GT Sport vs Other Games: Comparison Video Thread
- Thread starter GTPNewsWire
- 2,529 comments
- 217,663 views
- 1,167
- Paradera
- SDSPOWER01
I see alot of members like to nitpick a certain flaw of the game to make it look like the whole package is "terrible".
Yes the graphics in GT Sport is incredible and seriously improved to match other title's in the current gen.
But let us not also forget the sacrifice of dynamic TOD and weather makes it stand up. The way materials, shaders and the lighting look in PD's s game is simply spectacular (but compared to Forza 7 I do not see that HUGE of a difference).
Sure you all have the right to voice your opinion on different aspects of the games.
But I also see when a specific aspect of the game....oh what the hell I will just say it, when people starts making comparison of GTS vs Forza 7, PCars 2, Asseto Corsa and R3E for the SOUND that is where things start to heat up. We can see clearly how GTS lacks after IDK almost 20 years in that department.
We have seen improvement in the sound department which I find great.
But when making comparisons with the likes of it's competitions thats where I start to feel embarrased for the title.
I mean after 20 years they start to notice one of the biggest flaws of the game and even after big improvements it still lacks behind competition now THAT IS DEPRESSING.
Yes the graphics in GT Sport is incredible and seriously improved to match other title's in the current gen.
But let us not also forget the sacrifice of dynamic TOD and weather makes it stand up. The way materials, shaders and the lighting look in PD's s game is simply spectacular (but compared to Forza 7 I do not see that HUGE of a difference).
Sure you all have the right to voice your opinion on different aspects of the games.
But I also see when a specific aspect of the game....oh what the hell I will just say it, when people starts making comparison of GTS vs Forza 7, PCars 2, Asseto Corsa and R3E for the SOUND that is where things start to heat up. We can see clearly how GTS lacks after IDK almost 20 years in that department.
We have seen improvement in the sound department which I find great.
But when making comparisons with the likes of it's competitions thats where I start to feel embarrased for the title.
I mean after 20 years they start to notice one of the biggest flaws of the game and even after big improvements it still lacks behind competition now THAT IS DEPRESSING.
- 491
I understand you are a strong supporter of PC2 but from the comparative images I have eyes to see that on PC2, that track, it's horrible at the visual level.
Then explain why you posted that picture if then tell me that I have to play both to say it's not so.
With compromises at: tons of tearing, dynamic resolution, a multitude of bugs, poor graphics, IA kamikaze?
On GTS they sacrificed tod and dynamic weather but in the settings of the various times and conditions of the day is a joy to the eyes and we have not yet seen the weather.
I prefer what PD did if it did not have the problems that got GT5 and now pc2
Last edited by a moderator:
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,734
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
A track is more than just a static image and I would fully agree that GTS looks better than PC2, the reasons being the two differing design choices the two developers made.
However while not as good as GTS's, as a track its certainly not 'horrible' at a visual level.
In regard to your list of compromises "With compromises at: tons of tearing, dynamic resolution, a multitude of bugs, poor graphics, IA kamikaze?"
It doesn't have tons of tearing, and bugs and AI have nothing at all to do with the visual design route taken (or are you assuming that videos with the ai skill set to zero and aggression set to 100 are somehow a normal representation).
Now dynamic resolution isn't something that I personally have an issue with and disagree that the graphics are poor. They are at a lower level of fidelity to GTS, to allow the dynamic TOD, weather and Live Track 3.0.
Now keep in mind that based on the beta the representative levels of performance in framerate between the two was near identical in regard to the hardware. With lows in the 40s for both on the standard PS4, and 59-60 on the Pro. However that was with full wet conditions and a full grid on PC2, while for the GTS beta that was for static sunny weather and could happen on some tracks with a single car on track (Willow mainly).
As such we have no idea at all yet what impact rain will have on GTS in regard to framerate or tearing, as such attempting to take issue with another title in that regard could well backfire.
The two differing design choices allow for two different approaches, one allows a dynamic track, weather and TOD at the expense of a higher level of graphical fidelity; the other has a higher level of graphical fidelity at the expense of a dynamic track, weather and TOD.
Some may only be happy with only one of those two options, personally I'm going to play both as they both have pros and cons in that regard; however neither is 'wrong' in that regard at all; and I do find it rather odd that many taking issue with one of these design directions may well have been happy with the way GT5 dealt with dynamic TOD and weather, despite that having significantly more issues with graphical fidelity as a result.
Fixating on a single area of performance can cause people to miss damn good titles, now if you want a horrible looking title on PS4 then Seb Loeb Rally Evo is the one. It looks and sounds poor...
...and yet to dismiss it because of its looks or sounds would be to dismiss the best off road physics engine on the PS4 (and yes its better in that regard that the very nice looking and sounding Dirt Rally).
Also please stop double posting, the quote and edit tools allow for very easy multi-quoting.
Last edited:
- 6,838
- Europe
- GTP_Slim
- PzR Slim
With compromises at: tons of tearing, dynamic resolution, a multitude of bugs, poor graphics, IA kamikaze?
On GTS they sacrificed tod and dynamic weather but in the settings of the various times and conditions of the day is a joy to the eyes and we have not yet seen the weather.
I prefer what PD did if it did not have the problems that got GT5 and now pc2
Livetrack 3.0
I imagine people who are so shallow as to only care about what a game looks like would have no idea just what that adds to the experience.
- 15,532
- Cairo, Egypt
- GTP_SEMS
- 6,838
- Europe
- GTP_Slim
- PzR Slim
Then my comment didn't apply to you. If you only like racing in dry conditions then Livetrack 3.0 is just applicable to you. A living race track that changes it's surface grip levels based on temp, conditions, amount of rubber that has been laid down by others cars is just applicable to you as someone who likes to race in all weather conditions. My comment was aimed at some in here who clearly think that what a game looks like is the only thing to judge a game on. We would all like a game to look as good as possible, and GTS does indeed look very special, however many of us, and I know you are included in this, put a lot of store in how the game handles as well. It just appeared to me that some in this thread were using the graphics of GTS as a stick to beat other games with, without taking into consideration the other factors.
Scaff put it well with his example of SLRE, a pretty shocking game in the looks dept but probably the best loose surface handling of any game.
Buy a decent PC and you can have it all
Last edited:
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,734
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
You do know that aside from dynamic resolution (which is not a bad idea - quite the opposite) at least three GT titles could have the exact same accusations leveled at them?
And that one of them includes the one in your user name!
GTPSP
"a stippled, dithered look to the visuals.", "the use of lower resolution textures."
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-gt-psp-60fps-video-blog-entry
GT5
" Spray in particular on the wet levels looks - to be blunt - pretty dreadful.", "Another area that is seen to be wanting is the implementation of shadows on the cars on some circuits", "That said, frame-rates on GT4 are undoubtedly higher and tearing, although present, is nowhere near as pronounced as it is in GT5.",
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-gran-turismo-5-tech-analysis
GT6
" Unfortunately, the 60fps target is regularly missed, resulting in screen-tear and image judder far more often than we'd like.", "Tearing remains an issue with GT6", " there's a definite "wobble" in the presentation when frame-rate dips below 60fps.", "the amount of cars in any given race is noticeably pared back in the sequel - a decision that appears to have been made for performance reasons."
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-vs-gran-turismo-6
I've also lost count of the number of members who ran GT5 and GT6 in a lower resolution to minimize the above as much as possible, that's a drop in resolution that isn't even dynamic!
It would seem that the kind of compromises you are happy to accept in Gran Turismo suddenly become a problem when it comes to other titles, this kind of partisan nonsense doesn't help our hobby at all.
Last edited:
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
- 14,436
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
For someone's insistence on almost purely visuals, it's odd to disregard a PC outright like that. You'd think that would literally be the best option for them if that's what they want to focus on. Either way, it's obvious what's happening here.
- 491
So criticizing past GTs on portable or 12 year old platforms because they did something that was not feasible for the hardware they developed them is a motive to have the console version of PC2, deliberately designed superficial because it was not their main development platform I would say it is a great point of view .... but of course it is not partisanship this.
PC2 could be done much better on consoles but deliberately took the pc version is scaling up of graphic settings to make them decentemnte on consoles sorry but defending such a thing because PC2 shows an interesting function is too little in comparison with other games seen the whole of the pros and cons.
I have videos that show offrageous things, since to have 60fps stable, but not too much as there are spots where framerate collapses, they made tons of compromises:
cutmeamango
(Banned)
- 672
- Brazil
Forza 7 looks sick there.
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,734
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
I've not criticized them at all, I have simply pointed out that the design route that SMS took with PC2 is very similar to the one that PD have take with three titles, one of which the members I was replying to is fond enough of to make it part of his user name.
You will also find that to make it feasible on the PS4 compromises have to be made, which is exactly why GTS doesn't have dynamic weather, time of day or an evolving track surface.
As I have said before, these are two different design routes, neither of which is wrong.
As such no its not partisan, something that would be rather odd given that I have GTS pre-ordered and have had for around a year.
An interesting function?
Dynamic weather and time of day with an evolving track is only that? Can you point out to me which other titles I can find it in?
Are you aware that GTS on the standard PS4 hits the exact same frame rate collapses (your words) without weather? The exact same frame rate collapses (your words) that GT5 and GT6 suffered from?
On the PS4 Pro both titles are a steady 59-60 fps, however only one of those is doing so in full weather and a packed grid, the other is doing it to a higher level of graphical fidelity.
So when rain (and maybe snow) is shown for GTS what frame rate do you believe it will hit on the standard and pro?
Digital Foundry on the PS4 PC2 Frame rates:
Pro: "outside of stormy stress tests with upwards of 16 cars in play, the game holds firm at 60fps, "
Standard: "drops into 40-50fps range"
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-project-cars-2-performance-analysis
Digital Foundry on the PS4 GTS Beta Frame rates:
Pro: "held a virtually solid 60fps lock, "
Standard: "can drop to the mid-40s "
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-gran-turismo-sport-ps4-pro-analysis
So would you describe the GTS Beta on a standard as having frame rate collapses?
I'm really not sure how the concept that both titles have made compromises is missed?
Project Cars 2 compromises on a higher level of visual fidelity for dynamic weather, TOD and Live Track
GTS Compromises on dynamic weather, TOD and an evolving track for a higher level of visual fidelity.
They both compromise in terms of frame rate to a near as damn it identical point.
Last edited:
cutmeamango
(Banned)
- 672
- Brazil
This shows how art direction makes a good difference. I've spoken about Forza's legacy assets and how thoughtful, mood lights and dramatic skyboxes (along with res/filtering/aa on PC/X1X) really salvage old content.
- 14,436
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
With the small decrease in things like that, we've managed to get a good bit of nifty features handed to us with the Forza games. 24 cars on track, Dynamic weather and TOD(to an extent) and much like Pcars2, track surfaces get effected by rain and puddles will start to form/dissipate. They seemed to have found a good balance, and managed to get it at a locked 60fps as well, even on base consoles.
This shows how art direction makes a good difference. I've spoken about Forza's legacy assets and how thoughtful, mood lights and dramatic skyboxes (along with res/filtering/aa on PC/X1X) really salvage old content.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
Since this isn't the Forza vs. Forza thread, what are you comparing this to in the GT series?
This shows how art direction makes a good difference. I've spoken about Forza's legacy assets and how thoughtful, mood lights and dramatic skyboxes (along with res/filtering/aa on PC/X1X) really salvage old content.
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,734
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
No problem, your English is fine.
That's OK.
Have you tried it?
I ask because its a lot more than that. GT5 and 6 had the dynamic weather and Time of Day, but nothing at all close to Live Track 3.0
I don't recall seeing anything on the standard PS4 since the beta from PD or Sony and we are still discussing if rain will be in or not, as we haven't seen it at all.
We have seen some progress on the Pro, but that version was solid enough already visually. Keep in mind that GT5: P was also solid and great looking, yet we lost some of that when the final release arrived.
It will be interesting to see what PD show before release and if they put a release day review embargo in place (as they did for GT5 and 6).
Frame rates don't bother some people, however the tech analysis from DF is quite clear that they happen, as was the feedback on the Closed beta forums.
Now I am still interested to know, given that these are the frame rates the beta hit, if GTS does get rain, what do you expect it to do to the frame rates?
You do know which platform they sold the most copies on don't you?
I would also disagree that its bland, visually its not on a par with GTS, but anyone expecting it to be should seek help. The route it took is a different one to GTS and its certainly not a bland experience behind the wheel at all, quite the opposite. Given the demands of the physics engine (and based on the Beta GTS will be better than GT6 in this regard, but not to the level PC2 is), cars on track, the dynamic weather and TOD, along with Live Track 3.0 it would be mad to think it would look as good as GTS. However that wasn't what they were aiming for (in all honestly going up against PD on the visual front is the wrong move for any PS4 title), and I can certainly appreciate both titles fro what they offer.
So as I have already said, neither approach is wrong
From a personally point of view the approach SMS took is not the safe one in terms of visuals.
- 982
Dithering shadows were a massive complaint in GT5 and in certain times of day were clear, even on the best tracks. I didn't buy GT6.
If devs could do both it would be nice but right now I rather have a better looking game.
More like I'm not wasting money for better resolution/FR when the actual graphics of the games on PC can't match the best on console (GTS and Driveclub).
Similar threads
