Standard cars ARE in GT6. (100% confirmed)

[freshseth83]

He cant upgrade every standard to premium in the time he had with the number of staff, so keeping them but 'upgrading' them is probably the best way to go about it. Theres standard cars we would miss if not included. Somewhere out there there's someone appreciating a standard car that might be looked over by the majority. Must be tough to decide which cars exactly to redo. Can't please everyone if you are going to have non premium cars without interiors. Perhaps GT on PS4 will be different. That would be major if the car count is around the same. And how do you decide ahich trim to model? Cars have different color leather, cars have different stitching colors, cars have different different floormats etc. Take the LFA for example. In GT5 it comes with the "polished wheels". There are 3 types of wheel finish. The interior has over 10 different colors for the leather. Or you can get alcantara. Then theres more than 5 colors of stitching. Thats the type of detail you have on cars irl that would take precious time to recreate in game that I don't think PD have the manpower to accomplish in time. It makes you wonder if their staff is a certain number because of skill or budget. It seems odd to say budget when Sony is behind you, though. But how much do they contribute? Going forward I hope PD expands and becomes bigger. With the news of cooperating with manufacturers maybe we will keep with up to date cars and racing programs they're involved in. Thats something GT has been criticized about before; the 'old cars'. That goes back to having standard cars. But you see thats not always the case. So what is the deal with standards? Lack of resources, time, staff? Thats my question rather than why they bring them back.

 

[TopGearFTW]

I always thought the standards were because PD refused to outsource the scanning and creating of the cars because it wouldn't necessarily conform to their standards (pun not intended)

 

[Jnolan]

I don't think he's implying that all standards will even look any better than in GT5. Only improving the bad ones and there is a few!. So long as they keep interesting premiums coming in by DLC, that aren't at a ridiculous price then i'm happy.

 

[RickNU]

Standard cars dont bored me, if in the future they pass to premiums, for exemple a dlc with 4 cars (2 standards and 2 new cars)

 

[defoncateur3k]

I'm going to ask again now because I've spotted a few modellers here. Is it not possible for modellers to create a "default cockpit view" that would "stick" to the black edges we have right now? I'm thinking of some sort of 3D adaptable cockpit (with textures that wouldn't look like they're being torn apart by the different forms of the cars).

I assume it wouldn't be too complicated to incorporate this (may be even generating it on the fly), and stick the logo of the brand on the wheel, and that's it. One default cockpit for common cars, one for race cars, and to mirror them for the UK/Japanese cars, etc. With maybe 5 default interiors, and considering the implementation of all the premium features and overall amelioration of the exterior aesthetics of the standards is already confirmed, it seems to me that it may have been a very decent B plan to fill the gap even more.

The only counter-argument I can foresee - and it's a heavy one - is that Polyphony Digital might not want to be associated with anything that doesn't offer 100% fidelity to the real models. I'm not anal about graphics so I'm all in favour of having 1200 cars, even borderline duplicates and lower modelled ones, but what strikes me the most is not having a cockpit view for every car.

 

[NFSCARBON1]

In response to defoncateur3k
I think a very basic cockpit could be made to fit onto the current black mask standard cockpits.
I'm thinking LHD and RHD variations with
1. Racing Steering Wheel, Basic GT6 HUD based dials, no shifters (Automatic only cars)
2. As above with Paddle Shifters
3. As above with Manual Gear shifter

So 6 variations reusing the same parts which simply have to be placed onto the black cockpit we already have. Obviously, unlike GT5, you should be able to see visible bodywork outside the car.

And if a standard car has a Premium counterpart, simply port it's cockpit over (not 100% accurate, but better than nothing.)

 

[regnar]

[WIKIPEDIA][/WIKIPEDIA]Not really seeing them making any big leaps on the cockpits,(1200 standards). I think there focus will be mainly on the exteriors, smoothing out the meshes, replacing the old textures with newer higher quality ones. As a side note I expected The fastest way PD could get original courses created for GT5 was to use courses from GT3 & GT4 as a starting point using the course model, add new textures, repopulate the course with newer trees & track objects, new skyboxes, etc.;

 

[analog]

And if a standard car has a Premium counterpart, simply port it's cockpit over (not 100% accurate, but better than nothing.)

Why not simply 'port' the entire car over then?

And really people? Default cockpit discussion again? Default which means generic in this case is an even far worse option than having nothing at all (besides, car brands would certainly object to fitting something non-existing like that in their individual cars) as it would be exactly the same for those who appreciate cockpitview as a generic exterior would be to those who prefer chase cam, think about it.

Kaz already gave a firm no, which most likely means what we currently got (blacked out ones for closed cars, and a visible one for open top cars).

 

[eran0004]

I'm going to ask again now because I've spotted a few modellers here. Is it not possible for modellers to create a "default cockpit view" that would "stick" to the black edges we have right now? I'm thinking of some sort of 3D adaptable cockpit (with textures that wouldn't look like they're being torn apart by the different forms of the cars).

I assume it wouldn't be too complicated to incorporate this (may be even generating it on the fly), and stick the logo of the brand on the wheel, and that's it. One default cockpit for common cars, one for race cars, and to mirror them for the UK/Japanese cars, etc. With maybe 5 default interiors, and considering the implementation of all the premium features and overall amelioration of the exterior aesthetics of the standards is already confirmed, it seems to me that it may have been a very decent B plan to fill the gap even more.

The only counter-argument I can foresee - and it's a heavy one - is that Polyphony Digital might not want to be associated with anything that doesn't offer 100% fidelity to the real models. I'm not anal about graphics so I'm all in favour of having 1200 cars, even borderline duplicates and lower modelled ones, but what strikes me the most is not having a cockpit view for every car.

My guess is that it's not possible. You're talking about a mesh that adapts automatically to the shape of the car to generate a cockpit? That's pretty much rocket science and although you can make miracles with computers I don't think it would be worth going through the trouble of doing it because it would involve a lot of work and the chances of success are small.

And personally I would prefer a black silhouette over a generic interior, I just don't find it very appealing to drive a 1960's Corvette with the interior of a 2008 BMW M3. It's better with the black silhouette, because then at least you can imagine the interior.

 

[NCRthree]

I'm going to ask again now because I've spotted a few modellers here. Is it not possible for modellers to create a "default cockpit view" that would "stick" to the black edges we have right now? I'm thinking of some sort of 3D adaptable cockpit (with textures that wouldn't look like they're being torn apart by the different forms of the cars).

I assume it wouldn't be too complicated to incorporate this (may be even generating it on the fly), and stick the logo of the brand on the wheel, and that's it. One default cockpit for common cars, one for race cars, and to mirror them for the UK/Japanese cars, etc. With maybe 5 default interiors, and considering the implementation of all the premium features and overall amelioration of the exterior aesthetics of the standards is already confirmed, it seems to me that it may have been a very decent B plan to fill the gap even more.

The only counter-argument I can foresee - and it's a heavy one - is that Polyphony Digital might not want to be associated with anything that doesn't offer 100% fidelity to the real models. I'm not anal about graphics so I'm all in favour of having 1200 cars, even borderline duplicates and lower modelled ones, but what strikes me the most is not having a cockpit view for every car.

Not in favor of anything generic. Just stick with the black mask instead of that. It's obviously had some minor modeling done, you know you're in that particular car-the mirrors and wheel seem to be located properly. It'd be fine with some sort of basic modeling and the hood. Then the generic instrumentation super imposed.

But yeah, at this stage of GT's development I'd almost rather not have them without some type of cockpit cam. Doubt if I would drive them anyway if the garage is going to expand with 200 new models with full interiors. Then again if folks love a particular Standard, why not just leave them all in. There's plenty I don't utilize in GT but someone else may love.

 

[detergent]

I always thought the standards were because PD refused to outsource the scanning and creating of the cars because it wouldn't necessarily conform to their standards (pun not intended)

That's my thought exactly. Although it would probably be in PD's best interest to have outsourced at least the car exteriors for the standards and then hire more staff to do the interiors for a later update or for PS4 Gran Turismo.

 

[TheeFrogmanlego]

Wow PD is really slow considering i made this in oh 15 Min. by frogmanlego, on Flickr
Work in progress... ;P wheres that mod..

Yeah stop speculating its 2d.. by frogmanlego, on Flickr
Placing it n a game engine is not modeling a car . and it should be as simple as doing it in ten min. ? Im seeing half of you guy's here know jack squat about how games are made or how graphics seem to work, GT5 took so long due to them optimize there REMADE ENGINE on a new platform and as I said originally that whole time it takes to " make it" is probably spent on sources and sizes.. , animating a car? who said that XD
EDIT : its the mach one head light .. XD its not done but it should be by tomorrow..
http://www.oldcarsguide.com/ford/mustang/1973-mustang.html Headlight

 

[Downhill Dino]

Rather then going on about your swiftness in 3D model and texture creation, can you actually implement in a game engine?

Plus, what the heck is that?

And on about this game engine stuff, not all employees are for modelling, there are many for coding and working on the engine.

 

[Chad D.]

Rather then going on about your swiftness in 3D model and texture creation, can you actually implement in a game engine?

Plus, what the heck is that?

And on about this game engine stuff, not all employees are for modelling, there are many for coding and working on the engine.

I too wonder what it's supposed to be. Maybe part of the inside of a square headlamp? Maybe the inside part of a mirror (behind the actual mirror)? 15 minutes sure, but I don't think anyone here can figure what the heck it is......

But yeah, asking for 800 cars (even if you take out duplicates would make it around 500 to 600 maybe) to have proper interiors is ridiculous. I think it's fine the way it is in GT5, (though I probably say that because I never use the cockpit view, the roof/hood cam feels better to me)

Placing it n a game engine is not modeling a car . and it should be as simple as doing it in ten min. ? Im seeing half of you guy's here know jack squat about how games are made or how graphics seem to work, GT5 took so long due to them optimize there REMADE ENGINE on a new platform and as I said originally that whole time it takes to " make it" is probably spent on sources and sizes.. , animating a car? who said that XD
EDIT : its the mach one head light .. XD its not done but it should be by tomorrow..

As someone who's taken an AutoCAD class in HS and a Visual Basic class in college this year I can safely tell you that modeling is not done that quickly (I mention VB because you deal with string data, which has to be dealt with in game making anyways, though not necessarily modeling), at least not when doing it at the level of detail that PD does it, which, your little headlight thing, is not, not right now anyways. Not to mention, you are making one headlight, there are literally thousands of things that you have to make to actually make a car, it's not that simple. Why don't you make a car at the same level of detail as PD and see how long it takes just you to make it, then get back to us about how PD is "slow".

 

[oink83]

Yh I'm kinda lost looking at that as well?

 

[TheeFrogmanlego]

I too wonder what it's supposed to be. Maybe part of the inside of a square headlamp? Maybe the inside part of a mirror (behind the actual mirror)? 15 minutes sure, but I don't think anyone here can figure what the heck it is......

But yeah, asking for 800 cars (even if you take out duplicates would make it around 500 to 600 maybe) to have proper interiors is ridiculous. I think it's fine the way it is in GT5, (though I probably say that because I never use the cockpit view, the roof/hood cam feels better to me)

If PD added headlights with that level of detail to all standards .. 👍

 

[Tornado]

Modelling rectangular headlights in 15 minutes would be great if all 800 Standard cars were the Wagon Queen Family Truckster.

 

[Chad D.]

If PD added headlights with that level of detail to all standards .. 👍

Again, that would still take a lot more time than you think.

Modelling rectangular headlights in 15 minutes would be great if all 800 Standard cars were the Wagon Queen Family Truckster.

Yeah, there are only a couple cars that those would actually work on, technically, the 1988 IROC-Z Camaro in the game would work with those (more or less), but I'm sure no more than 100 cars (maybe 200) actually have square headlights).

 

[TheeFrogmanlego]

Modelling rectangular headlights in 15 minutes would be great if all 800 Standard cars were the Wagon Queen Family Truckster.

Again an ignorant comment , I can make ANY HEADLIGHT using basic shapes and then lofting more complicated shapes from them, hell if i had the exact dimensions. again I'm not done with it, I'm missing the inner ring, and the lamp itself . Sure a more complicated light will take longer but most headlights aren't to complicated. Again PD bragged about how many polys a head lamp had XD
OH and just a quick comment there not by any means rectangular or square, there smaller on one side than the other and are a tad bit round , I was actually freaking out as to how the lens would concave inside until I realized it was actually quite simple .

 

[Tornado]

Dude. You attempted to prove that you could match PD's modelling ability by making a rectangle. Are people really supposed to be impressed? I could do that in CAD in 15 minutes, and I haven't used any software of that nature in half a decade.

 

[oink83]

Dude. You attempted to prove that you could match PD's modelling ability by making a rectangle. Are people really supposed to be impressed? I could do that in CAD in 15 minutes, and I haven't used any software of that nature in half a decade.

In fairness, the challenge was to do it by wednesday. Maybe this rectangle will transform into a beautiful butterfly by then...

 

[TheeFrogmanlego]

Dude. You attempted to prove that you could match PD's modelling ability by making a rectangle. Are people really supposed to be impressed? I could do that in CAD in 15 minutes, and I haven't used any software of that nature in half a decade.

Pd's "quality... " do you really want me to take pictures of interiors that you guys mouth water about and point out all the cheep outs they have done ?
Get over PD's godly modeling standards, there great but not the best and do not take 2 freaking months to make! Maybe if the guy works one hour a day 5 days a week for two months and waits on the pictures to come in * WAITS*
again im not done. im missing bolts, rings , packing's and a lamp to go there..
the picture of the Audi in gt6 that's not in there godly lighting engine, it looks really cheep..

 

[shadynader]

Placing it n a game engine is not modeling a car . and it should be as simple as doing it in ten min. ?

Haha.

Im seeing half of you guy's here know jack squat about how games are made or how graphics seem to work,

He says whilst using Inventor and thinking his work is done

GT5 took so long due to them optimize there REMADE ENGINE on a new platform and as I said originally that whole time it takes to " make it" is probably spent on sources and sizes.. , animating a car? who said that XD

This makes little to no sense.

EDIT : its the mach one head light .. XD its not done but it should be by tomorrow..
Headlight

Can't wait

Thanks for the laughs though

 

[GTPorsche]

I always thought the standards were because PD refused to outsource the scanning and creating of the cars because it wouldn't necessarily conform to their standards (pun not intended)

Sounds about right. Outsourcing modelling work could end up with results that aren't on par with what they manage in-studio and would look just as bad when compared.

 

[TheeFrogmanlego]

Haha.

He says whilst using Inventor and thinking his work is done

This makes little to no sense.
Can't wait

Thanks for the laughs though

Most game company's use either auto desk or Maya, mudbox, 3ds max etc to model , I agree not inventor , Maya is actually easier to use and more flexible.
Inventor makes sense when making things like this And no Dev make there models inside there games engine.. considering there ALL CROSS COMPATIBLE
Aside from this. Pd could always re texture all the standards and map shaders were the door cracks are instead of just a black line and use shaders on the headlamps and taillights, cheep but effective none the less

 

[Downhill Dino]

Pd's "quality... " do you really want me to take pictures of interiors that you guys mouth water about and point out all the cheep outs they have done ?
Get over PD's godly modeling standards, there great but not the best and do not take 2 freaking months to make! Maybe if the guy works one hour a day 5 days a week for two months and waits on the pictures to come in * WAITS*
again im not done. im missing bolts, rings , packing's and a lamp to go there..
the picture of the Audi in gt6 that's not in there godly lighting engine, it looks really cheep..

You really should just stop talking. If you can accomplish it in less time since you have soooo much confidence in yourself, go right ahead and shut us up. If you aren't willing to, or can't, best not to go on about this.

 

[CCXRacer]

You really should just stop talking. If you can accomplish it in less time since you have soooo much confidence in yourself, go right ahead and shut us up. If you aren't willing to, or can't, best not to go on about this.

It is rather enjoyable to read though.

 

[shadynader]

Most game company's use either auto desk or Maya, mudbox, 3ds max etc to model , I agree not inventor , Maya is actually easier to use and more flexible.
Inventor makes sense when making things like this And no Dev make there models inside there games engine.. considering there ALL CROSS COMPATIBLE

Most devs use 3DSMax or Maya for a reason. Using Inventor is just making your job a lot more time consuming for no benefit whatsoever. If, in the future you are seriously thinking about becoming a 3D modeller for games either professionally or even just as a hobby for modding PC titles, my advice would be forget about using Inventor for this task.

 

[TheeFrogmanlego]

You really should just stop talking. If you can accomplish it in less time since you have soooo much confidence in yourself, go right ahead and shut us up. If you aren't willing to, or can't, best not to go on about this.

Im not at school I free load the program in my engineering class XD
And i know , i love Maya XD im just to poor to afford it. MY free trial is long expired

 

[Sam48]

It is rather enjoyable to read though.

Coming from a person who uses such software to make a living as a designer, yes, yes it is.