Dirt has better graphics than GTHD & Forza2?

Arwin said:
GT:HD has bad graphics for next-gen standards? :oops:
Click to expand...

I think so, Dirt looks far better because it has a superior lighting system and far much more detailed landscape and you can race with up to 8 players if i remember right (but thats gameplay).
GTHD:
http://ruliwebimg.empas.com/data/news7/12m/24/ps3/ruliweb_gthd_44.jpg
DIRT:
http://www.gamereactor.no/bilde/?textid=108489&id=118634
PG2:
pgr2.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Have to agree on that, DIRT is actually looking better and I love the 'see through window effect' in one of the gametrailer videos. But Forza 2 is all about realism and that has meant some sacrifice on the graphics department. GT:HD looks good but I have to give my penny to DIRT as long as they keep the graphical IQ seen in the videos.
 
Arwin said:
GT:HD has bad graphics for next-gen standards? :oops:
Click to expand...

I think so. Just look at dragon's example, environmental shadows are prebaked (although tunnel casts shadow). There are many things like that in GT HD that really shouldn't be in a next-gen game.
 
Why is GT:HD even being considered Next Gen? Wasn't it built on the PS2 engine and pretty much just res bump and nothing more?
 
aselto said:
I think so. Just look at dragon's example, environmental shadows are prebaked (although tunnel casts shadow). There are many things like that in GT HD that really shouldn't be in a next-gen game.
Click to expand...

Without being negative I would say that GT:HD's graphics looks 'static'. As you said prebaked shadows, 2D backdrops (may turn to/or be 3D with simple mesh at near distance/far away). Makes me think about how Max Payne 2 still looks good and reasonably realistic in it's graphics due to prebaked shadows/lighting and some more.
 
Nebula said:
Without being negative I would say that GT:HD's graphics looks 'static'. As you said prebaked shadows, 2D backdrops (may turn to/or be 3D with simple mesh at near distance/far away). Makes me think about how Max Payne 2 still looks good and reasonably realistic in it's graphics due to prebaked shadows/lighting and some more.
Click to expand...

I didn't say GT HD (or FM2 for that matter) have bad aesthetics, but they look bad for next-gen standards. Other thing is that all racers that have really amazing graphics (Dirt, Motorstorm, PGR4 looking at the new trailer) are only 30fps.
 
aselto said:
I didn't say GT HD (or FM2 for that matter) have bad aesthetics, but they look bad for next-gen standards. Other thing is that all racers that have really amazing graphics (Dirt, PGR4 looking at the new trailer) are only 30fps.
Click to expand...
30 fps is smooth.
 
aselto said:
Yeah, both GT HD and FM2 have relatively bad graphics for next-gen standards
Click to expand...

no no, every gameplay video from DIRT reminds me of this VGCats comic: "brown? yep, haven`t you heard? real is brown" . . . than bloom and unstable framerate lurking in every gameplay video, that`s not next-gen by my definitions
 
dragon said:
30 fps is smooth.
Click to expand...

for most action games 30fps is all you really need and for some other type of games (like serious 3d fighters and driving sims) 60fps is what you'd really want. forza 2 screens might not look that impressive but the sense of speed (thanks to 60fps) adds a layer of depth that are not apparent untill you actually play the game. in short i'll take 60fps for my driving sims over visual effects any day.
 
Codemasters says that in the final release the game is going to run at 30 fps on xbox360. I play my games on a hardcore PC so 60fps should not be a problem for me;)

The lighting in Gears of war was not pre-baked.
colinmcrae_118633.jpg
 
Nebula said:
Without being negative I would say that GT:HD's graphics looks 'static'. As you said prebaked shadows, 2D backdrops (may turn to/or be 3D with simple mesh at near distance/far away). Makes me think about how Max Payne 2 still looks good and reasonably realistic in it's graphics due to prebaked shadows/lighting and some more.
Click to expand...

The mountains in GT:HD are ALL 3D. Sigh. I can't believe how often I've had to correct this mistake. It has some pretty interesting lighting effects even on those mountains. And at 1080p/60, it is pretty impressive ... doubt that Dirt is doing more than 720/30.

The lighting in the desert looks pretty impressive in Dirt, but when you look at shots from asphalt tracks, things don't look as hot. In the meantime, I'll be interested in how a GT:HD version of something like the Grand Canyon track in GT4 will turn out.
 
Arwin said:
The mountains in GT:HD are ALL 3D. Sigh. I can't believe how often I've had to correct this mistake. It has some pretty interesting lighting effects even on those mountains. And at 1080p/60, it is pretty impressive ... doubt that Dirt is doing more than 720/30.

The lighting in the desert looks pretty impressive in Dirt, but when you look at shots from asphalt tracks, things don't look as hot. In the meantime, I'll be interested in how a GT:HD version of something like the Grand Canyon track in GT4 will turn out.
Click to expand...

GTHD:The mountains gives a to strong contrast with the landscape.
I think Forza2 looks better than GTHD and Dirt looks better than Forza2.
Dirt shots form asphalt looks very good thanks to the great lighting you should se the vids a linked to.
Heres another (not sure if its a new vid):
http://www.gametrailers.com/umwatcher.php?id=61999
 
Arwin said:
The mountains in GT:HD are ALL 3D. Sigh. I can't believe how often I've had to correct this mistake. It has some pretty interesting lighting effects even on those mountains. And at 1080p/60, it is pretty impressive ... doubt that Dirt is doing more than 720/30.
Click to expand...

Yeah well I said 3D at near distance (helicopter tour) or 3D at distance as you said (wasn't shure), well 3D it is but looks far from it looking at gameplay videos. And yes I am shure DIRT will be 720p and 30fps and that may be the reason it looks so much better. :smile:

You have to understand how the mountains could be mistaken for 2D when looking at images like this (see below, posted by dragon). But 3D although with simple geometry mesh or so I would think.
http://ruliwebimg.empas.com/data/news7/12m/24/ps3/ruliweb_gthd_44.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Gubbi said:
No it isn't!!

Cheers
Click to expand...

30fps is smooth but 60fps is uber smooth!

Duke said:
Isn't Gears' lighting pre-baked?
Click to expand...

No way, just take a look at some videos of GoW (Gears of War) gameplay and you'll see that the lighting is top-notch and not pre-baked.

novcze said:
no no, every gameplay video from DIRT reminds me of this VGCats comic: "brown? yep, haven`t you heard? real is brown" . . . than bloom and unstable framerate lurking in every gameplay video, that`s not next-gen by my definitions
Click to expand...

Well unstable framerate is something that plagues many games on both consoles before final release of the game(s).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
novcze said:
no no, every gameplay video from DIRT reminds me of this VGCats comic: "brown? yep, haven`t you heard? real is brown" . . . than bloom and unstable framerate lurking in every gameplay video, that`s not next-gen by my definitions
Click to expand...
This is the same build that was showed to press in early March... and the build was probably prepare and certified in February. An it really is nothing unnatural is a little choppy 3 months before it's done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

2
DIRT Gameplay Vids
2
Replies
25
Views
4K
aselto
A
Back
Top