GTAIV Dated to April 29th

Joystiq is reporting that Take-Two has nailed down a final release date for Grand Theft Auto IV . When they delayed the game last year, they said they were aiming for a February to April target, and they're making it ... barely. "If you've checked out the multitude of previews that dropped this week, you'd know that game is looking really, really awesome, so we're counting on Rockstar to hit its date this time around. What more is there to say, really? GTA IV. April 29."

Comments

PC Release?

[Cerberus7]

The site's blocked from where I am right now, so I can't rtfa. Does it mention when the PC release will be? Is it going to be a year later like the last three GTA games?

Re:PC Release?

[Chris Mattern]

The official Take 2 site says the April 29 release will be for PS3 and Xbox360. No mention of a PC release. Can't get any info off the official game site because their fancy Flash interfaces breaks on my browser. Doesn't look like there's much there anyways.

Re:PC Release?

[drolrevO]

The site's blocked from where I am right now, so I can't rtfa. Does it mention when the PC release will be? Is it going to be a year later like the last three GTA games? Try https://www.vtunnel.com/, if it's not blocked yet ;)

They should've said April 1st...

[cthellis]

...just to drive everyone insane. ;-)

Karma Whoring

[foodnugget]

Can you beat a karma whore to death and get your money back? It does not look good for PC gamers.... Next-generation Console Debut of the Grand Theft Auto Franchise Set for April 29, 2008 New York, NY - January 24, 2008 - Rockstar Games, a publishing label of Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. (NASDAQ: TTWO), is proud to announce the release date for Grand Theft Auto IV, the new title in the genre-defining Grand Theft Auto franchise. Developed by Rockstar North, Grand Theft Auto IV will be simultaneously available for Xbox 360® video game and entertainment system and PLAYSTATION®3 computer entertainment system and will be in stores worldwide on April 29, 2008. "We are so excited to be releasing Grand Theft Auto IV," said Sam Houser, Founder and Executive Producer of Rockstar Games. "We've pushed ourselves very hard to make something incredible and hope the game sets a new benchmark for interactive entertainment." For more information, log onto http://www.rockstargames.com/IV

Re:Karma Whoring

[elh_inny]

In addition to what you said:
1. PC Ports of the games are not only delayed, but also suffer in performance. This has been most visible with 1st gen XBOX with has been a plain PC under the hood and the Celeron 733 powering it, yet the PC ports of XBOX games required 1GHz + processors and much more RAM. Current example is Assasin's Creed which recommends 3GB of RAM!!! No console has that much, yet it work smoothly somehow...
2. They blame piracy and poor sales, but usually PC sales add profits to what's been made on a console. Usually the can be a shared development path for consoles and PC for mainstream engines like Unreal 3. Technically speaking it's more difficult to develop for PS3 and X360 rather than X360 and PC, yet no one admits that.
3. Top end PCs clearly have superior power and better input/output options.

Consoles have the advantage for publishers in the sense that they have much more control over how you use the content, they can extra for any mods or add-ons, but the net result is dumber users who play on their TV but don't know much about technology :(

Re:Karma Whoring

[steveo777]

In regards to your being upset that you need a computer of remarkable power increase for games... Even if the original XBox was just a relatively slow computer with a nice graphics card, it still had special controllers and dedicated hardware. Granted, it didn't have all the bells and whistles a console with that much power should have, it worked.

Dedicated hardware, drivers, and optimized code make a huge difference when compared with PC games. Windows is designed to work on almost anything, and with almost anything. So you have to remember that Windows needs a LOT of resources just for it's own fat code. Also the game has to be designed to plug into all that. Think about all the 'wasted' hardware. The system bus is completely impractical for gaming because it is designed to take care of much, much more than it needs to do.

Just saying. The closest I come to being a computer engineer is being able to put them together and troubleshoot pre-Vista Windows... so, yeah.

Re:Karma Whoring

[powerlord]

3. Top end PCs clearly have superior power and better input/output options.

And Top end PCs cost how much?

As PCs have advanced to the latest generation, the hardware is ridiculously overpowered for what the majority of users do (Word processing, Spread sheets, email, web surfing, the occasional video).

That means that, barring mal-ware infection of the OS, most people can use a given system for longer than the old "Its good for two years". Most systems, unless you need to play the latest games, can easily last 4-5 years. So, does it make sense for people to spend money upgrading constantly for a Top End PC, or just going out and buying a console for the price of a Top End video card? (let alone a new processor, motherboard, memory, etc.)

Re:Karma Whoring

[Applekid]

I think you're putting too much emphasis on the impact Windows itself has on PC gaming. DirectX is pretty modular in it's memory usage such that only components needed get loaded into memory. Those myriad of drivers and alternative hardware schemes simply don't get loaded if they're not needed.

For the GP example, Assassin's Creed. The XBox 360 has 512 MB of memory. All of a sudden you need 3 GB (SIX times as much) on a PC? The CPU requirements are equally crazy. Methinks that the latest lazy-port fashion isn't porting games per se but instead wrapping them with emulated feature sets.

But, to temper this a little, the PC versions of GTA3 and above have featured better (more complete) car physics sampling than the console versions.

Re:Karma Whoring

[TheNinjaroach]

This has been most visible with 1st gen XBOX with has been a plain PC under the hood and the Celeron 733 powering it, yet the PC ports of XBOX games required 1GHz + processors and much more RAM. That full featured OS you're running has to fit somewhere. You can't really compare the two just because the underlying hardware is similar, unless you want your PC to be about as useless as an XBox.

Re:Karma Whoring

[dintech]

They're probably waiting to get some decent sales under their belt before releasing a moddable, 'hot-coffeeable' version.

Re:Karma Whoring

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Consoles have the advantage for publishers in the sense that they have much more control over how you use the content, they can extra for any mods or add-ons, but the net result is dumber users who play on their TV but don't know much about technology :( Console games also typically sell more copies. At least that's what I was told when a company I worked for worked with a game company. This was a few years ago, but they said that a 'success' was 200k copies on a PC and 500k copies on a console. I'm not sure how true those specific numbers are today, but the console market has been quite successful.

Re:Karma Whoring

[mrchaotica]

Consoles have the advantage for publishers in the sense that they have much more control over how you use the content, they can extra for any mods or add-ons...

And that is exactly why I, for one, refuse to buy consoles. The most recent one I bought was a Sega Genesis/CD/32x.

Re:Karma Whoring

[Anonymous Coward]

1. PC Ports of the games are not only delayed, but also suffer in performance. This has been most visible with 1st gen XBOX with has been a plain PC under the hood and the Celeron 733 powering it, yet the PC ports of XBOX games required 1GHz + processors and much more RAM. Current example is Assasin's Creed which recommends 3GB of RAM!!! No console has that much, yet it work smoothly somehow... It's a lot easier (and effective) to optimize software when you know exactly what kind of hardware it is running on (which is the case with consoles). On PC's the situation isn't so rosy.

Though Assasin's Creed recommending 3GB when the consoles only have 512Mb is especially crazy, and I expect the result of just a lazy port.

Re:Karma Whoring

[CastrTroy]

What? No Wii Version? Nothing like beating a hooker by actually swinging the controller.

Re:Karma Whoring

[UnknownSoldier]

> This has been most visible with 1st gen XBOX with has been a plain PC under the hood and the Celeron 733 powering it, yet the PC ports of XBOX games required 1GHz + processors and much more RAM.

There are a few things you are forgetting about the original XBOX

- it had a Geforce 3.5 and even if games used pixel shaders, most games only used a 640x480 res. Given the old tradeoff between flexibility and speed, the console's strength is speed.
- it only had 64 megs of ram, so even with compressed textures, they were low res
- it ran a stripped down NT kernel that didn't chew up tons of megabytes like the desktop version does
- it had a small & fast directX implementation

Re:Karma Whoring

[CottonThePirate]

Another thing to remember is that consoles have relatively poor graphics compared to a PC. 480p is roughly 640x480, imagine running a PC game at that resolution, it'd be awful. Even new gen games like Halo 3 have the much angered not quite 720p resolution. 1300x720 is still not the 1900x1600 or even 1280x1024 that PC games demand. It takes a lot more to push that many more pixels.

Re:Karma Whoring

[Yahweh Doesn't Exist]

that game's out already: Scarface

Re:Karma Whoring

[steveo777]

Another thing to consider is that most consoles don't actually need as much memory. They have hardware compression/decompression of textures and the like where as I don't believe that any PCs/video cards have that covered yet. Nintendo's Gamecube system's video card, Flipper, could do 8 texture layers per pass and had 6:1 texture compression. All on the fly. I can't find a lot of data for the Wii, but I can't imagine that they didn't improve on this a bit. If not just doubled the speed. As for PCs, agreeing on any sort of standards like this probably isn't plausible with so many graphics card manufacturers.

Also, I believe I covered 'optimized code' in my original post, but the point can be re-emphasized because it does make that much of a difference. Something I forgot to mention (which has been discussed in another response) is that most consoles are running at lower resolutions than PCs, therefore allowing a greater amount of work to be done in 'less space'.

These are all reasons why I'm more of a console player. I like computer games, but the console is more my style. No need to keep up with the Jones's just to play the newest games.

Re:Karma Whoring

[Moonpie Madness]

PC's have superior power? Clearly? Sounds like you just proved they do not.

You cannot compare systems solely on ram and processor speed in mhz. There's more to it, and obviously a PS3 with .5 gigs ram does a hell of a lot better than the equivalent computer. The PC architecture is excellent for flexibility and terrible for specific applications.

I like PCs too, but we should just expect a PC to take a lot more Ram and processor to do a task than a system geared very specifically to a task.

Also, what input options do you mean? I think game consoles are starting to allow keyboards and mice, but the general game controller makes games very easy to use. I can use any PS2 controller on the planet. I can go to a pal's house and play football much more easily. things are simpler. Sure, it's not quite as flexible as a keyboard, and that makes the games very simple sometimes, but one is not clearly better than the other. It's a tradeoff situation. As more PS3 games use keyboard/mouse, I expect this issue to completely disappear.

Also, the PS3 has too much market share to be ignored. Even if it is easier to develop on the 360 and PC, it's smarter to develop on PS3 and then port to the more flexible 360 and then port that to the PC, since you probably need something on all those systems anyway, a lot of developers will just start at teh wierd one and work outwards. Remember, easy is only in terms of per dollar earned. And the PS3 is easy enough for the money it makes (not as good as 360, but enough).

Re:Karma Whoring

[KDR_11k]

PCs supported DXT since some time around 2000, that's the 6:1 compression deal.

Re:Sweet!

[untaken_name]

Well, unless they've deviated from formula, you'll pay your money, and yes, do everything you've done in previous versions....plus a whole bunch of new stuff that will be old hat by the time the next one comes out. For example, motorcycles in Vice City and bike racing, city-travelling, jumbo jet flying, and parachuting in San Andreas. Obv I did not create a complete list.

T-minus 3..2..1...

[navygeek]

And a video gamer's best friend, Jack Thompson, files suit against Take Two, Walmart, Microsoft, Sony, Best Buy, and cousin Skippy on April 30th.

Re:T-minus 3..2..1...

[voltaire954]

Nah, you've got it backwards. In a twist, this time it's TTWO that has recently filed suit against Thompson: http://gamepolitics.com/2007/03/16/breaking-take-two-sues-jack-thompson/

Re:T-minus 3..2..1...

[Kohath]

You missed it. Take Two already implemented a nuisance-lawsuit version of the Bush Doctrine and sued Jack Thomson preemptively. That's how to have to deal with these sorts of fellows.

A release date without a new gameplay video?

[Bruiser80]

Ah well - game looks awesome though

Fixed

[kellyb9]

What more is there to say, really? GTA IV. April 29, 2046

youmeandueon

[PseudoLogic]

Sorry for the offtopic, but what does this tag mean? Isn't it necessary for more than one person to use the same tag for it to show up? So I'm guessing it's not a typo.

Re:youmeandueon

[SuiteSisterMary]

I think it reads as 'you-mean-due-on', as in, they haven't declared a 'release' date, they've declared an intended release date. We won't know the actual release date until it's actually been released.

Re:youmeandueon

[4D6963]

I think it reads as 'you-mean-due-on'

And, thanks, I was about to look Google up to find out who Ueon is.

You forgot the hookers.

[Lilith's Heart-shape]

Don't forget banging hookers and then killing them to get your money back. That was always GTA's most charming feature.

Re:You forgot the hookers.

[Diginosis]

Don't forget banging hookers and then killing them to get your money back. That was always GTA's most charming feature.
I think they call that a "freebie".

GTAIV

[nog_lorp]

How about GTA:FPS? The GTA games are great, but 3rd person auto-aim battling sucks. Tried GTA:SA:MP? PVP is horrid.

Re:GTAIV

[somersault]

Try the PC version then. I usually hate third person view too, but GTA is one of the few games that does it right (and you can switch to 1st person while driving or shooting anyway - in San Andreas it was more of an over the shoulder view than 1st person though).

Re:GTAIV

[KDR_11k]

So you're saying the game turns into crap just because the camera is moved forward a few metres?

Mark my word

[elrous0]

This game will be pushed back into the Fall. No one releases a blockbuster like this in April.

Re:Mark my word

[Emetophobe]

Where's the rule that says a game can't be released in April? Like you said, it's a blockbuster. A game like GTA IV will sell 10+ million copies (even in April).

And it was already delayed 6 months (it was originally going to be released in October 2007). October 2007 + 6 month delay = April 2008. My only hope is that it doesn't get delayed again.

GTA IV to be followed by GTA: Emerald City

[WillAffleckUW]

I for one am looking forward, after April 29th, to all the camera crews here in Seattle for the upcoming GTA: Emerald City.

And I'm jacking the copter from on top of Seattle Grace (KOMO TV) and buzzing the crab on top of the Space Needle!

Might even shoot me some interns ... well, except the cute ones ...

Re:PIRACY IS KILLING PC GAMING

[fremean]

I have to laugh tho, it shows what the game is worth if you think about it. I have no problems going out and buying GTA games (PC only I don't believe in consoles), in fact I own every one that's come out on PC - I even bought 1&2 before they were released free. I have no intention to buy CoD4 because Activision jacked the prices to screw up us Aussies - When it first came out you could buy it for 50 odd USD, now it's 80 odd USD - It makes me want to pirate it to spite them, I know I can get it from the US far far far far cheaper. When was the last time Americans payed $80+ in any currency for a game? I could go into the list of crap games I've paid for without 'trying' first - or buying after playing a demo that made things look better then they are (BF*.* for starters) but the fact remains, I'm not going to spend $80usd (not $80aud) on a game that the Americans can get for less then 50 usd. (Note, I don't have a copy of CoD4 but I have considered it.) You also seem to forget that PIRACY is just as much of a problem on consoles, a quick survey online shows that almost all the most recent games can be downloaded - for example Mass Effect (Was the only one I could think of - isn't panic media marketing great?). I don't have a problem buying a good game at a good price (In the case of GTA, I would pay 80usd because I get months of game play out of it, not hours - but then, I'd hope they charge the Americans 80usd for it also.)

Re:Graphics kinda blah?

[KDR_11k]

Well it fits right in wih the other GTAs then.

Re:PIRACY IS KILLING PC GAMING

[Bud Dickman]

"I don't believe in consoles"

They exist, trust me - I've seen them!