that' s what i don' t understand about rockstar in GTA , why can' t they replicate close enough the same systems that worked so well in other popular games, they did an amazing job in so many areas that are much more complicated but they failed, relatively speaking, in some others.

VF, i don' t agree with you at all, , an 8? are u kiddng me ? this game looks freaking amazing, the most impressive 360 game so far and please stop that bullshit about 25 fps, most people are totaly ok with 25-30 in that kind of games as long as the graphics are that great. don' t think that rockstars were lazy, with the 360 hardware , it is not posqsible to have that graphic quality at 60 fps, that' s just plain impossible no matter the developers skill, i can barely believe it is running on 360 as it is !

The art is also amazing , of course it' s no mass effect or mario galaxy, what kind of stupid comment is that? the game is very stylich, and very atmospheric , the city just feels real, the character design is also great a,d the color filters used sometimes are amazing, sometimes it gives a painting look when that blue filter is used, in the morning... VF you always succeed on getting on my nerves.

Graphics aren' t the only thing that determin frames per second. In a game like GTA, you' re constantely reading off the HDD and have a lot going on to keep the CPU busy, memory bandwidth is also a huge factor. Performance should be measured seperately from graphics. Which has more to do with the console than the game. The graphics are beautiful, even if the 360 is a bit too slow to handle the game.

Well we also gave Mario Galaxy and Orange Box 10s...

Right on, Adam! As I continued to ponder the subject last night I thought Orange Box should be right up there too. I can' t comment on Super Mario Galaxy as I haven' t played it, but it seems excellent and fully realized as well.

Which has more to do with the console than the game. The graphics are beautiful, even if the 360 is a bit too slow to handle the game.

I think it has to do with the developers as well as the console. For example, Double Dragon on XBLA has unforgivable slowdown... since it' s an older and much simpler game, it has to be on the developers for not optimizing the emulation correctly.

Now obviously the scope of GTAIV is much more grand and ambitious, I' m just saying it isn' t always about the console' s limitations and clearly there are some development teams that are more skilled than others. Rockstar excels at certain aspects (I' m really impressed with the appearance and behavior of the water in GTAIV, for example)... while other features they seem to greenlight if they only " kinda" work. Anyway, I don' t mean to belabor the point, it' s a great game, just not quite a 10 to me. I wonder if more people will agree in a year and a half or two years when the next installment comes out... " Rockstar has really improved on all the problems in GTAIV!"

Visually the weather effects, lightinga nd colour palettes are spot on. The aliasing and occasionally muddy textures are forgiven because of the sheer scope of the game. The draw distance is fine, as is the minimal pop in. It' s a little too dark at night sometimes though, but that' s can' t really be avoided.

The bridges look phenomenal at night though and the particle effects are superb. I think the most impressive thing is how they' ve handled rain. Not only can you see where the wind is blowing strongly but the transfer from dry to wet surfaces is perfect. People even run to get out of the rain, ...get their umbrellas out etc... it' s fantastic.

I think the loss of traction for cars is a bit exagerated in the rain, but there isn' t anything wrong with that.

The graphics are worst inside dark buildings. The lighting is reallly bad there. Just try to avoid looking at the shadows on the wall.

I had to change the in-game contrast but after that the darkness level was ok. For me the graphics look their best when looking over large distances, especially over bridges at night.

Sometimes I cant quite look at characters faces in cutscenes on the other hand, because the lighting sometimes makes them quite ugly. Niko' s not the best looking chap in the first place. Looks a bit like one of the chuckle brothers, y' know the short skinny one.

10 in every respect? C' mon!

It' s a good game, even great but graphics alone are NEVER 10, clipping, zigzags (I own the PS3 version) all over the place and pop-ins...?

Also: All cars control likes sofas!
After a while you get used to it, but driving fast in Liberty City is almost impossible and cornering at high speeds... you got to invest a lot of time to perfect your driving skills... it' s a little too hard for my taste.

10 in every respect? C' mon!

It' s a good game, even great but graphics alone are NEVER 10, clipping, zigzags (I own the PS3 version) all over the place and pop-ins...?

Yep.. nothing Amazing (and runs below average, did i mention this before)

Niko' s not the best looking chap in the first place. Looks a bit like one of the chuckle brothers, y' know the short skinny one

Hahaha! good one.

Welcome Polymorphy.

To VF5 - surely if anything in the game is a 10, it *HAS* to be the sound! Soo many radio stations, the best voice acting ever, and they even manage difeerent dialogue runs when you repeat missions? The sound in GTA for me defines the series.

Edge also gave it 10, and I can' t think of more than 3 other games that got this score in Edge. Great review Adam.

ORIGINAL: polymorphy

10 in every respect? C' mon!

It' s a good game, even great but graphics alone are NEVER 10, clipping, zigzags (I own the PS3 version) all over the place and pop-ins...?

Also: All cars control likes sofas!
After a while you get used to it, but driving fast in Liberty City is almost impossible and cornering at high speeds... you got to invest a lot of time to perfect your driving skills... it' s a little too hard for my taste.

I disagree with this. I think the controls control pretty well. Obviously you can' t take corners going 60 mph. Why would you be able to? You shouldn' t be able too. Your cousin' s car is a crappy beater, it sucks driving it because it is a crappy car. The better cars are a lot more fun to drive. The only thing I don' t like about the driving is how slow the camera moves using the right joystick. It wouldn' t have been hard to have a sensitivity option for it. It moves way too damn slow.


I don' t think the sound should get a 10. Sure, the game has excellent voice acting and tons of different sounds, music, talk radio stations, ect., but the sound engine itself sucks. There aren' t echo' s or anything, everything always sounds the exact same no matter where you are. It doesn' t make very good use of surround sound either. The engine has questionable audio positioning.

Either everyone has been play way to many FPS games or simple can' t bothetr to learn a new control system. Been playing this with ease on the controls. I think they work fine. Car handle depends on the car used. The muscle cars handle like shit but get in a car like the Comet and your whipping around corners at 40 50 or 60 MPH. I turn off auto aim fuck that shit free aim all the way and you' ll rack up kills like this:

I' ve gone to the First person car view as of late and it really helps when driving quickly and weaving through traffic etc. That said, you do lose a bit of the fun that you get watching pedestrians and the overall flow of whats happening around you. However, it really does make the city feel huge, especially with the buildings and bridges towering around you.

I think Kikizo and most other reviewers should ditch the subscores (graphics, sound, etc) and just go with one final score. Heck, most of the time they don' t even have a relation to the final score so why the hell are they there? A great game is more than the sum of its parts, GTA4 is definitely one of them.

The more you break something down, the more you are likely to over analyse something and miss out on seeing what really makes it great.

Niko' s not the best looking chap in the first place. Looks a bit like one of the chuckle brothers, y' know the short skinny one.

Hahahahaha!

10 in every respect? C' mon!

Yep.. nothing Amazing (and runs below average, did i mention this before)

A 10 out of 10 game doesn' t mean the game is perfect. It means that the few flaws the game has are outweighed by it' s enormous entertainment value.

Oh... and VF? Quite frankly, what the were you expecting with the framerate? Your argument against the game in that regard is downright thick. That' s like saying that Crysis' s performance and graphics are poor because it won' t run on " very high" , with high anti-aliasing and high anisotropic filtering at a high resolution.

It' s a hardware issue, and if they' d waited another six months, on top of the six they already added on to optimize the PS3 version, to release a game that has been in development since 2004, they could have added five or so frames per second to the title. Try rationalizing that decision to Take-Two stockholders, and the gaming public at large.

The game' s fantastic, and I think you' re nitpicking.

@VF5
What again was your opinion on the framerate issues of Mario Kart Wii in online multiplayer?

Oh... and VF? Quite frankly, what the were you expecting with the framerate? Your argument against the game in that regard is downright thick. That' s like saying that Crysis' s performance and graphics are poor because it won' t run on " very high" , with high anti-aliasing and high anisotropic filtering at a high resolution.

It' s a hardware issue, and if they' d waited another six months, on top of the six they already added on to optimize the PS3 version, to release a game that has been in development since 2004, they could have added five or so frames per second to the title. Try rationalizing that decision to Take-Two stockholders, and the gaming public at large.

The game' s fantastic, and I think you' re nitpicking.

I don' t care about the politics, all i know is this game runs at the lower end of the framerate scale.

As for telling me this game is fantastic, i already knew that a good 2 weeks before you as i was playing through it.. And your being thick for expecting everyone to have the same opinion about the game. Ive give very valid reasons why i wouldnt give its graphics a 10/10. (or the whole game either)

@VF5
What again was your opinion on the framerate issues of Mario Kart Wii in online multiplayer?

Why, are their known issues?? im not aware?

Ive not experienced any

Then again, MK Wii does supports 12players online @60fps and with all the chaos of the shells and shit flying around the tracks i do expect that to put alot of strain on the old Hardware.. So i wouldnt be suprised if there was the occassional issues, but it would be Unlike Nintendo to have took a blind eye to them and left the tracks in the multiplayer modes (they took certain Online tracks out of the DS version because they where to Constraintive)..

I' m I the only person in this world that knows the difference between you' re and your?

the " ' " and the " e" . Yup your correct you' re thought on the subject is true. People need some spelling lessons. I blame the laziness in public schools.

Gets on my nerves too, but I dont tend to say anything as English is not the first language for many here.