Gah, you Bronies and your silly fonts...
Perhaps we can start with you explaining how you know these things:
- Lifelike and individual bot A.I.?
- Fully variable drivercam settings (position, aim, shake, etc).
- A much improved Photo Mode and Movie Maker?
- A full featured livery editor, including realistic exotic paint and metallic effects?
- A full featured track creator, with LONG Nurburgring-like track length?
- A full featured real world-like Career/Season Mode?
Require a new system to implement instead. I'll spot you the movie maker thing, since that did seem to need to be pulled by PD.
GAH! You bronies and your dumb fonts!
On most of those items I mentioned, it depends on what you want GT6 to be. The camera settings and Photo Mode, Season Mode too, yes, those can be done in a patch to GT5 itself. But then, I was making a quick post, you might recall. For the rest, though, that stuff requires a beefier Playstation. Yes, in my humble, humble,
humble opinion.
And this is why.
Bot A.I. requires some sort of genius to create to start with, especially good A.I. Now I don't know why racing games seem to short sheet this aspect, but of the dozens of racing games I've played, I haven't really been too impressed by any of them. The PC sims like the GTRs have bots which are rather sedate, polite, cruise missile-like, and the most you can say about them is they drive faster as you bump up the difficulty, as is the case with most racers. Forza has always had bots which are more than combative, they're sometimes downright mean, moreso in certain games, which is what I am NOT looking for in racer A.I.
So with GT6, the issues which are recurring issues is the bots tend to stomp the brakes, have little finesse with them, and brake too early around turns. For whatever reason, this has been a problem since GT1 and has only been slightly fixed in GT5. The bots are more lifelike but not very aggressive, though I have seen them fight me and each other. I know most people here want more challenging A.I., and that requires two things: a talented programmer or team, and processor power, just as physics and graphics do. The more you ask of the game, the less power is available for things like A.I., as everything has to fit into a performance budget. Run out of power and you have problems, so all game designers try and reserve a thin margin for safety.
On the Livery Editor, this hinges greatly on how much extra power the GPU has for custom graphics on a number of vehicles - in the case of online racing with real humans, and how those custom liveries are rendered. It could be handled by the CPU/GPU processing the elements you use to create a livery and reducing everything to a massive skin, which is what you do on a computer when you create a livery with a graphics proggie for a PC racer. Is this how console racers do it, by and large? I have no idea. I've come up empty on any developer admitting how they handle custom liveries in their games.
So what about the massive Track Creator? Well, this requires ram, just like the Movie Maker does. Would you be happy making small 1.5 mile tracks with little detail and few elements? You need less ram. But how much? Remember, the GT5 Track Maker is largely predetermined, with most of the creative aspects taken out of your hands. Do you want to make your own Nordshleife, and lots of creative freedom to do as you please? You need a good chunk of memory, plus enough for the tools, and a fast processor is sure useful. Why do you think game developers have dev kits with gigabytes of ram? It's not just for software tools. I am amazed at what ModNation Racers is capable of, but then, it's also rendering very basic, cartoony elements. I want something on par at least with the Standard Tracks we have in GT5. Every unique tree model, every patch of grass, every foot of track and trackside, every stand and portapoddy, every mega-texture requires ram, and processing to render it.
But what else do you want GT6 to be? Evidently you just want GT6 to be GT5 fixed up a bit, and it seems that about half the guys here feel the same way. But it depends on how SONY feels about it. More importantly, it depends on what Kaz wants, and what the team wants to accomplish.
Perhaps we can start with you explaining how you know these things:And by the way, that "well, GT5 was made to the best of PD's ability with 4 years of experience" bit is rather moot when they completely redid the lighting engine twice and the sound engine at least once since the game came out; so clearly GT5 as it was at launch wasn't the best that the system could accomplish. Or how, since they were still adding graphical features to the engine after Prologue stopped being updated but before GT5 proper came out that they couldn't quite pull off, which at least implies that there is greater optimization to be found.[/color][/b][/font]
Yes, but you make it sound like they scrapped everything they learned about the PS3 architecture at each step. Clearly, when they made changes, they knew
more than they did previously. They probably know more now. So, why does GT5 still have these ugly unfixed issues? As I see it, you only have four possibilities.
- It's just too much of a hassle
- The team never really understood the Cell Engine
- The team built the GT5 engine wrong to start with
- The team, and SONY (3D), crammed too many performance demands into GT5
I can't see the first three being true. I also can't see the team making two changes to the lighting engine and letting them go if they made the game look worse, unless without them, the game
would have looked even worse yet. Assuming what you said is true anyway. And stating that the team was unable to optimize the graphics enough when with
at least four years experience with the PS3 architecture, and the unbelievable accomplishments they have made in GT5, is kind of a stretch.
I mean, look. I played quite a bit of the Japanese release of GT5 Prologue online. These graphic issues with tire smoke didn't exist, and on the overseas servers there was a LOT of smoke because of periodic lag. The lighting has changed very little, regardless of anyone's statements that the lighting engine was "completely reworked" - which, I can imagine the engine was tweaked since Prologue, but I can't find any mention of it being torn down and completely reworked even once.
And still, no one but me has dared to even hazard a guess as to why Prologue looks better. But I'll do it again.
- SONY insisted on 3D being a part of the entire GT5 game, requiring more processing power
- The physics were enhanced, requiring more processing power
- Some say that lighting was reworked, and could well need a certain amount more processing power
- The A.I. was enhanced, requiring more processing power
- Even the minimum damage in the game requires more processing power
- Having this all (minus 3D) run in the pseudo-1080p resolution (stretched 1280) requires more processing power
And from remarks that Kaz made concerning the development of GT5, mentioning the performance tools they use for each game to find hidden power in the Playstation hardware, they've pumped the well pretty hard. To me, this indicates that there isn't much left in the Cell BE to mine, and so any improvements in GT6 on PS3 would require cutting back in other areas to free up resources. Dropping resolution below 1080p, culling more polygons from somewhere, redoing textures away from the track at lower resolution... there are a few brute force things PD could do to harvest performance to apply to particle rendering, alpha texturing and shaders which would improve the graphics markedly. Perhaps even allow a few more cars per race. But the problem with that is that Kaz has never taken steps backwards to my knowledge, and has always sought to push the Playstation hardware as far as he thought it could go. That's his personal design philosophy, and prior to GT5 it worked pretty well.
In the grand scheme of things, allowing you to race against more than 16 cars seems pretty meaningless when there was a grand total of only (I'm pretty sure) 2 things offline since the game came out that even had that many cars in it (both of them being Seasonal Events) and it's rare that an online room even gets to 12. Nor am I particularly bothered if PD doesn't make a game that looks fine under typical circumstances have extra graphical effects added to it; or if they go crazy and make the 3D better than it is now.
That's because we all play GT5 in our own way. Clearly, Arcade Mode isn't your thing, but it is mine. In fact, for those of us who enjoy Arcade Mode racing, and there are more than a few, we perhaps enjoy the game more than others, as the only reward in Arcade Mode is the race. No credits, no cars, no records, no human opponents. Just 16 cars tearing around the track at the difficulty of your choice. And when you go from a 16 car field to 12 or less, those races seem pretty small, especially with 8 cars. The Nurburgring with more than one lap and only eight cars is pretty lonely, especially at night.
Online, I know that you have to deal with the performance limitations of the whole ball of wax. But offline is a different matter. I really doubt that a majority would like to see GT6 average 12 car fields offline again. If anything, I recall requests for bigger fields. I certainly do, I want to see 24 car races if the PS4 will handle it, or more.
Once again, this all comes down to what you guys want in a GT6. If you basically want GT5 with more cars and tracks, then PS3 is adequate, with a couple more years of scrupulous tweaking to deal with the uglies. If you want more... well, it isn't.
I want more, and I suspect Kaz, PD, and most fans do too.