How in the Frank Bruno did Forza III do it?

  • Thread starter LP670-4 SV
  • 924 comments
  • 73,356 views
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just because the Xbox 360 can't handle them in real time doesn't mean the car models them selves are vastly inferior to GT5's
you're kidding yourself if you think the PS3 is VASTLY more powerful than the 360...

For example the day to night tracks require you to essentially model the textures for the entire track twice, one set of textures for day and another for night.

why on earth (no pun intended) would you need to have separate textures??..its all about the lighting in changing time of day....textures will be exactly the same...its just changing the light source...or in the case of going to night...essentially removing the main source of light and replacing it with headlights and such...

absolutely not need for different textures for day and night...
 
I think you guys are giving the PS3 too much credit in the power department. It is a powerful console but so is the X360 and for the most part games end up looking pretty similar on both consoles.

Actually I kind of wish Sony had gone the way Microsoft did and have 512MB of memory that could be used for the system or the graphics because I think it would offer more choices for developers.

That's for sure, PD is just that much better with the hardware and working with polygonal cars than pretty much every other car game dev out there.

Turn10 had help making their models, plus ported majority of their cars from FM2 only the newer cars had to be completely scanned, built and recorded for the new game. They didn't start from scratch with anything really and still they outsourced(with mixed results on some vehicles). There we go, all answered.
 
I think you guys are giving the PS3 too much credit in the power department. It is a powerful console but so is the X360 and for the most part games end up looking pretty similar on both consoles.

Actually I kind of wish Sony had gone the way Microsoft did and have 512MB of memory that could be used for the system or the graphics because I think it would offer more choices for developers.

No.PS3 and XBOX looks similar only on CROSS-PLATFORM games.And that type of games all are medicore, they need to match both consoles performance at given time.
Just look at PS3-only games and you understand me.They all "best graphics" games.If you played Uncharted 2 there is no such thing as "not enough video ram" (giant textures) or "not enough ram" (game loads ONE time in whole game).More of this.God of War 3 is at very TOP even with common PS3 problem - antialiasing.MLAA is better than 4x or even 8x.
PS3 is a 3-4 year old console so programmers are adapted enough to make great looking PS3 games.(most noticeable problem earlier is DIFFICULT programming, because PS3 hardware is NOT EVEN CLOSE to XBOX hardware.But now there is no such problem)
 
Last edited:
No.PS3 and XBOX looks similar only on CROSS-PLATFORM games

8 out of 10 multiplatform games look better on 360. However 1st party games seem to look a bit better on PS3. Also 1st party game reviews have scored PS3 games higher as group than MS 1st party games.
 
Forza 3 interiors were only possible because they are so damn basic. have a very generic look to each. They look ok but are pretty standard compared to even GT5 Prologue interior modelling. Even the shaders are basic.
 
Now why would you go and say something like that knowing some of the people who frequent this part of the forum?

But, I'll back you up by saying the following: The 360 also has the better GPU. But Cell (purely from an PC enthusiast/uber geek perspective) has the upper hand when raw processing power comes into play, mostly because it can be dedicated to computational and/or graphical tasks.




Again with the worse screen capture one could possibly find.

I am just trying to expose it, to those. Who think, they have done great job in some 4yrs or so by making 2 games :rolleyes:

360 was released in 2005. I think in 2007 Forza2 came and in 2009 Forza3. Here are those two games comparison which I have posted in this thread already. But for those who have missed it. Here it is again:
http://kotaku.com/5374211/but-does-forza-3-look-different-from-forza-2/gallery/

I think it is not fair to bring PS3 vs 360 here. PS3 is powerful than 360 but not by much as some people think.
 
Last edited:
Hello everybody, this is my first post. In fact, I've been reading GTPlanet since always. But never had any need to post.

However this time I wanted to say my own few words. By the way, the process of registering gave me a hard time, as I was asked to form the proper abbreviation for "Gran Turismo". I had to search for my dictionary (I'm not an English native) to find out what does abbreviation mean. :)

Okay, to the topic. I find on this board during the last days many bitter words about the game and PD, especially in comparison to T10's game.

I strongly believe, that mr Yamauchi made the best thing he could.

1. Many people say here, that car rendering should have been out-sourced, so the overall number of premium cars could be higher. In my opinion it's a bad idea, even though that's probably the future of gaming.

Why? Well, just look at the motor industry nowadays. You find one engine in many cars from different brands etc. Many people call my Volvo S40 a Focus in a more expensive skin. It makes the cars cheaper and easier to maintain. But you have to say that they lose their individual feeling.

Would you really want your precious and so anticipated GT5 to be like that? With engine made in PD and cars all around the world, with bad quality control and stuff? It is impossible for PD to get the quality they want exactly by making others render the cars. The game would lose it's special own feeling.


2. In addition, you can't forget that mr Yamauchi is japanese. And that brings the japanese ethos of working. T10 just wants to make cash from the game, and when Microsoft asks them, they'll make The Sims 4. As for PD, I believe that they find working on GT as some sort of art. And I'm sure that for mr Yamauchi it's the work of life. I simply can't imagine him letting render the cars some China firm.

3. Remember, that 200 premium cars equal to 200 cars in possible GT6 on PS4. Next generation of consoles will bring even bigger jump in power. Possible next games from PD and T10 will have to keep up with that jump. Of course that T10 can simply copy their cars to that hypothetical game. But their cars lack the detail which will be needed to make a use of the next Xbox.

PD already has 200 cars ready. We can see that the models are perfect, it's no more the matter of polygons. And it's much easier to add better lighting and stuff to a ready car, than make a car from the scratch again?

Mr Yamauchi has one goal - make a perfect game. Im absolutely sure that he's aware since some time that he can't achieve it on Blu-ray, with PS3. As a step to that game, he made with PD a new superb engine, with great day/night effects, crashes and great physics. And a superb game, which is called GT5.

Mark my words, that you will face the Real driving simulator really soon. You will probably have to install it on the hard drive of your future console, because it will be too big.

You can easily wait for that playing GT5. PD doesn't need to think about their reputation, they have it. They are simply doing their job in the best way they can.

I don't have a PS3. I never had a need to get one. I'm buying it soon to drive my 800 standard cars!

Cheers

Welcome to gtplanet! Nice post 👍
 
you're kidding yourself if you think the PS3 is VASTLY more powerful than the 360...

The Playstation has an eight core, 3.2GHz processor, while the Xbox is burdened with a paltry (when compared to Sony's behemoth) three core processor. The difference in power is truly vast, like it or not. By the way, welcome to GT Planet, gtfokthx. Great, sensible first post. :)
 
The Playstation has an eight core, 3.2GHz processor, while the Xbox is burdened with a paltry (when compared to Sony's behemoth) three core processor. The difference in power is truly vast, whether you like it or not.

So why doesn't the PS3 do better games then.
 
The Playstation has an eight core, 3.2GHz processor, while the Xbox is burdened with a paltry (when compared to Sony's behemoth) three core processor. The difference in power is truly vast, like it or not. By the way, welcome to GT Planet, gtfokthx. Great, sensible first post. :)

On paper, in games the difference is noticable, but not vast by any means. In any case, it's not enough to explain the difference in graphics between Forza 3 and GT5's premium cars. That's everything to do with the amount of time and work put into them.
 
So why doesn't the PS3 do better games then.
360 is more accessible and has the more modern and powerful GPU.
PS3 has a lot of potential thanks to the SPUs that enable things impossible on 360 but it's a more complicated job.
 
On paper, in games the difference is noticable, but not vast by any means. In any case, it's not enough to explain the difference in graphics between Forza 3 and GT5's premium cars. That's everything to do with the amount of time and work put into them.

Exactly. I have both 360 and PS3 since launch and played numerous games on both. There is practically no difference and what difference there is, is attributable to the game maker. Such as what engine they use and how much time and development they put into the specific parts of the game.
 
The Playstation has an eight core, 3.2GHz processor, while the Xbox is burdened with a paltry (when compared to Sony's behemoth) three core processor. The difference in power is truly vast, like it or not. By the way, welcome to GT Planet, gtfokthx. Great, sensible first post. :)

Not quite.

The PS3, technically speaking, doesn't utilize the entire Cell mainframe. Only six of the eight SPEs are available to developers for outright processing power. As one of the SPEs is solely dedicated to the OS and security, and the eighth is just disabled. Whether or not it's physically available is something I don't know; it might be disabled to increase the yield I'd assume.

In any case that still leaves the PS3 with 6 SPEs and the PPE, but Cell is mainly optimized for single precision tasks; it can handle double precision tasks but not without consequences, so there the 360 can either run toe-to-toe with it or even exceed it.

When it gets right down to it, the both of them are fairly even with both having advantages and disadvantages.
 
Look at this part of an article from the Official PlayStation Magazine:

1007232-11.jpg


Original:
 
The Playstation has an eight core, 3.2GHz processor, while the Xbox is burdened with a paltry (when compared to Sony's behemoth) three core processor. The difference in power is truly vast, like it or not. By the way, welcome to GT Planet, gtfokthx. Great, sensible first post. :)

you might want to read up on the Cell Broadband engine before making this claims..

BAH!...the PS3 DOES NOT have an 8 core processor. In terms of actually processing "cores" as we know them in PC terminology, the Cell is a SINGLE core processor....

it contains one PPE, thats it. It and aslo has 8 SPE's (in the PS3 1 is disabled to help chip yeilds, and one is reserved by the system OS, giving developers access to 6)...

the SPE's ARE NOT full fledged cores, SPE's are simply "helper cores." They are very good at quick number crunching, which is why things like MLAA have been so successful because you pass off the AA task to a SPE instead of the GPU. However, as a multipurpose CPU, the SPE's would be rather POOR on their own...

Also, while we are at it. The 360's CPU and the Cell are from the same family of processors (IBM's PowerPC), the same processor family that Apple USED to use in their Macs. The 360's CPU is, like you said a tri-core setup, and each core is a modified version of the single PPE that the PS3 uses, but the 360 has no SPE "helper cores"

A simple comparison between the two is this...

The 360 is like a laboratory with 3 scientists working in it...

The PS3 is like a laboratory with 1 scientist and 8 assistants that are very good at completing specialized smaller tasks to allow the scientist to focus on the more important tasks...
 
I haven't a clue about consoles. I own both btw.

I saw it explained in a console for dummys type article that comparing PS 3 and Xbox that the Xbox had better acceleration and the PS 3 gad a better top speed.

Dunno if that makes sense but that's what I read.
 
I've just read 12 pages of this thread and got bored.

I'm just amazed, This argument is stupid.

Turn10 had:

Almost double the staff working on it
A 3-4 year development time
A game engine designed for the 360 to act as a base (Of which we saw few major improvements - The physics still bear similarities to Forza 2)
Lots of cars that could be ported and upscaled from the previous game, a lot of which have had inaccurately implemented interiors as some people have pointed out.

PD had:

5-6 years of development
Around 180 staff working on it, at it's peak. Supposedly less than that before they opened up the online server room/building area.
No game engine to start with - They started from scratch, on a console that is notoriously difficult to develop for due to the nature of the cell processor and how much it differs from a conventional hardware setup.

They set the graphics bar too high when they set out. They ended up with only 200 models, which are untouchable this gen and next. They are future proof. They have also built a graphics and physics engine that is probably unrivalled on the Playstation 3, and will act as a base for GT6.

As a result of their poor time management, they are using older models for the standard cars. They led us to believe that all cars would have the cockpit view, intentionally or not, this was wrong of them. So 4/5 of the cars in GT5 are missing a feature that we all took for granted since Prologue was released in 2007. There is no denying it, it is a huge mistake on PDs part, and will almost certainly damage game reviews and potential sales. It is inexcusable.

As can be seen from this poll, a lot of people are going to be disappointed.

But, are any of you going to boycott the game because of this? I won't.

Not quite.

The PS3, technically speaking, doesn't utilize the entire Cell mainframe. Only six of the eight SPEs are available to developers for outright processing power. As one of the SPEs is solely dedicated to the OS and security, and the eighth is just disabled. Whether or not it's physically available is something I don't know; it might be disabled to increase the yield I'd assume.

In any case that still leaves the PS3 with 6 SPEs and the PPE, but Cell is mainly optimized for single precision tasks; it can handle double precision tasks but not without consequences, so there the 360 can either run toe-to-toe with it or even exceed it.

When it gets right down to it, the both of them are fairly even with both having advantages and disadvantages.

The cell processor has 8 cores, 1 PPE and 7 SPEs. The PPE acts as a central hub, converting the SPE processes into the relevant calculations needed. The PPE's purpose is to enable the 7 SPEs to work correctly, it does not itself, contribute to any calculations required for gaming or the operating system. Hence why of the remaining 7, 6 are for gaming and the 7th is for the OS. This makes it very versatile in one sense, but for old-school/PC game programmers it is a nightmare, as they have the split all the graphical cycles between the Cell processor and the graphics chip, and I would imagine it would get very tedious trying to get the most out of the SPEs.

If you maximise the potential of the hardware, the PS3 will offer higher quality graphics at a higher resolution and framerate. The Xbox 360's trump card is Anti-aliasing, which can actually make up for shortfalls elsewhere.

Though, you already know all of this :P I ike to just 'ignore' the disabled core in the cell :)

Exactly. I have both 360 and PS3 since launch and played numerous games on both. There is practically no difference and what difference there is, is attributable to the game maker. Such as what engine they use and how much time and development they put into the specific parts of the game.

Please, comparing poorly ported cross platform games is not a good measure of the hardware performance of one console over another. If anything, it makes the less powerful console appear superior, because they use the less powerful one as the benchmark and then port it over, often dumbing it down so they don't have to make big changes to the engine to utilise the vastly different hardware.
 
Last edited:
A simple comparison between the two is this...

The 360 is like a laboratory with 3 scientists working in it...

The PS3 is like a laboratory with 1 scientist and 8 assistants that are very good at completing specialized smaller tasks to allow the scientist to focus on the more important tasks...
I like your example.


The problem for the 360 'and the reason that the graphically wise the PS3 wipes it off the floor', is that the system itself is designed from a pc based system. So its much more linear setup, which is fantastic from programs like words and so forth, but once you implement systems that game developers require, it lags behind when the systems are used to their full potentials.

As the above mentioned, the Xbox is trying to do so much at one point in time, while the PS3 can divert its calculations over a number of areas where they can work at their absolute maximum.

People talk about power and what not, but if the system can't calculate the data fast enough, then whats the point.


Its like having a billlion million torques in your car. If the tyres and drive train cannot handle it, you're not going to move.
 
I like your example.


The problem for the 360 'and the reason that the graphically wise the PS3 wipes it off the floor', is that the system itself is designed from a pc based system. So its much more linear setup, which is fantastic from programs like words and so forth, but once you implement systems that game developers require, it lags behind when the systems are used to their full potentials.

As the above mentioned, the Xbox is trying to do so much at one point in time, while the PS3 can divert its calculations over a number of areas where they can work at their absolute maximum.

People talk about power and what not, but if the system can't calculate the data fast enough, then whats the point.


Its like having a billlion million torques in your car. If the tyres and drive train cannot handle it, you're not going to move.

fanboy much?
 
Well, I have yet to play a 360 game that looks anything near the visual quality of Uncharted 2, Killzone 2 or God of War 3.

I don't know much about the tech mumbo jumbo. I just rely on my own two eyes.
 
Well, I have yet to play a 360 game that looks anything near the visual quality of Uncharted 2, Killzone 2 or God of War 3.

I don't know much about the tech mumbo jumbo. I just rely on my own two eyes.

This

Anyways it is not about PS3 and 360. Turn10 in so many years have made half-assed game
 
while the PS3 can divert its calculations over a number of areas where they can work at their absolute maximum.

the problem is that the PS3 cannot do this on its own...the developers must specifically instruct the PPE as to how to organize everything...

this is the major problem with multiplatform games...they simply just do not translate well between consoles...
 
Just to add in, Turn10 has significantly more employees than PD, I think I heard it's 300 compared to around 110 at PD.
 
i prefer forza's crap quality interiors than not having interiors at all on 800 cars. However forza sucks compared to gt.
 
Last edited:
So why doesn't the PS3 do better games then.
It depends on what you mean by better games.

Graphically, as has been pointed out, in the past at least, most developers did a straight port without any attempt whatsoever to do more than a passing adaptation to the Cell Engine. In fact, they still do such as with Bayonetta, which looks slightly better on 360 because the developers basically wanted the game out sooner and didn't want to mess with divvying up tasks to the SPEs.

However, first party PS3 games shine a little better. Sometimes, a lot better. From the very start, the SONY partner games looked just as good or better in preliminary shots and videos to 360 games which were already released. And 360 games never did lurch ahead, but kept pace, on a system which was so much easier to work on, and with a one year head start. As has been pointed out, the 360 doesn't have a Killzone 2, an Uncharted 2 or a GT5.

Gameplay wise, this is a matter of taste, but I think the PS3 library mops the floor with the 360 list. I still only have my two Forza games on 360, and it's still disassembled since Christmas. The 360 library, other than the Halo series, Alan Wake and Forza, is full to the brim with rehashes, ports and multiplats. The adoration of GEARS! just baffles me. I think it's a stupid series, and I despise the weapons and fanfic level plot and dialog. Halo, I can live without, and I'd rather play it eventually on PC. Alan Wake, the same. I already have Heavy Rain. Most of the games just seem like PC games, or games which PC devs tried to make feel like console games, but not quite.

By the way, the Forza series are half-assed, bug riddled, "Why the hell did they change this?!" games. And Turn 10 has no excuse, except even with a bigger team, they still farmed out work to freaking Viet Nam and spent no time fixing a lot of things they should have. They also didn't have two games produced by the team, one of which was forced on them along with a major headache.
 
This

Anyways it is not about PS3 and 360. Turn10 in so many years have made half-assed game

Half-assed no. Rushed....yes. They were given a ridiculous time-frame to get Forza 3 out and made some poor decisions but there's no way you can call a developer that puts out 3 decent games in 4 years lazy.
 
Turn 10 didn't fix the issues before release. But then, what else is new about a company that put out a 360 on an unsuspecting public knowing full well that a good number of them would fail? To the tune of almost 70% in the first two years.

I forgot to add that if you think you'd get more than 200 Premium cars, you're forgetting that Polyphony was forced to make GT PSP, which was a major headache for the team. In fact, there were times the entire team had to stop work on GT5 to work on GT PSP, because it was being so hard to develop. It's basically GT4, made larger with even more content, then squeezed from 6-9 gigs to just one. Part of the team also produced Tourist Trophy during this time. Some of you would be happy with another GT3, but... well, that's you.

Even with such a large staff, and farming out work to Viet Nam (WTH??), Forza 2 and 3 were the best Turn 10 could do? Oh well, some of you love it, I guess, but I still haven't played FW3 since November.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back