Why Cant I Choose Max Setting For GTA 4

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for iki080
iki080

1085

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 iki080
Member since 2008 • 1085 Posts
i have and engtx 260 874mb something like that and i choose every thing on high then when i run gta 4 again its on medium ! why does it keep changing back to a lower setting please help me i don't even know if I'm playing it at max.
Avatar image for zaku101
zaku101

4641

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#2 zaku101
Member since 2005 • 4641 Posts

Link

I hear the games really buggy.

Avatar image for Lach0121
Lach0121

11815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

#3 Lach0121
Member since 2007 • 11815 Posts

the most overrated franchise in gaming, has one of its most over-hyped games... performing like crap.

hopefully for the people that like this sort of "game", they will come with some sort of patches for people to actually play it like they want to.

Avatar image for Velocitas8
Velocitas8

10748

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 Velocitas8
Member since 2006 • 10748 Posts

I don't have the game..but try putting "-norestriction" at the end of the shortcut target path. I think I heard that it removes any graphical setting restrictions.

Avatar image for Jamiemydearx3
Jamiemydearx3

4062

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Jamiemydearx3
Member since 2008 • 4062 Posts
What res are you running? Might not have enough Vram.
Avatar image for CellAnimation
CellAnimation

6116

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 CellAnimation
Member since 2007 • 6116 Posts
The high quality textures take 600MB of VRAM on their own.
Avatar image for CellAnimation
CellAnimation

6116

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 CellAnimation
Member since 2007 • 6116 Posts
the most overrated franchise in gaming, has one of its most over-hyped games... performing like crap.Lach0121
The game runs perfectly fine on decent hardware. I'm getting 45-60 FPS with medium textures, highest quality renderer, all sliders on 50 except the shadows on 0 @1920x1200. People just need to actually listen to the developer and stop over estimating the power of their own computers. With the settings I've settled on I've got a much better looking game, running better than either console version. For me the biggest performance increases have come from dropping the shadow density to zero, and turning off the video clip recorder.
Avatar image for Hellboard
Hellboard

2429

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 86

User Lists: 0

#8 Hellboard
Member since 2008 • 2429 Posts
The high quality textures take 600MB of VRAM on their own.CellAnimation
Needless to say my old 8600 gt has 1024mb and doesnt run it!
Avatar image for CellAnimation
CellAnimation

6116

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 CellAnimation
Member since 2007 • 6116 Posts
[QUOTE="CellAnimation"]The high quality textures take 600MB of VRAM on their own.Hellboard
Needless to say my old 8600 gt has 1024mb and doesnt run it!

Did you really think it would be able to? There is more to the power of a video card than just the amount of RAM. Crappy old video card runs game crappy... um duh! :)
Avatar image for Hellboard
Hellboard

2429

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 86

User Lists: 0

#10 Hellboard
Member since 2008 • 2429 Posts
[QUOTE="Hellboard"][QUOTE="CellAnimation"]The high quality textures take 600MB of VRAM on their own.CellAnimation
Needless to say my old 8600 gt has 1024mb and doesnt run it!

Did you really think it would be able to? There is more to the power of a video card than just the amount of RAM. Crappy old video card runs game crappy... um duh! :)

Now thats what am saying the video memory thing is bullocks too the core speed matters only!
Avatar image for Johnny_Rock
Johnny_Rock

40314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#11 Johnny_Rock
Member since 2002 • 40314 Posts

[QUOTE="Hellboard"][QUOTE="CellAnimation"]The high quality textures take 600MB of VRAM on their own.CellAnimation
Needless to say my old 8600 gt has 1024mb and doesnt run it!

Did you really think it would be able to? There is more to the power of a video card than just the amount of RAM. Crappy old video card runs game crappy... um duh! :)

But a good company can make a game scale well on a wide variety of systems. It just goes to show you how bad Rockstar is at programming.

Avatar image for simardbrad
simardbrad

2355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#12 simardbrad
Member since 2004 • 2355 Posts

[QUOTE="CellAnimation"][QUOTE="Hellboard"] Needless to say my old 8600 gt has 1024mb and doesnt run it!Hellboard
Did you really think it would be able to? There is more to the power of a video card than just the amount of RAM. Crappy old video card runs game crappy... um duh! :)

Now thats what am saying the video memory thing is bullocks too the core speed matters only!

wrong again... it depends on the series of gfx cards. You can find two cards, one has a higher core speed and the second one has a lower core speed, but it'll still perform much better. Performance has to deal with memory bandwidth, steam processors, etc.

Avatar image for Lach0121
Lach0121

11815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

#13 Lach0121
Member since 2007 • 11815 Posts

[QUOTE="Lach0121"]the most overrated franchise in gaming, has one of its most over-hyped games... performing like crap.CellAnimation
The game runs perfectly fine on decent hardware. I'm getting 45-60 FPS with medium textures, highest quality renderer, all sliders on 50 except the shadows on 0 @1920x1200. People just need to actually listen to the developer and stop over estimating the power of their own computers. With the settings I've settled on I've got a much better looking game, running better than either console version. For me the biggest performance increases have come from dropping the shadow density to zero, and turning off the video clip recorder.

i can agree with the most part of whta your saying..

its just these devs can optimize the engine just a little more. especially with the ports from consoles.

.

though some of it is ATI and Nvidia's bs sometimes.

but all in all, it just seems like there is more compatiblility errors, and or hardware flukes now then there use to be.

Avatar image for Hellboard
Hellboard

2429

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 86

User Lists: 0

#14 Hellboard
Member since 2008 • 2429 Posts

[QUOTE="Hellboard"][QUOTE="CellAnimation"] Did you really think it would be able to? There is more to the power of a video card than just the amount of RAM. Crappy old video card runs game crappy... um duh! :)simardbrad

Now thats what am saying the video memory thing is bullocks too the core speed matters only!

wrong again... it depends on the series of gfx cards. You can find two cards, one has a higher core speed and the second one has a lower core speed, but it'll still perform much better. Performance has to deal with memory bandwidth, steam processors, etc.

So everything is bullocks? does that include the price of the vga card? rg the more the better?
Avatar image for -CheeseEater-
-CheeseEater-

5258

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#15 -CheeseEater-
Member since 2007 • 5258 Posts
My 8800GT Sli Setup is running GTA IV shocking. I can't even turn up the texure resolution to "High", with View Distance at 30, Detail at 20, Shadows at 0! 1650x1050 res, without AA, GTA IV looks like utter bollocks on my screen. The blur effects of hitting "p" in game daze my eyes... :cry: GTA IV on PC is very, very poorly optimised...the Original Crysis runs better than this, let alone Crysis Warhead (which runs even smoother)...
Avatar image for eva89
eva89

807

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 eva89
Member since 2004 • 807 Posts
dont bother setting up high even u have more than 1gb vram. the game itself has bad rendering..it looks crappy at times with blur effects... all it does need is a good patch.. the gameplay is good just too many technical issues that brought it down.
Avatar image for iki080
iki080

1085

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 iki080
Member since 2008 • 1085 Posts
dont do sli anymore just get one powerful card i learnt my lesson doing sli
Avatar image for not_wanted
not_wanted

1990

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 not_wanted
Member since 2008 • 1990 Posts

I think they're trying to make us buy the console version, that's why they didn't bother optimizing it.

And wow, The Force Unleashed Reloaded, this is from Gamespot article about GTA IV PC problems: As for performance issues on high-end rigs, Rockstar's tech support documentation contained the following explanation: "Most users using current PC hardware as of December 2008 are advised to use medium graphics settings. Higher settings are provided for future generations of PCs with higher specifications than are currently widely available."

Probably the LucasArts devs are now like: "see, we told you you need a $4000 PC lol"

Avatar image for fatzebra
fatzebra

1470

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 fatzebra
Member since 2005 • 1470 Posts
[QUOTE="-CheeseEater-"]My 8800GT Sli Setup is running GTA IV shocking. I can't even turn up the texure resolution to "High", with View Distance at 30, Detail at 20, Shadows at 0! 1650x1050 res, without AA, GTA IV looks like utter bollocks on my screen. The blur effects of hitting "p" in game daze my eyes... :cry: GTA IV on PC is very, very poorly optimised...the Original Crysis runs better than this, let alone Crysis Warhead (which runs even smoother)...

Called tech support. GTA IV doesnt support SLi or Crossfire yet.