New PGR3 pic *WOW*

[Qroach]

video of real or fake stuff you mean?

 

[Bohdy]

Bizarre did not release this to indicate the level of technical wizardry they wield. It's just an insight into what they're working on and what it looks like.

And I wouldn't expect anything more, but need I remind you that the title of this topic is "WOW", so I commented in response to that.

 

[ralexand]

video of real or fake stuff you mean?

Ouch.

 

[Iron Tiger]

The picture is nice but I would prefer to see a car infront of that backdrop. Also seeing a still image is nice...but in this driving SIM games, you generally don't pay attention to detail like that. I would like to see more or less exotic sceneray where your inveloped in the surroundings, like at a Beach or on a Cliff.....

It's actually a nice arcade game in an urban enviroment.I don't know which cities will be in it besides New york.

I've never played PGR but its only based in a city scape? Meh...I couldn't play in a game that only offered me city courses....I want diversity (surrounding wise) in my tracks...

The title "Project Gotham Racing" denotes that it's city based, just like its ancestor "Metropolis Street Racing". Though I'm sure the usage of famous DC Comics city names in the titles is purely coincidental.

On topic, the only way I'd be impressed by this is to see it in motion and find out that the lighting is dynamic. From the screen it looks baked on, and that's something that could be managed by the PS1.

 

[dukmahsik]

Bizarre did not release this to indicate the level of technical wizardry they wield. It's just an insight into what they're working on and what it looks like.

And I wouldn't expect anything more, but need I remind you that the title of this topic is "WOW", so I commented in response to that.

that was my first word when I saw the pic

 

[function]

When did everyone here become a game artist?

About the same time that, apparently, everyone became a hardware engineer and graphics programmer too.

 

[Qroach]

From the screen it looks baked on, and that's something that could be managed by the PS1.

nonsense. The assertions here by some people is 100% nonsense. The PS1? come on. Since when could you tell that lighting is static or dynamic in a single screen shot?

If you can tell that, you can also tell me what the controls will be like in this game just by looking at the screen shot.

 

[Qroach]

About the same time that, apparently, everyone became a hardware engineer and graphics programmer too.

Yeah, heh, I guess people in here are working on thier 3rd & 4th university degree. how do they find the time...

 

[function]

On topic, the only way I'd be impressed by this is to see it in motion and find out that the lighting is dynamic. From the screen it looks baked on, and that's something that could be managed by the PS1.

And of course the PS1 could draw triangles, which is why no computer graphics seen since are impressive.

 

[Qroach]

And of course the PS1 could draw triangles, which is why no computer graphics seen since are impressive.

exactly. Nothing is better than vertex lighting.

 

[Shogmaster]

On topic, the only way I'd be impressed by this is to see it in motion and find out that the lighting is dynamic. From the screen it looks baked on, and that's something that could be managed by the PS1.

PS1 could do filtered textures?!? I knew my PS1 was defective!

 

[ralexand]

From the screen it looks baked on, and that's something that could be managed by the PS1.

Show me a pic of a ps1 game that looks as good as this shot baked lighting or not. It's a racing game. Dynamic lighting on buildings that you're racing by at 100mph just isn't important.

 

[ChryZ]

I am going to be impressed, when I see a complete track in such detail + a bunch of cars. At this very moment there is only discrepancy, previous screens with cars and not so much details and this single very detailed, static, narrow shot with no cars, but a high level of detail. Go figure ...

 

[_phil_]

With mapped photographies +vertex ambient occlusion,it's pretty easy to reach that level of photorealism.
Good work still ,but i don't see the interest of doing that .I hope that as a game artist i won't sit hours in front of my PC ,trying to copy the reality that is outside.:?

There is something insane about that job.

 

[BlueTsunami]

From the screen it looks baked on, and that's something that could be managed by the PS1. Show me a pic of a ps1 game that looks as good as this shot baked lighting or not.

Show me a pic of a ps1 game that looks as good as this shot baked lighting or not. It's a racing game. Dynamic lighting on buildings that you're racing by at 100mph just isn't important.

Hey hey hey..I didn't write that

 

[Iron Tiger]

From the screen it looks baked on, and that's something that could be managed by the PS1.

nonsense. The assertions here by some people is 100% nonsense. The PS1? come on. Since when could you tell that lighting is static or dynamic in a single screen shot?

If you can tell that, you can also tell me what the controls will be like in this game just by looking at the screen shot.

Based on what I've seen in other screens from the X360 (as well as upcoming PC games), shadows in first gen games won't be as soft as they are in reality. From the softness of the shadows in that screenshot, I could assume that the shadows aren't realtime (also, there's no shadow of the ladder on the right falling on the red sign, as there is on the photo). It looks like there could be some specularity on the windows and maybe some environment mapping, which is why I didn't say that I know there is no dynamic lighting. If it turns out that the lighting isn't static, I'll likely be impressed (but if the game still runs at 30fps, I won't be buying the crap anyway).

On topic, the only way I'd be impressed by this is to see it in motion and find out that the lighting is dynamic. From the screen it looks baked on, and that's something that could be managed by the PS1.

PS1 could do filtered textures?!? I knew my PS1 was defective!

No, but the PS1 could use touched up photos as textures, which was my point.

From the screen it looks baked on, and that's something that could be managed by the PS1.

Show me a pic of a ps1 game that looks as good as this shot baked lighting or not. It's a racing game. Dynamic lighting on buildings that you're racing by at 100mph just isn't important.

I didn't say it was important to have dynamic lighting on the environment (though it would definitely enhance the visuals and feel of the game). But if the lighting isn't dynamic in that shot, then there's nothing special being done in it, and it's nothing to be terribly excited over. An increase in polycount and texture fidelity should be a given. Doesn't anyone remember the shots of MSR that Bizarre Creations was showing alongside photos of the real locales? This screenshot looks like nothing more than a linear increase in detail beyond that, and I am expecting a lot more out of hardware that is exponentially increased in features.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Why do people want dynamic lighting on buildings that don't move, illuminated by a single and to all extents and purposes stationary light source? :? Unless you really want all that processing time (surely neither XeCPU or Cell having enough oomph for realtime GI, let alone with a game to power along the way) dedicated to a sun v...e...r...y...s...l...o...w...l...y... creeping across the sky and subtly changing the shadows to an imperceptible degree that you won't notice when haring round the track at 180 MPH!

 

[Edge]

> "PS3 has too many ports/connections, 1080p, too powerful and so on."

LOL! Too true. The only time I know that 1080p is a "problem".

Back on topic, that screenshot is awesome, and the reason being, it's a picture of the actual store plastered onto some geometry in the game. Looks great, and I think some of you guys are too picky. Now too bad it won't come out on PS3.

 

[Iron Tiger]

Why do people want dynamic lighting on buildings that don't move, illuminated by a single and to all extents and purposes stationary light source? :? Unless you really want all that processing time (surely neither XeCPU or Cell having enough oomph for realtime GI, let alone with a game to power along the way) dedicated to a sun v...e...r...y...s...l...o...w...l...y... creeping across the sky and subtly changing the shadows to an imperceptible degree that you won't notice when haring round the track at 180 MPH!

By dynamic lighting, I'm referring to specularity and reflections. When your perspective shifts, so should the reflections on the environment. The tarmac in Gran Turismo 3/4 was stationary, but it added a lot to see the lighting shift on it as you drove. Shadows are another matter which would only change in night races when your cars provide moving light sources. In current, non-GI realtime graphics, lighting and shadows are separate entities and I usually try to address them as such. I should have said that the shadows in the screenshot looked baked on, because of the softness of them. The lighting may or may not be dynamic, but I don't have my hopes up that it will be dynamic (or that the game will run at 60fps).

 

[carpediem]

Why do people want dynamic lighting on buildings that don't move, illuminated by a single and to all extents and purposes stationary light source? :? Unless you really want all that processing time (surely neither XeCPU or Cell having enough oomph for realtime GI, let alone with a game to power along the way) dedicated to a sun v...e...r...y...s...l...o...w...l...y... creeping across the sky and subtly changing the shadows to an imperceptible degree that you won't notice when haring round the track at 180 MPH!

By dynamic lighting, I'm referring to specularity and reflections. When your perspective shifts, so should the reflections on the environment. The tarmac in Gran Turismo 3/4 was stationary, but it added a lot to see the lighting shift on it as you drove. Shadows are another matter which would only change in night races when your cars provide moving light sources. In current, non-GI realtime graphics, lighting and shadows are separate entities and I usually try to address them as such. I should have said that the shadows in the screenshot looked baked on, because of the softness of them. The lighting may or may not be dynamic, but I don't have my hopes up that it will be dynamic (or that the game will run at 60fps).

If you look down on the tarmac, do you see yourself?