Is it only I who think that the system requirements are, to quote Jimmy McMillan, too damn high.
If GTA IV for the PC hadn't been a (very) lazy port, what system requirements would it have had?
Let me ask you something, what are you basing your assessment of the system requirements being "too damn high" on?
What you're suggesting is that there's some significant optimization that could be made to the game to improve performance and lower system requirements yet you've given nothing to back this up.
I'm all for calling out bad performance for lazy ports and badly made games if we can actually demonstrate the areas where this is true, the problem is that now and again we see a game that pushes the limits of available hardware at the time, people get butt hurt they cannot run in max settings.
Lets get something absolutely crystal clear, needing high system requirements because you have a genuinely demanding game is NOT the same as having high system requirements because you have unoptimised code, to differentiate between the 2 you need to actually demonstrate areas where genuine optimisations can be made, where you decrease CPU/GPU time with no loss computational accuracy.
Everyone, all the GTA IV and Crysis whiners all go in the same "butt hurt" camp until they can demonstrate otherwise, because their subjective assessment of "this should run faster because it looks like it should" is just about the worst way to gauge optimisation of game code and rendering speed.