Rockstar; why no GTA 4 for PC?

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
they are going to wait a year or so and milk the consul version of GTA for all the money they can. (like every GTA title) then when sales start to drop then they release the PC version to milk even more money. Rockstar dose it every year.
 



I just hope that this is true and wait for results, there`s nothin` left for us to do 🙁
 
Why the hell are we speculating things and hoping for a PC release. There are a lot of good games for PC Gamers from last year as well as this year. COD4, BIOSHOCK, CRYSIS, ASSASSINS CREED to name a few. Even if ROCK* do not release the game on PC this year, PC gamers have alot of good games coming their way. MAFIA 2 would be releasing for PC along with consoles on Oct, 31 2008 which is going to be an even better game than GTA 4. If you are a PC gamer and you have played the above mentioned games (COD 4,etc) you should not be worried about the system requirements of any game on this planet. I feel sorry for all of you who were sucked into buying PS3 or XBOX 360 just for a game. For those of you who are looking forward to Buy PS3 for playing MGS4 (another successful game of the year), I would suggest you practice a little self-restraint as rumour is going around that by end of year 2008 Sony are planning to reduce the price by 200$.
 
Here is some BIG NEWS. Along with Mafia 2 there is another successfull title making its way to all PC Gamers. Ang this one is gonna Rock cause it's ......................SAINTS ROW 2(Release date 14th Oct,2008)............Your chance to play a Gangsta all over again................Mafia 2 and Saints Row 2 will surely make people forget about GTA 4 for a longtime. So even ifff Rockstar decides to release their GTA 4 this November they would have to face stifff competition.
 


Keep waiting, it's no big loss. I played it hard core the first 2 weeks it came out, and haven't touched it since. It's mind-numbingly dull. Get a car, go kill someone. Get a car, go out to eat/race/date/mission. Get a car, go kill someone...

After about 40% through the main missions they become rather monotonous. I'll be damned if I'm gonna waste hours looking for 200 pigeons to shoot and jumps to jump. I completed the "final" mission and was relieved it was over, not excited.

Online play is cool though. That's where the PC version will shine.
 
the only game thats come out on consoles that I really wanted... was battlefield bad company... but w/e we'll get an even better battlefield in 09 so w/e
 
the only game thats come out on consoles that I really wanted... was battlefield bad company...
Click to expand...

It's the best Battlefield yet IMO. While I originally thought the gold aspect would be rather lame, the whole attack/hold the line aspect of the entire battle is great. It being gold crates is irrelevant. Most of the map being able to be destroyed is nice too. I was running down a hill overlooking the main battle and saw a big explosion then a tree fell in the a middle of the woods. I knew there was a tank there, it looked awesome. The surround is much improved over previous versions as well.

A sniper can now use plane-dropped laser guided bombs, which you can steer, and it changes everything! No more being on a hillside with a tank/apc hunting you and being helpless.
 



and shine it will. one big thing(and i do mean BIG) that the pc community has over the console community(xbox360-ps3) we have modders and developers(and i dont mean devs that made the game) point blank period. console dont have sandbox or radiant(etc...). and yes a C2D(any) + 8800Gt + 2 gigs ram = play all games at high settings. plus we can upgrade anytime to meet game standards. no matter if its a gfx card or a cpu your not going to spend over $200(given ur buying cheap stuff).

off Wikipedia site "Staff at Sony were quoted in PlayStation Magazine saying that the "RSX shares a lot of inner workings with NVIDIA 7800 which is based on G70 architecture" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSX_%27Reality_Synthesizer%27

my old AGP 8x 7800 GS 256 ram is equivalent to the ps3 gpu. and i BEAT on ppl in CoD4.

ps3-xbox 360 - 30-35 fps (locked) @ 1280x1024 (maybe some games get higher but not much more that this)

pc - up too 60 fps @ 2560x1600 on a 30'' LCD


the cost a console is around the same price of a C2D(e4700) P5N-E SLI mobo + 8800Gt + 2 gigs ram(i just built this i know its not a monster but i can play crysis @ 1440x900 on my LCD with all high settings and have around 30-35fps). but you still have to tv to play it on. ok u can buy a cheap tv but for the best graphics you'll need a HDTV to get that. that cost what(???) roughly $2000+ for a good one. so that console just got a lot more expensive than any pc.
 


I agree with you here. I had more fun playing a mod of 1942...




Here I disagree. I built a home theater (110" projector, 7.1, etc), to have a...movie theater. I had an HD DVD player but also wanted Blu-ray. The Sony stand alone unit was $399. The PS3 was $399. From my perspective, the PS3 was a "free" bonus on top of having built in wireless/2.0 bluetooth allowing me to do firm/software updates for the Blu-ray player, something only now stand alone units are getting the ability to do without discs...
 
i doenst make any difference. really who am i to tell you wan to spend your money on. i can careless if you spend it on 3 c**ted hookers and a lollipops.

projectors (cons)- using a projector you would have to turn down your lights and/or dim the room. unless u have a high lum. projector. Bulbs have to be changed often (depending on usage). Also projectors' fans make noise when on(most). you have to place it in the right position for good viewing. For a good res. and good lum. projector expect to spend a pretty penny.

pros - you get that "theater feeling" and look.

regardless its still not convening enough to buy one. and i really dont want a console that why i have a PC.
 
???

Thanks for telling me the pro/cons of my projector. You still haven't addressed you adding the cost of the tv into the total cost of a console. Everyone already has a tv. I'm not saying a pc/console is better. I have both and enjoy them. It's a retarded going in circles argument. Both have advantages, both have disadvantages.
 
well like i told you too explain and it took like 4 hrs to write that. lol your right YOU are "a retard going in circles argument"(????) if that makes any sense. try "arguing in circles like a retard"
 


When inferring someone is a retard, using correct grammar and punctuation helps your argument. I said the argument was retarded, not you for the record.
 
7|-|)( ƒ0® ß31|\|9 4 734(|-|3® 1 £3ƒ7 7|-|3|\/| ß4(|{ 1|\| $(|-|00£. 3\/3|\| 7|-|0 7|-|3 $µß_|3(7 |-|4$ ß3 Ð3®41£3Ð 4 £0|\|9 71|\/|3 490 17 Ð03|\|$ |\/|4773®.

can u correct me on my grammar and punctuation now?
 
Um... last time I checked, a quality 50 inch (1080p) plasma still cost $2000.

So, that makes a console more expensive. Besides almost every console game only displays 720p. Any PC game can play at 1080p, and with video cards like the 8800GT and 4850 as cheap as they are, most people can play at that resolution as well.
 
I'm not saying there was no TV, but that most likely there was no widescreen LCD or Plasma TV.
A lot of people in the US right now stlll do not have a widescreen plasma, they still have the old 4:3 aspect TV. Whether they are projection or CRT does not matter. In order to play a console game and have it look decent you need a plasma or LCD.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom