I am having crap load of fun but up close the game looks really bad. I was expecting GTA IV on a next gen console to looks good in terms of visuals. Don't get me wrong it does but I'm curious as to why Rockstar went with the blurry fuzzy graphics for the game. Upclose all the edges of the textures are blurred as if to give off some bloom affect. At times it makes the game look unrealistic like for example when it rains and the fog comes in. I was hoping it was some setting that could be turned on or off but its just the way the decided to design the game. It looks as if i'm playing with at thin layer of vasoline on my screen or something. I play on a 32inch Toshina HD at 1080p on the 360.

I don't think the the 360 version runs at 1080p, only at 720p

Does anyone think Rockstar are being lazy?

I just got a 52" Sony Bravia and hooked up my xbox 360 via HDMI. It stutters and looks like ass at 1080p, and I am guessing that the box, though it says 1080p, is wrong? Only COD4 has run smoothly at all at 1080p on my system

Lets hope that games companies realise that pcs are the best entertainment systems bar none and put us back at top of the publication list...

Give us HD / Blu-ray Optical drives as standard

Us pc owners have had the best technology and can only get better if Nvidia's CUDA becomes mainstreme..


PC games have recieved a hit of late but looking at the re written pc versions of games Mass Effect is the best version on the pc and so is Assasins Creed...Its a shame that some games wont be comming to pc such as the new Starwars game.

Look forward to more wipe the floor pc versions of console titles to take advantage of our better control and free online capabilities, better graphics and sound...

Long live the pc.........

couple of things to look at

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/7644 [...] -possibly/

http://www.g4tv.com/xplay/blog/pos [...] oming.html

Breaking news: on pcgamer.co.uk it says that Starwars : Force Unleashed is comming to pc

Hope it is

Were GTA graphics ever that good? This game wasn't meant to be sold on the merit of it's graphics, as for the framerate I can't comment because I haven't played it, and probably will not unless (hopefully until) it comes to the PC.

the only thing annoying me about the game graphics is the shadows, which are all fuzzy and dont have sharp edges, the edges of shadows look like there made out of hexagons.

but im not a gfx whore and dont mind the game is pretty decent but very repetitive, im hoping it gets better as i play through.

oh and i voted that the frame rate is to low for both... but most game developers develop console games to run at 30fps, which i can notice and find very frustrating at times.

I think the game is pretty technically impressive for the current generation of consoles. It doesn't run in 1080p and the framerate does dip, but you have to consider that this game is a lot more technically strenuous than something like bioshock or call of duty. It takes a lot of power to process everything that's going on at once in this game. What other game has to handle a scenario where there's a 20 car pileup with things blowing up everywhere, AI for a couple dozen on-screen characters and manage a realistic physics system controlling all of it? The developers weren't lazy by omitting 1080p support. They sacrificed a little bit of visual fidelity in order to get all this stuff running at once. I mean I'm no programmer, but it seems obvious to me that it had to be quite a challenge to get this all to run at a playable speed. Now the PC port on the other hand is a different story...

to be honest this is the least optimsed game i ever played console or pc i get lower fps on max settings than on crysis max settings which looks alot better rock star have disappointed me