Cars in GT6 that has PS4-Ready graphics.

[Nexus]

Just going to steal some posts from @PaMu1337 from this thread regarding tessellation.

Like I said earlier, the tesselation should apply to them too on PS4. As a game development student I have quite a bit of knowledge about graphics technologies, and I don't see any technical reason why tesselation could not be implemented on all cars (and it wouldn't require any work on PDs side). The reason it only applies to some cars now is related to the fact that the PS3 doesn't actually support tesselation, so PD has had to do a lot of hacking to get it to work, which probably required specific work on the cars.

There are not more polys. It's the tessellation that is splitting existing polys into multiple polys to make curves smoother.

Basically, all cars on PS4 can have tessellation.

 

[Scaff]

But that benchmark is possible only thanks to running in a much better hardware than GT6. You think that the GT6 models will not use the "default to any developer" better shaders, lighting or effects available in the PS4? if not I don't understand why you think that aren't PS4 ready. The 3D models itself and the technology under them are better and more advanced than in Drive club and the better "colors" to paint the models will come free once PD steps into the PS4 package.

Evo haven't just used "better colours", they have used multiple layers of basecoat, paint and top coat to not just get the colour right, but to achieve the correct depth of colour.

This is not just simply a case of taking a preset tool kit and applying it.

I would wait until GT plays its race in the PS4 before voicing any crown lost, it's clear who is the winner given the relative hardware specs and would not be rare if PD visually outperform, again, every game in the same system when GT7 is seen, as happenned with GT1, GT3 and GT5... Their natural evolution between generations is pointing at that direction, they have the experience and the power under the hood to outperform by a large scale anything seen in GT6 and they are far from timid at the time of pushing realistic graphics or developing newer graphical effects.

GT outperforms every game on the respective platform in everyway in terms of graphics?

That is what you just said!

In terms of the premium cars I would be more than happy to agree, but in every area of graphics in comparison to every title on every playstation platform they have been on?

Nope sorry can't agree with that at all.

Yes, that's my safe minimum in this discussion (I don't need to bet higher to make my point) but isn't what I expect. I expect great things graphically in the PS4 given all what they acchieved in PS3 with a very outdated hardware. PD are now in an excellent position to surprise with GT, as a whole, more than any other developer or currently announced racing game, no matter the system. Too high?

Given that PD said the same thing when they started developing on the PS3 (that it has the power to do what they could not in the PS2) and they were one of the first development teams to work on the PS3 outdated is more than a little inaccurate.

PD have prioritised just about every other area of graphic performance over frame rate for the last two titles, as such I don't personally think they are in an excellent position at all. They have a lot of ground to make up and a lot of people who have been turned off the series follow the position they have put themselves in over the last two title to turn around.

 

[Robin]

If only....

 

[gtracedriver1]

But that benchmark is possible only thanks to running in a much better hardware than GT6. You think that the GT6 models will not use the "default to any developer" better shaders, lighting or effects available in the PS4? if not I don't understand why you think that aren't PS4 ready. The 3D models itself and the technology under them are better and more advanced than in Drive club and the better "colors" to paint the models will come free once PD steps into the PS4 package.


I would wait until GT plays its race in the PS4 before voicing any crown lost, it's clear who is the winner given the relative hardware specs and would not be rare if PD visually outperform, again, every game in the same system when GT7 is seen, as happenned with GT1, GT3 and GT5... Their natural evolution between generations is pointing at that direction, they have the experience and the power under the hood to outperform by a large scale anything seen in GT6 and they are far from timid at the time of pushing realistic graphics or developing newer graphical effects.


Yes, that's my safe minimum in this discussion (I don't need to bet higher to make my point) but isn't what I expect. I expect great things graphically in the PS4 given all what they acchieved in PS3 with a very outdated hardware. PD are now in an excellent position to surprise with GT, as a whole, more than any other developer or currently announced racing game, no matter the system. Too high?

Well said. GT5P trailer of 8yrs ago still look great PD have pretty much mastered the gfx.





It is just that PS3 can only do so much. With PS4 everything with look glorious at native 1080P

 

[RacerPaul]

Regardless of all this very detailed and intelligent discussion, the use of GT4 car models in GT7 is gaming sacrilege

Imo

You don't get all this obsessive nuttiness in the Forza forums you know. I used to be a GT player and it is indeed a
phenomenon that it induces such in-depth and detailed discussion about every little bit of it

Scary almost

 

[Mr Taskforce]

I think they should just scrap the standards for GT7. Quite frankly, the majority of them are old and are a waste of space; they should focus on converting the most popular standards to premiums (Ex. Toyota Supra or Group C cars)

They're gonna have to make some sacrifices that's gonna affect different sides of the community obviously (Keeping the standards or eliminating them) but I think it should be for the greater good.

You could have a 1000+ cars in the game but only about 20-40% are actually impressively modeled cars, with the rest 60-80% being subpar and from generations before.

I'd rather have around 500-600+ cars that are all beautifully modeled and are very relevant and popular to GT7 and the community. Just my opinion though.

 

[Zer0]

Evo haven't just used "better colours", they have used multiple layers of basecoat, paint and top coat to not just get the colour right, but to achieve the correct depth of colour.

This is not just simply a case of taking a preset tool kit and applying it.

The "colour" word was meant to group all what is needed to digitally "paint" or bring to life a car from a 3D raw model, to don't repeat every time all the list of graphical features that I have also listed many times in the previous posts, so the quotation marks. That is: shaders or material properties, lighting, shadows, reflections and other effects over the surface of the car and not only related to the paint surface but to glass, rubber, etc.

As I said in the previos posts:

Spoiler

"More realistic materials, textures, lighting, shadows, effects, etc... all these comes in a natural way at the time you start to develop in a more powerful hardware"

"Premium cars will shine in PS4 (better shaders, better lighting, better effects, better rendering quality, etc)."

"premium car models in GT7 will look better and more realistic than in GT6, with better shadows, with better reflection, with better lighting, with better driver models, with better materials, with better tyres, etc."

"You think that the GT6 models will not use the "default to any developer" better shaders, lighting or effects available in the PS4?"

I guessed that my point would be clear enought without the need to list again every feature for fifth time!

GT outperforms every game on the respective platform in everyway in terms of graphics?

That is what you just said!

In terms of the premium cars I would be more than happy to agree, but in every area of graphics in comparison to every title on every playstation platform they have been on?

Nope sorry can't agree with that at all.

The same as the above. I like to stay on-topic so any reply I do (except if is stated the contrary) is related to "racing games", as I make clear in my first and previous post in this thread:

Spoiler

"they are the best on that and the best at pushing the technological limits of the hardware one step beyond the rest of [racing] developers."

"PD are now in an excellent position to surprise with GT, as a whole, more than any other developer or currently announced racing game, no matter the system."

Every videogame genre it has its own priorities and a different allocation of resources, so to compare graphics between them would make not much sense and the differences would not mean much in its respective genres.

Given that PD said the same thing when they started developing on the PS3 (that it has the power to do what they could not in the PS2) and they were one of the first development teams to work on the PS3 outdated is more than a little inaccurate.

PS3, 8 years after it was launched, is a very outdated hardware to today standards, or related to the next-gen system (PS4) that is powering today DC, the benchmark game that is being compared graphically to GT6.

PD have prioritised just about every other area of graphic performance over frame rate for the last two titles, as such I don't personally think they are in an excellent position at all. They have a lot of ground to make up and a lot of people who have been turned off the series follow the position they have put themselves in over the last two title to turn around.

Technically and graphically, as in context , PD are in an excellent position to upgrade in an exponential scale the GT franchise with the new available resources of the PS4, the experience learned, and the scalable effects and assets developed during the PS3 years. Aside of all the new technology and graphics that they will be capable to extract from the PS4.

 

[Eager Snake]

Just to clarify something, Evolution Studios has 260.000 polys per car. In GT6, or at least GT5, we have 200.000 for the premium ones.

 

[Scaff]

The "colour" word was meant to group all what is needed to digitally "paint" or bring to life a car from a 3D raw model, to don't repeat every time all the list of graphical features that I have also listed many times in the previous posts, so the quotation marks. That is: shaders or material properties, lighting, shadows, reflections and other effects over the surface of the car and not only related to the paint surface but to glass, rubber, etc.

As I said in the previos posts:

Spoiler

"More realistic materials, textures, lighting, shadows, effects, etc... all these comes in a natural way at the time you start to develop in a more powerful hardware"

"Premium cars will shine in PS4 (better shaders, better lighting, better effects, better rendering quality, etc)."

"premium car models in GT7 will look better and more realistic than in GT6, with better shadows, with better reflection, with better lighting, with better driver models, with better materials, with better tyres, etc."

"You think that the GT6 models will not use the "default to any developer" better shaders, lighting or effects available in the PS4?"

I guessed that my point would be clear enought without the need to list again every feature for fifth time!

The point I was making was not that I expected PD to be able to do the same on the PS3 (which would be absurd), but rather your assumption that PD will simply be able to apply some pre-baked tools and away you do.

As you said "default to any developer", can you provide a source that shows the paint layer and how they are made up, the lighting tools, etc. that Evo have used are simply "default to any developer"?

The difference between our views is that you seem to consider this to be 'done', that PD will have no issues at all, and my is that given the issues we have seen on the PS3 I don't work on that same assumption.

The same as the above. I like to stay on-topic so any reply I do (except if is stated the contrary) is related to "racing games", as I make clear in my first and previous post in this thread:

Spoiler

"they are the best on that and the best at pushing the technological limits of the hardware one step beyond the rest of [racing] developers."

"PD are now in an excellent position to surprise with GT, as a whole, more than any other developer or currently announced racing game, no matter the system."

Every videogame genre it has its own priorities and a different allocation of resources, so to compare graphics between them would make not much sense and the differences would not mean much in its respective genres.

Yes and I don't consider an unlocked frame-rate that ranged from 20 - 60 to be an indicator that "they are the best on that and the best at pushing the technological limits of the hardware one step beyond the rest of [racing] developers.".

As such I don't share the same blind faith that you seem to.

PS3, 8 years after it was launched, is a very outdated hardware to today standards, or related to the next-gen system (PS4) that is powering today DC, the benchmark game that is being compared graphically to GT6.

By today's standard it is, but the issues that occurred in GT5 and GT6 were from a developer that had more time with the platform that just about any other developer around, as such the continued 'PS3 wasn't good enough for what we wanted' is still at odds with the claims PD themselves made about the PS3 at its launch.

Another reason not to place blind faith in the claims that the power of the PS4 will allow PD to do everything they wanted, but were not able to with the PS3.

Technically and graphically, as in context , PD are in an excellent position to upgrade in an exponential scale the GT franchise with the new available resources of the PS4, the experience learned, and the scalable effects and assets developed during the PS3 years. Aside of all the new technology and graphics that they will be capable to extract from the PS4.

May be able to extract from the PS4, given that we have not seen a thing from them yet 'will' is more than a little presumptive, after all they were not able to fix all the issues they wanted between GT5 and GT6 despite the "the experience learned, and the scalable effects and assets developed during the PS3 years" and some of the choices they made between those two titles do raise (for me at least) questions about the choices they make.

Hence my lack of blind faith.

Just to clarify something, Evolution Studios has 260.000 polys per car. In GT6, or at least GT5, we have 200.000 for the premium ones.

Nope....

"Kazunori Yamauchi: “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.”"
Source: http://www.examiner.com/article/gt5-500k-polygons-a-car

....its been 500k polygon cars since GT5.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

If only....

First time I've seen that, seriously impressive. I was playing Driveclub yesterday and to me it didn't look as impressive as GT regarding car models and also I was surprised by lack of clarity in the environments that I struggled to see braking points that I was already anticipating on seeing in cockpit view.

It makes me appreciate even more how high level of performance PD managed to get out of the PS3. Seeing how good the premium models can look and how high quality some textures are for the environments in GT6, I think it bodes really well given how much more advanced and faster the PS4 GPU is and the massive memory bandwidth and capacity increase coming from the PS3. Shame about the CPU which seems biggest bottleneck in advancing the series regarding PS4 but maybe the next handheld if Sony make one might have similar level of performance so might get better ports.

I think in a way we will be seeing these Premium cars for many generations, maybe even for the rest of my life unless there is big advancements in 3D modelling and scanning technology, I don't see much reason to start again fresh so will be good to have a huge amount of cars at that quality.

 

[Eager Snake]

Nope....

"Kazunori Yamauchi: “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.”"
Source: http://www.examiner.com/article/gt5-500k-polygons-a-car

....its been 500k polygon cars since GT5.

My bad, I did a second research and I've found the same. I don't remember exactly how I got the 200.000 number...
Now, I have to ask this, even knowing that many people isn't interested about that aspect in the game or doesn't even have the equipment but... 3D.
I love that feature. I think it's tremendously immersive and it really helps to "balance" a bit the bad things with the good things of GT6.
I just tried again GT5 because I was excited to compare the two and so I did, I re-installed the game and had a go.
The first thing that shocked me was the clarity of the whole interior, including the impressive detail. That remained exactly the same at least for my eyes.
In comparison, in GT6, the 3D effect was extremely more convincing and natural, you can even adjust "in real time" the level of the 3D, but the quality of the interiors is a big let down when you compare it with GT5.
I have no idea what kind of method they used for the 3D in GT5, but the quality of the premium cars is untouched.
In GT6 we have, as I said, at least for my eyes, a great and inmersive 3D effect but the details, the textures and some edges are roughly cutted while playing with a premium car using the interior view.
If we have 3D in GT7, it's going to be something similar?

Ps: we should "trust" that PD can outperform the competition as they always did in the graphical department, but a logical thing to do right now if they want to maintain the quality, graphically speaking, is redoing the standards to premiums, which is kind of extreme if you ask me, and focusing on applying better shaders, effects and such to the game, which is not that difficult.
With that being covered, they can definitely apply to what really matters. Simulation in all aspects, as they promised, sounds, physics, tracks... I was always intrigued by that promised function that was going to match the real weather/time of a track like Nurburgring thanks to the online capabilities with the virtual one.
If I'm not mistaken, that was talked to be introduced in GT5, but then "announced" for GT6...

 

[Zelalem]

Nevermind, Sorry

 

[Scaff]

Ps: we should "trust" that PD can outperform the competition as they always did in the graphical department,/

I trust PD to outperform the competition in terms of car models (but do not yet consider them to be PS4 ready), but in terms graphics in the wider sense I have very little trust in PD given the choices made across GT5 and GT6.

 

[Zer0]

The point I was making was not that I expected PD to be able to do the same on the PS3 (which would be absurd), but rather your assumption that PD will simply be able to apply some pre-baked tools and away you do.

As you said "default to any developer", can you provide a source that shows the paint layer and how they are made up, the lighting tools, etc. that Evo have used are simply "default to any developer"?

Since the start there was available in the PS4 SDK a very low level graphical API (GNM) wich gave full control of the PS4 GPU, so if needed any developer can custom program by default their effects outside of the integrated high level and middleware supported graphical tools (more user friendly). All this is in constant evolution and more powerfull tools are added with every SDK update.

This is from the 2013 PS4 SDK, google the names if you don't know them.

My point was that the GT6 premium models will look much more realistic with not much effort in PS4 just with the default tools available and supported in the SDK, as the hardware have much better graphic capabilities and allow for it. It's common sense and it's very likely that PD will surpass all those SDK default capabilities with their own programed tools and visual effects. My point is not that any developer can achieve the top graphics of DC with a "click" or a "pre-backed" tool. And if you think that the GT6 models ported to GT7 will need to look as in DC to be considered "PS4 models", it's a personal opinion that I don't agree but that I'm not discussing here with you.

The difference between our views is that you seem to consider this to be 'done', that PD will have no issues at all, and my is that given the issues we have seen on the PS3 I don't work on that same assumption.

Not sure what part of the issues you see in the PS3 could not allow to PD to create a more realistic looking game in PS4 as happened with the transition from the GT4(PS2) to GT5-6(PS3), even with all the "issues". The difference between a standard car running in PS2 and a GT6 tessellated premium running in PS3 is not enought proof to you to understand how good can look a car in the next PS4 hardware? even GT6 looks more realistic at times than DC without using any next-gen shader or a better hardware.

Yes and I don't consider an unlocked frame-rate that ranged from 20 - 60 to be an indicator that "they are the best on that and the best at pushing the technological limits of the hardware one step beyond the rest of [racing] developers.".

As such I don't share the same blind faith that you seem to.

I'm discussing car models not framerate, again off-topic... anyway what is your source of those 20 fps??

I don't see the blind faith in expecting logical advances between hardware generations, is again comon sense, otherwise it would be blind negativity.

By today's standard it is, but the issues that occurred in GT5 and GT6 were from a developer that had more time with the platform that just about any other developer around, as such the continued 'PS3 wasn't good enough for what we wanted' is still at odds with the claims PD themselves made about the PS3 at its launch.

Another reason not to place blind faith in the claims that the power of the PS4 will allow PD to do everything they wanted, but were not able to with the PS3.

May be able to extract from the PS4, given that we have not seen a thing from them yet 'will' is more than a little presumptive, after all they were not able to fix all the issues they wanted between GT5 and GT6 despite the "the experience learned, and the scalable effects and assets developed during the PS3 years" and some of the choices they made between those two titles do raise (for me at least) questions about the choices they make.

Hence my lack of blind faith.

Not sure if you see all the advances and exponential technical and graphical jumps realized during the PS2 to PS3 hardware transition, "issues" aside was a gigantic jump and that's the only you need to pay attention to understand what PS4 will mean to the future of GT graphics.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

I trust PD to outperform the competition in terms of car models (but do not yet consider them to be PS4 ready), but in terms graphics in the wider sense I have very little trust in PD given the choices made across GT5 and GT6.

I could consider for example Driveclub cars as not PS3 ready as it struggles to compete in detail to models on a PS3 game for example and none of the current car games on PS4 are PS4 ready but I don't find that a realistic expectation. I'm surprised that Driveclub doesn't seem to even use tesselation. Other areas of game, given how good track comparisons to real life GT6 already looks and some textures in-game already (Photo by @Whistle Snap), I'm quite confident it will look spectacular compared to other racing games. If they can also achieve even better smoke effects which seem already ahead of the competition then that should make it look even more incredible. An obstacle PD will likely face is they might have to hit really high frame rates, maybe even as high as four times Driveclub so it will be interesting to see if they do that while most things looking better.

 

[Scaff]

Since the start there was available in the PS4 SDK a very low level graphical API (GNM) wich gave full control of the PS4 GPU, so if needed any developer can custom program by default their effects outside of the integrated high level and middleware supported graphical tools (more user friendly). All this is in constant evolution and more powerfull tools are added with every SDK update.

This is from the 2013 PS4 SDK, google the names if you don't know them.

My point was that the GT6 premium models will look much more realistic with not much effort in PS4 just with the default tools available and supported in the SDK, as the hardware have much better graphic capabilities and allow for it. It's common sense and it's very likely that PD will surpass all those SDK default capabilities with their own programed tools and visual effects. My point is not that any developer can achieve the top graphics of DC with a "click" or a "pre-backed" tool. And if you think that the GT6 models ported to GT7 will need to look as in DC to be considered "PS4 models", it's a personal opinion that I don't agree but that I'm not discussing here with you.

A list of tools does mean that you simply drop them in place and your work is done, as such proving a list of tools alone doesn't actually support the claims you have made.

Not sure what part of the issues you see in the PS3 could not allow to PD to create a more realistic looking game in PS4 as happened with the transition from the GT4(PS2) to GT5-6(PS3), even with all the "issues". The difference between a standard car running in PS2 and a GT6 tessellated premium running in PS3 is not enought proof to you to understand how good can look a car in the next PS4 hardware? even GT6 looks more realistic at times than DC without using any next-gen shader or a better hardware.

No, because until we see a PD developed car running on a PS4 we can't understand how well they will do. We can guess and make assumptions, but nothing more.

Oh and on balance I would have to disagree that GT6 looks more realistic than DC.

I'm discussing car models not framerate, again off-topic... anyway what is your source of those 20 fps??

Your the one that opened up the discussion in regard to graphics and compromises that have to be made in genres, don't moan about the direction an answer to a question you asked take.

In regard to a source, are you really being serious? Let me link to the conversation in which you inferred that GT5/6 runs at a solid 60fps in the rain and sources were provide to show that was not the case? Sources for this have been provided to you numerous times times.
About rain / wet asphalt
About rain / wet asphalt
About rain / wet asphalt

And here's another source just for you:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-gran-turismo-5-tech-analysis?page=3

I don't see the blind faith in expecting logical advances between hardware generations, is again comon sense, otherwise it would be blind negativity.

PD have produced nothing for the PS4 to date and while you may be happy top ignore the compromises made by them when they moved from the PS2 to the PS3 many are not.

Not sure if you see all the advances and exponential technical and graphical jumps realized during the PS2 to PS3 hardware transition, "issues" aside was a gigantic jump and that's the only you need to pay attention to understand what PS4 will mean to the future of GT graphics.

I'm more than aware of them and was full of confidence in an improvement all the way from GT right through to GT5P; that confidence was undone with GT5 and further more with GT6.

Don't infer that I don't know and understand the GT series or the development that have occurred across it.

I could consider for example Driveclub cars as not PS3 ready as it struggles to compete in detail to models on a PS3 game for example and none of the current car games on PS4 are PS4 ready but I don't find that a realistic expectation. I'm surprised that Driveclub doesn't seem to even use tesselation. Other areas of game, given how good track comparisons to real life GT6 already looks and some textures in-game already (Photo by @Whistle Snap), I'm quite confident it will look spectacular compared to other racing games. If they can also achieve even better smoke effects which seem already ahead of the competition then that should make it look even more incredible. An obstacle PD will likely face is they might have to hit really high frame rates, maybe even as high as four times Driveclub so it will be interesting to see if they do that while most things looking better.

I can't view the linked image and would disagree that DC 'struggles' to complete with GT6 models at all.

I'm also surprised you seem to think that GT7 will possibly hit 120 fps (which would be four times DC)?

 

[JockeP22]

Has the Z8 been mentioned?

 

[Saidur_Ali]

I can't view the linked image and would disagree that DC 'struggles' to complete with GT6 models at all.

I'm also surprised you seem to think that GT7 will possibly hit 120 fps (which would be four times DC)?

Uploaded now to GTP:

It is like half the number of polygons, I think you can see a lot of the extra detail in the lights in GT and it gives the sharpness to the car models. In other words I do think Driveclub car models look bland hence why I think it will be a struggle to match the PD models.

In that Eurogamer article, GT5 could hit an effective 120FPS on PS3 depending on situation but reason why I'm thinking they need to hit such a high performance target is to up the VR experience which supports that frame rate. Should also help if they target really high frame rates in getting a locked 60FPS. This is just speculation on what way they may go.

Here are some snapshots from GT trailers to see car models in greater detail (I personally think they are ready for many more generations of PlayStation consoles):

 

[Zelalem]

A list of tools does mean that you simply drop them in place and your work is done, as such proving a list of tools alone doesn't actually support the claims you have made.

exactly.

No, because until we see a PD developed car running on a PS4 we can't understand how well they will do. We can guess and make assumptions, but nothing more.

This. Polyphony and naughty dog were developing the graphic showcases last gen, but this gen cell and powerpc isn't used anymore and they have to deal with an different architecture, which RaD or Evolution could understand better than them. I for one think the order is superior to the early uncharted footage and Driveclub has a framerate advantage, since the game doesn't need to run with 60FPS like GT does.

 

[Tornado]

In that Eurogamer article, GT5 could hit an effective 120FPS on PS3 depending on situation

Which, once again, is not what that article actually said:

Chances are that with a track created with the course maker, in concert with a time trial (to eliminate the other cars), we could see this rise to 60FPS - an effective 120FPS throughput!

Under the best possible theoretical circumstances, they said it might happen. And GT7 running at a fantastic framerate on a brief occasion when barely anything is actually happening doesn't mean anything for graphical superiority if it is as all over the place as GT5 the rest of the time.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

Which, once again, is not what that article actually said:


Under the best possible theoretical circumstances, they said it might happen And GT7 running at a fantastic theoretical framerate when barely anything is actually happening doesn't mean anything for graphical superiority if it is as all over the place as GT5 the rest of the time.

Depends on situation like i said and seeing that with snow track and another car on track it can hit effective 100FPS, I think the chances are quite likely.

 

[Scaff]

Uploaded now to GTP:

Thanks

It is like half the number of polygons, I think you can see a lot of the extra detail in the lights in GT and it gives the sharpness to the car models. In other words I do think Driveclub car models look bland hence why I think it will be a struggle to match the PD models.

I don't see the advantage of the double polys in the GT models providing a 'lot of extra' detail over DC and don't think the DC models are bland at all, quite the opposite.

In that Eurogamer article, GT5 could hit an effective 120FPS on PS3 depending on situation but reason why I'm thinking they need to hit such a high performance target is to up the VR experience which supports that frame rate. Should also help if they target really high frame rates in getting a locked 60FPS. This is just speculation on what way they may go.

I think your overstating that somewhat, what they actually said is.....

"At its nadir, we see 18FPS on a car-logged Special Stage Route 7, and at best we can see around 50FPS in our Nurburgring test. Chances are that with a track created with the course maker, in concert with a time trial (to eliminate the other cars), we could see this rise to 60FPS - an effective 120FPS throughput!"

....as your throwing in both a theoretical situation and one that requires the much reduced detail of the course maker tracks. Its also in the 3D mode alone

In terms of a 60fps frame rate, that being locked for GT7 is in my opinion a must.

Here are some snapshots from GT trailers to see car models in greater detail (I personally think they are ready for many more generations of PlayStation consoles):

In terms of poly count and the detail that brings I would agree (and have done throughout this thread), in terms of the material finish, in particular the paint, I don't agree.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

I don't see the advantage of the double polys in the GT models providing a 'lot of extra' detail over DC and don't think the DC models are bland at all, quite the opposite.

I think this picture gives the feeling I get from Driveclub (From IGCD):

I think your overstating that somewhat, what they actually said is.....

"At its nadir, we see 18FPS on a car-logged Special Stage Route 7, and at best we can see around 50FPS in our Nurburgring test. Chances are that with a track created with the course maker, in concert with a time trial (to eliminate the other cars), we could see this rise to 60FPS - an effective 120FPS throughput!"

....as your throwing in both a theoretical situation and one that requires the much reduced detail of the course maker tracks. Its also in the 3D mode alone

In terms of a 60fps frame rate, that being locked for GT7 is in my opinion a must.

Even on a detailed track like Nurburgring, that is an effective 100FPS. Main point was though the possibility of achieving high frame rates is possible with old hardware; imagine the possibility on hardware that has at least 10 times more GPU power.

In terms of poly count and the detail that brings I would agree (and have done throughout this thread), in terms of the material finish, in particular the paint, I don't agree.

I think the paint thing is also something that is really well done in GT, the accuracy of manufacturers colours is IMO the best there is in racing games.

You can see in an interview with Kaz why that may be the case: Link

What are some of the processes involved in constructing car models?

We measure surfaces using a 3-D scanner; we put the paint color under a spectrophotometer, a device used to measure light intensity; we measure the power of the engine and do things like place cars on a dynamometer to record the sound.

You can see a really good real life comparison here by Abraxas: Link

 

[Scaff]

I think this picture gives the feeling I get from Driveclub (From IGCD):

You honestly think that image is representative of DC?

Even on a detailed track like Nurburgring, that is an effective 100FPS. Main point was though the possibility of achieving high frame rates is possible with old hardware; imagine the possibility on hardware that has at least 10 times more GPU power.

Its a potential 100fps rate in 3d at best, throw in a full grid with heavy rain and its not and its that lack of a locked frame rate that's a compromise that needs to go.

I think the paint thing is also something that is really well done in GT, the accuracy of manufacturers colours is IMO the best there is in racing games.

You can see in an interview with Kaz why that may be the case: Link

Getting the colour right doesn't mean you get the depth of colour right. The colour sample you get in a car brochure is 100% accurate in terms of the colour, doesn't mean its looks the same as it does on the car. Without multiple layers its not going to be the same.

You can see a really good real life comparison here by Abraxas: Link

Yep and it illustrates the current issues well, accurate to a fault in terms of the poly and detail, yet it still looks overly clean and sterile.

 

[ron86]

Yep and it illustrates the current issues well, accurate to a fault in terms of the poly and detail, yet it still looks overly clean and sterile.

Those pictures in the link for sure arent too clean or sterile...

 

[syntex123]

Well said. GT5P trailer of 8yrs ago still look great PD have pretty much mastered the gfx.





It is just that PS3 can only do so much. With PS4 everything with look glorious at native 1080P

They even cared to add the heat in that trailer haha. Like in GT3. I hope they bring back that for GT7!

 

[Scaff]

Those pictures in the link for sure arent too clean or sterile...

That's the fun things with opinions, we are all allowed differing ones, and in this case I disagree.

 

[508920]

You can clearly see the Gemasolar from the badge in the steeringwheel of the Lamborghini Countach. I mean, I can't even think of a way to make it more detailed... Zooming in further to a solarpanel until you see the reflection of the car again?

 

[Johnnypenso]

I think this picture gives the feeling I get from Driveclub (From IGCD):

Wow DriveClub looks like PS2:tdown:👎 Sure wish it looked like this on the PS4

Oh wait, my bad, those are from DriveClub.

 

[ron86]

That's the fun things with opinions, we are all allowed differing ones, and in this case I disagree.

Hmmm, wether you nor me stated that what we wrote was our opinion only...

Btw, my opion disagrees with your disagreement, theres not much to criticise on those GT comparison pictures!