The GT6 Epic Whining and Crying Thread

[sk8er913]

Your previous post cites the limiting factornas development time. Not power of the hardware.

The only problem is that you're completely missing the point.

It's about the number of tracks, not about how difficult it is to make them. I never wanted to discuss your/that stuff.

Less development time = more models(tracks).

@sepulturite isn't wrong, the PS3s limitations, are a reason for 27 tracks on GT6.https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/members/sepulturite.212812/

 

[Tornado]

Which is great, but has nothing to do with the concept that more tracks on a PS3 game can't be done at all. To add more tracks in your scenario requires more development time. Not new hardware, as was originally claimed to be the case.

 

[Gejabo]

What?! Are you serious?! The blu ray is only part of it! Lol

A track is ' static' data you can have as many as you can fit on the disk.
The ps4 will read and liad them faster due to a higher reading speed an more RAM, but that is not the point right now.
The number of cars that run in a race is something limmited by RAM.

 

[sk8er913]

Which is great, but has nothing to do with the concept that more tracks on a PS3 game can't be done at all. To add more tracks in your scenario requires more development time. Not new hardware, as was originally claimed to be the case.

But it does need newer hardware to, more ram = more tacks can be made in X amount of time.


@Gejabo, everything that loads on screen in a frame is limited by ram, and it creates setbacks and redesigns of corners.

 

[ShiftingGears]

Read my previous post.

But you're not loading several tracks at once...

 

[sk8er913]

But you're not loading several tracks at once...

But you are loading several objects and textures, if you try to load more than 256 MB of things at once. The app crashes. I can't imagine developing GT6 on 256 MB ram... a live wallpaper (5 sprite sheets) on a device 384 MB of ram, overloaded the app several times... now imagine 16 super high quality cars, a track and programming.... eww. :|

 

[Gejabo]

@Gejabo, everything that loads on screen in a frame is limited by ram, and it creates setbacks and redesigns of corners.

But

But you're not loading several tracks at once...

This

 

[Tornado]

But it does need newer hardware to, more ram = more tacks can be made in X amount of time.

Except it doesn't, because you're assuming that the reason for so "few" tracks is hardware limitations (as well as ignoring the fact that there are limitations on next gen hardware as well and assuming the time differential between content implementation between generations is so large as to have a dramatic effect on quantity); and the fact remains that they could fill the disc with far more tracks than what is there now on the PS3 if they had more time to do so (and with the DLC plan they announced thry clearly imtend to) so the limiting factor isn't the hardware.

 

[dr_slump]

But it does need newer hardware to, more ram = more tacks can be made in X amount of time.


@Gejabo, everything that loads on screen in a frame is limited by ram, and it creates setbacks and redesigns of corners.

Ok to your point (has nothing to do with the previous discussion):

Now explain why it takes more and more ressources to develope new triple A games. More workforce is needed, higher budgets are needed, more work hours are needed.

Modeling tracks for next gen console triple A games does not require less time.


Oh and it's not as if they could do whatever they want on new consoles, they have to do optimizations just as they'd have to do on older systems. Only difference is that those tracks are even more complicated, detailed, costlier, etc...

 

[sk8er913]

Except it doesn't, because you're assuming that the reason for so "few" tracks is hardware limitations (as well as ignoring the fact that there are limitations on next gen hardware as well and assuming the time differential between content implementation between generations is so large as to have a dramatic effect on quantity); and the fact remains that they could fill the disc with far more tracks than what is there now on the PS3 if they had more time to do so (and with the DLC plan they announced thry clearly imtend to) so the limiting factor isn't the hardware.

Its vast enough for us to have, maybe 2-4 extra tracks.

Ok to your point (has nothing to do with the previous discussion):

Now explain why it takes more and more ressources to develope new triple A games. More workforce is needed, higher budgets are needed, more work hours are needed.
Modeling tracks for next gen console triple A games does not require less time.


Oh and it's not as if they could do whatever they want on new consoles, they have to do optimisations just as they'd have to do on older systems. Only difference is that those tracks are even more complicated, detailed, costlier, etc...

We don't have to optimize until we hit the limits. which we don't have to worry about at the moment, because it is new, yay.

 

[Tornado]

Prove it.

 

[dr_slump]

We don't have to optimize until we hit the limits. which we don't have to worry about at the moment, because it is new, yay.

I don't think you work for any big game studio in this case.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Prove it.

Yeah exactly, how @sk8er913 can deduce to that variation is amazing, I'd like to see the method myself.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I simply refuse to believe you're a part of a development team if you think the number of tracks a game can have is related to the generation of system it's on. If you truly believe that, tell me, what's the limit on cars then, too?

Oh, and how does the Course Creator effect this supposed limit?

 

[sepulturite]

But you're not loading several tracks at once...

That's true alright. I stand corrected so! Lol

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I simply refuse to believe you're a part of a development team if you think the number of tracks a game can have is related to the generation of system it's on. If you truly believe that, tell me, what's the limit on cars then, too?

Oh, and how does the Course Creator effect this supposed limit?

What about the photo thread locations too that seem to have increased along with more tracks as well as more cars, in reality alot of things were increased from last game on the same platform so...

 

[sk8er913]

Prove it.

To prove it, or try too Ill look at the amount of tracks/RAM improvement between consoles, as well as development time, of GT2,4 and 6.

We would assume the jump between consoles would be about equal, but the PS3 has less than we would expect, leading GT6 to have the least tracks over its development time because it was the hardest to dev for. I know this might be a stupid argument to make, but I'm going to make it anyway because I am curious.

GT2, 2 MB, 27 tracks.
GT4, 32 MB,51 Tracks (1600% console ram increase)
GT6, 256 MB ,33 tracks (800% console ram increase)
GT8, 8 GB, ?? tracks (3200% console ram increase) note: would be 1600%, if the PS3 was 1600% more than the PS2

As you see the PS3 is lacking in its improvement of RAM, compared to the other generation jumps, although overall, The systems are quiet equally distanced, so the quality was also equally improved. You must remember KAZ saying that the PS4 is easier to develop for (I blame RAM).

The development time of GT2 was 3 years.
The development time of GT4 was 5 years
The development time of GT6 was 7 years.

GT2 had an even RAM architecture, but low development time. To equalize it, we will multiply GT2s 27 tracks by 1 2/3. the answer: 45 Tracks.

GT4 had an even RAM architecture, and normal development time, it has 51 tracks.

GT6 had a low amount of RAM, and a high development time, it has 33 tracks... but, lets even out the RAM and development time. (33 X 2 X 5/7) = 47.

This isn't really about an argument anymore... but this is a really really interesting thing to know, hope you enjoyed my somewhat logical number crunching.

I simply refuse to believe you're a part of a development team if you think the number of tracks a game can have is related to the generation of system it's on. If you truly believe that, tell me, what's the limit on cars then, too?

Oh, and how does the Course Creator effect this supposed limit?

I am there is 5 of us. Dem Android devices! And it isn't about the generation, it's about how even it is. Kaz said himself in the PS4 thing, that its easier to develop for the PS4, and hes also said that the PS3 is harder than the previous 2.




edit: just for the fun of it, I'm going to predict the amount of tracks on GT7.
1.5 years of dev time, normal arcitecture, PD = 13 + GT6s, 33.

GT7 will have 46 +/- 1 tracks.

 

[azn_racer]

But you are loading several objects and textures, if you try to load more than 256 MB of things at once.

So that defines how refined/high quality the tracks are, am I right in understanding that?

 

[dr_slump]

I'm speachless, totally...

 

[sk8er913]

I'm speachless, totally...

It was quite spectacular... it doesn't really mean anything, but its definately fun to think about. lol

 

[VolkswagenX]

It was quite spectacular... it doesn't really mean anything, but its definately fun to think about. lol

 

[Imari]

To prove it, or try too Ill look at the amount of tracks/RAM improvement between consoles, as well as development time, of GT2,4 and 6.

We would assume the jump between consoles would be about equal, but the PS3 has less than we would expect, leading GT6 to have the least tracks over its development time because it was the hardest to dev for. I know this might be a stupid argument to make, but I'm going to make it anyway because I am curious.

GT2, 2 MB, 27 tracks.
GT4, 32 MB,51 Tracks (1600% console ram increase)
GT6, 256 MB ,33 tracks (800% console ram increase)
GT8, 8 GB, ?? tracks (3200% console ram increase) note: would be 1600%, if the PS3 was 1600% more than the PS2

As you see the PS3 is lacking in its improvement of RAM, compared to the other generation jumps, although overall, The systems are quiet equally distanced, so the quality was also equally improved. You must remember KAZ saying that the PS4 is easier to develop for (I blame RAM).

The development time of GT2 was 3 years.
The development time of GT4 was 5 years
The development time of GT6 was 7 years.

GT2 had an even RAM architecture, but low development time. To equalize it, we will multiply GT2s 27 tracks by 1 2/3. the answer: 45 Tracks.

GT4 had an even RAM architecture, and normal development time, it has 51 tracks.

GT6 had a low amount of RAM, and a high development time, it has 33 tracks... but, lets even out the RAM and development time. (33 X 2 X 5/7) = 47.

This isn't really about an argument anymore... but this is a really really interesting thing to know, hope you enjoyed my somewhat logical number crunching.

This is the worst abuse of the word "logic" I have ever seen, and I've been in the Do you believe in God? thread.

 

[MakOh01]

I seriously hope you guys are not associating RAM with the amount of tracks on disk.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I seriously hope you guys are not associating RAM with the amount of tracks on disk.

One of us is, but I think he's in for a re-education shortly

 

[fredyellowone]

RAM have nothing to do with the amount of tracks.

 

[sk8er913]

One of us is, but I think he's in for a re-education shortly

I'm not associating ram to the amount of tracks we can have. I'm associating the balance of the system specs (including ram, CPU, GPU) on the amount of time it takes to create tracks... the more time you have to spend on making 1 track directly influences the amount of tracks that appear in game. The PS3 was not a well balanced system. And i knew it was a stretch to assume what i did on that long post, as I have said twice... but you have to admit the results were interesting. 45, 51 , 47

 

[wowbaggerBR]

This is the worst abuse of the word "logic" I have ever seen, and I've been in the Do you believe in God? thread.

Awesome.

 

[HaylRayzor]

Real money for game credits.

Some may say that GT has become no different than any other console game. Except that there is no game in the game. Stars and coffee breaks. No career mode.

Seems like every announcement makes it less likely I'll ever buy GT6.

 

[MOV Games]

No need to make excuses for PD. Plenty of games have far better damage models with licensed vehicles. Need for Speed Rivals being one of them. PD simply doesnt care about damage, and they even said so themselves. If you dont believe me Ill dig up the link. Something about wanting people to focus on the beauty of the cars. Again, PD not caring what the fanbase wants and doing their own thing. Im done supporting such a company. They just might be the most arrogant of them all.

I didn't mean too, I thought I heard a few people on another forum mention that there was certain restrictions on damage for certain makes. Maybe what I heard was BS.

 

[mr_serious]

It does, I am part of a development team. "Ahh your texture is too high res! its lagging, can you resize it!" "What too?" "Oh, try 128x128" "Ok, but let me finish this first." *1 hour later* "It's fixed! ... 🤬 the scene is still takes up too much RAM!"

IF that is the way you develop applications you really need to go back to school.

1) The limitations of the console are well known from the start.
2) At the most I would expect most surprises about resource allocation to happen on development of the first track only, not every time you have to apply a texture.
3) I'm sure many of the textures are actually procedurally generated, which greatly reduces the amount of RAM required (although it does increase cpu/gpu requirements.
4) The amount of RAM available does not affect development time, especially when you have dedicated some time for design prior to development. After that point you follow your designed track creation methodology and stay within your resource constraints.
5) If you don't optimise until you hit a resource limit you haven't planned correctly.

You would never make it on to a development team run by me.

mr_serious
BSc (hons) Soft Eng.