Top
150°

Face-Off: Grand Theft Auto 5 on PC

Digital Foundry:
Our initial look at Grand Theft Auto 5 on PC surprised with its scalability across budget PCs, but the top-end experience is another beast entirely. Rockstar's much-delayed release makes the wait worth it by adding options to play to most GPUs' strengths - whether you're tweaking for straight 1080p60 or a more ambitious band of settings at a locked 30fps. But supposing you have the hardware to go absolutely bananas, what does a maxed-out experience really add over PS4 and Xbox One? And indeed, where do the new console versions fall on the PC's wide graphics spectrum?

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
The story is too old to be commented.
greenmiker855d ago

PC version looks really impressive.

spacedelete855d ago

PS4 version is fine. not once when playing it do i think about better framerates as it is optomised well and i'm usually sensitive about that.

MasterCornholio855d ago

I agree. The game still looks and plays great on the PS4. We all know that the PC version is the best but the console versions are good as well.

MRMagoo123854d ago

The ps4 version looks really good imo , I am playing the pc version now but the ps4 version in first person is really impressive especially from a distance from what I have seen at home. Rock star did a great job all around no matter if you got ps4 or pc imo.

Hanuman855d ago

In this video the PC has better AA and is a bit sharper. If I had to make a choice between 4k on PC screen or PS4\1080p on my (larger) TV, I'd take the PS4 version any day! If the PC version wasn't held back by consoles it would probably be the other way round!

MRMagoo123854d ago

I use my 40 inch TV for my pc in my bedroom, I have the ps4 in the living room mainly for the kids on another 40 inch, they both look great but pc wins even with my gtx 750ti.

Genuine-User855d ago (Edited 855d ago )

I was called a liar and dishonest for suggesting that the current-gen version ran between high/very-high and ultra. I provided a 20+ minute video showcasing evidence of my claims, but for some, that was simply not enough.
Digital Foundry pretty much backs up my suggestion. I wonder if the same people will disregard DF's article as well.

Tsubasa-Oozora855d ago

It looks like they straight up ported the PS4 version to PC. Isn't the PS4 architecture similar to PC? Maybe that's why.. but I can't really see any difference between the 2

Genuine-User855d ago

My take on this would be that was initially in development for the PC. When current-gen consoles were announced the PC development came to a halt and Rockstar switched over to the console remaster.

Erik7357855d ago

Your right, your disagrees are just from butthurt gamers who waited so long to play it on PC.

It's like the ps4 version but a little sharper and better AA....only time I noticed a difference was the draw distance on vegetation....its basically a ps4 port...

ravencry855d ago (Edited 855d ago )

Wrong link. i fucked it up

blackmagic855d ago (Edited 855d ago )

Your statement of high-very high settings isn't even what got my goat. If you had just done that and posted the video, I probably would have been impressed that you had made the effort to back up your statement. But you didn't do that.

Instead, you trailed your statement with the proclamation "Confirmed by Digital Foundry and nxgamer" and posted a link to the nxgamer video. And then you followed that with a second comment where you declared that disagreement can only mean one thing "irrational hostility".

Such a bold declaration piqued my interest of course so I went looking for the comparison on Digital Foundry, probably something I wouldn't have even done if not for how absolute your statement was and guess what? The only thing I found was an article that DIDN'T agree with your statement. So I disagreed and linked to what I did find and suggested that was why you were getting disagrees.

Now, instead of providing a link to a Digital Foundry article or saying you must have seen it elsewhere or just saying it was an error of some sort, you went on a mission to discredit Digital Foundry (which was previously your own reference that apparently confirmed your statement), a campaign of misdirection and a flurry tangential references.

The funny thing though, you STILL have not produced a link to show that Digital Foundry confirmed your statement. I mean, you are once again in love with Digital Foundry since they have now posted an article that supports your statement but it was only posted today. It didn't exist two days ago when you actually made the statement. So where is this illusive unicorn article?

I will say one thing that I am sorry for, I allowed myself to be drawn into a debate with a fanboy, something I always regret doing in the end, is never fruitful and tends to draw out the worst in me. For this, I apologize to the community in general and I hope they can accept it.

Genuine-User855d ago (Edited 855d ago )

You’re painting a picture that does not exist. I did not make an absolute statement; I wasn't even specific on who said what. I initially suggested that GTAV ran between high to very-high on current-gen, declaring that it was "confirmed by DF and NXGamer".

While I admit that I jumped the gun with DF, I did however provide an alternative source.

I stand by my following statement. There was not a single counter argument with a shred of evidence.

Let me make it abundantly clear, I did not disregard or discredit Digital Foundry; I was merely suggesting that they were also prone to making mistakes. Unlike you, not only did I claim such a thing, I provided evidence of their mistakes and mishaps.

You disregarded a nigh-half-hour technical analysis video that detailed exactly what I had said with this statement “nx gamer", a nameless youtube personality with less than 5,000 followers that just does a voice over on a random video playing in the background and pits it as "fact" to counter HIS OWN REFERENCE”.

You were shamelessly appealing to authority, which resulted in a logical fallacy.

You know what I find funny, the fact that you dismissed and disregarded an in-depth technical analysis video based on your appeal to authority, yet the same outlet has proved you wrong today.

It’s quite ironic that you mention my love of DF.
Have you forgotten what you said the other day:

-“Digital Foundry, who has done hundreds of these comparisons over the last decade and have established themselves as a high quality source of information “
-“simply isn't anything near enough for me to even have a shimmer of a doubt that Digital Foundry is accurate in their assessment.”
-“I believe Digital Foundry is correct in its assessment, nx gamer needs to put some glasses on and you need to be able to prove your statements with reputable sources.”

Finally, since you have no hope of redemption, you shamelessly resort to the one last thing you can do, and that is to call me a fanboy. A fanboy of what sort exactly, I do not know. But your character assassination isn't going to work on anyone.

Don't be so quick to disregard an alternative source next time.

Psychotica855d ago

The vegetation on the hill @1:02 mark really showed the difference to me. It gave the PC version a much more realistic look and feel to it.

GortJester855d ago

If it's hard to tell the difference, just look at Trevor's hair at 4:07. It looks like real hair on the PC version. Phenomenal job R*.

Psychotica855d ago

You really need glasses if you don't see any difference..

GUTZnPAPERCUTZ855d ago

@1:02 you can EASILY see the difference...