• 108 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#1 Edited by JouselDelka (967 posts) -

I've been seeing and hearing from the gaming community about how badly some new games run on those systems since around 2010/2011. That, along with the fact that GTAV is advertised as Rockstar's biggest most technically-advanced title to date, raises the question: how is it even possible for GTAV to run on the old consoles well? Rockstar's biggest game coming out on the current gen two months before the new gen?!

How is it possible for the biggest open world Rockstar ever made with crazy advanced tech, new mechanics, graphics, jets and underwater exploration, to run on the consoles where Far Cry 3, Saints Row IV and a myriad of new games have been confirmed to look like crap and dip in the FPS so low that they occasionally turned into slideshows? I mean technically speaking, SR4 doesn't hold a candle to how big and goodlooking GTAV looks. Think about that for a second.

Regardless of next-gen versions or a PC version, this game will release on the current gen and people will buy it. So am I crazy or is the only realistic expectation that GTAV will run absolutely horrendously on the 360 and PS3?

Basically, this makes as much sense as inFamous Second Son running on PS3 or Ryse running on 360..

If you're a console owner, what are your realistic expectations for GTAV? Anyone not buying it because they're kinda sure it won't run well?

#2 Posted by natetodamax (19142 posts) -

I'm definitely gonna wait for the reviews before I get it. It's a bummer that next gen versions of the game haven't been announced, otherwise I would just forget about the 360 version.

#3 Edited by Nekroskop (2786 posts) -

Maybe the lead platform is the PS3 and porting it to both PC and 360 would take too much time? So they went with 360 instead.

I'm pretty sure they'll give it the LA Noire treatment on PC next summer.

#4 Posted by MideonNViscera (2257 posts) -

It seems kinda dumb from the timing, but this game was delayed, and I can only guess at how long it's been in development. I don't know how much extra work it would take to make next-gen versions, or how long they would have had the information required to do so. So maybe they had no choice, and maybe we'll get a next-gen update in a year.

Who knows. I'm pretty concerned about how well it's gonna run though.

#5 Posted by John1912 (1745 posts) -

@jouseldelka: Some games running poorly does not equal all games running poorly. It all about what you do with the system. R* is a good developer, they know what they are doing and have to budget to get things right and not shove a low frame rate out the door. Would it be better on PC, yes, but Im sure it will run just fine on consoles.

#6 Posted by ottoman673 (396 posts) -

It's a super-AAA title and Rockstar wants to launch it on consoles where it'll grab a high attach rate.

Would you rather release your game to platforms that have 75 million+ sold, or platforms that'll sell a couple million worldwide tops before year's end?

#7 Posted by e30bmw (356 posts) -

@ottoman673: This. The install base for PS3 and 360 combined is like 150 million units. That's why they are releasing it there. GTA4 sold something like 25 million copies and I'm sure they'd like this game to get similar numbers eventually. Releasing them on new consoles right when they come out won't result in that.

#8 Posted by cloudnineboya (700 posts) -

MONEY&time probably , it will come to pc eventually and i'm sure to ps4/x180 when they sell loads. Still can't get over how sharp it looks, looks hot can not wait to get my mitts on it.

#9 Posted by JouselDelka (967 posts) -

It's a super-AAA title and Rockstar wants to launch it on consoles where it'll grab a high attach rate.

Would you rather release your game to platforms that have 75 million+ sold, or platforms that'll sell a couple million worldwide tops before year's end?

That is exactly my point: The business motives are irrelevant when the game seems too advanced and the current systems are too old for it to actually run well. That is the equivalent of releasing a broken product for full price. And it's a bigger deal for V than other games because it's a blockbuster, you'll have millions of people complaining that the new GTA runs like shit! How is that a plausible or logical reality? Or have developers become so comfortable with gamers' backsides that releasing a broken blockbuster for 60 bucks a pop is acceptable today?

@john1912 said:

@jouseldelka: Some games running poorly does not equal all games running poorly. It all about what you do with the system. R* is a good developer, they know what they are doing and have to budget to get things right and not shove a low frame rate out the door.

But that's what I'm asking: How is it possible, technically? SR4 doesn't hold a candle to V's graphics, environment and scope, and it hiccups like a mofo on current gen doesn't it? Are you saying Rockstar is some kind of a wizard to pull this off?

#10 Edited by probablytuna (3447 posts) -

I'm playing GTAIV on the PS3 right now and yeah the frame rate is rather inconsistent, almost always less than 30FPS so I'm kinda worried how GTAV will run seeing as it's a newer title that looks way more impressive. I just hope it is as sharp as it looks as GTAIV looks blurry as hell.

#11 Posted by Irvandus (2645 posts) -

Not at all. Since it's only coming to those console I expect it to be built with those specs in mind instead of poorly optimizing because your coming out on pc anyway.

#13 Edited by Seppli (9773 posts) -

@jouseldelka:

I don't know how they do, I just trust in their ability to do it. The guys at Rockstar have blown my mind time and time again. First with GTA III, then Vice City, then San Andreas, then GTA IV, then Red Dead: Redemption, I have not yet played LA Noire, but what I've seen of the facial capture, that too was mindblowing in its own way, Max Payne 3 is my favorite 3rd person shooter of this generation, mechanically and setting-wise.

Long story short. Rockstar delivers. And my best guess in regards to how they do it? Data Streaming Magicians working their magic, and them getting enough time to do what they need to do, to make it so. That and a tons of talent and passion and crunch time - and a whole lot of money. Of course I also expect technical hiccups like spotty framerate, level of detail artifacts like visibile pop ups, textures loading in late - the usual kind of crap that comes with current gen games.

#15 Posted by Aetheldod (3346 posts) -

Poorly optimized games run like crap ... but Rockstar games are well optimized , also Red Dead Redemption is an amazing game that worked flawlessly , so I have no doubt in R* ability to optimize for the current gen , also they must be banking on the fact that there are millions of console already out and it has been a while since they released a game so from the bussiness view point it makes sense to release on current gen , also the development could have been so advanced at the point when the new gen was anounced that they couldnt go for the next gen.

#16 Posted by BaneFireLord (2881 posts) -

@irvandus said:

Not at all. Since it's only coming to those console I expect it to be built with those specs in mind instead of poorly optimizing because your coming out on pc anyway.

This. You'll notice that the majority of complaints about recent console games running poorly are aimed at titles developed for both PCs and consoles. Correct me if I'm wrong, but your Last of Uses and Gears of Wars and God of Wars and other console exclusive titles haven't been framey shitshows, for the simple reason that they were built from the ground up to target the 8 year old hardware. In addition, Rockstar is arguably one of the best devs in the business, and I trust that they know the limitations they're dealing with, have worked around them over the course of the last five years and aren't going to dump a slideshow on the market to grab a quick buck.

#17 Posted by dkessler175 (58 posts) -

I just finished playing Saints Row on 360 and sure it had its hiccups and frame drops. But none of that was able to ruin the insane amount of fun I had playing that game. It wasn't near unplayable and as long as GTA V is fun then I guess I won't really notice those issues. And yes I do have a PC capable of playing current games at high to max settings.

#18 Posted by OurSin_360 (755 posts) -

Marketing gimmick? console players won't notice the performance issues more than likely, if it's limited to occasional dropped frames. Only pc guys really complain about Far Cry 3 and saints row fps on consoles, if you have nothing to compare it to you don't easily notice that stuff

#19 Posted by GreggD (4451 posts) -

I'm playing GTAIV on the PS3 right now and yeah the frame rate is rather inconsistent, almost always less than 30FPS so I'm kinda worried how GTAV will run seeing as it's a newer title that looks way more impressive. I just hope it is as sharp as it looks as GTAIV looks blurry as hell.

The shading and bump mapping looks considerably smoother in all the footage I've seen of GTAV, which is to say not quite as taxing. It looks gorgeous, but at the same time, it's slightly stylized to the point where they can get away with omitting certain aspects of modern games to make it run better. Like, look at Niko Bellic's face in GTAIV, and then look at Trevor's face from V. You can see that they forewent extra bump maps, thus making the game have a much cleaner look, while at the same time giving the processors less to worry about.

#20 Posted by TheStandardToaster (110 posts) -

@probablytuna: I think rockstar has come a long way since GTA IV technically. Look at red dead redemption and max payne... They both are great looking games that improve the gameplay mechanics from GTA IV. I wouldn't doubt rockstar on this one... Plus 2k has probably dumped an incredbile amount of money into this project so I am assuming that they have made sure it is optimized and runs well enough to be played by millions

#22 Posted by Daneian (1174 posts) -

Yes.

#23 Edited by TheManWithNoPlan (4471 posts) -

Yep. I still think it'll come to Ps4 and Xone eventually.

#24 Posted by probablytuna (3447 posts) -

@thestandardtoaster: The thing is though, the world of Red Dead is not quite as dense as Liberty City. It's beautiful for sure, but it also had a lot less parts to it. Max Payne 3 looks great as well but they're confined to levels instead of an actual open world so they can use more resources to add detail. The fact that they're saying the world of GTAV is larger than San Andreas, GTAIV, Red Dead has me a little nervous. Can't wait to get my hands on the game and see it for myself though, I'm still incredibly excited for it.

#25 Posted by Turtlebird95 (2152 posts) -

The install base is there and Rockstar has stated many times that the game runs well on current gen consoles so no, my mind is not boggled.

#26 Posted by Turtlebird95 (2152 posts) -

The install base is there and Rockstar has stated many times that the game runs well on current gen consoles so no, my mind is not boggled.

#28 Edited by MooseyMcMan (9795 posts) -

In response to Saints Row IV, that game doesn't run poorly because it's an open world game, it runs poorly because you can run at insane speeds and leap over tall buildings in a single bound. Sure, you can get in planes, but only from specific areas, like airports. You can't just go from walking on the street to gliding over the city in seconds like you can in Saints Row IV. The game will have more time to load and prepare for that stuff.

Also, this game has a required install for both PS3 and 360 versions of the game. You HAVE to install the second disc of the 360 version to run the game. They got Microsoft to reverse their stance of mandatory installs for this one game. That will definitely help with loading and streaming the world.

#29 Posted by gaminghooligan (1352 posts) -

I trust Rockstar. I think there will be that usual open world jank, but R* hasn't ever let me down before.

#30 Edited by Huey2k2 (475 posts) -

I've been seeing and hearing from the gaming community about how badly some new games run on those systems since around 2010/2011. That, along with the fact that GTAV is advertised as Rockstar's biggest most technically-advanced title to date, raises the question: how is it even possible for GTAV to run on the old consoles well? Rockstar's biggest game coming out on the current gen two months before the new gen?!

How is it possible for the biggest open world Rockstar ever made with crazy advanced tech, new mechanics, graphics, jets and underwater exploration, to run on the consoles where Far Cry 3, Saints Row IV and a myriad of new games have been confirmed to look like crap and dip in the FPS so low that they occasionally turned into slideshows? I mean technically speaking, SR4 doesn't hold a candle to how big and goodlooking GTAV looks. Think about that for a second.

Regardless of next-gen versions or a PC version, this game will release on the current gen and people will buy it. So am I crazy or is the only realistic expectation that GTAV will run absolutely horrendously on the 360 and PS3?

Basically, this makes as much sense as inFamous Second Son running on PS3 or Ryse running on 360..

If you're a console owner, what are your realistic expectations for GTAV? Anyone not buying it because they're kinda sure it won't run well?

The game is being made with that specific hardware in mind. Is it also in development for the PC? Probably, but they are releasing it on consoles first and knowing Rockstar they will spend a lot of time making sure it works on those consoles.

Also you are assuming that it is never coming out for Xbox One or PS4. For all you know they will have simultaneous releases with the inevitable PC version.

All that said, I will be waiting for the PC version to come out.

#31 Posted by GreggD (4451 posts) -

I trust Rockstar. I think there will be that usual open world jank, but R* hasn't ever let me down before.

Dude, I am banking on that shit. Open-world jank is always the best part about GTA games, or at least the best unexpected part. Remember the Swingset of Death in GTAIV?

#33 Posted by charlie_victor_bravo (870 posts) -

Game will run OK, not good but OK on the current gen consoles. However anyone thinking that it was purely developed to current gen is in denial.

#34 Edited by DharmaBum (1060 posts) -

The first gameplay trailer was all current gen in-game footage and I thought it looked fantastic. I'm not the type to let a few blemishes ruin my enjoyment of a masterpiece like this game. "Hey, look, there's an entire recreation of Los Angeles at my disposal, BUT DID YOU SEE THAT LOW RES TEXTURE ON THE GROUND?" One should be able to appreciate the artistry and craftsmanship on display regardless of hardware limitation.

This is Grand Theft Auto we're talking about. I'm there day one.

#35 Posted by GreggD (4451 posts) -

The first gameplay trailer was all current gen in-game footage and I thought it looked fantastic. I'm not the type to let a few blemishes ruin my enjoyment of a masterpiece like this game. "Hey, look, there's an entire recreation of Los Angeles at my disposal, BUT DID YOU SEE THAT LOW RES TEXTURE ON THE GROUND?"

This is Grand Theft Auto we're talking about. I'm there day one.

Oh man, that texture comment reminded me of a certain someone around here, who I am not gonna name...

#36 Edited by Alexander (1720 posts) -

I don't believe any footage we've seen is from current gen consoles.

#37 Posted by JouselDelka (967 posts) -

I don't believe any footage we've seen is from current gen consoles.

ditto

#38 Posted by DharmaBum (1060 posts) -
#39 Posted by jimmyfenix (3688 posts) -
@greggd said:

@dharmabum said:

The first gameplay trailer was all current gen in-game footage and I thought it looked fantastic. I'm not the type to let a few blemishes ruin my enjoyment of a masterpiece like this game. "Hey, look, there's an entire recreation of Los Angeles at my disposal, BUT DID YOU SEE THAT LOW RES TEXTURE ON THE GROUND?"

This is Grand Theft Auto we're talking about. I'm there day one.

Oh man, that texture comment reminded me of a certain someone around here, who I am not gonna name...

YUP.

#40 Edited by ThePickle (4149 posts) -

Nope. Rockstar released three GTA games for the PlayStation 2. They were just going to let the PS3/360 get away with one? They're sending the generation off in style. They managed to squeeze every bit of power out of the PS2 for San Andreas. Where the Xbox and PC versions better looking? Sure, but that doesn't take anything away from the fact that San Andreas was great on the PS2.

How is it possible that it can run on current-gen hardware? I don't know, maybe Rockstar's been making grand scale open world games for over a decade. Something tells me they know what they are doing. Something tells me the people behind a series that has sold 125 million units since 1997 know a tad more about making games than a bunch of grumpy PC gamers.

But hey, I'm just an idiot console gamer that's actually optimistic about a Grand Theft Auto game.

You people seriously want to thrown down $300 (400 for the Xbone) plus the $60 for the game for a slightly better looking/running version of the game? You're willing to buy an entirely new console with a non-existent game catalogue to play a game that will only have rare framerate dips instead of occasional framerate dips?

#41 Posted by stryker1121 (1243 posts) -

I played 30 hours of FC3 on the 360 and it ran fine, if not w/ the buttery smoothness of PC. I'm no expert, mind, but will the mandatory install for GTAV help the game run significantly better on consoles, or would the game just be impossible to play w/o the install?

#42 Posted by GreggD (4451 posts) -

I played 30 hours of FC3 on the 360 and it ran fine, if not w/ the buttery smoothness of PC. I'm no expert, mind, but will the mandatory install for GTAV help the game run significantly better on consoles, or would the game just be impossible to play w/o the install?

It's probably a little bit of both.

#43 Posted by SparkleMotion (123 posts) -

It's amazing how many people have so much blind faith in Rockstar that they think the 60fps trailers are actually indicative of the game running on a system with 512MB of ram.

#44 Posted by Lukeweizer (2519 posts) -

I'm assuming the game has been in development since shortly after GTA 4 shipped. GTA 4 shipped in 2008, so let's say they started actually working on software in 2009. That's 4 years of development. That's a long time to ensure the game works correctly on the systems it's coming out for. I don't think it's fair to assume that Rockstar will put out a shitty 360/ PS3 version of their game because other developers couldn't put out a good version of their game.

#45 Posted by GreggD (4451 posts) -

It's amazing how many people have so much blind faith in Rockstar that they think the 60fps trailers are actually indicative of the game running on a system with 512MB of ram.

You saw a 60fps trailer for GTAV? Where did you find it, because all the ones I've seen are at like 30. You must be on the bleeding edge of games journalism, to have seen that!

#46 Posted by jimmyfenix (3688 posts) -

#47 Edited by Fattony12000 (6378 posts) -

Nope, if you've spent tens of millions of moneys on developing a mature video game title upon a mature video game console platform, using mature video game technology. You'd want your video game to come out on two video game platforms that have over 153.2 million installed units between them, for you to hit up.

#49 Edited by JazGalaxy (1577 posts) -

Games like GTA HAVE to hit with a large install base of potential users to buy the game. That means selling to Xbox and PS3 users.

Technically, the end of the console cycles is the BEST time for them to strike, since there will likely never BE more PS3 and X360 players as there are right this second.

#50 Edited by SparkleMotion (123 posts) -

@greggd said:

@sparklemotion said:

It's amazing how many people have so much blind faith in Rockstar that they think the 60fps trailers are actually indicative of the game running on a system with 512MB of ram.

You saw a 60fps trailer for GTAV? Where did you find it, because all the ones I've seen are at like 30. You must be on the bleeding edge of games journalism, to have seen that!

Guess you need to get your eyes checked.