Hi, Mrtnptrs.
I'm writing regarding your particular edit below:
https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Grand_Theft_Auto_IV&diff=1281577&oldid=1281571
"RGL-fix removed: source did mention updating it, but did not fix problem. "Infinite loading loop" removed as fix under it doesn't even mention it. Removed settings guides. Removed Steam Overlay-fix (doesn't make sense)"
I kindly ask you to have nothing against its restoration in the section below DXVK, slightly changed and renamed as:
"Framerate drops associated with too high details on not modern hardware"
I understand the section is completely irrelevant on such CPUs like i7-13700KF, but it's very useful and tested on configurations with old Core2Quads and Phenom II X4 to maintain 60 FPS on even RGL versions of the game.
It's also a good alternative for people with older GPUs which doesn't support DXVK as performance fix/workaround (no Vulkan support). I only slightly expanded the section made by someone else at some point, and I can confirm it works and someone did a good job on this.
Regards
Topic on User talk:Mrtnptrs
Uh... Next time, could we use the GTAIV's Talk Page instead of a user's one? I'll try to read the whole conversation and share my thoughts about the suggestions that were shared. 😅
Uhhhh, removed and refactored some notes in the DXVK section together with someone else to reduce bloat on the page. So, if you have good information to add, feel free to do so. It was just that saying "lower this setting to this to improve performance" was also removed by me because it is quite basic for almost all games; lowering draw distance improves performance for example.
"Framerate drops associated with too high details on not modern hardware" This is thus in my opinion also kinda standard; too high settings result in framerate problems. Please don't assume I'm disregarding this because I have a more modern PC, has nothing to do with that; I tried to look at it from an objective perspective and if it was too standard or not.
So, feel free to add whatever you want and if needed, it can always be discussed further :) Just my opinion would be to avoid to name things that are basically applicable to every game, like lowering draw distance can improve performance....
I absolutely got your point.
Although, especially on game launch, some high values were considered experimental to the extent they were unplayable and can be tasking even to this day due to legendary poor optimization of the game, so let's better leave people aware of the issue.
Yeah, higher values make it even worse, but even on lower settings, this game runs quite bad. It is also thus just in general very poorly optimized with lots of stuttering. I'll ask some others with more experience regarding GTA IV and if they find your changes ok, you won't hear a peep from me :)
@Deton24
While it may be very helpful, that sort of information is better kept in a personal tweak guide, not in the game article. I think you and mrtnptrs should probably try to reach a definitive consensus for that sort of stuff in the wiki with senior editors or perhaps moderation. You can always create a forum thread about the game and keep the information there too.
@Deton24 I share Markie's opinion here honestly. Although your additions are good and very well-intended, I would vote for replacing your additions with a mention in the introduction like "The game is notorious for poor performance (especially on higher settings, but also on lower settings) and frame-pacing issues, even on high-end systems. Lowering settings is strongly advised." The mentioned command line options by you are in my opinion also quite minor and are very lower-end hardware specific and most likely won't contribute even on those systems much to performance. What do you think about this proposition.
Moving the section to the discussion page with a link at the top of the GTA IV wiki with your note is an even better solution, indeed. Nobody will have writing permissions on discussion page, but comments will remain open. I see you've just moved key points to introduction, so it's moved there.
Yep. Sounds good to me too.
Think that is a good solution, nice :)