GTA V confirmed for PC

"could be a mistype" Keep begging herms :lol:RR360DD

......

No.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"] A few games with high budgets (still no where near the budgets of top console games) doesn't really help you're argument. Most PC games have very low budgets and are very disjointed niche games.Miketheman83

A couple of points you're going to need to prove, after you first define what "low-budget" and "high-budget" are, explicitly. Now, to the points:

1. Prove all PC games have "low-budgets".
2. Prove that they have nowhere near the budget of top console games.

Now, in your last sentence, you change your argument to "most", rather than "all".

----

I have to say, your argument is tremendously lackluster.

I don't need budget figures to tell a game has low production values, all I have to do is play it. Look at a game like Witcher 2 compared to Skyrim. It's pretty obvious. I've played both games by the way.

Miketheman83

Ahhh, so you aren't willing to properly form your own argument, let alone provide evidence? Shocking.

You're an imbecile and your initial point was proven wrong by at least one person... You then change your argument, without being able to cite any actual evidence. Laughable.

clyde46

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

[QUOTE="Jankarcop"]

Whats halarious is, even as a bad port, it ran and looked better than the 360/ps3 versions...and is now the 100% superior version.

wis3boi

Does it run properly on modest hardware?

Posts in the PC forum suggest otherwise.

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/29345168/grand-theft-auto-iv-gta-4-lags

*points out the fact his video card blows ass*

So it needs high-end hardware just to run properly.

Do you consider that a superior version of the game?

I don't.

Video games should be accessable to the average joe, not just to the %1 who devote their lives.

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"][QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

A couple of points you're going to need to prove, after you first define what "low-budget" and "high-budget" are, explicitly. Now, to the points:

1. Prove all PC games have "low-budgets".
2. Prove that they have nowhere near the budget of top console games.

Now, in your last sentence, you change your argument to "most", rather than "all".

----

I have to say, your argument is tremendously lackluster.

Nanomage

[QUOTE="wis3boi"]

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

Does it run properly on modest hardware?

Posts in the PC forum suggest otherwise.

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/29345168/grand-theft-auto-iv-gta-4-lags

ZombieKiller7

*points out the fact his video card blows ass*

So it needs high-end hardware just to run properly.

Do you consider that a superior version of the game?

I don't.

Video games should be accessable to the average joe, not just to the %1 who devote their lives.

Why even make a thread?

There is no confirmation to make.

It's coming to PC just like all the GTA games and be much better.

Funnily enough if it's true Rockstar is only using footage showing PS3 then it seems the 360 will be on the short end of the stick this time :shock:

Skyrim was made primarily for the 360.

If we depend on PC market for games, all we will have is low budget stuff, free to play and MMO's.

Skyrim was made primarily for the 360.

If we depend on PC market for games, all we will have is low budget stuff, free to play and MMO's.

ZombieKiller7

Skyrim was made primarily for the 360.

If we depend on PC market for games, all we will have is low budget stuff, free to play and MMO's.

ZombieKiller7

[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="Miketheman83"] No actually it's not. Skyrim has more depth in the first ten minutes then all of Witcher 2 combined. Constant QTE's really? Not a true open world game. Less magic, items, weapons etc. The cut scenes were laughable. Witcher 2 felt like a budget title in comparison.Miketheman83

Miketheman digging a bigger hole? Shocker :lol:

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

Skyrim was made primarily for the 360.

If we depend on PC market for games, all we will have is low budget stuff, free to play and MMO's.

Nanomage

What you call "miles better" I call a mild boost at best, on hardware 10x stronger, this is not an accomplishment or anything to be proud of.

Simply stated, PC gaming = alot of time, money and effort for almost no benefit AND more importantly does not financially support the platforms that make these games possible.

If there is no Steam, Skyrim will still exist.

If there is no console, there is no Skyrim.

I'm getting this for PC aswell, I assume it's going to be alot better optimized than GTA4. GTA V with mods will be awesome, especially having real cars :).

[QUOTE="Nanomage"][QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

Skyrim was made primarily for the 360.

If we depend on PC market for games, all we will have is low budget stuff, free to play and MMO's.

ZombieKiller7

What you call "miles better" I call a mild boost at best, on hardware 10x stronger, this is not an accomplishment or anything to be proud of.

Spoken like a true console fanboy. Go play on a PC then come back.

Simply stated, PC gaming = alot of time, money and effort for almost no benefit AND more importantly does not financially support the platforms that make these games possible.

Proof is needed for a claim that large.

If there is no Steam, Skyrim will still exist.

If there is no console, there is no Skyrim.

Nothing of value was lost.

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

[QUOTE="Jankarcop"]

Whats halarious is, even as a bad port, it ran and looked better than the 360/ps3 versions...and is now the 100% superior version.

clyde46

Does it run properly on modest hardware?

Posts in the PC forum suggest otherwise.

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/29345168/grand-theft-auto-iv-gta-4-lags

1. I think your idea of "modest hardware" is off.

2. The 360 version is upscaled to 1920x1080 and I'm sure the game assets were %99 the same

3. 30fps on PC is a herky jerky mess. 30fps on consoles is actually playable

4. GTA IV still have thousands of people playing it on XBL, how many ppl are playing it MP on Steam?

Bottom line, people who got GTA IV on 360 had alot more fun with the game and got more out of it than they did on PC.

Fact.

Console games have bigger budgets, bigger dev teams and higher production values, minus games like WoW where you have to pay to play.Miketheman83

Have you provided any evidence for your argument so far? I noticed you stopped our conversation... Was it due to having a ridiculously insufficient rebuttal?

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

If there is no Steam, Skyrim will still exist.

If there is no console, there is no Skyrim.

clyde46

Nothing of value was lost.

Then stop buying our games and piss off.

Or take your sloppy seconds like a man.

Having 10x powerful hardware to say "oh look, extra pixel on his left ear."

Ppl on 360 are enjoying their life, while hermits cry in their beer and try to recruit poor suckers to join the misery.

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"][QUOTE="clyde46"] Massive budget and still is one of the buggiest games this gen. clyde46

[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

Does it run properly on modest hardware?

Posts in the PC forum suggest otherwise.

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/29345168/grand-theft-auto-iv-gta-4-lags

ZombieKiller7

1. I think your idea of "modest hardware" is off.

My rig was considered mid range back in the day

2. The 360 version is upscaled to 1920x1080 and I'm sure the game assets were %99 the same

Actually the game is running at 720p and then upscaled to 1080

3. 30fps on PC is a herky jerky mess. 30fps on consoles is actually playable

That makes no sense. It runs fine at 30FPS on the PC.

4. GTA IV still have thousands of people playing it on XBL, how many ppl are playing it MP on Steam?

It uses GFWL and there are still people playing online.

Bottom line, people who got GTA IV on 360 had alot more fun with the game and got more out of it than they did on PC.

I bought the game on PC and had a lof of fun. That is an assumption and a very bad one at that.

Fact.

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"]Console games have bigger budgets, bigger dev teams and higher production values, minus games like WoW where you have to pay to play.lundy86_4

Have you provided any evidence for your argument so far? I noticed you stopped our conversation... Was it due to having a ridiculously insufficient rebuttal?

[QUOTE="Nanomage"][QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

Skyrim was made primarily for the 360.

If we depend on PC market for games, all we will have is low budget stuff, free to play and MMO's.

ZombieKiller7

What you call "miles better" I call a mild boost at best, on hardware 10x stronger, this is not an accomplishment or anything to be proud of.

Simply stated, PC gaming = alot of time, money and effort for almost no benefit AND more importantly does not financially support the platforms that make these games possible.

If there is no Steam, Skyrim will still exist.

If there is no console, there is no Skyrim.

the denial is strong in you, i don't know if it's just ignorance for not having played it ever on pc or just plain fanboyism

it is not a "mild boost" and it is not "almost no benefit". No matter how many times you tell that to yourself, it won't become true, just words from an ignorant fanboy.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"]Console games have bigger budgets, bigger dev teams and higher production values, minus games like WoW where you have to pay to play.Miketheman83

Have you provided any evidence for your argument so far? I noticed you stopped our conversation... Was it due to having a ridiculously insufficient rebuttal?

I don't need the evidence. You do, as you made the initial claim. Are we debating with a child here? This is a False Burden of Proof.

You realize that The Old Republic was speculated at having one of the largest budgets, if not the largest budget, in history, right? Link. That's a budget of $200 million.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, meaning it's the results are what counts, and the results undermine your entire point, as just shown. Good God, this is hilarious :lol:

[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

Does it run properly on modest hardware?

Posts in the PC forum suggest otherwise.

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/29345168/grand-theft-auto-iv-gta-4-lags

ZombieKiller7

1. I think your idea of "modest hardware" is off.

2. The 360 version is upscaled to 1920x1080 and I'm sure the game assets were %99 the same

3. 30fps on PC is a herky jerky mess. 30fps on consoles is actually playable

4. GTA IV still have thousands of people playing it on XBL, how many ppl are playing it MP on Steam?

Bottom line, people who got GTA IV on 360 had alot more fun with the game and got more out of it than they did on PC.

Fact.

Bottom line, people who got GTA IV on 360 had alot more fun with the game and got more out of it than they did on PC.

Fact.

ZombieKiller7

2. The 360 version is upscaled to 1920x1080 and I'm sure the game assets were %99 the same

ZombieKiller7

Similar assets does not mean that the game will look the same. This is a marked improvement over the 360 version -- which I am playing, at this very moment.

Direct feed, 1080p, PC screenshot:

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"][QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

Have you provided any evidence for your argument so far? I noticed you stopped our conversation... Was it due to having a ridiculously insufficient rebuttal?

lundy86_4

I don't need the evidence. You do, as you made the initial claim. Are we debating with a child here? This is a False Burden of Proof.

You realize that The Old Republic was speculated at having one of the largest budgets, if not the largest budget, in history, right? Link. That's a budget of $200 million.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, meaning it's the results are what counts, and the results undermine your entire point, as just shown. Good God, this is hilarious :lol:

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"]Console games have bigger budgets, bigger dev teams and higher production values, minus games like WoW where you have to pay to play.Miketheman83

Have you provided any evidence for your argument so far? I noticed you stopped our conversation... Was it due to having a ridiculously insufficient rebuttal?

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"] Can you find evidence that they are? The proof is in the pudding dude. If you really think no-name PC games that sell for less than $40 have the same budgets as big name games like GTA you are jaded by the industry and maybe you should take some time away.Miketheman83

I don't need the evidence. You do, as you made the initial claim. Are we debating with a child here? This is a False Burden of Proof.

You realize that The Old Republic was speculated at having one of the largest budgets, if not the largest budget, in history, right? Link. That's a budget of $200 million.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, meaning it's the results are what counts, and the results undermine your entire point, as just shown. Good God, this is hilarious :lol:

The Old Republic released in 2011. The brand is irrelevant. Electronic Arts pumped a ridiculous amount of money into the development of the game.

You're proving your idiocy when you gloss over massive portions of the post. Given up using a false burden of proof?

Provide your evidence.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"] Can you find evidence that they are? The proof is in the pudding dude. If you really think no-name PC games that sell for less than $40 have the same budgets as big name games like GTA you are jaded by the industry and maybe you should take some time away.Miketheman83

I don't need the evidence. You do, as you made the initial claim. Are we debating with a child here? This is a False Burden of Proof.

You realize that The Old Republic was speculated at having one of the largest budgets, if not the largest budget, in history, right? Link. That's a budget of $200 million.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, meaning it's the results are what counts, and the results undermine your entire point, as just shown. Good God, this is hilarious :lol:

It has everything the Witcher 2 has and then some. Deeper stealth gameplay, more magic, more crashing, more alchemy, it isn't linear and there is more to do.Miketheman83

Well, can't argue with this one, it crashes, and crashes a lot... it's a Bethesda game after all...

Also, the magic system is a joke, it's unbalanced, it's shallow, and it just plain sucks. After you hit Lvl.30, the spells stop scalling, they don't become any stronger, which is a huge issue. While I do like Skyrim, it's a heavily flawed game, some elements are simply a broken mess that can't be even fixed with mods...

And is there a single person in existance that uses the alchemy in Skyrim?

Leveling up your alchemy skill must be the dullest and most useless things you can do in life...

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"][QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

I don't need the evidence. You do, as you made the initial claim. Are we debating with a child here? This is a False Burden of Proof.

You realize that The Old Republic was speculated at having one of the largest budgets, if not the largest budget, in history, right? Link. That's a budget of $200 million.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, meaning it's the results are what counts, and the results undermine your entire point, as just shown. Good God, this is hilarious :lol:

MrYaotubo

Yeah, even reading through his posts feels a bit... wrong! :|

Just... sad...

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"][QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

I don't need the evidence. You do, as you made the initial claim. Are we debating with a child here? This is a False Burden of Proof.

You realize that The Old Republic was speculated at having one of the largest budgets, if not the largest budget, in history, right? Link. That's a budget of $200 million.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, meaning it's the results are what counts, and the results undermine your entire point, as just shown. Good God, this is hilarious :lol:

lundy86_4

The Old Republic released in 2011. The brand is irrelevant. Electronic Arts pumped a ridiculous amount of money into the development of the game.

You're proving your idiocy when you gloss over massive portions of the post. Given up using a false burden of proof?

Provide your evidence.

So not confirmed? ok.