How did they get a GTA 3 cover?

me? · Post by **me?** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 3:38 am

I was looking at http://www.cdcovers.cc/dreamcast_g.php and found a GTA 3 French cover. Does this mean it somehow made it to France?

dj898 · Post by **dj898** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 3:59 am

probably homebrew...

DjB · Post by **DjB** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 4:28 am

Yay, I have an excuse for some valuable input

Ok, a fair while ago a hoax was created claiming that a group of coders were porting the PC version of GTA3 to the DC. Those in the know and those with a general knowledge of the Dreamcast and its capabilities knew that, yes with profesionals at it it could be quite feasable but with a few no names claiming it, it was a fake.

There was a screenshot released that many of the respected artists here sussed out and proved fake. Also, there was a site 'devoted' to it with a message board that was updated not so often but after a couple of months without inactivity, we knew the truth. The case would have been made in anticipation, or another ploy to get people hyped up for nothing.

Code-Red · Post by **Code-Red** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 4:31 am

DjB wrote:yes with profesionals at it it could be quite feasable

No, not even close.

DjB · Post by **DjB** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 4:43 am

Now I know shit all about programming and that but I do know that GTA3 isnt that complex of a game. If its possible on PS2 its quite possible on the DC. And I do mean professionals, not as in the best around here. I mean the best of the best.

DaMadFiddler · Post by **DaMadFiddler** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 5:24 am

Well, Rockstar aren't exactly the "Best of the Best" themselves

. I'm sure that, had they decided back in the day to do such a thing, it would have been a very sloppy port. And since the PS2 can push a lot of polys but sucks at lighting and textures, and the DC has a markedly lower poly count but comparably excellent lighting and texturing, there's a LOT of space for things to go wrong when it comes to careless porting.

GTA: San Andreas has little to no audiovisual improvement over the first-wave game GTA3, the framerate still sucks, still quite a few bugs...they used Renderware middleware to develop it, and they outsourced GTA Advance to another software team they'd just bought. Also, their recent release Manhunt (aside from being an utterly despicable game both content-wise and in terms of gameplay) was a major step DOWN in technical terms from the visuals of GTA3, which were none too pretty to begin with.

The only Rockstar game I can think of that I actually enjoyed was Max Payne. The GTA's are fun to dick around in, but a lot of the actual missions are just annoying and tedious...and (esp. in GTA3) there are a lot of minor engine bugs that can mess things up and tick you off.

DaMadFiddler · Post by **DaMadFiddler** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 5:30 am

Incidentally, Max Payne is one of the many games on that long list of scheduled DC releases that was axed after the infamous Sega announcement.

Code-Red · Post by **Code-Red** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 5:43 am

DjB wrote:Now I know poop all about programming and that but I do know that GTA3 isnt that complex of a game. If its possible on PS2 its quite possible on the DC. And I do mean professionals, not as in the best around here. I mean the best of the best.

Yes, but what you said was to port the PC version of Grand Theft Auto, which is a sloppy ram hog, and would not port very well to Dreamcast at all. You could port it, hell you can port anything, but the level of playability is what determines whether a game is worth porting. Dreamcast wouldnt even come close to the PS2 with the imense size of a game like GTA is.

DaMadFiddler · Post by **DaMadFiddler** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 6:42 am

Code-Red wrote:Yes, but what you said was to port the PC version of Grand Theft Auto, which is a sloppy ram hog

[chuckles] I'd forgotten about the PC version. Kind of like how the xBox version of Shenmue II was inexplicably inferior to the DC version despite the fact that the xBox is technically far superior in every way, so the PC version of GTA3 was inexplicably slower and not much better than its PS2 counterpart. I tried it on my P4 1.7, with 256MB RAM and a Radeon 9000, and still had a few minor framerate & stuttering issues...which should have been MORE than adequate to run just about any game around that time.

The Kron · Post by **The Kron** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:19 am

Code-Red wrote:Dreamcast wouldnt even come close to the PS2 with the imense size of a game like GTA is.

You're very much incorrect, The Ram deficiency is easily overcome thanks to the DC's texture compression which is 3-4 times more efficient on the fly than the way the PS2 handles it.

goatdan · Post by **goatdan** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 10:42 am

The Kron wrote:You're very much incorrect, The Ram deficiency is easily overcome thanks to the DC's texture compression which is 3-4 times more efficient on the fly than the way the PS2 handles it.

I'd agree -- Crazy Taxi 2 is a pretty big world, although not as big as GTA... but you move through CT2 at a MUCH higher rate of speed then even the speediest GTA3 parts.

And even on the Xbox, the GTA series looks crappy compared to other games. I went on an Xbox buying binge lately (10 games in a week thanks to the buy-two, get-one deal at GameStop... spent less than $60 too!) and one of the games I got was Crazy Taxi 3. Crazy Taxi 3 looks very similar to the DC games in the graphics department. In comparison, GTA 3 and Vice City look pretty crappy, and these are the "superior" ports of the two games.

cube_b3 · Post by **cube_b3** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:28 am

DaMadFiddler wrote:Incidentally, Max Payne is one of the many games on that long list of scheduled DC releases that was axed after the infamous Sega announcement.

actually this game was just a rumor 3d realms told planet dreamcast it was never intended to be released on any console...

cube_b3 · Post by **cube_b3** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:32 am

what was the web sites name gtafreedc.com or something right
so like what the web site just disappeared or what?

coke · Post by **coke** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 7:34 am

Rofl, How can PC game that requires a min 700mhz run on the DC which is only 200mhz?(210-250 if modded)

The Kron · Post by **The Kron** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 9:01 am

Because the PS2 has a 700mhz processor doesn't it (no), The answer is called development and adaption.

Unless you understand the concept that comparing vastly differing cpu speeds with different architechture you'll never understand.

Rofl that.

coke · Post by **coke** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 9:34 am

Where did you get PS2 out of my post?(Read closer or put your classes on) I'm talkig about the PC verison dumbass. It's impossible to adap any PC game with requirments that are over the fucking top. The only way you would get this game on the DC is if you added 8bit fucking graphics. Here are the specs below: The DC doesn't come close to these and never will, so if you want to bullshit me with cpu speeds and architechture port a game with these specs so I can laugh my ass off while you fail. k?

800Mhz-1000Mhz
System Memory:
128Mb
Graphics Memory:
32Mb

Here are your ps2 specs:

CPU: 128 bit "Emotion Engine"
Operating Clock: 300 MHz
Memory: 32 MB Direct Rambus

See? What you just said was comparing GTA3 PC for PS2, the PS2 is nothing like the DC or PC notice in quotes emotion engine that should sum it for you, playing PC games on the PS2 is like saying Porting PC games with high specs like above, doesn't work.

Clessy · Post by **Clessy** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 9:44 am

Right so something over the top say like Doom 3 runing on Xbox would be impossable right? Since you need say triple the specs of a xbox to run it on pc. Ohh wait doom 3 is being made to fun on xbox and doesnt look hardly any graphically infearior.

coke · Post by **coke** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 9:57 am

It's as simple as you said it when you have the source, I don't think anyone here has the source to GTA3. Wouldn't need to triple the specs ethier the xbox is at 700mhz while doom3 is 1.5 so just double. To add on: I've played doom3 on 800mhz p3 with 1gb ram and gf 6800 just fine.

MKE · Post by **MKE** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 10:25 am

coke wrote:Where did you get PS2 out of my post?(Read closer or put your classes on) I'm talkig about the PC verison dumbass. It's impossible to adap any PC game with requirments that are over the fudging top. The only way you would get this game on the DC is if you added 8bit fudging graphics. Here are the specs below: The DC doesn't come close to these and never will, so if you want to poop me with cpu speeds and architechture port a game with these specs so I can laugh my ass off while you fail. k?

800Mhz-1000Mhz
System Memory:
128Mb
Graphics Memory:
32Mb

Here are your ps2 specs:

CPU: 128 bit "Emotion Engine"
Operating Clock: 300 MHz
Memory: 32 MB Direct Rambus

See? What you just said was comparing GTA3 PC for PS2, the PS2 is nothing like the DC or PC notice in quotes emotion engine that should sum it for you, playing PC games on the PS2 is like saying Porting PC games with high specs like above, doesn't work.

well, like kron said (and if you want to continue posting here i would suggest you respect your elders

) it's all about architecture.

How can an AMD 1.8 ghz processor beat an Intel 2.5ghz P4 (or even an apple 900mhz laptop compare to an amd 2400+ laptop), it's the architecure it uses. and again as he said unless you understand that you wont get it

kron just was using an example of the ps2. And because game console gpu's and cpu's are made to run games (or just 1 prog. at a time), they dont need as much power to make them playable. Also, it's only runing the game. If your plaing the pc games, your running probably 10-20 background thing's at the same time, that's why you need 256mb ram instead of the 32 the ps2 uses, and you need a 1.7ghz processor to play it instead of a 200mhz one.

Like Kron said, its how the coders use the hardware supplied....

and Unless you understand the concept that comparing vastly differing cpu speeds with different architechture you'll never understand.

The Kron · Post by **The Kron** » Sun Dec 05, 2004 10:38 am

coke wrote:Where did you get PS2 out of my post?(Read closer or put your classes on) I'm talkig about the PC verison dumbass. It's impossible to adap any PC game with requirments that are over the fudging top. The only way you would get this game on the DC is if you added 8bit fudging graphics. Here are the specs below: The DC doesn't come close to these and never will, so if you want to poop me with cpu speeds and architechture port a game with these specs so I can laugh my ass off while you fail. k?

800Mhz-1000Mhz
System Memory:
128Mb
Graphics Memory:
32Mb

Here are your ps2 specs:

CPU: 128 bit "Emotion Engine"
Operating Clock: 300 MHz
Memory: 32 MB Direct Rambus

See? What you just said was comparing GTA3 PC for PS2, the PS2 is nothing like the DC or PC notice in quotes emotion engine that should sum it for you, playing PC games on the PS2 is like saying Porting PC games with high specs like above, doesn't work.

Are you seriously this unaware? Whether PC or PS2 version its irrelevent, The game runs on renderware. So what if the game has overspecced requirements for PC, You can easily see GTA3 pc is very poorly optimised.

The SH4 in the DC is nothing like a standard PC processor either, 200mhz DC does not = 200mhz pc.

The term "Emotion Engine" is nothing but branding, To see you use it as if its some sort of ultimate cpu just reads like someone who accepts hype way to easily. You are so wide of the mark its untrue, Perhaps you need to look again who is the "Dumbass".