Gran Turismo Sport: General Discussion
- Thread starter Formidable
- 47,132 comments
- 4,757,350 views
- 8,187
- Kaikoura, NZ
- Nato777
I think the issue people have is that they fully expected them all to be in the next GT, especially with the 'future proof' statement. Now they are apparently not future proof after all and as yet there has been no explanation as to why.
Personally I'm not too bothered, I guess if we had to pay for them in DLC that would be a worst case scenario but I'm not really expecting that. I'll be happy enough to buy new content as DLC but not old content.
Personally I'm not too bothered, I guess if we had to pay for them in DLC that would be a worst case scenario but I'm not really expecting that. I'll be happy enough to buy new content as DLC but not old content.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
- 8,715
Highly unlikely.I have a new worst case scenario for you; Kaz explains why the PS3 premiums were dropped for GTS... "We just couldn't get them to work properly in the Scapes therefore we decided to do away with them."
(Unless you mean detail).
I personally favour the sound "excuse" at this point in time. Combined with the time required to get all the GT5 era Premiums to tessellate.
- 8,187
- Kaikoura, NZ
- Nato777
Last edited:
We have, GT6. Ok we don't know that for an absolute certainty but I think it's extremely likely they didn't model the VGT cars twice in such a short space of time. They surely were already modelled with the new method the first time, as were any other DLC cars, probably even some of the last ones made before release.
Ok, seeing them in the GTS engine is more important but still, who thought the 'old' premiums looks noticeably worse than the VGT cars? The fact we can't tell and nobody ever said at the time they thought the VGTs looked any different suggests not.
- 8,187
- Kaikoura, NZ
- Nato777
That's the thing, we don't know anything about this for a certainty. Nothing wrong with discussing it of course, just you have to accept either side of the argument as being opinion at this point and equally valid and possible... in my opinion. 
- 8,715
This is true, but the major difference in the same model between GT6 and GTS, aside from run-time LoD, will be in the textures. This controls the appearance of things like the light clusters, some logos and stickers and such, much of the interior, "tiling" materials (like carbon fibre, meshes, tyre treads etc.), some transparency effects, liveries and so on.
We don't know to what extent PD "future-proofed" in providing car-specific textures at two (or more) quality levels to "deploy" on both PS3 and PS4. It's "or more" because PD might have shifted the goalposts since GT5 in particular, which the "super-Premiums" would arguably point to being the case.
In that sense, although the differences might not be noticeable on PS3 (same target), it might be on PS4 (potentially shifted targets).
That's the thing, we don't know anything about this for a certainty. Nothing wrong with discussing it of course, just you have to accept either side of the argument as being opinion at this point and equally valid and possible... in my opinion.
True, I'm not the one attacking someone for being hypocritical based on uncertainties, though.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
Neomone
(Banned)
- 133
- Australia
I simply think it's that it's the smallest mainline car list ever for reasons I don't fully understand. That feels bad. I fear that it will have less unique real cars than GT5P Spec III, and I think that's a negative both for replayability and for the price that they want to charge.
I'm hoping that there will be additional features revealed, or that there will be a more indepth discussion from Polyphony of why this is of benefit to the consumer. The problem at the moment is that it feels like taking away next gen ready models just because. That may not be the case, but perception matters.
I know that some people are willing to simply accept that Polyphony has made the decision for a good reason. I'm wary of most developers in general, and with Polyphony in particular I take a wait and see attitude. GT5 and GT6 have not convinced me that they make design decisions that I would consider good. I would like them to show me that this is the best choice for the consumer and the game as a whole.
- 1,984
- Barcelona
- mannjonusa
Just looked at these properly...
The lighting is much better in the GTS pic, for me. Night & day, you could say
Look at the steering wheel - the GT6 one just looks so 'gamey'.
All the surfaces/textures are consistent, no matter how much light is falling on them or at what angle.
The GTS pic is way more natural - the light actually seems to obscure the texture information somehow (the top of the dash, in particular). I have no idea what tech is at play here (global illumination?), but it's real impressive.
I'd love to see a rundown of what is exactly going on to achieve this. Might help with the running 'premium' argument too
Just looked at these properly...
The lighting is much better in the GTS pic, for me. Night & day, you could say
Look at the steering wheel - the GT6 one just looks so 'gamey'.
All the surfaces/textures are consistent, no matter how much light is falling on them or at what angle.
The GTS pic is way more natural - the light actually seems to obscure the texture information somehow (the top of the dash, in particular). I have no idea what tech is at play here (global illumination?), but it's real impressive.
I'd love to see a rundown of what is exactly going on to achieve this. Might help with the running 'premium' argument too
Exactly, the lighting is where the big improvement is there, not the polygon model. Well ok, the textures are probably also better in the GTS model but the lighting is the main improvement. As has been said, we really need to see the 'old' premium models in the GTS lighting engine to truly judge how they stack up. A lot of people (not you) continually mix up model quality and lighting quality when they talk about how cars look in video games.
For example, many people have long said that the Forza car models look "plastic/cartoon" when the real problem was the lighting engine, not the models themselves. I remember a few years ago someone ripped the Forza 4 models and rendered them in a more realistic lighting engine and they looked amazing, very realistic. The models weren't plastic, it was the inferior lighting engine.
- 1,984
- Barcelona
- mannjonusa
Everyone looks happy except Kaz.
But it's unhappy in a Lost Boys kind of way
I think you hit the nail on the head there, and really good point about the Forza thing. I've always said Forza looked plastic too, and now I'm more leaning towards your theory about that. I know nothing about real-time rendering or whatever, but it almost seems as though the Forza engine models the light on just one reflection, whereas in the real world (and to a certain extent, in GTS it seems) the light just flies off at all angles, reflecting itself, anything nearby, etc...
I could be talking pseudo-technical nonsense here, but it seems right in my head
Last edited:
- 35,193
- Addison,Texas
- GTP_RACECAR
But it's unhappy in a Lost Boys kind of way
I think you hit the nail on the head there, and really good point about the Forza thing. I've always said Forza looked plastic too, and now I'm more leaning towards your theory about that. I know nothing about real-time rendering or whatever, but it almost seems as though the Forza engine models the light on just one reflection, whereas in the real world (and to a certain extent, in GTS it seems) the light just flies off at all angles, reflecting itself, anything nearby, etc...
I could be talking pseudo-technical nonsense here, but it seems right in my head
I wish I could find the photos to illustrate, they were on GTP in a Forza thread but it was a long time ago. Those same plastic models looked great, they were nicely rendered in realistic scenes. It perfectly illustrated that the models were not the problem.
- 137
- Japan
I think that PD has become very cautious in paid DLC. So, do not worry too much about the worst scenario. They've prepared a paid DLC in GT6, but it was it is "for the people with no time". Many of the available DLC in GT6 has been included in the update.
If there is a paid DLC it will provide a credit to the "for people with no time".
- 15,532
- Cairo, Egypt
- GTP_SEMS
Off-topic ish but I love reading @Griffith500 's posts, don't understand half of what he says 
but always learn stuff from him.
but always learn stuff from him.
- 696
- Ibicaraí, Bahia - Brasil
- IrwingBR
Off-topic ish but I love reading @Griffith500 's posts, don't understand half of what he says
I really enjoyed to read it too. At first I knew i wasn't ready, as my english is limited so i cooled my head, and get back to it to proper read it.
Is always nice to learn new things, specially when it us about something we enjoy.
- 16,143
- Melbourne
- ScottPuss20
- CheetahsMeow
So, will a new build be shown in China? Or will it be the E3 build? I'm really interested to the see the progress made, if any...
- 2,006
- Austria
I think no one can tell you that.
Let's wait and see
- 355
- Italy
- riblo72
I agree about the technical issues of porting the premium cars from PS3 to PS4 and so on but i think we all forget the main thing: the FIA licensing...
I think that PDI was "forced" di put azide many cars models cause they are too old for GTS...
You dont do a game like GTS and put the 60s VW van from woodstock into it...
So PDI haf time to concentrate on making super premiums out of the most modern cars (like 2000-2016 i guess)...
If this GTS is the model on wich future GT games will be based all cars before 2000 are lost... Unless they male a GT Classic game/DLC...
I think that PDI was "forced" di put azide many cars models cause they are too old for GTS...
You dont do a game like GTS and put the 60s VW van from woodstock into it...
So PDI haf time to concentrate on making super premiums out of the most modern cars (like 2000-2016 i guess)...
If this GTS is the model on wich future GT games will be based all cars before 2000 are lost... Unless they male a GT Classic game/DLC...
- 325
- United Kingdom
- hejustsitsthere
Is anyone else excited by what looks like much better support for at least some of the specific racing disciplines? I count fifteen very clearly designated GT3 cars, not including VGTs, and that's just what we know about so far, as well as five Group B cars including the Peagueot RCZ which really has my curiosity piqued. It's early days but, with livery editor to throw into the mix to boot, it's looking like we're going to have far more colourful and diverse grids, which will only make for more interesting racing.
And before you welcome me to the forum, I used to be on here as SCER until I forgot my password and lost access to the email address, so if anything welcome me back.
And before you welcome me to the forum, I used to be on here as SCER until I forgot my password and lost access to the email address, so if anything welcome me back.
- 8,715
I thought I saw some global illumination in the R18 garage scene, and I once described how PD could use each car's reflection maps to subtly light the interiors to avoid the dreaded shadows.
However, I think it was in a VVV video that some "indirect lighting" was spotted on the underside of a car, but (only?) in a replay. So PD might have taken it further than that.
I doubt it's a genuine GI implementation, but much as GT4 didn't use genuine "image based lighting" in its photo mode, it still benefited from the principle through what must have been a similar approach (that was then applied in real time at all times on PS3 - hence "superior lighting").
PD (like some other developers) are geniuses at distilling a technical problem down to what is required and then engineering a unique hybrid solution for it, constantly defying "industry norms" (and then effectively establishing norms in turn). Of course, there is the concern that they have been bogged down with "technical" stuff of late.
Thank you both for the compliments. I also enjoy learning about this stuff, and try to share that enthusiasm.
However, I hope that what I write isn't taken as read, and rather used as incentive to look into these things for yourselves (perhaps in your own languages). If anyone can correct any mistakes, so much the better for us all!
I would also much rather be able to write in a way that everyone can understand, but instead I tend to be a bit disjointed and random (but that's probably how I'm able to remember half this stuff, so...) I need my own Translator-san at times!
However, I think it was in a VVV video that some "indirect lighting" was spotted on the underside of a car, but (only?) in a replay. So PD might have taken it further than that.
I doubt it's a genuine GI implementation, but much as GT4 didn't use genuine "image based lighting" in its photo mode, it still benefited from the principle through what must have been a similar approach (that was then applied in real time at all times on PS3 - hence "superior lighting").
PD (like some other developers) are geniuses at distilling a technical problem down to what is required and then engineering a unique hybrid solution for it, constantly defying "industry norms" (and then effectively establishing norms in turn). Of course, there is the concern that they have been bogged down with "technical" stuff of late.
Off-topic ish but I love reading @Griffith500 's posts, don't understand half of what he says
Thank you both for the compliments. I also enjoy learning about this stuff, and try to share that enthusiasm.
However, I hope that what I write isn't taken as read, and rather used as incentive to look into these things for yourselves (perhaps in your own languages). If anyone can correct any mistakes, so much the better for us all!
I would also much rather be able to write in a way that everyone can understand, but instead I tend to be a bit disjointed and random (but that's probably how I'm able to remember half this stuff, so...) I need my own Translator-san at times!
nasanu
(Banned)
- 1,429
- Australia
- nasanu
- nasanu
The thing is that is doesn't matter. People should judge the game based on the game. Instead they judge the game based on coding techniques using in old software, or people talking in interviews, or the alignment of the stars etc. Personally I'll judge GTS solely on its merits while questioning the sanity and intelligence of those who don't.
Really people are crazy. Imagine if I could dig up an old quote from Kunos saying their next game will feature one billion cars and make you breakfast every morning, would AC suddenly be a worse game? No. I really don't know how the crazies think the previous games, or interviews, or the vision GT project etc change the game code in GTS. By what magic?
