Gran Turismo Sport: Weather VS AI ?

[w_a_i_n]

Ok, like many of you, I'm an ageing gamer, trying multiple franchises. Yet - I'm a one-trick pony. I only like the driving genre. I enjoy harder car/track scenarios.

I'm wondering about something. Here it comes in this post - to see what the community thinks. Feel free to reply, if you dare read to the end of the post!! Good luck!

Devs, increasingly, are adding time of day/effects like rain/fog/night. When you read online, what developers write, it's accepted that the following rule is technically true: games modelling/simulating effects that can change/adapt dynamically on the fly, won't hit ultra high frame rates as a result. Certainly not 100% consistently on current gen consoles.

A game measuring/recording temp changes forced by rain/fog/time of day, and using that data to adjust phyiscs "live" is doing lots already. The rendering pipeline for gfx/weather post-processing (sun/fog/rain spray etc) will all impact how few frames can be processed on-screen, per second. These points are technically backed up by a recent dev stating, it can't hit 60FPS locked. Yet if it wasn't modelling live weather/track simulation, it would have headroom left. So, it's about a balancing-act right? With the scene set, as quickly as I could, here goes.

*Some of you aren't likely too troubled by the fact that rain is missing in GTS
*Some don't likely want/need time of day to alter, whilst you are driving in real time, in the way rain could too
*Many could hate rain, making harder races via puddles, forcing you to slow down and wait for a drying a line

But...

For those who'd enjoy dynamic weather, night/track conditions, what if ????

Obviously - the only way you can "create" space/headroom for all of that extra code/cpu/gfx processing to happen in GTS, would be by turning something else "down or off" to compensate. Juggling 400 tasks, is less intensive than 4,000 per millisecond right.

If the number of the AI could be altered, would that be an option? Would it be enough to "compensate" the huge demands placed on the PS4/PS4 Pro?

Let's be honest about it, GTS is doing a lot of cool work !!

One thing that highlights this (behind the scenes) workload really well is this following fact. If you run your PS4 Pro at 1080, the game hits 50-60 FPS refreshing in replays, even in demanding scenes. This was tested by Digital Foundry on YouTube. But, on a 4Pro outputting at 4K settings and HDR, you'll get a vertical resolution bump to 1800 pixels, from 1080. It's then stretches to fit to 2160 pixels (of 4K).

But, such is that extra demand, that replays will then only hit 30FPS. Such is the power required to push all those pixels to upscaled 4K. A very basic calculation here: A PS5 in 2-3 years, even if was built with twice the power of a PS4 Pro, would be needed for 4K (checkerboarding from 1800p) to run GTS 50-60FPS in replays. Assuming running identical Polyphony code. But that has nothing to do with anything.

Sooooo. Given a choice, would any of you "wish/want" an option in GTS to reduce the number of AI you race against?

If that option could improve GTS from having static physical based lighting/set times of day, and allow physically dynamic lighting in races as you drove "live". Also, there's another option that you see in driving software now, designed to help old hardware "scale" the experience to best fit its performance (or lack of it).

Change the amount of cars you see drawn on the screen at the same time. It can help in replays, and whilst driving. So what about the two combined? That would free up more resources for fully dynamic weather/lighting?

In my mind, if GTS could add these options it would offer huge benefits to the immersion. Plus, with so few tracks in the game day-one, night and rain adds much to the way you approach lapping, so would expand the title no end I feel. Kaz did recently say he couldn't implement weather/lighting due to quality issues, and we all remember those 10-15FPS dire moments in previous GT titles. But if allowed himself to think outside of the box, it might just buy the CPU/GPU enough power to cope.

This post is just about me "wondering" what many of you think. Kaz won't change GTS. I'm not writing this post to sway opinion, or split the community. I certainly don't want anyone stressed by the wording used here. GTS is what it is, in the main, it will not change. This is his new vision. Personally I get that. I understand he wants to attract new people, more casual types possibly.

But, would these have been optiona you could have wanted in a perfect world??

Be interested to read your thoughts as always. If you got to the end, bloody well done lol !

Don't be shy !



P.S. Yes this is a GTS thread, but it's cool if ya wanna mention other games, it doesn't bother me. We are all racers at the end of the day ok.

 

[zzz_pt]

I'm not a dev or a software engineer but I'm a bit sceptical of that trade off - less AI cars in order to have dynamic weather and time of day. I think if that was the problem / limitation PD had, I think they would do the same they did in past GTs. Have only 16 cars on track but include dynamic weather and time of day. Remember the fancy Gran Turismo HD trailer from E3 back in 2005? It looked awesome, with 20 cars on track and animated pit crews. But that didn't make it into the final product (GT5).

Kaz said already in the past that the limit to 16 cars on track was related to performance and if I'm not mistaken, dynamic weather and tod was part of the subject.

I suspect there's something more there. Either they're developing those features to include post release, or they're simply too demanding for the hardware if PD wants to keep the quality and the frame rate / performance as it is at the moment.

PC2 has live track 3.0 which is awesome and you can have up to 32 cars on track. But the visuals suffer and that's pretty apparent, especially with full grids at night. Everyone has to make compromises. I'm not sure PD made the right ones yet but I'm curious to see what they can come up with.

 

[cjr3559]

I would definitely race against fewer AI if it allowed weather/time transitions. Don’t need to race against 23 AI opponents in a 5,10, or even 15 minute race personally. On the other hand, I suppose weather transitions wouldn’t really have much reason to exist in such a short period of time unless a freak thunderstorm happened to blow through.

8-16 competitive cars with an hour or two of racing is my sweet spot. And let me post a qualifying time offline like the old school GT’s. I’m not aware it’s availabile in GTS.

 

[eran0004]

I don't think the number of AI is what set the limits for time and weather transitions. They probably picked the static option because it looks better than the dynamic option.

 

[w_a_i_n]

I would definitely race against fewer AI if it allowed weather/time transitions. Don’t need to race against 23 AI opponents in a 5,10, or even 15 minute race personally. On the other hand, I suppose weather transitions wouldn’t really have much reason to exist in such a short period of time unless a freak thunderstorm happened to blow through.

8-16 competitive cars with an hour or two of racing is my sweet spot. And let me post a qualifying time offline like the old school GT’s. I’m not aware it’s availabile in GTS.

It would offer you a choice though I guess. Whilst rain could be dynamic, if you had 20 mins to kill before turning the console back off, it would allow you to take a break from dry lapping. But 100% understand yours replies regardless, cheers.

 

[w_a_i_n]

I don't think the number of AI is what set the limits for time and weather transitions. They probably picked the static option because it looks better than the dynamic option.

Kaz stated they didn't put weather in GTS because of quality issues. Many guess - that it means that the game won't run smooth. Kaz's choice, from that point of view, helps GTS quality stay really high - which is great.

Thanks for your reply, and yes, no it doesn't per se set the limit. But between each frame update per second, the game engine can only juggle so much. The workload, as a difference between say 24 & 12 AI cars, would give 50% of the CPU time (and GPU render time), back to the game engine, to do other things with. One example, if AI reduced from 20 to 14, just as a random 30%. Then AI could be given more intelligence. Because their decisions must happen at the same time as everything else, within game engine limits. So, preventing the AI shunting your rear, in SP AI races.

Regardless of what we all feel/want, until a new more powerful console lands, GTS in its current form doesn't have the power for weather without it affecting quality. Unless he meant by "quality issues", that they can't make it look polished enough for now. But I doubt that. The reason I doubt this, is because after a year of optimisation/polish, dry lap replays showing AI cars in a long shot made the frame rate drop to 50FPS at 1080p. For all we know, they may have fully dynamic systems already built in - but had to disable them.

Then this will be a reason to upgrade when PS5 drops, and GTS-Ultra is launched lol

 

[syntex123]

I'm not sure giving us less AI would help, but I wouldn't mind less AI if it did. Remember in the original GT? We had waayy less AI and it was still a blast to play.

What I don't understand though, why doesn't Kaz just tell Sony what kind of specs he needs when the PS5 is going into production, so that he can make the next game as perfect as he want without limitations of hardware? Won't happen, I know. It's just wishful thinking I guess.

 

[CHEN255]

I would not like to see a reduction in the number of ai. At 19 ai opponents I am happy, it is the same size as an F1 grid including the player. If anything, I want more ai opponents, not less.
Perhaps on the next generation of consoles we will be able to have dynamic weather, large grids and superb graphics as well.

 

[eran0004]

Kaz stated they didn't put weather in GTS because of quality issues. Many guess - that it means that the game won't run smooth. Kaz's choice, from that point of view, helps GTS quality stay really high - which is great.

Thanks for your reply, and yes, no it doesn't per se set the limit. But between each frame update per second, the game engine can only juggle so much. The workload, as a difference between say 24 & 12 AI cars, would give 50% of the CPU time (and GPU render time), back to the game engine, to do other things with. One example, if AI reduced from 20 to 14, just as a random 30%. Then AI could be given more intelligence. Because their decisions must happen at the same time as everything else, within game engine limits. So, preventing the AI shunting your rear, in SP AI races.

Regardless of what we all feel/want, until a new more powerful console lands, GTS in its current form doesn't have the power for weather without it affecting quality. Unless he meant by "quality issues", that they can't make it look polished enough for now. But I doubt that. The reason I doubt this, is because after a year of optimisation/polish, dry lap replays showing AI cars in a long shot made the frame rate drop to 50FPS at 1080p. For all we know, they may have fully dynamic systems already built in - but had to disable them.

Then this will be a reason to upgrade when PS5 drops, and GTS-Ultra is launched lol

The graphics budget saved by going with a static sky was more likely spent on bumping the graphics quality than on adding more ai. I doubt you would save much at all by cutting the grids down.

I'm sure a dozen cars in the same shot can make the frame rate drop, but the game was optimised for its current configuration and not for a hypothetical dynamic sky scenario. A dynamic sky could easily have been implemented by reducing the graphics quality.

 

[Blindside92]

I have a gameplay>graphics point of view.

I’d rather play a racing game that had more gameplay variables such as changing weather conditions/time of day/larger fields of opponents at the expense of how good the graphics look.

 

[w_a_i_n]

I have a gameplay>graphics point of view.

I’d rather play a racing game that had more gameplay variables such as changing weather conditions/time of day/larger fields of opponents at the expense of how good the graphics look.

It must be a tricky thing for devs to have to juggle, when making design choices. The talent at Polyphony certainly have obsessed about detail, and the extra year for polish highlights an increase in standards. I'd hope most racing fans would agree with your point on the importance of balance too.

 

[IfAndOr]

I wouldn't really want to drop the number of AI cars since we've only just got the number up to 20. The more the merrier (within reason), especially so if it's a longer race.
I agree with the point about PD's obsession with details. To give a bit more processing headroom I wouldn't mind is if they reduced the detail level on the cars during the races. While it sure is pretty to look at I don't really need to be able to count the number of wheel nuts on a car I'm racing against, I'm (hopefully) looking where I'm going.
By all means have the super high detail level elsewhere but for racing it's not entirely needed. It'd be better to have some other possible features/enhancements/fps that freeing up a bit of processing power would allow.