Photo GT5 prologue VS Forza 3 Demo

[RedSuinit]

True, but you forget, you are talking about a multi plat game. mulit plat developers dont got the extra mile for the ps3 (at least in my opinion) but when you have devolopers like Naughty Dog stating how they are able to achieve awesome graphics in Uncharted 2.

It makes you wonder, is the 360 holding back the ps3 on mulitplat games. Because one, developers can not use the hardrive to install games, 2. the DVD space is very limiting.

No, developers do NOT got the extra mile for the PS3... If anyone has a PS3 go download the Uncharted 2 multiplayer beta, it looks so amazingly good!

 

[Earth]

You have. You've repeatedly pushed your idea of GT on others as if you know what's best.

I think your just being touchy

1)Thanks for proving my point; you've taken that in another direction.
2)What does it matter if they are? You're still the one being called out on your base-less opinions.

They are not baseless. I am a youtuber and have seen plenty of videos and have read plenty of reviews and breakdowns of the FM3 demo and Enthusia.

You don't know the livery editor will always be abused.
Rewinding isn't cheating if B-Spec isn't.
You haven't played the competitors' games, so you have no actual opinion on physics vs. physics.
Halo had nothing to do with that review. You've even admitted this already.

Dont know? I've seen it. But that's besides the point, I'm not 100% against he livery editor, I just think it should have restrictions. And yes, Halo had nothing to do with the interview.

That's what's wrong. Your opinions are full of stupid logic.

I dont think so

You are one of the most bias here. Don't attempt to tell me otherwise.

You'd be surprised. I have criticized GT5 and GT5P more then I have Forza 3. I can pull up threads and posts if you'd like.

You're not calling Turn10 out at all, you're making up dumbass reasons for why rewind & livery editors shouldn't be in GT. You're just being a GT fanboy upset that people that may actually like Forza features in a GT game.

No, not really. If you look at the first page of the livery editor thread you will even see some of the cars I painted using a livery editor. The fact Forza has it doesnt mean anything because I take Forza as seriously as I do Need for Speed Shift.

Again, you're not calling anyone out, you're just being a cry baby about Forza features.

Lets stop the ranting. I'm serious.

 

[Devedander]

Sigh, i guess i will have to break it down for you, that even a 2 year old will understand.

Why does movies on blu ray and hd-dvd look 10x better then movies on a dvd disc? Because both hd formats doesn’t require to be compressed to fit on a disc. Where dvd movies require it, which = loss of picture and sound quality. Which is why sony game developers in the pass has stated that they are able to stream uncompressed info from the bd disc due to the amount of storage BD can hold.

OK first off you are making some pretty common mistakes I think talking a little above what you actually know. We ran into this with daanscardesigner a while back on the steeringwheel lag thread.

First off... BD video requires no compression? BD video comes in one of two formats, MPEG4-AVC (and MPEG and VCEG joint venture codec) or VC-1 (a mainly microsoft format originally used for HD DVD). Actually I think Mpeg2 Part 2 content might be included also... memory doens't serve me well on that one.

The point is... they are all compressed formats.

When talking about BD the uncompressed you so often hear about is uncompressed audio.

Secondly, the reason a BD has a sharper picture than DVD is mainly due to storage size. You can store a higher bit rate, higher resolution video file if you have more room.

You may say "and that is the same size improvement that means video games will look better!" but it's not that simple.

Yes BD could store more high res textures than a DVD. And that MIGHT contribute to having higher quality output from a game, but it's only one of many contributing factors.

Most important is how many textures a system can work with at once.

Think of your disc as your storage vault. The bigger your vault, the larger and more detailed files you can hold in it.

But it's not always accessible to work with, you have to go get those files to work with them and when you are done working with a file it has to go back to the vault (in reality you do not put files back from RAM onto the disc, but it's the easiest way to make this analogy work since the point is you have limited space to have files useable at any given time).

Think of your RAM as your desk. This is where you can put the files you got from storage temporarily while you use them. These are the files you can access directly.

Now if your desk is only 512 square feet, you can only fit 512 square feet worth of files on it at any given time. It doesn't matter how many files you have in storage, your desk is only so big.

If you have bigger higher resolution files in storage, you will be able to fit less of them on your desk at a given time.

The way a game console works is, it reaches out to the disc (long term storage) retrieves the files it needs to work with (files) and puts them into RAM (on the desk).

This is why he is saying that RAM is the limiting factor... no matter how big the texture files are, the bottle neck is that you can only work with the ones in RAM at any given time. In fact textures too big will be bad for you as you won't have enough room on your desk to hold all the ones you need at the same time.

For example, each car on a DVD game only has 100MB of textures then I can have textures for 5 cars in RAM at once. But wait you say, on BR I can fit much larger and more textures!! So I use 500MB tetures for each of my cars! Certainly my cars will look better! Well yes, assuming yoru supporting hardware (cpu, gpu) can handle those textures, you would get a better picture...

For 1 car.

Because you ran out of deskspace (RAM) to load more textures.

So in a system with 512MB of RAM, if you have a DVD with 9GB of textures, or you have a BD with 50GB of textures, it doesn't matter you can only load 512MB of textures at any given time.

Back to BR looking better than DVD, again there are lots of reasons, but they are in large part not related to game graphics as the contributing factors are so greatly different. With video a processor is decoding the video and simply reading what color every pixel is on screen. With games the console has to actually create the whole image on screen from dynamic parts. To explain it to someone who doens't grasp the basics already (no offense, but the way you talk about it makes it clear you don't) would be very difficult... like trying to explain calculous to someone who just learned basic algebra.

I don't mean that in an insulting way (although it sounds like it is) but that's what it comes down to.

 

[Tenacious D]

Playing off of Deve's example above, both the PS3 and 360 have the same amount of ram, and though the PS3's is divided up into two chunks of 256MB, the VRam is very fast, as is the buss bandwidth. In fact, many developers are treating the 360 as if it had divided ram too, as it makes development on both systems much easier. Plus, you're never going to have a game with 450MB of graphic and audio data, and very little game code, not a serious game anyway.

Where Blu-ray shines and DVD is becoming a pain is in the space it affords you to load your data. Suppose your 360 DVD is like a warehouse holding 7000 square feet. That's not bad. But Blu-Ray is like a warehouse with 25,000 square feet. And not one, but two of them because Blu-ray is dual layer. So a single Blu-ray disc can hold seven complete Forza 2 games. And if you own a Forza 2 Platinum Edition game, all that extra DLC comes on a separate DVD, because T10 ran out of room on the first disc. This is something the PS3 won't have to worry about for some time.

 

[cicohipe]

sigh...

How can you use more and better textures GIVEN THE LIMITATION OF RAM???????????????

You could put a game on a terabyte hard disk and ingame textures would STILL be limited by RAM.

Anyway, lets forget that so we can live in your little world for a second. Explain why the textures are generally better in Xbox 360 games if DVD's are such a bottle neck? (better textures is an opinion of course)

I'm well aware of the part RAM and the optical drive, hard drive, and CPU all play together I'm an old school PC gamer. It doesn't change the fact that more size is always going to be a good thing especially as games continue to get larger. And PS3 is without question now producing games that look superior to Xbox 360. Halo ODST? come on...


As for the guy above me, sorry i didn't catch your name before i hit reply. You have a very in depth guide however i see some problems. You are stating that RAM is the limiting factor as if this is the be all and end all of graphics. And yet the Xbox has slightly more ram than PS3. Clearly there are more factors at play here.

The truth is unless you have actually developed for the PS3 or X360 you really don't know how these consoles take best advantage of the hardware and are simply working off stuff you have read off the internet or computer knowledge, which although the Xbox is very similar to a PC, the PS3 is clearly a different beast entirely

 

[Devedander]

Where Blu-ray shines and DVD is becoming a pain is in the space it affords you to load your data. Suppose your 360 DVD is like a warehouse holding 7000 square feet. That's not bad. But Blu-Ray is like a warehouse with 25,000 square feet. And not one, but two of them because Blu-ray is dual layer. So a single Blu-ray disc can hold seven complete Forza 2 games. And if you own a Forza 2 Platinum Edition game, all that extra DLC comes on a separate DVD, because T10 ran out of room on the first disc. This is something the PS3 won't have to worry about for some time.

I really wish MS had just slammed an HD DVD drive in the 360... I think that would have been plenty of room.

I'm well aware of the part RAM and the optical drive, hard drive, and CPU all play together I'm an old school PC gamer. It doesn't change the fact that more size is always going to be a good thing especially as games continue to get larger. And PS3 is without question now producing games that look superior to Xbox 360. Halo ODST? come on...


As for the guy above me, sorry i didn't catch your name before i hit reply. You have a very in depth guide however i see some problems. You are stating that RAM is the limiting factor as if this is the be all and end all of graphics. And yet the Xbox has slightly more ram than PS3. Clearly there are more factors at play here.

The truth is unless you have actually developed for the PS3 or X360 you really don't know how these consoles take best advantage of the hardware and are simply working off stuff you have read off the internet or computer knowledge, which although the Xbox is very similar to a PC, the PS3 is clearly a different beast entirely

Halo 3 ODST is running on the Halo 3 engine, which to be honest, wasn't a particularly good engine for eye candy. There are plenty of great looking games for the 360 as well as multiplatform games that look better (there are lots of speculations as to why on that).

And yes, you are correct, I had to severly simplify the explanation and RAM is not necessarily the limiting factor, it just could be a limiting factor.

If your GPU can't handle it or your bus isn't up to transporting all that info... any part can be the weak point.

The point I was trying to make is that more storage is not all it takes to get better graphics and in some cases won't make a difference.

And while you are partially right that you can't know the insides and outs of programing for either console without actually doing it, there are some basic rules of technology that they must follow.

It's like saying that you can't know what it's like to work on an monster truck engine unless you have done it, but there are some rules about internal combustion engines, drivetrains, transmissions etc that apply in a general way and you can base your understanding off of.

 

[cicohipe]

I really wish MS had just slammed an HD DVD drive in the 360... I think that would have been plenty of room.



Halo 3 ODST is running on the Halo 3 engine, which to be honest, wasn't a particularly good engine for eye candy. There are plenty of great looking games for the 360 as well as multiplatform games that look better (there are lots of speculations as to why on that).

And yes, you are correct, I had to severly simplify the explanation and RAM is not necessarily the limiting factor, it just could be a limiting factor.

If your GPU can't handle it or your bus isn't up to transporting all that info... any part can be the weak point.

The point I was trying to make is that more storage is not all it takes to get better graphics and in some cases won't make a difference.

And while you are partially right that you can't know the insides and outs of programing for either console without actually doing it, there are some basic rules of technology that they must follow.

It's like saying that you can't know what it's like to work on an monster truck engine unless you have done it, but there are some rules about internal combustion engines, drivetrains, transmissions etc that apply in a general way and you can base your understanding off of.

LOL yeah i know ODST was a bad example, however there was nothing stopping them beefing up the engine. Anyway.. enough ODST.

I actually completely agree with you, the monster truck analogy is sound, however as i think you are leading to, without the actual real world experience of doing it, everything is just theory.

 

[scandisk]

I'm on board with you. I think the graphics are good, but the backgrounds look 'gamey' or not very realistic, something out of Halo or Fable.. I think GT's backgrounds look more photo realistic.

Maybe it's not quite PHOTO REALISTIC but its certainly more detailed then GTP's (Better use of textures etc). But in the end, it all boils down to preference.

BUT?

you can't top that.

 

[soldiaboy]

this is a joke, not to mention how long ago gt5p dropped

 

[RedSuinit]

The one thing that Deve, and other's have forgotten, (which I have previously stated, is PRE-RENDERING, BD allows for a higher level of pre-rendered textures since the textures can be stored in higher, more detailed resolutions. Now, with these higher level pre-renderings, you can have more detailed backgrounds, levels, etc. etc. while having LESS post-rendering effects. Now with these fewer post-rendering effects, you open up MORE of the V-RAM for different, streamed textures (that can't be pre-rendered) and other post-rendering processes, which can give you more detail, and better looking graphics without slowing performance.

 

[Devedander]

The one thing that Deve, and other's have forgotten, (which I have previously stated, is PRE-RENDERING, BD allows for a higher level of pre-rendered textures since the textures can be stored in higher, more detailed resolutions. Now, with these higher level pre-renderings, you can have more detailed backgrounds, levels, etc. etc. while having LESS post-rendering effects. Now with these fewer post-rendering effects, you open up MORE of the V-RAM for different, streamed textures (that can't be pre-rendered) and other post-rendering processes, which can give you more detail, and better looking graphics without slowing performance.

Ummm first off, isn't a pre rendered texture the same size as a non pre rendered texture (ie a 256x256 image of some wood is about the same size as a 256x256 image of some sanded painted wood). So bigger storage size wouldn't be what allows pre rendered textures.

Secondly, in a game like GT where dyanmic lighting and effects are the staple of how great the game looks, pre rendered anythign would stick out like a sore thumb. I mean in a fixed point of view game with little or no dynamic rendering I could see it working (something like diablo) but in a 3d environment that you move through and in which elements can effect each other?

I am not sure I can give credence to pre rendered textures here...

 

[TorqueHappenS08]

Enough with the Fanboy dribble, let's have some tea and Crumpet's And all will be well.

 

[RedSuinit]

Ummm first off, isn't a pre rendered texture the same size as a non pre rendered texture (ie a 256x256 image of some wood is about the same size as a 256x256 image of some sanded painted wood). So bigger storage size wouldn't be what allows pre rendered textures.

Secondly, in a game like GT where dyanmic lighting and effects are the staple of how great the game looks, pre rendered anythign would stick out like a sore thumb. I mean in a fixed point of view game with little or no dynamic rendering I could see it working (something like diablo) but in a 3d environment that you move through and in which elements can effect each other?

I am not sure I can give credence to pre rendered textures here...

You can have LARGER pre-rendered textures while still leaving space for game data.... Why is this so hard to comprehend? Do you honestly think that there is no upscaling in pre-rendered textures? If you do, you're naive...

Oh, and I wasn't talking about GT, now was I? If I was, please point out where. We were comparing the reasons why a BD would be able to assist in producing better graphics than a DVD.

 

[Devedander]

You can have LARGER pre-rendered textures while still leaving space for game data.... Why is this so hard to comprehend? Do you honestly think that there is no upscaling in pre-rendered textures? If you do, you're naive...

Oh, and I wasn't talking about GT, now was I? If I was, please point out where. We were comparing the reasons why a BD would be able to assist in producing better graphics than a DVD.

First off you didn't make it clear you weren't talking about GT (I thought we were talking about GT on a GT forum) and secondly yes more storage space means you can store larger textures in general (I am not sure what pre rendered has to do with it... bigger texures will generally result in better image quality as a general rule no matter where you render them) but there you run back into that other problem of bottlenecks in other areas of the system.

No one is saying more storage space doesn't have some benefits sometimes, but we were talking about some specific examples when you jumped in.

BTW if you want to get into BD in general, the slower read speed of BD vs DVD hampers the use of exactly that benefit.

 

[RedSuinit]

First off you didn't make it clear you weren't talking about GT (I thought we were talking about GT on a GT forum) and secondly yes more storage space means you can store larger textures in general (I am not sure what pre rendered has to do with it... bigger texures will generally result in better image quality as a general rule no matter where you render them) but there you run back into that other problem of bottlenecks in other areas of the system.

No one is saying more storage space doesn't have some benefits sometimes, but we were talking about some specific examples when you jumped in.

BTW if you want to get into BD in general, the slower read speed of BD vs DVD hampers the use of exactly that benefit.

BD reads at 12x ~ 432 Mbit/s with 1x representing 36 Mbit/s for BD's and DVD reads at 24x ~ 259 Mbit/s with 1x representing 10.8 Mbit/s for DVD's (this is general for max speeds of both types of readers, which is what is generally used in BD and DVD readers) so as you can see BD reads at almost twice the speed of DVD's... Sorry try again.

EDIT: Also, when I jumped into the conversation it had nothing to do with GT, it was solely moved onto a question of "Why would a BD make a game look better than a DVD just because it has more space? Since the limiting factor is RAM?" I was answering that question.

 

[Soju]

pre-rendered textures?.. thats a new one

All games I've seen are restricted to texture-memory, so it doesnt matter if its dvd or bd... unless your IDsoftware and texture mem doesnt matter as much

 

[RedSuinit]

pre-rendered textures?.. thats a new one

All games I've seen are restricted to texture-memory, so it doesnt matter if its dvd or bd... unless your IDsoftware and texture mem doesnt matter as much

Seriously? You've never heard of pre-rendering? Go read about it, it's like getting high. Why do you think games have load times? Pre-rendered textures have been used ever since the creation of OpenGL...

 

[Soju]

Really?

Im pretty sure games load because its loading everything into memory...

And unless you mean something else "pre-rendering" to me means anything that isnt rendered real-time like a cg movie

So when you say pre-rendered texture... it has me confused??

 

[RedSuinit]

Really?

Im pretty sure games load because its loading everything into memory...

And unless you mean something else "pre-rendering" to me means anything that isnt rendered real-time like a cg movie

So when you say pre-rendered texture... it has me confused??

Alot of 3d textures are pre-rendered, and don't take up any space on your V-RAM. For example, your browser on your computer, now the window itself is no longer on the RAM, it is now in the cache being run from the CPU. Now each individual keystroke is going in and out of RAM resulting in the change in the "pre-rendered" browser that you are currently seeing on screen. Get it? Sort of? Maybe? Yes? No?

 

[Devedander]

BD reads at 12x ~ 432 Mbit/s with 1x representing 36 Mbit/s for BD's and DVD reads at 24x ~ 259 Mbit/s with 1x representing 10.8 Mbit/s for DVD's (this is general for max speeds of both types of readers, which is what is generally used in BD and DVD readers) so as you can see BD reads at almost twice the speed of DVD's... Sorry try again.

EDIT: Also, when I jumped into the conversation it had nothing to do with GT, it was solely moved onto a question of "Why would a BD make a game look better than a DVD just because it has more space? Since the limiting factor is RAM?" I was answering that question.

Maybe my data's old, but the last time I looked into it I was getting these kinds of results somehow...

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2007/01/6658.ars

 

[Soju]

Haha.. No :*(

I just think you are misusing words a bit like your definition of "pre-rendered" and "3d textures?"

 

[RedSuinit]

Haha.. No :*(

I just think you are misusing words a bit like your definition of "pre-rendered" and "3d textures?"

Then correct me, since you clearly know more than me, oh master...

 

[Soju]

Sure thing!

texture resolution has no bearing on whether its on dvd or bd for games

 

[FyreandIce]

I'm well aware of the part RAM and the optical drive, hard drive, and CPU all play together I'm an old school PC gamer. It doesn't change the fact that more size is always going to be a good thing especially as games continue to get larger. And PS3 is without question now producing games that look superior to Xbox 360. Halo ODST? come on...

No matter how hardcore the halo fanboy, he will always admit that the Halo games have never been a graphical powerhouse. (Although they have, in my opinion, the largest scope of any game(ODST's background action and draw distances are just incredible))

Playing off of Deve's example above, both the PS3 and 360 have the same amount of ram, and though the PS3's is divided up into two chunks of 256MB, the VRam is very fast, as is the buss bandwidth. In fact, many developers are treating the 360 as if it had divided ram too, as it makes development on both systems much easier. Plus, you're never going to have a game with 450MB of graphic and audio data, and very little game code, not a serious game anyway.

Where Blu-ray shines and DVD is becoming a pain is in the space it affords you to load your data. Suppose your 360 DVD is like a warehouse holding 7000 square feet. That's not bad. But Blu-Ray is like a warehouse with 25,000 square feet. And not one, but two of them because Blu-ray is dual layer. So a single Blu-ray disc can hold seven complete Forza 2 games. And if you own a Forza 2 Platinum Edition game, all that extra DLC comes on a separate DVD, because T10 ran out of room on the first disc. This is something the PS3 won't have to worry about for some time.

A very good way of putting it. You can fit more content onto blueray but that doesn't mean you will get better graphics.

The one thing that Deve, and other's have forgotten, (which I have previously stated, is PRE-RENDERING, BD allows for a higher level of pre-rendered textures since the textures can be stored in higher, more detailed resolutions. Now, with these higher level pre-renderings, you can have more detailed backgrounds, levels, etc. etc. while having LESS post-rendering effects. Now with these fewer post-rendering effects, you open up MORE of the V-RAM for different, streamed textures (that can't be pre-rendered) and other post-rendering processes, which can give you more detail, and better looking graphics without slowing performance.

you cannot pre-render a realtime 3d scene.

 

[RedSuinit]

No matter how hardcore the halo fanboy, he will always admit that the Halo games have never been a graphical powerhouse. (Although they have, in my opinion, the largest scope of any game(ODST's background action and draw distances are just incredible))



A very good way of putting it. You can fit more content onto blueray but that doesn't mean you will get better graphics.



you cannot pre-render a realtime 3d scene.

Yes, you can. Backgrounds for GT are PRE-rendered... It's a lot more computationally intensive, but that moves it from real-time V-RAM to running off the cache in the CPU... If I am wrong, please correct me and help me understand what is really going on.

EDIT: I feel as if I may in-fact be using the term pre-rendered incorrectly as has been suggested to me by Soju. So anyone who can correct my thinking, please do.

Sure thing!

texture resolution has no bearing on whether its on dvd or bd for games

YES IT DOES! If you were to store the full texture resolution on a DVD, and not do any upscaling you would run out of room, and FAST...

 

[JakeCourtney]

Well, I think maybe PD should start putting even just half the effort into their tracks and environments as they do in the cars and maybe, just maybe it won't look like it does now.

 

[Earth]

Well, I think maybe PD should start putting even just half the effort into their tracks and environments as they do in the cars and maybe, just maybe it won't look like it does now.

Only through Forza 3 sunglasses would anybody who raced HSR, Daytona, London or Eiger feel unimpressed.

Besides, PD puts the effort where it matters, because I can't drive a mountain.

 

[Soju]

Yes, you can. Backgrounds for GT are PRE-rendered... It's a lot more computationally intensive, but that moves it from real-time V-RAM to running off the cache in the CPU... If I am wrong, please correct me and help me understand what is really going on.

EDIT: I feel as if I may in-fact be using the term pre-rendered incorrectly as has been suggested to me by Soju. So anyone who can correct my thinking, please do.

Ah.. my padawan

Backgrounds are just a texture mapped onto a sphere... ala skydome/skybox

YES IT DOES! If you were to store the full texture resolution on a DVD, and not do any upscaling you would run out of room, and FAST...

Game engines can only handle soo many textures running at the same time which is why games stream and mipmap textures(Which is why you see some games have a blurry to full res texture pop), So texture size means nothing on whether its on bluray or dvd, only that you can store more on 1 BD rather than using multiple dvds. Your going to get the same quality

See IDs game Rage which uses megatextures, really high res, but will look the same on both consoles

 

[RedSuinit]

Ah.. my padawan

Backgrounds are just a texture mapped onto a sphere... ala skydome/skybox




Game engines can only handle soo many textures running at the same time which is why games stream and mipmap textures(Which is why you see some games have a blurry to full res texture pop), So texture size means nothing on whether its on bluray or dvd, only that you can store more on 1 BD rather than using multiple dvds. Your going to get the same quality

So what you're saying is that BACKGROUNDS can be pre-rendered but a 3D building can not since a camera rotates around it instead of just inside it?

But, would the fact that you would need multiple DVD's therefore make some texture combinations impossible to achieve?

 

[Organ-Donor]

Only through Forza 3 sunglasses would anybody who raced HSR, Daytona, London or Eiger feel unimpressed.

Besides, PD puts the effort where it matters, because I can't drive a mountain.

True that 👍