60fps (and 1080p to some extent) limit GT5

[petalpusher6]

What does outsourcing the work to India have to do with anything as long as it gets done?

True the car model detail is high but considering how fast they drop to lower LoD I personally give it much less weight (although for photomode quite nice).

Again though, is it worth bragging rights that you made such high quality models when they end up hurtinng your game play?

Isn't that really a BAD decision and not a brag worthy one?

The reason is quite simple..Turn10 staff doesn't model any cars in the developpement process so they can do something else. But this is not the same level of expertise you get by outsourcing and we can see the result (amongst other technical reasons).

Again, displaying that kind of models has no impact on the framerate. Just start a race with a lot of standard cars, you ll get the same framedrop in some scenarios. SPU's can handle that kind of polycount just fine, with some culling.

 

[Devedander]

The reason is quite simple..Turn10 staff doesn't model any cars in the developpement process. But this is not the same level of expertise you get by outsourcing and we can see the result (amongst other technical reasons).

Again, displaying that kind of models has no impact on the framerate. Just start a race with a lot of standard cars, you ll get the same framedrop in some scenarios. SPU's can handle that kind of polycount just fine, by some culling.

Well considering all the issues with models if you look in the bugs glitches thread it seems in house only modeling isn't exactly flawless... so while it's easy to say T10 outsourced and blame all their problems on it, what about PD who didn't outsource (that we know of) but still has plenty of problems?

As for LoD regardless of how much it affects frame rate, my question honestly is, outside of photomode, do you ever really see the benefit?

 

[JBturbo]

The reason is quite simple..Turn10 staff doesn't model any cars in the developpement process so they can do something else. But this is not the same level of expertise you get by outsourcing and we can see the result (amongst other technical reasons).

Again, displaying that kind of models has no impact on the framerate. Just start a race with a lot of standard cars, you ll get the same framedrop in some scenarios. SPU's can handle that kind of polycount just fine, with some culling.

I wonder what the poly count of the premium models is. It must be in the region of 250,000 or so. It's not a small amount anyway, it will have some bearing on the performance, even a small one.

Drawcalls are where it's at. I'm willing to bet the premiums have a crapload of them.

Edit: And if my job was solely to model cars, and I had the relevant design drawings and reference images, I reckon I could have a premium fully modelled and textured within a month.

 

[petalpusher6]

Cause you are focusing on GT issues. I garantee you turn10 models (but that's just a fair example i don't have anything against forza) has a lot more glitch and cheap way to model cars. Just a picture to illustrate :

Yes i can see the difference between GT models, and forza models, shift, etc.. I think everybody can. At least the ones who can see the difference between 30 and 60 fps, i guess.

 

[Devedander]

Cause you are focusing on GT issues. I garantee you turn10 models (but that's just a fair example i don't have anything against forza) has a lot more glitch and cheap way to model cars. Just a picture to illustrate :



Yes i can see the difference between GT models, and forza models, shift, etc.. I think everybody can. At least the ones who can see the difference between 30 and 60 fps, i guess.

For one thing, lighting engine makes a huge difference... what you do with lighting and shaders has a lot more to do with final result than strict poly count. It's like digital cameras constantly pushing higher MP when really picture quality depends so little on MP after a certain level.

You have also cherry picked a pretty bad one in a bad situation for FM3. There are plenty of good looking cockpits in FM also

and plenty of ugly ones in GT5 (in fact many of them have blurry dials which I attribute in large to the non native resolution stretching).

As for more glitches and problems... perhaps... it would be interesting to count and compare but I can certainly say GT5 shows the whole "keep it in house for perfection" argumen to be fundamentally flawed.

And the quetion still remains does that have to do with outsourcing to India or would we have seen the same results from in house modelers? Is the outsource to india and the level of final product causation or correlation issue?

Again looking at the kinds of flaws in GT5 it points to in house not being infallible either.

 

[petalpusher6]

I wonder what the poly count of the premium models is. It must be in the region of 250,000 or so. It's not a small amount anyway, it will have some bearing on the performance, even a small one.

Drawcalls are where it's at. I'm willing to bet the premiums have a crapload of them.

Edit: And if my job was solely to model cars, and I had the relevant design drawings and reference images, I reckon I could have a premium fully modelled and textured within a month.

250 000 poly for each car ? in real time? in 2010? LOL

Turn10 models has 200 k poly in menu screen (or in doctored images). Divide this by almost ten in game.
Ingame gt and forza should pull 30-40k for each different models. GT is maybe reaching 50k ingame but nowhere near 250 000.
8 different cars is already a load of poly, something like 500k.
For example the best character model on this gen on all consoles, is Nathan Drake in Uncharted and it's 35k..(this model has been extracted from the disk) just to put some perspective. We are not yet in the region of millions of poly in real world, real time rendering situations.

 

[JBturbo]

250 000 poly for each car ? in real time? in 2010? LOL

Turn10 models has 200 k poly in menu screen. Divide this by almost ten in game.
Ingame gt and forza should pull 30-40k for each different models. GT is maybe reaching 50k ingame but nowhere near 250 000.
8 different cars is already a load of poly, something like 500k.
For example the best character model on this gen on all consoles, is Nathan Drake in Uncharted and it's 35k..(this model has been extracted from the disk)

GT5 prologues were 200,000 each.

Project gotham were between 80,000-100,000

In Dead rising the peak poly count is about 4 million.

Lair on the PS3 streamed up to 134 million in memory.

250,000 is certainly realistic, and throughout my life modelling various things, that's how many I'd need to model the premium cars how they are modelled.

 

[petalpusher6]

LOL

i don't think you realize what kind of nonsense you just wrote..

Transformers movie for example is mostly 3D CGi movie with farms of computer who renders image one by one (some for hours).

The best model of this movie is Optimus prime with 1,8 Million polygones. Most of the others have at least half, some are under the million polygon.

So you are basically saying, in video game, IN REAL TIME RENDERING, we get about the same polycount than in Hollywood CG movie.

Please stop. Seriously, your previous thoughts about framerates are already embarrasing enough.

 

[JBturbo]

LOL

i don't think you realize what kind of nonsense you just wrote..

Transformers movie for example is mostly 3D CGi movie with farms of computer who renders image one by one (some for hours).

The best model of this movie is Optimus prime with 1,8 Million polygones. Most of the others have at least half, some are under the million polygon.

So you are basically saying, in video game, IN REAL TIME RENDERING, we get about the same polycount than in Hollywood CG movie.

Please stop. Seriously, your previous thoughts about framerates are already embarrasing enough.

Now tell me, what process do you have in CG rendering that you don't have in games.

 

[dhandeh]

This quickly turned into a forza v gt thread! For me, if the shadows were sorted i would be content with the graphics.

 

[petalpusher6]

A small little detail. In CG you have clouds of supercomputers to render AN image in any time you want.

In video game rendering you have one small piece of hardware in the 300$ range and you have to render 60 frames per second.

This is really a small detail, i think you are missing here. Even if you can't see by yourself than computer generated models are light years ahead what we have on a video game.

The process of creating a model for offline rendering and real time rendering, is like..a different job in fact too.

 

[JBturbo]

A small little detail. In CG you have clouds of supercomputers to render AN image in any time you want.

In video game rendering you have one small piece of hardware in the 300$ range and you have to render 60 frames per second.

This is really a small detail, i think you are missing here. Even if you can't see by yourself than computer generated models are light years ahead what we have on a video game.

The process of creating a model for offline rendering and real time rendering, is like..a different job in fact too.

“We had maybe 300 polygons in a car in the first game. Now we have about 500,000 polygons in each car. Back then, pieces of the car were more like symbols. Now they are real and reflect light.”

Quote from Kaz.

Knock half off for obvious reasons.

 

[petalpusher6]

They sure have 500k models, as i said for travel mode (that's why it takes several second to render when you shot the picture, this is not real time rendering anymore) and for PS4 already. Turn10 has also 200k something models for the menu.

Ingame. NO.

 

[HeadsoupBob]

...

 

[JBturbo]

They sure have 500k models, as i said for travel mode (that's why it takes several second to render when you shot the picture, this is not real time rendering anymore) and for PS4 already. Turn10 has also 200k something models for the menu.

Ingame. NO.

Hence why I didn't say I'd need 500,000, I said I'd need 250,000. If you ever did some modelling you'd realise why that's neccessary.

 

[Devedander]

Back to the original topic, I must be in the minority but I completely agree with JBturbo. I just think 30fps needs to be the target minimum, not the target average, then it's fine. GT5 struggles to keep it's 60fps average and has massive tearing issues, and btw the replays are in 30fps anyway and no one complains they're slow...
30fps is just a lot closer to the noticeable region if the framerate drops, 60fps has a bigger buffer.

Actually every time I look at a replay I notice very much the dropped framerate... especially if I have recently played a 60fps game.

Replays have a ton of extra effects turned on however and they are not gameplay in which you are controlling and playing anything so it's easier to focus on pretty than framerate.

So I don't think the 30fps replay argument holds much merrit here...

 

[blaaah]

LOL

i don't think you realize what kind of nonsense you just wrote..

Transformers movie for example is mostly 3D CGi movie with farms of computer who renders image one by one (some for hours).

The best model of this movie is Optimus prime with 1,8 Million polygones. Most of the others have at least half, some are under the million polygon.

So you are basically saying, in video game, IN REAL TIME RENDERING, we get about the same polycount than in Hollywood CG movie.

Please stop. Seriously, your previous thoughts about framerates are already embarrasing enough.

Well the point i get from this is that it's not all about graphics, as Transformers was the worst film ever to have been made in the history of the moving-image story telling format. It would have been a far better film if the characters were all puppets made by children and they were holding them to animate them.

 

[Wolfe]

The prevalence of 30fps is one thing I've always disliked about so many Xbox 360 games. I would always rather have lower-quality graphics at a higher framerate -- it simply looks better in the end, at least to me. I think anti-aliasing is a waste of processing power, too.

On the topic of GT5 and 60fps, for the first time in a racing game I found I preferred the exterior view, simply because the framerate improved significantly and I could actually tell how fast I was going. The sense of speed is greatly improved by a proper framerate, and for some reason even the bumper-cam in standard cars chokes up the hardware (why???).

 

[ikarys]

Well the point i get from this is that it's not all about graphics, as Transformers was the worst film ever to have been made in the history of the moving-image story telling format. It would have been a far better film if the characters were all puppets made by children and they were holding them to animate them.

Have you seen the mechanic in Transformers? HUBBAHUBBA!

 

[SirDrexl]

Wow, I can't believe people are arguing over whether 60fps is noticeable. Just for the sake of curiosity, are there any games out there that run at 30fps but have motion blur that can fool you into thinking they run at 60fps? I know LittleBigPlanet has motion blur, but to me it looks like a blurred 30fps rather than 60fps.

Although, as stated before, there is more to 60fps than just smoothness. Notice that fighting games remain at 60fps because they depend on very precise timing. There is a contingent that actually counts frames to determine optimal timing for combos and such.

 

[infamousDee]

As for LoD regardless of how much it affects frame rate, my question honestly is, outside of photomode, do you ever really see the benefit?

Yes, as a matter of fact we do.

 

[Devedander]

Yes, as a matter of fact we do.

Yes I overlooked replay mode... however I am not convinced that even that is the highest level model available and at that it's wasted as you can see lack of detail due to resolution in almost any circumstances before lack of detail due to poly count...

 

[highlifeGT]

I see some ridiculous explanations here about what our brain perceives, what is an acceptable frame rate for a racing game, etc. So I'll inject my 2 cents and see if it ruffles anyone's feathers.

I can absolutely tell the difference between 60fps and 30fps. Sometimes I feel as though I am the only one though. After a while, I think most gamers will encounter a game that brags about running at 60fps. Some playstation games' boxes bragged about running at 30fps (Wipeout). But we're now at the point where demanding 60fps in a game is reasonable. -Yes I agree with some other posts here, and will admit its not always practical, but I want my GT5 experience as fluid as possible, and I DO prefer 60fps.

I can take a good guess as to why PD decided to run GT5 in 1080p (at the expense of frame rate drops, and choppy replays)...Televisions.
Sony's mid-range and high end TV's can now fix frame rate hicups to a certain extent. I realized this when I purchased a new Sony 240hz 3d tv. As most everyone has realized, the replay's overall frame rate is much less than the race itself when displayed on most standard 60hz tv's. However, after turning on a feature called MotionFlow to "smooth" mode on my TV, the TV fills in the frames between each that are displayed and fools your eyes into thinking its running at a much higher frame rate. In essence, the intro of GT5, and all the replays look as though they're running at 60fps now. Google: Sony MotionFlow technology and "interpolation" for a better run down on this...And if your picky about frame rate issues, get a TV from sony or samsung that do this effect the best (120hz, 240hz models are ussually the ones that have interpolation featured under the alias "TruMotion", or "MotionFlow", etc.)
That solved my gripe about the choppy replays.

The MotionFlow effect on my TV is appreciated most during replays, but it helped with in-game racing as well. -VERY VERY smooth. My guess is that this feature is the ONLY reason GT5 can run decently in 3D mode.
3D mode is a different story altogether though, and I wont get into the details. -a bit choppy, but certainly playable. -not my cup of teat though. Still...props for PD for making a 1080p game of this caliber that runs in 3d. It is a very cool experience. = )

So after noticing all the fancy effects the new tv's do, I'd have to say I dont blame Kaz for insisting GT5 run in 1080p (and optional in 3D). In a way, it resulted in me seeking out a new TV. Merry Christmas.

 

[Devedander]

I can absolutely tell the difference between 60fps and 30fps. Sometimes I feel as though I am the only one though. After a while, I think most gamers will encounter a game that brags about running at 60fps. Some playstation games' boxes bragged about running at 30fps (Wipeout). But we're now at the point where demanding 60fps in a game is reasonable. -Yes I agree with some other posts here, and will admit its not always practical, but I want my GT5 experience as fluid as possible, and I DO prefer 60fps.

One reason 60FPS is important now while 30FPS was pretty good back in the day is display size and resolution.

The inherent issue with representing fluid motion with a series of still images is the shutter effect where while your eye cannot necessarily discern each frame individually, it CAN detect the gaps between where objects are drawn between frames.

So in real life in a 1/10 second you see a smooth smear, in a game you see several staggered images kind of ghosted on top of each other and you can detect the gaps between where they were each frame even if you can't pick out an idividual frame.

As the screen gets bigger, these gaps become larger. On a 19 inch screen the gap might be .5 inches, however blow that same image up to 50 inches and suddenly that gap is over 1 inch of a jump between frames.

Add onto this the increase in resolution means that there are discernable gaps in smaller movements. At 480p there are only 480 lines of resolution so moving 1/480th of a screen means it only moves 1 pixel and no gap. But on a 1080p set moving 1/1080th of the screen is necessary to not have a gap between pixels displaying a moving object. In other words the same object moving on a 480p screen could appear very smooth as it transitions from each pixel to the one adjacent, however on a 1080 screen the same speed movement will produce at least 2 pixels of blank between each frame as the same object moves.

People are now also sitting relatively closer to their displays. While it was not abnormal to sit across the room from a 19 inch TV, people now regularly sit 6 feet from a 50 inch display.

All of these together work to make shutter effect and unfluid motion more detectable. The solution is higher framerate.

The MotionFlow effect on my TV is appreciated most during replays, but it helped with in-game racing as well. -VERY VERY smooth. My guess is that this feature is the ONLY reason GT5 can run decently in 3D mode.
3D mode is a different story altogether though, and I wont get into the details. -a bit choppy, but certainly playable. -not my cup of teat though. Still...props for PD for making a 1080p game of this caliber that runs in 3d. It is a very cool experience. = )

So after noticing all the fancy effects the new tv's do, I'd have to say I dont blame Kaz for insisting GT5 run in 1080p (and optional in 3D). In a way, it resulted in me seeking out a new TV. Merry Christmas.

I kind of doubt this is a major reason why less than 60FPS was acceptable... first off 120 hz TVs with interpolation are not terribly prevalent. 60hz sets are still regularly on sale at most retailers and I doubt the infiltration rate of 120hz sets is very high yet.

Secondly many users wouldn't know how to turn it on even if they do have it. I still come across people who have 55 inch LCD TVs and are running composite cables to it or think that just becuase a show says "Broadcast in HD" they are seeing it in HD even on their old CRT TV.

Lastly it may be differnt on mine, but I have an LG with Trumotion and a large part of the interpolation is it looks to smooth out natural motion. This means it also looks for the motion blur that exists in all real motion to help interpolate the movement. Since many games have no motion blur, the engine cannot work as well. On my set, the trumotion on does very little if anything to alleviate the framerate issues during actual racing and actually brings in a lot of image artifact issues.

You will notice with any of the 120hz interpolation algorythms that fast motion around a static image (think turning quickly while looking at the crosshairs in a FPS) causes distortion and macro blocking around that area.

 

[SirDrexl]

That motion plus feature is going to cause input lag because the TV has to wait for the next frame in order to process and display the interpolated frame in between. That negates the advantage of the higher framerate from a physics standpoint.

Whether you'll be able to tell the difference, that will vary from person to person.

 

[Metfanant]

The frame rate is important, its "1080p" that should have been sacrificed. GT5 would have been much better off going for native 720p@60fps

 

[GTRL_Junior]

720p@60fps is the perfect resolution and it would have been much much better. So smooth. I understand to a certain point that they one to be 1080p HD all the way but, 720p for racing is just the right resolution in order to run 60fps. Who cares about 1080p, some of us wouldn't even know whether it's running on 720p or 1080p.

 

[Devedander]

The frame rate is important, its "1080p" that should have been sacrificed. GT5 would have been much better off going for native 720p@60fps

Bear in mind that 720p 60 would have required some cuts still because currently in 720p the game uses 4XMSAA which bring the framerates in 720p mode pretty close to inline with 1080.

I would think they coudl have turned that down more but whether they could have hit 60fps solidly even then (let alone with vsync on) is questionable.

PD really overstepped their resources on this project, which in my mind is a pretty big mistake.

 

[Metfanant]

Bear in mind that 720p 60 would have required some cuts still because currently in 720p the game uses 4XMSAA which bring the framerates in 720p mode pretty close to inline with 1080.

I would think they coudl have turned that down more but whether they could have hit 60fps solidly even then (let alone with vsync on) is questionable.

PD really overstepped their resources on this project, which in my mind is a pretty big mistake.

agreed, but there are many things that could have been done to fix a lot of the problems in this game...

Sony has a few first party devs that are really pushing the boundaries in using the PS3's hardware...Currently PD is not at the top of that list. They could have taken a few more techniques from the guys at Naughty Dog, Guerilla Games, and Sony Santa Monica (though Santa Monica does get a "special thanks" in the credits)

As for an AA solution, Sony includes MLAA standard in their new dev kits for the PS3, and both Santa Monica, and Guerilla are using it in their games (God of War III, and Killzone 3)...Now anyone that has seen GoW, and seen some of the videos of KZ3 can tell you that the MLAA is VASTLY superior to what PD is running in GT5.

The biggest benefit to the MLAA technique that Santa Monica has really pushed however is not even its on-screen effect, but instead that the whole process is offloaded to a single SPU on the Cell to handle. The dev dedicates an SPU to JUST work on the AA implementation. The SPU's are VERY good at these calculations, and it frees up the RSX to work just on rendering the pixels on screen....The problem however, is that with GT5 being in development for so long they could have been too far into the game to swap out the entire AA solution and make even the deadline that they did.

I truly think that dropping to native 720p, going with an MLAA technique and possibly allowing the Sony ICE team (housed within Naughty Dog Studios) to lend some serious optimization help would have allowed this game to nail 720p@60fps with better shadow effects, and less screen tearing.

At the end of the day PD (and honestly just about all of the Japanese Developers this generation) have fallen off pace in terms of pushing the current hardware to its limits...and because this game was allowed to be "polished" up until the absolute last minute, it seems that there was little time for such outside help.

 

[GTRL_Junior]

Metfanant great write up mate!!! I agree with you 100%/