Graphical fidelity

[Imari]

Why bother improving anything? Games that were made 40 years ago on very primitive hardware were fun enough. Hell, you don't even need a computer to make a good game, let's all go play hide and seek!

If you don't push the boundaries, you don't know where they are. Let's see what PD have been cooking before damning their apparent technical zeal.

Well, their technical zeal in GT5 got them a game that couldn't hold a solid 60FPS, and had all sorts of graphical glitches. Many of which were eventually patched out, but many of which still exist.

Sorry, but I'm judging them on their past results. They pushed too far on GT5, and there's not really any evidence that GT6 is any different. In fact, from the demo it would appear that the problems are worse, if anything.

You know full well I'm not advocating giving up on advancing technology, but there's got to be some awareness of the capabilities of the system. Why don't they run 40 cars on track at once? Because the system isn't capable. It's an old box, and they make do with what they can. And sometimes that means admitting that certain things just aren't possible.

There's a difference between finding where the boundaries are, and selling it to people for $60 per.

 

[HaylRayzor]

Please fix the title. It hurts my brain.

 

[MrPainCake]

 

[IceMan PJN]

It's a demo.

They don't have a PS2 demo version and then a high-quality retail version. The track will appear in retail as it does in the demo. The demo would have the track that they have built for the retail game. They aren't going to give it a complete makeover right before it ships.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Although a nice environment is part of the experience, especially in a current gen console game, I must admit that some people overreact with how the tracks look.

The way tracks look in GT5 have never bothered me, unless I decide to park the car and take a picture. And with new lighting engine, I didn't noticed anything wrong with the tracks offered in the demo. They serve their purpose.

I'm in the same boat. My focus is entirely on physics and gameplay. The graphics for me were good enough in GT5 even on the Standards If I had a choice between more tracks of the same quality and or less tracks or less additional tracks but better quality, I'd take the former for sure.

 

[phil_75]

They don't have a PS2 demo version and then a high-quality retail version. The track will appear in retail as it does in the demo. The demo would have the track that they have built for the retail game. They aren't going to give it a complete makeover right before it ships.

Exactly!

Also, The more i play the demo, the more it feels like GT5, the tuned 370Z especially, and why does the tuned version with wing seemingly have less grip than the standard 370Z?

 

[Cosbuster]

Exactly! and why does the tuned version with wing seemingly have less grip than the standard 370Z?

Because...it's going faster?

 

[daus26]

Please stop with the lazy talks. If anything, it's time. If not time, priority.

I get it if they don't work as fast as you like it too, but that doesn't mean they're lazy.

 

[Gravitron]

Please fix the title. It hurts my brain.

Me too. Fixed.

 

[Griffith500]

Well, their technical zeal in GT5 got them a game that couldn't hold a solid 60FPS, and had all sorts of graphical glitches. Many of which were eventually patched out, but many of which still exist.

Sorry, but I'm judging them on their past results. They pushed too far on GT5, and there's not really any evidence that GT6 is any different. In fact, from the demo it would appear that the problems are worse, if anything.

You know full well I'm not advocating giving up on advancing technology, but there's got to be some awareness of the capabilities of the system. Why don't they run 40 cars on track at once? Because the system isn't capable. It's an old box, and they make do with what they can. And sometimes that means admitting that certain things just aren't possible.

There's a difference between finding where the boundaries are, and selling it to people for $60 per.

But GT6 is just a continuation of that work. They've carried on from where they got to, what we'll see is the culmination of their developmental effort on the platform. All their work to date. By not working to some middle ground and instead targeting the absolute best from the start, that's what we'll get in the end. Technically, at least - that says nothing about the actual game built on top of it all, which has nothing much to do with it (except for systems interaction, like physics, weather etc.).

So if the plans they had were targeting this end position from the start, then the idea would have been to take off the prototyping bench what was working at the time and craft it into a game: GT5, that "could be finished any time". Instead, they were waiting for content to be made (damn future proofing) and got lost in feature creep with stuff that just wasn't fully ready to go (e.g. weather etc.)

I don't mind funding further development in that vein, because it works in the long run - it's great that a large developer gets this kind of freedom, usually you're looking to the impoverished indie scene for real top-down creative ambition. As for the cost, if you want a sound investment, buy gold, or maybe silver - or is it land? It's definitely not games...

 

[Imari]

I don't mind funding further development in that vein, because it works in the long run - it's great that a large developer gets this kind of freedom, usually you're looking to the impoverished indie scene for real top-down creative ambition. As for the cost, if you want a sound investment, buy gold, or maybe silver - or is it land? It's definitely not games...

Oh, good argument. I say they shouldn't sell us poorly designed games for $60, you say I should invest in precious metals?

Best of luck, mate. I don't think there's a rational discussion to be had here.

 

[TheeFrogmanlego]

Oh, good argument. I say they shouldn't sell us poorly designed games for $60, you say I should invest in precious metals?

Best of luck, mate. I don't think there's a rational discussion to be had here.

Money talks..
This gen has honestly disappointed me , we truly see the lack of dedication now as opposed to the previous gens . I see that inconsistency in alot of games that yells , " hey ima spend time on this area but heck that other areas good enough!! " Like really.. Imagine buying a car that had some fantastic quality parts and other parts that were clearly manufactured without a care in the world and were falling apart.. Are the manufactures suppose to blame there equipment when they are clearly capable of making good quality parts?
I wouldn't mind if all tracks looked as bad as Grand valley but they were consistent , that track shows PD couldn't give a rats ass . Go drive it in GT5 right now and the shadows are clearly baked in as they don't project on your car . PD knows its a big track and it will require allot of work to remake but " eh its good enough"

 

[Downhill Dino]

You say this, yet they did practically redo Autumn Ring. A track that could've very much been left alone. Inconsistencies? Yes. But does it matter that much? Or do you just love nit-picking?

And do we have to go over how long it takes to do such things? Or do you want to make another reflective square? I mean headlight.

 

[TheeFrogmanlego]

You say this, yet they did practically redo Autumn Ring. A track that could've very much been left alone. Inconsistencies? Yes. But does it matter that much? Or do you just love nit-picking?

And do we have to go over how long it takes to do such things? Or do you want to make another reflective square? I mean headlight.

Least I did int BS and say it takes FOREVER , on the other hand I printed it out and chrome'd it ( 3d printer), saved my self money as the actual piece on eBay is crazy expensive , iv been needing that since some Jerk rear ended my parked 73 mach one ;P Technically PD could do that and scan it... and still have time to spare.

 

[dr_slump]

They don't have a PS2 demo version and then a high-quality retail version. The track will appear in retail as it does in the demo. The demo would have the track that they have built for the retail game. They aren't going to give it a complete makeover right before it ships.

How does it come that GT5P looked different from GT5? Or even GT HD in some aspects?

Maybe it will stay the same, maybe it will change.

 

[TheeFrogmanlego]

How does it come that GT5P looked different from GT5? Or even GT HD in some aspects?

Maybe it will stay the same, maybe it will change.

I honesty hope its a place holder , Autumn ring did not need a face lift
Trail mountain and Grand valley did..

 

[Griffith500]

Oh, good argument. I say they shouldn't sell us poorly designed games for $60, you say I should invest in precious metals?

Best of luck, mate. I don't think there's a rational discussion to be had here.

No, I'm saying games are a comparative waste of money anyway. If you want a polished commercial product designed to sell in the millions and tickle everyone's "must stay current" glands, you're pretty well catered for. I don't mind the odd ugly duckling if it leads to the proverbial swan, if you catch my drift.