If you've been waiting for GTA 4 on PC...

You better think about shelling out more money for new hardware unless you have a high end PC:

Minimum System Requirements
* OS: Windows Vista - Service Pack 1 / XP - Service Pack 3
* Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo 1.8Ghz, AMD Athlon X2 64 2.4Ghz
* Memory: 1.5GB, 16GB Free Hard Drive Space
* Video Card: 256MB NVIDIA 7900 / 256MB ATI X1900

Recommended System Requirements
* OS: Windows Vista - Service Pack 1 / XP - Service Pack 3
* Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad 2.4Ghz, AMD Phenom X3 2.1Ghz
* Memory: 2 GB (Windows XP) 2.5 GB (Windows Vista)
* 18 GB Free Hard Drive Space
* Video Card: 512MB NVIDIA 8600 / 512MB ATI 3870

(Source: VGCchartz).

Looks like another lazy port to me, rather than really design and opitimise it for the PC they are just getting it running and pumping up the requirements.

I don't know if those people who have been hanging on to play this game are going to feel about having to shell out a couple of times the cost of a console for the equipment needed to enjoy the luxury of playing it on the PC, without the DLC...

Darkheart

I can't keep track of all these cpu types.
It used to be so much easier when it was all about 486's and GHz.

I've got a dual core 3GHz pc with 2gig ram and an ATI 4850 with 512mb, running XP. That should handle it surely?

So far all the recommended specs simply havent matched the reality. I havent found a simgle game in the last few months that couldn't run well on my system. I tend to take these things with a pinch of salt these days since usually you can enjoy a game with high graphics fidelity on a system of much lower specs than those recommended.

Probably, although there is a vast performance difference between a Core 2 Duo and a Pentium-D at the same clockspeeds, so if you have a Pentium-D or Celeron-D you may be closer to that minimum requirements than you'd like.

It's a Pentium D. Might be time to upgrade in prep for Total War:Empire anyway...

18 GB Hard drive space!

Am I the only one annoyed by this size of install? The game runs off a single disc on my 360 with no hard drive install. Outside of the initial load time, the game streams data on the fly. Why the heck can't they do this with PC versions too?

Example,...
Diablo 1 played off the CD. Install was 100k or so (yes kilobytes)
Diablo 2 full install was like 3.5 gig (Not sure exactly but several GB for sure)
Diablo 3 will be ???

I don't mind doing an install, but it just seems like these could be trimmed down perhaps a bit? I don't know, I guess I'm not the target audience anyways (I don't buy ANY PC games that use DRM or are available on consoles, and I don't buy the latest and greatest PC on a regular basis so that rules out most games)

How do you do patches/mods for a game that's on a cd?

The one thing that really surprises me about this is that GTA4 DOES NOT have a lot of high-end flashy graphics running at high FPS, if anything the GFX in GTA 4 are rather sub-par (particularly for a 360 game). Therefore you do wonder what, (other than the explanation already offered), could be the need for such high requirements (e.g. why quad core?).

You would have thought the extra memory and CPU power available on the PC would make it easier to run the game at a good performance level on an "average" PC. It also seems bizarre that a game that requires no install at all on the 360 seems to need 18 GB on the PC...

Darkheart

And Leadwerks posted about the move back to PC's who in thier right mind would move to a bloatware platform from a streamlined console.

:)

Yeah isn't that about 30 CDs? Or 12.500 floppy disks. :) That would be funny. "Insert disk 8.945 and press any key."

Using single sided versions of the disks used for the C64 that would be a bit over 100.000 disks! >:(

I guess that's why they never released GTA for the 64.

Quite.

> Looks like another lazy port to me

Say hello to the PC market for the past 12 years.

Just buy a console, you could have been playing this game months ago, and you won't need to think about upgrading either.

FarCry 2 is enough reason to upgrade your box. I'd hate to see it on a console.

Hehehe..

far cry 2 isn't very resource hungry. I'm amazed how well it runs in the highest settings on the 7800 and I installed it in windows vista which is supposed to be slower. I'm not sure if settings are different on DX10 cards but I have it all maxed out at high or very high except medium geometry and shadows, no AA 1024x768 and it runs very well indeed.

People with a modern mediocre system should have no trouble playing it with lots of eye candy at around 30fps. And it's not the kind of shooter that needs more.

I believe the recommendation is actually for 3 cores (i.e. AMD Phenom X3), and one suggested reason is that 360 is essentially a 3 core engine, implying a lazy 360 port. The other suggestion I heard was that the extra size might be the 360 DLC bundled in, but I doubt that.

Personally, I should just need to upgrade my GPU and squeeze through. I was expecting to do so in the next few months anyway (just started looking in the £100 region - 8800GT/9800GT or 3870 seem to be the way to go). I'll probably do it just after Christmas, and probably get FC2 and Bioshock in the sales, plus GTA4 of course - should keep me busy for a few months...

the pictures you posted gosse, the PC version just looks like its got higher res textures :s

Load the game data from the cd/dvd, and when it's done you look inside the game directory on the harddrive for any patch files, and applies them if found.

At least that's how I would do it.

Wait until the first game to take 100gb+ comes out, by the time you've installed it the sequel will be out on it's way!!

http://aoc.wikia.com/wiki/System_Requirements

Age of Conan requires 32 GB hard disk space.

I mean, what is the big deal? 1 TB HDDs sell for 120$ !!! Why make a big story about disk requirements? If the game's asset require that amount of space, it is for obvious reasons; "It is a big game with diverse textures models, and sounds". The asset is taking up all the space, there is no way around this.

Now if GTA on XBOX360 requires 1 disk, must be because it is a DUAL LAYER disk (9 GB) and that the textures (for example) are probably of lower resolution than on the PC. I think it's a good thing that the PC version has better visuals.

What might be bad thoe, is to imagine that if you have a P4, that you can't run GTA 4, which would be lying to you. Surely a 3.4Ghz P4 should run GTA 4!!!

Part of the deam is that not everyone is in the USA or pays those prices (ie cheap).

How long does it take to install 32 GB??? If you want to throw your money down the drain, to get sharper textures and slightly faster (depending on how much money you have) fair enough. I think it's mad though. You can't really justify those kind of specs for GTA IV.

As said before on this thread. Lazy Developers.

>How do you do patches/mods for a game that's on a cd?

You place the update files on the harddisk and when you load from DVD, you check the version and load the newer version from HD instead of DVD.

For me the issue is simply the waste of resources, even if I have plenty. I like to do things efficiently, and conserve resources when possible. This type of install just goes completely against that. It's most noticeable on console conversions, because I *KNOW* that the console version had no install, and played fine straight off the disc.

A lot of games require the disc in the computer to play,... at least they could use it to stream the several hundred meg title screen animation!

To me these large installs are just laziness. Yes I know next-gen resources take up more memory, but these install sizes don't seem to be scaling up at the correct rate. Do they even try to fit resources within a reasonable range anymore? Maybe if they did, then modern PC games would not require a new system every 6 months.

Just my .02

Why the heck does it need 18gb? I'm hoping that's just for installation purposes only and the game itself takes roughly 8gb, or else I have to ask how the hell they managed to bloat a game that ran on a dual-layered DVD on the 360 and streamed all the data fine, where-as PC users have to install something on the scale of 2 DVDs with compress data all to the harddrive instead.


Anyways, I wish they gave an idea what settings the game would even run at with Minimum. Would be easier if PC game specs gave information on what kind of rig would constitute good FPS at medium settings (1024x768) resolution), and recommended would be for high graphical settings.


Going to wait on the reviews and see how the port job itself fairs. I've always waited on the PC port of the GTA series since III since I couldn't stand the dual-analog control.
(although GTA4 was better in that respect, but I still didn't enjoy it as much compared to WASD+Mouse when I tinkered about in it on my brother's 360)

The size wouldn't bother me, installing the damn thing would. You buy it, set it of installing and wait an hour plus to play it. It'll be like installing an OS...

....you game install will complete in 39minutes
....5mins later...you game install will complete in 37minutes
....10 more mins later...you game install will complete in 34minutes etc

Hopefully, in the future, games will come on USB 3.0 sticks instead of the (IMO) obsolete CDs/DVD-ROMs. Prices are falling every day - you can get an 8gb stick for $14 from any major retailer. Eventually, games will come zipped on those little things. Then, that hour will be five minutes!

Or, you'll be downloading everything from a service like Steam. Hopefully, the internet will be hundreds of times faster (Internet 2.0, anyone?), and then the cost of media won't be an issue, nor will space.

Think about it. My friend's first computer had a 15mb hard drive, which the salesperson said 'would last forever'. It's only natural for games to eventually get to be 32gb. I remeber my 'roomy' 5gb HDD a while back. Later, I remeber the outrage that new games took 1gb+ to install. It's only a natural progression, like the 8mb NES carts, to the 9gb DL DVDs for the 360, and now the 50gb Blu-Ray Discs for PS3.



Yet they don't. They just want you to have the disc in to prevent copying games illegaly. The problem is, for honest gamers (98%), that will be nothing more than a major inconvienence/annoyance. For software pirates; they'll eventually find a way around it anyway. So, it does nothing, really. And now I hear EA has new anti-copying tech on their new discs that prevent them from installing after x times, yet you can call EA up and they'll reset it for you. What is the point of that, really?!!

Oh, and too bad if you have an EEE PC or any other netbook without a disc drive, and want to play old games on it. Too bad - enjoy lugging around that external disc drive, at which point your ultraportable becomes a heavy, underpowered laptop. Just to play <insert old disc-based game>.

Maybe new games will ship on SD card! :-)

And ironically, this only annoys honest non-pirates, since this copy protection method has been cracked (you can download a patch to remove it like any other game) since the day it came out.