Rockstar confirms GTA IV for PC

[Blackthorn]

I always turn with a handbrake, so screw you and your analogue sticks.

Good luck with that in GTA4, cars do not like handbreak turns, spins them right around. Took a while to adapt to that since I used to handbreak every corner.

 

[OmegaX]

It's a good game... I just felt it could have been better. The single player starts off slow with the very easy missions, but gradually gets much better. The thing is they went for realism with this one and that takes out alot of the wacky fun you may have had in the previous ones.

I'll actually looking forward to Saints Row 2, I feel it will be the more fun/wacky version of GTA IV.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

You know, I really feel it's missing something. Something has gone from the series that was there with 3, VC and SA, and it was such a damper on the experience for me.

I completely agree with this. I stopped playing half way through the story and have no plan of going back (to the console version, at least).

 

[soulslicer]

You know, I really feel it's missing something. Something has gone from the series that was there with 3, VC and SA, and it was such a damper on the experience for me.

I agree with this. For some odd reason, I didn't enjoy it as much as SA.

I agree with this. For some odd reason, I didn't enjoy it as much as VC.

I also agree. I found it pretty OK, but that's it.

I completely agree with this. I stopped playing half way through the story and have no plan of going back (to the console version, at least).

And just like that, my anticipation level dropped by 30 percent.

 

[FishBulb]

And just like that, my anticipation level dropped by 30 percent.

That's good. That way, when you get to play it, you won't be crushed when your hype falls.

 

[eraser]

You know, I really feel it's missing something. Something has gone from the series that was there with 3, VC and SA, and it was such a damper on the experience for me.

Agreed man, agreed.

It's just missing some of the magic. I mean when it first came out, in my opinion, it really hooked you, but the replay and exploring capabilities just aren't the same.

 

[Raziaar]

The only thing I felt was missing for the most part, was airplanes and perhaps feeling the world was too small.

I was really spoiled with San Andreas huge if sparse world... and even though GTA IV is huge as well, it doesn't feel like it.


I think GTA IV is a fantastic game.

 

[eraser]

I think GTA IV is a fantastic game.

Oh, of course. It's definitely quite an amazing game. I guess it's just that freedom you had in SA, as you said, that spoiled us.

 

[VirusType2]

OH, well, that won't bother me.

I usually just stick to one area and run over people.

Once I've got a few hundred rounds, then I paint the town red, collect all the money, and go save my game.

I like to explore too but I never see all there is to see in any GTA game.


My main thing is really to drive around (making sure I steal any car that is better than mine) and shoot people.


I'll love it.

 

[Saturos]

Can probably expect the graphics to be slighty improved over the console versions fs, but to me, just like how I prefer to play FPSs on PC, third-person action games play better on a console. The only plus other than (probably) improved graphics imo is the ability to install third-person mods to enhance gameplay and overall enjoyment over the vanilla version.

We'll just have to wait and see how creative the modding community is with GTA IV.

The only thing I felt was missing for the most part, was airplanes and perhaps feeling the world was too small.

I was really spoiled with San Andreas huge if sparse world... and even though GTA IV is huge as well, it doesn't feel like it.


I think GTA IV is a fantastic game.

I missed the over-the-top gameplay from San Andreas too, but GTA IV's physics are so damn awesome, I nearly forgot about GTA SA's world.

The only thing that disappointed me personally is the lack of a national guard 6-star rating along with the tanks. Would've been fun as hell to run over cars in GTA IV with a tank with it's uber-vehicle damage physics. You'd be able to flatten cars like a tin can! :O Would've been so awesome. Oh, I missed the mini-gun too.

Oh, the car crusher from GTA III would've been interesting in GTA IV too.

 

[eraser]

Can probably expect the graphics to be slighty improved over the console versions fs, but to me, just like how I prefer to play FPSs on PC, third-person action games play better on a console. The only plus other than (probably) improved graphics imo is the ability to install third-person mods to enhance gameplay and enjoyment over the vanilla version.

We'll just have to wait and see how creative the modding community is with GTA IV.

Yeah, in all honesty even just a first-person perspective mod where I can walk around the city just looking at shit would be fun. Not to mention the countless other things that will be released by the community.

 

[PimpinPenguin]

If Rockstar let the community mod, they may lock up the game since they are still pissed off about the Hot Coffee incident.

 

[AiM]

If Rockstar let the community mod, they may lock up the game since they are still pissed off about the Hot Coffee incident.

I suppose what got them really in trouble was the fact that the material was already hidden within the game and made by Rockstar. Now I know it was locked and never intended to be released, but it's arguably "different" than say if a 3rd party mod maker made a sex scene themselves.

Considering the amount of mod support for previous GTA games, I can't see how Rockstar can lock GTA IV for just themselves.

 

[PimpinPenguin]

Considering the amount of mod support for previous GTA games, I can't see how Rockstar can lock GTA IV for just themselves.

With the San Andreas 1.2 patch Rockstar really limited the amount of modding allowed. I think they are going to lock up alot of the main files and only allow basic modding such as replacing cars.

 

[Blackthorn]

I'm loving GTAIV myself, and it definitely feels better than San Andreas to me. For all it's freedoms, and some amazing missions, there was just so much total crap you had to put up with. The whole gang territory system was just awful, as was working out and having to increase weapon skills which inevitably just became grinding. The country was expansive, but filled with **** all except the occasional empty farm. And when you were driving this country, miles from anywhere, only to get an alert saying that you're hungry was amongst the most annoying moments from the last generation. Vice City is still the pinnacle of GTA IMO.

I do have notable gripes with IV though. None of the missions feels as crazy as some of VC & SA's best, they're nearly all "Drive, chase, kill". The vastly improved combat does help it feeling too repetitive, but you can't help wanting to burn weed fields or parachute out of a plane. The story is definitely better than the ridiculous "rags to riches" of SA, but you never feel like you're ever making real progression. Some of the best moments in SA were when you'd have to leave your previous home, to be dropped in a new location that you knew nothing about. I think they open up the whole city far too quickly in GTAIV, not far into the game you feel you've seen everything. It definitely feels like Rockstar are intentionally holding back on the crazier features so that they'll have plenty of new stuff for the inevitable next release. It's as if they went out their way to make it the GTAIII of this generation, which makes me anticipate greatly what leaps they'll deliver in the next one, but I wish they hadn't simplified it quite so much.

To conclude: Vice City > GTAIV > San Andreas

 

[Kadayi]

It's going to be interesting to see what the exclusive DLC is that the 360 is getting soon, and also whether that exclusive content eventually ends up on the PC as well.

 

[smwScott]

GTAIV is a far better and more cerebral experience than the previous ones. The game is just so much better, hands down. The gameplay is incredible, the story can truly be taken seriously, and there's just so much more depth.

The only thing it's lacking is side-missions and random stuff to do, but I can forgive that. It still got more hours out of me than VC or GTA3, and I enjoyed those hours far more than I did any of the past games.

 

[joule]

Driving in GTA games on the PC using mouse and keyboard is so much better than a gamepad, you can look where you want without having to worry about the oversensitivity of the camera on the analogue sticks , and shoot dead on.

For most games, PC controls have the obvious advantage, but I think GTA is one of those games I feel much more comfortable using a 360 controller. One advantage is the trigger for accelerating some of the cars, especially the bikes.

 

[stemot]

For most games, PC controls have the obvious advantage, but I think GTA is one of those games I feel much more comfortable using a 360 controller. One advantage is the trigger for accelerating some of the cars, especially the bikes.

See, the one thing I hate about the 360 version is actually how difficult it is to drive, aim the camera and shoot a target, and when it's the only way to pass a mission, it gets a little infuriating when you fail because the camera's a bag of shite to get accurate. The PC version will not suffer from this. Also, a keyboard has an up arrow for accelerating, what's your point?

 

[Blackthorn]

His point is keyboard keys lack analogue functionality. Go on, find a way to deny that.

 

[PimpinPenguin]

So what, If i want to go slower i just tap the key. Better than holding it half way on a joypad.

 

[Blackthorn]

Face it, they both have benefits. Analogue control is the benefit of a controller. Stubbornly saying tapping a key is better is just ridiculous.

 

[Kadayi]

I use a 360 controller for flying generally in GTA 3 games, but M&K for the run & gun and driving mainly.

 

[OmegaX]

Face it, they both have benefits. Analogue control is the benefit of a controller. Stubbornly saying tapping a key is better is just ridiculous.

I agree. You have much better control over something like that with analog. Any game that is 70% driving works better with a controller.

 

[Stigmata]

So what, If i want to go slower i just tap the key. Better than holding it half way on a joypad.

Nope.

 

[redruM]

YESSS!!! Bring on the custom vehicle & weapon models, screw the console version.

 

[Raziaar]

See, the one thing I hate about the 360 version is actually how difficult it is to drive, aim the camera and shoot a target, and when it's the only way to pass a mission, it gets a little infuriating when you fail because the camera's a bag of shite to get accurate. The PC version will not suffer from this. Also, a keyboard has an up arrow for accelerating, what's your point?

It's not intended to be easy to drive a vehicle and fire from it at the same time... They said it would be rather difficult.

But I find it pretty easy myself, even aiming for targets such as specific wheels or the driver through the windows.

I adore driving in GTA IV and generally have no trouble with it.


Oh and for PC, I definitely recommend using a controller... it's the only way to go.

 

[PimpinPenguin]

I guess it's a matter of choice. I hated using a controller on San Andreas and preferred the keyboard. Ok it may not be the best for driving, but it's far better for shooting. I don't see why people find it hard driving with a keyboard, i find it easy, tapping the keys easily make up for it being digital.

 

[StardogChampion]

GTA is hardly a driving sim so analogue isn't so useful. Just look at SA online vs people with gamepads. They rarely win over hardcore keyboard users.

 

[Raziaar]

When I play I use a gamepad AND a keyboard.

Most people I've played with who play SAMP and the other one, do the same.

I have my controller on my desk and when I'm driving I use my gamepad(ps2 controller), and when I'm on foot I effortlessly switch to keyboard and mouse.

Gamepad is oodles better when driving, and mouse and keyboard is oodles better when on foot.

 

[stemot]

It's not intended to be easy to drive a vehicle and fire from it at the same time... They said it would be rather difficult.

But I find it pretty easy myself, even aiming for targets such as specific wheels or the driver through the windows.

I adore driving in GTA IV and generally have no trouble with it.


Oh and for PC, I definitely recommend using a controller... it's the only way to go.

But it shouldn't be hard, it just a lazy excuse. If it's really the case that their mission design rests solely on not being able to hit people in cars accurately because that's how they designed the camera to be, then why when they port them to PC are the camera's still not the same oversensitive mess?

 

[bam23]

DLC adding the over-the-top weapons for the 360 version is needed. **** realism in a game where the possibilities could be endless. Give us flyable planes and a cheat for permanent 0-star wanted level too. I played around for hours on the SA PC version just messing with stuff.

And a better annihilator for **** sake :|

edit - haha, that was way off topic D:

 

[Raziaar]

But it shouldn't be hard, it just a lazy excuse. If it's really the case that their mission design rests solely on not being able to hit people in cars accurately because that's how they designed the camera to be, then why when they port them to PC are the camera's still not the same oversensitive mess?

Yeah it should be hard. It was a design decision, not a lazy excuse at all. They wanted to convey the inaccuracies of driving an automobile and busting out your window and trying to shoot at a car that's swerving all over the place trying to avoid you. It's easier to program accuracy as a constant than it is adding the additional element of potential inaccuracy which would be a possibly frequently changing variable, so don't give me that crap about it being a lazy excuse. It's design decision all the way.

The game would be retarded if it was made easy to constantly target a moving vehicle as you lean out of the vehicle partially while still handling the gas, break, gears and steering.

I think it's still too easy anyways and killing people doing it is ridiculously simple, but oh well.


As for camera, I never had a problem with the camera while playing GTA IV.

 

[Unfocused]

Tapping a key is more convenient than holding it halfway down?

As for camera, I never had a problem with the camera while playing GTA IV.

Hm, I tend to push the right stick forward to make the camera hover higher over the car, so I can see what's ahead better. The camera is slightly too low by default IMHO.

 

[PimpinPenguin]

What's the big deal in tapping the key? I find it mile more comfortable than holding a button half-way down. Plus the combination of mouse and keyboard will make driving and shooting a breeze. Like to see you use a controller to drive and a mouse to aim and shoot.

 

[Unfocused]

What's the big deal in tapping the key? I find it mile more comfortable than holding a button half-way down. Plus the combination of mouse and keyboard will make driving and shooting a breeze. Like to see you use a controller to drive and a mouse to aim and shoot.

I only find it weird that you prefer it that way. Holding the button seems to take less effort than repeatedly pressing and letting go.

Would you rather tap the gas pedal in a car than press it with appropriate force to maintain a constant speed?

 

[stemot]

Yeah it should be hard. It was a design decision, not a lazy excuse at all. They wanted to convey the inaccuracies of driving an automobile and busting out your window and trying to shoot at a car that's swerving all over the place trying to avoid you. It's easier to program accuracy as a constant than it is adding the additional element of potential inaccuracy which would be a possibly frequently changing variable, so don't give me that crap about it being a lazy excuse. It's design decision all the way.

The game would be retarded if it was made easy to constantly target a moving vehicle as you lean out of the vehicle partially while still handling the gas, break, gears and steering.

I think it's still too easy anyways and killing people doing it is ridiculously simple, but oh well.


As for camera, I never had a problem with the camera while playing GTA IV.

I would agree with that, if the missions had been programmed with some thought to the inaccuracy to the camera taken into account, seems the mission is expecting you to kill these guys pretty early on, yet you can't due to shitty camera's, then they just have the target take the same route round again once they run to the end of their programmed route. That appears to me like they expect you to kill them before they hit that point, but when your on a bike hurtling along to keep up with your target whilst trying to avoid traffic, all the while dealing with an unruly camera, it doesn't work, hence locking on targets.

The PC versions never suffer from these problems and the games are still just as challenging in their missions, just that we don't suffer from having to battle a camera as well as the targets.

 

[Blackthorn]

I found that if you don't drive too fast, the person you're chasing won't either, worked in SA too. Looks like Rockstar put in some rubber banding to make sure they never get too far away if you're a less reckless driver. Driving at less than full speed definitely makes aiming easier.

 

[stemot]

I found that if you don't drive too fast, the person you're chasing won't either, worked in SA too. Looks like Rockstar put in some rubber banding to make sure they never get too far away if you're a less reckless driver. Driving at less than full speed definitely makes aiming easier.

I never found that, I find if I don't keep at full, they get away, which is really annoying if you start the chase in a crappy car

 

[Blackthorn]

Well of course don't go slow, but it seems programmed that you can never overtake the person you're chasing, so if you go full speed, they just go faster.