⠀

[Coyote]

Err the reason why there's no licensed cars in GTA is because Rockstar will sell just as many games as if there were licensed vehicles, except they don't pay any rights to use real brands. That means they make just as much money without spending more money, see the point? I'm pretty sure Rockstar has enough money to get the rights to use any car in their game, and I'm pretty sure most brands would let them if they have the cash, which, like I just said, I'm pretty sure they have.

They pics you posted look horrible. The first picture looks terrible and so do all of the others you posted. I don't see what's so flattering there

Look at the GTA V pics where you can see the city in the background. On any of those pics, it just looks terrible. And it will probably stay like that, because the PS3 (nor the Xbox) can't handle this. That's also the reason why DSF has ugly background pictures, because the PS3 is a weak and already dated machine.

And I doubt this will come out on PS4. Which means, once again, that you have a very modern game trying to run on an old machine. Sounds like Driver 2!

Also, why would you not buy a game when school starts? You don't need to play it all the time, and you're not at school 24/7 either. And playing video games all summer long, are you serious? Get some fresh air guys

[Olanov]

Of course they save money by not using the money and time to obtain licenses for cars, that could be put in something else. However, car companies can be very strict about their cars getting banged up, so you'd really have to use a lot of money just for that and I don't think even R* would be spending that much money for so many vehicles. Honestly, it would not be worth the effort. Although, we are all just assuming since, well, there is no official word.

And about the pictures, you obviously missed my point. Saw the screenshot of GTA IV before release? Yeah, it was pretty bad. Closer to release/after? It was highly improved in comparison to before. Happens with pretty much all games. Each game has it's own limit. Even while those graphics don't look hyper super duper cool flattering like something out of highly overrated Crysis 3 wubstep shooter for an example, are they TERRIBLE? No. If you really do think so, I can recommend some glasses. Also, the game content has to be taken into thought since GTA is going to be obviously enormous and screen very often busy with the game handling a lot of stuff at the same time. It just could not handle all of that with some hyper graphics. Most of the time, the content in gameplay actually makes up for any "loss" in visual department.

As long as the game looks good enough like, hell, any GTA has so far looked and the main focus is on gameplay, what's the point in complaining?

Also, no one ever said that we would not be buying it when schools start, or that we'd be playing it 24/7 during time off school or all the time in summer. You should quit it with those half-assed assumptions.

[Coyote]

Of course they save money by not using the money and time to obtain licenses for cars, that could be put in something else. However, car companies can be very strict about their cars getting banged up, so you'd really have to use a lot of money just for that and I don't think even R* would be spending that much money for so many vehicles. Honestly, it would not be worth the effort. Although, we are all just assuming since, well, there is no official word.

And about the pictures, you obviously missed my point. Saw the screenshot of GTA IV before release? Yeah, it was pretty bad. Closer to release/after? It was highly improved in comparison to before. Happens with pretty much all games. Each game has it's own limit. Even while those graphics don't look hyper super duper cool flattering like something out of highly overrated Crysis 3 wubstep shooter for an example, are they TERRIBLE? No. If you really do think so, I can recommend some glasses. Also, the game content has to be taken into thought since GTA is going to be obviously enormous and screen very often busy with the game handling a lot of stuff at the same time. It just could not handle all of that with some hyper graphics. Most of the time, the content in gameplay actually makes up for any "loss" in visual department.

As long as the game looks good enough like, hell, any GTA has so far looked and the main focus is on gameplay, what's the point in complaining?

Everything is possible in a game, it just needs something powerful enough to run it. In my opinion a game should be made on a really very powerful computer, and then have options to turn off stuff. To be able to play it on everything. Obviously it wouldn't be as good on a weak system as it is on a powerful one then, but at least everyone would be able to play it, and those with powerful systems would be able to enjoy the game to it's maximum.

I didn't care that GTA San Andreas or so were bad graphics, I'm not sure why. It's kind of because of Driver: San Francisco now, nothing looks as good to me

And yes, I personally do find the pics terrible.

Also, no one ever said that we would not be buying it when schools starts

nobody will buy a game when school have just started

I definitely agree with you RF

[Olanov]

Whoops, that's my bad with RF. I personally don't know why he, or someone would delay buying a game or any other product for that matter since school starts, sounds silly, but that thing with you implying we'd be playing it 24/7 and what not was a low blow.

Now, if games only would be made for super powerful systems, they would still cost sh*t ton (those systems), and I doubt the average gamers would be able to obtain one. I don't think we'd really have a lot of games if they'd be only made for so powerful systems only, since there wouldn't be enough cash coming in for the next one to be developer, thanks to the high cost.

Also, what do you mean by "after Driver: San Francisco now, nothing looks as good to me". That's not what I think you mean, right?

[PostalDude]

Err the reason why there's no licensed cars in GTA is because....

It's too violent. You think Ford wants in on a game where you can burn old women alive with molotov cocktails?!

And playing video games all summer long, are you serious? Get some fresh air guys

Wow, talk about generalizing. "U ALL HAEV NO LIVES XD"

[RacingFreak]

Guys.. what the heck. My point being is that the part of GTA fans that start school/college/uni at that time, are most likey unable to buy nor play GTA V (obvious reason, esp if youre in campus), and also that 18 yr olds who are going to be in 12th grade would prefer indeed doing that during summer vacation... its 3 months free time.

[Coyote]

Whoops, that's my bad with RF. I personally don't know why he, or someone would delay buying a game or any other product for that matter since school starts, sounds silly, but that thing with you implying we'd be playing it 24/7 and what not was a low blow.

Now, if games only would be made for super powerful systems, they would still cost sh*t ton (those systems), and I doubt the average gamers would be able to obtain one. I don't think we'd really have a lot of games if they'd be only made for so powerful systems only, since there wouldn't be enough cash coming in for the next one to be developer, thanks to the high cost.

Also, what do you mean by "after Driver: San Francisco now, nothing looks as good to me". That's not what I think you mean, right?

Why would they cost a sh*t ton? It would basically just be a good computer. I didn't mean that they're made ONLY for those good computers. But basically that they're "based" on that. Let me give you an example. In DSF for example, everyone is mad because there's no trams, and not all traffic on the street, no parked cars, very few real intersections etc. That's a memory thing, and it's a power thing, and this game was from the start made for consoles, for consoles that were too weak to handle all that stuff. Instead, they could have left it the best way possible. There would be extra versions for consoles where this is limited (for example not all cars on traffic, but different packs in each chapter), and you could also have such an option if you're playing on a weak PC. To turn off trams, to turn off real mirrors, to turn of weather, etc etc. See what I mean?

I don't think it would cost too much to make. Look at the car wallpapers that were released for DSF. Those cars are the exact same cars as in the game, except they're high-poly versions. That's probably also how the cars started life, and later they made some lower-poly models for the game.

Also, there's some people willing to pay a lot of money for a single game if it's good enough. I'm one of them because I don't play anything, and one game is enough for me for several years if it's good enough!

And I'm not sure what you mean, but graphic-wise, Driver: San Francisco is hard to top if you ask me. And yes, those pics look really bad compared to Driver.

[Olanov]

I can see your point there, but it would fuel epic shitstorms between console, PC or -whatever- the system's community. You know, with less stuff problably always ending up being on consoles, extra stuff being in this version, not on that... with more popular games, that would become really controversial. Not to mention developing/porting different versions of the game would at least be costful.

Honestly, graphics-wise, Driver San Francisco isn't anything that special (however, they did impressive tricks with high poly looking cars not being that demanding, not to mention optimization) except for the pre-rendered cutscenes. But no, I was not comparing those pictures to Driver. What I thought you're saying is, that after seeing/playing 'Frisco, nothin' else looked as good. I mean, come on. Who could forget about Gran Turismo 5? That game certainly takes the cake on that side.




Also, this topic is horribly derailed.

Desperate attempt to get back on tracks, go!

Found that when going throught YT recommended list. 3D modelling is magic.

[Coyote]

Well yeah they would most likely be fights between people who have this and not that, etc. But they could just put money by side and buy a better system I do think DSF is excellent graphic-wise (well and everything else).

And that video you posted, wow, this is exactly what I was talking about. This video (whoever has done it) just totally has the Sims effect. It doesn't feel like a GTA, it feels like The Sims

This here looks even more like "The Sims"


Years ago when I had all GTA's from the GTA 3 era, I didn't mind the lack of realism, the fake cars, fake cities… just fake everything basically. The graphics went well with the game and the cars etc. belonged to this little world, like you said earlier. But now, since I've had DSF, I can't stand this cartoonish look anymore, neither the fake cars or fake cities. Also, people sometimes complain about Tanner's look changing in each Driver, but I haven't seen anyone yet complaining about Liberty City completely changing too? I'm wondering how much different Los Santos will be now, from the Los Santos that we know.

[Olanov]

Well, Rockstar themselves said GTA III and IV era are different, so I'm not surprised they changed Liberty a lot, that also explains why it looks different. Same will probably happen with Los Santos. I like how the cities look in IV era though, compared to for an example, GTA III's era. With a lot more details put into stuff (obviously since GTA III was using much cartoonic theme overall).

I don't get what you mean by "The Sims" look/effect. Last time I saw Sims it wasn't about gunning people down, going on a crime spree or such. What it seems to me is just Rockstar is stepping it a bit up from IV again on visual department.

Also, am I the only one who didn't really give a crap even though Tanner's looks kept changing? I can't see why it was such a big deal for some people.

[Coyote]

Nope, I didn't give a crap either about Tanner's look changing.

The shooting and such isn't what I was talking about. The whole look of the game looks like the Sims. I only started to see this after someone else said it. It just has the Sims effect. I've played them for ages and this is exactly what it feels like

I remember in fact that they said that this is the next-generation universe, and that therefore characters from the GTA 3 era don't co-exist with the ones from the GTA 4 era.

[Olanov]

Hmm. I think I remember seeing a comment like that but I just can't really see it in V.

I just thought of the worst game ever. Sims/GTA mixed together. OH GOD.

[Coyote]

GTA is becoming more and more like The Sims, except it keeps the violence. Stuff like eating, sleeping (saving the game basically), changing clothes, doing fitness, puking, becoming fat, using your phone etc etc. There will probably be even more of that in GTA V, so, basically you named it yourself, the worst game ever

[max.thunder]

The other funny stuff is the iFruit.

[max.thunder]

[Olanov]

I saw these earlier, were analyzing these with Custo. Looks such an improvement to GTA IV! Especially with the police! They have really great looking duty belts/shoulder mics and variations overall! Short sleeves, different patches for ranks, etc... all my yes!

[0takumetalhead]

At least a huge improvement on IV (which was decent imo). Not a Day 1 buy from me but I am looking forward to V.

[TheEngiGuy]

As a highly skilled driver, Franklin can slow down time when driving, giving him the ability to make split second decisions and take dangerous corners at high speeds.

It's Driver San Francisco all over again.

[Coyote]

That reminds me of Need for Speed actually, I'm not sure about the new ones but in Most Wanted or Carbon you had this slow motion button. Was pretty cool.

[Olanov]

It's Driver San Francisco all over again.

Hope that's a joke.

Also, saw a screen with Sheriff's Deputies and motorcycle officers... I'm satisfied.



Even got the campaign hat! Nnnngh

[TheEngiGuy]

It's Driver San Francisco all over again.

Hope that's a joke.

Let me fix this: it's Need for Speed Most Wanted all over again!

Police cars are awesome by the way.

[max.thunder]

I atleast hope that it won't be a rushed console port like GTA IV was, no optimization at all.

[Olanov]

I atleast hope that it won't be a rushed console port like GTA IV was, no optimization at all.

Do mind, it was Rocktar's first really big port over to PC with the RAGE engine and even then, it was optimized to a much better condition a patch after another.

[max.thunder]

Maybe i've to patch it, i thought that it was automaticaly patched in R* Social Club.

[TheEngiGuy]

Maybe i've to patch it, i thought that it was automaticaly patched in R* Social Club.

AFAIK Windows Live will do all the work for you, otherwise if you have issues you can install the patches manually.

[Fab2cent]

i remember when i 1st got gta iv for pc, so bad for pc at release

[Olanov]

Steam version should also be always up-to-date.

[max.thunder]

Just updated, looks way better, i probably was playing a 2008 version, thanks Olanov .

[Olanov]

Glad I could help!

[max.thunder]