If GTA V Is anything Like IV...

...Then I will never buy from Rockstar again. By that I mean optimization, it's just ridiculous.

Constant framerate drops, constant stuttering, constant bugs and glitches, it's just impossible to appreciate the game when there's so many problems with the port.

GTA IV is the only game I've had problems with playing on the higher settings, and these are major, major problems.

Well then rejoice! Cause there is always a possibility that the next installment won't touch PC.

Yes, definitely, bad performance is a small price to pay for R* games, especially since I consider that I ran it great considering the hardware I have. When somebody will do better games or even half as I good I might consider not getting a R* games, GTA especially, till then more power to them.

Try it on a consle then tell me Gta4 sucks

Yes, definitely, bad performance is a small price to pay for R* games, especially since I consider that I ran it great considering the hardware I have. When somebody will do better games or even half as I good I might consider not getting a R* games, GTA especially, till them more power to them.

DanielDust

Same here. Never been a framerate counter, anyway.

Yes, definitely, bad performance is a small price to pay for R* games, especially since I consider that I ran it great considering the hardware I have. When somebody will do better games or even half as I good I might consider not getting a R* games, GTA especially, till them more power to them.

DanielDust

But there's no denying that it could have been much better optimized.

[QUOTE="DanielDust"]

Yes, definitely, bad performance is a small price to pay for R* games, especially since I consider that I ran it great considering the hardware I have. When somebody will do better games or even half as I good I might consider not getting a R* games, GTA especially, till them more power to them.

Resistance_Kid

But there's no denying that it could have been much better optimized.

[QUOTE="Resistance_Kid"]

[QUOTE="DanielDust"]

Yes, definitely, bad performance is a small price to pay for R* games, especially since I consider that I ran it great considering the hardware I have. When somebody will do better games or even half as I good I might consider not getting a R* games, GTA especially, till them more power to them.

DanielDust

But there's no denying that it could have been much better optimized.

There are games that look better than GTA IV, and are much better optimized, and run much better than GTA IV.

Give it a break. It's an epic game however the port is crap and buggy.

There are no games on PC as advanced or with tons of textures that run better than GTA or exist. Graphics might not be that great but everything other than graphics is the best ever created, all the technical stuff that makes the game work.

PC has the best version if you can max it, and it still is the best at console settings, only thing they should have fixed from the start was the micro stuttering near water which was fixed in EFLC and the latest GTA IV patch, the rest is flawless considering everything it has going on, and you keep telling about graphics, I only said one gig of VRAM, even a mainstream card can max it out on 1280x960 or similar ws with 1 gig of VRAM, nobody said anything about it being the next Crysis.

There are no games on PC as advanced or with tons of textures that run better than GTA or exist. Graphics might not be that great but everything other than graphics is the best ever created, all the technical stuff that makes the game work.

PC has the best version if you can max it, and it still is the best at console settings, only thing they should have fixed from the start was the micro stuttering near water which was fixed in EFLC and the latest GTA IV patch, the rest is flawless considering everything it has going on, and you keep telling about graphics, I only said one gig of VRAM, even a mainstream card can max it out on 1280x960 or similar ws with 1 gig of VRAM, nobody said anything about it being the next Crysis.

DanielDust

I was going to ask this by the way. What settings do consoles use? And does the game support DX9 mode?

Give it a break. It's an epic game however the port is crap and buggy.

LIONHEART-_-

'however the port is crap and buggy.'

That's what I said ;)

Never said the game was bad, the game's awesome, just like the series. It's just unfortunate that the port is bad.

Try it on a consle then tell me Gta4 sucks

xboxmad12

All medium besides some settings that are only on PC with definition off and iirc draw distance and detail distance are somewhere around 10-14 and vehicle density under 30. From what I know it's only DX 9 :P.

Even with those settings consoles have frame drops so I'm happy playing the game at 36 average (on the latest patch) with shadows on medium, draw distance 45, detail 54, car density 58, everything on high except textures on medium at 1440x900 on a Q6600 and a mere 8800GT, sure there are some slowdowns from time to time but I'm happy with the results, especially since I don't expect anything great from my PC, just to work till the next, hopefully decent, GTX500 series :P.

[QUOTE="xboxmad12"]

Try it on a consle then tell me Gta4 sucks

kris9031998

All medium besides some settings that are only on PC with definition off and iirc draw distance and detail distance are somewhere around 10-14 and vehicle density under 30. From what I know it's only DX 9 :P.

Even with those settings consoles have frame drops so I'm happy playing the game at 36 average (on the latest patch) with shadows on medium, draw distance 45, detail 54, car density 58, everything on high except textures on medium at 1440x900 on a Q6600 and a mere 8800GT, sure there are some slowdowns from time to time but I'm happy with the results, especially since I don't expect anything great from my PC, just to work till the next, hopefully decent, GTX500 series :P.

DanielDust

What is definition?

If you turn it off the game becomes a blurry mess that hides the lack of AA. Here's a few pics, and lol I found my own screenshots on google :P which are also on GS Definition off at a low res to make it look like it has some sort of shapes (it's at low settings iirc) and with definition on DanielDust

So definition off=less jaggedy lines?

If you can understand anything while playing with so much blur then yeah :P if not and you have a good enough GPU you can try the ENB mod that enables AA. Not sure about a 4670, I know it didn't even activate on my 8800GT :P.

If you can understand anything while playing with so much blur then yeah :P if not and you have a good enough GPU you can try the ENB mod that enables AA. Not sure about a 4670, I know it didn't even activate on my 8800GT :P.

DanielDust

Well I use a mixture of medium-high settings and get 30+FPS on 1280x800 Resolution.

Take a look at this :P. Hate the lighting, that's the only reason why I don't like ENB, but it does look amasing except he didn't use the latest patch, those are the old shadows that used to look bad.

There are no games on PC as advanced or with tons of textures that run better than GTA or exist. Graphics might not be that great but everything other than graphics is the best ever created, all the technical stuff that makes the game work.

PC has the best version if you can max it, and it still is the best at console settings, only thing they should have fixed from the start was the micro stuttering near water which was fixed in EFLC and the latest GTA IV patch, the rest is flawless considering everything it has going on, and you keep telling about graphics, I only said one gig of VRAM, even a mainstream card can max it out on 1280x960 or similar ws with 1 gig of VRAM, nobody said anything about it being the next Crysis.

DanielDust

Your maths are a little off for a starters, to max GTA 4 out at 1280 x 960 you need at least 1.2gbs of Vram and I am interested to hear what you think a mainstream card is if you think one can max it out and still get playable framerates. I have a Quad + GTX260 and the game is unplayable (sub 10fps) with settings maxxed at 1280 x 960.

Now of course you are not going to believe me and claim there is something wrong with my machine (despite the fact I play all games at 2048 x 1152 maxxed out except GTA 4). So here it is from Rockstar Toronto tech support whom are on record as saying you need a fast i7 + 2 x GTX 480's :-

We tested similar settings on a fast core I7 with 2 GTX 480's in SLI and seeing a pretty consistant 30fps. The hardware to run this game at FULL MAX settings at 60 fps does not yet exist but the game is coded such that when it does it will take full advantage.Rockstar Toronto

source

The game was a horrible port and GTA 4 deserves all the bashing it gets the game runs horribly on pretty much all hardare. It was clear from the start the game was a mess, when it was first released many couldn't even run the game at all on decent hardware.

Now for those that want to know what the console settings are, we have some of them :-

Resolution = 1280 x 720 @ 30fps

Texture Quality = Medium

Reflection Quality = Medium

Shadow Quality = High

Render Quality = Low

View Distance = 21

Detail Distance = 10

Vehicle Density = 33

Night Shadows = Does not exist on the console

source

This settings have changed since patch 1.0.7.0 when Rockstar completely reworked the shadows. I tried the console equivalent settings on my Quad + GTX260 and I barely get above 30fps for most of the time and see dips below 30fps at console settings it really is a horribly optimised port.

As to whether I will bother with the next GTA after the mess that was GTA 4. Well firstly there will be another GTA on the PC, the PC version sold incredibly well in European territories. I don't know if I will bother with another GTA on the PC myself, I am sick of this "release it on the console first and then the PC a year later" crap and the whole attitude Rockstar has towards PC gaming is just plain insulting. I will see what they do with the next GTA on the PC before deciding but if they don't pick up their game on the PC then they won't see my money.

We can argue about this all day long. I experienced a few glitches and patching didn't resolve all technical issues but I was able to play the game.

GTA4 could have been technically better at the cost of something else. The problem is that I liked San Andreas a lot better.

Why do people like cartoon violence so much? Because it's fun! That's why I enjoyed Saints Row 2 so much, despite it being a worse PC port than GTA4.

I can't wait to see what's coming up next, warts and all. :)

The game runs pretty well on my PC, butI do hope they drop that GFWL crap. The multiplayer can be overly complex if you happen to have a 'wrong' modem, let alone a wireless network.

[QUOTE="DanielDust"]There are no games on PC as advanced or with tons of textures that run better than GTA or exist. Graphics might not be that great but everything other than graphics is the best ever created, all the technical stuff that makes the game work.

PC has the best version if you can max it, and it still is the best at console settings, only thing they should have fixed from the start was the micro stuttering near water which was fixed in EFLC and the latest GTA IV patch, the rest is flawless considering everything it has going on, and you keep telling about graphics, I only said one gig of VRAM, even a mainstream card can max it out on 1280x960 or similar ws with 1 gig of VRAM, nobody said anything about it being the next Crysis.

charmingcharlie

Your maths are a little off for a starters, to max GTA 4 out at 1280 x 960 you need at least 1.2gbs of Vram and I am interested to hear what you think a mainstream card is if you think one can max it out and still get playable framerates. I have a Quad + GTX260 and the game is unplayable (sub 10fps) with settings maxxed at 1280 x 960.

Now of course you are not going to believe me and claim there is something wrong with my machine (despite the fact I play all games at 2048 x 1152 maxxed out except GTA 4). So here it is from Rockstar Toronto tech support whom are on record as saying you need a fast i7 + 2 x GTX 480's :-

We tested similar settings on a fast core I7 with 2 GTX 480's in SLI and seeing a pretty consistant 30fps. The hardware to run this game at FULL MAX settings at 60 fps does not yet exist but the game is coded such that when it does it will take full advantage.Rockstar Toronto

source

The game was a horrible port and GTA 4 deserves all the bashing it gets the game runs horribly on pretty much all hardare. It was clear from the start the game was a mess, when it was first released many couldn't even run the game at all on decent hardware.

Now for those that want to know what the console settings are, we have some of them :-

Resolution = 1280 x 720 @ 30fps

Texture Quality = Medium

Reflection Quality = Medium

Shadow Quality = High

Render Quality = Low

View Distance = 21

Detail Distance = 10

Vehicle Density = 33

Night Shadows = Does not exist on the console

source

This settings have changed since patch 1.0.7.0 when Rockstar completely reworked the shadows. I tried the console equivalent settings on my Quad + GTX260 and I barely get above 30fps for most of the time and see dips below 30fps at console settings it really is a horribly optimised port.

As to whether I will bother with the next GTA after the mess that was GTA 4. Well firstly there will be another GTA on the PC, the PC version sold incredibly well in European territories. I don't know if I will bother with another GTA on the PC myself, I am sick of this "release it on the console first and then the PC a year later" crap and the whole attitude Rockstar has towards PC gaming is just plain insulting. I will see what they do with the next GTA on the PC before deciding but if they don't pick up their game on the PC then they won't see my money.

I can play the game fine on my rig with everything on high, water very high. View Distance 25, Detail distance 35, Vehicle Density 100, night shadows off at 1920 x 1080.

I get 38 fps in the BOGT benchmark (It runs better most of the time ingame) and 62 fps in GTA 4 and 55 in TLAD.

[QUOTE="charmingcharlie"]

[QUOTE="DanielDust"]There are no games on PC as advanced or with tons of textures that run better than GTA or exist. Graphics might not be that great but everything other than graphics is the best ever created, all the technical stuff that makes the game work.

PC has the best version if you can max it, and it still is the best at console settings, only thing they should have fixed from the start was the micro stuttering near water which was fixed in EFLC and the latest GTA IV patch, the rest is flawless considering everything it has going on, and you keep telling about graphics, I only said one gig of VRAM, even a mainstream card can max it out on 1280x960 or similar ws with 1 gig of VRAM, nobody said anything about it being the next Crysis.

HeavenIceDay

Your maths are a little off for a starters, to max GTA 4 out at 1280 x 960 you need at least 1.2gbs of Vram and I am interested to hear what you think a mainstream card is if you think one can max it out and still get playable framerates. I have a Quad + GTX260 and the game is unplayable (sub 10fps) with settings maxxed at 1280 x 960.

Now of course you are not going to believe me and claim there is something wrong with my machine (despite the fact I play all games at 2048 x 1152 maxxed out except GTA 4). So here it is from Rockstar Toronto tech support whom are on record as saying you need a fast i7 + 2 x GTX 480's :-

We tested similar settings on a fast core I7 with 2 GTX 480's in SLI and seeing a pretty consistant 30fps. The hardware to run this game at FULL MAX settings at 60 fps does not yet exist but the game is coded such that when it does it will take full advantage.Rockstar Toronto

source

The game was a horrible port and GTA 4 deserves all the bashing it gets the game runs horribly on pretty much all hardare. It was clear from the start the game was a mess, when it was first released many couldn't even run the game at all on decent hardware.

Now for those that want to know what the console settings are, we have some of them :-

Resolution = 1280 x 720 @ 30fps

Texture Quality = Medium

Reflection Quality = Medium

Shadow Quality = High

Render Quality = Low

View Distance = 21

Detail Distance = 10

Vehicle Density = 33

Night Shadows = Does not exist on the console

source

This settings have changed since patch 1.0.7.0 when Rockstar completely reworked the shadows. I tried the console equivalent settings on my Quad + GTX260 and I barely get above 30fps for most of the time and see dips below 30fps at console settings it really is a horribly optimised port.

As to whether I will bother with the next GTA after the mess that was GTA 4. Well firstly there will be another GTA on the PC, the PC version sold incredibly well in European territories. I don't know if I will bother with another GTA on the PC myself, I am sick of this "release it on the console first and then the PC a year later" crap and the whole attitude Rockstar has towards PC gaming is just plain insulting. I will see what they do with the next GTA on the PC before deciding but if they don't pick up their game on the PC then they won't see my money.

I can play the game fine on my rig with everything on high, water very high. View Distance 25, Detail distance 35, Vehicle Density 100, night shadows off at 1920 x 1080.

I get 38 fps in the BOGT benchmark (It runs better most of the time ingame) and 62 fps in GTA 4 and 55 in TLAD.

Maxed out means everything on very high, View Distance and Detail distance on 100, and night shadows on high ;)

I can play the game fine on my rig with everything on high, water very high. View Distance 25, Detail distance 35, Vehicle Density 100, night shadows off at 1920 x 1080.

I get 38 fps in the BOGT benchmark (It runs better most of the time ingame) and 62 fps in GTA 4 and 55 in TLAD.

HeavenIceDay

Then may I suggest you contact Rockstar Toronto and tell them they are lying about their own game. They are of the impression to max GTA 4 out you need an i7 + 2 x GTX480's and even on that system you will only get a stable 30fps. That isn't ME saying that it is the developers of the actual game saying that.

It would have also been nice if you had listed your specs so we know exactly what hardware you are running this game on with settings that are barely above the console version in some cases eg view distance on the console is 21 and you only have it at 25.

[QUOTE="HeavenIceDay"]

I can play the game fine on my rig with everything on high, water very high. View Distance 25, Detail distance 35, Vehicle Density 100, night shadows off at 1920 x 1080.

I get 38 fps in the BOGT benchmark (It runs better most of the time ingame) and 62 fps in GTA 4 and 55 in TLAD.

charmingcharlie

Then may I suggest you contact Rockstar Toronto and tell them they are lying about their own game. They are of the impression to max GTA 4 out you need an i7 + 2 x GTX480's and even on that system you will only get a stable 30fps. That isn't ME saying that it is the developers of the actual game saying that.

It would have also been nice if you had listed your specs so we know exactly what hardware you are running this game on with settings that are barely above the console version in some cases eg view distance on the console is 21 and you only have it at 25.

Isn't maxed out supposed to be... maxed out? Like everything on very high and view distance, detail distance and Vehicle density on 100?

In that case he isn't playing it on max, though I may be wrong.

[QUOTE="HeavenIceDay"]

I can play the game fine on my rig with everything on high, water very high. View Distance 25, Detail distance 35, Vehicle Density 100, night shadows off at 1920 x 1080.

I get 38 fps in the BOGT benchmark (It runs better most of the time ingame) and 62 fps in GTA 4 and 55 in TLAD.

charmingcharlie

Then may I suggest you contact Rockstar Toronto and tell them they are lying about their own game. They are of the impression to max GTA 4 out you need an i7 + 2 x GTX480's and even on that system you will only get a stable 30fps. That isn't ME saying that it is the developers of the actual game saying that.

It would have also been nice if you had listed your specs so we know exactly what hardware you are running this game on with settings that are barely above the console version in some cases eg view distance on the console is 21 and you only have it at 25.

I didn't say i was maxing it out, i said i'm able to play it with a good framerate on high settings. What they said about the requirements could very well be true when you put view distance and detail distance to maximum.

I have a Q9650 @ 3 Ghz (may overclock soon), 4 GB DDR2 OCZ Dual Channel Ram and a 480 GTX Zotac AMP!.

Isn't maxed out supposed to be... maxed out? Like everything on very high and view distance, detail distance and Vehicle density on 100?

In that case he isn't playing it on max, though I may be wrong.

Resistance_Kid

You obviously didn't get the memo Resistance_Kid, maxxed out no longer means "maxxing the settings out" on the PC. It seems to me that Maxxed out = whatever settings people can play the game at now. The point is if you need a fast i7 + 2 x GTX480's just to "max" GTA 4 out at 1920 x 1080 @ 30fps then you have to question those that claim they can run GTA 4 at very high settings and get playable frame rates.

At the end of the day I know it is futile arguing with those that believe GTA 4 is a well optimised game, they just refuse to accept it. The quality Rockstar Toronto put into GTA 4 and the patches is pretty abysmal. I remember patch 1.0.2.0 even removed a lot of game assets from the game which had to be re-added again in patch 1.0.3.0.

If the next GTA is of the same dubious quality as GTA 4 then I know I definitely will not be touching it with a barge pole and judging by many comments I have read from PC users I am not alone in that decision.

I have a Q9650 @ 3 Ghz (may overclock soon), 4 GB DDR2 OCZ Dual Channel Ram and a 480 GTX Zotac AMP!.HeavenIceDay

So you have a very decent system and a graphics card that completely eclipses the console gpu by a factor of at least 10. Yet despite all this you have to play the game at some settings that are hardly better than the console version and you think that is acceptable ? I just give up.

...Then I will never buy from Rockstar again. By that I mean optimization, it's just ridiculous.

Constant framerate drops, constant stuttering, constant bugs and glitches, it's just impossible to appreciate the game when there's so many problems with the port.

GTA IV is the only game I've had problems with playing on the higher settings, and these are major, major problems.

Resistance_Kid

e8400 @ 4.2ghz, btw your computer isn't that strong lol so this game probably runs like total crap for you.

[QUOTE="Resistance_Kid"]Isn't maxed out supposed to be... maxed out? Like everything on very high and view distance, detail distance and Vehicle density on 100?

In that case he isn't playing it on max, though I may be wrong.

charmingcharlie

You obviously didn't get the memo Resistance_Kid, maxxed out no longer means "maxxing the settings out" on the PC. It seems to me that Maxxed out = whatever settings people can play the game at now. The point is if you need a fast i7 + 2 x GTX480's just to "max" GTA 4 out at 1920 x 1080 @ 30fps then you have to question those that claim they can run GTA 4 at very high settings and get playable frame rates.

At the end of the day I know it is futile arguing with those that believe GTA 4 is a well optimised game, they just refuse to accept it. The quality Rockstar Toronto put into GTA 4 and the patches is pretty abysmal. I remember patch 1.0.2.0 even removed a lot of game assets from the game which had to be re-added again in patch 1.0.3.0.

If the next GTA is of the same dubious quality as GTA 4 then I know I definitely will not be touching it with a barge pole and judging by many comments I have read from PC users I am not alone in that decision.

I have a Q9650 @ 3 Ghz (may overclock soon), 4 GB DDR2 OCZ Dual Channel Ram and a 480 GTX Zotac AMP!.HeavenIceDay

So you have a very decent system and a graphics card that completely eclipses the console gpu by a factor of at least 10. Yet despite all this you have to play the game at some settings that are hardly better than the console version and you think that is acceptable ? I just give up.

Well it does look much better then the console version at these settings and i still enjoy the game a lot (See my Bloopers series on YT :P ) but i agree that the port is really really bad, so many people have problems running this game its no wonder only so few people play the multiplayer on PC.

I hope they do a better job with RDR if they release it at all...

Btw. i benchmarked with everything set to max. Here are the results:

TLAD: 37,69 fps

BOGT: 24,84 fps

GTA 4: 48,08 fps

But every version ran like complete and utter crap in actual ingame situation which proofs that the benchmarks mean next to nothing in this game.

[QUOTE="Resistance_Kid"]

...Then I will never buy from Rockstar again. By that I mean optimization, it's just ridiculous.

Constant framerate drops, constant stuttering, constant bugs and glitches, it's just impossible to appreciate the game when there's so many problems with the port.

GTA IV is the only game I've had problems with playing on the higher settings, and these are major, major problems.

Jamiemydearx3

e8400 @ 4.2ghz, btw your computer isn't that strong lol so this game probably runs like total crap for you.

You're PC isn't exactly top-of-the-line...

You're PC isn't exactly top-of-the-line...

Wasdie

I know it's not, but it gets the job done. Besides, it's a HUGE step up from my last gfx card. :D

Also if you let me be picky(I'm not trolling or anything), you're=you are. You are PC isn't exactly top-of-the-line...? :D

Lol just having some fun, don't get me the wrong way.

But, yeah, not top of the line, but gets the job done. I finally got GTA IV running well on a mix of all settings.

I dunno, it runs pretty well for me. I run it with everything maxed out except without shadows at 1680 x 1050 on a 4870, E8400 @ 3Ghz, and 4Gs of DDR2 ram. Make sure you run the game with the clip capture feature off, it goes a bit slower when its on.

Edit: Also, I forgot to mention I like to use the Ultimate Graphics Tweak with the game, it makes it run a little bit smoother imo:

http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?showtopic=386262&st=0

[QUOTE="Resistance_Kid"]

[QUOTE="DanielDust"]

Yes, definitely, bad performance is a small price to pay for R* games, especially since I consider that I ran it great considering the hardware I have. When somebody will do better games or even half as I good I might consider not getting a R* games, GTA especially, till them more power to them.

DanielDust

But there's no denying that it could have been much better optimized.

If you can understand anything while playing with so much blur then yeah :P if not and you have a good enough GPU you can try the ENB mod that enables AA. Not sure about a 4670, I know it didn't even activate on my 8800GT :P.

DanielDust

ENB series mod worked on mine with an 8800gt OC.

I also used the Realizm mod and ultimate textures 2.0 mod.

I couldn't get AA to work though....

The thing that bugs me the most is the loading textures.....everything is blurry for a sec and it gets on my nerves.

[QUOTE="DanielDust"]

If you can understand anything while playing with so much blur then yeah :P if not and you have a good enough GPU you can try the ENB mod that enables AA. Not sure about a 4670, I know it didn't even activate on my 8800GT :P.

Hakkai007

ENB series mod worked on mine with an 8800gt OC.

I also used the Realizm mod and ultimate textures 2.0 mod.

I couldn't get AA to work though....

The thing that bugs me the most is the loading textures.....everything is blurry for a sec and it gets on my nerves.

First screen has too many bright colors, looks a bit unrealistic. Second screen, Niko looks hideous.

Just my opinion.

First screen has too many bright colors, looks a bit unrealistic. Second screen, Niko looks hideous.

Just my opinion.

Resistance_Kid

Meh I was just messing with putting different mods together.

[QUOTE="xboxmad12"]

Try it on a consle then tell me Gta4 sucks

kris9031998

haha good one

Also if you let me be picky(I'm not trolling or anything), you're=you are. You are PC isn't exactly top-of-the-line...? :D

Lol just having some fun, don't get me the wrong way.

Resistance_Kid

What is the point of mentioning that if your not gonna troll with it?

[QUOTE="Resistance_Kid"]

Also if you let me be picky(I'm not trolling or anything), you're=you are. You are PC isn't exactly top-of-the-line...? :D

Lol just having some fun, don't get me the wrong way.

True_Sounds

What is the point of mentioning that if your not gonna troll with it?

So that he doesn't embbarass himself in the future... I'm actually doing him a favor you know.

Welcome to the internet :)

I dont know how GTA iV works for you guys...but for me it runs pretty decent.

And i never encountered any bugs or major glitches in the game.

Btw i run GTA IV @ the settings from the pic and my min. fps are 25. average 35. and highest 60.I do play with v-sync turned on.

And TLAD min fps are 20. average 30-32. and max 50.

GTA IV worked fine for me up until the 1.0.6.0 update, at which point I got bad lag and stutter. An affinity fix got the game working like normal again, but that doesn't hide the fact that IV has some serious optimization issues. I still get massive framerate dips and rendering problems in random places, and I've gotten dropped consistently from multiplayer games, something that never happened to me on the 360 version.

I will say that the game does work rather well for me at medium settings, which still looks pretty good, and I don't have any problems with the gameplay itself (missions could use more variety, especially towards the end of the game). At the end of the day, it's still a pretty decent game for me, and barring any gamebreaking performance issues, I'll still get GTA V. I just expected a little better with the hardware I have and how the game looks.