Kaz interview on Eurogamer - Standards are here to stay! Poll added

[RandomCarGuy17]

Yeah, for GT7; I really hope PD keeps it at 16 cars max so other factors don't suffer this time round like on GT5/6.

 

[Max911]

The last shred of pure optimism left in me regarding the series following statements like the one this thread is about what PD can do with new hardware now that they hopefully got all of this blatant overreaching nonsense out of their system.





But it would help a lot more for the the "graphics aren't the important thing" rebuttal that keeps floating around to the Standard car issue if a good half of the PR material from the company (be it directly from Kaz in interviews or given out by Sony in regular press releases) wasn't essentially saying how awesome the game is going to look or saying how they kept "pushing limits as far they could go" (for the sequel to the game that already had performance problems so bad when they made it "better than reality" that he personally apologized for them when they came to light. Then repeated them for GT6).

They were being ambitious but, you have to give them credit, the game just looked awesome and the features, although iffy, were pretty cool. It wasn't perfect, far from it, because they decided to try new things rather than improve it although I find that the game is awesome as it is. But give it time. It'll get better and better. With the improvements they did recently, it's a good sign of things to come.

 

[gtracedriver1]

GT5P was the first game that did 16cars on track before that and after that also most game were having 8cars on track. Forza4 only managed after 6yrs on 360 I think and it is same for Forza5 on new hardware. I think 24 is easily possible for Polyphony. They can access 5-6gigs of ram for games. Other than start it is rare to have more than 10cars on screen anyways.

 

[Tornado]

They were being ambitious but, you have to give them credit, the game just looked awesome and the features, although iffy, were pretty cool. It wasn't perfect, far from it, because they decided to try new things rather than improve it although I find that the game is awesome as it is. But give it time. It'll get better and better. With the improvements they did recently, it's a good sign of things to come.

My point is, when people ask why graphical quality is being treated as such a hot button issue, it helps to note the years of PR material for one game alone where where graphical fidelity was treated as a cornerstone of the title; to the extent that two games in a row had performance problems because of it.



Who says graphics are that important? When they aren't sweeping aside any details about Standard cars behind vague interview answers and carefully presented 40 second videos, it is PD that says graphics are that important; and they/Sony have repeatedly done so since GT3 at least.

GT5P was the first game that did 16cars on track

What you meant to say, I hope, was that GT5P was the first GT game that did 16 cars on track.

 

[ShiftingGears]

delete.

 

[Imari]

GT5P was the first game that did 16cars on track before that and after that also most game were having 8cars on track. Forza4 only managed after 6yrs on 360 I think and it is same for Forza5 on new hardware. I think 24 is easily possible for Polyphony. They can access 5-6gigs of ram for games. Other than start it is rare to have more than 10cars on screen anyways.

You could have hundreds of cars on track, it's all about how much graphical quality you're willing to sacrifice to do so.

On PS3, the Codies F1 games have 20+ cars, and the Eutechnyx NASCAR games have some huge amount. 43? Polyphony probably could have had 50 car races if they limited them to standard cars only.

 

[gtracedriver1]

Codies and most other games are locked at 30fps though. I would say that F1 2013 car models look standard. In rear view, mirror very poor. Probably the worst in this regard

 

[Johnnypenso]

Think about it this way.

The PS3 can't handle a grid of 30 premium cars, but the PS4 probably can. Improving the graphics is one thing, but having twice the rendering power can give us twice the amount of activity on the same screen and it's just better in my opinion. Although games like Mortal Kombat X coming out really shows off the next gen consoles' graphical capability.

There is zero evidence to date to suggest more than 16 cars on track on the PS4. You have to realize there will also be much more going on in the game (hopefully)in the environment, trackside details, flags, physics, crowd animations, better AI, crash damage etc. etc. etc. and every car model with even higher resolution that we have at the moment. DriveClub has a phenomenal list of features, but they can only do it at 30fps, which should tell you the system has very real limitations.

As @Imari said earlier, I'd be happy with 16 cars on track so long as we get a locked 1080p/60fps and everything in the game works the way it's suppose to. No more excuses and tradeoffs to squeeze the last little bit of performance out of the system this time, it shouldn't be acceptable.

 

[Akira AC]

Codies and most other games are locked at 30fps though. I would say that F1 2013 car models look standard. In rear view, mirror very poor. Probably the worst in this regard

Yet they do better weather.

And frame rate plunges just as much as sometimes in GT6, as much as I like GT6 performance issues are existent, mostly because of not having a locked frame rate, specially on replays (and with grids with premiums, like Nascar races).

DriveClub has a phenomenal list of features, but they can only do it at 30fps, which should tell you the system has very real limitations.

It depends, by that logic future Forza games wont be able to make night tracks because they might reach hardware limitations and therefore performance issues (also note how the game doesn't run all the time on vistamode).

Excuse me, but sometimes I find the PC master race excuse of more power=better performance laughable, good framerates and not archived by raw processing power but by code optimizations, hence why F1 2013 runs and looks perfectly fine on medium range rigs, while P-Cars have several dips if you turn everything up, granted P-Cars looks better but I can't see how running it on 720p it struggles to run as well as maxed out F1 2013 at 1080p.

 

[Gerarghini]

Codies and most other games are locked at 30fps though. I would say that F1 2013 car models look standard. In rear view, mirror very poor. Probably the worst in this regard

There no way in hell that a standard model, upgraded or not, will visually beat ANY other modern racer's selection of cars. F1 2013's roster of cars are really good, interior and exterior. It looks bad in the mirrors because it's to save processing power.

 

[Imari]

Codies and most other games are locked at 30fps though. I would say that F1 2013 car models look standard. In rear view, mirror very poor. Probably the worst in this regard

Which is exactly the point.

You can have as many cars as you like, as long as you sacrifice other things.

 

[1241Penguin]

I can't help but disagree with people who want standards in GT7.

The fact is that standard cars will affect all players whether they ignore them or not. Playing the game knowing that standard cars are present makes the game feel like a cheap product. Any outsider who learns of GT's mix of premium and standard quality cars will view the game as the product of a half-arsed developer who gave up half way through making the game. GT5 Prologue feels much more like a quality product than GT5 or GT6 will ever be simply because it is consistent with the car quality. If you were the developer, you wouldn't want to have a high caliber person play your game if there are standard cars because it would be embarrassing. And I'm sure PD knows that, given that almost all of their trailers for GT5 feature only premium cars.

"GT is all about the love of cars" is not an excuse for standard cars either. I like cars and I like driving, just like most people here do, and that is exactly why I can't stand standard cars. Seeing some of my favourite cars like the Evo VII RS or the blob-eye STI with pixels and old textures makes me want to avoid them. Either do it right or not have it at all.

With regards to people fearing the loss of their favourite cars, that honestly shouldn't be a game-breaker either. Unless you have some mindset that you can only play a game if it had a certain car in it, in which case you need get over it because there are people whose favourite cars aren't in the game but they still play it because you know, they can handle it.

 

[H3avyM3tal]

With regards to people fearing the loss of their favourite cars, that honestly shouldn't be a game-breaker either. Unless you have some mindset that you can only play a game if it had a certain car in it, in which case you need get over it because there are people whose favourite cars aren't in the game but they still play it because you know, they can handle it.

You want me to give up on a favorite car because yours isn't even featured in the game? You other reasons I can understand, but this one? Has no logic behind it. It's a video game, not a social code.

 

[1241Penguin]

You want me to give up on a favorite car because yours isn't even featured in the game? You other reasons I can understand, but this one? Has no logic behind it. It's a video game, not a social code.

No, I don't want you to "give up" on the car itself. It's the PS2 model that needs to be removed. If the quality of the car model is consistent with the premium cars, then of course we should have it, but obviously it isn't if it's a standard car.

 

[2clicks]

No, I don't want you to "give up" on the car itself. It's the PS2 model that needs to be removed. If the quality of the car model is consistent with the premium cars, then of course we should have it, because obviously it isn't if it's a standard car.

There should be no reason to think that Kaz and his team are going to do absolutely nothing about the current state of the standards. They won't just look at the poorly textured models and discard them without trying to improve them first. Nor will any developer do that when it comes to reusing assets for that matter.

 

[1241Penguin]

There should be no reason to think that Kaz and his team are going to do absolutely nothing about the current state of the standards.

Of course, that's why you still have cars like this in GT6:

RUF type standards is totally cool but to have cars with this sort of quality in the game for a 3rd time? It's just silly (I won't boycott the game over it or anything I'm just laughing at the idea of cars that could look like this on the PS4)

View attachment 177435

So no, it's completely logical to think that PD won't do anything about them on the basis that they haven't done anything about them in GT6 with the except of a few cars...

They won't just look at the poorly textured models and discard them without trying to improve them first. Nor will any developer do that when it comes to reusing assets for that matter.

...which is a total waste of time. Premium cars need to be built from the ground up.

 

[ShiftingGears]

While that may be true, how often do you use a 100x zoom lens in real life to compare textures of different cars?

Almost everyone can tell a standard from a premium when they first see them in-game, let's not claim that it's only noticable when zoomed in 100 times. They look bad from a distance because they look awful up close.

Fact is that there are varying standards in real life, so it's quite acceptable in a simulation or game.

Yeah when I go down to my driveway I often find my car with visible pixels and lacking polygons. Seriously your statement just reads like you doing a routine in mental gymnastics.

 

[1241Penguin]

Yeah when I go down to my driveway I often find my car with visible pixels and lacking polygons. Seriously your statement just reads like you doing a routine in mental gymnastics.

 

[Fat Tyre]

I must admit xbox 360 looks much better texture wise , but the scale of objects are far from correct as in fences and the green floodlights and other things but that's just knit picking really

Scale (size) can vary a lot depending on the focal length used. Given that in GT (not sure how it works in Forza) you can change the focal length while in photomode I would be cautious with that comparison. I say if you really want to compare both games you would have to select the same track, position, perspective and focal length.

 

[Fat Tyre]

Wow Kaz is really clever!!! We should actually be up in arms knowing they are going to use ps3 quality cars for a Next-Gen title, when we all know we should have new next-gen cars for a next-gen title (yes I'll repeat next-gen that's the quality I want).

PS3 premiums should be considered "standards" in PS4, now that he said this (putting old ps2 cr@p "standard" cars) if he changes his mind and says "oh we've listened to the fans, we'll only use ps3 cars" then everyone will be saying how this is the best thing in the world blah, blah.

I just saw a video of Forza 5 in youtube and on top of their cars being totally photo-realistic you can also open the doors, the bonnet, any way none of the Gt premiums can do that.

Do we not realize we are being completely screwed over by Kaz and his gang?

 

[NixxxoN]

2. A non-immersive experience is not good gameplay

A waste of resources to model crash damage for crash kids? Im sorry, but when I run into a wall at 200mph and bounce off it like a cheap piece of tupperware it kind of takes me out of the experience.

Better for you then, you wont suffer so much when you crash and you'll have a second chance.

Kaz says standards are returning because he doesnt want to get rid of someone's favorite car. I dont think thats entirely honest. The real reason I think for the possible return of standards is to pad the car list again for the silly 1,000+ cars slogan, as well as using the standards to hide holes in the poorly chosen premium car list.

Dont be silly. They dont keep as many cars as possible just so they can say "we have 1000+ cars" this is stupid... they keep them because a lot of us (unlike you) love to have as many cars as possible

 

[Whitestar]

As @Imari said earlier, I'd be happy with 16 cars on track so long as we get a locked 1080p/60fps and everything in the game works the way it's suppose to. No more excuses and tradeoffs to squeeze the last little bit of performance out of the system this time, it shouldn't be acceptable.

Yes, please! I don't need "cutting edge". Just want a solid 60fps and no shadow flicker.

 

[Fat Tyre]

Better for you then, you wont suffer so much when you crash and you'll have a second chance.

Dont be silly. They dont keep as many cars as possible just so they can say "we have 1000+ cars" this is stupid... they keep them because a lot of us (unlike you) love to have as many cars as possible

How can you defend the undefendable? People who don't want the so called "standards" do want +1000 cars, we just want them to be of the same quality and to be of high quality not hugely pixelated crap that was good only 480i old analog tube tv sets.

Plus he is right, on top of that, that +1000 figure is highly inflated. There must be more than 40 identical Miatas and a lot of duplicate models (check the Mitsubishi GTOs, Toyota Supras, etc).

Now if you think that GT's no show damage modelling is better than having realistic damage than I suggest you go see a shrink.

 

[SimTourist]

Scale (size) can vary a lot depending on the focal length used. Given that in GT (not sure how it works in Forza) you can change the focal length while in photomode I would be cautious with that comparison. I say if you really want to compare both games you would have to select the same track, position, perspective and focal length.

It would help if we had real life photo of the same section for reference. Who knows when T10 and PD gathered reference for their tracks, maybe they're both accurate but have difference due to changing trackside objects. Tracks don't stay the same forever, do they The comparison was mainly to show the differences in textures.

 

[Fat Tyre]

It would help if we had real life photo of the same section for reference. Who knows when T10 and PD gathered reference for their tracks, maybe they're both accurate but have difference due to changing trackside objects. Tracks don't stay the same forever, do they The comparison was mainly to show the differences in textures.

Then we would need to know what type of lens the photographer used plus the focal length, etc. We could get that info from the EXIF file though. Any way I just wanted to point out it is not as simple as putting two photos next to each other and saying "hey they match/ don't match!".

 

[NixxxoN]

How can you defend the undefendable? People who don't want the so called "standards" do want +1000 cars, we just want them to be of the same quality and to be of high quality not hugely pixelated crap that was good only 480i old analog tube tv sets.

Plus he is right, on top of that, that +1000 figure is highly inflated. There must be more than 40 identical Miatas and a lot of duplicate models (check the Mitsubishi GTOs, Toyota Supras, etc).

Now if you think that GT's no show damage modelling is better than having realistic damage than I suggest you go see a shrink.

Of course, and I want 5.000 cars or more (not just 1.000) at perfect quality. But we all know we cannot expect all that much because PD are humans, cant do everything. We have to chose between a lot of cars with quality differences (thats what I choose) and few quality cars.

Realistic damage is completely USELESS in a game like GT, and that would take a lot of resources for PD to make.
Only crash kids and similars like to crash on purpose. I used to when I was a kid and I played Carmageddon, thats true. But each game is for a different purpose. GT is not a game for crashing or damaging cars.

 

[Samus]

Oh boy, all of the clichés are coming out, from "don't like it don't use it" to "It's a driving game, not a crashing game".

Realistic damage useless in a realistic racing game, oh the logic.

 

[Fat Tyre]

Of course, and I want 5.000 cars or more (not just 1.000) at perfect quality. But we all know we cannot expect all that much because PD are humans, cant do everything. We have to chose between a lot of cars with quality differences (thats what I choose) and few quality cars.

Realistic damage is completely USELESS in a game like GT, and that would take a lot of resources for PD to make.
Only crash kids and similars like to crash on purpose. I used to when I was a kid and I played Carmageddon, thats true. But each game is for a different purpose. GT is not a game for crashing or damaging cars.

PD could easily hire more people or outsource instead of blowing up money racing the Nurb and other places. If they are short on staff they should priorize their man hours instead of wasting them on stupid things like "perfect sky" or the useless "moon buggy".

As for crash kid, Are you kidding me? No one would crash on purpose if you would have damage since it would RUIN YOUR RACE!!!. Because of the fact that there is NO damage it is that people crash onto walls and gain advantage. The real problem is that they CAN'T do it!!! PD should just concentrate on Physics and sale that to other game developers. So then you can buy a racing game that says "powered by GT physics" since that is the only thing they get right.

I would like to see you lap the Nurb with DAMAGE ON, you wouldn't last a second bumper boy.

 

[steve30x]

Oh boy, all of the clichés are coming out, from "don't like it don't use it" to "It's a driving game, not a crashing game". Got any more? .

Build a bridge and get over it

 

[Samus]

Build a bridge and get over it

Constructive input.