Technical Update in GT7 (PS4) from GT6 (PS3)

[gtracedriver1]

TBH on PS3 they already pushed the gfx to the max and it looks great even to date. Some tracks are bland and some are good. But overall they did awesome job. On PS4 they need to improve shadows, texture quality, aliasing and little more detailed environments. Even 2D crowd would be ok rather than empty stands. Also some track like monte carlo and Laguna seca needs to be redone

 

[Imari]

TBH on PS3 they already pushed the gfx to the max and it looks great even to date. Some tracks are bland and some are good. But overall they did awesome job. On PS4 they need to improve shadows, texture quality, aliasing and little more detailed environments. Even 2D crowd would be ok rather than empty stands. Also some track like monte carlo and Laguna seca needs to be redone

Let's be fair, on PS3 Gran Turismo looks great some of the time. There's massive variation between GT at it's best and GT at it's worst.

With premium cars on a premium track and a nice time of day, the game is incredible looking.

With standard cars on a standard track it's not really flash at all. Or worse, on a course maker track with hideous pop-up everywhere. Or in a group of cars at night in the rain where the frame rate drops by half. There's a lot of circumstances that GT looks fine in a screenshot but it really struggles in motion.

GT looks great in screenshots and very select circumstances. Everything else could do with improvement. They've got a long way to go to achieve graphical quality comparable to other modern console racing games.

 

[glassjaw]

GT looks great in screenshots and very select circumstances. Everything else could do with improvement. They've got a long way to go to achieve graphical quality comparable to other modern console racing games.

Remember when GT was that game that looked amazing 100% of the time? Haven't felt that way since GT5 Prologue.

 

[badAZbuddha]

Remember when GT was that game that looked amazing 100% of the time? Haven't felt that way since GT5 Prologue.

Yep, when every car was detailed and there were no jagged shadows. Gran Turismo 5 prologue(PS3) and back were 100% consistent.

 

[Vspectra]

GT looks great in screenshots and very select circumstances. Everything else could do with improvement. They've got a long way to go to achieve graphical quality comparable to other modern console racing games.

I'd change the word quality to consistency. Quality wise, GT looks better than any other racer on last gen. PD not wanting to outsource car models or legacy tracks and insist on porting old modeling data was a problem. Their engine is still graphically impressive most of the time.

Yep, when every car was detailed and there were no jagged shadows. Gran Turismo 5 prologue(PS3) and back were 100% consistent.

I'll take real-time lighting changes over GT5p's baked lighting and shadow maps.

 

[Imari]

I'd change the word quality to consistency. Quality wise, GT looks better than any other racer on last gen. PD not wanting to outsource car models or legacy tracks and insist on porting old modeling data was a problem. Their engine is still graphically impressive most of the time.

I do know what you mean. The engine is great, but it still looks awful half the time because of the terrible models it's forced to display. Unfortunately, the player is exposed to the whole thing as a package, there's no part of the game where you're purely experiencing the engine without the models.

You can build the greatest car in the world, but as long as it's stuck on retread tyres it's not going to be very good to drive.

I think F1 2010 gave GT a decent run for it's money on PS3, despite being 30fps. In the rain it was incredible. Shame the rest of the game was a buggy mess. I think that Wipeout HD was very impressive from a technical standpoint as well. Shift 2 had the best night racing, but again 30 fps and the rest of the game was a buggy mess. Burnout Paradise is still probably the best damage model. Horizon with it's open world and great atmospherics is right up there as possibly the most lovely to look at.

GT6 is very nice, and overall probably the best package, but there are definitely other games out there that challenge it in specific areas, even ignoring the standard models and tracks.

To me, graphical quality includes all that a game is capable of. But I'm happy to admit that GT6 at it's best is better looking than any other PS3/360 racing game at it's best.

I'll take real-time lighting changes over GT5p's baked lighting and shadow maps.

Personally, I think it's swings and roundabouts. You get real time lighting, but you get a less stable frame rate and the graphics get worse. And it's quite distracting in a field of cars with obviously limited light sources, when some of the cars aren't casting the light that they should be. There's something to be said for the GT5P/FM6 method of having presets that are just known to work and give solid results.

I think it really depends a lot on how sensitive you are to frames dropping, some people just can't see it and therefore don't see the problem.

Time change is great when you're alone on a track, but that's a small part of a racing game.

 

[Quakebass]

Gone is the age of hyping up poly counts.

Right now it's all about lighting engines - aside from when looking straight on at a contrasted/highlighted circle or curve (a-la Mazda MX-5 dashboard/interior in the trailer), you can hide most all jagged surfaces with clever texturing and shaders and other elements in the lighting engine.

Most of the issues with the standard cars in the past two GT iterations were low-quality textures - a few really were below the decent poly count, but most the glaring issue were caused by insanely low quality/resolution textures:





A lot of those textures aren't much more than tri-color maps, and (obviously) have pixeated edges - not something that results from a bad poly/wireframe model.

If you look at the edges between the headlights and the background, and the lip of the bumper/grill where it contrasts with the darker/inner parts of the car in shadow (and pretty much any other contrasty bits), you can still see the polygons, but you can also see how the reflected light looks more curved than the actual surface seems to be. (I pulled these from the Internet, so excuse the compression)

PD has the poly count largely in check, they do have a few heavy offenders they'd need to fix before carrying them over to GTS, but they mostly just need to update/optimize the textures and shaders to make everything pretty.

 

[glassjaw]

To me, graphical quality includes all that a game is capable of. But I'm happy to admit that GT6 at it's best is better looking than any other PS3/360 racing game at it's best.

Agree with every point you make in that post except this one. Dirt 3 takes the cake for prettiest PS3/360 racer in my opinion. Even during rallycross events when the game was throwing 12 cars on screen, it still looked great. The Ego engine was outstanding last generation, I think I prefer it even to Polyphony's despite being 30 FPS in all its console applications.

Gone is the age of hyping up poly counts.

Absolutely. Poly count just doesn't matter anymore. It's all about lighting, textures, and of course accuracy in your modeling, but that goes without saying. Those are the things that separate a great looking racing game from the rest of the pack now.

 

[Tornado]

I do know what you mean. The engine is great, but it still looks awful half the time because of the terrible models it's forced to display. Unfortunately, the player is exposed to the whole thing as a package, there's no part of the game where you're purely experiencing the engine without the models.

I'd say it's similar to how GT5 and GT6 pretty blatantly had some of the best (if not the best) audio design in the genre/generation regarding things like specialization, doppler effect and dynamic range, but then fed it stuff like this to playback:

 

[Imari]

Agree with every point you make in that post except this one. Dirt 3 takes the cake for prettiest PS3/360 racer in my opinion. Even during rallycross events when the game was throwing 12 cars on screen, it still looked great. The Ego engine was outstanding last generation, I think I prefer it even to Polyphony's despite being 30 FPS in all its console applications.

D3 is one of the few racing games on PS3 that I didn't play, because I got a free PC copy with my graphics card. I agree that Codies found a good balance between graphical bells and whistles and functionality in general on PS3. I really liked the look of all their games that I played on PS3.

 

[gtracedriver1]

Let's be fair, on PS3 Gran Turismo looks great some of the time. There's massive variation between GT at it's best and GT at it's worst.

With premium cars on a premium track and a nice time of day, the game is incredible looking.

With standard cars on a standard track it's not really flash at all. Or worse, on a course maker track with hideous pop-up everywhere. Or in a group of cars at night in the rain where the frame rate drops by half. There's a lot of circumstances that GT looks fine in a screenshot but it really struggles in motion.

GT looks great in screenshots and very select circumstances. Everything else could do with improvement. They've got a long way to go to achieve graphical quality comparable to other modern console racing games.

Playing GT6 I easily see that on PS4 will set a new benchmark. Because it is already very close to it. So improved textures, shadow, aa and more detailed track is enough. On PS2 and PS3 also they did amazing stuff for its time.

 

[glassjaw]

Playing GT6 I easily see that on PS4 will set a new benchmark. Because it is already very close to it. So improved textures, shadow, aa and more detailed track is enough. On PS2 and PS3 also they did amazing stuff for its time.

It's a shame the way GT6 and 6 panned out, because Polyphony really did work magic with the hardware they were given. Probably my favorite Kaz interview ever was when he discussed the advantages of developing for the PS2:

"When the [PlayStation 2] came out, one unique characteristic of that system was that the screen fill rate was very fast. Even looking back now, it’s very fast. In some cases, it’s faster than the PS3. There, we were able to use a lot of textures. It was able to do that read-modify-write, where it reads the screen, you take the screenshot, and you modify it and send it back. It could do that very quickly.

I don’t know if anybody remembers, but when the PS2 first came out, the first thing I did on that was a demo for the announcement. I showed a demo of GT3 that showed the Seattle course at sunset with the heat rising off the ground and shimmering. You can’t re-create that heat haze effect on the PS3 because the read-modify-write just isn’t as fast as when we were using the PS2. There are things like that. Another reason is because of the transition to full HD.

The PS3 was a combination of a poor GPU with an SPU that’s really fast if you use it right. It’s not a very well-balanced machine. It’s hard to use the hardware properly. That’s one reason why it took us five years to develop GT5."

Despite the PS3's increased power, it was not as ideal a development environment as the PS2 because it wasn't as balanced or versatile. Sony wanted to design a platform that only they knew how to use effectively, and it resulted in comparably poor performing games until the end of the system's lifecycle, when most developers finally figured it out. The PS4, by contrast, isn't much different from PC development, with its x86 architecture. I think Sony realized that in handcuffing developers they were handcuffing the full potential of their console and brand.

How does that tie back to GT Sport? I think it means Polyphony won't need to concentrate quite as much on R&D with awfully-planned hardware and instead focus on making a great game, rather than just making great technologies. Think of all the progress they made during the PS3 era; they know how to do dynamic weather and time now, because they've been working on it for nearly a decade. They've flirted with adaptive tesselation. They have learned the difficulties of damage modelling. Polyphony has spent so much time and effort learning how to make these things happen on uncooperative hardware that I think, in transitioning to the PS4, they'll finally have room to breathe and execute what they've practiced, and the result will be much closer to what they first idealized.

 

[Johnnypenso]

It's a shame the way GT6 and 6 panned out, because Polyphony really did work magic with the hardware they were given. Probably my favorite Kaz interview ever was when he discussed the advantages of developing for the PS2:

Despite the PS3's increased power, it was not as ideal a development environment as the PS2 because it wasn't as balanced or versatile. Sony wanted to design a platform that only they knew how to use effectively, and it resulted in comparably poor performing games until the end of the system's lifecycle, when most developers finally figured it out. The PS4, by contrast, isn't much different from PC development, with its x86 architecture. I think Sony realized that in handcuffing developers they were handcuffing the full potential of their console and brand.

How does that tie back to GT Sport? I think it means Polyphony won't need to concentrate quite as much on R&D with awfully-planned hardware and instead focus on making a great game, rather than just making great technologies. Think of all the progress they made during the PS3 era; they know how to do dynamic weather and time now, because they've been working on it for nearly a decade. They've flirted with adaptive tesselation. They have learned the difficulties of damage modelling. Polyphony has spent so much time and effort learning how to make these things happen on uncooperative hardware that I think, in transitioning to the PS4, they'll finally have room to breathe and execute what they've practiced, and the result will be much closer to what they first idealized.

What exactly was so limiting about the PS3 that if meant they had to focus on weather, time change, adaptive tesselation and the like instead of focusing on gameplay? And if you know this limitation for 8+ years why do you then release another game that taxes the poor old hardware even more by increasing resolution from 1280 to 1440x1080? Would it not have made more sense, strictly from a logical point of view, since the system was supposedly so difficult to work with, to instead avoid those game elements that were much more difficult given the architecture of the PS3, and instead focus on gameplay? PD chose to go in the direction they did, in spite of the limitations of the hardware, which to me indicates, as I've said all along, GT5 and 6 turned out the way they did not because of the PS3, but because of the way PD chose to utilize what was given to them. Those same limitations exist on the PS4, the different directions taken by Drive Club and Project Cars make that quite obvious. PD will face the same choices on PS4 that they did on PS3. It's not the hardware that needs to change it the design philosophy of PD.

 

[glassjaw]

What exactly was so limiting about the PS3 that if meant they had to focus on weather, time change, adaptive tesselation and the like instead of focusing on gameplay? And if you know this limitation for 8+ years why do you then release another game that taxes the poor old hardware even more by increasing resolution from 1280 to 1440x1080? Would it not have made more sense, strictly from a logical point of view, since the system was supposedly so difficult to work with, to instead avoid those game elements that were much more difficult given the architecture of the PS3, and instead focus on gameplay? PD chose to go in the direction they did, in spite of the limitations of the hardware, which to me indicates, as I've said all along, GT5 and 6 turned out the way they did not because of the PS3, but because of the way PD chose to utilize what was given to them. Those same limitations exist on the PS4, the different directions taken by Drive Club and Project Cars make that quite obvious. PD will face the same choices on PS4 that they did on PS3. It's not the hardware that needs to change it the design philosophy of PD.

I don't completely blame the hardware for GT5/6; I agree Polyphony's design decisions and inability to prioritize were key issues, probably even more than the PS3's limitations. All I was trying to say was that the hardware didn't help, and it's well recognized that the architecture of the PS3 presented many problems last generation. Indeed it would have made more sense to focus on core gameplay rather than those secondary elements, especially when you consider how dynamic weather and time adversely affected framerate and actually made that core experience suffer. However, if there's a silver lining to any of this it's that Polyphony will still be able to take what they've learned (even if they were working on things they probably shouldn't have) into a better development environment. Limitations will exist on any platform but some are easier to work with than others. Honestly the fact that Project Cars runs on PS4 at all is a testament to the strength of that console.

 

[TurismoBad]

Not expecting improvement in loading times. Same storage tech, more detailed game, more assets to load - probably longer loading times. (?)

As for graphics I only expect full 1080p with better IQ and lighting. I already saw blocky parts of the interior in the trailer.

For the first time I don't expect PD to produce anything particular.

I have my own theory when it comes to GT graphics and how PD managed to make they game look "real".

To me better hardware is NOT benefiting them since PS2.

To me the best looking game in relation to hardware was GT3 and GT4.

I would argue that to me GT4 looked more real than GTS trailer. (at the time)

When you clean up the IQ and rise the resolution you need better textures, models, and lighting.

To me it looks like with GTS the image quality is too good for the rest of the game and so the whole package is not as convincing.

 

[ScottPuss20]

The team at PD have made significant technical jumps from console to console in the past-especially in regards to presentation, UI, graphics and physics. I don't think that the transition to the PS4 will be any different, but with SOO much competition, they really need focus on upgrading the game to a very high standard.

 

[AleksandarSRB]

Not expecting improvement in loading times. Same storage tech, more detailed game, more assets to load - probably longer loading times. (?)

As for graphics I only expect full 1080p with better IQ and lighting. I already saw blocky parts of the interior in the trailer.

For the first time I don't expect PD to produce anything particular.

I have my own theory when it comes to GT graphics and how PD managed to make they game look "real".

To me better hardware is NOT benefiting them since PS2.

To me the best looking game in relation to hardware was GT3 and GT4.

I would argue that to me GT4 looked more real than GTS trailer. (at the time)

When you clean up the IQ and rise the resolution you need better textures, models, and lighting.

To me it looks like with GTS the image quality is too good for the rest of the game and so the whole package is not as convincing.

For me, trailer looked superb, and pretty real. Didn't see blocky parts of interior... I would be happy with graphic from the trailer and rest of PS4 power to use for detailed track enviroment, more tire walls that can be smashed, more action in pit lane (more people in garage, pit wall), damage model, sound, AI and physics.

 

[JR98]

When it comes to "Graphics" what I want from GT7 is the graphics of the GTS trailer (if not a little better) along with 36 car grids maximum and proper pits with a seperate pit crew for each car in the race with proper animations for putting fuel in the car and changing the tyres. I'd also like accurate mechanical damage with real time temps for the engine, tyres and brakes along with accurate downforce which is affected based on the damage of the car (that can be viewed mid race via real time telemetry). I'd also like the possibility of parts falling off the car such as bumpers, wings and wheels although that's probably asking a bit too much.

What I expect is the graphics for GTS trailer and 24 cars per track with accurate animations for the tyre changes but maybe not for fuel changes and the telemetry and advanced damage.

 

[GTracer125]

Am I the only one who noticed how the colors in the trailer for GTS looked too familiar to GT4's, it had a similar monotone and darkness to it, like grayish but everything else looked very detailed, hopefully the gray monotone was only for the trailer because I never liked the colors for GT4's, made the game look depressing and bland to me although it is one of my favorites.

 

[Lewis_Hamilton_]

I would just hope they sort out image quality and consistency. Other than frame rate, jaggies/aliasing is probably now my number one distraction that takes away immersion and the realistic look. Pop in is up there too, I would rather there were other post processing effects, shaders, particles effects or whatever missing to increase the draw distance of objects and shadows.

Interesting to see some discussion on resolution. That's been a big thing for me recently because it does so much for image quality and detail, it really does make everything look better. I wouldn't expect GTS to surpass 1080p, but I would hope there's plenty of anti-aliasing being used. I expect PD will be re-using a lot of old models and assets, which will probably look fine if you cover it up with a good lighting engine and AA solution. For an example, here's how good GT3 and GT4 could look, simply by increasing the resolution, a bit of shader boost and Anisotropic filtering. I've got a few 'remastered' GT4 videos on my channel too for further examples.

 

[NOVOCAINE]

I find it funny how at 4k resolution even the most realistic looking PS2 games begin to look like The Simpsons Hit & Run!

 

[Imari]

I expect PD will be re-using a lot of old models and assets, which will probably look fine if you cover it up with a good lighting engine and AA solution. For an example, here's how good GT3 and GT4 could look, simply by increasing the resolution, a bit of shader boost and Anisotropic filtering. I've got a few 'remastered' GT4 videos on my channel too for further examples.

The thing is, they look fine considering their age (amazingly good, really), but compared to PS4 assets they look like they came from PS3 at best. Put that in a store running alongside a FM6 or pCARS booth, and it will look pretty naff no matter how many fancy tricks they pull. They need to be completely retextured at the very least, and they could really use some strategic additional polygons as well.

The old assets hold up surprisingly well, but they're not even close to good enough for PS4.

 

[glassjaw]

Now that PS4 backwards compatibility is a reality, it'll be interesting if we ever get the opportunity to play GT3 and 4 in not-quite native 1080p. I wonder how the assets will look compared to standard cars in GT5 and 6.

 

[Imari]

I wonder how the assets will look compared to standard cars in GT5 and 6.

You can see via PC emulation now, like @Lewis_Hamilton_ did above. They look similar, but the lighting isn't as good.

Look on his Youtube channel for videos. Some have external views where you can see the cars, at least for short periods.

https://www.youtube.com/user/LewisHamiltonMSPR/videos

 

[Lewis_Hamilton_]

The thing is, they look fine considering their age (amazingly good, really), but compared to PS4 assets they look like they came from PS3 at best. Put that in a store running alongside a FM6 or pCARS booth, and it will look pretty naff no matter how many fancy tricks they pull. They need to be completely retextured at the very least, and they could really use some strategic additional polygons as well.

The old assets hold up surprisingly well, but they're not even close to good enough for PS4.

I probably should have specified I was talking about them re-using their PS3 assets, which they no doubt will. The premium cars and tracks are still good by today's standards (Photomode for evidence), trackside textures aside. If PD were smart, they should already have created high res versions of all those textures years ago when making GT5/6.

Personally I hope they drop and remake all the PS2 stuff.

 

[Imari]

I probably should have specified I was talking about them re-using their PS3 assets, which they no doubt will. The premium cars and tracks are still good by today's standards (Photomode for evidence), trackside textures aside. If PD were smart, they should already have created high res versions of all those textures years ago when making GT5/6.

Personally I hope they drop and remake all the PS2 stuff.

Oh, right. I totally agree.

Yeah, the PS3 era stuff looks fine, although the tracks tend to be a little bland and lifeless. The cars will be totally OK, although depending on what sort of damage system PD go for we may see cracks in the facade. In general though, I think the PS3 era stuff is more than good enough.

I hope they drop the PS2 stuff as well, but unfortunately we're probably going to be stuck with it, and it's probably going to look more or less like your videos, with better lighting.

 

[AleksandarSRB]

I probably should have specified I was talking about them re-using their PS3 assets, which they no doubt will. The premium cars and tracks are still good by today's standards (Photomode for evidence), trackside textures aside. If PD were smart, they should already have created high res versions of all those textures years ago when making GT5/6.

Personally I hope they drop and remake all the PS2 stuff.

That is what am thinking also.

 

[unit-one]

8. Hopefully they change the cockpit camera and FOV, it is absolutely atrocious the way it's set up right now.

Would be nice if we could adjust "seat height and position."
Suzuki Cervo- sitting too low and off center. One of the Mini Coopers- too close to the wheel, GT by Citroen- too low, HUD display is in the way. etc.
Chase camera lacks consistency too. Mustang Mach 1- too far away, makes this big car feel very small. SLS AMG somewhere down there and at a weird angle. Some are close, some are far.

 

[NOVOCAINE]

It seems to me that some people took the announcement made by PD some time ago, of standards being retained in GT7, as confirmation that PS2 assets were going to remain. Whilst that is a possible meaning I think another, more likely meaning, is that some cars without interiors will still be included; but their exteriors will be completely remodelled and textured, too PS4 standards. I could be wrong but I really can't see them using PS2 assets, in a PS4 game.

 

[grind mouse]

Am I the only one who noticed how the colors in the trailer for GTS looked too familiar to GT4's, it had a similar monotone and darkness to it, like grayish but everything else looked very detailed, hopefully the gray monotone was only for the trailer because I never liked the colors for GT4's, made the game look depressing and bland to me although it is one of my favorites.

I agree with you, i can't compare the colors of my old tv that i used with gt4,but ,strange to say by me, my girl friend had noticed the greysh quality on the gt sport trailer, she said " it looks not so much colorful". No problem ,i will put the super color option on my tv
I can't wait for this gt sport