An Indepth Look into the Apparent Downgrading of Graphics Since Prologue + Pics!

[Robin]

I'm glad all of you had you differing viewpoints on the matter, some stronger than others ...Thanks for your input...

Yeah maybe I am abit over the top, if you are flying past at x number of MPH's it does not really matter.....but you have to remember that big shapes like the building themselves have been downgraded too and these are things you can see at any speed...... just race on a track with a blue background if you just wana race!.....the whole point of most racing games is to have a track which has 'realism'.

I was just proving that there was a substancial change.....not placing judgement anything.....GT4 is still amazing, Im not arguing with a massive company like PD......they had their reasons to do this Im sure.....

There are many people in this thread that feel that downgrading of perfectly decient realism before (in prologue) is really annoying, I could see how it would be particularly bad if you lived in New York and wanted to see details in the game that were important to you......now blurred by GT4's inabilities....

PD said that GT4 would "reach a new level of realism"......well they obviously meant car visual and physical realism.......at the expense of environmental realism......

Im sorry that the picture quality was not that amazing (to some!) but I assure you that if you looked at the NY track in prologue and GT4 you will see the difference.......the pictures were just to back this up and you could clearly see the changes.....if you dont believe me then go and look for yourselves!

GT5 will sort it all!

Thanks again.....

Robin 👍

 

[Robin]

isn´t it logical that gtp has better grafics than gt4 because gtp needs less space than gt4 because of the 60 cars and only some tracks. gt4 is a huge game where pd took of some polygons of the buildings trying to make the game work on the simple ps2

I'l refer you to this post on page 1...hope it helps explain

Originally Posted by Aipex

The Prologue disk had far less content on it, thus allowing for higher resolution texture maps. I'm sure they were forced to revert to lower res maps because of the amount of content in GT4. Not really that big of a deal, it's all flying by at over 100MPH anyway


Kensei

Wrong.

The texture maps display resolution wa slowered to save CPU space for the more CPU intensive physics and AI.

Disc space means absolutely nothing. I bet if you could hack out the texture maps of both Prolouge and GT4 they would be the same. At the same time you could hack back the higher resolution texture maps in GT4 but you'd probably crash the PS2, get jumping frames, get the dreaded fuzzy screens and have the AI stand still (you'd probably have to hack the AI off in your pretty texture maps GT4).

 

[Pink_the_Floyd]

Hey man, think about it....

-Proloque wasn't a big game, just a few cars and some license tests.
-GT4=700 cars
50 tracks

If they were paying attention on those unimportant details.......they were still busy making the game!!!



Cheers,

 

[Rocketeer]

maybe you just got a **** TV!!

 

[xgarage]

I just look at my Prologue and compare to my GT4 in 1080i. I don't know what ta heck happend on those pictures for GT4, but on my TV GT4 is much better than Prologe.

 

[Robin]

It is not because of the TV!! It's a brand new Sony flat thingy!

I don't know about 1080i mode......I am talking about PAL which doesnt have any option.....and this has got major differences to prologue...

.....it could just be a PAL problem.....

 

[dreesemonkey]

Meh, I hate that track anyway

 

[GuyNamedJohn]

Ha ha, yeah and mind you this isn't to gratuitously bash our fine new game. It's a *big people* () type of discussion, like where *grown ups* get together and discuss the finer points of a major motion-picture's transfer to DVD for example. Someone, i cant remember who? was also submitting that in the opening to the game, after the CGI graphics, the "gameplay" footage is superior to the in-game graphics, which are generally more grainy and less solid in distances. After weeks now of playing the game, I can echo this sentiment. I use RGB cable (component) on a nice tiny 20" Panasonic flatscreen; plain ol' 480i and no high-def. --It is interesting to note how a game like Rallisport Challenge 2 can just completely trump everything else out there, RIGHT NOW, in the PRESENT generation of hardware. I mean, you really have to see that game to understand. It's better in 480i than GT4 at 1080i, and that is remarkable.

Anyways, that's all in the graphics department. While we're talking about "trumping," I'd have to say GT4 KiLLz every other console racing sim in physics & handling and sheer mass content.

Xbox games might be drop-jaw pretty, but i'll prolly be playing nothing but GT4 long into next year. It is a crowning masterpiece. 👍

-John

 

[MuFF]

well think about it this way, it takes up space, despite the fact that it's a dvd disc.. also it would increase loading time

 

[Steve Gunnis]

At first I was quite interested to read about this but then I realised, this is just a game, one day computer games will tap directly into our minds and feed off our own imagination so everything will look exactly as we want it.

Until then, lets just enjoying racing some cars that we're never going to in reality.

**** the cardboard people, If I want to see people I'll go for a walk.

 

[katana87]

i dont really see a big deal in the track issue cause i dont look to the side of me i only look towards where im going not like your driving looking at the wall. Just ignore it and consentrate on driving

 

[XCNuse]

im speechless

how disapointing! AHhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


@steve.. you just read that thing on forza in popular science magazine didnt you LOL! (i just read it on the way home hahah)

 

[GuyNamedJohn]

At first I was quite interested to read about this but then I realised, this is just a game, one day computer games will tap directly into our minds and feed off our own imagination so everything will look exactly as we want it.

"Gran Turismo 10: The Matrix Evolution"

 

[Wakeem]

oh my goodness, when you are going at speeds at around 100km/h you can hardly read billboards, most of the races at NY you go at over 200km/h! Why would you even care if you can't read what the signs of the shops say, does it really matter???

Oh no! how horrifying it is to not be able to read the sign, "Computer Shop" at NY
So, is all you do during a race is turn into the wall and see if you can read the f*^*$%&* sign?????

If people really cared about this tiny issue in the game then im sure a thread for this would have started a long time ago

sure as hell makes a difference to me...its like the difference between reading a book and reading the chapter summaries of that book. assuming you can not recall all the information from the book nor the chapter summary, (only a percentage of it) then in order to retain true information the summaries are intended to give, then you have to actually read the book. the percentage you obtain from the summary is proportional to the amount retained from reading the book itself.
the chapter summary represents the downgraded graphics, and the actual book represents high resolution graphics. sure, you do not pay attention to those minute details while youre driving, but if they were high resolution, you perceive a greater amount of detail even still. When the graphics are downgraded, you obtain a proportional amount, but still, it is less. analyzing the small details such a robin did quantifies this relationship.

 

[pain killer]

is it really that big of a deal, everything else in the game kicks arse, except for the 5 second penalty rule, to me thats much more annoying that not being able to read singns or pixelated details. lighten up on pd.

 

[Wakeem]

omg, did you not even bother reading the last post???

 

[SuperCobraJet]

32Megs of System RAM and 4 Megs of Video RAM are only capable of so much. Just look at all GTs on the PS2 in split screen.

I think this says it all. The PS2 is comparitively archaic in todays capability terms, and at the end of its run. My graphics expectations were also somewhat dissapointed, especially after the 1080i HD hype. I,ve tried every combination of TV, (52" widescreen Hitachi HD) game, and PS2 settings to no avail. The graphics are only so good. I would rate them a little better than GT3 and not as good as some XBOX games. (Forgive me, I realize that may sound blasphemus to some out there) However, with the size and features of the game you know there had to be some compromises somewhere. Like most everyone else, there are some things I'm not crazy about, wish were better, or different, but all and all I'm enjoying the heck out of the game. The biggest thing I can say for it is KY and PD made an honest effort at giving us 50 bucks worth, which is a lot more than I can say for most games out there.

 

[woodstock827]

um... i'd worry about the shaking screen first more than less detailed backgrounds....

PS2 can only handle so much....
i wouldn't mind that much if i can have less pixels but no shaking screen..

 

[Ford 429 Hemi]

Didn't PD take measurements on the cars with insane levels of detail so that they wouldn't have to remap them for GT5, just downgrade them for GT4? I assume they did the same for tracks, allowing them to work on other things for GT5. The next PS will resolve everything or so I hope.

Oh heack yes!
Ps3 is gunna have a 64 bit 4.6 ghz proc! And an nvidia gfx card faster than a 6800 Ultra.....
more than enough muscle to flex for the devs. I owuld bet that pd is already knee deep into GT5.
Cuz all they hafta do is bump up the quality on the current stuff, then make more. Having the old stuff in the high quality saves alot of time. Maby they can get three companies that really NEED to be in gt into GT5....
And maby more muscle????
And maby more Aussie cars?
I would honestly bet on seeing over 1000 cars and around 100-150 tracks in GT5.
Blueray discs can do 25gb....
dual layered blue ray is 46 gb....
That's insane storage!

 

[GuyNamedJohn]

The graphics are only so good. I would rate them a little better than GT3 and not as good as some XBOX games. (Forgive me, I realize that may sound blasphemus to some out there).

Well you'd have to be a blind man living in a cave not to see that a game like the Xbox's Rallisport Challenge 2 running in progressive scan is one of the most accomplished works of art in existance today, PC or otherwise. It is seriously good.

i'd worry about the shaking screen first more than less detailed backgrounds. i wouldn't mind that much if i can have less pixels but no shaking screen..

Down here in Virginny way we called it The Jitter Bug.

 

[Koolad]

I think there's only a lack of detail in NY to prevent popping from appearing.. I can't see any downgrade in graphics in any track else.

 

[j8mie]

Well some of us had not noticed the "fuzzy" graphics in GT4, mainly because when your racing past these signs, you don't have time to stop and look around you. And if you do, then you must have crashed and therefore are rubbish at GT4

 

[mrnelson]

Looking at the lowered quality graphics it looks to me like they've made an effort to make all the words blur in certain directions, possibly to increase the feeling of speed.

I'm not doubting the fact that they are lower res and therefore likely to be easier on the CPU, but they do seem to have worked to try to compensate for the lack of detail with an increase in the feeling of speed.

 

[GuyNamedJohn]

I gotta agree with Koolad up there. New York hurts your eyes, but there are still so many other environs that are seriously well-done, and you've just got to hand it to them. Truly, I can see both sides, and quite enjoy playing "devil's advocate" on the issue. Here's an "editorial"...

I know a lot of you are young'uns, or otherwise just new to Gran Turismo, but for us veterans of the series it's pretty rough when you realize that we've come all this way, and what we have is really a highly polished, 60 fps version of GT2 w/ updated car roster:

• No tire marks.
• No damage.
• No weather.
• No actual racing per se, with fields consisting of still only 5 AI dumbots.
• People rave and rave about "the physics," but my God there are NO crash physics.
• No official online mode. Heck, we don't even have officially hosted leaderboards--and that's something the Dreamcast was doing years ago. With F355 Challenge you could download other people's ghosts!

Do people even remember that back in the day, GT2 had historic information on nearly every single model of car? It was so educational; it made it all immersive and interesting.

In fairness though, we do have that L3 fast-forward clicky now, they just took out the ability to skip from lap to lap in a long, long replay. Oh wait, that's another step b-a-c-k-w-a-r-d. Ouch.

Y'know, they churned out GT2 six years ago with all 640 cars (in total) in just two years from the release of GT1. Sure, we all know it was released with bugs, but hey it didn't take FOUR YEARS to be released with bugs!

See, part of the problem for GT4 is that it arrived on the shelves about 18 months too late for its own good. Technology moves on, and as a result, an overlong development cycle is deleterious to the final game. It is perplexing to me how those guys could have required almost 4 years, given that they were working with a familiar console and an established coding architecture from GT3.

Someone was talking about GT5... Does anyone know if maybe they're planning on releasing GT5 soon after PS3's launch, or maybe early '07 perhaps? That would be pretty sweet.

Well anyway, there's my thesis on the matter.

-John

 

[SuperCobraJet]

um... i'd worry about the shaking screen first more than less detailed backgrounds....

PS2 can only handle so much....
i wouldn't mind that much if i can have less pixels but no shaking screen..

I have never experienced the "shaky screen" so far, but I see a lot in the threads about others having the problem. I'm 50% in the NA version with a SCPH 39001/ PS2. So far, mine has never shook, hiccupped, or even lockedup, even once. If I was having that problem I wouldn't be too happy about it, though. It seems to be associated more with the new Slim PS2.

 

[FRST]

32Megs of System RAM and 4 Megs of Video RAM are only capable of so much. Just look at all GTs on the PS2 in split screen...

What I'm more dissapointed with is the Jag S Type R isn't the drift machine it was in GT:C unless you stick on street tyres with hard on rear soft on front & then its near impossible to drive. Although still strangely fun

+1
but me I'm disappointed in the Skyline GT-R concept that was already in GT concept tokyo geneva it was a drifitng machine back there and now it handles like a basic 4x4..not fun 👎

 

[Craig HP]

As Robin pointed out some time ago, the graphics in Gran Turismo 4 were downgraded from Gran Turismo 4 Prologue. He also posted some pictures of the New York City track in Gran Turismo 4 Prologue, which I have reposted at the bottom of this post. So when I was reading the PM he sent me, he was saying he had made a thread on this before, so I clicked on the link and had a little read. And this made me think, can we find evidence of this on any other circuit. So if you can find any more areas on Gran Turismo 4 where the graphics have been downgraded, take some photo's and post them. I will try tommorow, providing my Gran Turismo 4 disc can fight of the red circle glitch for at least 6 minutes!

 

[Megasoft Office]

This confirms something else that was bothering me. I was wondering if the GT4 drive-through of Fuji Speedway at the circuit's official Japanese website was in a development version of the game (or even Prologue); the visuals and scenery look much sharper. There's even snow on Mt. Fuji...

 

[GTStig]

I'm sure the graphical difference may have something to do with all the GT4p screens being events with just the player car in it and the screens from GT4 are full on race events with 6 cars

 

[daan]

GT4 Prologue was a fraction of the game GT4 was. GT4 P therefore had more room on the disc for textures. Perhaps GT4 wouldn't fit onto 1 disc if they used the same textures, so they had to downgrade them.

Tell me why this needed its own thread? Why wasn't it added to the end of Robin's?