GT5 looks better than this GT6 Demo

N

newbielives

600
Watching the replays, the cars just don't look real, its has that Forza 4 sheen that makes it look like fake plastic where GT5 actually looks like metal. It's like GT6 demo is missing some shaders and wow are the tracks bland, eg where is my grass that flaps in the wind when I drive by.
 
newbielives
Watching the replays, the cars just don't look real, its has that Forza 4 sheen that makes it look like fake plastic where GT5 actually looks like metal. It's like GT6 demo is missing some shaders and wow are the tracks bland, eg where is my grass that flaps in the wind when I drive by.
Click to expand...

Ill have to play the demo a bit more but that doesnt sound right.

Bare in mind that its a demo subject to change in the final build.
 
I completely disagree. Watching a GT5 replay is horrible. Shadows flicker all over the car, the color saturation feels very wrong and the movement of the suspension kills any belief that this could be real.
 
I agree completely but I hope it is due to the fact that I played the demo on an old plasma screen. Not good to see another player thinking the same. I can live with it though but I hope they fix the stutter and dancing textures for the final game.
 
newbielives
it look like fake plastic where GT5 actually looks like metal.
Click to expand...

This is possibly one of the most nonsensical remarks ever made on the internet.

Do you realise cars are made up of plastics and metals?

All you see is the paint (which is closer to a plastic than a metal). Saying one game looks like plastic while another looks like metal is completely nonsensical and AFAIK has never been substantiated.

GT6 looks like GT5 but with a different set of graphical problems.

It's not some sort of massive leap in any direction.
 
This could be due to the fact that Demos tend to have reduced visual details in order to save demo file size.
 
newbielives
Watching the replays, the cars just don't look real, its has that Forza 4 sheen that makes it look like fake plastic where GT5 actually looks like metal. It's like GT6 demo is missing some shaders and wow are the tracks bland, eg where is my grass that flaps in the wind when I drive by.
Click to expand...

Stop trolling:tup:





Pretty good for a Demo...
 
Oh boy, another rant thread what a suprise! :rolleyes:
A word of advice or haters of the demo that has only been out for a little over 24 hours-IT IS JUST A DEMO :dunce:. Wait for the full game, then express your thoughts. This is definitely what I'm doing...
Btw, I completely disagree with the OP 👎. Loading times are faster, the physics are profoundly different, and the tracks/cars look slightly more realistic (tracks especially).

Edit: agree with ninja poster above 👍
 
ReverenceSatans
File size has nothing to do with it.

Low amount of content = smaller file sizes.

Games do not work like videos.
Click to expand...

Reducing quality helps too, smaller amounts of lighting and using less details in the track models etc. save memory.

Go on UDK and try building a fully light map compared to a single light map to see what I mean ;)
 
It is a demo indeed BUT NOT A BETA THING! The drumheads of PD seem that have copied most of GT5 here. The shadows flicker here too, the in race graphics are not too different. There is nothing that justifies the PD's grandiose announcement that GT6 will bring PS3 to its very limits.

If it is to remain like that, they'd better keep updating GT5 and just let GT6 go!
 
ReverenceSatans
This is possibly one of the most nonsensical remarks ever made on the internet.

Do you realise cars are made up of plastics and metals?

All you see is the paint (which is closer to a plastic than a metal). Saying one game looks like plastic while another looks like metal is completely nonsensical and AFAIK has never been substantiated.
Click to expand...

Actually you're the one making nonsensical statements here.

Various materials and compounds react drastically differently to light, and it's perfectly reasonable to state that 'one game looks like plastic while another looks like metal' in this day and age. There are significant (hard to overstate this) technical hurdles, and with everyone looking to trim every single bit, it isn't unheard of for shaders (code used to help render different materials) to lack coloured/glossy/fresnel/etc information. Since the cars will of course take up a huge amount of screen space, any extra performance cost (remember, this is computed per-pixel!) will drastically increase.

Add in the fact that car paint is one of the more complex materials that can be rendered, even in offline rendering (movies, etc), and you've got a significant technical issue.

Look into conductive vs dielectoc material rendering, please.

CarloPlaya
This could be due to the fact that Demos tend to have reduced visual details in order to save demo file size.
Click to expand...

ReverenceSatans
File size has nothing to do with it.

Low amount of content = smaller file sizes.

Games do not work like videos.
Click to expand...

It's not a linear thing either.

The 3D mesh/meshes is probably the largest piece of data for a car in GT5/6, by a HUGE margin.

The physics properties are fairly small; think of a txt file with everything about the car, it's still going to be tiny.

Next would be the shader; you'd need one for metallic, pearl, gloss, matte finishes. Like the physics info, it's fairly small.

Each material (think paint chip) would reference a shader type (metallic), base coat, top coat, glossiness, reflective values, etc - very tiny.
 
I love the new physics. I will be buying GT6 no matter what, but this is my observation.
Inferno251
Oh boy, another rant thread what a suprise! :rolleyes:
A word of advice or haters of the demo that has only been out for a little over 24 hours-IT IS JUST A DEMO :dunce:. Wait for the full game, then express your thoughts. This is definitely what I'm doing...
Btw, I completely disagree with the OP 👎. Loading times are faster, the physics are profoundly different, and the tracks/cars look slightly more realistic (tracks especially).

Edit: agree with ninja poster above 👍
Click to expand...
 
TBR 427
Actually you're the one making nonsensical statements here.

Various materials and compounds react drastically differently to light, and it's perfectly reasonable to state that 'one game looks like plastic while another looks like metal' in this day and age. There are significant (hard to overstate this) technical hurdles, and with everyone looking to trim every single bit, it isn't unheard of for shaders (code used to help render different materials) to lack coloured/glossy/fresnel/etc information. Since the cars will of course take up a huge amount of screen space, any extra performance cost (remember, this is computed per-pixel!) will drastically increase.

Add in the fact that car paint is one of the more complex materials that can be rendered, even in offline rendering (movies, etc), and you've got a significant technical issue.

Look into conductive vs dielectoc material rendering, please.
Click to expand...

The 370z is made up of Steel, Aluminum and Plastics. Explain why the paint looks identical on all of the panels.

It's because you see the paint. So, it is a completely nonsensical statement.
 
newbielives
Your video proves my point. Maybe its the paint used on the cars, but in GT5 there is a metallic coating where GT6 demo is flat and almost too reflective.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean...


The paint on GT6 reflects and refracts in a more realistic manner, you can seen on the roof how there is little colour from that car, rather the sky is reflected...

The leaf shows off the Pearl (mica) effect quite good.
 
That video comparison wasn't the best thats why he picked that one. This one shows how much better the GT6 demo looks than GT5

 
zanxion
It is a demo indeed BUT NOT A BETA THING! The drumheads of PD seem that have copied most of GT5 here. The shadows flicker here too, the in race graphics are not too different. There is nothing that justifies the PD's grandiose announcement that GT6 will bring PS3 to its very limits.

If it is to remain like that, they'd better keep updating GT5 and just let GT6 go!
Click to expand...

Facepalm.

Of course it will, GT5 did bring the PS3 to the very limits so there's no reason to think that GT6 will not do the same.
"Copied most of GT5" is true about the models and the textures, but it's a different shader, that is obvious if you take a closer look at it.
 
There is something weird going on with the speculars in the GT6 demo. The best video to use for comparison is the Grand Valley one, as that's got the same lighting conditions.

It seems like, because of the higher dynamic range in the lighting in GT6, the speculars can be made brighter, closer to what they should be for bright sunshine. That means that GT5's speculars are intentionally dimmer, perhaps to prevent washing out of the paintwork, like the sky washes out.

Further, I think the tessellation is playing a part, too. The specular effect, on paintwork at least, appears to be vertex-based. Therefore, if the underlying vertex grid (the polygon model) is rough / coarse, the specular effect can look patchy (because there is too much space between normal vector data). The tessellation was brought in to reduce the typical polycount on screen (you have to "waste" some power with discrete LoD switching to avoid seeing the switches, and simply to get the overlap required), so the cars are probably at a lower level of detail than they were in GT5, so the sepcular effect has fewer vertices to work with now than it did then - hence the apparent patchiness.

They may have to convert it to a full per-pixel effect, but you still need surface normals... I guess it just needs tweaking ("better" interpolation?), which is fine considering how much has changed, in terms of the balance of overall lighting.

Something I don't like is the focus on full-screen effects, like the depth of field blur that basically obliterates the image quality of the whole scene. That stuff happens all the time in shooters, and we don't need it here. Plus it wastes power, and this demo is clearly struggling with the full screen effects (that's why it runs better in 720p, and number of cars on track has no influence etc.).
 
@ newbielives

What kind of TV are you using?

One of the things I keep hearing, is people with certain TVs see a lower frame rate, colors, ect. If your TV doesn't even run full 1080p, then this could also be a issue. Just saying, it sounds like a personal problem (no pun intended).

Even a friend of mine was complaining about some of the same things last night. His problem was that his TV only runs 720p. When he played it on his living room TV in full 1080p, he said it was fine.
 
eran0004
Facepalm.

Of course it will, GT5 did bring the PS3 to the very limits so there's no reason to think that GT6 will not do the same.
"Copied most of GT5" is true about the models and the textures, but it's a different shader, that is obvious if you take a closer look at it.
Click to expand...

By this logic you could be using sprite graphics and run Folding@Home in the background and be bringing the PS3 to the very limits.

Either GT5 was optimal and GT6 isn't a step up, or GT6 is an improvement and GT5 was sub-optimal.

Maybe they both use all the processing cycles and memory available, but if one does so in an inefficient manner it's hardly "bringing it to the very limits".
 
Ah, but optimisation is not objective. As you said, it depends on what you do with those processor cycles, what your targets are etc. - that will always be subjective. It's perfectly possible that both games bring the PS3 to its limits, but actually Kaz said they had some room left in the SPUs with GT5 (even though it was the SPUs causing the slowdown most of the time) - presumably, what he meant was they could do things differently and open up some room.
 
Inferno251
Oh boy, another rant thread what a suprise! :rolleyes:
A word of advice or haters of the demo that has only been out for a little over 24 hours-IT IS JUST A DEMO :dunce:. Wait for the full game, then express your thoughts. This is definitely what I'm doing...
Btw, I completely disagree with the OP 👎. Loading times are faster, the physics are profoundly different, and the tracks/cars look slightly more realistic (tracks especially).

Edit: agree with ninja poster above 👍
Click to expand...
These haters hated GT6 before the demo was even available and they are hating the full game before release. These people will hate Every GT and will express so until PD stops making GT games and even then they will hate the GT Games claiming they are fans of GT.
 
I agree with OP it's as if light is reflecting off a plastic surface not metal. I hope this is only a demo issue.
 
ReverenceSatans
This is possibly one of the most nonsensical remarks ever made on the internet.
Click to expand...
Your post doesn't sound any better. Material shaders are used by developer to simulate real life materials, therefore yes in very poor words some games could seems like plastic others like metal. It really depends on the car you are trying to simulate, sometimes plastic or carbon fiber shaders fits the car better than metal shaders.
 

Similar threads

D
GT5 looks better than GT6?
2
Replies
33
Views
8K
BattleDude7
BattleDude7
C
GT6 is better than GT5
Replies
14
Views
8K
SluggerDandy
SluggerDandy
S
Do you think GT7 is a better game than GT5/6?
5 6 7
Replies
185
Views
29K
Cayit
Cayit
Miskaroni
LIST of probable content hidden inside late GT Concept demo builds.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Miskaroni
Miskaroni
M
A Theory On Leftover PS2 tracks in Gran Turismo 5
Replies
2
Views
2K
MrGranTurismo
M

Latest Posts

Back