SentinelQW
Newcomer
Uhhh, MY GOD!!! The Virtual Reality:
http://www.xboxfront.de/screenshots-727-1657-Project_Gotham_Racing_3.html
http://www.xboxfront.de/screenshots-727-1657-Project_Gotham_Racing_3.html
PGR 3 - Pictures and Framebuffer Discussion
- Thread starter SentinelQW
- Start date
scooby_dooby
Legend
so this is what replay mode looks like? WOW, I thought I had been nice and desensitized but man, those are SICK
!eVo!-X Ant UK
Banned
There nice but not great, the lighting stilll does'nt look right.
!eVo!-X Ant UK said:
Debbie Downer!
I like them. Although just like GT4, I won't be using Photo Mode that much, if at all.
Jon Brittan
Newcomer
By far the most important picture in that selection is this one:
http://www.xboxfront.de/daten/screenshots/bilder_17288.jpg
Look at the TVR with the colour blend in there.
TVR are one of the car manufacturers that make quite a lot of use of pearlescent paints, with the colour of the car changing depending upon the lighting and the angle it is looked at, they look fantastic on the road, but if they've managed to get that effect working cleanly and smoothly in the game it will be incredible and in a lot of ways a big graphical departure from what we've seen in racing games in the past.
http://www.xboxfront.de/daten/screenshots/bilder_17288.jpg
Look at the TVR with the colour blend in there.
TVR are one of the car manufacturers that make quite a lot of use of pearlescent paints, with the colour of the car changing depending upon the lighting and the angle it is looked at, they look fantastic on the road, but if they've managed to get that effect working cleanly and smoothly in the game it will be incredible and in a lot of ways a big graphical departure from what we've seen in racing games in the past.
You can see from these how hard nice flora is to produce. The cities don't look half bad, but the trees look extremely fake. Something for PGR4 I suppose.
Not at all difficult with SM3.0. Probably doable on SM2.0 if not earlier too, as you only need interpolate a colour based on dots and normals. I think the main reason it's not seen before in because there's not many materials in the world that change colour by angle!Jon Brittan said:
Vysez said:
PGR3 is the first game in the PGR series to have a Photo mode, like GT4 was the first for the GT series to have it.
Personally, i don't see the point. Yeah it's pretty but... I would hardly ever use it. I like to ride these things, not to take pictures of them!!
Vysez said:
Like L-B said, this game is the first in the PGR series to use it. Thinking about it now, if Photos from Online games can be taken and saved...then this can actually be pretty cool. Capture the more memorable moments in a race.
Which really strikes me as surprising. They're not using many polys for scenery in the trees. In the city pics most so far have looked to me like the usual box with building mapped on, which of course is all you need for buildings at a distance and blurred. It seems as though pretty much the entire poly budget was spent on the cars with not much left for detailed scenery (though I haven't looked closely enough at enough PGR3 pics to know for sure. Just haven't been struck so far with the level of scenery quality apart from a few special closeups). Here comes some speculative number crunching...
40,000 polys inside and out. As we don't see all of them, I'm guessing 20,000 visible polys per car. 8 cars = 160,000. Scenery doesn't appear to have anything like as many, except crowd scenes. Pie in the sky figure of anouter 20k. Let's say 200,000 triangles per frame. 30 fps (current speed) = 6 million triangles a second. Assuming they are keeping the poly levels lower as they try to reach 60 fps, if they make 60 then that's 12 million triangles a second.
Doesn't sound too next-gen yet. Do people agree or disagree with these figures? You reckon there's more than that? Does 10 ish million shaded triangles per second seem okay for Xenos, or should be getting much, much more than that in later games? And if so, what's the bottleneck in PGR3?
40,000 polys inside and out. As we don't see all of them, I'm guessing 20,000 visible polys per car. 8 cars = 160,000. Scenery doesn't appear to have anything like as many, except crowd scenes. Pie in the sky figure of anouter 20k. Let's say 200,000 triangles per frame. 30 fps (current speed) = 6 million triangles a second. Assuming they are keeping the poly levels lower as they try to reach 60 fps, if they make 60 then that's 12 million triangles a second.
Doesn't sound too next-gen yet. Do people agree or disagree with these figures? You reckon there's more than that? Does 10 ish million shaded triangles per second seem okay for Xenos, or should be getting much, much more than that in later games? And if so, what's the bottleneck in PGR3?
Last edited by a moderator:
Shifty, the problem your pointing is the thing that puzzles me the most about this whole "next-gen".
But the problem, for me, doesn't concern PGR3 alone, it concern almost each and every I game I saw until now...
Those new machines, on the paper, could handle, easy breezy, a lot more than 2M pps per frames at 60fps, and all that while those said surfaces are harboring complex materials.
Nevertheless, all I see, for the moment being is PS2+ level of geometry plus a shiny (shine) coat of normal mapping (APS)... Or sometime, nothing but the good old vertex shading (DOA...).
While the memory allocation and management argument could have been relevent if we were talking about having numerous, and each different, really high poly models.
This argument falls short to explain why we don't see no game with a (hell) lot more of procedural and/or repeated complex models.
Being able to push up to two digit Millions pps per frame and still being able to see vertex so easily without looking for them is puzzling.
But the problem, for me, doesn't concern PGR3 alone, it concern almost each and every I game I saw until now...
Those new machines, on the paper, could handle, easy breezy, a lot more than 2M pps per frames at 60fps, and all that while those said surfaces are harboring complex materials.
Nevertheless, all I see, for the moment being is PS2+ level of geometry plus a shiny (shine) coat of normal mapping (APS)... Or sometime, nothing but the good old vertex shading (DOA...).
While the memory allocation and management argument could have been relevent if we were talking about having numerous, and each different, really high poly models.
This argument falls short to explain why we don't see no game with a (hell) lot more of procedural and/or repeated complex models.
Being able to push up to two digit Millions pps per frame and still being able to see vertex so easily without looking for them is puzzling.
Similar threads
