Photorealistic Screens of MotoGP (X360)

[scooby_dooby]

those pics are pure crap compared to what I see on my HDTV

Thank you. And Shifty, enough with the arm-chair anaysis of games you haven't even played. If you had played MotoGP you would realize that despite the fact that you 'look at the road ahead' you would be completely unable to see very much detail at all on the road because of the speeds you're travelling. But hey, lets ignore that FACT and keep bitching about things that don't matter when you're actually playing the game. Screenshots are far more important.

"Uhhh, what are you talking about? Link to this supposed "hundreds of people" showing him it has jaggies? Kameo has virtually zero jaggies and is definitely using some amount of AA."

Hundreds of people, lmao. Like one guy with a cell phone taking pics from 3 inches away from the screen, and then half a dozen people who've never played tha game outside of a demo giving their expert airmchair anaysis. Kameo does have virtually zero jaggies, although there are certain rare places you can find them if you look hard enough.

 

[darkblu]

Thank you. And Shifty, enough with the arm-chair anaysis of games you haven't even played. If you had played MotoGP you would realize that despite the fact that you 'look at the road ahead' you would be completely unable to see very much detail at all on the road because of the speeds you're travelling. But hey, lets ignore that FACT and keep bitching about things that don't matter when you're actually playing the game. Screenshots are far more important.

scooby, there are no such ground speeds at which you would not be able to see clearly the outlines of the road at a sufficiently far distance ahead. actually that's why at high speeds you look at the road far ahead - 1st, you want to know ASAP what follows, and 2nd, the road in your immediat vicinity is a blurred mess.

again, for those real experts out there i'll explain in detail: the road close to you is a blurry mess. the road far in the distance is not. that's the effect known as parallax. that's why a plane in the sky may seem like turtling ahead whereas in fact it moves at 300+MPH.

now, pay real close attention to the shapshot of that dear-to-your heart bikes game we're discussing here. notice something? the road right in front of the cam is clear. the road in the distance is a blurry mess.

this, to emphasise for the real experts out there, is totally wrong with regard to any reality resemblance.

so before accusing everybody of disregarding your opinion, maybe your should check whether it holds?

 

[kyleb]

Thank you. And Shifty, enough with the arm-chair anaysis of games you haven't even played. If you had played MotoGP you would realize that despite the fact that you 'look at the road ahead' you would be completely unable to see very much detail at all on the road because of the speeds you're travelling. But hey, lets ignore that FACT and keep bitching about things that don't matter when you're actually playing the game. Screenshots are far more important.

Man I agreed that the screenshots are blurry as well, but all the same they are clear enough to plainly see the lack of AF. And seriously Scooby, go play a racer on a PC where you can toggle AF on and off and you will see exactly how patently absurd your argument here is.

"Uhhh, what are you talking about? Link to this supposed "hundreds of people" showing him it has jaggies? Kameo has virtually zero jaggies and is definitely using some amount of AA."
Hundreds of people, lmao. Like one guy with a cell phone taking pics from 3 inches away from the screen, and then half a dozen people who've never played tha game outside of a demo giving their expert airmchair anaysis. Kameo does have virtually zero jaggies, although there are certain rare places you can find them if you look hard enough.

You don't have to look hard at all, they are all over the place.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Man I agreed that the screenshots are blurry as well, but all the same they are clear enough to plainly see the lack of AF. And seriously Scooby, go play a racer on a PC where you can toggle AF on and off and you will see exactly how patently absurd your argument here is.

What argument? I've never said this has AF, needs AF, or doesn't need AF, all I said is the quality of the ground textures is not a big concern in this game, and that there's no point in judging anything from blurry screens.

Anyways, here's some better ingame screens:
http://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/774/774360/img_3640523.html
http://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/774/774360/img_3640529.htmlhttp://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/774/774360/img_3640523.html
http://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/774/774360/img_3640517.html

 

[_phil_]

even GTHD has AF.
http://www.gfdata.de/archiv05-2006-gamefront/01714.html

 

[London Geezer]

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=28578&page=7&highlight=kameo+AA
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=28578&page=8&highlight=kameo+AA

People forget what they want to forget very quickly when their favourite toy is involved...

Point is, some people here have no idea what AF and AA are, or what effects some HDTVs have on games, but still they lecture other people on it as if they know what they're talking about, only to try and defend their favourite toy.

 

[kyleb]

What argument? I've never said this has AF, needs AF, or doesn't need AF, all I said is the quality of the ground textures is not a big concern in this game...

No, you came in after others suggested that the game would benift from AF and claimed:

The game moves too damn fast for you to be able to make out any of this detail on the road...

Which is comically incorrect.

...and that there's no point in judging anything from blurry screens.

Yet what people here have been judging from the screens is that the game lacks AF, and as blurry as the shots are they are well clear enough to demonstrate that fact.

 

[Mintmaster]

What argument? I've never said this has AF, needs AF, or doesn't need AF, all I said is the quality of the ground textures is not a big concern in this game, and that there's no point in judging anything from blurry screens.

I don't buy it scooby. I've played many fast racing sims and can't stand the lack of AF. Starwars PodRacer from way back is also blazingly fast, and still needs AF.

It doesn't matter how fast you're travelling, because the road in the distance moves slowly on the screen. When you're setting up your lines, road lines are a very important visual marker for tracking exactly where you're heading and how to adjust.

Lack of AF is even more pronounced in the first person view or bumper cam, even though the road details are travelling down the screen faster due to a viewpoint closer to the gravel. Maybe it's the third person view that's skewing your judgement because you're looking where the bike is rather than where it's headed, which is all you can rely on on in first person because you can't really see your vehicle.

 

[joebloggs]

The promotional shots and the in-game footage look like two different games on two different systems from two different generations.

Status of buzz = killed.

 

[darkblu]

The promotional shots and the in-game footage look like two different games on two different systems from two different generations.

Status of buzz = killed.

and that pretty much sums up this thread.


ps: btw, _phil_, do you happen to know where one can get a GTHD trailer with the quality of those screenshots you linked to? i'm curious as i've never seen the whole footage PD presented.

 

[_phil_]

sorry ,no.

 

[sonyps35]

The promotional shots and the in-game footage look like two different games on two different systems from two different generations.

Status of buzz = killed.

Huh?

I'll say I was more excited over this game after playing the XBL Demo, not less. Quite impressed with the graphics. Especially when in a large pack of enemy riders.

Although, maybe I had not been following the screenshots 100% closely.

I put more stock in what it looks like in person anyway, and I was fairly impressed with Moto GP demo.

It also has kickass loud music and a lot of ragdoll physics when you wipe out.

Demo feels kind of buggy though, but that's to be expected.

People forget what they want to forget very quickly when their favourite toy is involved...

Pot/Kettle/black?

Interesting edit about AF though, since I started reading B3d forum posts about it, the lack of it began bothering me. Before then I never noticed at all.

It reminds me of a comment Kyle from Hardocp made about the texture shimmering issues on Nvidia cards. Something about "if you dont notice it currently, DO NOT go looking for it, because it might start to annoy you" or something to that effect.

But given that I didn't notice AF before forum topics like this one, I'm strongly betting that the average casual gamer looking at it on a Best Buy kiosk,, much less knowledgable than me, doesn't have a clue about it, so minmasters idea about devs not caring is probably right on. The Devs probably dont care because 99% of gamers probably never notice it or know what AF is.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Point is, some people here have no idea what AF and AA are, or what effects some HDTVs have on games, but still they lecture other people on it as if they know what they're talking about, only to try and defend their favourite toy.

My new x1300 says otherwise, but don't let me interrupt your little fantasy.

For the last time, this has nothing to do with it being a 360 game, if that's too difficult a concept to accept for some of you guys I could really give two [moderated].

Maybe the game needs AF, but everything looks pretty damn sharp on my TV with the exception of the road in the distance, while it would be nice to see that sharpened up, it's also not a big concern because the truth is this game moves so fast, and your bike accelerates so fast, that if you lower your vision to study that detail you'll probably crash, as such you never find yourself looking down at the road and always above it, at the corners, looking for lines. That's just my experience with the demo, and it has nothing to do with what console it's on, I won't be buying this game and was not overly impressed with the gfx, the backgrounds especially are lacking in detail.

 

[darkblu]

Maybe the game needs AF, but everything looks pretty damn sharp on my TV with the exception of the road in the distance, while it would be nice to see that sharpened up, it's also not a big concern because the truth is this game moves so fast, and your bike accelerates so fast, that if you lower your vision to study that detail you'll probably crash, as such you never find yourself looking down at the road and always above it, at the corners, looking for lines. That's just my experience with the demo, and it has nothing to do with what console it's on, I won't be buying this game and was not overly impressed with the gfx, the backgrounds especially are lacking in detail.

and to think of it i was dicussing racing sims with the guy in that gt thread..

boy am i stupid!

 

[London Geezer]

Maybe the game needs AF, but everything looks pretty damn sharp on my TV with the exception of the road in the distance, while it would be nice to see that sharpened up, it's also not a big concern because the truth is this game moves so fast, and your bike accelerates so fast, that if you lower your vision to study that detail you'll probably crash, as such you never find yourself looking down at the road and always above it, at the corners, looking for lines. That's just my experience with the demo, and it has nothing to do with what console it's on, I won't be buying this game and was not overly impressed with the gfx, the backgrounds especially are lacking in detail.

Well, when i play racing games i always look at the road far away because that'e the only way to see where i actually have to go. Looking at the backgrounds isn't enough, I actually have to see where the road is going.
But maybe i'm the only one...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

But maybe i'm the only one...

No. I'm embarrased to admit that I too look pretty much at the centre of the screen as to where the road ahead is going, and not looking at the crowds or buildings or my car. I guess that's two of us.

 

[ihamoitc2005]

Details

The promotional shots and the in-game footage look like two different games on two different systems from two different generations.

Status of buzz = killed.

Here maybe we can see what is triangles for motorbike. Is it 13,000+? In top corner there is little bit information.

http://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/774/774360/img_3564017.html

I think bikes have good look but I would like more detail for backgrounds. Bikes have new gen look but backgrounds have not so great old-gen look. Like Xbox1.5! But for real power Xbox360 is really very amazing (GPU has 10x power) so I do not know why they have this problem. Maybe developer needs only little bit more experience. I do now know. I think Test Drive has much better look.

 

[RobertR1]

On a bike on the track, you look at your point of entry from the exit of your previous corner, point of apex once you're close to the point of entry and then where you want to end up on the exit before you hit your apex. Racing is connecting the dots....corner to corner.

 

[Lysander]

 

[kyleb]

If you wanted to make a point with that post you really shouldn't have used excessively compressed and downsampled SD captures for the gameplay shots.