Dispelling a myth (GTA4 related)

There are many common arguements on system wars, but this one needs to die pretty fast. It has been debunked in the past, yet regardless of this so many fanboys throw it around as a fact. And it's to do with Grand Theft Auto 4.

Apparently the game is held back thanks to the 360. It would be twice the size, if it weren't for the 360. It's all because of that cursed 360. Why? "The devs said so!!!1"

Sorry chaps, they didn't. In an interview with OFFICIAL PLAYSTATION MAGAZINE, the following question was put to a single member of Rockstar Games:

"On PS3 you've got a guarantee that every machine is going to have a hard-drive and, with Blu-ray, you've got plenty of storage, whereas on Xbox 360 there's no guarantee of a hard-drive and you're working with the DVD format. Does that create limitations?"

Of course it does. They have to make sure their game can work without a hard drive, and that it fits on one disc. Of course it's a challenge. How exactly does this mean "games would be bigger if it weren't for microsoft..." :? That really is just nonsense, solidified by the fact that he goes on to say:

"To be honest with you we haven't solved all those riddles yet. Both have enormous challenges, and both have their own particular pleasures and pains."

So both systems are challenging to get their game out there and working properly. If you've ever said "ah but that rockstar dev said GTA4 is smaller because of the 360" - and you know who you are - stop it. Because it's completely bogus.

I think the argument is that the game had the potential to be bigger than it will be if it were because of a garunteed hard drive and more disc space, which you really can't argue against. It would all come down to whatthe developers wanted to d if they were developing for PS3 instead of 360. I'd like to think they had a huge vision for the game and shrunk it down accordingly, of course, if they had more space to work with it wouldn't have been shrunk down as much.

As for "holding back the PS3 version", I don't agree with that statement at all. If the game was being built from the ground up for both consoles, with equal content in mind, the PS3 version might be being held back. As is, the game is being developed for 360, the PS3 is getting the full realization of GTAIV.

It just drives cows mad knowing that only the Xbox360 version of GTA IV has been shown so far.:)

I think the argument is that the game had the potential to be bigger than it will be if it were because of a garunteed hard drive and more disc space, which you really can't argue against. It would all come down to whatthe developers wanted to d if they were developing for PS3 instead of 360. I'd like to think they had a huge vision for the game and shrunk it down accordingly, of course, if they had more space to work with it wouldn't have been shrunk down as much.

As for "holding back the PS3 version", I don't agree with that statement at all. If the game was being built from the ground up for both consoles, with equal content in mind, the PS3 version might be being held back. As is, the game is being developed for 360, the PS3 is getting the full realization of GTAIV.

jonny2x4

The two games are identical. The game is not being held back by the xbox at all. The PS2 didn't hold back the other GTA games; rockstar didn't just say "hey... ps2 is less powerful so that's what everyone gets". The PC and xbox versions had better graphics, less pop-in, greater draw distance.

It will be exactly the same with this game; if one console can handle a better version, it will. As they said already, both games on the PS3 and 360 are identical. Simple as that.

It just drives cows mad knowing that only the Xbox360 version of GTA IV has been shown so far.:)

LosDaddie

MS paid them $50 million to say thatfanboysmustdie

To say what? :| And do you have any proof to back up these ramblings? I didn't think so.

[QUOTE="fanboysmustdie"]MS paid them $50 million to say thatNinja-Vox

To say what? :| And do you have any proof to back up these ramblings? I didn't think so.

do I really have to link to it? Its common knowledge that MS paid them $50 million

[QUOTE="LosDaddie"]

It just drives cows mad knowing that only the Xbox360 version of GTA IV has been shown so far.:)

white_sox

Maybe if we knew anything abou the new IP.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Vox"]

[QUOTE="fanboysmustdie"]MS paid them $50 million to say thatfanboysmustdie

To say what? :| And do you have any proof to back up these ramblings? I didn't think so.

do I really have to link to it? Its common knowledge that MS paid them $50 million

Yeah for episodic content. Not to say that.

[QUOTE="white_sox"][QUOTE="LosDaddie"]

It just drives cows mad knowing that only the Xbox360 version of GTA IV has been shown so far.:)

LosDaddie

Maybe if we knew anything abou the new IP.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Vox"]

[QUOTE="fanboysmustdie"]MS paid them $50 million to say thatfanboysmustdie

To say what? :| And do you have any proof to back up these ramblings? I didn't think so.

do I really have to link to it? Its common knowledge that MS paid them $50 million

No, wrong son. They paid R* 50 million for downloadable content; their contract is that they will make that 50 million back on the downloads and that if they do not, R* will give them the difference back. Lord knows how you took that and made it into something so different. :roll:

[QUOTE="fanboysmustdie"][QUOTE="Ninja-Vox"]

[QUOTE="fanboysmustdie"]MS paid them $50 million to say thatDrukter

To say what? :| And do you have any proof to back up these ramblings? I didn't think so.

do I really have to link to it? Its common knowledge that MS paid them $50 million

Yeah for episodic content. Not to say that.

and you know because MS keeps you updated with all their contracts right?

[QUOTE="Drukter"][QUOTE="fanboysmustdie"][QUOTE="Ninja-Vox"]

[QUOTE="fanboysmustdie"]MS paid them $50 million to say thatfanboysmustdie

To say what? :| And do you have any proof to back up these ramblings? I didn't think so.

Yeah, just like they seem to update you.

do I really have to link to it? Its common knowledge that MS paid them $50 million

Yeah for episodic content. Not to say that.

and you know because MS keeps you updated with all their contracts right?

Yeah, just like they seem to update you.

and you know because MS keeps you updated with all their contracts right?

fanboysmustdie

In this case yes. There was a full news story on how they paid $50 million as an advance and would have all of that money returned to them via profits made on the downloadable content, and that the contract states that if they dont make back their $50 million, rockstar will return the difference.

I guess you just missed it. :|

The pains he suggests in PS3 isn't exactly qualified. For all you know it could be something like the common complaint that the PS3 is so hard to develope for because it's so different from anything out there.

X360 he admits is the storage issue. Claiming the argument is bogus because he says PS3 has issues with certain things doesn't take away the fact it does really seem that X360 limited hardware is effecting the scope of the game.

Saying it's completely bogus is wrong, it's completely legit.....the only thing is PS3 as you said also has issues for them but he never says specifically what they are so there is no way to know which is worse. For all we know there is framerate issues with PS3's version because speed of the Blu-Ray drive is less than X360's DVD drive. We just don't know anything for sure EXCEPT X360 limited storage capacity is an ISSUE.

The pains he suggests in PS3 isn't exactly qualified. For all you know it could be something like the common complaint that the PS3 is so hard to develope for because it's so different from anything out there.

X360 he admits is the storage issue. Claiming the argument is bogus because he says PS3 has issues with certain things doesn't take away the fact it does really seem that X360 limited hardware is effecting the scope of the game.

Saying it's completely bogus is wrong, it's completely legit.....the only thing is PS3 as you said also has issues for them but he never says specifically what they are so there is no way to know which is worse. For all we know there is framerate issues with PS3's version because speed of the Blu-Ray drive is less than X360's DVD drive. We just don't know anything for sure EXCEPT X360 limited storage capacity is an ISSUE.

darthogre

It is not effecting the scope of the game. Where do you take that from? He is asked if having to work out how to make them game work with no HDD on the dvd format is a challenge, and he replies yes. As anyone would expect it to be. How can you read that and take "the scope of the game is being affected"? Just how? :?

Both have issues. Simple as that. The xbox is not "holding the game back" as cows like to claim. Simple as that.

There are many common arguements on system wars, but this one needs to die pretty fast. It has been debunked in the past, yet regardless of this so many fanboys throw it around as a fact. And it's to do with Grand Theft Auto 4.

Apparently the game is held back thanks to the 360. It would be twice the size, if it weren't for the 360. It's all because of that cursed 360. Why? "The devs said so!!!1"

Sorry chaps, they didn't. In an interview with OFFICIAL PLAYSTATION MAGAZINE, the following question was put to a single member of Rockstar Games:

"On PS3 you've got a guarantee that every machine is going to have a hard-drive and, with Blu-ray, you've got plenty of storage, whereas on Xbox 360 there's no guarantee of a hard-drive and you're working with the DVD format. Does that create limitations?"

Of course it does. They have to make sure their game can work without a hard drive, and that it fits on one disc. Of course it's a challenge. How exactly does this mean "games would be bigger if it weren't for microsoft..." :? That really is just nonsense, solidified by the fact that he goes on to say:

"To be honest with you we haven't solved all those riddles yet. Both have enormous challenges, and both have their own particular pleasures and pains."

So both systems are challenging to get their game out there and working properly. If you've ever said "ah but that rockstar dev said GTA4 is smaller because of the 360" - and you know who you are - stop it. Because it's completely bogus.

Ninja-Vox

The real myth that people should stop saying is that GTA 4 was a PS3 exclusive. :| No other GTA game has been exclusive, maybe timed exclusive but thats itGarchomPro

You can't honestly say that the scope (size or whatever you would like to refer to it as) is not affected by limited space. The point being made is that if the limited space was larger, the game could potentially be larger. More space to work with does equate to more potential for a larger game. But like I said earlier, the game isn't being made for PS3 with keeping it in line with 360 hardware requirements in mind, so the PS3 version isn't being held back.

It may be too much to ask, but stop bringing up the PS2, it's not relevant at all.

I think it's clear as day he said that the 360's lack of hard drive and limited storage limited the game. Point being that multiplats are restricted by the weaknesses of all systems being developed for, and in this case the 360 has more weaknesses that are now are being imposed on the ps3 version as well.

That "both systems have strengths and weakness" was diplomatic imo, and probably deals with nuts and bolts of how each system puts out sound and graphics, not things as major as a hard drive or better storage media. Those things can affect the core elements of how a game is created, and the scope of the gameplay. ie, Littlebigplanet is simply not possible on the 360. The differences in graphics and sound are not as critical.

That "both systems have strengths and weakness" was diplomatic imo, and probably deals with nuts and bolts of how each system puts out sound and graphics, not things as major as a hard drive or better storage media. Those things can affect the core elements of how a game is created, and the scope of the gameplay. ie, Littlebigplanet is simply not possible on the 360. The differences in graphics and sound are not as critical.

GunSmith1_basic

Precisely, but LBP could be done in the 360, any game can be done anywhere, you just need to downgrade and strip enough.

I think it's obvious ps3 hardware(specificaly hdd+br) allow for greater diversity of audio and textures, which is something good in sandbox games. 360 hardware obvously has an advantage in graphics, however.

Each have their 'strengths and weakness', but a bigger userbase and attach rate is also an advantage of 360, right now at least.

Ps3 hardware may allow better and wider games but that won't happen unless Ps3 userbase and attach rate financialy allow developers to make exclusives for it. If userbase of both stay around the same size, we're gonna see more and more multi-plat games that really won't take full advantage of each one unique strengths.

once again ninja-vox taking microsoft's side. it's plain and simple if microsoft wouldn't have offered the milking core package, than GTA IV would be some what better. if i was the head of microsoft i'd tell rockstar that i dont want the game on my system, becuz the limitations of the hardware of the xbox 360, and the poor decisions that j allard and the crew decided to choose. its funny how microsoft is still losing money on every xbox 360 sold :D becuz theres so many microtransactions on xbox live, over-priced accessories, and its games are selling very well you'd think that they'd turn over a profit already!progenitorvirus

Please see the epic wall of text i posted yesterday as to why microsoft sucks so much. Come up with an actual point; yelling fanboy only makes you look silly when it turns out you called the wrong person the wrong thing. :roll:

not only that but the developers of PGR4 are saying they are having trouble fitting everything into the game becuz of the dvd9 format :lol: honestly blu-ray has all the space you ever need. microsoft will go the route when the new systems are out, and include blu-ray. more space.progenitorvirus

I'm fine with that, but it has nothing to do with this discussion. The fact is, too many cows claim GTA would be so much bigger and better if it were not for the 360. I dont think that's true. Last gen, the game wasn't limited by the PS2. Why the double standard? Last gen the PC and xbox games were both better because of their hardware. Yet this time around, the game isn't any better on the PS3 and it must be because it was let down by that crummy xbox?

No thanks.

its funny how microsoft is still losing money on every xbox 360 sold :D becuz theres so many microtransactions on xbox live, over-priced accessories, and its games are selling very well you'd think that they'd turn over a profit already!progenitorvirus

If you dont mind me asking, what does that have to do with anything whatsoever? :? I mean how is that even slightly relevant at all? Or do you just get off on randomly throwing hatred on a company in wherever you can, even when it's completely irrelevant to the topic?

Maybe if we knew anything abou the new IP.

LosDaddie

And that whitesox guy goes around calling others blind fanboys all of the time. LOLbriguyb13

This is no "myth". As long as the game is anywhere close to the limit of the disc, it almost proves they would have done more if they had the space.

Even if the PS3 has a limitation, it's only graphical. GTA3/VC/SA were phenomenal and they didn't have top-notch graphics. The 360's limitation actually puts a limit on almost everything else that relates to content.

MS paid them $50 million to say thatfanboysmustdie

/thread

both have their own pleasures and pains.... imagine for example that the pleasures of the ps3 is large disk space and hard drive standard.. and the pains is its hard to program for.......

now imagine that the pleasures of the 360 is its easy to program for but the pains are lack of standard hard drive and higher capacity disk media......

if that was what they were talking about, that still means the 360 has limited the size and depth of the game overall. your arugment doesnt make sense to me for those reasons... if you have others please explain.

both have their own pleasures and pains.... imagine for example that the pleasures of the ps3 is large disk space and hard drive standard.. and the pains is its hard to program for.......

now imagine that the pleasures of the 360 is its easy to program for but the pains are lack of standard hard drive and higher capacity disk media......

if that was what they were talking about, that still means the 360 has limited the size and depth of the game overall. your arugment doesnt make sense to me for those reasons... if you have others please explain.

Dr_Neptune

He was asked if it was a challenge working with a platform with no standard HDD and the DVD format. He replied yes. As far as i'm concerned, that's a simple answer i'd expect. Bethesda said they hated the idea of not having a standard HDD and said it too, would make their life more difficult than if it remained on all 360s.

This does not mean that the 360 is "limiting" the game. Many people often go on about how it would be longer/set in a bigger city/more feature-filled if not for the 360. I think that's nonsense. Nothing of that nature has been said, and so that's a pretty huge leap of logic to land at that conclusion when all one guy at R* has said is that both platforms have their annoyances, and that a lack of HDD and DVD is one of the 360s.

Like i said also, the PS2 didn't limit the game. They simply shipped what they could do on the PS2, and upgraded that for the xbox and PC versions. Both had better textures, better draw distances, less pop-in.

Face it, no game world has yet to spill onto one disc. When GTA cannot fit on a single disc and rockstar are forced to start cutting down on the size of their game, i'll accept that as a bad thing. That hasn't happened though.

This is no "myth". As long as the game is anywhere close to the limit of the disc, it almost proves they would have done more if they had the space.

Even if the PS3 has a limitation, it's only graphical. GTA3/VC/SA were phenomenal and they didn't have top-notch graphics. The 360's limitation actually puts a limit on almost everything else that relates to content.

Xolver

Actually PS3 has been proving it has the graphical advantage as well. That was not the limitation R* was talking about I've read this old interview awhile back and they said the limitation was how hard it is to develop for.

[QUOTE="Dr_Neptune"]

both have their own pleasures and pains.... imagine for example that the pleasures of the ps3 is large disk space and hard drive standard.. and the pains is its hard to program for.......

now imagine that the pleasures of the 360 is its easy to program for but the pains are lack of standard hard drive and higher capacity disk media......

if that was what they were talking about, that still means the 360 has limited the size and depth of the game overall. your arugment doesnt make sense to me for those reasons... if you have others please explain.

Ninja-Vox

He was asked if it was a challenge working with a platform with no standard HDD and the DVD format. He replied yes. As far as i'm concerned, that's a simple answer i'd expect. Bethesda said they hated the idea of not having a standard HDD and said it too, would make their life more difficult than if it remained on all 360s.

This does not mean that the 360 is "limiting" the game. Many people often go on about how it would be longer/set in a bigger city/more feature-filled if not for the 360. I think that's nonsense. Nothing of that nature has been said, and so that's a pretty huge leap of logic to land at that conclusion when all one guy at R* has said is that both platforms have their annoyances, and that a lack of HDD and DVD is one of the 360s.

Like i said also, the PS2 didn't limit the game. They simply shipped what they could do on the PS2, and upgraded that for the xbox and PC versions. Both had better textures, better draw distances, less pop-in.

Face it, no game world has yet to spill onto one disc. When GTA cannot fit on a single disc and rockstar are forced to start cutting down on the size of their game, i'll accept that as a bad thing. That hasn't happened though.

i spose you mean two disks rather than one (in th last paragraph)

you say it doesnt mean the game has been dummed down for the 360. i agree, thats cool. but it also doesnt mean that if the 360 had standard hard drive and larger disks the game wouldnt be bigger more missions etc.

i spose you mean two disks rather than one (in th last paragraph)

you say it doesnt mean the game has been dummed down for the 360. i agree, thats cool. but it also doesnt mean that if the 360 had standard hard drive and larger disks the game wouldnt be bigger more missions etc.

Dr_Neptune

I dont think it would. If that were the case, the PS3 would be bigger and have more missions. Yet they've already said the two are identical. Rockstar have always worked to each system's strengths; if it can do more, they do more. They have never worked to the lowest common denominator, so i dont see why they would now.

your a moron... The game has the possibility of being bigger if it was developed for PS3 alone... 360 has more of a limitation than Ps3. If R* decided to they couldve made GTA games bigger on Xbox than on PS2... which they did by making seperate versions the xbox was better because it was the better machine just like the PS3 is superior to the 360.

swade

Why should i bother even talking to you if you're just going to come out with mindless insults because i dont share the same opinion as you? And what's more, you even make a point i've already adressed. I said already that they would make a bigger, better GTA for the PS3 if it was held back by the 360, just like they did with the xbox - just like you just said. :roll: