ManuVlad3.0
Regular
Then would you mind, explaining this to the not so genious people that believe GT5 will look better than real life.
It wouldn't be the first time that the "genious" burned their tongues.
The GT5 expectation thread (including preview titles)*
- Thread starter mckmas8808
- Start date
- Status
It wouldn't be the first time that the "genious" burned their tongues.
Can you see any aliasing in those images?
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
I figured it out. They are having the artists also doing the programming hehe.
djskribbles
Legend
i think all of them could be real-time, with exception to the Nissan Xanavi shots and maybe the last shot of the GTR concept car.
What AA would it take to get that type of fidelity. GT5 is at 1080p which would help. Or is it possible that the polly count is so high that you don't need a super high AA. Or am I talking complete rubish and its impossible to have all those smooth edges?
Is it possible that there is no "jaggies" due to some of the screens given out downsized to 720P?
Just wondering thanks!
Is it possible that there is no "jaggies" due to some of the screens given out downsized to 720P?
Just wondering thanks!
djskribbles
Legend
well, to me, those shots look like they're taken from a replay; GT 3, 4 and HD look identical in-game compared to the replays, but they add some motion blur effects in the replays. sure replays usually look more impressive, but thats because you're not just looking at a shot of the rear of the car (if you use that view) and if you use the in-car view, then it looks even less impressive. so my guess is yes, it will look at least comparable in-game to the shots posted earlier in this thread. PD can do some amazing things with PS hardware.Real-time but playable in real-time?
At this point it is still a lot of speculation. For all we know these could be photo-mode shots. GT4 practically invented it (practically - there was Sega GT on Xbox I think that had a basic form). They could also be downscaled, or who knows GT5 has taken the extra bandwidth it has in 720p mode to put in some sick AA. Or maybe even in 1080p - GT didn't seem to use all that much SPU power initially, and maybe he figured out a way to have good AA by putting two SPUs on the job. Would that even be possible?
We'll see soon enough.
Most of the images came in at 2160p, where you can spot plenty of 'realtime' rendering imperfections:
There were three types of screenshot.
(1) 3840x2160 captures, likely the same type of replay source material used for the trailer.
(2) 1080p captures probably photo mode, includes white F430, Mustang, and Z4.
(3) 1080p car select framebuffer screenshots.
Atleast 16xAA or better.
Not at all. Im just amused that the biggest GT fanboys weren't even able to spot motion blur in GT:HD replay, AND the fact that when photomode pictures are shown in other games (PGR4), it gets called upon, however obvious humongous AA PRshots (trailer has 16+x AA aswell doesnt it? ) are called realtime in the GT thread. You also get flamed for calling big budget PS3 game screens for PR-shots.
Im amused that people go out of their way to tell you that everything you see on the PS3 is real. When the reality is different.
Im amused that its okay to make ridiculus claims about Forza 2 handlings system ("cars handle like on ICE") but i get flamed when using real life examples of things that obviously are done wrong in GT.
Im amused that every exclusive game on the PS3 looks good because of the power of the CELL!111!!1!!ONE!! and that it cannot be done on the X360. (Apparently, according to some people at b3d, X360 cannot handle mud deformation because motorstorm utilizes the Cell. Tell that to Sega Rally). Im amused that every mutliplatform game that looks better on the X360 is because of "bad optimizing for the PS3", whereas the only multiplatform game that runs\looks better on the PS3, are due to the Cell, and not because Besethsda had 1 more year to tweak an allready finished multiplatform engine.
I mean, when the biggest fans of the game, suddenly are so concentrated of telling you everything you see is realtime, that they are not able to mention obvious changes in the replay mode of a game vs gameplay, it starts getting amusing.
If you do a proper downsizing of a 1080p picture to 720p that only gains you 2x AA. For this you need 16x or so.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah it is kind of strange that one platform gets a "free out of jail" card!
I think we all need to wait for some ingame screenshots (and by that I mean someone playing it). But the trailer was touched up (and replay makes it look better with use of effects and probably better detail/LOD) even though it probably is real ingame assets since the trees at the end of the trailer are bilboards (take a ss and make it brighter to see).
Last edited by a moderator:
djskribbles
Legend
i haven't followed the Forza or PGR threads, but are you sure its not the same on both sides? i mean, are you sure there weren't any Forza/PGR fanboys saying that the photo mode shots were real-time?
just wondering...
just wondering...
PGR4 got some comments when it got obvious photomode images. But I ve also seen many times seen such images in PGR4 being marveled but none said anything
I think you are confusing what people are marveling. People arent marveling the high quality of the resolution.
Some of the so called "PR shots" are taken directly from the game with only the aliasing reduced. Everything else is identical. These are what people see and like.
Now the only pictures posted in this thread that are no way from the game are the scenes with the Nissan starting from the pit stop and the last screen. These has been posted and compared only by one person.
As for GT's replays there is only one person who was claming that they were identical and it was shown later that he was talking about GT's replays in general and not to GT:HD alone and he admitted the usage of some small effects. Well and he is usually ignored of course many times due to his bias which is known to everyone.
But even if they like what they see in replay modes its perfectly understandable. Why not?
I did a runthrough the thread's posts after the GT5 trailer and I didnt see the fanboys you are talking about or people claming everything we see is real. So I think you are exaggerating a bit.
Also GT is more being attacked than PGR4 for its visuals as if there is nothing remarkable during gameplay and as if everything impressive is during the replay's added effects only.
I think you are very unfair with people who are impressed with PS3 games in general. Why people are defending PS3 games so often is because PS3 games are equally attacked. If this happens once for a 360 game this happens more for a PS3 game. The few times people dared to say something about excessive AA in some of the 360 games (which is pointless really since everything else is identical and representative of the quality) they were attacked and called fanboys.
This game looks disgustingly good. Whatever they are doing with car shaders should be copied by devs from here on out. The lighting engine looks sweet.
The funny thing about this and GT4 is that whatever graphic deficiencies there are (static lightmaps, shadows not projecting onto cars, and more), they don't really take away from the experience. Polyphony makes so many smart art decisions, that they take a turd (relatively speaking, please no flames) like PS2 and polish it into Kate Moss/Rebecca Romejn Stamos (whatever sp). No wonder that on a relatively fantastic/easy to develop for platform like PS3 they can pump out such screen sex.
The funny thing about this and GT4 is that whatever graphic deficiencies there are (static lightmaps, shadows not projecting onto cars, and more), they don't really take away from the experience. Polyphony makes so many smart art decisions, that they take a turd (relatively speaking, please no flames) like PS2 and polish it into Kate Moss/Rebecca Romejn Stamos (whatever sp). No wonder that on a relatively fantastic/easy to develop for platform like PS3 they can pump out such screen sex.
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
On a little sidenote next to all the tech talk, are there more people dissapointed about GT (and alot of other racers) only using real circuits? Racing around small tight mountain roads would be so much cooler. Thats what I loved in nfs2/3/4, those cool roads and not just the dead gray racetracks which really dont do the supercars any good.
Don't know what you mean? Existing tracks is a relatively new thing to the GT series. In GT3, only two tracks were existing (Monaco and Laguna), and of course there were some city tracks that were based on real cities, sort of.
Your small tight mountain roads were among others in the fantasy tracks of Citta d'Aria, Cote di Amalfi, and the recent GT:HD Eiger track is pretty much the definition of ... Though the Nurburgring I think also fits into this category, in my view anyway. But maybe you mean a faster track that is still in the mountains? I do think I remember which track in NFS3 (Hot Pursuit) you are referring to - that looked like a highway in the U.S. and went up in the mountains and over a very high pass, then all the way down. It was a great track and at the time it felt very long.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
