DriveClub by Evolution Studios [PS4]

London-boy said:
I think you need to play the game a bit more before passing judgment on its gameplay.
Surely after your tech assessments you'll have time to get into it, took me a little while but it became a lot of fun.
Click to expand...

Well he admittedly bought the game just to criticize the graphics, not play the game. BTW it is his only tech breakdown on his blog... the story about Gaf is also amusing ;)

There have been a lot of people raving over the graphics technology behind DriveClub for the PS4. I’m a very passionate person when it concerns graphics in general, so I bit the bullet and bought this game today from my local Gamestop for $20.00 used. I am not really interested in the gameplay per say but still wanted to invest in analyzing this game’s graphics engine and what it could do with the PS4 hardware.
Click to expand...
 
Since the 'tech analysis' went into gameplay, then I fail to see the relevance. If you only got the game to see the graphics, then go in commenting on how the gameplay is (not) affected by the weather - it is, a lot - then surely more time is needed to explore the game.
 
I am not sure it is possible to have the same weather and day/night system at 60 fps into a racing simulation on PS4 and Xbox One but I think it could be interesting to see a PC games using this system in a simulation at 60 fps.

At least on PC if you have a powerful one you can brute force and have 16xAF and downsampling from 4k or 2k to 1080p...

I think all studio working on racing games took notice of the weather and lighting system of Drive Club...

Edit: I am not in PC master race. I don't play on PC...
 
Last edited:
The 'tech analysis' screams, everyone is saying this is good I feel the need to assert my superior intellect and tell these peasants how wrong they are.

The points already disproven thus far tell us ask we need to know about this 'tech analysis'. He's changed his mind about the analysis more than a lonely nerd trying to fit in with the cool kids and their stupid ideas.

File it under garbage and move on.
 
London-boy said:
Since the 'tech analysis' went into gameplay, then I fail to see the relevance. If you only got the game to see the graphics, then go in commenting on how the gameplay is (not) affected by the weather - it is, a lot - then surely more time is needed to explore the game.
Click to expand...

The tech analysis didn't go into gameplay. I mentioned the aspects of the rendering. How you guys interpret that to gameplay is your choice. I only wanted to critique the graphics.
 
DJ12 said:
The 'tech analysis' screams, everyone is saying this is good I feel the need to assert my superior intellect and tell these peasants how wrong they are.
Click to expand...

That's a very rude thing to say. How am I proving gamers are "wrong" concerning the graphics? Do you think the game is perfect graphically? I tried to be very clear concerning each graphical aspect of the game. And to be fair, there are more good points than bad points. I, personally, don't like the overall presentation of the game graphically and for reasons I stated very clearly in the overall impressions.

The points already disproven thus far tell us ask we need to know about this 'tech analysis'.
Click to expand...

There are no "disproven" points. They are opinion. I didn't see the displacement on the sides of the car.. big deal. That didn't detract from the point that the collision doesn't exhibit actual car parts separating. That's clearly not in the game (as I would've seen it). Reflections being on car-to-car, I corrected and edited the article.

If you want to argue that day/night cycles or weather are paramount to a driving game's gameplay when we've had oodles of driving games that were quiet enjoyable without those.. go right ahead.. but that's going off the original intention of the blog.

File it under garbage and move on.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry I don't see the game in the same light as you do. Such is the gaming community. Not everyone shares the opinions of others.
 
VFX_Veteran said:
That's a very rude thing to say. How am I proving gamers are "wrong" concerning the graphics? Do you think the game is perfect graphically? I tried to be very clear concerning each graphical aspect of the game. And to be fair, there are more good points than bad points. I, personally, don't like the overall presentation of the game graphically and for reasons I stated very clearly in the overall impressions.



There are no "disproven" points. They are opinion. I didn't see the displacement on the sides of the car.. big deal. That didn't detract from the point that the collision doesn't exhibit actual car parts separating. That's clearly not in the game (as I would've seen it). Reflections being on car-to-car, I corrected and edited the article.

If you want to argue that day/night cycles or weather are paramount to a driving game's gameplay when we've had oodles of driving games that were quiet enjoyable without those.. go right ahead.. but that's going off the original intention of the blog.



I'm sorry I don't see the game in the same light as you do. Such is the gaming community. Not everyone shares the opinions of others.
Click to expand...

When you use real car the brand need to accept the level of damage you want to implement. MotorStorm or Burnout level of damage are impossible with real car. On GAF during the PS3 and 360 era the Turn 10 community manager explained why it was difficult to have car damage in Forza series not from a technical point of view but because each carmaker having differents opinions about what is an acceptable level of damage...
 
Last edited:
VFX_Veteran said:
That's a very rude thing to say. How am I proving gamers are "wrong" concerning the graphics? Do you think the game is perfect graphically? I tried to be very clear concerning each graphical aspect of the game. And to be fair, there are more good points than bad points. I, personally, don't like the overall presentation of the game graphically and for reasons I stated very clearly in the overall impressions.



There are no "disproven" points. They are opinion. I didn't see the displacement on the sides of the car.. big deal. That didn't detract from the point that the collision doesn't exhibit actual car parts separating. That's clearly not in the game (as I would've seen it). Reflections being on car-to-car, I corrected and edited the article.

If you want to argue that day/night cycles or weather are paramount to a driving game's gameplay when we've had oodles of driving games that were quiet enjoyable without those.. go right ahead.. but that's going off the original intention of the blog.



I'm sorry I don't see the game in the same light as you do. Such is the gaming community. Not everyone shares the opinions of others.
Click to expand...

From a technical point view I disagree with your analysis because screen space reflexion are good but it is not new and the limit are not so visible in racing game.

When all games will use GI approximation system like Voxel Cone Tracing or better Voxel Octree approximation, the screen space reflexion will quickly dissappear... It is not soon maybe next generation if we continue with classical consoles not cloud based box...

The best feature is lighting system and weather system. It is probably the most expensive feature in term of performance and Evolutions engineer decided to go with deffered engine for this...

Even on PC most of recent games with a partial or complete deffered engine have no MSAA option now. It is post process AA or downsampling..
 
chris1515 said:
From a technical point view I disagree with your analysis because screen space reflexion are good but it is not new and the limit are not so visible in racing game.
Click to expand...

I never said it was new tech. I mentioned it's importance because it seems to be very expensive and a lot of games don't include it because it's expensive. And I agree, it's not really done to perfection, but there is no other SSR in a game that shows this quality.

When all games will use GI approximation system like Voxel Cone Tracing or better Voxel Octree approximation, the screen space reflexion will quickly dissappear... It is not soon maybe next generation if we continue with classical consoles not cloud based box...
Click to expand...

The technique to get reflections is actually irrelevant. VCT is very expensive and I'm willing to bet we won't see that with open world games for some time.

Even on PC most of recent games with a partial or complete deffered engine have no MSAA option now. It is post process AA or downsampling..
Click to expand...

Yes, that is something they need to solve. Ryse has an incredible AA system for it's deferred renderer.
 
Driving around a track hot lapping and seeing the lighting subtly change is really nice. One of the biggest wow to me was that after 16 laps of driving in clouded Scotland I suddenly saw a patch of sun move across the landscape moving in my direction. The viewing distance is huge. Eventually I found myself drive in the sun briefly and it was amazing. The lighting (and now weather) really keep the tracks more interesting for much longer. For me btw the motion controls are also essential to the game's enjoyment.
 
I had that with the cloud covers already! Though at times I also thought the real cloud covers were a lot more complex.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BRiT
Human Head Studios shuts down, talent acquired by Bethesda to form Roundhouse Studios
Replies
0
Views
1K
BRiT
BRiT
C
Sony Interactive Entertainment first party and Cloud Strategy powered by Microsoft Azure
2
Replies
38
Views
8K
BRiT
BRiT
I
Where Microsofts Game Studios stand and what do they need to do next?
3 4 5
Replies
95
Views
14K
PSman1700
P
A
Everwild by Rare [XO, XBSX|S, PC, XPA]
2 3
Replies
49
Views
8K
Johnny Awesome
J
D
DriveClub VR [PS4]
9 10 11
Replies
216
Views
25K
Karamazov
K
Back
Top