Rockstar: GTA IV has multiplayer capabilities in all versions
by Alexander Sliwinski 
{ Feb 13th 2008 at 12:55PM }
Now, what these multiplayer capabilities are is still anyone's guess. Also up for debate is what Mattrick exactly meant when he said, "I'm really excited with [GTA IV's] downloadable content and online multiplayer support -- again, that's something that's unique to 360."
Gallery: Grand Theft Auto IV
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Fernando Rocker @ Feb 13th 2008 1:01PM
Without bashing or trolling... honestly... I don't see the appeal of the GTA games.
Anyone fells the same?
Vidikron (FU) @ Feb 13th 2008 1:06PM
Not really. I enjoy sandbox type games and GTA is one of the best.
one i blind @ Feb 13th 2008 1:06PM
They're fun. I mean I would never play one all the way through but they're a good time waster. However, add in multiplayer and I might take it more seriously.
michaud.jon @ Feb 13th 2008 1:07PM
Hahahahah, I can't believe I am replying to the great "Fernando"!
I really like the GTA series, and unlike most. I really really enjoyed the original GTA and GTA2, especially the later with its multiplayer mayhem! Sooo much fun!
I can't believe it took X amount more games to finally incorporate multiplayer into this franchise. This is the reason most open-world games have done so well in recent years.
This should hopefully help breath new life into the aging franchise.
Can't wait! Wii360 ftw!
Evan @ Feb 13th 2008 1:08PM
Just imagine a GTA MMO... a city full of assholes. It seems ideal given how a lot of online gamers behave.
xFenixKnightx @ Feb 13th 2008 1:19PM
For some reason I am interested in THIS one. Ive never been much of a fan but this one is shaping up nicely and Ill probably give it a go =) Fernando you should have left the other pic loco.
maverick_saturn_626 @ Feb 13th 2008 1:20PM
GTA is crazy good, its fun, and you can just about get anyone to play it :)
Anam @ Feb 13th 2008 1:25PM
I find Grand Theft Auto to be fun in two ways:
1. As a really enjoyable racing game where the track and hazards change every time depending on the area of town and the mission you are on.
2. As a laid-back experience where I can drive around and listen to music, while I might be looking for hidden packages or places to do motorcycle tricks. It's a good change of pace from the, ahem, violence in other games.
I have a few friends who don't like Grand Theft Auto, but it seems like they mostly have false expectations about it, and think that it's all about killing people and shooting stuff. Granted, you CAN kill people and shoot stuff, but honestly, there are much better games that do that. The controls of GTA are rather bad for shooting purposes, and since everything respawns it feels like there's no point in killing anyone. Kind of like playing an MMO where you don't get any experience.
Fernando Rocker @ Feb 13th 2008 1:29PM
Henshin a go go baby!
Nigeria @ Feb 13th 2008 1:33PM
Ahh, Viewtiful Joe.
What a beautiful game, yet so disappointing.
Noshino @ Feb 13th 2008 1:40PM
So what's with the V-watch on your arm, man? What, you think you some kind of Mega-Man or something?
Anyway, GTA isn't for everyone, many might like the sandbox type of games, but not all of us (Including me...) like the theme...
But it shows that since this theme is so popular nowadays (gettho, mafia, etc), it does sell...
maverick_saturn_626 @ Feb 13th 2008 1:45PM
Honestly, GTA is no different from most of the games out today, it just has a little bit of everything, thats all.
You have Burnout, NFS, Halo etc etc, GTA is just a bit of them all, a bit of killing here and there like Halo, COD or Half Life, a bit of illegal street racing like Burnout and NFS, a bit of pool, a bit of flight simulator, a bit of boat simulator.
Its just an all round, thats why I love it. I find it hypocritical when a FPS fan yaps on about it being 'too violent with pimps and crap', lol
MariosInferno @ Feb 13th 2008 1:55PM
All personal preference. I personally feel like it's garbage that's rehashed over and over and over. But, then again, a lot of games I like are like that. Guess I just don't care for the subject matter.
I can't think of a single Rockstar product I've enjoyed, with the exception of Max Payne. The rest has been shite and GTA (which are one in the same for me).
baby sea tuna @ Feb 13th 2008 2:27PM
Max Payne 2 maybe. Personally, I enjoyed Table Tennis more than all of the GTAs combined.
Still, I'll pick this up if they manage to fix the aiming mechanic.
James @ Feb 13th 2008 2:29PM
I really like GTA games. I don't care for "urban" culture or anything daft like that but I enjoy the open ended approach to the games. Not too keen on GTA3 but San Andreas is my fave for this. It's just a giant world.
UH OH Don't tell Fenix but it sounds like I just got a job at Rockstar.
Anam @ Feb 13th 2008 5:20PM
Regarding the theme of GTA, I'm also not big on the urban street hustler/pimp/gangster genre. That's one of the reasons why I couldn't get into San Andreas. I'm much more into Vice City, with its 80's action movie style.
Also, since you like 80's rock music Fernando, I should mention that Vice City has one of the greatest soundtracks ever put into a game, and it's all 80's music.
mike @ Feb 13th 2008 5:49PM
of course you dont like GTA games Fernando, their not on a nintendo console. If GTAIV was on the wii as well im sure you would be raving about it.
Personally I hated GTA 3+vice city+ ESPECIALLY SA. I loved GTA 1 and 2. Im only semi looking forward to GTA4 because I really loved saints row and im hoping GTA4 can do what saints row did. However Im begining to doubt it because its only months away from release and no1 has any idea what the multiplayer is about, is it part of the game or jsut minigames, how many p[layers, etc etc. Actually we still have yet to see an in game screenshot with the hud shown and any sort of gameplay video. Makes GTA4 look like some crappy no thought sequel. I hope theres a demo for it tho like saints row had.
Evan @ Feb 13th 2008 1:05PM
Even the Wii version? Oh, nevermind...
Mystic @ Feb 13th 2008 1:08PM
He obviously mis-spoke. There will only be DLC for the 360 version. Of course multiplayer will be in the PS3 version. Stop blowing everything out of proportion.
maverick_saturn_626 @ Feb 13th 2008 1:42PM
Multiplayer for both, thats all that matters. Either way, I'll be able to play online with other peeps.
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Feb 13th 2008 2:49PM
Um, I think there will be DLC for both platforms. Xbox gets some exclusive DLC.
Zoesch @ Feb 13th 2008 4:09PM
Just classic Microsoft FUD, that's all... like when they claimed GTA IV was a 360 exclusive.
Korova @ Feb 13th 2008 10:50PM
He meant that HOME sucks like a Hoover. XBL FTW
deaftly @ Feb 13th 2008 1:08PM
Looks like the 360 version is the one to pick up
maverick_saturn_626 @ Feb 13th 2008 1:19PM
If it really bothers you about extra downloadable content that is, the majority of PS3 owners won't notice the difference once they have GTA full stop unless the unique content is significantly different or appealing. Extra cars are crap won't really make the game any more precious to get on 360 compared to PS3.
PC versions of older GTAs proved that, when they had mods to create your own cars and all sorts, yet the PS2 version was still best selling.
Lets just see how things go, I'm just eager to play the game, no matter which console I'm buying it for :)
Fernando Rocker @ Feb 13th 2008 1:23PM
maverick
There are several reasons to pick the 360 versio the PS3 one.
The 360 version is the lead version... in fact, they were struggling with the PS3 one.
Episodic content. Not just cars, and clothes and weapons.
Rumble out of the box, without the need of buying another controller.
It's in DVD-9, proving that bluray is innecesary in this game.
Better online integration. Live > PSN
Achievements.
Fernando Rocker @ Feb 13th 2008 1:23PM
maverick
There are several reasons to pick the 360 versio the PS3 one.
The 360 version is the lead version... in fact, they were struggling with the PS3 one.
Episodic content. Not just cars, and clothes and weapons.
Rumble out of the box, without the need of buying another controller.
It's in DVD-9, proving that bluray is innecesary in this game.
Better online integration. Live > PSN
Achievements.
maverick_saturn_626 @ Feb 13th 2008 1:34PM
Fernando, to half the people that already own a PS3, the episodic content won't make the slightest bit of difference to them, as for those who don't already own a PS3 or 360, they won't just buy the 360 just to get GTA with episodic content :S They will buy it because they want GTA, full stop, unless they actually know about 360 version having more, whereby they would still have to pay to get Xbox Live in order to get the extra content in the first place.
Its just a good thing I have both, not everyone is as fortunate as me.
As for the achievements and Live bing better the PSN, again, pointless, PSN may not be as good as live, but are you forgetting Live is highly restrictive, had the content been on PS3, it would have been far more open for customizations from gamers to be traded online, much like UT3. And in the case of achievements, PSN is getting that as well.
Like I said, 360 version is offering more, but it depends on how much better that extra stuff is, I guess those with the imaginations to think of far more interesting things to do in order to use up their time in the game, will have most fun, extra content or not.
maverick_saturn_626 @ Feb 13th 2008 1:38PM
Those who have both consoles are lucky, if I can't get the 360 version, I'll just go out and buy the ps3 version :) Don't really care much for extra content, if I get it, thats a bonus, but its not going to make my gameplay experience any worse or any better. I have fun playing GTA no matter what ^^
GTA FTW!
Trev @ Feb 13th 2008 1:45PM
"The 360 version is the lead version... in fact, they were struggling with the PS3 one." Proof? Find a link. Because here they don't specify: http://www.joystiq.com/2007/08/02/take-2-grand-theft-auto-iv-delay-almost-strictly-technological/
"Episodic content. Not just cars, and clothes and weapons." You mean more missions? Because everyone plays GTA for the missions not just to mess around. Since nothing has been announced for it, I wouldn't be surprised if it was ONLY missions.
"Rumble out of the box, without the need of buying another controller." Because a buzzing controller is immersive. If you like it, fine, but if rumble makes or breaks a game for you, your priorities are off.
"It's in DVD-9, proving that bluray is innecesary in this game." Because this is a reason that the 360 version is better. This one is just pathetic.
"Better online integration. Live > PSN." Play online vs. play online. Find a list of live specific features that PSN doesn't have.
"Achievements." Snore. GTA games always track shit you do anyway. Get all the jumps or Get all the jumps 10G, you still have to spend hours searching for the fucking jumps.
maverick_saturn_626 @ Feb 13th 2008 1:51PM
Lol, GTA does automatically track your records, the only difference would be that it transfers those records to our live accounts. Convenient, but not significant, if anything, just makes me seem more nooby, I've never bothered to complete anything, to this day, I have yet to collect all 100 hidden packages in a GTA game, i got close with GTA:LCS for PSP, with 71, but thats it, usually I just stick cheats on and mess about with mates in the game.
If the game has more cheats, I don't care about anything else, lol, if 360 version gives me more cheats that the PS3 version doesn't have, like transform all civilians into rabid zombies who crave your blood and such, I'm buying the 360 version, if its missions and cars, yawn, I'll just buy the cheapest and most accessible.
xFenixKnightx @ Feb 13th 2008 2:08PM
Trev are you serious?
Atleast make some good arguments but you didnt. Every...damn...person in here prefers rumble to no rumble. 99.9% actually. If your the .1% then sux for you. (yes I know here come all the "oh its not immersive, I dont need it, blah blah blah" comments but its true damnit)
GTA should be really great with Achievements. Dont you know that with well thought out achievements (as I know THIS game will probably have) games are just better and let you experience the game on a diff level. Devs are using achievements these days to let the gamer play the game in ways that maybe they thought it was just a little bit cooler or more fun. Example...Assasins Creed, COD4, Gears, Halo3, Bioshock, etc,
Live is definately another reason to own the 360 version for SOOOOO many reasons. Yes PS3 is working on it but they arent there yet so in the meantime they are losing sales and they know it. Thats why they are woking on it!!!! DUHHHHHHH!! < Sorry about that :/
GTA4 devs themselves said PS3 was the reason for delays so yea, IMO it means that the 360 is running quite better and IS the lead console for this.
No doubt both versions should be great but if anyone out there owns both then yeah, the 360 version IS the one to get in that case and in most other multiplat game cases.
maverick_saturn_626 @ Feb 13th 2008 2:13PM
Fenix, theres achievements in GTA already :S The only difference is that it will be placed on your 360 account to give you more gamerpoints.
There is no difference in terms of Live for 360 then there is for PSN, while Live may be superior to PSN generally, in the case of GTA, the only bonus seen thus far is extra content and achievements, which really makes the online experience no different in either case.
Fernando Rocker @ Feb 13th 2008 2:17PM
maverick
At least with the 360 we can send friend invites directly from the game.
Live > PSN
deaftly @ Feb 13th 2008 2:20PM
stop filling my inbox jerks!
maverick_saturn_626 @ Feb 13th 2008 2:23PM
Dude, lol, you can do the same with PS3, have you even played a PS3?
What you meant to say was that you can invite people into another game via 360's in game interface and messaging system, whereby you would be 100% correct.
BTW, is this game releasing in different countries at different times, or worldwide, PS3 is region free, so if its different countries at different times, then I can just order a PS3 version of it from America before all the other UK suckers do :P I hope it does. American stuff is cheap :) UK is overpriced :P
Fernando Rocker @ Feb 13th 2008 2:26PM
"What you meant to say was that you can invite people into another game via 360's in game interface and messaging system, whereby you would be 100% correct."
Thats what I meant to say. =)
maverick_saturn_626 @ Feb 13th 2008 2:26PM
Lmao, sorry deaftly, I'll fill someone else's inbox :)
Noshino @ Feb 13th 2008 2:31PM
Fernando,
so you couldn't really find anything else to say that the 360 version was superior...other than to be able to send invites in-game?....
Also, who knows, by that time Sony might make in-game invites available...they have already made many other functionalities available for the devs (although not forced like for the 360)
James @ Feb 13th 2008 2:37PM
Yup it does. As I've said before; better controller and DLC. And if it follows trends it'll be £10 cheaper than the PS3 version.
If they were balanced then it'd be a 50/50 decision. But it isn't since the 360 version *is* better. And all the PS3 fanboys in the world can't make it sound otherwise, oh wait, they tried.
Wonder if the PS3 version will have Entitlements or whatever they were called?
xFenixKnightx @ Feb 13th 2008 2:37PM
"stop filling my inbox jerks!"
LMFAO!!!!!!!
Sorry about that buddy =)
Mav Saturn
Wow dont make it out to sound like its so convenient to invite people over to games on PS3. I have one and let me say comparing the two isnt even an option. LIVE>PS3 in so many ways.
On my PS3 its like, WTF do I even have a friends list for? On live I can see so many things about my best buds (what game they are in, what stage, what level, what map, what mode, when they were last on and what game they were playing) etc. etc. etc, teh list goes on!!! Stop fooling yourself there bud. Its ok like I said Sony is working on it for a reason. Live is just better right now.
maverick_saturn_626 @ Feb 13th 2008 2:54PM
Fenix, as much as you have a point, thats if you care about it in the first place, I have PS3 and 360, I make use of them both simply to talk to ppl in gaming, I don't need it for anything else, so I couldn't care less what game they are playing. Thats none of my business unless I want to play the same game, of which it becomes useful.
There are things PS3 could do to improve their multiplayer experience, but for me, whether or not they add it won't change the fun I have gaming in any way or form, I bought PS3 for its bonuses and I bought 360 for its bonuses, each of which have their own great unique abilities.
Trev @ Feb 13th 2008 2:56PM
@Fenix
If you want to pretend that a buzzing controller is like gunfire, good for you but the look and sound of it is the important part considering the same buzz could represent a fall from a building or a car collision. L-O-fucking-L. You would have no idea the car was even moving if it wasn't for the shaking controller, right? Having rumble > no rumble is like saying having a penny is better than not having a penny - I guess you have one, but what the fuck is the real value? That $50 in your wallet is SO much better with the extra cent at your disposal.
You don't have a list of achievements (you KNOW it will PROBABLY = you don't know shit), and collecting all the flags in Assassin's Creed for 10G didn't make collecting the flags any fun. Rockstar is creative, but "Finished chapter 1 5G" is just so fucking pointless. Finishing chapter 1 was a huge letdown, but those 5 points made it awesome, amirite? "Run 1000 miles on foot" better not be in there either. If they want you to "experience" GTA in "new ways", they're going to have to do better than any game has yet and I just don't see them doing it considering the past GTA rewards were for "Find all the packages", "find all the jumps", "spray all the tags", and "do all the taxi missions" (taxi missions being exactly the same as pizza delivery, ambulance, and fire truck missions). We'll see if the achievements are actually worth all the credit you and Fernando giving them when the game is out.
Live is the reason to own the 360 version... if you want laggy p2p games for a fee. I'll take my lag-free cost-free p2p games, thanks. Microsoft paid 50mil just to say they had something Sony didn't, there's no assurance of quality, new cars, new clothes, new guns, or anything but "episodic content". If its just pay phone missions then good luck with that.
xFenixKnightx @ Feb 13th 2008 3:04PM
Mav Saturn
I respect you and your views kind sir.
Trev
Why bother...lets agree to disagree. All in all in this point in time these recent years have been some of the best gaming years in history. A win-win for everyone!!
Deaftly thats the last one from me, promise ;)
Ryan @ Feb 13th 2008 3:14PM
Even if you intend to argue that the 360 exclusive stuff "isn't that much better" that's still a stupid argument for someone that has both systems.
Ok, so let's say "it's not that much better". It's still there, and it's still extra stuff.
If I offered you $105 or $100 which would you take? $105 isn't that much more, but it's still more, so why the hell would you take the offer for less?
Personally, I will never buy a non-fighting multiplatform game for the PS3 because if some buddies start up a multiplayer session of some game I want them to be able to see me online and shoot me an invite no matter what game it is. The achievements, exclusive content, etc just make it even more of a no brainer.
Fighting games are a different story because the PS3 d-pad is way superior to the crummy 360 d-pad. Outside of that, I'd have to be some kind of retard to knowingly take a version of the game that is priced the same but has less going for it when given the choice.
Trev @ Feb 13th 2008 3:08PM
@fenix
Yeah, sure. I'm not even saying the PS3 version will be better, just that the differences are inconsequential. Kind of like Burnout Paradise.
I completely disagree that that's the last one though and suggest that Deaftly's inbox must suffer the mighty and pointless wrath of internet comments. I can suggest this because I own a PS3 and that clearly makes me a terrible person.
Trev @ Feb 13th 2008 4:03PM
@ryan
I'm not saying "not that much better", I'm saying "not better at all".
There's nothing to say the DLC is going to be more than a handful of missions and if both games drop at $60 (as they most likely will) you'll be paying extra for them. Achievements are negated by actual in-game rewards (find all the packages for weapon spawns by your hide out, the 10G doesn't add anything to gameplay while a flamethrower spawn would). Rumble won't suddenly make you forget that you're watching this on a screen.
It's more like $100.05 than $105, and that nickel isn't going to pay for anyone's college. None of it is bad, it just doesn't have an impact.
PS: Muhahahaha at Deaftly's inbox. *mustache twirl*
deaftly @ Feb 13th 2008 9:08PM
after checking my email tonight, fuck all of ya :)
hvnlysoldr @ Feb 15th 2008 5:02PM
C-C-COMBO BREAKER! I mean what? Just fulfilling inbox spamming.
Intentless @ Feb 13th 2008 1:10PM
All I know I want is a free game multiplayer. Just load in multiple people with no objectives or goals where you can just drive around and cause general mayham....
Like in the originals...