favour of the 360) and now that it isn't not the case they are for some strange reason upset.
And come on, the game (regardless of version) seems to be a jewel.
Probably because 360 was the lead console.
Rangers
28-Apr-2008, 12:18
I find it crazy that when a game on the PS3 has some advantages (even in this case it seems to very minor) over the 360 it is like that the sky is falling down and now all those review are biased. It something I've been witnessing on different fora since the release went up on ign.
Sometimes I have the feeling that allot of people where expecting to see a big difference between versions (in favour of the 360) and now that it isn't not the case they are for some strange reason upset.
And come on, the game (regardless of version) seems to be a jewel.
My perception is PS3 owners aren't used to "winning one" and, since they now have something to trumpet, are really driving this issue at forums across the internet into heated battle. The GAF thread is a good indication.
Whats amazing either way is that system wars talk almost seems to overshadow the game itself talk even though most agree there isn't much difference in the versions.
My perception is PS3 owners aren't used to "winning one" and, since they now have something to trumpet, are really driving this issue at forums across the internet into heated battle. The GAF thread is a good indication.
Whats amazing either way is that system wars talk almost seems to overshadow the game itself talk even though most agree there isn't much difference in the versions.
Or the PS3 owners have been given the shaft until now? This is a game that plays to the strengths of the PS3 and since the developer didn´t get "lazy" they took advantage of them, maybe an exclusive PS3 deal would have made it even better on the PS3?. Perfect for everybody, except those that need the 360 to always "win".
Rangers
28-Apr-2008, 12:26
IGN head to head
http://www.rockstarwatch.net/news/469/IGN-Compares-GTAIV-for-the-PS3-and-360/
PS3 gets nod in AA, better load times, less pop-up, better controls for driving(possibly preference, though the guy comparing played the game on 360 first, and then went to PS3 and still found it better there) and Sixaxis controls. 360 gets more vibrant colours (just calibrate your TV), better lock-on in shooting and DLC.
They dont mention pop up in that vid.
And its worth noting they deem the versions so near-identical that their final recommendation on which version to get is to get whichever one your friends have for multiplayer. Which seems to kind of be ignoring the DLC on 360 elephant in the room imo.
Rangers
28-Apr-2008, 12:34
Or the PS3 owners have been given the shaft until now? This is a game that plays to the strengths of the PS3 and since the developer didn´t get "lazy" they took advantage of them, maybe an exclusive PS3 deal would have made it even better on the PS3?. Perfect for everybody, except those that need the 360 to always "win".
Well again, since there isn't much differece, why so much fighting about it?
It seems to me it's PS3 owners grabbing it and "Aha..you suxxor 360!" that is simply driving things. Not on B3d since we're fairly free of that.
Whichever version "won" there would have been a fair amount of that. Probably less if 360 won since that seems to be more the norm everybody is used to.
Really?
Seems to me the only one concerned about the reviewers claiming the PS3 version is better was liolio.
However, I have to disagree with you when you say whichever version that won would've had the same effect on this board because it simply isn't true. Look at all the games that are better on 360 and it's accepted by and large by PS3 owners, two BIG games (Burnout and GTA) are better on PS3 (however big the gap is) and it's like the World has ended for some people. How is it possible the PS3 version is better.
For example better AA is always one major reason for owner a 360 game over PS3, now the boot is on the other foot so to speak it's a minor difference.
inefficient
28-Apr-2008, 13:10
I think it's pretty likely the DLC project is going to be farmed out/outsourced to a different dev studio.
The risk is too high for the main dev team to be working on DLC versus working on a new game. It would be the financially smart thing to do. Getting another "real" GTA game out has to be very high on Rockstar/T2's priority list right now if they want to maintain their share price and stave off take over from EA.
News of DLC does not excite investors. In this situation, it's money already in the books. News of another GTA4 game in < 2 years will keep investors interested.
GTA4 got frigging leaked. *Insert that banging head against a brick wall smile*
I hate pirates.
pjbliverpool
28-Apr-2008, 13:48
IGN head to head
http://www.rockstarwatch.net/news/469/IGN-Compares-GTAIV-for-the-PS3-and-360/
PS3 gets nod in AA, better load times, less pop-up, better controls for driving(possibly preference, though the guy comparing played the game on 360 first, and then went to PS3 and still found it better there) and Sixaxis controls. 360 gets more vibrant colours (just calibrate your TV), better lock-on in shooting and DLC.
AA, better load times and less pop-up are all pretty big deals IMO. I'm especially suprised about the AA given what we know - or at least what we think we know about both the GPU's.
Controls however is completely subjective and no matter what a reviewer says, I know the 360 controls will be better for me simply because its a better controller (IMO of course).
Also more vibrant colours is a pretty stupid "advantage" since as you say, that can be changes in your TV configuration and isn't necessarily a better thing anyway. e.g. would GT5 look better with more vibrant colours?
DLC is a complete non issue for me as well since I would never spend money on it. Hell, even if its free I probably wouldn't bother to spend the time downloading it unless it was something pretty special. Whats the point when there is already so much content in the game that i'm unlikely to complete?
Based on what i've heard so far it seems like the PS3 version has a slight edge which is a bit of a bummer for me since I have a 360 :mad:. Even worse, my mate has a PS3 and is intending to get this game for it and I just know he'll lord it over me if he reads the PS3 version is better.
Hence i'm going to wait for the PC version so I can lord it over everyone :twisted: :wink:. All I have to do now is convince myself (and my mate) that waiting for an even better version is the way to go!!
Really?
Seems to me the only one concerned about the reviewers claiming the PS3 version is better was liolio.
However, I have to disagree with you when you say whichever version that won would've had the same effect on this board because it simply isn't true. Look at all the games that are better on 360 and it's accepted by and large by PS3 owners, two BIG games (Burnout and GTA) are better on PS3 (however big the gap is) and it's like the World has ended for some people. How is it possible the PS3 version is better.
For example better AA is always one major reason for owner a 360 game over PS3, now the boot is on the other foot so to speak it's a minor difference.
How ot say this gently, I'm getting slightly peaced off yours comments.
Given press and internet press record lately I stated that reviews have to taken with a grain of salt...
I 'm still waiting from users comments here even if at this point it's more or less clear that the ps3 is on top.
Happy now? I hope because I could start to think that you would in fact have enjoyed a web explosion in regard to burnout and GTA IV.
And there is really few screenshots of the ps3 rendition (getting better every hour) and this did help in this regard.
but if you want to use me as example on a one man crusade, I disagree...
So please stop ;)
My one man crusade is for sub HD rendering... and I'm really alone on this front :lol:
(in regard to reactions in older threads)
Scott_Arm
28-Apr-2008, 14:32
What I don't understand is when people get personally insulted if they find out their favourite game console has a slightly "inferior" version of the game. I also don't understand why other people get so smarmy when they find out their favourite console has gotten something slightly "better." I'm not pointing fingers at anyone in this thread, it's just a general comment about the heated internet flame war over this game.
The way I'm interpreting things, from what I've read, the versions of the game are so close that if you put a person in a room watching the game being played on a display, but they couldn't see the console or controller, they might not be able to tell which version they're looking at. Hardly anything to fight over. If you like GTA, there's absolutely zero reason to pass this one up for either system.
I should get a chance on day 1 to see the game running on both systems, but I'm not expecting any glaring differences.
Ons::lob::
28-Apr-2008, 14:45
I like to lurk on this forum alot because I can usually get info and opinions about a game and it's free of all the fanboy/system wars comparisons that plague other forums.. for the last 3-4 pages though this thread has gone from talking about the game itself to talking about the consoles running the game.
Can we get a moderator in here to clean this up? I would rather much read about the game and talks about it's graphics engine/characters/story etc than see you guys arguing about which console the game is better for when all the reviewers plainly say "flip a coin the experience is the same".....there's alot of new info out there guys. Lets start talking about the game again.
deepbrown
28-Apr-2008, 14:48
What I don't understand is when people get personally insulted if they find out their favourite game console has a slightly "inferior" version of the game. I also don't understand why other people get so smarmy when they find out their favourite console has gotten something slightly "better." I'm not pointing fingers at anyone in this thread, it's just a general comment about the heated internet flame war over this game.
The way I'm interpreting things, from what I've read, the versions of the game are so close that if you put a person in a room watching the game being played on a display, but they couldn't see the console or controller, they might not be able to tell which version they're looking at. Hardly anything to fight over. If you like GTA, there's absolutely zero reason to pass this one up for either system.
I should get a chance on day 1 to see the game running on both systems, but I'm not expecting any glaring differences.
Aye...and if they did see a difference, it's most probably because each TV is calibrated differently :smile:
Mintmaster
28-Apr-2008, 15:03
However, I have to disagree with you when you say whichever version that won would've had the same effect on this board because it simply isn't true. Look at all the games that are better on 360 and it's accepted by and large by PS3 owners, two BIG games (Burnout and GTA) are better on PS3 (however big the gap is) and it's like the World has ended for some people. How is it possible the PS3 version is better.I don't know which boards you're reading, but IMO the prevailing opinion is that the PS3 is better. Few people are of the opinion that many games are better on the 360.
This is one of the advantages that Sony gets from its branding and mindshare. If a game looks worse on PS3 it's lazy devs or a poor port or an abberation. If it looks better on PS3 it's because the PS3 is superior. If a good game is exclusive to the PS3 (GT5, Uncharted), it could only be done on the PS3.
This GTA discussion about differences between platforms is 10x more noisy than for any other game so far. Even the double framerate of EA games didn't get remotely as much discussion as the slight differences here.
I think it's pretty likely the DLC project is going to be farmed out/outsourced to a different dev studio.
The risk is too high for the main dev team to be working on DLC versus working on a new game. It would be the financially smart thing to do. Getting another "real" GTA game out has to be very high on Rockstar/T2's priority list right now if they want to maintain their share price and stave off take over from EA.
News of DLC does not excite investors. In this situation, it's money already in the books. News of another GTA4 game in < 2 years will keep investors interested.
I've heard rumours that GTA4 is the last in the series?
Obviously Rock is a multi-faceted studio, though we know they are working on LA Noire and Red Dead Revolver.
Then again,I guess if GTA4 sells 10m+, that could change things!
So, 16 (http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=42405) pages of discussion for EA Sports titles last year is not much discussion then ;)
There is very little discussion about the differences in this thread, it's been mainly about the game until the last couple of pages.
I don't know why you would think otherwise to be honest. Anyway, it's not important as is being made out by this thread.
It will be interesting to see what Quaz51 says about the AA then.
Seems pretty clear though, the PS3 version is the best version to buy, the only reason to get the 360 version (if you have a PS3 and 360) is the DLC.
Although stella sales of the PS3 version will likely mean DLC for the PS3 also, just different DLC than the 360 gets.
I thought about this long and hard 'cause I have both. The difference are virtually nil to my eyes. But the DLC is big, but the biggest factor is far more of my friends have 360s than PS3s, and I much prefer XBL to PSN...
So, 360 it is.
How can it be a big deal when you have no idea what it is going to be?
Intriguing maybe, but definitely not a big deal. Best I've heard about it is that each one might add 10 hours of gameplay to the game.
pjbliverpool
28-Apr-2008, 15:52
I don't see why everyone is so suprised at peoples bias towards a specific platform. For many people (even casuals), a console is like a football team. You don't just own it but you support it and you want it to beat the other team.
I don't even think its necessarily a bad thing as long as the discussion stays reasonable and intelligent. As my analogy suggests its a perfectly normal part of life in the sports world and isn't considered bad there. Its probably just a human nature thing. Besides geeks tend to like sports less than joe average so they gotta have something to get behind, right? :lol:
GTA4 just happens to be the world cup of console clashes, hence all the attention its getting.
How can it be a big deal when you have no idea what it is going to be?
Intriguing maybe, but definitely not a big deal. Best I've heard about it is that each one might add 10 hours of gameplay to the game.
Because I like the concept. I enjoyed the Oblivion DLC for instance. And Forza 2 DLC.
I just see the technical differences between the two as an effective wash. So then it comes down to the intangibles: Which one is on the better multiplayer network? Which one will my friends be playing? Which one has guaranteed additional content coming? A pretty easy decision, really.
Mintmaster
28-Apr-2008, 16:21
So, 16 (http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=42405) pages of discussion for EA Sports titles last year is not much discussion then ;)On this forum, sure, but elsewhere?
I repeat: Very few people think many games run better on 360. Whether you look at articles or forums, the rationale you always see is "poor optimization" when it's worse on PS3, and "superior hardware" when it's better.
Galduta
28-Apr-2008, 16:30
http://www.mediafire.com/?kdkmditng1i
HD video of 360 - 35 mb - . This looks worse than the video of Gametrailers- more blurry , perphas Gametrailers is using a sharpen filter in the videos ?
Shifty Geezer
28-Apr-2008, 16:38
Okay, I'm zipping this thread up as an unwieldy mess. For discussion on the actual game, not the platforms it's running on, feel free to create a new GTA thread, and I'll make sure unwanted talk doesn't pollute it. IMO the comparison talk has been done now and doesn't warrant any further talk; all that's been coming up over the past pages is fanboy warisms. If anyone wants to consider the technical differences between platforms and possible hardware reasons, not that I think that's possible with such tiddly differences, there's a technology forum to post in, but you'd better stay technical and not gripe about who's a fan of what platform they are and how the internet is entirely prejudiced - those aren't topics for any of the Embedded 3D forums.
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.