Why 2d trees are the way to go

[RedBaron]

Please, don't confuse people with statements claiming that good physics deny detailed surrounding as well as we want 3D trees everywhere. For me those 6-12 polygon pseudo-3D trees in the first row or two would be enough. But get your eyes out of your a.. and understand that those crossed cardboards five meters away of your car are just crime in upper AAA title which GT really is.

 

[Shinu]

Someone said they should use 3D trees in the foreground. Well think about it

Racing - it would look good;
Photo-mode - maybe yeah;
Replays - strange because you would be able to see that there are trees that are in different quality;

In tracks like fuji I think is possible to use all 3D trees, butt in tracks like G Hell - no. And again I think PD want to maintain same quality so it would not look strange.

I think there is a lot of poly saving being done (when I look at forza videos I think there are a lot less trees then in GT) mainly so you could race 16 cars on track smoothly as possible. Its the same for skid-marks and so on.

I think that new videos look awesome (depth and the sense of speed especially).

When you make games / 3D models, you have to make compromises (I do it as my hobby and my job).

For me the only thing is lacking (from prologue), is the steering angle configuration and telemetry (if you don't count the multiplayer).

 

[Max_DC]

I'm in a hurry right now, so just a few words :

1.

2D vs. 3D trees. I care about the looks of the trees, they should look as real as possible - of course without affecting the overall performance in a massive way. I don't need perfection and since it is no shooter I realise that the overall importance of good looking vegetation is not the first priority in a racing game.
The thing is - I actually see those 2D crossed bitmaps trees and I find them distracting at certain moments, in slow corners for example - and that kind of "ruins" the overall experience for me, because as others already said, a awesome looking car next to a PSone tree in Highdef looks odd and reminds me that I'm playing a videogame.

I think PD should try take those 2D crossed bitmaps trees and replace them with anything looking a little more realistic. I'm not expecting the best looking video game tree known to man.


2. I think this discussion tends to end up in a flamewar everytime it arises, because behind it there are at least 2 fractions of people :

Those who focus on cars and handling only and those who... I don't know... prefer a good overall experience.

I enjoy nice looking cars just as much as everybody else, but I'm not willing to sacrifice as much as others.

So if PD can't realise 500k polygons per car in 1080p, 60 fps and a 16 cars grid without bringing sound / crash physics, dynamic aspects ( weather, day/night, clouds, destructable objects ) THEN I'd prefer to cut down resolution, polygons and the grid.
I think the 60fps are crucial for gameplay, so I wouldn't want to sacrifice too much in that segment.

Of course that is my opinion, there are others that are jus as valid.


3. How would I like my GT5 ?

The track should be lifelike and realistic. I mean, take Forza 3 or GT5p. Chose a random track and stop your car at a random spot. What do you see and hear ?

Do you guys know the Stephen Kind movie : The Langoliers ?
Everything is dead and empty.
No wind, no trees moving in the wind, the sky is a bitmap, the clouds are static and there is no sound whatsoever :

I'm parking my highres 500k poly car which is perfectly recreated up the sturcture of the plastic of the turnlights in Tokyo or New York and I hear nothing. No traffic, no people, no planes, no birds.
Maybe some animated crowds here and there, cheering for me like a crazy zombie hord.

I'm driving 60 miles a day to university and back. And it never looks the same no matter how often I drive these same roads.
Imagine the Trial Mountain track, a nice breeze makes the trees move gently in the wind, som leaves are on the ground - moved by the wind, soem dark clouds are moving, and you just feel that rain will fall very soon.
I know that sounds like some romantic book scenery, but those aspects will make the difference imo, not so much if there are a few k polgons more or less.
And I know that that is a racing game and I agree that while driving with 150 mph many of these things won't matter, but still PD or any racing game developer should adress those aspects to a certain extent.

Those of you who enjoy a good ride in Test Drive Unlimited might know what I mean. The cars don't look that great, but they did a good job in creating atmosphere.

You know the Nuerburgring - that's you against nature, against the elements.

Whatever, gotta go now

 

[analog]

Those of you who enjoy a good ride in Test Drive Unlimited might know what I mean. The cars don't look that great, but they did a good job in creating atmosphere.

To conclude everything you said, I'll suggest buying Test Drive 2 instead of GT5..........

 

[JDMKING13]

Damn i cannot understand why so much tree drama. I would of never guess people would be so upset about trees in a racing game. My question to the people who are concerned about trees, would you rather have the ring with less tress with a 3D built or the way it is now. I thought the trees looked fine in the videos. You can barley see them while driving. I just got done playing Forza 3 and the ring looks empty no where compared to the GT5 video.

 

[speedfreak69]

max_DC: +1
I have a similar example from the FPS world, although nothing can realistically compare to Crysis in terms of graphics, Stalker has much much more deeper atmosphere because of inspired usage of sounds, day-night cycles, realtime weather changes...it's just so much more enveloping and immersive, despite having poorer polygon counts, texture resolutions and whatnot...

Analog:
That's a poor and hasty conclusion.
btw. I will definitely check out TDU2, but GT holds a special place.

 

[bullie77]

But what we actually got was a quick list of reasons why PD have 2D trees, which people already know about in general.

True... but on the other hand I think that the reason for why 2d trees is so obvious that this kind of discussion is somewhat pointless...

To conclude everything you said, I'll suggest buying Test Drive 2 instead of GT5..........

Or maybe he can buy both. Or "true GT" fan boys stick only to GT franchise, as for racing games goes?

 

[analog]

Analog:
That's a poor and hasty conclusion.
btw. I will definitely check out TDU2, but GT holds a special place.

It probably was, although I didn't agree with his priority of reducing the graphics of the cars to make way for better surroundings ( which to me are fine as they are ) and he mentioned Test Drive as the game which came closest to what he seemed to describe.
Granted, they aren't the same sort of games ( one track-based, the other an open-world game ) but I don't want ( and luckily it's not going to be ) GT5 to resemble a track-based Test Drive graphicswise........

And no bullie77, I do play other racing games, and although I am critical of GT it remains the racing/driving game i enjoy most ( can't help it )........

And I do share Max_DC's opinion of it being the overall experience I'm after, but the balance like it is now is the one I actually prefer, just different preference and therefore a different priority.

 

[ICEMAN_ZIDANE]

tokyo:Now sure which trees you were looking at, but the ones I could make out had the usual 2D Xshape. What it does highlight is the fact that when you are at high speed, they look very convincing. To me that is all that matters.

1. i think it was 3d trees in the video
2.if you say it seems real/3d if you are at high speed than where is the problem?

here are many people which are talking about 2d/3d trees
but 1. the trees seems 3d(maybe on some videos they are 3d and on some videos they are 2d) but we cant see a real difference
and if we cant see a real difference then its stupid to talk about that

in some old videos there was new gras beside curbs ...but we cant see any new features in the demo
no damage/gras/night/much more
that means for me that it was a demo without new features=old demo

 

[Mr Latte]

Okay buy a 3DTV and get 2D tress in 3D hows that 💡

These trees are such a big issue arent they?
I suggest to those of you that are so disturbed by this will find many other things in the game wont please you neither.
Why always look for faults than share praise with whats good?

 

[Zer0]

3. How would I like my GT5 ?

The track should be lifelike and realistic. I mean, take Forza 3 or GT5p. Chose a random track and stop your car at a random spot. What do you see and hear ?

Do you guys know the Stephen Kind movie : The Langoliers ?
Everything is dead and empty.
No wind, no trees moving in the wind, the sky is a bitmap, the clouds are static and there is no sound whatsoever :

I'm parking my highres 500k poly car which is perfectly recreated up the sturcture of the plastic of the turnlights in Tokyo or New York and I hear nothing. No traffic, no people, no planes, no birds.
Maybe some animated crowds here and there, cheering for me like a crazy zombie hord.

I'm driving 60 miles a day to university and back. And it never looks the same no matter how often I drive these same roads.
Imagine the Trial Mountain track, a nice breeze makes the trees move gently in the wind, som leaves are on the ground - moved by the wind, soem dark clouds are moving, and you just feel that rain will fall very soon.
I know that sounds like some romantic book scenery, but those aspects will make the difference imo, not so much if there are a few k polgons more or less.
And I know that that is a racing game and I agree that while driving with 150 mph many of these things won't matter, but still PD or any racing game developer should adress those aspects to a certain extent.

Those of you who enjoy a good ride in Test Drive Unlimited might know what I mean. The cars don't look that great, but they did a good job in creating atmosphere.

You know the Nuerburgring - that's you against nature, against the elements.

Whatever, gotta go now

Forgot about TDU, I found your perfect Driving Simulator:

[youtubehd]P7_xF_I2kT8[/youtubehd]

 

[scope72]

Forgot about TDU, I found your perfect Driving Simulator:

--VIDEO--

Would never buy that game... I mean, did you see the crappy driving physics?!?!

 

[Zer0]

Would never buy that game... I mean, did you see the crappy driving physics?!?!

Physics what's that? have you seen the 3D trees and the birds??

 

[scope72]

Physics what's that? have you seen the 3D trees and the birds??

Yea, but if they would have done 2d trees and less wildlife they probably could've nailed the driving physics. I just can't understand their logic.

 

[H20HYBRID_GT]

Okay buy a 3DTV and get 2D tress in 3D hows that 💡

5-D ? 💡

Seriously tho, as I've always complained about the trees and what not, but I must agree, there will always be people complaining, no matter how good it actually looks... I'm still not convinced GT5 will be really that great game we're waiting for (so many questions are still unanswered, like performane, features, etc.), but it's certainly not hard to see there's a lot of improvement compared to earlier builds.

 

[CTznOfTime]

I am not here to have heated conversation with you guys, i am not here to look for trouble.
I dont need it and i dont enjoy it.

Reading this tread since the beginning,and actually the whole idea of it, just makes me laugh, just as for JDMKING13.

Between you and me, i believe i am in a better position to say that : "I simply dont care"
You are the one requesting leaves with the most detail possible, and thus, you are the one to care about this issue much more than me.


I just dont understand why you guys cannot see it past the fact that tree leaves are not the priority (yet) at this point in time.
no matter how much you complain,

I am not foolish either to think, and even less to try to stop you from fighting for your ideas/ideals.
but I am just trying to make you tree-and-leaves lovers realize that it's completely futile at this moment in time to request such things...


I am not here to defend KAz, PD, and GT5 per say, but rather i am here to point out that, unless you really want something and are willing to wait longer for a later release that would include those features, then feel free and express yourself.
Dont just complain about every single thing unless you know you are not going to buy the game no matter what.
Dont be complaining and then going to buy the game. I find that a bit .... what's the word >>> disrespectful FOR All those who have worked so hard on it.



that's the sort of contradiction that makes me laugh... the fact that you guys are so blind of the amount of effort the PD team has put in.

They have been paying attention to other things... they had to cut corners with the trees and leaves and other crabs...

When i read your comments, i just get the feeling and the idea that 2D tree is totally blasphemy, and therefore i must assume that you will NOT buy the game based on issue. (or skidmarks, or rear lights, or whatever else) Dont then.

maybe it was Kaz fault for setting his aim a bit high, for saying that GT5 > Real
maybe it was Kaz fault for saying that he is aiming at perfection.

and therefore, you all are so blinded by that beautiful idea, putting all your expectation on him...

i am just saying.... think about it...



Reality is no perfection.
Reality has compromise.
This is compromise, and thefore GT5 is real?!


I guess we could say the same for Forza and NFS-Shift.

but i am drifting here




Surely my analogy between the NRA and PETA wasn't the best of example,
Surely my analogy between the Motorsport and GreenMovement is even less of a bad example,
(because next thing you know, PETA is people eating animals, and NRA protects animal by killing people...
but i dont know if that's better than a Prius simulating the sounds of the LFA V-10)

what i am really trying to say is:

what i said above ^^








@ RedBaron : we at least have something in common, i am a car nuts, and i certainly love driving my old RWD car through twisty windy shady roads...
I dont consider myself as a GT Fanboy, i root for the best looking, best overall racing game out there, which turns out to be GT5 at this moment (for me only, i dont know for you)

If Turn10 can deliver a smashing product, be sure that i will go out there and get myself an Xbox. I almost pull the trigger for FM3, but decided that i would be missing that good game in favor of GT5 because of the (lack of) quality FM3 has. My loss i understand. But that's my choice.

I am probably the most down to earth guy out here,
I do remember how real things look, if i need to get fresh air and a breeze, i stop and smell the flowers and look at the leaves on real tree.
I dont need Kaz to deliver that for me.

Sadly and unfortunately for me, I like GT5 because that's something i cannot do in real life.

Sadly and unfortunately for some of you, if it ain't about Treeleaves, then it would be back-up light, or the hot debate on skidmark and damage...:
@ RedBaron: if they could make the damn trees 3D, they would, if the could implement weather change, if they could implement damage easily, they would.
but since they didnt, which can only means one thing: it wasnt easy for them to do so, given the time they had/have.

@ TokyoDrift and SHinu: i enjoyed reading your posts, as i can tell that you are much more understanding than others regarding these issues.

And here is what i think about them:

Skidmark:​

if they are going to make skidmark, i say that they also should make tire tread wear out during the wheelspins and drifts/slides.
it wouldnt be totally real and perfect if you can lay down a skidmark on the road for 2 mins without wearing out your tires....?!

Damage:​

as for as damage, it is really about licensing... do you need other proof than in SuperStreetFighter??! remember back in the days in the original StreetFighter 2, we used to be able to beat up the Lexus LS... well iin the new game, the car is a bland looking luxury sedan that ressemble nothing on the road... no car manufacturer has allowed their names and face to be put up for destruction....


I guess i am somewhat easier than some of guys, that's probably why, for me, none of this matter.
In short, i have to Agreeing with "Captain Roh"'s post:

Personally i dont take into consideration brand loyalty when talking about GT5, i just comment on what i see. And what i see is very realistic physics engine coupled with extremely detailed car models never been seen before on lesser platforms. Awesome really.

There has to be a trade off somewhere. There's no such thing as a perfect game, however hard Kaz tries. And if you're really honest with yourself, driving those roads in the snarling twitching beast of your choice with accurate physics FAR exceeds the look of the trees. Right!? If you watch the 24hr cockpit video with your wheel or joypad in hand, pretending you were driving it, you wont even notice them. You'll be looking down the road, where your focus should be.

To end my post:
i find speedfreak post to be the most appropriate...

who here would really care about how pretty the crab should look like???

That's because crabs naturally don't tend to care about the aesthetics.

when i look at this, i am too busy focusing on something else other than the crab.

so why bother, Let's not distract Kaz from his main task
considering that T10 Nurb track is treeless and bushless, i dont see you guys going over that ??!!


Kaz delivered at least 10 times more, what else do you need to ask from the man, and he is racing on the Green Hell all the while... so?!



@ Griffith500: "noise pollution a crime" !! ????? pollution from the combustion engine OK, i give you that, and as an engineer, i too am looking forward to what the future has in store for us petrol heads, but noise pollution???!!! it's the best part of a car! Vrroom vrroommm ... certainly cant do that with the Prius and Leafs ... the crime is to describe Engine/Exhaust music as noise pollution!!! that' your crime! on that instance, i doubt about you being a total petrol head.

take it lightly ok?! ... this aint an attack on you, again, i just find it funny that you would use that "noise pollution" to illustrate your point.

@ Seismica: The truth is none of us, nobody here on GTP has a clear answer to the question of this tread, only the people from PD can tell us their choice and trade off... other than that, your complains are just as good as our guesses. In the end, whether you accept it or not, you still have to live with their choice... for those so distracted by this issue, i suggest you not buying the game, save yourself from the torture


Thanks for reading, i hope my post wasnt too short, next time, i will try to write a longer one

Yea, but if they would have done 2d trees and less wildlife they probably could've nailed the driving physics. I just can't understand their logic.

LOL

 

[dazzi]

Reading this its funny how quick to defend some of you are .

Firstly I wanted to ask, I thought the Tokyo Route trees were 3D in the demo's we have seen?

I am a huge gran turismo fan but some area's are lacking, the general answer of pssssh your driving who needs a tree? that is stupid, its simply just an excuse as was Polyphony's reason to remove online in Gt4. I hate nothing more than when you see Rfactor and the first thing that comes to my mind is wow these visuals are 5 years behind even when the game came out, then you get the response of, 'oh but you know the physics are all that matters', no they aren't. Would you play something like F1 1997 on the ps1 just because it felt better than Grid?
I don't mind the 2D tree's aslong as they look half 3D if you know what I mean, but I honestly don't want GT to turn into one of those thrashy sims that everyone praises that look ugly as hell. Its interesting how ISI have the balls to release what simply looks like a patch for Rfactor 1 as a whole new game that thing looks like a joke.

On a side not maybe Kaz is already distracted he's doing nothing but racing and going to car shows not to mention he really should hire a few extra people into his dev team with the current number of 150 or so, that is less than what rockstar made GTA3 with in 2000 .

 

[scope72]

Reading this its funny how quick to defend some of you are .

Firstly I wanted to ask, I thought the Tokyo Route trees were 3D in the demo's we have seen?

I am a huge gran turismo fan but some area's are lacking, the general answer of pssssh your driving who needs a tree? that is stupid, its simply just an excuse as was Polyphony's reason to remove online in Gt4. I hate nothing more than when you see Rfactor and the first thing that comes to my mind is wow these visuals are 5 years behind even when the game came out, then you get the response of, 'oh but you know the physics are all that matters', no they aren't. Would you play something like F1 1997 on the ps1 just because it felt better than Grid?
I don't mind the 2D tree's aslong as they look half 3D if you know what I mean, but I honestly don't want GT to turn into one of those thrashy sims that everyone praises that look ugly as hell. Its interesting how ISI have the balls to release what simply looks like a patch for Rfactor 1 as a whole new game that thing looks like a joke.

On a side not maybe Kaz is already distracted he's doing nothing but racing and going to car shows not to mention he really should hire a few extra people into his dev team with the current number of 150 or so, that is less than what rockstar made GTA3 with in 2000 .

First off, I could go on for days with my critiques in regard to the GT series. Which are mostly AI related. However, lets stick with the tree topic.

Personally, I think that everyone should cut slack in this department for two reasons.

1. PD is famous for their ability to squeeze a lot out of a console. I definitely trust those guys on that. If they can fit some extra detail on the screen, they do. So, when I see 2D trees, it is probably because they are pushing the limits of the hardware.

2. They are trees and I don't really care, and I think it is beyond stupid to care this much about trees. It is annoying. So, I decided to argue about it in hopes that it would stop, or at least be contained.

In summary, if PD could do 5,000 3D trees on the ring, they probably would have. Besides they look fine in motion, especially when your watching the road. Which I hope a lot of you guys are sight seeing and looking at trees in the online races, as I leave you in the dust.

P.S. Don't turn those who defend parts of the game into PD worshipers. And I won't turn those who critique the game into trolls. Capiche?

EDIT: Also, there are a lot of people who have been waiting a looooong time for this game. And it is almost here. They want to be excited about that. Complaining about trees almost feels like your coming over to someone's birthday bash and complaining about the beer. Drink the beer and have a good time, because we are all going to be playing this game, sooooooooon!

 

[dazzi]

The issue is though you have nothing to defend, they might have ran out of power in the console but its still ugly so I have the right to criticize it.
Not sure how you will manage to turn me into a troll as I never said another game was better, but most people here are GT Worshipers that can't be denied.

 

[Pierced Lead]

*guys at PD are reading this thread*

Kaz: "Our fans want 3d tre..."

"Yo Kaz, Imma really happy for chu, and imma let chu finish, but skidmarks are da most important damn thing of all time! OF ALL TIME!"

Problem solved.

I suggest you wait for 3D trees for your grandchildren.

 

[scope72]

The issue is though you have nothing to defend, they might have ran out of power in the console but its still ugly so I have the right to criticize it.
Not sure how you will manage to turn me into a troll as I never said another game was better, but most people here are GT Worshipers that can't be denied.

**walks away**

 

[RedBaron]

When there will be GT9, utra-photo-realistic simulation where nobody can say that it's just a game and every little screw inside a car will have billion polygons then we will still have few hints how to recognize it from reality: It will feature magnificent crossed cardboards instead of trees, cars won't let any rubber to stay on a pavement after burnout and their reverse light bulb will be broken all the time

Although PD have nightmares to squeeze every single bit of code for a game to look beautiful, PS3 is just showing it's weakness as an attractive gaming machine for today fullHD screens. Exactly like PS1 was the weaker one for SD, really well rendered Full HD enviroment will not come until PS4.

This wouldn't be so obvious if they don't stand out for that pseudo-fullHD resolution and don't place those almost perfect cars with 500.000 polygons and light bulb writings into sh...y enviroment full of cardboards, angly curves, 2D barriers and shadows like freshly cut black cloth. It's like eating delicious steak from a muddy plate. Although I am absolutely sure there will be no better game for me than GT5, I still don't like their car orientated blindness.

I would like just more ballanced experience, even if it would cost lowering resolution to 720p and cars with only 150.000 polygons. Because I wouldn't notice it the way I do those few pixel cardboards sticking into my 120.000 polygon cockpit on the ring.

Blame me for it but I just don't understand luxury of watching functioning needles on the dashboard meters from a helicopter view when there is really obvious disturbing poorness of the enviroment and car is driving along some badly prepared theater properties. Even LOD system is used very sporadically which is really shame, because it could draw the closest things in much better quality and let those distant to be as simple as possible.

 

[TokyoDrift]

considering that T10 Nurb track is treeless and bushless, i dont see you guys going over that ??!!

Kaz delivered at least 10 times more, what else do you need to ask from the man, and he is racing on the Green Hell all the while...

To be fair, I just watched videos of the Nurb in GT5, Forza 3 and for real. The T10 Nurb track is not treeless and bushless, at all. It has LESS trees and bushes, and for that reason it does lose a lot of authenticity even though they are rendered in 3D. GT5 has tree lines that are a lot closer to the real track, and so 2D trees prevail in this instance.

Having said that, Forza 3 sounded much better!

so?!

So what?!

When there will be GT9, utra-photo-realistic simulation where nobody can say that it's just a game and every little screw inside a car will have billion polygons then we will still have few hints how to recognize it from reality: It will feature magnificent crossed cardboards instead of trees, cars won't let any rubber to stay on a pavement after burnout and their reverse light bulb will be broken all the time

Although PD have nightmares to squeeze every single bit of code for a game to look beautiful, PS3 is just showing it's weakness as an attractive gaming machine for today fullHD screens. Exactly like PS1 was the weaker one for SD, really well rendered Full HD enviroment will not come until PS4.

This wouldn't be so obvious if they don't stand out for that pseudo-fullHD resolution and don't place those almost perfect cars with 500.000 polygons and light bulb writings into sh...y enviroment full of cardboards, angly curves, 2D barriers and shadows like freshly cut black cloth. It's like eating delicious steak from a muddy plate. Although I am absolutely sure there will be no better game for me than GT5, I still don't like their car orientated blindness.

I would like just more ballanced experience, even if it would cost lowering resolution to 720p and cars with only 150.000 polygons. Because I wouldn't notice it the way I do those few pixel cardboards sticking into my 120.000 polygon cockpit on the ring.

Blame me for it but I just don't understand luxury of watching functioning needles on the dashboard meters from a helicopter view when there is really obvious disturbing poorness of the enviroment and car is driving along some badly prepared theater properties. Even LOD system is used very sporadically which is really shame, because it could draw the closest things in much better quality and let those distant to be as simple as possible.

Well said 👍 I totally agree, although I got hammered earlier for even suggesting that they would have been better off reducing the resultion to 720p, maybe knocking the cars down to 12 on track at once, and as you say, reduce poly count a bit. None of that would really take away from the beauty of the game, or the playability, but it would give them more headroom to do justice to the rest of it.

Anyway, it is what it is and people will defend Kaz to the bitter end as though we are critiquing their own child. However, I totally agree that the blindness caused by the attention to specific areas of detail has resulted in a bit of an imbalance.

One thing's for sure though, for all of its relative failings, GT5 is shaping up to be one heck of a tasty looking racing game, and I'm sure it will be all the game I need on PS3!

 

[dazzi]

**walks away**

What can I say , the more time goes by the greater the expectations maybe PD should have hired more staff and got this game out 2 years ago , because by theory in today's standards of staff numbers GT5 has taken about a year to make.

 

[Griffith500]

@ Griffith500: "noise pollution a crime" !! ????? pollution from the combustion engine OK, i give you that, and as an engineer, i too am looking forward to what the future has in store for us petrol heads, but noise pollution???!!! it's the best part of a car! Vrroom vrroommm ... certainly cant do that with the Prius and Leafs ... the crime is to describe Engine/Exhaust music as noise pollution!!! that' your crime! on that instance, i doubt about you being a total petrol head.

take it lightly ok?! ... this aint an attack on you, again, i just find it funny that you would use that "noise pollution" to illustrate your point. [/COLOR]

Haha! Firstly, congrats on this 10lb bundle of bounding joy!

Anyway, the language I used was deliberate, since we were talking about the apparent juxtaposition / hypocrisy of caring for the environment and being a proponent of motor racing. Regarding engine noise, it was that which turned me into a proper petrol-head around the age of 10 or 11 after being at a top fuel drag event

It's the sound that gets me fired up the most in a car; the rest of my senses are dedicated to interpreting the forces on the wheels, suspension and chassis / shell, as well as all that visual feedback stuff.

The problem is, all this should be "implicit", in that it should just occupy a sub-conscious part of your brain, whilst you concentrate on the driving strategy (short-term, and long-term). It can be a bit off-putting when the sounds, visuals (inc. trees) etc. are rammed down the appropriate passageways...

 

[CoolColJ]

I got the perfect game for all you 3D tree lovers - you can even grow your own

 

[Griffith500]

That game is awesome! Bit heavy on micro-managing for me, though.

Anyway, those trees don't look at all realistic...

 

[daus26]

Saw some nice posts here. Nice to see some people at least understand on what's going on.

I think it's as simple as this.. Those who really want 3D trees in the Nurb. would have to skip GT5, or possibly even GT6 and wait for the GT version for the PS4 (or even PS5?). The Ps3 has its limits and PD is really already pushing it.

Do some of you really think PD would decide to use 2D trees if they could go 3D?

 

[shirakawaa]

Personally, I'm not against 2D trees. I'm against 2D trees which stand out for looking bad.

 

[Pierced Lead]

I just watched the ZR1 videos, and I am disappointed to say that the 2D trees are very noticeable and are just plain ugly.