An important addition needed - a realistic View

[Tenacious D]

If you sit really close to your TV you'll find that the current cockpit view is perfect. The track is your focus with everything else in the car in your periphery as IRL.

Neat... so now we all have to sit smack in the TV screen or save up for a 50" plus HDTV to get a decent view of the track?

I do okay and I still use a 14" CRT TV, so people claiming they can't see enough doesn't really cut it.

I can't see enough. It doesn't look like the view I see when I drive. In fact, it looks like I'm driving from the rear seat. And just to reiterate, I'm one of those guys who uses roof cam and can't do without it now.

I think this thread is evidence that what Kaz needs to do is implement a tweakable driver view so everyone is happy. That shouldn't take a whole day to code.

 

[Squasher]

Neat... so now we all have to sit smack in the TV screen or save up for a 50" plus HDTV to get a decent view of the track?

A 32" to 40" HDTV these days can be gotten really cheap, sit 2-3 feet away and it is really immersive

I can't see enough. It doesn't look like the view I see when I drive. In fact, it looks like I'm driving from the rear seat. And just to reiterate, I'm one of those guys who uses roof cam and can't do without it now.

I think if you move the view forward from the current view it will mean you will lose vision out either side making it harder to see and hit apex's (pleural for apex is??) I'm quite interested to see how the new supercar challenge view feels

 

[Tenacious D]

A 32" to 40" HDTV these days can be gotten really cheap, sit 2-3 feet away and it is really immersive

First, I have a 40" Bravia, but I'm not about to rearrange the livingroom so I can sit closer. And I don't think the perspective would be to my liking anyway.

Second, it's not very reasonable to tell people in general, "Just go buy a cheap HDTV." Anyone getting a new TV will want the best they can afford, I'd think, and even the cheap ones are $600 US or more, and not everyone can afford to spend that much on a fling.

Dude, just a little bit of coding would be much more reasonable.

 

[homeforsummer]

The simple fact is that you have a bunch of unnecessary stuff blocking the view, therefore you are seeing less.

No, you really aren't seeing less. What exactly are you seeing less of? The sky, and some tarmac. And a blind spot where the A-pillar is. Guess what? You get these blindspots in a real car too.

If you moved the POV forward, then you'd be losing the vision to your sides, at the expense of seeing more of the sky. Really helpful. Incorporating more of the view to your left and right, like you get with the current cockpit view, is more realistic than having your nose pressed to the windscreen.

You might argue that you could just "turn your head to the side" if you wanted to see what was coming up beside you. But seriously, do you do that in a real car? No, you use your peripheral vision, and a quick glance in your side mirror. Neither of which you'd be able to do if the POV was moved as far forward as is being proposed.

@ Tenacious D - I disagree about the point of view, for the reasons I've already mentioned. However, I do agree that if the view was tweakable, it'd keep more people happy 👍

 

[RedBaron]

I am satisfied with in-car view as it is, but some options to change angle and position would be very good.

 

[amar212]

Best view ever:

Also was available in full-widescreen in cabinet multiscreen setup showing interior and such (no rear view mirrors, since Naomi hardware was already used to it's limits):

Thank you PD, much appriciated.

 

[Jay]

3 screen should still make it to GT5 as it did GT4 (I hope).

 

[Zathra5_]

homeforsummer, sorry you are fighting a losing battle. there is no way that your little 14 inch screen can represent what you actually see in a car. In a real car the pillars can block your view but they don't take up nearly the same percentage of your field of view that they do with the in car view. In real life you can quickly look at all three mirrors. How many do you have in the in car view? Usually you don't even have full view of two mirrors. If that is so how much of your peripheral vision do you think you have? Obviously not much. Again its a compromise.

With the dash view the close the camera is modelled to the dash the better the peripheral view. Given the same lateral constraints (the pillars for example), the further back you are (say sitting in the seat) the worse your peripheral vision. That's simple geometry.

 

[homeforsummer]

homeforsummer, sorry you are fighting a losing battle. there is no way that your little 14 inch screen can represent what you actually see in a car.

If you can find where I said that my 14 inch screen represents what I see in a car, then feel free to quote me on it. What I said is that even with a small TV, I still get a good view, so it's a little rich people complaining that you "can't see enough of the track" when you blatantly can.

In a real car the pillars can block your view but they don't take up nearly the same percentage of your field of view that they do with the in car view.

Actually, they do. My car has quite narrow pillars but you still need to move your head to look around them when pulling out of junctions, negotiating roundabouts and generally just trying to see past them. And yet, you're able to see out of the side windows, which is a benefit you don't get if you move the point of view forwards.

With the dash view the close the camera is modelled to the dash the better the peripheral view. Given the same lateral constraints (the pillars for example), the further back you are (say sitting in the seat) the worse your peripheral vision. That's simple geometry.

Erm... how is having a significant portion of the side windows having worse peripheral vision? That doesn't even make sense.

Peripheral vision isn't being able to see clearly out of the front screen by having your POV located on top of the steering wheel, it's being able to see out of the corners of your eyes to things beside you too.

Put simply, if your head is pressed to the windscreen like the view you're suggesting, you'll have great forward vision (plus a great view of the sky... wow!) but your peripheral vision is severely affected as you won't have the mirrors in your line of sight, and the pillars (if you can see them from your vantage point) will actually be in the corners of your screen, taking away your view to the side.

Seriously - how is this "too far back"?

The view in something like GRID is much worse:

And yet I suspect, you're proposing something more like that in Colin McRae DIRT:

Which I think is too far forward - look at that huge chunk of vision you're missing from the left hand side because the pillar is right in the way. And the hands and top of the steering wheel look huge - again, not very realistic at all.

 

[Zathra5_]

Thanks for proving my point. in your image the a pillar knocks out a significant portion of your view, you have no peripheral vision to the left, a miniscule amount to the right and can only see a portion of two of your mirrors. How is that realistic.

No I don't like the dirt one either. You need a decent rear view mirror which it doesn't have. Currently I prefer the bumper cam since it gives you a proper mirror, decent peripheral vision and with the G25 programmed properly you can look side to side easily (and yes in real life you do turn your head).

 

[Jay]

homeforsummer, sorry you are fighting a losing battle.

I don't think so.

Though don't know why this is a battle in the first place, it's about choice, IMO in car view is perfect (as good as you can be on a standard widescreen TV).

 

[Zathra5_]

I don't think so.

Though don't know why this is a battle in the first place, it's about choice, IMO in car view is perfect (as good as you can be on a standard widescreen TV).

My point is that none of the views give an adequate representation of what you experience in real life including and especially in car view. Any view will be a compromise and what people think is the best compromise to them will vary from person to person. For me and many others the compromises of in car view are too much. As you can see in the posted picture the in car view does not in fact give you very much peripheral vision, blocks your vision, and gives you very poor visualization of the mirrors. I think that the comment that people make that we should be using the in car view since this is a sim is absurd.

 

[homeforsummer]

Thanks for proving my point. in your image the a pillar knocks out a significant portion of your view, you have no peripheral vision to the left, a miniscule amount to the right and can only see a portion of two of your mirrors.

Because having your head close to the windscreen, as in the Ferrari 355 Challenge pics Amar posted above, is so much better? Yes, you do have more peripheral vision in the GT5 view.

How is that realistic.

It's more realistic than having your nose pressed to the windscreen, and yet somehow still being able to see your rear-view mirror, which is what you appear to be proposing, as below:

You need a decent rear view mirror which it doesn't have.

In the view you seem to want, you would just have to have a boxed-out view of the rear view mirror, as you do with bumper cam. Try it. Sit close to the windscreen in your car, so you can just see the top of the steering wheel

How is that realistic?

If you're going to be pedantic about it, which you seem determined by, then I will be too. I went out to take shots of the view I see in my car.

The first image is what I see, sitting in my normal position. I can see so much, clearly, in my peripheral vision (that is, everything I can see in front of me, not just what I could see out of the corners of my eyes), that I had to take three photos and stitch them together. This is with a digi SLR with an 18mm wide angle lens. And really, I could see more than this too, including the top of the windscreen. If I couldn't see that, why would they bother fitting sun visors?:

And this is the view I presume you're in favour of, just the top of the wheel visible, very little a-pillar...

Now we're debating realism here. The first photo is what I see when I'm driving. It's the realistic view. Yes, you focus on the road ahead, but you see a lot more - in fact, you see what you'd see in GT5's interior view. You do not see what you see above in my second photograph. And because you can't see half of the windscreen and anything out of the side window, your vision is restricted. Plus, if you wanted a "realistic" rear-view mirror, it would have to be in completely the wrong place - effectively, in the middle of the windscreen.

Seriously, I'm not saying this to wind you up, I'm saying it because PD already have the realistic view on GT5P.

 

[JDMKING13]

My point is that none of the views give an adequate representation of what you experience in real life including and especially in car view. Any view will be a compromise and what people think is the best compromise to them will vary from person to person. For me and many others the compromises of in car view are too much. As you can see in the posted picture the in car view does not in fact give you very much peripheral vision, blocks your vision, and gives you very poor visualization of the mirrors. I think that the comment that people make that we should be using the in car view since this is a sim is absurd.

What game in your opinion has a good interior view if you dont mind me asking?

 

[Jay]

I think that the comment that people make that we should be using the in car view since this is a sim is absurd.

I don't think anyone said we should be using in car view (unless I missed it).

Thats why we have more than one view, for prefernce, as long as we are looking at it through a TV that doesn't represent our peripheral vision then we will always have comprimise, no one is wrong, no one is right.

Choice.

 

[Antti-san]

I think the in-car view in the game is fine as it is, and it is the one I use almost all the time. Really, it's a LOT better than in many other racing games that I've played; you can actually see outside! Besides, what would be the point of modeling the interior of every car if you couldn't even see any of it when driving?

They had the option to adjust the position of the in-car view in Test Drive Unlimited, perhaps PD could implement the same thing in GT5? Then we could all be happy!

 

[Zathra5_]

What you appear to have done is zoomed in on the second picture rather than move the camera forward. If you move the camera forward and go wider with the lens you would still be able to see the red car or the blue door and not have the pillar in the way. Thus you have moved closer to the windshield but have just as good peripheral vision. The way you have the second picture is more like what you can see while driving. You are correct that you can see more but you can't see any detail unless you move your eyes. You cannot read your speedometer or look in the mirror without moving your eyes.

The car on the right in the first picture is clearly ahead of the car that you are in. You have almost no vision of what is beside the car. I can detect movement about 90 degrees to the direction that I am looking. To get that you would have to go wider with the lens. That would end up looking pretty funny and would make everything look even smaller on the TV. You could probably then actually see your mirrors but they would be so small that you likely wouldn't see any detail.

Are you getting the point? You cannot recreate both what you can clearly focus on and your peripheral vision. You cannot get a realistic in car view without rap around monitors or virtual reality goggles. Your images show that the in car view has almost no peripheral vision. I suspect that the bumper cam view gives just as good peripheral vision (the dials are the width of the car) and has the advantage of having a decent mirror.

 

[homeforsummer]

What you appear to have done is zoomed in on the second picture rather than move the camera forward. If you move the camera forward and go wider with the lens you would still be able to see the red car or the blue door and not have the pillar in the way.

You're right, I did do that - but my camera lens, despite being fairly wide-angle (18mm), only just got my view in from the further back position, let alone moving closer. But the view in the second picture is pretty much what you'd get in the game - no view whatsoever to the right, and very little to the left. Which is why the view currently offered in GT is the best option.

But, if I moved my head into the position showed in the second image, I wouldn't be able to see the red car at all, as the a-pillar would be blocking it. As you mentioned earlier, it's simple geometry - if I move my point of view forward, the pillar moves back in relation to my view - blocking off that car. And blocking off a lot more of my vision to the side - the closer you get to the pillar, the less you'd be able to see either side of it.

And trust me, if GT5 included a car like mine, the view you see of my dashboard above is pretty much exactly what you'd get in the game.

The way you have the second picture is more like what you can see while driving.

I disagree - I purposely took the photo to represent what I see. Though it's not necessarily what I focus on (Very important to make that distinction - I strongly suspect you're assuming the more realistic view is based on what you focus on, which is seeing the road in front of you) Seriously though, I've made it quite clear - the first view is the more realistic view. That's not open for debate.

You are correct that you can see more but you can't see any detail unless you move your eyes. You cannot read your speedometer or look in the mirror without moving your eyes.

True - but think how irritating it would be in the game if you had to move a joystick about all the time to look down at the speedo, or across at one of the mirrors. Remember I mentioned about focusing on what's ahead? Why not just do that in the game? Effectively, you can still have the current interior view offered, because that's what you see. It's up to you to focus on the road. Having the view where it currently is, is much better than having to constantly look around - to look at the speedo, mirrors, etc.

The car on the right in the first picture is clearly ahead of the car that you are in. You have almost no vision of what is beside the car. I can detect movement about 90 degrees to the direction that I am looking. To get that you would have to go wider with the lens. That would end up looking pretty funny and would make everything look even smaller on the TV. You could probably then actually see your mirrors but they would be so small that you likely wouldn't see any detail.

Again, you're right - but that's why the view currently offered is the best option - any closer to the screen and it doesn't represent what you actually see, any further back and you get the problems that you describe.

Are you getting the point? You cannot recreate both what you can clearly focus on and your peripheral vision.

Same question, back at you - You can recreate that, and it's more realistic than the moved-forward view you seem to want.

I suspect that the bumper cam view gives just as good peripheral vision (the dials are the width of the car) and has the advantage of having a decent mirror.

The bumper cam does give you a better view, you're right - but it's less realistic (obviously). And we're talking about realism, not what view is easiest to race with.

 

[JDMKING13]

Nice way of backing up your point homeforsummer 👍 I think the Interior view is just fine the way it is, but i would like PD to make a way where you could adjust your vison so everyone would be happy.

 

[MGR]

There is no bumper cam in GT5P.

Quite often when you join an online race and appear on the grid the normally visable interior parts and bonnet of the car are shown for a split second before being removed.

If you're still not convinced go and mount a video camera to the front of your own car and drive right up behind another as close as you can (preferably without hitting it ) and tell me what you see on the video playback? More than likely a small section of the licence plate of the vehicle in front of you plastered across your entire screen. Now go jump in any car in GT5P and while using this supposed 'bumper cam' drive right into the back of any car and tell me what you see?

In fact if you run right up the back of another car the same as yours you'll notice if you draw a line across the centre of the screen that line will pass right through the helmet of the driver in the car in front. If the camera were mounted the same height as the bumper the line would pass through the drivers toro or legs.

Arguements about what's the most realistic driving position are utterly pointless because not everybody has the same sized display and not everybody sits the exact same distance from the screen.

+1 vote for an adjustable camera position using the 'cockpit view' though.

Then you can adjust it to suit your display size, seating distance from the display and personal preference.

 

[Tenacious D]

My point is that none of the views give an adequate representation of what you experience in real life including and especially in car view. Any view will be a compromise and what people think is the best compromise to them will vary from person to person.

Exactly. This is why some people love the cockpit view as it is, while others want it adjustable. And others prefer bumper/hood cam. Others chase view. And why I swear by roof cam.

By the way, +1 to being able to adjust all views. Choice for all.

 

[homeforsummer]

By the way, +1 to being able to adjust all views. Choice for all.

I agree And in fact, if you go a page or so back, you'll see that when you wrote this point:

I think this thread is evidence that what Kaz needs to do is implement a tweakable driver view so everyone is happy. That shouldn't take a whole day to code.

I responded by saying:

I do agree that if the view was tweakable, it'd keep more people happy 👍

I'd be more than happy if PD included an adjustable view (both inside the car and outside, for those who prefer driving from 3rd person view). I just happen to believe that the current cockpit cam offers the most realistic viewpoint already.

There is no bumper cam in GT5P.

Quite often when you join an online race and appear on the grid the normally visable interior parts and bonnet of the car are shown for a split second before being removed.

If you're still not convinced go and mount a video camera to the front of your own car and drive right up behind another as close as you can (preferably without hitting it ) and tell me what you see on the video playback? More than likely a small section of the licence plate of the vehicle in front of you plastered across your entire screen. Now go jump in any car in GT5P and while using this supposed 'bumper cam' drive right into the back of any car and tell me what you see?

In fact if you run right up the back of another car the same as yours you'll notice if you draw a line across the centre of the screen that line will pass right through the helmet of the driver in the car in front. If the camera were mounted the same height as the bumper the line would pass through the drivers toro or legs.

You're right, there is no bumper cam, you certainly don't get the restricted view you would if you had a true bumper cam and drove right up to the back of a car, as you describe. However, "bumper cam" is the description which describes that view the best currently. What else would you describe it as? "First person viewpoint #2"? "In-car without the bodywork cam"? "Base of windscreen without the bonnet cam"? "Bumper" cam is just a term that everyone's familiar with so there's no need to debate the meaning of the word.

Arguements about what's the most realistic driving position are utterly pointless because not everybody has the same sized display and not everybody sits the exact same distance from the screen.

1) I prefer the term "debate"
2) The size of the screen or where you sit is irrelevant to how realistic the actual view itself is. The only variations you get based on screen size are whether you get a widescreen view and how much detail you can see. The realism of the point of view is the subject up for debate, which is nothing to do with screen size. The only reason I mentioned my TV originally was to show that even with a small screen, the game is perfectly playable from the interior view and not as restrictive as is being claimed.

 

[Tenacious D]

Thanks for the backup, hfs. I have a mind numbing job that starts stupid early, and it's hard for me to remember all this postage. In fact, I really should be getting ready for work, but working for Obama, even indirectly, makes me want to just stay home.

 

[MGR]

You're right, there is no bumper cam, you certainly don't get the restricted view you would if you had a true bumper cam and drove right up to the back of a car, as you describe. However, "bumper cam" is the description which describes that view the best currently. What else would you describe it as? "First person viewpoint #2"? "In-car without the bodywork cam"? "Base of windscreen without the bonnet cam"? "Bumper" cam is just a term that everyone's familiar with so there's no need to debate the meaning of the word.

Depends on the context the term is used. How often do you see comments such as "oh I don't use the bumper cam because when I drive my car I'm not strapped to the front bumper" and "bumper cam is too low" etc.

Something like "Dash cam" would be more appropriate for GT5P.

2) The size of the screen or where you sit is irrelevant to how realistic the actual view itself is. The only variations you get based on screen size are whether you get a widescreen view and how much detail you can see. The realism of the point of view is the subject up for debate, which is nothing to do with screen size.

It has everything to do with screen size. Playing GT5P on a 12" screen sitting 12 feet away using cockpit view is like driving a car from the back seat looking through the wrong end of a pair of binoculars.

 

[homeforsummer]

It has everything to do with screen size. Playing GT5P on a 12" screen sitting 12 feet away using cockpit view is like driving a car from the back seat looking through the wrong end of a pair of binoculars.

But that's fairly unlikely, isn't it... if we're being realistic, people are unlikely to be playing the game on anything smaller than about 14/15" and are unliklely to be sitting at the other end of the room. I play the game on a 14" screen and sit around six feet away, and have absolutely no trouble seeing where I'm going.

Even if I did, it wouldn't be relevant to the realism of the view itself, which is what we've been discussing. So no, PD's choice of cockpit cam has nothing to do with screen size. If you're dumb enough to sit miles away from a tiny screen then it's not PD's fault you can't see anything.

 

[Zer0]

2) The size of the screen or where you sit is irrelevant to how realistic the actual view itself is. The only variations you get based on screen size are whether you get a widescreen view and how much detail you can see. The realism of the point of view is the subject up for debate, which is nothing to do with screen size. The only reason I mentioned my TV originally was to show that even with a small screen, the game is perfectly playable from the interior view and not as restrictive as is being claimed.

You need to experience on first hand to know what a difference can make a bigger screen size.

For reference I played GT4 with a 17" tv at about two meters of distance, playing on Citta Di Aria was a nightmare was very difficult to me making clean laps on that stretchy and sinuos roads. The first day when was upgraded to a +70" projector made a clean lap on my first run and a lap time of less than 4 seconds of my best, I was amazed on how easy was driving and how great was that bigger view, you can turn your head to look at the sides to get a complete view, the wheel inputs and the feel of distances where much improved, was easy to make better lines and the driving was a lot more confidence.

The game is the same, the image information is the same, but on bigger screens you has a more realistic representation and an easy interpretation of the real thing and that's a fact not an opinion. Is all about the correct scale 1:1 and with only one screen it can't be done better.

 

[homeforsummer]

You need to experience on first hand to know what a difference can make a bigger screen size.

For reference I played GT4 with a 17" tv at about two meters of distance, playing on Citta Di Aria was a nightmare was very difficult to me making clean laps on that stretchy and sinuos roads. The first day when was upgraded to a +70" projector made a clean lap on my first run and a lap time of less than 4 seconds of my best, I was amazed on how easy was driving and how great was that bigger view, you can turn your head to look at the sides to get a complete view, the wheel inputs and the feel of distances where much improved, was easy to make better lines and the driving was a lot more confidence.

The game is the same, the image information is the same, but on bigger screens you has a more realistic representation and an easy interpretation of the real thing and that's a fact not an opinion. Is all about the correct scale 1:1 and with only one screen it can't be done better.

I don't disagree with any of that - I've played GT5P on both my mate's 42" flat screen and my housemate's 40" flatscreen, and it's certainly a more immersive experience.

But that doesn't change the fact that screen size doesn't change the realism of the actual view PD have chosen for the cockpit.

Seriously guys, read my posts clearly. I'm not debating the size of the screen and it's ability to make the game feel more real, I'm talking about the actual cockpit view and the perspective you get from it.

 

[G.T.Ace]

Your post above with the photos is so perfect, i would call it epic, yes, epic post.
This is, 100%, what i was talking about in this thread: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=114924
If i could i would kiss you.

 

[GT]

take it easy, this could turn into a law suit

 

[red7]

Yet some things are missing such as 900 degree rotation in/game with matching hand movements!

Yup, this has been bothering me for some time now. This is why i've actually started to use roof cam at times so that my steering input relates more naturally to the movement of the car. Something seems to be lagging behind with the current animation, it never seems to match up, then after a few laps i'm just watching the car itself/hood for cues.

I remember pretty clearly in GT4 though that some of the convertibles that revealed interiors in time trial/practice modes did infact include full 900 degree motion as well as the shifter actually going into individual gates!

If they could do it for GT4 then I'll have some faith that it'll be included for the final product.