Slashdot Mirror
Live GTAIV Demo Dominates Take Two E3 Event
The Take Two event was dominated by a live demonstration of Grand Theft Auto IV . Though little more than jacking a car and a bit of driving was shown, it seemed to make an impression on journalists at the event. Other titles shown at the conference include Civilization Revolutions, Bioshock, and All-Pro Football 2K8. From Joystiq's take on the GTA demo: "Two Rockstar devs take the stage. The music is a placeholder, so they ask that we not mention it. They've never shown a game to an audience this large before it's release. They remind us that it's a work in progress, so we'll be nice. Something tells us it will impress regardless. The titles shares all key players from earlier GTA games. This consistency should ensure that the title meets expectations. With GTAIV, they're looking to "create the defining next generation action adventure." They show Niko starting in Star Juntion (Times Square). This is not a rags to riches story, 'it's a rags to slightly better rags story.'"
Grand Theft Auto hijacked the event.
So whats the over/under on Thompson releasing a press announcement before the week is up?
Wow, from Sid Meier to Bioshock to Grand Theft Auto, all in one hour. Quite the lineup. Seems like this was the conference to attend to see the games in action.
Reviewing just the first hour of video games.
cant wait for it, im almost to the point of actually going out and running people over if i cant get my fix soon *waits for police to knock on door*
There is hopeful symbolism in the fact that flags do not wave in a vacuum. --Arthur C. Clarke
same game, new music, better graphics.
GTA 3 was great in that it had lots to do and was a very open game. The stunts bonuses you could get added a nice non violent touch to the game. That aspect was greatly lost in the next 2 installments of the genre.
Basically the PS3 is baught once GTA4 and Metal Gear 4 come out on it. I just seriously hope Sony doesn't gut it too much by the time I woujld like to buy. I would realy love them to keep the PS2 hardware in the system. But... I guess emulation is a good thing too. They can somewhat enhance the graphics of the PS2 games and possibly add in more frame rate if done right.
You mean like most game manufacturers "downgrade" games to work on PCs with less than the best hardware?
Oh, wait...
There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
Don't record it or he'll hunt you down like CJ did Officer Eddie Pulaski!
*slow clap*
This man is going to grow up to one day save the world.
Psst.. might want to see the stories posted by websites like Gamespot, showing that PS3 graphics are actually not that much better, and in some cases are worse, than the XBOX 360 ones. Whether this is due to the PS3's newness or not is open for debate, but Rockstar is just as new to the Cell as any other 3rd party developer.
Storage is a valid concern, but Blu-Ray discs access slower than DVD's as a result, so there is a trade-off. This game is taking place in an urban environment, not jungles, and rainbows, and the moon - I don't think limited texture storage is going to be that much of a killer, bud.
- Scott
//TODO: Insert catchy phrase
So this is a bit offtopic, but why is it that Sid Meier is the only guy who gets his name listed on the box like he's the author? Does he program the whole thing himself? Or does he just own the company?
AFAIK though, Rockstar has the ability to make the game require the 360 HDD, as long as they mention it on the package. I know when I purchased Splinter Cell: Double Agent, it had a sticker advising that the game required the hard drive.
In the event I am wrong though, the second half of that paragraph still applies.
I do wish more game makers would make the HDD standard for the their games though.
- Scott
Oh jeez, I don't even know where to start... Sony consistently ruining games for the PS2 was never a problem for people, so why would a problem that's not really that great make people flip out like you are?
Dreamcast had 60hz on EVERY GAME in Europe and PS2 completely rejected proper refresh rate for YEARS without people complaining like this. Resident Evil 4 got reduced to shit when it got converted from Gamecube, and so did many other games that were multi-format directly. PS2 was consistently and obviously worse than the other systems of the same generation, and yet the Sony fanbois warped that into "PS2 is actually more powerful than the Xbox and Gamecube, it's just hard to program for" every damn time. The same damn thing is gonna happen with the PS3. Completely ignore the facts, and just spout off whatever garbage you saw on that message board dedicated to Sony worship. Now the rest of us can wait and see which goddamn game actually looks and plays better, and you can go back to your fanboi wank session.
Hahaha you're cute. You enjoy watching your PS3 fold proteins while I play games over here.
Okay, I know you're a troll, but I'll be nice and correct you. I'm not a fan of the Dreamcast, I don't have one and I don't know anyone who has one. I'm talking about a basic feature that every other console of the PS2 generation had, and even the Dreamcast which no one counts as the same generation had that feature. Of course if you think "fuck Europe," it doesn't matter to you. It's still relevant to my point, that people weren't whining as much as you are even when Sony was doing FAR worse things to the games they played.
This is also why many PS3 games require multi-gig installs. Personally, I'm not a fan of that approach.
No PS3 game 'requires multi-gig installs' dimwit.
I'm pretty sure that MS requires games to be able to be played without a HD (I dont care enough to try and find proof). Although they do clearly state that if you want to play online or play old games you need one.
I thought that the HD in the original xbox was a great idea and it made absolutely no sense whatsoever to offer a new console without one. I mean really, they couldn't put a 20 gig HD in the basic system and just make all the developers lives a little easier.
//TODO: Insert catchy phrase
Care to offer any examples? I've played quite a few games and have yet to have one install anything on the HD. Now if you go online and get the updates it puts it on the HD, but not right out of the box. Caching is not the same as installing.
//TODO: Insert catchy phrase
I actually think it's quite smart.
They give people the choice to add whatever options they want to their console (ie. HD-DVD, HDD, Wireless G), and keep the price down. If they later decide they want to use the hard drive to speed things up, they can just give developers the OK to require the HDD for some of their games.
The modular design of the XBOX 360 was a wise decision, I think.
Either way, the parent post is some horribly uninformed vitriol. Holding Rockstar in contempt for making their game multiplatform is ridiculous, simply because the other platform's hardware isn't quite as great. By that logic, he should have been furious that they made previous GTA's for the PS2, since the XBOX's hardware was far superior.
Or do I have to wait to hear about this at the German gaming convention later this year?
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I am sorry I have to break the bad news, but Microsoft have tricked you into thinking Blu-Ray in PS3 is slower than the DVD in the 360.
It's simply not true, Microsoft have stated the maximum data transfer rate, at the outer edge of the disk, Blu-Ray is consistent across the entire disk surface (look up CAV and CLV). If you take the average speed of the Xbox DVD drive, and consider it's only 12x on single layer media (8x on DVD9), the Xbox drive is actually slower.
I hope you didn't base any buying decisions on Microsoft's lies..
There are too many other fantastic PC games coming out over the next year to care about a game that the company themselves are admitting is downgraded to support the consoles - the underpowered 360 and PS3 with only a HDTV maximum resolution, and useless extra cores.
...
Rockstar you decided to sell out and make gamers suffer with a downgraded game. PC users aren't going to put up with a crappy game that is downgraded to run on the PS3 and 360.
Hey look ma! I can troll too!
This is why talking out of your ass is bad. Personally, I'm not a fan of that approach.
When Penny arcade discussed Spider-man 3 "Tyco" states He [Gabe] brought it home, went through the long install again on his own PS3, and then wept under its cruel lash.
This was the first I had heard of any installs to the hard drive (beyond DLC or patches), so I went to Gamestop and checked the boxes, and Resistance for example "Requires 3 gigs of Hard Disk space" to play. I saw a number of boxes with similar requirements. Is that all caching that gets overwritten when you pop in a new game? Is Spidey 3 the exception?
Please let me know as I don't wish to be spreading FUD if I misunderstood.
I just rented Resistance and didn't notice any kind of install, so I'm going to go with "most" games don't require any install. My guess would be that the "required 3 gigs" is for caching and the updates you can download. Crappy movie based piece of shit games do lots of stupid things, like getting made in the first place.
//TODO: Insert catchy phrase
I was talking about access rate, not transfer rates.
- Scott