com on rockstar give us that bad ass game now



***** i n g nice game

well fix the graphics before you work on animations considering the gfx were sh!!t even compared to saints row.

If im not mistaken Endorphin, Euphoria, and DMM (digital molecular matter) are are developed by the same studio and are funded/owned by Lucasarts. Im not 100% sure, but i do know for a fact that if you want to license any of tools you have to go through lucasarts.

By "this trailer", I meant the newest trailer.

I love hearing this kind of devolpments.......most people dont understaind how much goes into the animations

rockstar is trying to give us kick a-s-s games but those stupid office oldies wont let rockstar distribute it to the public. suppression of rights is rampant and the public cannot do anything about it.

i'm thinking - but i'm not finding the answer.



maybe because it wouldn't be much better > if u think it will, ask your self this question:



how much better will the exclusive episodic content be, seeing as its exclusive for the xbox 360 + therefore being developed/designed for the x360?

"This is probably just because they had to stuggle to get it to run on the 360."



Struggle? What has the 360 got to do with it? If you expect GeOW graphics in an expansive game like GTA, then you're stupid. If you think the PS3 version should have higher res textures, more polygons and a bigger game world, then the PS3 version should be able to run the 'lower' quality game much better than the 360. But as we've seen so far in almost ALL multi-format games, it is the 360 version which usually offers the best performance, and even games which are PS3 ports appear to be improved on the 360 (as VF3 previews show).



And what has 50GB Blu-ray disks got to do with it? Which PS3 games are currently 50GB? Which PS3 coming out this year will be 50GB? Oh that's right, none. The biggest so far is STILL Resistance at 16GB.



So let's wait and see shall we! You're acting like a typical closed minded fanboy who always has to find reasons to attack another console, even when it has nothing to do with the actual topic.

Resisitance is only 16GB cos of the amount of 1080p cutscenes, otherwise its actually 6.8GB, which if the PS3 could actaully upscale stuff properly, it would easily fit onto a 8.5GB DVD-9, yes, you tw@ face its actually 8.5GB.

gta has never had a realistic look to its games so gta4 is in line with what any gta fan is used to anyway the game is not set to release till october I think the textures will improve by then anyway well find out in october.

You Sony fans really need to get off the whole 50 GB thing. There will never be a game that big and you know it, unless the disk is filled with uncompressed HD videos, as has been proven with your precious OMGz 22GB Resistance. If the comments below aren't enough, you can actually put the Resistance disk in your PC (if you have a BR drive) and see for yourself.



Another thing, Gears of War isn't even very long nor does it even take up a lot of space (6 or 7 GB total I think), and it is reported it cost $10 million to make. Do you have any idea how much money it would cost to develop a 50 GB game?



50 GB games are almost as funny as "Next-gen starts when we say it does". Sony and its fans make me lol

WOW, got ya bad people.

Heh, I fabricated that post just to infuriate those who dislike the PS3.

And while anyone who has played any current gen games must agree that the look of GTA 4 is sub par, this game is obviously still in development. (Obvious due to the fact that there is only 2 trailers.) Rather than logically considering this fact, or any other argument, you all simply attacked the PS3 and boasted the Xbox 360. Now, may I ask, who is the fanboy?

And for 50 gigs not being taken up...

When the PS2 came out, it started using DVD, jumping up from games that were 800 mbs on CD. Eventually, someone will make use of 50 gigs, vs their old 9 gigs. Just like those people moved from 800 mb to 9 gigs. For now though, I don't really care.

Because the jump in development costs is PHENOMENAL this gen. It didn't cost ten million to make an 800 meg game, developers could afford to move up to 9 gigs.



And while the people who simply attacked the PS3 and put the 360 in a good light may be fanboys, if you created that whole post with the sole intention of angering fanboys on the Internet you are a nerd.

Saints row looks like a piece of 5hit... GTA IV graphics aren't da best but there a hell of a lot better than Saints row.

"The only reason why multi-platform games are looking better on the 360 is because developers are lazy as hell."



Throughout last gen, I heard the same thing over and over again about the PS2. It is NEVER the fault of Sony for creating a complicated to program machine, oh no, it's always the devs fault for being too 'lazy'.



Look, games don't create themselves, people create them, and therefore they have to cope with many factors during the developement of a game, such as cost, time, ease of developement, support, console limitations, etc. So putting it ALL down to laziness is just, well, just being lazy instead of using your mind.



It's a fact that the PS3 has LESS memory than the 360 for games (428MB on the PS3, 480MB on the 360), because the PS3's OS takes a much bigger chunk out of memory compared to the 360. This means much more at present than disk storage space. So that's 12% more memory for 360 games, and that IS significant. Together with the 360's GPU being a little more powerful and the console being easier to develope on compared to the PS3 means multi-format games have every reason to look and perform better on the 360, although the difference should lessen as devs get to grips with the PS3.



So stop playing the 'lazy' card every time and start looking for the REAL reasons behind the differences.