WINE vs. Windows benchmarks

[L33F3R]

nah, i try to keep my rig 50% more powerful then anything i could use it for at the time . I mean, it was a shit 360-windows port all and all.

[pfunkman]

nah, i try to keep my rig 50% more powerful then anything i could use it for at the time . I mean, it was a shit 360-windows port all and all.

As soon as you explain what makes it a bad port ill begin to take you seriously. Otherwise from what i am reading you're just another person bitching that you cant max it out on a $400 wal-mart rig.

A cheap dual core and mid range video card will make GTA 4 look far better than the 360.

The work they put into it to make it scale so incredibly well on the PC alone makes it a better than average port. Like i said look at the screenshots side by side and tell me again how shitty of a port it is...

It had its bugs at release but it is far from a shitty port. This is whats wrong with so much of the PC gaming market. Rockstar went way the hell out of their way to make a quality port for the PC that actually leverages the power of a PC and the crybabies with cheap rigs call it a bad port because they cant max it.

For the uneducated crybabies a good port to the PC SHOULD look far better than its console counterpart. This also means it wont run at max settings on your $400 brown box rig. Ports to the PC that play well yet look no better than the console versions are the bad ports. If you want it to look and play with the quality of the console buy a damn console, i game on the PC for higher quality graphics and gameplay.

[L33F3R]

i never said it looks like shit, I said it was a shit port. I never said i couldn't run it. I will begin to take you seriously when you learn how to read.

Your point about it being a buggy POS, thats the kind of shit that im talking about. Looking at a screenshot and trying to play it are 2 totally different ballgames. Yes i played it on win 7, quad core with a gt260 and guess what? it was a shit port. You can grind on rockstars jock all you want but a shit port is still a shit port. I come to that conclusion comparing it to the PS3 version, which i had also played. Maybe the textures are not as high res on the consoles, but actually being able to play it the way it was made to be played was very rewarding.

[pfunkman]

i never said it looks like shit, I said it was a shit port. I never said i couldn't run it. I will begin to take you seriously when you learn how to read.

I have reading comprehension problems?

This is your third post about how its a terrible port and you have yet to give a single reason for saying so.

What problems have you had playing it? I bought it at launch from steam and have played it beginning to end 4 times now with 0 issues crashes etc. and still play multiplayer every now and then. My freaking brother played it beginning to end on a shitty laptop with the HD3200 onboard chip on default settings with 0 issues as well.

Besides the memory leaks when it was first launched WTF are you talking about exactly?

[L33F3R]

its been a while so i cannot speak for exactly what happened. However i remember it crashing on me more then a few times. I think because of your steam version it auto updated. I typically dont apply patches for a single player experience. Some of these issues were probably fixed. Still, at point release it was not even close to being worthy of any release at all. I would even go about saying it was worse then BF2, and that was pretty bad. Although BF2 became more broken after every patch they pushed....

about me not giving a reason why it sucks:

Your point about it being a buggy POS, thats the kind of shit that im talking about

So yes, you do have reading comprehension issues.

[pfunkman]

its been a while so i cannot speak for exactly what happened. However i remember it crashing on me more then a few times. I think because of your steam version it auto updated. I typically dont apply patches for a single player experience. Some of these issues were probably fixed. Still, at point release it was not even close to being worthy of any release at all. I would even go about saying it was worse then BF2, and that was pretty bad. Although BF2 became more broken after every patch they pushed....

about me not giving a reason why it sucks:



So yes, you do have reading comprehension issues.

You refused to patch a game that you knew had a buggy release and then complained about bugs. Good going you win the internet genius award.

The issues where fixed before you ever played it... Its not rockstars fault you chose to ignore the patches.

[L33F3R]

i played it days after it came out on vista, i doubt patches exited at that point. Just for kicks i tried it on win 7 a few months ago. If i was attempting to play online i can totally understand what you say about patching, but to render your game nearly unplayable at point release isn't very clever under any circumstances. I knew the release was buggy AFTER my purchase. There is no excuse for this, regardless. If i wanted to patch my stuff up because it never worked to begin with i would run windows full time. Im not going to go patch hunting for a game i have already played perfectly on the ps3... The ps3 version ran just fine without patches diddnt it? Why do i need to get a half ass experience on the PC? A shit port is a shit port. I think to make it more clear, they simply should have tested it before putting it in a box.

[pfunkman]

Nearly unplayable my ass all it did was crash every couple HOURS due to a memory leak. Exaggerating is fun.

[pfunkman]

If you want to gimp your gaming experience by not patching thats your business but dont complain because of your silly notions about gaming.

The ps3 version has had a few patches like the one to fix the issue where the game would just completely freeze randomly. But hey you didnt patch that one right?

[L33F3R]

then perhaps you could better explain to me why i couldnt maintain a window for more then 10 minutes.