Your thoughts about "standard" vs. "premium"

[Dravonic]

Trying to use facts to prove that the standard cars don't look good is never going to work. As far as i'm concerned I will base my opinion on the pictures and videos I see of the standard cars, and eventually when I play the game, because that is what matters. Sure maybe all of the information about the polygons and textures is pointing towards the standard cars looking bad, but if they look good in the game it doesn't matter what the figures say. Hard evidence is never going to prove that a car does not look good, it will be your own opinion from what you see.

I agree, if they look good or bad is up to you and no low polygon model or texture resolution will change that.

Unfortunately to me though, the higher the texture resolution and the higher the poly count, the better it looks. Since this generation I've been spoiled with 500k polygon models, the 5k polygon cars look quite bad to me now.

 

[SSJNeBiRoS]

I agree that the standard aren't as impressive and are far from the premiums in terms of modeling, but I don't see them as bad as many of you say, for example between this:

And this:

I don't see a generation gap as many keep saying. Obviously they are not the same level as Shift, Forza and others, but they are not that bad either.

 

[JDMKING13]

I agree, if they look good or bad is up to you and no low polygon model or texture resolution will change that.

Unfortunately to me though, the higher the texture resolution and the higher the poly count, the better it looks. Since this generation I've been spoiled with 500k polygon models, the 5k polygon cars look quite bad to me now.

I feel you on that, but doesn't FM have higher/same poly count cars than GT5 Premium? They don't even look in the same league. I know FM3 has higher poly count than the standards but when I watch the videos of both games the cars in standard replay look so much better to me. The cars are visible, no darkness and they look real not plastic.

 

[Tornado]

Most of that is Forza's occasionally iffy lighting engine.

 

[Akira AC]

 

[JDMKING13]

!!!!!

 

[Forza4life]

How does everyone feel about the premium cars of GT5 compared to all the other racing games on consoles? I still think Forza 3 has the best so far from what i've seen of GT5.

 

[Lucas]

Strittan feels the GT4 car looked better. It made me laugh

If that's his opinion, that's his opinion. A lot of things in this thread make me laugh, but I don't point them out because I don't feel like hurting people's feelings.

I will say that GT4 cars looked much better to me in 2005 than these standard cars in 2010.

Oh, and if you plan to use my name on another post, it's Lucas, not Lucus. 👍

 

[JDMKING13]

If that's his opinion, that's his opinion. A lot of things in this thread make me laugh, but I don't point them out because I don't feel like hurting people's feelings.

I will say that GT4 cars looked much better to me in 2005 than these standard cars in 2010.

Oh, and if you plan to use my name on another post, it's Lucas, not Lucus. 👍

(deep breath) Lucas I know you and Strattan are buddies and you feel you need to hold his hand and defend him however If your going to quote me at least know what your talking about.

I was not laughing at Strittan opinion I respect everyone opinion. I was laughing at the fact I told Dave that When I said Standard look better than GT4 I wrote IMO for the fact of you cannot write facts as an opinion on GTP because some folks will try to throw it it your face just as your buddy did to me even though he was wrong. Dave SZ said it was a fact so I said you can call it anyway you want. So again Lucas I know you want to defend your buddie an all which is cool but at least know what the situation is.

Here is how the conversation went.

IMO the standards still look better in GT5, You can compare a Edit GT4 picture to the standard cars, and the standards still look better.

That's not really an opinion, it's more of a fact.

If you want to call it that its cool with me.

.
EDIT: By the way, edited or not, I personally think the GT4 Camaro SS at Seattle look better than the GT5 standard Camaro SS in the comparison you made a couple of pages back, but that's me.

I don't think GT4 looks better than standards. I was agreeing with you, when I said it was fact not opinion.

O ok my bad D. I was not saying it in a bad way towards you, Strittan feels the GT4 car looked better. It made me laugh because I feel just as you, but I know on GTP you cannot state facts as opinion thats why I put the IMO. 👍

.@ Dave SZ This is why I said IMO. Some feel GT4 looks better than GT5 I respect everyone opinion.

Even at the end i wrote i respect everyones Opinion, and again thats why I put IMO so lucas please when you quote a person make sure you know what your talking about. If your going to quote somebody at least use the whole relevant quote, and know what your talking about big guy.

 

[Dravonic]

The perceived improvement in the tonality of the bodywork is not necessarily because of improved textures, not in the way it seems folks think it is, at any rate.

The improvement in the textures SlipZtrEm was talking about is related to the textured shutlines being thinner in the standard car:

(Messed around with the GT4 image to make it look more like the GT5 one)

The body isn't textured but the shutlines are, and the only way they can get thinner is if PD improved the texture. Well, not necessarily improved but they did something to it. It's much less apparent now. Not sure the lighting engine alone can do that.

 

[Emet_PL]

I don't have PS2 at my home right now so could someone take a shot of this Corvette in Photo Travel mode (not replay photo mode) to compare with in-game model showed in picture above?

 

[JDMKING13]

The improvement in the textures SlipZtrEm was talking about is related to the textured shutlines being thinner in the standard car:

(Messed around with the GT4 image to make it look more like the GT5 one)

The body isn't textured but the shutlines are, and the only way they can get thinner is if PD improved the texture. Well, not necessarily improved but they did something to it. It's much less apparent now. Not sure the lighting engine alone can do that.

I agree with you D, but the GT4 one looks like a drawing/paper while the GT5 version look real and fuller like more 3d , I'm sorry I really cant explain what i mean so i'm throwing word at you do you know what I'm talking about? Can you explain why?

Edit I was thinking where the hell Did you get that GT4 picture from it really helps the comparison, Then I just read the small text that cool man good job. 👍

 

[SlipZtrEm]

The improvement in the textures SlipZtrEm was talking about is related to the textured shutlines being thinner in the standard car:

(Messed around with the GT4 image to make it look more like the GT5 one)

The body isn't textured but the shutlines are, and the only way they can get thinner is if PD improved the texture. Well, not necessarily improved but they did something to it. It's much less apparent now. Not sure the lighting engine alone can do that.

👍

No, and that's kind of my point with all of this.

JDM, I'm not gonna quote because I feel like I've subjected people to enough scrolling, heh. I said offend because you said "gripe" *shrug*. And just for clarification:

modeling error =/= carryover assets. I just spent a few minutes looking around the 'net for FM1 images of the S2000. Then I compared them to FM3 S2000 images. The current model might be based on the original, but it's had a huge number of polygons added, and the texture resolution has been increased. It's been modernized (even if they haven't fixed that stupid modeling error). The reason they could build off the original? Their models were always multi-piece, whereas GT4's, other than the wings (and a handful of animated aero pieces) weren't.

This gold Vette has made me wonder if maybe PD will be updating some, or all, of the textures before release. If they are... then yeah, I can't say Standards are entirely last-gen. They're last-gen models with shiny new textures.

The makeup of the model meshes (that is, a uniformly one-piece affair), is still old news. And a dead-end no less. That's all I've really meant about them being "last-gen". I don't think they look awful, but I'm not blinded by the fact it's GT to notice that they're way behind the pace (the Standards, and only the Standards). It's not even entirely about graphics; the features available to us with Standards will always be lacking compared to Premiums. That can't be argued. I still don't think you're really entirely getting what I'm saying...

It's why I at least see the argument some people present by saying they would rather the Standards weren't in the game. It would make for a smaller game, but the quality would all be to the same level throughout. It's just a question of priorities and preferences for some people, but that particular argument is entirely opinion-based.

Anyways, I'm not saying you're not allowed to think the Standards look good, you are more than entitled to your opinion. I'm just trying to point out the factual reasons behind me not being impressed with them, not so much with the graphics (which will bother me as soon as we get into Photomode), but the general sense of disparity the introduce to the game in regards to quality. I think we still technically agree; I'm just trying to prove that nobody has done this before in regards to bringing over the exact same assets from their last-generation title. But, if PD's updating the textures of every Standard, as this Vette seems to hint at... well, then I guess I can't really say that any more!

Make sense?


Emet - I might be able to provide an image in a few minutes. Don't think I own the car in that colour, but I do own a C3.

I agree with you D, but the GT4 one looks like a drawing/paper while the GT5 version look real and fuller like more 3d , I'm sorry I really cant explain what i mean so i'm throwing word at you do you know what I'm talking about? Can you explain why?

No, I know what you mean; I wish we would've used this Vette all those pages ago as an example instead of the C5R, honestly. It looks better due to more advanced/accurate lighting, and what seems like improved textures. Though now they're almost unrealistically good; the shutlines are hardly, hardly visible! 1970's Chevrolet definitely didn't have the attention to detail of 2000's Audi!

 

[JDMKING13]

👍

No, and that's kind of my point with all of this.

JDM, I'm not gonna quote because I feel like I've subjected people to enough scrolling, heh. I said offend because you said "gripe" *shrug*. And just for clarification:

modeling error =/= carryover assets. I just spent a few minutes looking around the 'net for FM1 images of the S2000. Then I compared them to FM3 S2000 images. The current model might be based on the original, but it's had a huge number of polygons added, and the texture resolution has been increased. It's been modernized (even if they haven't fixed that stupid modeling error). The reason they could build off the original? Their models were always multi-piece, whereas GT4's, other than the wings (and a handful of animated aero pieces) weren't.

This gold Vette has made me wonder if maybe PD will be updating some, or all, of the textures before release. If they are... then yeah, I can't say Standards are entirely last-gen. They're last-gen models with shiny new textures.

The makeup of the model meshes (that is, a uniformly one-piece affair), is still old news. And a dead-end no less. That's all I've really meant about them being "last-gen". I don't think they look awful, but I'm not blinded by the fact it's GT to notice that they're way behind the pace (the Standards, and only the Standards). It's not even entirely about graphics; the features available to us with Standards will always be lacking compared to Premiums. That can't be argued. I still don't think you're really entirely getting what I'm saying...

It's why I at least see the argument some people present by saying they would rather the Standards weren't in the game. It would make for a smaller game, but the quality would all be to the same level throughout. It's just a question of priorities and preferences for some people, but that particular argument is entirely opinion-based.

Anyways, I'm not saying you're not allowed to think the Standards look good, you are more than entitled to your opinion. I'm just trying to point out the factual reasons behind me not being impressed with them, not so much with the graphics (which will bother me as soon as we get into Photomode), but the general sense of disparity the introduce to the game in regards to quality. I think we still technically agree; I'm just trying to prove that nobody has done this before in regards to bringing over the exact same assets from their last-generation title. But, if PD's updating the textures of every Standard, as this Vette seems to hint at... well, then I guess I can't really say that any more!

Make sense?


Emet - I might be able to provide an image in a few minutes. Don't think I own the car in that colour, but I do own a C3.



No, I know what you mean; I wish we would've used this Vette all those pages ago as an example instead of the C5R, honestly. It looks better due to more advanced/accurate lighting, and what seems like improved textures. Though now they're almost unrealistically good; the shutlines are hardly, hardly visible! 1970's Chevrolet definitely didn't have the attention to detail of 2000's Audi!

No doubt slip I'll To that, Everything you said I can understand you and other members have teched me a deal. In the beginning of this thread I had no clue what you where talking about. My bad for coming at you wrong if I did man, I was going off the looks off of the 2 models. You Where coming from a tech side. Its all good 👍

 

[Tornado]

I don't have PS2 at my home right now so could someone take a shot of this Corvette in Photo Travel mode (not replay photo mode) to compare with in-game model showed in picture above?

I was gonna suggest someone do this as well, and then I was like "wait a minute. I own all the cars in GT4!"


My prognosis? They appear to have done something to the car textures (or maybe it is just some kind of trickery) but it certainly does look better.



As an aside, I had forgotten how fidgety GT4 was in relation to what stuff it would accept when saving in Photomode. Though maybe it was the PS3.

 

[JDMKING13]

I was gonna suggest someone do this as well, and then I was like "wait a minute. I own all the cars in GT4!"


My prognosis? They appear to have done something to the car textures (or maybe it is just some kind of trickery) but it certainly does look better.



As an aside, I had forgotten how fidgety GT4 was in relation to what stuff it would accept when saving in Photomode. Though maybe it was the PS3.

That pic is a nice picture you took, but I agree with you that GT4 car looks like a drawing/paper like but it still looks good, but compared to the standard car the standard looks more fuller 3D like.

 

[Tornado]

At the very least, this probably bodes well for the rest of the Standards* if PD do indeed have better textures on hand for them compared to what they had in GT4. Personally, my problem with the standards was always more an issue with the textures (and cockpits) than it ever was with the models.





*Except the ones from GT3.

 

[Dravonic]

I was gonna suggest someone do this as well, and then I was like "wait a minute. I own all the cars in GT4!"


My prognosis? They appear to have done something to the car textures (or maybe it is just some kind of trickery) but it certainly does look better.
http://a.imageshack.us/img231/507/img0000tf.th.jpg[IMG][URL]


As an aside, I had forgotten how fidgety GT4 was in relation to what stuff it would accept when saving in Photomode. Though maybe it was the PS3.[/QUOTE]

Yep, textures are definitely improved. I'm hoping that's the case for all standards.

 

[Tenacious D]

I've been spending the past two days doing research on paint - you may have pegged me as Mr Meticulous by now. And after looking at a few examples of artwork done with different media - and a stunning looking few watercolors - Toronado's Vette pic caught me off guard.

I'm familiar with how the relatively lower horsepower of the PS2 can cause issues when trying to render Photo Mode pics, especially in certain environments and with metallic colors, and this one is no exception. But the cool part is that when the PS2 fought to handle all those effects processes, it ended up giving the Corvette pic the look of a painting. Processing the facets gives the surface of the car the look of brushstrokes, as if it had been tricked up in Photoshop or some other program. Some may think it makes it look goofy, but to me it's too cool. And while those are technically flaws and GT5 is going to process the image properly, I'm going to miss this effect.

I know, off topic, but I thought I'd point that out.

 

[CoolColJ]

They probably just increased the size of the textures. They might have done them at larger sizes initally, but could not use them in the PS2. That, and the GT5 engine probably has better texture filtering

 

[Devedander]

I was gonna suggest someone do this as well, and then I was like "wait a minute. I own all the cars in GT4!"


My prognosis? They appear to have done something to the car textures (or maybe it is just some kind of trickery) but it certainly does look better.



As an aside, I had forgotten how fidgety GT4 was in relation to what stuff it would accept when saving in Photomode. Though maybe it was the PS3.

I am thinkinng perhaps the textures are rendered in a higher resolution now is what we are seeing. Notice the jaggies and starstepping on the curved areas? I think it's likely what are otherwise thin lines are rendered as thicker and chunkier when the rendering engine does it in lower resolution and then wraps it onto the framework of the car.

Sort of similar to how sometimes dynamic shadows look funny because they are rendered realy low resolution maps and get lots of stair stepping, another artifact is that now a hair thin line when rendered can end up becomming a chunky line because the engine has to make the call between basically not rendering it at all or rendering it as a full unit wide at whatever resolution it's doing it at.

For instance imagine a 640x480 image with a 1 pixel line running down the middle. Now reduce the resolution to 160x120. All of a sudden that 1 pixel line is 1/4 a pixel wide... what do you do? Well if you force your rendering engine not to ignore and eliminate it or dither it down to invisible, you end up with a line that is 4x it's previous relative width.

Blow that back up to wrap onto a model and you get huge and chunky.

That's just a guess...

 

[Tornado]

While I understand what you are saying (though feel free to correct any mistakes), it seems counterproductive to downscale and then upscale a texture on the fly instead of just feeding lower resolution textures into the rendering engine in the first place. This is particularly true when you take into account the programming quirks that the PS2 had (a 4MB frame buffer, no matter how fast, is still only going to let you feed 4MB of textures into it at a time). That is how PC games do it, in any case, and I've even seen a few where choosing different image quality settings loads a completely different set of textures into the game from separate locations on the hard drive. What I think is far more likely (which is partially based on what we know about the Nike 2022) is that PD had a bunch of (relatively) high resolution textures that they fully planned on mapping to all of the cars, and then found that something about them or the models they were trying to map them to was causing serious performance hits. The differences between the Standard Corvette and the GT4 car may just be the difference between the model PD intended to use for GT4 and the model they ended up having to use.

Now, I'm not stating this as empirical fact, but there's actually a bit of evidence that they were probably fighting the PS2's rendering ability right up to release. For example, while the models are generally flawless, the textures on the cars range in quality from "fantastic for the PS2" to "worse than the poorest ones in GT3," like they noticed the performance problems late in the development cycle and had to hurry to cut the textures down in resolution across the board so each car took up a certain number of system resources each and hope the quality didn't take too much of a hit for any of the cars.
Coupled with the screen jittering that shows up when certain cars are on screen and the not-quite-60-FPS frame rate the game always runs at, and it seems increasingly likely that PD were over ambitious with their plans. There is also what Phil Frank said about the Nike 2022, in that they fully expected and had it modelled/textured to be usable in all races, and only then found out that they simply weren't able to do so. They had to dramatically pare that car back and they still weren't able to get it usable. I'd imagine it was the same situation with the various other cars that were basically useless in GT4, like the Tank Car and Plymouth Prowler.

With all that in mind, I don't find it too hard to believe that, at least in regards to textures (models are a bit harder to directly compare), PD almost certainly has higher quality textures for all of the Standards that were previously in GT4.* At the very least, it would explain why the Sting Ray looks considerably better than it did in GT4 but the C5R still looks like crap.


*Do I even have to say it anymore?

 

[drummermaniac]

Ok guys , what car is that at 2:05 in this video , it´s a Premium ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGxN17sRCBc

That cockpit , it looks like the GTPSP type of cockpits...

 

[Devedander]

While I understand what you are saying (though feel free to correct any mistakes), it seems counterproductive to downscale and then upscale a texture on the fly instead of just feeding lower resolution textures into the rendering engine in the first place. This is particularly true when you take into account the programming quirks that the PS2 had (a 4MB frame buffer, no matter how fast, is still only going to let you feed 4MB of textures into it at a time). That is how PC games do it, in any case, and I've even seen a few where choosing different image quality settings loads a completely different set of textures into the game from separate locations on the hard drive. What I think is far more likely (which is partially based on what we know about the Nike 2022) is that PD had a bunch of (relatively) high resolution textures that they fully planned on mapping to all of the cars, and then found that something about them or the models they were trying to map them to was causing serious performance hits. The differences between the Standard Corvette and the GT4 car may just be the difference between the model PD intended to use for GT4 and the model they ended up having to use.

Now, I'm not stating this as empirical fact, but there's actually a bit of evidence that they were probably fighting the PS2's rendering ability right up to release. For example, while the models are generally flawless, the textures on the cars range in quality from "fantastic for the PS2" to "worse than the poorest ones in GT3," like they noticed the performance problems late in the development cycle and had to hurry to cut the textures down in resolution across the board so each car took up a certain number of system resources each and hope the quality didn't take too much of a hit for any of the cars.
Coupled with the screen jittering that shows up when certain cars are on screen and the not-quite-60-FPS frame rate the game always runs at, and it seems increasingly likely that PD were over ambitious with their plans. There is also what Phil Frank said about the Nike 2022, in that they fully expected and had it modelled/textured to be usable in all races, and only then found out that they simply weren't able to do so. They had to dramatically pare that car back and they still weren't able to get it usable. I'd imagine it was the same situation with the various other cars that were basically useless in GT4, like the Tank Car and Plymouth Prowler.

With all that in mind, I don't find it too hard to believe that, at least in regards to textures (models are a bit harder to directly compare), PD almost certainly has higher quality textures for all of the Standards that were previously in GT4.* At the very least, it would explain why the Sting Ray looks considerably better than it did in GT4 but the C5R still looks like crap.


*Do I even have to say it anymore?

Sounds entirely plausible... possibly some middle ground of the two ideas, who knows...

 

[JDMKING13]

Ok guys , what car is that at 2:05 in this video , it´s a Premium ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGxN17sRCBc

That cockpit , it looks like the GTPSP type of cockpits...

It looks like this car in yellow.

 

[trk29]

^^^Yes but why isn't there any gauges in the dash? If only the sun would've shined in a little more.

 

[drummermaniac]

And the lightning inside the car , compare to this :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFmoY_yWD7c

1:30 the nascar car at the same section of the track.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy4OzP7_vAw&feature=related

1:23...

 

[trk29]

And the lightning inside the car , compare to this :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFmoY_yWD7c

1:30 the nascar car at the same section of the track.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy4OzP7_vAw&feature=related

1:23...

Very nice 👍 the gauges should be visible if it is a premium car. The only thing is that the windows are clear and not black from the beginning of the video.

 

[dzidza]

Very nice 👍 the gauges should be visible if it is a premium car. The only thing is that the windows are clear and not black from the beginning of the video.

If you look closely the gauges are visible.

 

[Dravonic]

If you look closely the gauges are visible.

Indeed, if you look closely you'll realize the interior is there, unlike the pitch black GTPSP interiors. It is awfully dark though. GT5P has some dark interiors where you can barely see the dials, like the Ferrari 512BB. Nothing like this though.

Still, I think it's quite far fetched to consider it a standard car interior, but it does make one wonder, no doubt.