*Weeping in tears of joy*

EDIT:

*Sniffs around and realizes it's a pile of crap*

Excellent.

Can't wait to see what awesome things the modders will do.

Rockstar hasn't mentioned it, yet anyone with sense knows it's coming. Every main GTA game has come to PC's, and nVidia themselves said GTA V is coming later.

As for "PC fanboys" not caring, not sure who you're referring to, but this game will make Rockstar possibly another billion dollars once it releases on Steam. Don't underestimate PC *gamers*.

I bet you'll still be arguing against the PC version even after it's released. Are you by any chance the author of the "Keep GTA V off PC" petition? You seem to be on that troll level.

talk about a misleading title. the title states that the game "will" have these things, yet the article says,

"Also note the x64 reference, which means that the game will have support for 64 Bit memory. ie more then 4 GB of RAM, ie very high texture packs inbound, whether Vanilla or Mods we cant say. So you can easily expect 2k + texture packs in the future."

expecting 2k textures based on conjecture is not the same as it being a fact that they're coming. especially since, again, the title makes it seem like we know for a fact they're coming.

also, please learn the different between 'then' and 'than' or just stop writing articles for sites.

Exactly. If they announce it now, people may hold off for the PC version.

Most can't though, because we've already waited 5 years for this game so it's a "must play now" sort of thing for a lot of us.

Yes it is absolutely smart of them. I really do not see any trouble with them releasing a pc xbox1 and ps4 version of the games due to the similarity in programming. I really do want to know if the speed of porting is as fast as rumored on ps4. Imagine them porting it in 3 weeks.

Funny how "must play now" is so true. If you played games a year behind the times the hobby would probably cost half the price, and the experiences wouldn't diminish in the slightest.

But we just... can't.... wait!

Well the thing is, if they can milk it more. Why wouldnt they ? :P On one hand we have Valve where we beg them to milk their franchises (HL3, Portal3) and the other hand we have R*....

775 mil actually. Profit that is.

it cost $300 million to make the game. Then you have to pay investers for risking their own money on the venture, which takes a large chunk considering such investments should make a return of about 8-12% per year. And finally there is always bonuses all throughout the company, and for government to then take 39% of the profit to pay for the welfare state, and lastly another 40% of the income of each employee at Rockstar.

My point is... the only greedy and immoral thing going on here is the government's screw*ng over of hardworking people... all so they can buy the votes of those non-working leeches who they redistribute those tax dollars to.

At least in europe they're not spending all the money, then borrowing an extra trillion a year as to not upset everyone living off the taxpayer.

I'm actually waiting for it to come out on a next gen platform called the PS4

Nexus 7 2013

gta 4 sold horribly on the pc compared to consoles/how do you come to your conclusion

@Vish
GTA IV is at the top of the Steam charts with every sale. I am sure the PC versions of all the GTA games did extremely well when they first hit and then continue to sell through sales.
Just because they may have low sales in terms of retail release, that doesn't mean they don't do well otherwise.
I can only assume they've shifted a lot of copies.
Besides, if GTA IV really did do poorly, I would simply point to the fact that you could never be sure whether or not, no matter the power, your PC will even run it properly.

I saw somewhere, although it has been awhile, that GTA IV sold over 20 million on consoles and under 3 million on PC. If I can find source I will come back and provide it.

How would you know how much he needs? Maybe he does a lot encoding or modelling work. Don't just make baseless assumptions just to make it look like you know what you're talking about.

So your assuming he does "modeling work" when this is primarily a video game forum. Id say if anything, your assumtion is most likely wrong.

didn't you know ram is everything this gen. It can do so many amazing things we just started making stuff up.

we can dream cant we

Little do people realize that GDDR5 is just a different version of DDR3.

@pandamobile I don't know I'm not a tech guy but I know Microsoft is getting hammered for using it

He has 16gb of DDR3, and 3gb of GDDR5 on his graphics card.

PC's use both.

Here is the difference:

The principle differences are:
•DDR3 runs at a higher voltage that GDDR5 (typically 1.25-1.65V versus ~1V)
•DDR3 uses a 64-bit memory controller per channel ( so, 128-bit bus for dual channel, 256-bit for quad channel), whereas GDDR5 is paired with controllers of a nominal 32-bit (16 bit each for input and output), but whereas the CPU's memory contoller is 64-bit per channel, a GPU can utilise any number of 32-bit I/O's (at the cost of die size) depending upon application ( 2 for 64-bit bus, 4 for 128-bit, 6 for 192-bit, 8 for 256-bit, 12 for 384-bit etc...). The GDDR5 setup also allows for doubling or asymetric memory configurations. Normally (using this generation of cards as example) GDDR5 memory uses 2Gbit memory chips for each 32-bit I/O (I.e for a 256-bit bus/2GB card: 8 x 32-bit I/O each connected by a circuit to a 2Gbit IC = 8 x 2Gbit = 16Gbit = 2GB), but GDDR5 can also operate in what is known as clamshell mode, where the 32-bit I/O instead of being connected to one IC is split between two (one on each side of the PCB) allowing for a doubling up of memory capacity. Mixing the arrangement of 32-bit memory controllers, memory IC density, and memory circuit splitting allows of asymetric configurations ( 192-bit, 2GB VRAM for example)
•Physically, a GDDR5 controller/IC doubles the I/O of DDR3 - With DDR, I/O handles an input (written to memory), or output (read from memory) but not both on the same cycle. GDDR handles input and output on the same cycle.

The memory is also fundamentally set up specifically for the application it uses:
System memory (DDR3) benefits from low latency (tight timings) at the expense of bandwidth, GDDR5's case is the opposite. Timings for GDDR5 would seems unbelieveably slow in relation to DDR3, but the speed of VRAM is blazing fast in comparison with desktop RAM- this has resulted from the relative workloads that a CPU and GPU undertake. Latency isn't much of an issue with GPU's since their parallel nature allows them to move to other calculation when latency cycles cause a stall in the current workload/thread. The performance of a graphics card for instance is greatly affected (as a percentage) by altering the internal bandwidth, yet altering the external bandwidth (the PCI-Express bus, say lowering from x16 to x8 or x4 lanes) has a minimal effect. This is because there is a great deal of I/O (textures for examples) that get swapped in and out of VRAM continuously- the nature of a GPU is many parallel computations, whereas a CPU computes in a basically linear way.

http://www.techspot.com/com...

On topic: Cannot wait for GTA 5 on PC! Having a blast with the 360 version at the moment. The modders are gonna do some pretty amazing things with the PC version.

Physx pretty much wipes the floor with havoc, especially with Physx 3.

Havoc is shit. Please stop using it. But then again if you have AMD you're pretty much stuck with that.

@Bolts

Physx 3 can run off the CPU. Only GPU-accelerated Physx is exclusive to Nvidia due to the CUDA cores.

Physx is rarely impressive anyway, but we'll see how its implemented (if at all).

its a hard bet to make. hindsight is always 20/20.

After Driveclub's reception, hard to say it would have done well enough to compete. It's easy to dream of such a thing, but to make it happen? It's taken how long for CoD to be dethroned? And it was dethroned by Hogwart's Legacy and has gained it right back just the next year.

Futbol.

Agree that all you just posted are great games. Expedition 33 is one of my favorites. Spent a large chunk of time on BG3 in 2023. Another for my all-time list.

My point though not well articulated in the OG post is that we would get more of the games of the quality you mentioned if so many valuable resources were not allocated to FTP slop and/or heavy monetization schemes. Some of what used to be my favorite franchises have been ruined by them.

To sum it up, I would like to see games like 33 outperform the profits made by games like Fortnite so more resources are allocated to great games. When heavily monetized FTP games are at the top of the list, we end up being stuck with a significant chunk of games that are not good. Or worst case scenario games that spend years in development, but get cancelled due to industry trend chasing.

Perhaps, and I hope you’re right. A shift is needed IMO