Gran Turismo 5 Full Game Footage/Images

  • Thread starter Sam48
  • 8,194 comments
  • 1,544,445 views
Nope, they've opted not to render the smoke behind the vehicle because it's a waste of memory and would hamper performance. So they "cut-it-back" to stop around the edges of the car. It's a common technique in game development, though not always as obvious as this example.

I suppose you think the shadow jaggies are a bug too. Don't be an idiot.

P.S. I think you'll find I specifically said it's in the game and replays as well, read up.

"Opted" not to render smoke behind the vehicle because it's a waste of memory? :lol:

There's no OPTING in it, it's simple z-order mechanics and the engine typically takes care of that.

You are an idiot. Read up from page 1 onwards and you might learn something. There's a good lad.
 
It is most definatly an intentional cutback. The smoke would look better if the pixels were half the size, (so the jaggies were half the size so less noticable), but from what I understand this would take twice as much GPU usage for the smoke effects, and there is obviously a good reason why they wouldn't have made it look better than it does - slowdown.


they promised 60 fps 1080p, that's why I think they stood to this promise
 
amg2q.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]

My car, Well Wifey's really. :sly:

Cant wait to drive this Weds or something similiar to it.
 
nice pictures!
i have an idea:
can someone please reenact the very first "damage in gt5 prologue" picutre, that went around the world (and started here)?
i mean the one with the blue clio at suzuka, i´m sure you guys remember it.
 
they promised 60 fps 1080p, that's why I think they stood to this promise

Yup, hence them cutting back a bit on the smoke effects :)

Don't get me wrong I'm not complaining, it doesn't bother me. I'll just be sure to place the car and smoke not in line in pictures :)
 
"Opted" not to render smoke behind the vehicle because it's a waste of memory? :lol:

There's no OPTING in it, it's simple z-order mechanics and the engine typically takes care of that.

You are an idiot. Read up from page 1 onwards and you might learn something. There's a good lad.

It is indeed a waste of memory. Do you really think PD lack the ability to render smoke behind a car? You think they "didn't notice" the incredibly blatant graphical anomaly? Stop being ridiculous. It's a common method in game development, it's not an accident. If you can't even have a conversation without resorting to insults it's plainly obvious you lack the ability to back up your point by any logical means. Grow up son.
 
Personally, I think that PD should have used the 720p mode as the main one for in-game graphics and kept 1080p as a bonus "HiFi" mode (with some limitations) like in Gran Turismo 1. There would have been less graphical compromises in that way.
 
It is most definatly an intentional cutback.

If it's a "cutback" there'd be nothing wrong with extending it just past the car such that the gap between the car and the smoke doesn't show. It's actually plain to see that you can't see the smoke through the car glass / interior - it really ought to be rendered. Occlusion should be handled as part of the game's engine.

You want the smoke effect to be correctly placed in the z-order such that the car overlaps the smoke and not the other way around.
Clearly it is a bug.

The smoke would look better if the pixels were half the size, (so the jaggies were half the size so less noticable), but from what I understand this would take twice as much GPU usage for the smoke effects, and there is obviously a good reason why they wouldn't have made it look better than it does - slowdown.
I do agree that if the buffer were higher resolution then of course you'd be pushing more pixels and that would cause frames to drop, however I don't agree with slowdown being an issue that mandates a "cutback" because any smoke rendered in the foreground is still transparent (i.e. you can still see the scene behind it). If there's slowdown then there's slowdown and 'cutting back' isn't going to help in the circumstance where that smoke, dirt, etc is in the foreground. There won't be any memory saving there, nor any saving regards slowdown.
 
Last edited:
RX-7_FD3S

Can You take a Picture of the Honda civic Type R 08'? I'm looking for one picture but it's hard to find one:S

The Civic you are looking for is not in GT5 the 08 civic is the Type R FD-2 which is not the same car.

civic_fd2_type_r_100.jpg


I didn't even know they made a saloon Civic ,sorry! ,it looks ok though :)

Yeah it doesn't look bad but it looks nowhere near as cool as the Hatchback Civic Type-R, I wonder why PD chose that car? Weird.
 
That's the premium version and nope not a lot of tunning option, 2 front and 2 wing. No good rims neither. As for engine tunning there's lot less choice than FM3, no engine swap or anything, just the usual turbo / NA upgrade and some motor upgrade too.

And it looks a bit better ingame, couldnt figure the good lightning. If you look at the full res pics too you'll see it looks ok.
 
That's the premium version and nope not a lot of tunning option, 2 front and 2 wing. No good rims neither. As for engine tunning there's lot less choice than FM3, no engine swap or anything, just the usual turbo / NA upgrade and some motor upgrade too.

And it looks a bit better ingame, couldnt figure the good lightning. If you look at the full res pics too you'll see it looks ok.

too bad about the body mods for this car. i assume this one cannot be race modified?

By the way, thanks for the info.
 
Yeah, i think the main problem is that there isnt enough shadow under the car to give it more of a sense that it's on the road, and not just placed on the picture.
 
Back