Are we ever gonna get a PC version?

>is rockstar ever gonna stop shoving the fingers up their ass?
That was a rhetorical question.

File: FB_IMG_1487577842005.jpg (72KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 600x600px

>>384759470
I read an article a couple of years ago where they specifically said that rdr is never coming to pc... I forgot what the reasoning behind it was

>>384759976
>>384759672
It literally cannot come to PC
They would have to build the game from the ground up in order to port it, dodgy programming and the weird as fuck architecture for the old consoles kept it there. They would have to rebuild the entire game.

Since it's not worth their time to rebuild the entire game for a PC port however many years later, and they can't remaster cause a new game is coming out, then we just have to wait until a year after rockstar releases the new one cause they figured out how fucking DELICIOUS double dipping is

File: 1499970820952.jpg (113KB, 396x628px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 396x628px

They can't because the coding was done so fucking horribly that it would be easier to build the whole game up for PC, then do the effort of porting it. Their words.
Just wait a year or so until the PS3 emulator can run it.

I bought an xbox for rdr and other exclusive games and omg, it's the easiest, most repetetive game ever, you'te bot missing anything

>>384760252
But they could do it with GTAIV?

>>384759470
No. Soonest is going to be when rcps3 becomes viable.
It´s a known secret that RDR´s code base is a clusterfuck of spaghetti code and RS even had to get some guy to help them patch it together shortly before release.
Bringing it to pc would most likely require a complete rewrite which I can´t think they´d be willing to do

>>384760341
Different game
Like I also said, shotty programming

>>384759470
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4ZbKTpcx9c
Petition creators will get their very own version of the timed exclusive sequel, complete with shark points, and 90% of the story limited to online only.

>>384759470
nah, Rockstar's more focused on milking the online mp bux

>>384760272
>>384760574
>>384760252

> muh shitty programming

Worked fine on consoles :^)

we're literally closer to emulating it than getting a port

>>384760880
Except it didn't? Even after numerous patching, it still doesn't run very good and there's plenty of bugs.

>>384760574
It's actually because it was two different teams.
The team who does GTA does ports, the team who did RDR has never done a PC version.

Also GTA4 was outsourced for the port while GTA5 was done in-house, whice is why GTA5 has one of the best ports of all time while GTA4 was terrible.

>>384760880
Rockstar literally said it themselves though, long after the dust settled for good measures

>>384760970

Nope ran pretty smoothly on 360. Only thing that completely broke was multiplayer, and that was years after release.

>>384760997
>GTA4 was terrible.
I still can't get it to not stutter

>>384760880
Yeah that's why multiplayer got so broken two years after release that it was literally unplayable

File: 1500703057732.jpg (336KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

336KB, 1024x768px

>>384761031
Nigger there were bird people

>>384761004

> shit how do we tell PCfags we are too lazy to port and they are all theiving scum anyway?

> I know, pretend the game was horrible made so they wouldn't want it anyway!

>>384761138

Wow the game had some glitches? No way!

>>384760907
I wonder if Rockstar is kicking themselves in the ass for not doing a port, if fans are effectively doing one themselves. I imagine the time and money spend on a PC port would have been incredibly profitable.

>>384761084

Did you actually pay attention?

MP was fine for years after release, and completely broke much later on. R* was busy milking GTA FUCKING V at the time, they didn't care to fix it.

I have hundreds of hours from MP and it was good for a long, LONG time.

>>384759470
Either when they add xbox 360 support to windows 10 or when Xenia makes some kind of breakthrough. A straight port seems unlikely at this point. We sure are getting RDR2, though.

>>384759470
Maybe for part 2, but probably never for part 1. You can wait for 360/PS3 emulation to get perfected, I suppose.

>>384761263
Why would R* be too lazy to port RDR if literally all their other games made it to PC? This is R* we're talking about; they wouldn't miss out on easy cash. Methinks it's shit coding as they said.

>>384760252
PPC isn't "weird as fuck." I did read the game is a buggy mess, though, so that was why they couldn't port it.

>>384761505

You didn't play the game custardrace, sucks for you.

It ran much better than GTA4 *ever* did.

>>384761808
That was my point consolefag.

>>384759470
no

>>384762030

What is your point? That the game is coded badly despite running perfectly fine?

R* gave pclards an excuse just to stop the portbegging.

>>384762438
Which is their fault for bad coding. I don't see how wanting one of the biggest games of last gen to be port begging. Especially when said port would run much better than on console.