Guru Nathan

Go to trainer.ini in your GTA IV root directory and change the entry


VehicleLivery=1 //Trainer mapped Livery to VehicleLivery=0 //Trainer mapped Livery

Sounds like a hardware performance issue to me. What are your system specs? Have you set the graphics settings to the lowest possible? Also, have you tried forcing the game to lower the settings via the commandline.txt method? If not, try it out. The commandline options are good even for me when I'm running it on a high-end PC, as it actually optimizes the game better than just using the graphics settings in the game's menu. Make a new text file called "commandline.txt" in your game's root directory and copy/paste the following lines in it exactly as shown:



-novblank -norestrictions -safemode -frameLimit: 0 -availablevidmem: 2.0 -percentvidmem: 100 -minspecaudio -noprecache -nomemrestrict

Your computer appears to be missing some C++ and .NET dependencies that are needed to run the mod based on this (quoted) script error. Even if you have these already (as it says "TRUE" in the diagnostics that you do have them), try reinstalling Microsoft .NET Framework 4.0 and Microsoft Visual C++ 2010. Some people had this same error, and reinstalling these components did the trick and got the mod working. Don't know if it's the same case for you, but it's worth a shot.

Hope this helps you! If not, try not to load a saved game at all; instead, try to start a new game and see if you can use LCPD:FR. If you still have problems, see if you can still play GTA IV itself without any mods. Then, report back with any additional problems, error codes, etc.

I don't know if that has been addressed with the devs via beta testers...but there is an issue with the wanted levels at the airport. Wanted levels constantly tick on and off eventually and quickly causing a crash when on the runways, this was not the case in 0.91 as It was working fine.

If you connect the crime stats, it should show your LCPDFR username as the login name.

Oh, it's used alright. I have it working perfectly in 0.95 RC2 without linking my account to Crime Statistics, so I can customize the name displayed for videos. Just because the entry isn't in the file doesn't mean you still can't use it, at least that's the case for 0.95 currently anyways. ;) Try it out for yourself and see.



You really don't need to do a reinstallation if you just want to change the name, unless you want to link it to Crime Statistics. If that's the case, then yes, a reinstallation is needed to validate your account.

I don't think that ini file config is used anymore?

If you are talking about trying to customize the name without actually using Crime Statistics, then add the following lines to the FirstResponse.ini file:



[XGWEBSERVICES] Services|Enabled = False Services|Username = DESIRED USERNAME

Hope that answers your question! Have fun!

you should beable to do that with a reinstall of lcpdfr and link your lcpdfr account to the mod

As noted in my other post, i5's have no HT, so neg.

And to be honest the whole "Set core affinity" fix has been around for many games since the early 2000's.

Speaking as one of the guys from the America's Army Game project, we had to for many years before our 2.7.0 release, tell people with more than 2 cores, to set their affinity to only two (though back when the game was still pre-2.7, a lot of people had the HT on Pentiums, which was horrible compared to the HT in the Core i*'s), and people on the Pentium HT models we had to tell to set to a single core (because as noted, HT in the P4 was horrid), else the game would perform horribly. Mostly it was due to issues in the Unreal Engine itself, but still, a lot of games simply weren't "Optimized" for more than two cores, and some still aren't. Even with as predominant as 64-bit is starting to push, many game developers still release things in purely 32-bit builds, given with LAA and sometimes DX11 support, you still don't see many with separate 64-bit binary support included...

Edit: It is effectively going on 7 AM here, so I'm gonna finally crash for a bit, lol, be back a bit later.

I'm well aware of what a lot of 'overclockers' will claim, but much like you, I've been dealing in comps for a long time and my experience tends to diverge heavily compared to what most people seem to believe (in that you need extra CPU clock to 'handle' a higher end GPU).

And I didn't say the 32-bit + VRAM was bottlenecking, I said it -should- bottleneck far more than this system would (While PAE can give access to the full 4GB of RAM through virtual routing of the CPU, it in itself can be slight overhead in aspects like this).

And while it's -rare- for GTA IV to hit over 2GB of system RAM, it is far from impossible (right this very moment, the game is using 1.6GB exactly in system RAM, and 718MB of the GPU's available RAM). GTA IV is still however, a 32-bit application compile, and even with LAA, will max out at 3GB actual memory space, though I'm not concerned about hitting that really.

You really seem to just be quoting me on stuff I've already pointed out, dunno why, not sure if you're just ignoring half of what I'm saying or breezing through it without understanding, lol.

Long story short, my theory was correct after all, adjusting the affinity to use only two cores solved everything, performance is working pretty much as it should be and I'm no longer having odd rendering bugs as well (eg; alt tabbing out and back in cause the entire world to de-render).

Edit: Though I now seem to be flintstone'ing it, as my feet are protruding through the bottom of the vehicle most of the time, lol

I'm quoting on specific parts that you're talking about then giving examples as to why it does or does not bottleneck. I know you said should, and indeed I replied with either a confirmation or a disagreement, as well as reasons why. I'm not ignoring anything, as I've quoted you part by part and tried answering with examples. I just don't have an answer for why your Sandy Bridge processor gives you less performance than your Wolfdale processor other than GTA IV being a poorly coded game and needing settings to be changed, which I've read that you've done. As long as you have it running the way you like it, great! I'm just also letting you and other people here who are interested know what OCing can do, since not everyone are OCers or experienced computer gurus like us. ;)



Interesting. I've read a few articles, including this one here, where using two cores instead of four on a quad core actually decreases performance, but that doesn't involve setting any core affinities to force the program to use certain cores only. Those that I've read mainly dealt with hyper threading, so there you go. As long as it's working for ya! :)



LOL! Are you using any vehicle and/or ped mods by any chance? I've only seen this happen to the dog ped mod that I've installed (his lower body and tail protrudes out of under the car, LOL).

OpenIV,though being one helluva modding tool,is less used because-as a general modder myself- I'd like it to:
not check everytime for updates and threaten me in the face that it will shut itself down if not updated.Stucks you in an endless loop.
install my mods in EFLC,as well,which it doesnt support at all.I always just have to transfer each and every wtd I desire to mod to GTA:IV's directory,mod it and then take it back to EFLC's directory.
be fast and not just waste my 4 -5 seconds in starting.Its not photoshop or 3DSMax,you see.It should learn something from Spark.
Again,be fast.Spark is way faster in terms of rebuilding the archive.
offer simple and user friendly features like Spark.I've not even myself observed and discovered each and every aspect of OpenIV till date.

Other reason I can think of it being not as popular because newbs think of it as a "modders" tool and try and stay away from it.
People mention Spark in most of their posts and threads,so you know,Spark's....er...publicity is maintained by most of us.OpenIV...you won't see it mentioned in even 85% of the posts on this site.Maybe even more than 85.

It's not the technological aspects of the two CPUs that are bottlenecking the game per se; rather, it is the poorly written state of the game that is causing the bottlenecks. Generally, the better the technology, the more room for OCing and less occurance of problems, so that's why gamers recommend OCing the i5 2500K to atleast 4.00GHz. Even though the Core i5 Sandy Bridge processor is a quad core and doesn't compare up to the Core 2 Duo Wolfdale, there will still be bottlenecks if the game was ported poorly. I'm not an electrical engineer and haven't looked at and compared their designs, but as a computer and OC guru, I can say that OCing the Core i5 2500K to the same speed as your Core 2 Duo's speed should bring their performance up to par with each other. Additional frequency increase up to and past 4.00GHz should bring about major improvements. Since every computer and its hardware are different, I cannot say for certian by how much it will increase. But I can definitely assure that you'll see an increase in performance. As many OCers will tell you, high-end GPUs are always bottlenecked by CPUs that are not clocked to 4.00GHz or higher, and will recommend 4.20GHz for the i5 2500K. I have seen an increase in performance of my GPU simply by OCing my CPU, so I can attest to that. However, I am unable to explain the principles behind why the design matters, as I've already said. Hopefully, someone else can explain that.



And I never said you said that either. I'm stating that that's the common misconception that most people appear to have, so that others who are also reading this thread have an idea what's causing bottlenecks to their system and think about what to actually look for. You also have the misunderstanding that more VRAM and a 32-bit OS system is bottlenecking GTA IV. This is still not the case. As I've already stated, GTA IV is a poor console port, and therefore does not fully utilize hardware. In addition, most PC games don't use more than 2GB of RAM anyways. What GTA IV does use instead is VRAM, which my GTX 580 only has 1.5GB of, and it currently uses 1.2GB of that at max. I've tried allowing all 1.5GB to be used via tweaking the game's settings, but no dice. It appears that I'll have to get a GPU with more VRAM for it to have more actual RAM to use, since it does not use any, if at all, of the other 16GB of DRAM. Furthermore, no game that I know of at the moment is written entirely for a 64-bit OS. I only have programs like Photoshop that specifically have 64-bit versions that actually utilize over 3.5GB of the available DRAM. Therefore, all other programs that are written for a 32-bit OS will not even use near 4GB of DRAM, simply because they cannot. Therefore, what's left to blame is most likely the CPU and any software/BIOS settings that's related to it. This then will explain why your GPU faces more of a performance drop that it does with your new rig that supposedly has less room for bottlenecks than your former rig.



In theory, it should surpass it, and it may also do so for some of your other software. However, not every software is written in such a way that it fully utilizes new hardware that comes out. In some instances that I've seen, programs may be able to run better on dated OS and hardware than they do on newer systems, depending on what they were written for and when. Yes, the hardware is better, but don't assume that it can outperform everything that the former ran. That's where the trouble with deciding whether or not to buy new parts comes in, and where OCing becomes fun.

Hope you find all this information helpful. Building computers, troubleshooting and fixing problems with computers, and OCing are my hobbies, in addition to making mods for GTA.

Your current CPU is the bottleneck in your entire rig, next to the GPU. GTA IV was a poor console port, and so does not fully utilize all the hardware capabilities of additonal GPUs (SLI/Crossfire) and additional VRAM (only DRAM). Thus, the performance of the game is dependent primarily on your CPU, and then your GPU. If you want to see a high increase in performance quickly without having to buy a new GPU, I suggest you OC your CPU from the stock 3.30GHz to at least 4.00GHz, if not 4.50GHz. The K-series chips are meant for OCing, so they'll take some upping of frequencies and voltages without a hitch. You should see some major improvements once your CPU is at least up to speed. That is the misconception that most people have with this game--that a better GPU leads to better performance. That's wrong, and in most cases, it can be addressed by improving the performance of the CPU through various manipulations.

Lastly, performance also depends on the version of GTA IV you have installed. 1.0.4.0 will give you great performance with great graphics, while 1.0.7.0 will give you crappy performance with "ilovepoop" (quoted from another user) graphics. This is what I've come to find after doing a myriad of performance tests with games and several of my different rigs. I get 80 FPS while playing on 1.0.4.0. With iCEnhancer, I get only 40 FPS. It decreases performance, but I think it's worth it. Also wothy of noting, 1.0.7.0 only does 40 FPS at best...1.0.4.0 does 80 FPS all the time...that alone tells you why 1.0.4.0 is better. However, having fancy eye-candy is not why I use 1.0.4.0; I can do without iCEnhancer. 1.0.4.0 is simply the best patch in terms of performance and stability. 1.0.7.0 crashes all the time and is not recommended. I just installed it since I was trying out 1.0.4.0 versus 1.0.7.0...never want to go back to 1.0.7.0 again.

For your reference, here is what I have in my current rig:
Core i5 2500-K @ 4.5GHz 1.336v
EVGA GTX 580 SC
16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 RAM 9-9-9-24 1.5v
ASUS P8P67 Pro

I created a topic similar to this (located here ) a while back to gauge my system (see signature) to what others experienced.

I love my high performance computer as well as car mods so I am willing to live with 30 minutes of game play on LCPDFR. That being said, I think a lot of it is that our machines are too advanced for the poor PC port of GTA-IV. The mods (high poly cars, LCPDFR, and others) do have something to do with it as well, meaning that it will inevitably crash because it's running things it wasn't designed to do.

I agree with Guru Nathan 100%, and I understand NicolaiB's distinction between cracking and pirating software. It is totally unfair that game companies nowadays are using more and more intrusive measures to "protect" their intellectual property. Remember what happened when EA released Spore? People were outraged with the intrusive SecuROM measures implemented, as well as the limited installs of 3 times, with each additional one needing authorization from EA Support. Why would you think that people started to crack the game then? Not to save themselves a few bucks--that's what uninformed consumers would think. The real reason is to protest EA for basically punishing its paying customers.



It's people with this kind of thinking that are helping the big businesses' cause in invading the consumer's privacy. EA's Origin is known to go through documents on your computer, as a German computer user proved with a task tracking tool that showed Origin looking through his financial records among other things. SecuROM is known to cause problems to Windows and damage hardware. Think about it, people who crack the game to get around these BS measures are, as Guru Nathan said, the "smart shoppers." They are not falling for the companies' traps and are protesting them for their rights. If GTA V still contains SecuROM or other stupid draconian DRM system, then I'm simply not paying R* a cent of my money. But I'm sure there are other consumers out there that don't care and just want to get their hands on it no matter what. These are the ones who R* are manipulating, making it think it's OK to implement such intrusive software onto their customers.

Just stating my opinions so that others can stop and think for a moment and become smart shoppers as well. I remember the days when installing games used to be as easy as simple disk and CD-key checks. What ever happened to those days? Surely the cracking and pirating of games has seen an increase due to these intrusive measures. You would think that they'll go down, but like I said, the wise consumer won't take this kind of abuse from the big businesses.

I don't support pirating games just as much you do, or any kind of software for that matter, because it simply isn't right. Developers should be given their due respect for coming up with great software, so people should pay for software and not pirate them.

However, I disagree with disliking all people who pirate software, because in today's times, there are cases in which pirating software should be taken as a good initiative against evil, greedy, despicable, etc. companies. Such companies as EA, Rockstar Games, etc. FORCE end-users to install spyware (i.e. EA's Origin), backdoor rootkits (i.e. Sony's SecuROM), and other nonsense on their computers just to play a game. Remember, WE'RE the paying customers, not the pirates, so we shouldn't have to be put up with this BS in order to play the games that we buy. I can tolerate having to input a CD-Key and online verification for the first time a game installs, but I simply cannot stand draconian DRM that forces you to install additional BS on your coomputer and/or requires you to be online at all times in order to play the game that you purchased. That makes no sense, and is totally unfair to the customers. GTA IV was one of those games that went along with the viral version 7 of SecuROM, which is known to take out perfectly good CD-ROM drives among other problems. Of course companies that use these draconian measures say they are harmless...what would you expect them to say? I have faced some problems with StarForce (used by Ubisoft) before where I needed to reinstall Windows, because it did something wrong to the registry and Ubisoft said it cannot be fixed. So, before you go off hating all the pirates, think about why someone may pirate something. Yes, most people do so simply to avoid paying for stuff, but there are those "smart shoppers" who know not to be abused by big businesses and pirate software instead as protesting them. And I fully support these people, because we should be treated fairly by them if we're the ones paying for their stuff!

Just thought I'd point this out to people who have misconceptions about why some people pirate software. Before you start hating, think about it. Yes, I agree that pirating of any sort isn't right, but is it the customer's fault, or is it the company's fault? I think that installing SecuROM just to play GTA IV was pretty horrible, considering it was the most viral version, so I forgive those who pirated GTA IV. SHAME ON ROCKSTAR for ruining its own games with stupid BS. I hope that the PC version of GTA V won't be containing any more nonsense for us paying customers...

I don't support pirating games just as much you do, or any kind of software for that matter, because it simply isn't right. Developers should be given their due respect for coming up with great software, so people should pay for software and not pirate them.

However, I disagree with disliking all people who pirate software, because in today's times, there are cases in which pirating software should be taken as a good initiative against evil, greedy, despicable, etc. companies. Such companies as EA, Rockstar Games, etc. FORCE end-users to install spyware (i.e. EA's Origin), backdoor rootkits (i.e. Sony's SecuROM), and other nonsense on their computers just to play a game. Remember, WE'RE the paying customers, not the pirates, so we shouldn't have to be put up with this BS in order to play the games that we buy. I can tolerate having to input a CD-Key and online verification for the first time a game installs, but I simply cannot stand draconian DRM that forces you to install additional BS on your coomputer and/or requires you to be online at all times in order to play the game that you purchased. That makes no sense, and is totally unfair to the customers. GTA IV was one of those games that went along with the viral version 7 of SecuROM, which is known to take out perfectly good CD-ROM drives among other problems. Of course companies that use these draconian measures say they are harmless...what would you expect them to say? I have faced some problems with StarForce (used by Ubisoft) before where I needed to reinstall Windows, because it did something wrong to the registry and Ubisoft said it cannot be fixed. So, before you go off hating all the pirates, think about why someone may pirate something. Yes, most people do so simply to avoid paying for stuff, but there are those "smart shoppers" who know not to be abused by big businesses and pirate software instead as protesting them. And I fully support these people, because we should be treated fairly by them if we're the ones paying for their stuff!

Just thought I'd point this out to people who have misconceptions about why some people pirate software. Before you start hating, think about it. Yes, I agree that pirating of any sort isn't right, but is it the customer's fault, or is it the company's fault? I think that installing SecuROM just to play GTA IV was pretty horrible, considering it was the most viral version, so I forgive those who pirated GTA IV. SHAME ON ROCKSTAR for ruining its own games with stupid BS. I hope that the PC version of GTA V won't be containing any more nonsense for us paying customers...