[catisfit]

Originally Posted by Graham

The general public won't accept 'race mode' screenshots, this is why few companies will release them. It's not a Turn10 thing, it's a industry wide issue. It's about trying to sell your game. You put it in the best light you can, it makes little sense otherwise.

Just to clarify, I have no beef with this. I was simply vocalising a personal opinion that I am not particularly interested in in-engine/out-of-game screenshots, and will draw no conclusions, positive or negative, about F3 until I've seen where actual in-game image fidelity (and framerate) lie.

I've played enough Forza 2 (I'm actually trying to complete it as far as possible right now before Supercar Challenge comes out) to know exactly where it stands, and I'm interested to find out where Forza 3 is.

My primary concern (hopefully unfounded) right now is that all the talk seems to be about competing with Gran Turismo, rather than making Forza a better game. They have a cockpit view but it's supposedly 30fps, so that's a waste of time for me. They're claiming significant graphical improvements but there's still only 8 cars on track, the exact opposite of the upgrade I want. They haven't said anything about driving model improvements, but they're showing off that cars can roll - again it's an addition which is not in the direction I'm looking for. The absolute worst case for me would be if they've tried so hard to chase GT graphically that the framerate takes a hit. I sincerely hope not.

If anything their claims and PR are reducing my excitement for F3 rather than increasing it, which is a shame.

[RudeCurve]

MS needs to demo FM3 on one of these.

http://www.akihabaranews.com/en/news...s.php?id=18227

[phil-t]

Originally Posted by catisfit

Just to clarify, I have no beef with this. I was simply vocalising a personal opinion that I am not particularly interested in in-engine/out-of-game screenshots, and will draw no conclusions, positive or negative, about F3 until I've seen where actual in-game image fidelity (and framerate) lie.

I've played enough Forza 2 (I'm actually trying to complete it as far as possible right now before Supercar Challenge comes out) to know exactly where it stands, and I'm interested to find out where Forza 3 is.

My primary concern (hopefully unfounded) right now is that all the talk seems to be about competing with Gran Turismo, rather than making Forza a better game. They have a cockpit view but it's supposedly 30fps, so that's a waste of time for me. They're claiming significant graphical improvements but there's still only 8 cars on track, the exact opposite of the upgrade I want. They haven't said anything about driving model improvements, but they're showing off that cars can roll - again it's an addition which is not in the direction I'm looking for. The absolute worst case for me would be if they've tried so hard to chase GT graphically that the framerate takes a hit. I sincerely hope not.

If anything their claims and PR are reducing my excitement for F3 rather than increasing it, which is a shame.

Just some info that may alleviate your concerns.

The Cockpit view is being worked on, at the Audi AXF event, the T10 guys did say to one of the guys 60fps is the target for all view, and it's quite evident from the lighting model that they haven't 'finished' in this area of the game.

The driving model improvements have been 'talked' about to get a good idea
- Tyre deformation phsyics
- More realistic centre's of gravity
And feedback from all at the 24 Hour AXF event was that it's a big step up from FM2..

The other issue with all this comparison of 'screen shots' seems largely a battle of the photo-mode.
People say GT5 doesn't have this, yet if you press 'triangle' in game, you suddenly get a nice view of the car with DOF/max LOD, etc, etc.. which seems unerringly the same as FM3's photo-mode...

People are right in that we are so 'hyped' on photo-mode shots from all games that looking 'in-game' is not the same experience, and people would moan.

Here's a shot only intended to show worse case direct feed in-game screen shot that shows how far even it's rival can differ (Not meant as fanboy, simply that both games are so much better when in photo-mode)



And I bet FM3 isn't going to be much better!

[phil-t]

Originally Posted by catisfit

Just to clarify, I have no beef with this. I was simply vocalising a personal opinion that I am not particularly interested in in-engine/out-of-game screenshots, and will draw no conclusions, positive or negative, about F3 until I've seen where actual in-game image fidelity (and framerate) lie.

I've played enough Forza 2 (I'm actually trying to complete it as far as possible right now before Supercar Challenge comes out) to know exactly where it stands, and I'm interested to find out where Forza 3 is.

My primary concern (hopefully unfounded) right now is that all the talk seems to be about competing with Gran Turismo, rather than making Forza a better game. They have a cockpit view but it's supposedly 30fps, so that's a waste of time for me. They're claiming significant graphical improvements but there's still only 8 cars on track, the exact opposite of the upgrade I want. They haven't said anything about driving model improvements, but they're showing off that cars can roll - again it's an addition which is not in the direction I'm looking for. The absolute worst case for me would be if they've tried so hard to chase GT graphically that the framerate takes a hit. I sincerely hope not.

If anything their claims and PR are reducing my excitement for F3 rather than increasing it, which is a shame.

It was said over on fm.net from the people that went to the Audi AXF 24 hour event that 60fps will be accross all views, which kind of ties in with the 'talk' that in the E3 demo, the cockpit view was added quite late, and needed optimising..

The driving model improvments have been touted quite vocally, tyre deformation physics, some insight from the MacLaren F1 simulator, more realisitic centre of gravities, etc.
Everyone that has given 'feedback' regards how the cars drive from the Audi event have unanimously said it's a noticeable step up from FM2, so it's shaping up nicely..

The Photomode stuff is (I agree with the poster above) necessary these days, people just need to be shown as photo-realistic as they can get or their would be uproar..

[betan]

Does GT5P even have a photo mode though?

[Jugix]

Originally Posted by betan

Does GT5P even have a photo mode though?

If it has, I have completely missed it. EDIT: But seems like Polyphony has this mode. pic. Seems like same level of BS shot as Forza3 pics.

[2real4tv]

Originally Posted by Jugix

If it has, I have completely missed it. EDIT: But seems like Polyphony has this mode. pic. Seems like same level of BS shot as Forza3 pics.

Thats a bullshot...GT5P does not have a photomode

[Arwin]

Originally Posted by betan

Does GT5P even have a photo mode though?

GT5 Prologue certainly hasn't. I expect GT5 to have a pretty stellar one however, probably with partial or actual raytracing included, if we can take the garage view and other comparable showcases that nevertheless now show some strong aliasing and low-res blurring in GT5 Prologue. It's probably going to be pretty crazy.

[Arwin]

I think I've got a game called Sega GT for the original Xbox that had allowed you to make photos during your replay that you could then display in your 'garage' or main menu or something. I'm not sure if that's the first game either, but I do believe it was out well before GT4.

Yes, checking the interwebs reveals Sega GT 2002 releasing in 2003 so that's a few years before GT4. It has a number of other fairly forward looking features too, but the game never gained a lot of popularity. For my part that was because the driving just didn't feel great.

[Joshua Luna]

http://www.xboxygen.com/Medias/Video...a-Motorsport-3

4 new videos, some non-replay gameplay footage that, while offscreen, show that the game has improved texturing and filtering. Lighting in particular is substantilly improved over the previous title. Btw, I agree with Graham... I hope he gets the game :P Considering the hardware FM3 is running on it is quite an accomplishment.

[Tap In]

Originally Posted by Joshua Luna

http://www.xboxygen.com/Medias/Video...a-Motorsport-3

beautiful

[infinity4]

So can anyone confirm if this game has 4xMSAA in gameplay?

[Arwin]

I'm sorry, but the triangle just zooms in during the replay. So you're just seeing the replay model up close in the replay which runs at 30fps with some DOF and motion blur, as we've discussed. It's not a photo mode. Photo mode for GT4 added tonnes of effects never seen in the replay, offered all sorts of filters, exposure times, and so on and so forth. I can only imagine what Photo Mode in GT5 would be like if they update it ... wouldn't be surprised if it is fully ray-traced or something crazy like that, producing something like a 10MB image that you can print on a poster or something.

[nightshade]

Originally Posted by Arwin

I'm sorry, but the triangle just zooms in during the replay. So you're just seeing the replay model up close in the replay which runs at 30fps with some DOF and motion blur, as we've discussed. It's not a photo mode. Photo mode for GT4 added tonnes of effects never seen in the replay, offered all sorts of filters, exposure times, and so on and so forth. I can only imagine what Photo Mode in GT5 would be like if they update it ... wouldn't be surprised if it is fully ray-traced or something crazy like that, producing something like a 10MB image that you can print on a poster or something.

I would second that.

But without going anymore offtopic I'd say regarding those Forza 3 screens, if they are photomode with additional & superior effects. Then why is it that we still see traces of bilinear filtering in some of those screens :S . Some as in here:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3635/...c004be7d_o.jpg

I see the mip mapping change noticeably right near the front tire. [or am I missing something ]

[djskribbles]

Maybe that's from a replay? There is some noticeable aliasing on the door.

[Arwin]

Originally Posted by djskribbles

Maybe that's from a replay? There is some noticeable aliasing on the door.

Yeah, that's what I assumed too, that this is a replay shot.

[RudeCurve]

Originally Posted by nightshade

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3635/...c004be7d_o.jpg

That's from the replay video that is available for download awhile back. That section of the video is actually in slow motion.

[Joshua Luna]

Originally Posted by Arwin

I'm sorry, but the triangle just zooms in during the replay. So you're just seeing the replay model up close in the replay which runs at 30fps with some DOF and motion blur, as we've discussed. It's not a photo mode. Photo mode for GT4 added tonnes of effects never seen in the replay, offered all sorts of filters, exposure times, and so on and so forth. I can only imagine what Photo Mode in GT5 would be like if they update it ... wouldn't be surprised if it is fully ray-traced or something crazy like that, producing something like a 10MB image that you can print on a poster or something.

"It's not a photo mode" but compared to gameplay it is in replay mode that minimally adds DOF, motion blur, and zooms in non-gameplay cameras.

Seems like it is parsing semantics while the point being made, at least it appears to me, is the use of shots not represenative of gameplay. Everything else is a diversion unless the point is to argue that GT5P shots are not photo-mode, but replay, and therefor do represent the game in some sense, which in turn makes the fuss over the 30fps directfeed replays kind of irrelevant. What is a photomode anyhow? So one had a "camera" that is a full featured SLR and the other a camera with cellphone like features, at the end of the day neither are 100% identical to gameplay.

Avoiding all the technicalities ("your photomode adds more than my photomode is more similar" and "but my replay adds less than your replay, so it is more similar") there is gameplay and then there is everything else--but everything else may, or may not, be roughly similar to the actual product. No magic word like "replay, not a photomode" addresses this issue.

[Arwin]

Originally Posted by Joshua Luna

"It's not a photo mode" but compared to gameplay it is in replay mode that minimally adds DOF, motion blur, and zooms in non-gameplay cameras.

That's exactly what I said.

Seems like it is parsing semantics

I just really rather enjoy precision. Maybe it's because I'm a linguist at heart, but probably a significant amount of people on this board in particular feel the same.

I actually really like both replay modes and photo modes in racing games with cars like these, by the way! I love being able to watch a beautiful replay of my race. So here too I care for and enjoy the work Turn 10 puts in to improve those. Also see nightshade's post, where we have an example of visible difference between photo-mode and replay mode in Forza 3 for instance. It's useful to make the distinction. In fact, there is probably four: gameplay, replay, photo mode and bullshot. Also, in GT5 Prologue there are differences depending on when you drive in cockpit view or use a HUD, etc. as well.

I noticed in the last videos posted by the way, that there is now some lighting on the dashboard. It seems like it's not being updated every frame, but they'll likely get that sorted before release, which is great. I really missed it in the original videos where the cockpit seemed devoid of (dynamic) lighting altogether.

@phil-t: thanks! A more realistic tyre model and a more realistic center of gravity could really help alleviate my issues with Forza 2's driving model.

[catisfit]

Originally Posted by Arwin

I noticed in the last videos posted by the way, that there is now some lighting on the dashboard. It seems like it's not being updated every frame, but they'll likely get that sorted before release, which is great. I really missed it in the original videos where the cockpit seemed devoid of (dynamic) lighting altogether.

F2 did that with reflections. More games should defer non-essential work if the framerate would otherwise suffer (although having said that I found the reflections distracting on bonnet view in F2, especially when cornering).

Originally Posted by phil-t

The driving model improvments have been touted quite vocally, tyre deformation physics, some insight from the MacLaren F1 simulator, more realisitic centre of gravities, etc.
Everyone that has given 'feedback' regards how the cars drive from the Audi event have unanimously said it's a noticeable step up from FM2, so it's shaping up nicely.

That's good to hear. Although I'd expect tyre deformation to be a visual effect only - but at the same time I would expect tyre model improvements, it was needed in F2.

[phil-t]

FM2's replays are not so hot IMO,

If you hire an AI driver (endurance races can be boring for me , you get treated to the whole race via replay cams..

I can put up with the (feels sub) 30fps, but I do find the reflections are probably running every other framel they must be 15fps.

From all footage I have seen, it does look as though replays are 30fps, but it does seem a damn site smoother then FM2, which I still play quite a bit of.

[RobertR1]

Lots more screen shots: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost...postcount=2393


My favorite of the bunch:

[Shifty Geezer]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! What's with the tiled gravel texture?? Jeez, two textures is all it takes to effectively elliminate repeating tile patterns on noisy surfaces. This was possible with the introduction of multitexturing, yet to this day, even with hugely programmable shader hardware, we see repeating patterns in gravel and grass etc. Sort it out, 21st century developers!

Other than that, the scenery looks pretty detailed and convincing.

[Arwin]

The first and the third picture on the gaf page look pretty good, but the rest just doesn't look right. For a big part though it might just be a lack of contrast? At least I think more contrast could really help here.

[Nebula]

Originally Posted by Arwin

The first and the third picture on the gaf page look pretty good, but the rest just doesn't look right. For a big part though it might just be a lack of contrast? At least I think more contrast could really help here.

Agreed, the background just seems to bright compared to the car. Such things can make even the best games look bad.