New Grand Theft Auto IV trailer

By Tom Bramwell Published 6 December, 2007

Move up, ladies. Apparently.

Rockstar has released the long-awaited third proper official trailer for Grand Theft Auto IV, and you can watch it on Eurogamer TV right now! Convenient, eh? That way we get hits and everything.

The new trailer - dubbed "Move up, ladies" - follows on from "Things will be different" and "Looking for that special someone".

It mainly focuses on the game's cut-scenes, which play out in a similar fashion to those from past GTA titles. It sees Niko arrive in the US to meet his cousin Roman, only for it to become apparent that the latter's claims of an American dream realised were a bit far-fetched.

For everything else on Grand Theft Auto IV, check out our roundup of everything we know up to now elsewhere on Eurogamer.net.

The game itself is due out on PS3 and Xbox 360 sometime between February and the end of April 2008, having originally been set for release in late October 2007.

Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000. Follow him on Twitter.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (75) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • konnsky #1 5 years ago

    get in!!

  • mr_ruberfon #2 5 years ago

    yeah, some game please

  • Sid-Nice #3 5 years ago

    Is this a PS2 game?

  • bicky316 #4 5 years ago

    After the disappointment that was San Andreas, I'm still not excited about this.

    \awaits gameplay footage

  • OnlyMe #5 5 years ago

    Cutscenes and gameplay has always been the same in 3D GTAs. The trailer showed a lot more than you guys give it credit for.

  • Madder-Max #6 5 years ago

    Have you lot been too dumbed down by Bioshock and Halo 3? has it gone too far for you? Are you beyond saving? (Apart from Onlyme)
    Edited by Madder-Max at 06/12/07 @ 20:23

  • bicky316 #7 5 years ago

    What do you mean cutscenes and gameplay are the same? I didn't see any third person camera, HUD etc........

  • Azazel #8 5 years ago

    ZOMG WERS TEH GAMPLAY!!!1

  • smelly #9 5 years ago

    meh

  • smelly #10 5 years ago

    They need to have a SERIOUS word with who-ever is doing their character modeling and character animation.

    .. And fire the whole of both departments (especially the animators)

  • Kyle #11 5 years ago

    Since it got delayed I haven't really been following this game much, only saw the first trailer. But this does look pretty cool. I mean I haven't played a 3D GTA that I didn't like - even San Andreas, and I'm not really into rap or hip-hop.

  • sanctusmortis #12 5 years ago

    The graphics are pretty poor, TBH, and it goes blocky a lot. Saints Row 2 it may well be, until Crackdown 2 anyhow.

  • TONYgr #13 5 years ago

    not good!actual gameplay please.i am begining to think that this game will be a disaster like angel of darknes when they made the jump to the next gen consoles.lets hope for the best.
    Edited by TONYgr at 06/12/07 @ 20:44

  • MasterGrief #14 5 years ago

    Crackdown = GTA with cheats on - Fun for 15 mins then then it gets boring

    Saints Row - LOL

  • Hugundo #15 5 years ago

    As far as Immigration games go...

  • finty13 #16 5 years ago

    Looks pretty damn good to me. The variety and quality of the characters looks amazing although I'd still like to see an in-game perspective. The journos were shown in-game footage back in bloody July so its crazy that R* are not showing it too us. Still the best GTA trailer so far though.
    Edited by finty13 at 06/12/07 @ 21:50

  • Subquest #17 5 years ago

    agreed, the massive draw distance of the pc version transformed san andreas for me
    Edited by Subquest at 06/12/07 @ 21:17

  • bdc #18 5 years ago

    Lovely FPS drops dotted around the trailer.

  • JediMasterMalik #19 5 years ago

    Looks dated.

  • SimonM7 #20 5 years ago

    If the music wasn't rubbish the trailer would be a whole lot more exciting.

    Animation is poor yeah, but a lot of high profile titles fall short, and have been falling short for years, in that area compared to games where emphasis has been put on it. So yeah, Uncharted it's not gonna be, animation wise.

    However, I do think it's admirable how their art style really comes across in some instances, like that fat guy for instance looking eerily close to both what they were shooting for ingame before, and in some ways even the cover art of the games. There's no denying it still looks pretty rough in places, but the story is intriguing and it's frankly.... well GTA really. It's difficult to doubt the franchise at this point, having survived even the shoddiest controls around in some miraculous way.

  • SimonM7 #21 5 years ago

    Um.. so Wii owners AND tech whores should leave? That pretty much clears the room. :o

  • M_Spitz #22 5 years ago

    I'm sure that's Queen Latifah providing one of the voices. This is important to me.

  • smelly #23 5 years ago

    @NickJD : So you DONT think animation and graphics are important to a game?

    But yet i presume you own a 360/ps3 rather than a wii/ps2?

  • Fitzmogwai #24 5 years ago

    Yeah, I'm with NickJD on this. You tech whoring Wii owners. Er. Anyway.

    Games are about FUN, not tech. That's why the best game ever is Ludo. All the gameplay, without the tech. Screw you, tech whores.

  • Orange #25 5 years ago

    GTA has never been about super polished graphics, with the vast amount of content and free roaming in each of the games in the series they would be hard pressed to manage catering for graphics whores as well.

    Top of my 2008 most wanted, can't wait for it.

  • drumbaby #26 5 years ago

    Oh dear.

  • Elfish #27 5 years ago

    It bothers me that there's tonnes of slowdown, poor lip synching and virtually no gameplay shown in a trailer that Rockstar is happy to release to the world to promote their game and get people "excited". Based on this trailer, I'm assuming GTAIV is going to be a disaster. Let's hope they prove me wrong.

  • smelly #28 5 years ago

    @JSPOOLE: The thing is.. if that were the case no one person should comment about how "low tech" the wii is.

    The fact of the matter is, everyone has updated their xbox/ps2 to 360/ps3 BECAUSE they should offer better graphics/animation/etc.

    The animation shown here isnt poor tech.. it's just poor animation

  • Artemis_Matsas #29 5 years ago

    This trailer was underwhelming for sure. Jerky animation and slowdown isn't my idea of fun.
    I respect the different approach they took in the graphics department, but there seems to be a lot of ironing left before this one gets released. I think that we can only be grateful that R* chose to delay the game.

  • Ghettomurph #30 5 years ago

    Fuck sake, some of the people who post comments here need to get a life....seriously.

    "The animation and lip synch are poor" etc. etc.

    So what? GTAIV will be a really enjoyable game to play, just like its predecessors. Mass Effect has arse lip synch and terrible texture pop-in...did it detract from enjoying the game? Not to me coz i play games for entertainment, not to analyse the living shit out of them.



    Oh yeah, forgot to mention the blatantly obvious fact that the game hasnt gone gold and wont for ages, thats plenty of time to get the framerate sorted and anything else that needs doing.
    Edited by Ghettomurph at 06/12/07 @ 23:29

  • Sid-Nice #31 5 years ago

    GTA isn't about graphics? WTF; GTA 3 was one of the most ground breaking games in video gaming history. GTA 3 took a top down perspective view game and threw you right into the action; at the time the graphics were nothing but amazing on the PS2.

    The poor quality of the graphics in this demo convinces me that there's a Wii version of GTA IV in development. I for one am looking forward to GTA party games.

  • Gl3n #32 5 years ago

    Poor Peter moore's arm. It'll never be the same!

  • smelly #33 5 years ago

    +1 to Sid Nice

  • seregrail7 #34 5 years ago

    GTA3 looked muck compared to other games released at the same time. It was revolutionary for its detailed and at the time huge city.

  • tgigreeny #35 5 years ago

    "GTA3 looked muck compared to other games released at the same time. It was revolutionary for its detailed and at the time huge city."

    Exactly.

  • YourMessageHere #36 5 years ago

    Why in hell is it called "Move up, ladies"?

  • Elfish #37 5 years ago

    @yourmessagehere: Because Rockstar are wankers.

  • thepiedpiper #38 5 years ago

    without trying to sound like a tech whore, meh, that looks well shifty. no wonder they pushed it back.

    don't know if it's been addressed but it looks like the same engine!! wtf.

    no doubt it'll still get top marks across the board though.

  • cobracotton #39 5 years ago

    hahahahah do you guys ever read your comments back to yourselves and think wait a minute I won't post that cos I sound like twat? no didn't think so.

    "Is this a PS2 game?"

    "They need to have a SERIOUS word with who-ever is doing their character modeling and character animation. "

    "It bothers me that there's tonnes of slowdown, poor lip synching and virtually no gameplay shown in a trailer that Rockstar is happy to release to the world to promote their game and get people "excited". Based on this trailer, I'm assuming GTAIV is going to be a disaster. Let's hope they prove me wrong."

    @ yourmessagehere: its so that all these sheilas can voice they're bitchyness pre launch and we faithful can mock them.

  • andromeda #40 5 years ago

    it is somewhat dissapointing to see the familiar "flid 1.0" character animation system hasnt been updated at all.

  • Fuser #41 5 years ago

    I noticed the animation, but I thought it was nice theyd kept the same 'style' as the previous games. Who knows - maybe theyve done that on purpose.......
    Anyway - looked good to me, with plenty of opportunities for mindless mayhem in a huge playing space.

  • space_ace #42 5 years ago

    hmm slideshow. is this a card game?

  • MyPointIs #43 5 years ago

    The fact is that EG has become the house of the High-on-my-Horse Knigths, and liking GTA is now widely seen as a chav weakness.

    You are underestimating one of the most talented development teams there is.

    GTA never went for close up detail or smooth framerate, but for inmersion, freedom and a huge, live game ecosystem. Also they always nailed a sense of fun that escapes to almost every other game developer.

    Yes, they screw up a couple of low-level mechanics. Forgive me my life, my lord.

  • mkreku #44 5 years ago

    Seriously, how on earth is it possible for them to record a trailer that they know will garner a LOT of interest around the world.. and not fix the shoddy framerates first? I mean, it's not like GTAIV is a showcase for what the next-gen can do graphically (not that I care)..

    But I still like the choice of music, the art design, the setting, the main character.. only the cars looked too loose. Did anyone else notice that? Even the slightest turn made the cars wobble like jelly.

  • earobus #45 5 years ago

    am wi cobracotton, how on earth do you come to these conlusions when you dont really know that much about a game or is three short trailers enough. i like gta games and hope this one will be good but lets face it children we wont know until the game is in the shops!

  • bodypopper #46 5 years ago

    Move up ladies?

    Ladies is a derrogatory jokey/slang term used by guys other guys in the US of A innit? And your character is looking to move up the ladder. What's so hard to get?

    And GTA HAS always been about gameplay over graphics. GTAIII didn't make an enormous splash on PS2 just because it looked fairly nice and was in 3D and that.

  • seasidebaz #47 5 years ago

    errr what shoddy framerate? i just watched it at home, looks fine to me! suggest people check their internet connections...

    and as for the graphics, you take a trailer at 1280x720 and squash it down to tiny-o-vision without any filtering and it's going to look a bit poo!

    don't pass judgement on egtv's little video, get yourself the hd download one on the consoles THEN if it's still shit, then pardon me (i didn't have time to download it on ps3 this morning...)

  • OllyJ #48 5 years ago

    "What do you mean cutscenes and gameplay are the same? I didn't see any third person camera, HUD etc........ "

    Why on earth would you have a HUD in a trailer? The cutscenes in GTA happen "in game" that means that if it's outside and there are cars driving by then it'll be different every time, well that's I recall from the others anyway.

    It's supposed to be a cinematic trailer and I got a feel for some of the gameplay there, it's not intended to be an in game "here's someone playing it" video.

    I dunno what all the complaints are about.

  • Pulsar_t #49 5 years ago

    Fun shmun.. Colour me not interested.

  • Totoriko #50 5 years ago

    @farticusmaximus

    I don't find them boring.

    "Drive here, shoot that, repeat x 1000. "
    Isn't that what games are about? Is Street Fighter boring because you have to punch, kick x 1000? or racing games boring because you have to press left, right, brake, accelarate x 1000?

  • Loser #51 5 years ago

    @JSPOOLE

    "foul mouthed psychos as leads"

    Did you even play GTA3?

  • mkreku #52 5 years ago

    How can anyone claim that GTA has "boaty vagueness" driving? I think it has one of the best driving models of any games I've played (excluding pure racing games)! Try Crysis.. or Boiling Point.. or Battlefield 2.. or Halo & Halo 2 (which admittedly has another type of gravity).. now THERE you have some less than impressive driving models.

  • JJrabbit #53 5 years ago

    I'm not quite sure what everyone's going on about when it comes to framerates. I watched the HD trailer on GameTrailers and it looked perfectly fine to me. To be honest, a lot of people are forgetting that this game is using the Euphoria engine which adds a whole new element of realism to the game, if not the graphics. Still, gameplay is where it's at and to those who claim that it's reptitive, then please please show me where your hidden vault of constantly original games is hidden. GTA has always been about the plot, animation and freedom and tbh if you don't like it, don't buy it but ffs at least wait till the game is on the shelves before passing judgement. Don't know if you've realised or not, but your bitching doesn't stop the game from shipping.
    PS: I'm hoping this game will be good, but will have to wait and see...
    Edited by JJrabbit at 07/12/07 @ 10:22

  • YogiTah #54 5 years ago

    I don't understand what all this bitching about the graphics is about. It's still a "sandbox game" that you can't compare to "run down that alley"-Shooters like Gears of war. I think it's still an achievement even if the framerate dumps down sometimes. I think our expectations are a little high up. Look how far we come in the past 3-4 years!
    Edited by YogiTah at 07/12/07 @ 10:28

  • agparrot #55 5 years ago

    @mkreku:
    .. only the cars looked too loose. Did anyone else notice that? Even the slightest turn made the cars wobble like jelly.

    About the cars looking loose - I agree that the suspension on the cars looked a little over the top in this trailer. Sort of reminded me of Driver and the 70's Movie feel of slewing around city corners. Hopefully this isn't the same for all the cars - nothing like taking a cheetah out for a road-hugging blast.

    As for the driving models, you are absolutely right... this has always been one area of the GTA games that has seen gradual progression. The feel of the weight of the cars has changed through all the iterations of the 3D Games... The step up in the physics model from III to VC was quite pronounced, with a far better sensation of weight moving around the four corners of the car, and this was only refined further for San Andreas, striking a balance between fun and realism.

    Nowhere is this more apparent than when playing things like Just Cause, where the vehicles seem to be almost unrelated to the surfaces that they are travelling on at times.

    edit for italics
    Edited by agparrot at 07/12/07 @ 10:29

  • tiddles #56 5 years ago

    meh-ch whores, the lot of you

  • Azazel #57 5 years ago

    Even as a professional cynic, the level of cynicism in these threads gets a bit dense for me some times...

  • TheDudesRug #58 5 years ago

    lol at the comments here.

    For the less anally retentive of you, heres the HD version at Rockstar:
    http://media.rockstargames.com/06ladies1...

  • orac1971 #59 5 years ago

    play Just Cause instead..

  • Max_Powers #60 5 years ago

    I thought the trailer was absolutely great, like all GTA trailers.

    Let me summarize:

    Great editing - check
    Fantastic feel for the 'zeitgeist' and popculture (something that almost no-other game developer has) - check
    Promise of a fantastic open world game - check

    Now about the average EG poster:

    Based on this trailer the game is going to be shit - check
    The textures are not sharp enough therefore this game is going to be shit - check
    Its cool to deride one of the most influential game series in history, and I'm a sad twat - check
    Etc.


  • FooAtari #61 5 years ago

    Video didn't really do much for me. Doesn't really tell me anything new. I too would like to seem some actual gameplay.

    I don't mind not have super detailed textures or the graphics not being on the same level as a game like GoW. But I do hate shoddy framerates. It effects my enjoyment of the game, slowdown is not fun it removes me from the game when I see it, it also effects control, a few seconds of slowdown causes lagging controls.

    This isn't 1995, every game should at the very least be a totally stable 30. If they cant get 60, 30 is fine as long as there is now slow down. It's all part of a designing a good game, What happened to all those promises of 720p graphics at 60 fps, few games, if any have been native 720 (not upsacled) at 60.

    People need to stop making excuses for the developers, it just shoddy programming and poor optimization which is every bit as important as level design, story etc etc.
    Edited by FooAtari at 07/12/07 @ 11:21

  • Calgon #62 5 years ago

    Yeah come on based on that trailer its not looking worth the hype is it? It may just be a bad trailer(wrong time to be showing the stuff they did without the polish?) but dont defend the trailer, I can't see how anyone is calling it great or that its got them more excited personally.

    We've seen the level of quality they are aiming for in the visuals is the highest yet, especially since theyve built their own engine this time around, so as rough as that looks(animations too need some work) it will improve before launch.
    Edited by Calgon at 07/12/07 @ 11:24

  • seregrail7 #63 5 years ago

    I think some people saying there's a bad framerate don't have computers capable of running HD movies well. They are quite hard on pcs. I didn't notice any terrible framerate.

  • MyPointIs #64 5 years ago

    Hope it allows me to hit tech-whores with a baseball bat.

  • Pulsar_t #65 5 years ago

    Rockstar apologists make me smile

    :)

  • SomaticSense #66 5 years ago

    Well I'm going to be honest. The trailer looks shit.

    The graphics look nowhere near to the level of other current gen stuff (Yes, even sandbox games. Crackdown didn't look this crap, neither did Saint's Row). Granted GTA3 wasn't a stunner, but it looked a LOT better with comparison to games available at that time on the PS2 than this does when compared to what's out for the PS3/360.
    If Rockstar had announced this trailer (and the last one) as footage of a PS2 version, I'd have believed them without question, and I'm normally very easily impressed when it comes to graphics.

    The animations look like they were literally pulled from the last gen GTA games. They were always pretty poor to be honest, even for the PS2, but's it's unforgivable for the PS3/360.

    But do I really care about any of this? No, because it's GTA and none of it really matters. We all know that gameplay-wise we will be getting a more focused and slightly more reality-based GTA game, which is all I want really. Has the trailer got me more excited for the game? No, it doens't really do the job it was intended to do, but we already had that with the first trailer. Watch that again if you want to get hyped up for it.
    Edited by SomaticSense at 07/12/07 @ 12:18

  • RichGL #67 5 years ago

    My word but doesn't this game attract the hate!

    Having said that maybe Rockstar should have used a dedicated engine to do the movies. Gamers are shallow after all.

  • FooAtari #68 5 years ago

    @seregrail7

    I watched it on the 360, although my pc is more than up to the task, I wasn't saying this trailer had frame rate issues, I didn't really notice any, although I wasn't looking that hard. Was just making a general comment to those saying it didn't matter :)

  • BBIAJ #69 5 years ago

    I don't get it, I downloaded and watched the HD version of the trailer from the X-Box 360's XBLMP in the early hours of this morning, rather than stream a tiny lo-res version being hit by many, and didn't see any of the aforementioned slowdown, texture pop-in, FPS drops, or poor lip synching and animation, so what gives?

    Or did you all assume a streaming lo-res tiny little trailer would be representative of the final product?

  • Ryze #70 5 years ago

    Went straight to gamespot to download this, streamed it from Rockstar.

    EG - please have your video player looked at. It runs on one of the PCs I use regularly, but it's a complete dog on my main Internet PC. It shouldn't need a graphics card update to play streaming video in flash, should it?

    My internet connection is very quick, and the PCs having trouble can playback Gamepot streams, MP4s iin quicktime player, DVDs, WMVs, DivX, Xvid, etc without any issue.

    This looks like an inefficient video player.

  • RichGL #71 5 years ago

    Arrogant twats?

    I have to ask... why?

  • bdc #72 5 years ago

    lol @ people trying to use poor media players excuse

    I have the HD trailer downloaded, and guess what, it doesn't magically make the animations and graphics better. There's still the occasional slowdown as well. Don't insult mine and others' fucking intelligence people.

  • DjFlex52 #73 5 years ago

    I've come to realize that if a game is immensely popular, a top seller and/or hyped then the comments are always 80% negative and 20% positive except for SMG because Nintendo is GOD and people tend to give GOD a pass.

    And for anyone seeing that trailer in HD on PS3 or 360 that can actually say that it looks like the PS2 cinemas of GTAIII is just negative by default and full of shit.

    I wish someone could point out the scenes that have slowdown. It's not even in-game so why would slowdown exist in a cutscene anyway??

  • SomaticSense #74 5 years ago

    It's not slowdown per se, but it definitely judders at much the slower framerate than should be expected, ie, lower than 30fps. I think the jerky animations might not exactly help it to appear that smooth though.

    edit: I should mention that I've only seen the HD Marketplace one on the 360.
    Edited by SomaticSense at 09/12/07 @ 01:01

  • menschenfracht #75 5 years ago

    //The female characters were truly ugly

    so what? why models have to be handsome/beautiful? doesn't anybody get tired by watching only beautiful people? I say it's a breath of fresh air. F.e., in Canis Canem Edit there was a really ugly pair of weird professor and a cook. I nearly threw up when I saw them kissing, but it was amusing too.

    Of course, more polygons would add to ugliness, too, but it's Rockstar after all...
    P.S. if they make this game at least as attractive (in every possible way) as Canis Canem Edit I would buy 2 .) For console and for PC
    Edited by menschenfracht at 09/12/07 @ 22:52