Why do GT games look so freakin good?

[one]

So I guess you find the background in this GT5 shot very accurate, photo realistic and technically impressive:

http://images.gamersyde.com/gallery/public/6171/1316_0011.jpg

Likewise, the two quad trees in this shot represent the height of realism to you:

http://images.gamersyde.com/gallery/public/5975/1316_0018.jpg

But, you find PGR4's expansive environments, slick motion blur, weather effects and mass overdraw not technically impressive. Interesting.

Unfortunately the lack of better HDR lighting and shadows in PGR4 makes the environment somewhat drab and unreal. At least they should add some more light blooms on the edges of buildings.
http://www.gamersyde.com/gallery_6182_en.html
http://www.gamersyde.com/gallery_6116_en.html
I guess it conflicts with their use of photo textures on buildings as they don't support a different time of day.

 

[Obakan]

What makes GT 5 look good? In my opinion the cars,
the cars are very well done, they look very realistic but thats all.
The environment and the reflection on the mirrors looks very outdated.
What makes a racing game look very good? IMO The cars and especially the envrionments, IMO GT 5 has 1 out of 2 and doesnt succed to impress me.

 

[one]

What makes GT 5 look good? In my opinion the cars,
the cars are very well done, they look very realistic but thats all.
The environment and the reflection on the mirrors looks very outdated.
What makes a racing game look very good? IMO The cars and especially the envrionments, IMO GT 5 has 1 out of 2 and doesnt succed to impress me.
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa4/Obakan/gran-turismo-5.jpg

Odd, the particular image you posted doesn't give me the typical CG-ish vibe often seen in video games and is very naturally integrated with cars. What's wrong with that image except for the mirror the dev confirmed it's WIP?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The tyre-wall looks pretty rubbish. But I think that's totally by-the-way, because immediately one's eye is drawn to the car and it looks real. Perfectly, fantastically, amazingly real. Who then takes their eyes from that motor to eyeball a stack of tyres?

I do think damage has become quite important now for the visual side. Watching movies of Prologue, it looks totally out of place to have cars bashing into each other with no visible impact. The breaks the illusions more than anything at the moment IMO.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Damage should have been there last gen to. Even nfs4 had fairly decent damage models and that is from around the start of last gen.

 

[one]

The tyre-wall looks pretty rubbish. But I think that's totally by-the-way, because immediately one's eye is drawn to the car and it looks real. Perfectly, fantastically, amazingly real. Who then takes their eyes from that motor to eyeball a stack of tyres?

I do think damage has become quite important now for the visual side. Watching movies of Prologue, it looks totally out of place to have cars bashing into each other with no visible impact. The breaks the illusions more than anything at the moment IMO.

You can see how the walls look in reality in these Super GT videos at Suzuka, they look less detailed than the game :smile:

http://supergt.jp/newsmovie/mov2006/0601move.htm
http://supergt.jp/newsmovie/mov2006/0606move.htm
http://supergt.jp/newsmovie/mov2007/0701move.htm
http://supergt.jp/newsmovie/mov2007/0706move.htm

I agree they need damage, crash scenes in these real race movies are highlights of them unfortunately for racers. They need more realistic smoke too.

 

[Acert93]

At least they should add some more light blooms on the edges of buildings.
http://www.gamersyde.com/gallery_6182_en.html
http://www.gamersyde.com/gallery_6116_en.html
I guess it conflicts with their use of photo textures on buildings as they don't support a different time of day.

The camera in the shots you are looking at already adjusted to the sun light levels (PGR3 had a strong emphasis on iris effect where bleeding and overbright are most prominent when first being hit by the sunlight and quickly fadding to normal saturation and bloom levels). When playing the game when you go from a darker area (either from under a bridge or turn from facing away then toward the sun) you do get bloom&bleeding on the buildings which quickly disappears as your "eyes adjust". You can see this in the recent video at Gamersyde even. Notably on the bridge with the AMAZING looking vette.

And again... if you want to talk about PGR3/4, there is a thread right at the top of the Console Games forum!

 

[ihamoitc2005]

in-game

Yes, PGR3 does look like that in-game.

I looked at all gamespot in-game pictures and videos and they do not look like that great. I also have friend who has the game and I played it many months ago and it did not look great in-game (driving mode). Best graphics is during car selection.

 

[ihamoitc2005]

15%

30fps and 720p aren't going to do much for environment detail (asset quality, variety, density) or car model complexity, lighting model, shadows, etc. 30fps makes a difference in gameplay of course, but you really are just hitting checkboxes right now more than talking about the environments in GT5. I have a number of PC racers, and running them at 2Mpixels with 4xMSAA doesn't really improve their environments. It may make them sharper, but it doesn't magically add loads of detail or improve the textures, lighting, shadowing, etc.

You misunderstand my friend. I mean opposite. PGR3 is drawing 15% of GT5P pixels so they have much more shader time for lighting and more bandwidth for textures no? So mediocre look is disappointing. Probably PGR4 will make big improvements.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

I looked at all gamespot in-game pictures and videos and they do not look like that great. I also have friend who has the game and I played it many months ago and it did not look great in-game (driving mode). Best graphics is during car selection.

The environments do look like that in game. Photomode AFAIK only gives more AA\AF etc, same textures.

 

[ihamoitc2005]

In-game

The environments do look like that in game. Photomode AFAIK only gives more AA\AF etc, same textures.

I cannot find any in-game (driving mode) screenshots that look like that.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

I cannot find any in-game (driving mode) screenshots that look like that.

That would be because when your driving, you going at high speed which equals lots of blur, and your rarely focusing on the environment when taking shots.

If i find my digital cam, il take some pgr3 pictures later today

 

[Cyan]

GT5 graphics aren't that impressive altogether but the cars and lighting are awesome.

Which I find unique about GT graphics is that they are great, fabulous, for what they do since they are primarily the result of the aforementioned factors.., but they are only a piece of the picture.

What's more, I'm quite impressed with the fact that this game runs smoothly at 60 fps and 1080p with up to 16 cars on screen. I'd rather prefer 720p and better mirrors, other minor details polished, though.

These features come at a prize, since 60 fps plus great cars models require a lot of processiong power and calculations to display, and I wouldn't expect PGR4/NFS graphics. In fact, on the whole PGR4 graphics are more down to earth because, as joker454 already pointed out in a different thread, 720p should be the standard this generation except for some specific games such as PSN and XBLA games.

It happened to Forza 2, it has ok graphics -it's only superior to GT5 in realtime reflections, other than that it's not- but the graphics, objectively, are inferior to a launch title known as PGR3. The 60 fps feature took a hit on textures and detail but it's for me and unnegotiable feature in sim racers.

Other than that, FM2 is a boring, VERY boring game.

Honestly, [SIZE=-1]what was once something I was enjoying and enthusiastic about is now so uninteresting and menial to the point that I cannot stand it.

I even wrote a long guide -not in this forum- but to me the hard work didn't worth it.

I was so hyped, so enthusiastic about FM2 that it made me hate cars' games. I expect a long hiatus after I play one of these games -if it's not arcade- again.

My point is that GT series are great games, added to that that they are average sims and they excel at two key features for this type of games, which I named at the beginning of this post, so it has some charisma and personality.

GT HD sneakily got away with GC-Xbox-PS2 gen physics, and reworked ps2 game assets, but looks like GT5 is going to be not only a great game, as usual, but a good sim.

Graphics wise, hmmmm, Bizarre are also unique and PGR is all about the fun and graphics, so I wouldn't say it's the best looking racing game out there. Perhaps in my Top 3 list

Joshua Luna, welcome back.
[/SIZE]

 

[Nesh]

About the 60fps at 1080p mode I have to agree. I dont know if its really worth it. How much difference will it make?

How many of us can enjoy 1080p graphics? Even the majority of HD displays I ve seen output at 1080i.

Does it really worth it at the end aiming for such resolutions? The typical consumer probably doesnt even know how to set their consoles at higher resolutions, or even know they can. Such resolutions which Sony is using as marketing are only appealing to a select few. People that know about technology, search for the appropriate information and own the right displays.

Timmy, Bobby, Tommy, Johny will most likely be impressed at a more detailed GT5 running at 60fps and 720p than a less detailed 60fps 1080p GT5 that needs a state of the art HD display and I wouldnt find it strange if even the select few would have been more impressed with the first case.

PGR4 manages that detail because of lower resolutions and lower framerates. Yet what PD achieved with GT5 proloque so far at 60fps and 1080p is nothing short of amazing and I can only imagine what they could have done if they choose to target 720p resolutions. It would have offered more room for more detailed trees to be applied easier as well as other details.

At the end the everyday person may not be able to appreciated what is actually hidden in GT like better framerates and higher resolution but more detailed backrounds and effects are easier to notice and appreciate in games such as PGR4. This is already apparent in the forum when people compare images of both games. Images are telling a different story than what is actually there.

 

[djskribbles]

What makes GT 5 look good? In my opinion the cars,
the cars are very well done, they look very realistic but thats all.
The environment and the reflection on the mirrors looks very outdated.
What makes a racing game look very good? IMO The cars and especially the envrionments, IMO GT 5 has 1 out of 2 and doesnt succed to impress me.

ugh, enough with the mirrors... they're obviously not finished yet.

to me, the car models are the most important thing. when you're racing, you're mainly concentrated on the vehicles, not the environments. the only time you get to enjoy the environments is when you're on a straightaway and you can look at the pretty scenery.

 

[Nesh]

And it is not that the environments are bad either. There arent much in the real life racing tracks to begin with anyways.

Aliasing also didnt help much. If you check high res images of the tracks released some years back by PD vs real photos of the same tracks you could be fooled.

There are other stages in GT4 though that look outstanding like the New York stage.

 

[ihamoitc2005]

moving car

That would be because when your driving, you going at high speed which equals lots of blur, and your rarely focusing on the environment when taking shots.

If i find my digital cam, il take some pgr3 pictures later today

I will like to see your shots. But what is important is that those shots are taken in moving vehicles. Rallisport had a feature where when you stopped the car or became slow the environment detail is added. Rallisport 2 they had this feature but it was not so obvious. Probably PGR3 also does this because all in-game shots (driving mode) even buildings not blurred look not so great.

 

[ihamoitc2005]

not 1080i

How many of us can enjoy 1080p graphics? Even the majority of HD displays I ve seen output at 1080i.

Very few displays have 1080i "output". Only old CRT based TVs. All LCDs and Plasmas are either 1080P or 720P. None are 1080i.

 

[Kfyh]

About the 60fps at 1080p mode I have to agree. I dont know if its really worth it. How much difference will it make?

How many of us can enjoy 1080p graphics? Even the majority of HD displays I ve seen output at 1080i.

Does it really worth it at the end aiming for such resolutions? The typical consumer probably doesnt even know how to set their consoles at higher resolutions, or even know they can. Such resolutions which Sony is using as marketing are only appealing to a select few. People that know about technology, search for the appropriate information and own the right displays.

I hate people who doubt 1080p(@60Hz) for some "hypothetically" better game, Gran Turismo 5 is real and looks stunning. I don't believe it is a matter of how many people can enjoy it, but more something for the few that can enjoy it. I remember seeing a video where developer had a 40" lcd on their desks (maybe one foot from the screen) testing out the game. GT4 had lots of little features for the few. I remember gettting a few lcd screens together (two dell 24" and a samsung 22") and setting them up so i could play gt4 across 3 monitors. Not many people could build a setup like that (you also need 3 ps2s and 3 copies of the game) but trying that out for a day was sweet. If we really wanted to make games for the mass market, all we'd get are movie franchise games, puzzle games and lego star wars.

At the end the everyday person may not be able to appreciated what is actually hidden in GT like better framerates and higher resolution but more detailed backrounds and effects are easier to notice and appreciate in games such as PGR4.

At the end of the day, not everyone appreciates Gran 'Turismo. I don't believe the game is going for the "Fast and the Furious" crowd who looks fancy motion blur, light streaks, big crashes etc. I think its more for the track day crowds. People who like taking their car out to a race track to see how far they can push the car, how different cars feel on the same track, what driving techniques and car tweaks they can do to make it go faster.

After all that i thought i'd ask a question, that's more on topic.

How big a difference is 720p to 1080p?

To clarify, assuming the viewer is close enough the see the difference in resolution, how far away would the game's camera have to be from the a car's door before the edge of the car door disappears and the car blends with the panel beside it (ie. the gap is less than a pixel)? For 1080p? For 720p?

 

[Laa-Yosh]

It must be cool to be one of the selected few...