Why does Grand Turismo 4 look so incredibly good
- Thread starter Cheezdoodles
- Start date
Indeed especially the last WRC looked brilliant. All WRC games on the PS2 had HUGE draw distances. They ahve made an incredible job on such an outdated piece of hardware
TurnDragoZeroV2G
Regular
With such a system, we could ALMOST rate a game's graphics strictly mathematically. Say, 100 points for Displacement mapping, less for parallax mapping, next to nill for normal mapping. Right? It would be awesome. So concrete!
(nevermind any kind of 'efficiency' regarding how effective the visuals are versus the tech used. It's the good ol' engineering debate, no doubt.
)
This one?
http://videos.streetfire.net/category/Video+Game+Racing/0/22792F1E-2203-4A88-8F9F-178230E9544E.htm
GTR Laptime : 8'22"3
GTR in-game Laptime: 8'22"3
No, that's not the one (although it's a nice one). The one I saw had the picture-in-picture completely synchronised on the track so that you saw the same thing at the same moment at all times both in game and in the real recording, and had the same weather and season conditions.
standing ovation
Regular
Ah, Test Drive Le Mans. It is the Mona Lisa of driving games.
Gran Turismo is cinematic (strikingly cinematic actually), but not as realistic.I think you may be confusing it with another Simulator (by Konami) called Enthusia or something. I remember such a video of that game
I dont think so, considering a generation is about twice the power each time.
Consider a 6800 ULTRA versus a 7800GTX.
Or a p4 1.5ghz vs a p4 3 ghz...
For GT I found this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8jzYwwDJas
This one is also interesting because you can see the steering: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72yyvNAU8Bg
Well if you're referring to graphics only (otherwise, 90% of racing games are "tunnel racers").repi said:
That said this is mostly subject of hw limits(particularly when you want to stream your courses) - typical tunnel racers of last generation (Outrun2, Burnouts) now have enough resources to render what "seems" like open enough environment, even though it never actually is.
I understand what you say about GT (and I agree, though more due to their physics then graphics). I would argue that the "tunnel" feel of their environments depends on how much optimization work needed to be done - there's some stages that were truly bad in GT3 particularly, but on the other hand you also have circuits in there that have completely open field of view.
i realise u were taking the piss but, yes u are correct, i have in fact sort of written up a chart (lighting/shading is the single most important thing contributing ~50% of the visual quality)
WRT displacement mapping + akin hacks your ratings are distorted, parallaxmapping is only very slightly better than normalmapping (its not this amazing technique thats far superior to normalmapping myth that some ppl make it out to be)
true i gave both extremes of the spectrum, but in doing so it does exagerate the differences
perhaps true but then again
tnt2 ->geforce1 (from memory might ie not be true, bumpmapping + more complicated texturecombiners, hardware t+l = 10x speed in polygon count, stencil shadows etc)
it certainly gave the artists much more to work with, ie an easier job.
gross generalization follows
or ps1->ps2->ps3. even the worse games of a generation look on par with best of the previous generation.
the best from previous generation prolly would have the best programmers + artists
the worse of the current would have the worst programmers + artists
yet they look roughly equal
right, except, even if you assume this is true, they weren't discussing the technology of different hardware generations at all. They were discussing software technologies, mostly on the same platform; i.e., why does GT look so much better than other PS2 racers, and almost as good as RSC for xbox, which in turn looks better than all the other xbox racers.
Also, wrt "tunnel racers", i have to agree with repi, but not to the same extent. I can certainly stand tunnel racers -- some of them are the best racers, and of course even a game like RSC2 has its roots in "tunneling", just a bit less so -- but all things being equal, of course I'd prefer wide open environs or even just the ability to randomly and severely crash off the track, and have the camera follow a piece of my brain matter (or other parts) over to the far side of the course.
That said, if I had worked most of my life to perfect a more dynamic racing environment, and stared at my own game and those of my competitors for years, I'm sure I'd be more of a hardliner on the subject like repi (or countless other devs who are passionate about their game design philosophies). wrt GT4, i know this is off topic, but I just wish more people would faithfully steal their gameplay -- especially on the PC market. A proper modding-&-racing GT game with plenty of mod tools would easily be my favorite PC game ever.
That's the one!
This one is also interesting because you can see the steering: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72yyvNAU8Bg[/QUOTE]
Yeah, neat one too. That's also how I play it, but then on widescreen of course.
Yeah, neat one too. That's also how I play it, but then on widescreen of course.
[/QUOTE]Derek Bell:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0M11GOVfA50&mode=related&search=
Check how Ickx is passing him, insane...
The_legend_of_drtre
Newcomer
Art Direction
Dedication
Time (GT4 was in development for 4 years)
Dedication
Time (GT4 was in development for 4 years)
Last edited by a moderator:
