Your thoughts about "standard" vs. "premium"

[Jamma]

If it is the only way for us to have this much variety then i think its justified. I was under the illusion that because this game has taken so long to make that all 1000 vehicles were going to look as good as the premium. This made me really dissapointed when i found out the truth. As im sure a lot of people on this site were. Though im over it now and really looking forward to playing this bloody game. So long as its only aesthetics then im not so bothered. Im sure more and more premuim models will be released as DLC eventually, im a bit worried about if/how much they will charge for them. It still hasnt sunk in that its actually just around the corner.

 

[eSZee]

We know what the max resolution of PHOTOMODE will be.
We know what the damage system is like. We just don't know how badly premium cars can be damaged. There will not be race ending crashes, you can quote me.

 

[gtracedriver]

I do hope more details are shown before release, because it's a good sign when a developer showcases all features of their game. If they don't reveal everything then it's because they want us to have a surprise on the disk and more often than not, this surprise is not very positive. Normally, it's a good idea to show the world all of your game's amazing and unique features, as they will act as selling points for it. If you've decided to hide something from the press, it's probably because you're not very sure people are really going to like what they see.

Anyway, moving to the second part of your post. I truly wish I could share your optimism towards the Standard Cars but I just don't see much time for improvement on them. I find it's going to be difficult for PD to create a new build of the Standards, because time is running thin and mind you, they have 800+ cars to update, so putting dashboards on all those cars in going to be one hard, tough marathon which I think they can't do (unless maybe if they don't sleep or eat). As for 3D models being nothing without lighting effects, shaders etc, it's true. A crappy lighting engine will strugle to display even the best 3D model at it's proper potential. But it's even more true that no lighting engine, no matter how good it is can disguise a poorly made model. In the end both cannot be without the other, but the model ends up being the most important bit. Allow me to give some examples of why it it so:

- Regarding textures, imagine you do a drawing on a sheet of paper. You put the sheet of paper on the perfectly flat surface of a table and look at it straight from above. You'll see what you drew perfectly clearly. Now put the same sheet of paper on top of an irregular pile of rocks and look at it from the same direction. You'll notice that your drawing has been distorted due to the uneven surface the sheet is hugging. This is the same way with textures on 3D models. If the model is not fully smooth and has jagged edges then increasing texture resolution won't do much to prevent them from getting blurred by the awkward surface they're being pasted on to.

- Regarding shaders and other lighting effects, picture this: I've just built a brand new car and released a spy-shot from it. The shot is completely dark with only a tiny bit of light getting in through a crack in a window and shining on part of the car revealing a smooth front end line with stylish headlights. It gives the idea to you that the car is very sleek right? Well, in fact the car I've built only has a smooth front-end and the back looks like a box on wheels. This is an example of a model that is dependant on specific lighting conditions to look appealing. A good 3D model should look proper at any given time and unfortunately, I see some Stardard Cars looking great in the sun-light but bad in the shade which shouldn't happen.

It is their decision what they want to show and generally speaking all games show their best whether it is screenshots, videos but I do not like to see fake pics. Regarding cockpit, I know they have said no internal camera views but hopefully we will get confirmation whether cockpit is there or not

Also it make huge differences with the new lightning and shaders GT5 is using. Just look at this pic this what huge amount of pixels can do. Looking at Tenacious D GT4 pics I think it will be great. GOW collection looks same in PS2 and PS3. They haven't changed anything. Only difference is that the collection edition is running at 720P and using little aa. Monster hydra and kratos looks so clean where as the original version looks bad.
http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/7264/godofwarcollection20091.jpg

In a way I think it is good that people are not expecting much from standard cars because I think they will surprised how good the game will look.

 

[Organ-Donor]

And I can't stress how shortsighted some of you are for wanting to segregate the Premium and Standard cars in races. As I posted yesterday, you're going to have some pretty thin selections for Premium races if you do, such as facing races with as few as one model available in some classes. How many one make races do you want to participate in? That only goes so far with me. I know Slip mentioned the damage issue. So make damage uniform, and save the body shattering level for your beloved Premium only races. And undoubtedly, there will be ways for you guys to race Premiums solely, so you can do so to your heart's content. Don't deem that this kind of apartheid is a good idea, or the only way to go, because this isn't a universally shared view. We can all enjoy GT5 in our own way, and there is no right and wrong way to do it. You know, the much lauded "freedom of choice" which in this case we should definitely have.

I agree 100%. I love cars, all types in all shapes. I want to be able to race all cars together instead of seeing a specific car multiple times in a race grid. There are way too many cars I would love to put against eachother, especially considering they will be all running on the same physics engine. If we get standard only or premium only races without the option to mix them, I will be pretty dissapointed. I love the variety, and with the new lighting engine to the standard cars, it really isn't going to that big of a deal to me, except for the lack of cockpit views (maybe?).

 

[Gryzor]

Yes we know bout that. Who said anything about religion? like Kaz said its almost like a ps4 game taking graphics into account but no game will be "perfect" but you can be close.

Why does there have to be some prior mention of religion for me to mention it as a "figure of speech"?

As for it being like a PS4 game, I sincerely hope not because what does that say about either the power of PS4 or their abilities to improve further?

 

[Ollie1066]

We know what the max resolution of PHOTOMODE will be.
We know what the damage system is like. We just don't know how badly premium cars can be damaged. There will not be race ending crashes, you can quote me.

Thats true, licencing doesn't allow road cars to stop working completely. Like in Forza, a car can only be damaged to the point it crawls along. However, for racecars the situation may be different (GRID for expample)

 

[warp9engage]

Maybe back in the old days, but these days, good texture painting tools will pre-process the texture so it doesn't render stretched on uneven surfaces.

Well, that's the problem with learning computer graphics in older, outdated programs. I wish I could start learning the ropes in the newer more powerful tools. Thanks for noting that detail . I do really hope PD does use these new technological features because so far, I still see blurred textures on GT5 Standard Cars.

There is a TON of things yet to be revealed about GT5, and I'm quite sure they aren't being hidden because they're lame.

That's true. However, there is something still making me think that Standard Cars have a problem that's being concealed. Think about it, most of the features you mentioned on the above list have only been slightly mentioned on magazines and interviews, and have had no media about them whatsoever, so they really haven't been showcased yet. The Standard Cars however, do have a video associated to them, meaning we do get to see them. But the video clip is only 40 seconds long versus the over 30 minutes of footage from Premium models. If GT5's cars have already started being revealed, why so much discrimination for the Standard Cars, especially considering they take more the half the list? My idea is that PD simply doesn't want to show them and I don't think it's for a gameshow surprise. For now however, the best we do is wait for said gameshows (GamesCon and TGS) to see if more information on the Standards is shown. If on both those gameshows, nothing about them comes up, then it's safe to assume PD isn't truly happy with them.

About those GT4 pics, I noticed on first glance polygonised surfaces that shoudn't be there if they were up-to-date models (Mclaren's side mirros aren't round enough, front of Mclaren not smooth, the grills on the Mclaren's hood need work, weird textures on the Mclaren's headlights, weird textures on the Bentley's headlights, blocky engine intake ramscoop on the Bentley).

And finally, the separation of Premiums and Standards will depend on how they look at the end, a reason I stated on an above post.

Just look at this pic this what huge amount of pixels can do.

Resolution and anti-aliasing don't always disguise a poor model. For that technique to work, the model still has to be quite clean. What I mean is that, if Kratos's shoulders were boxes, you could turn up the resolution to 1080p and up the AA to 8x and his shoulders would still be boxes, smooth boxes but still boxes.

 

[Griffith500]

Well, that's the problem with learning computer graphics in older, outdated programs. I wish I could start learning the ropes in the newer more powerful tools. Thanks for noting that detail . I do really hope PD does use these new technological features because so far, I still see blurred textures on GT5 Standard Cars.

They're blurred because they're relatively low-resolution textures, applied with a (seemingly) fairly extreme UV-map which means most of the texture is used for incidental details (such as panel gaps / shut-lines, headlights, badges, or materials other than paint.) As such, I doubt we'll get an updated "skin" with a re-done UV-map without an updated model - i.e. Premiumified.

... However, there is something still making me think that Standard Cars have a problem that's being concealed.

I think your fears are justifiable; I'm still waiting to hear about the new features, and I'm expecting that the comparatively low fidelity textures and models will be the lesser disappointment of the Standard cars.

...
And finally, the separation of Premiums and Standards will depend on how they look at the end, a reason I stated on an above post.

I disagree. If they are to be separated at all, it ought to be based on "features" - gameplay elements - not visual (superficial!) appearance. If they play the same, keep 'em together, I say.

Resolution and anti-aliasing don't always disguise a poor model. For that technique to work, the model still has to be quite clean. What I mean is that, if Kratos's shoulders were boxes, you could turn up the resolution to 1080p and up the AA to 8x and his shoulders would still be boxes, smooth boxes but still boxes.

True; but proper, effective AA will help on distant cars / scenery, irrespective of their maximum poly count
@SlipZtrEm: this is why 500k cars can run on the PS3, in 16 car grids. They're not 500k most of the time they're being displayed

 

[Tenacious D]

About those GT4 pics, I noticed on first glance polygonised surfaces that shoudn't be there if they were up-to-date models (Mclaren's side mirros aren't round enough, front of Mclaren not smooth, the grills on the Mclaren's hood need work, weird textures on the Mclaren's headlights, weird textures on the Bentley's headlights, blocky engine intake ramscoop on the Bentley).

This is where I have problems with posts like yours and Slip's. You don't "glimpse" polygons and facets, you look for them. And if you're looking for flaws in a game while racing, and it really matters that much to you... oh well, that's you.

I did this in GTR. I was looking at the backgrounds screaming by during quiet periods when I wasn't battling, and thought, 'Wow, this looks like Toca 3 on the PC2 in HD.' You know, washed out colors, 2D trees, poor texturing, yadda yadda. But that lasted all of a few moments. Now replays are pretty boring, with blah looking cars and no soundtrack, and the same camera angles all the time. If Kazunori had produced it, it would be a different story. But this is a PC racer, and I knew what I was probably getting, something like GT4 in HD.

If I could have GT4 in HD with my PC racers, but with GT5 color and lighting, I'd probably jump out of my seat. Maybe you'd be looking for polygons, but I'd be racing and taking thousands of screengrabs.

Just as you guys are mystified why we like the Standards and want to race them with Premiums, we're baffled why you don't.

 

[G.T.Ace]

This is where I have problems with posts like yours and Slip's. You don't "glimpse" polygons and facets, you look for them

Well, I don't "look for them" and still notice the stuff, actually I already noticed them back when GT4 was new, but it was okay back then because it was 2005.

 

[warp9engage]

Well, I don't "look for them" and still notice the stuff

This. And the fact that I am indeed a person who always looks at details. At least on some things like the cars. I sincerely didn't need much time looking at the Standard Cars video footage to notice some issues on the cars as they flew by. Sure I did miss some stuff like the blocky mirrors and rough wheelarches on the C5-R while it was moving but noticed some of the other things. It's just that I'm occasionally a bit of a perfectionist .

 

[maxpontiac]

I know some of you guys think the Standard cars are totally lame, and I know the reasoning behind this view. But I also think you guys are being silly, prejudging something before you have a chance to let it present itself. I've been spending more than a month playing GT4 and living in Photo Mode with cars which aren't going to look as good as the Standard cars in GT5. The PS2 is much more primitive. The GT4 engine is much more primitive. And yet, I'm amazed at how good the images are that you can capture on that old, obsolete system from that outdated game. SlipZtrEm must be getting sick of how awestruck I am that I can get pics like this:

I agree, TD. The cars taking everything into account will look better then what we see here.

I don't see a problem.

 

[gtracedriver]

Well, that's the problem with learning computer graphics in older, outdated programs. I wish I could start learning the ropes in the newer more powerful tools. Thanks for noting that detail . I do really hope PD does use these new technological features because so far, I still see blurred textures on GT5 Standard Cars.


That's true. However, there is something still making me think that Standard Cars have a problem that's being concealed. Think about it, most of the features you mentioned on the above list have only been slightly mentioned on magazines and interviews, and have had no media about them whatsoever, so they really haven't been showcased yet. The Standard Cars however, do have a video associated to them, meaning we do get to see them. But the video clip is only 40 seconds long versus the over 30 minutes of footage from Premium models. If GT5's cars have already started being revealed, why so much discrimination for the Standard Cars, especially considering they take more the half the list? My idea is that PD simply doesn't want to show them and I don't think it's for a gameshow surprise. For now however, the best we do is wait for said gameshows (GamesCon and TGS) to see if more information on the Standards is shown. If on both those gameshows, nothing about them comes up, then it's safe to assume PD isn't truly happy with them.

About those GT4 pics, I noticed on first glance polygonised surfaces that shoudn't be there if they were up-to-date models (Mclaren's side mirros aren't round enough, front of Mclaren not smooth, the grills on the Mclaren's hood need work, weird textures on the Mclaren's headlights, weird textures on the Bentley's headlights, blocky engine intake ramscoop on the Bentley).

And finally, the separation of Premiums and Standards will depend on how they look at the end, a reason I stated on an above post.


Resolution and anti-aliasing don't always disguise a poor model. For that technique to work, the model still has to be quite clean. What I mean is that, if Kratos's shoulders were boxes, you could turn up the resolution to 1080p and up the AA to 8x and his shoulders would still be boxes, smooth boxes but still boxes.

I was just giving an example that pixel can have such an impact on IQ. Better textures and especially shaders, lightning gives the realistic look. That is the reason GT5 standard or premium will be so superior to others. Regarding the blocky side view mirrors and those thing I hope they can use some trick like tessellation, tilling to get the curves smooth. Let us wait and see the retail version. There can always be some reasons to complain

 

[SlipZtrEm]

@SlipZtrEm: this is why 500k cars can run on the PS3, in 16 car grids. They're not 500k most of the time they're being displayed

Yeah, I know, LOD and all that . My point is mostly the marketing spin of this whole "our models are PS4-worthy!" statement. Premiums are better than anything currently on the consoles, I'll readily admit that, but they're still running fine on this generation.

Well, I don't "look for them" and still notice the stuff, actually I already noticed them back when GT4 was new, but it was okay back then because it was 2005.

+1. Like Warp's original post, he said "first glance", and that's all I need. I noticed it back leading up to the release of GT4. I still thought they looked good though, as good as possible given the technology anyways. That was 2004. A lot has changed since then.

This. And the fact that I am indeed a person who always looks at details. At least on some things like the cars. I sincerely didn't need much time looking at the Standard Cars video footage to notice some issues on the cars as they flew by. Sure I did miss some stuff like the blocky mirrors and rough wheelarches on the C5-R while it was moving but noticed some of the other things. It's just that I'm occasionally a bit of a perfectionist .

👍

I'm flattered that Tenacious can't seem to post without mentioning me by name (again, considering I let the previous thing drop, someone isn't over it), and that he still gets his (likely GT-logo'd) panties in a twist over it, but I don't see the Standards as near-copies of real-life images. They're blurry, dark, and have noticeable sharp polygons, even at these small image sizes. GT5 outputs images at 18mp, and I'm quite positive we won't see a single image of Standards at that size before release. Will I still enjoy the game, and use Standards? Of course. But I'm not blinded by GT support enough to think they're anything but resolutely last-gen. Which is a disappointment from a company that prides themselves on quality, and says to "expect perfection".

And as others brought up; these Standards make up 80% of the game. Why is it we've seen so little of them so far? After Vision GT back leading up to the PS3 launch, we've not seen any cars modeled in the same fashion as GT4*, up until this year's E3. We went years with only seeing cars built to the standards of what is now "Premium".

* - with exception to PSP and it's handful of new Standards (Countach, R8 LMS), which will be showing up in GT5.

 

[Spagetti69]

GT- logo'd panties.

Sorry for mentioning that but it made me wet myself (standard boxers btw).
Can't afford premium ones.

 

[Patrocles]

This is where I have problems with posts like yours and Slip's. You don't "glimpse" polygons and facets, you look for them. And if you're looking for flaws in a game while racing, and it really matters that much to you... oh well, that's you.

I did this in GTR. I was looking at the backgrounds screaming by during quiet periods when I wasn't battling, and thought, 'Wow, this looks like Toca 3 on the PC2 in HD.' You know, washed out colors, 2D trees, poor texturing, yadda yadda. But that lasted all of a few moments. Now replays are pretty boring, with blah looking cars and no soundtrack, and the same camera angles all the time. If Kazunori had produced it, it would be a different story. But this is a PC racer, and I knew what I was probably getting, something like GT4 in HD.

If I could have GT4 in HD with my PC racers, but with GT5 color and lighting, I'd probably jump out of my seat. Maybe you'd be looking for polygons, but I'd be racing and taking thousands of screengrabs.

Just as you guys are mystified why we like the Standards and want to race them with Premiums, we're baffled why you don't.

I played GTR and still play GTR2. Like you I can look beyond the poor GTR2 graphics because the game excellent AI, well-implemented online racing, and game configurability.

If we can get a GT5 game with the same thing and have modern photorealistic graphics I will be in heaven!

 

[eSZee]

This is where I have problems with posts like yours and Slip's. You don't "glimpse" polygons and facets, you look for them. And if you're looking for flaws in a game while racing, and it really matters that much to you... oh well, that's you.

If you actually think that you'll have to look hard to find flaws in the standard cars.....oh well, that's you. I can put on beer goggles and tell you a standard from a premium.

 

[syagre]

My thoughts about this endless debate:

When building such 3D objects for video-gaming, generally a high-poly model is created first, and then this high-poly model is downgraded to fit the console computational capacities.
At least, I expect such a process has been done for the creation of GT4 cars. So, when it comes to GT5 standard cars, why wouldn't they come from the GT4 high-poly models source files, only with less (or no) downgrade? In that case, I don't think it's worth fretting over GT5 standard cars quality.

That's all folks.

 

[yellowclone]

My thoughts about this endless debate:

When building such 3D objects for video-gaming, generally a high-poly model is created first, and then this high-poly model is downgraded to fit the console computational capacities.
At least, I expect such a process has been done for the creation of GT4 cars. So, when it comes to GT5 standard cars, why wouldn't they come from the GT4 high-poly models source files, only with less (or no) downgrade? In that case, I don't think it's worth fretting over GT5 standard cars quality.

That's all folks.

I've said the same thing many times, but it still gets pointed out at the way they were modeled vs the way this generation cars are suppose to be modeled (according to some people). The current way of modeling does have more benefits and is more accurate, but cars can still look great modeled the old way. Look back on page 194, I think, and you can see some photomode pics I took in GT4, just to show how good older generation modeling can look, on an older console game. I confident that they will be improved upon in GT5. I just hope we can race them together on the track at the same time to see if we can tell a HUGE difference when they are moving at 100+ mph.

 

[syagre]

I just hope we can race them together on the track at the same time to see if we can tell a HUGE difference when they are moving at 100+ mph.

It reminds me:
When a game has a multi-platform release, you often hear many gamers screaming about one version being "inferior" to another, while the differences are actually barely perceptible to the human eye.
I think the "standard cars" issue is about that order of magnitude.

 

[wakas]

It reminds me:
While the differences are actually barely perceptible to the human eye.
I think the "standard cars" issue is about that order of magnitude.

If that turns out to be true in November, I would be very disappointed knowing that we could have had a game that looks just as good in real time with all standard models and we could have had it like 2 years ago.

I know it is difficult to differentiate in real time but a polygon count difference of at least 5x is just too much not to be noticeable. Reflections will be a major issue with the low polygon models; premium cars are very shiny, if standards are rendered similarly, the low polygon count is going to become blatant.

Not to mention the subtle lighting effects in GT5 and HDR will make the standard models look plain.

^My argument is based on assumptions of 10,000 polygon standard models and 50,000 polygon premium.

 

[CoolColJ]

Premium cars

Looks like a lot of the older popular performance Japanese cars are premium.
Maybe the whole RX-7 range is all premium, and the Evos as well
There are more premium cars than we think

 

[eSZee]

Looks like a lot of the older popular performance Japanese cars are premium.
Maybe the whole RX-7 range is all premium, and the Evos as well
There are more premium cars than we think

There's still just around 200 of them. And judging by those pictures, of the 70+ we haven't seen, most are older japanese "favorites" just like some have suspected.

 

[CoolColJ]

nice sign at the back

 

[Sapphire-Wolf]

Premium cars
Looks like a lot of the older popular performance Japanese cars are premium.
Maybe the whole RX-7 range is all premium, and the Evos as well
There are more premium cars than we think

The FC, R32, and JZA70...

 

[Duphman]

The FC, R32, and JZA70...

Well, the R32 isn't really that new since it was already in GTHD the very first taste of GT5 models.

 

[Sapphire-Wolf]

Well, the R32 isn't really that new since it was already in GTHD the very first taste of GT5 models.

Not that I had a PS3 when that came out...

 

[Piotrov]

^Did that model of the Supra come without a front plate? A bit odd as I remember all the previous supras had front plates.

Also the Evo in the background seems to have darker windows then all the other cars.

 

[hardvibes]

nice sign at the back
http://i38.tinypic.com/2poe443.jpg

Ahahaha! I wonder when we'll see a Standard sign

 

[II IVORBIGUN II]

I I confident that they will be improved upon in GT5. I just hope we can race them together on the track at the same time to see if we can tell a HUGE difference when they are moving at 100+ mph.

Im confident because its already been confirmed they will be upscaled for GT5 which is why I don't understand some of the nonsense in this thread.

I certainly won't notice any difference between standard/premium when racing because I will be too focussed on the race because at the end of the day this is a video racing game. Unfortunately some people forget about this important fact because they are too worried how pretty the cars will look!