New PGR3 pic *WOW*

[Shogmaster]

From MSR to PGR to PGR2 to PGR3, it looks like straight linear improvements. Except for the increased resolution in PGR3, there's no real indication of a generational leap in any of the pics. IMO.

You picked some horrible pics for the PGR1. Those date back to March 2001 when they only were 3 months into porting MSR into PGR. Here's better pics to compare the 3 key games (MSR, PGR1 and PGR3). I'm skipping GPR2 because it was a second pass on the Xbox. I only want to look at first pass on each platform.

MSR:

PGR:

PGR3:

I don't know about you guys, but I'm seeing jumps in visuals.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Not to mention, the PGR1 shots are a finsihed game, the PGR3 shots are a game still in development.

 

[Iron Tiger]

What people dont get is that PSx and N64 didnt have fingers, so the Ps2 and xbox and Gamecube brought along fingers and high rez textures.

Xbox 360 and PS3 cant reinvent Fingers, what they can is Give you more of everything you saw last gen, better textures, physics and whatever.

But fingers could be made to look a lot better than they do this gen, like Optico's here, through the use of more geometry, normal mapping and dynamic lighting. Just increasing the screen resolution and texture detail doesn't signify to me a generational leap. If that's all that's really been done to make that screen look better than PGR3, then I think that's crap. If there's no dynamic lighting on the environment, or if the lighting turns out to be as unrealistic as PGR2's then what is there to get excited over?

 

[scooby_dooby]

Forza had dynamic lighting that was very realistic.

Where do you get the idea PGR3 won't?

You're just being completely pessimistic and only looking for a worst-case scenario, since that seems to be what you want to see.

 

[mckmas8808]

Forza had dynamic lighting that was very realistic.

Where do you get the idea PGR3 won't?

You're just being completely pessimistic and only looking for a worst-case scenario, since that seems to be what you want to see

Scooby don't that this the wrong way but you're right about people being pessimistic and looking for a worst-case scenario. Yet at the sametime people did the same exact thing to Sony and their videos. I'm NOT let me repeat I'm NOT looking for a flame war just stating what has happened in the past.

See this has happen to games that I'm looking to enjoy hopefully next year (being that I'm not getting a X360 so PGR3 for me is not in the plans) and now its happening to you and the game that you want to enjoy in the future.

So I say to you don't be surprised and expect this negativity to go even larger as more devs get beta kits and games on the X360 start to look even better.

 

[Iron Tiger]

Forza had dynamic lighting that was very realistic.

Where do you get the idea PGR3 won't?

You're just being completely pessimistic and only looking for a worst-case scenario, since that seems to be what you want to see.

Forza's lighting may be dynamic, but it's far from realistic. And I'm not saying PGR3 won't have dynamic lighting. I've learned to not get my hopes up when it comes to Bizarre Creations games. I hear lots of hype about what it does have, and only whispers of what's missing, though what's missing may very well be an essential ingredient in the recipe they're trying to cook up. What's so great about having a tunable radio if you're listening to the same couple tunes the developers threw in? (MSR) How can you have a modern racing sim at only 30fps (Forza), and how can that "sim" be crowned the king of racing sims? The game didn't even have support for a proper FF steering wheel. I'll stop being skeptical and hypercritical of Bizarre Creations when they start delivering more and hyping less.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Since when does a game need to run at 60FPS and support FF feedback to be a good racing game??

I always though things like graphics, track details, car models, track selection, physics, AI, tire physics, accuracy of tuning, variety of car handling, car selection and overall realism where more important....

Honetsly, 60FPS and no FF are straight out of the PS2 handbook for why Forza sucks, they are weak reasons that have nothign to do with the game.

FF? You don't judge games based on peripherals available...you judge them on how they play on the stock hardware.

60FPS? Who cares? Forza looks absolutely stunning on my 46" HDTV and looks completely smooth. 30FPS It was necessary to support ONLINE PLAY. But fo course, I woudn't expect you to give it credit where it's due, just rag on lame things like FPS and FF support

Would you rather race your own ghost at 60FPS or participate in real races with real people, at 30FPS?

Anwyays, back on topic, quite hating! You're just assuming the worst, and that's fine, but what's the point of spreading your own pessimism??

 

[Iron Tiger]

Since when does a game need to run at 60FPS and support FF feedback to be a good racing game??

It doesn't. But a racing SIMulation should eliminate as many things as possible that take away from the immersion. Things like low framerate or irregular control interfaces. I've had a blast playing racing GAMEs that ran at less than 30fps with a gamepad. But I couldn't call a racer a SIM if I was forced to deal with that. And note, I didn't say anything about GT4. There's plenty of racing sims on the PC that fit my requisites (not to mention the others that exist on the PS2).

My point was that Bizarre Creations thrives on hype and hoopla. They made a big deal about the radio tuning on MSR, but to me it didn't seem like anything new or interesting (though reviewers tried to convince me of otherwise). Project Gotham looked better than any other driving game in screenshots, but those choppy "realtime" reflections really hurt its visuals when in motion. PGR2 and Forza had choppy reflections again, as well as half of what had become the standard framerate for racing games/sims. Yet, people would try to argue that it had the best graphics, based on a feature checklist.

I'm not passing early judgment on PGR3 based on this screenshot. The game isn't done, the screenshot doesn't look bad, and there's no way to get a sense of how the game looks or plays based on this or ANY still screenshots. I've stated scenarios which might lead to my ultimate disappointment, and if we're not free to share our opinions, then what is this discussion board for?

 

[BlueTsunami]

Since when does a game need to run at 60FPS and support FF feedback to be a good racing game??

I always though things like graphics, track details, car models, track selection, physics, AI, tire physics, accuracy of tuning, variety of car handling, car selection and overall realism where more important....

Honetsly, 60FPS and no FF are straight out of the PS2 handbook for why Forza sucks, they are weak reasons that have nothign to do with the game.

FF? You don't judge games based on peripherals available...you judge them on how they play on the stock hardware.

60FPS? Who cares? Forza looks absolutely stunning on my 46" HDTV and looks completely smooth. 30FPS It was necessary to support ONLINE PLAY. But fo course, I woudn't expect you to give it credit where it's due, just rag on lame things like FPS and FF support

Would you rather race your own ghost at 60FPS or participate in real races with real people, at 30FPS?

Anwyays, back on topic, quite hating! You're just assuming the worst, and that's fine, but what's the point of spreading your own pessimism??

I'm guessing you've never played a game that ran at 60FPS..(especially a racing SIM)....at 30FPS it feels bogged down and becomes less and less enjoyable to me.....at that point it just seems like there trying to show off their graphics instead of giving the gamer a more fluid motion (which is extremely important in any racing game...)