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

[HeadsoupBob]

...

 

[Metfanant]

This is what JBTurbo was talking about by noting that Motion Blur removes the 'choppiness,' essentially as does the truemotion effect. 30fps with motion blur should look no different to 60fps without it. Read JBturbo's first post again...

http://freespace.virgin.net/hugo.elias/graphics/x_motion.htm

the problem with 30fps+ motion blur is not how it looks but how it performs. When you are traveling at 200mph even the slightest mistakes can mean you crash.

30fps games inherently have nearly TWICE the input lag of 60fps games, and there is nothing developers can do about it, its just an inherent problem with halving the frame rate.

Also, for each frame that gets displayed on your TV, your car will have traveled twice as far on the road. If the optimal braking point exists between 30 second frames, you can never hit it, because you will never see it.

 

[Devedander]

This is what JBTurbo was talking about by noting that Motion Blur removes the 'choppiness,' essentially as does the truemotion effect. 30fps with motion blur should look no different to 60fps without it. Read JBturbo's first post again...

Essentially this:

http://freespace.virgin.net/hugo.elias/graphics/x_motion.htm

Of course input lag may become a problem if it is not implemented well.

30 FPS w/blur does not necessarily look the same as 60 FPS. It depends on the motion blur technique used and sometimes the blur can hurt more than it helps.

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.

Exaclty why super long dev times are not usually a good idea... you get left behind when new solutions come along.

 

[highlifeGT]

This post is in reply to Devedander

You really just need to see these Sony's running MotionFlow Pro to understand my point, mate. Personally, I feel Sony does the smooth motion effect the best of all the TV's. It never really cuts in n out like some of the other brands like LG or samsung, and this is precisely wy i went with sony; I heard they fixed alot of the issues with the technology behind the motion smoothing effects, and there aren't any more artifacts or ghost images to be seen. I've heard this used to be a problem on the older 120hz models. I have NOT noticed anything like that with this model I have: (Bravia HX800 46")
If you doubt my claims on the constant frame smoothing the new sony TV's are capable of, just go to an actual Sony style store and look at their latest offerings. -heck, ask em to put in GT5! I'm not a salesman, but I certainly like to recommend good products I have purchased. I bought it, turned it on, set MotionFlow to "smooth" in the menu, and when GT5 loaded up, I noticed a HUGE difference. The only way to describe it is saying that the game seems as though its running at a constant 60fps. Its a wonderful illusion.

Bottom line, I just couldn't stand seeing GT5 running choppy. The problem solved for me now. Its a shame there are so many people with mis-formed opinions on this Forum. you guys are missing out.

 

[petalpusher6]

All these kind of frame creation introduce lag and artefacts. Not good at all for videogames, it's designed for TV broadcast (still questionnable but very marketable..). All "game mode" on TV nowdays shut them off, for a reason..

 

[Blitz187]

I must be superman then, because i have no problem seeing the difference in frame rate on games like gt5 vs shift, cod vs bad company.. 60 fps is miles better in shooter games and racing games imo.

Agreed... Shift was horrible! A game of the calibre of GT should run in 1080P and 60fps... Period... No questions asked... anything less is just unacceptable... IMO they got the most important thing RIGHT in this game... The physics engine... 👍

 

[magic7]

When im Driving Sports car i used cockpit mode, doesn't make any difference on your framerate progress because of the accelartion of the vehicle and when im driving RBRX2010 or Le Mans Prototypes, i used bup cam view to hustle up the frame rate and experience the adrenaline @ full 60fps.

 

[CoolColJ]

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.

MLAA wouldn't work well for a driving game.
Too much movement on the screen for it to work properly.
What GT5 needs is supersampling to reduce the twinkling effect when you have lines at acute angles

 

[RedBaron]

I'm surprised that some people here have holes instead of eyes and can't appreciate perfectly fluid motion of GT5 in sixty frames per second. It's the thing that makes this game so playable and swifty.

 

[DanDiplo]

I'd recommend people read the Gran Turismo 5 Tech Analysis by Digital Foundry where they do a very thorough technical analysis of the game.

1. The game runs at 1280x1080 with 2x quincunx (QAA) at 1080p. Note that, despite what has been claimed in this thread, the 1080p spec only defines vertical resolution (horizontal is not stated, though usually implied by the aspect ratio).

2. GT5 isn't locked to 60 fps

3. High frame rates are mainly desirable to minimise input lag, not for visual reasons. I've been a PC gamer for many years, and the "feel" of 60fps compared to 30fps is huge. Even with TVs with slower response rates and fixed refresh the lag is still noticeable at lower rates.

4. The whole "eye cannot see more than 30 fps second" myth has been debunked many times.

5. PD spent a hell of lot of time and effort optimising their engine trying to achieve a frame-rate of around 60 fps. Do people really think they did this knowing that 30fps would have been identical? Honestly, don't you think they know a thing or two more than you?

"Speaking to PSM3 Magazine, Yamauchi said that the Polyphony engineers were constantly complaining about having to try and achieve a sustained frame rate at a resolution of 1080p, but that he thought it was important to try and get the game as smooth as possible. He was adamant that the dips wouldn't be frequent, just when there was a lot of things going on at once."

- The Escapist magazine

 

[Blitz187]

^^^ Very true... totally forgot about that article!

 

[petalpusher6]

MLAA wouldn't work well for a driving game.
Too much movement on the screen for it to work properly.
What GT5 needs is supersampling to reduce the twinkling effect when you have lines at acute angles

No console games use super sampling, this is too much in rendering cost and bandwith. They rather use multi sampling AA (MSAA), wich means only the geometry is sampled. GT5 use MSAA depending on the resolution (4x720p - 2x1080p) in combinaison with a temporal AA by default (the "standard" mode in display option menu) the other mode use QAA with and without TAA, QAA is still a multi sampling method, but slightly different with blurred edges. TAA doesn't appear on screenshot of course, because it interpolates 2 frames together, that's why Digital foundry didn't noticed it. (Their analysis are decent but often lacks of real technical knowledge)

I agree MLAA would not really be a good fit for a racing game, and the high frequency artefacts everyone is considering as aliasing would still be there with MLAA.
The IQ on the geometry is really good (hopefully with that kind resolution + msaa), alpha coverage + over brightness from HDR eats some aa samples, has bad influences on the shaders. This is the real issue. Im sure everyone noticed how clean it can get when the sky turns cloudy grey (no over brightness = IQ is improving).