- 3,204
- 2.2L Camry
- NissanSkylineN1
- Xbox??? Who is this Xbox??
What's happening then?
Your thoughts about "standard" vs. "premium"
- Thread starter LP670-4 SV
- 10,183 comments
- 784,492 views
What's happening then?
Strittan
Premium
- 4,130
- Sweden
- Strittan
Tokyo Game Show.
- 4,323
It sounds like you are assuming that while detail level required is going up, tools to accomplish the job aren't getting faster and easier to use...
The average persons webpage today should look much better than the average persons webpage 10 years ago... but it also probably takes less time to crank out.
I wonder how many times a date has been set when all the questions will be answered?
- 4,323
Dupe.
- 378
Because the polycount and the level of detail is EXACTLY why they should have hired more modelers instead of having us waiting lots of time to deliver just 20% of the car in current generation quality.
And to answer you and Daniel at the same time: Forza 3 models (the ones in the menus) are very well done as far as the 3d model goes, just check them with the photo mode. What was rushed is the texture job and thats because Turn10 only had 2 years to make and release the game, Polyphony in other hand has been developing this game for almost 6 years so theres no reason to think it would cost quality and you know what guys now that you are talking about quality, the standard cars represent a quality problem, they are not even close to the rest of the game quality.
Microsoft rushed the game release and thats why some models have grey interiors and not working gauges but if you look at the finished model in the game you will see that they look gorgeous and thats the level you can get hiring external 3d modelling, far better than those outdated PS2 models.
Like i said this game have a huge budget (between 60 and 80 millions) and most of the developing cost has been already recovered thanks to GT5 prologue so i simply see NO excuse or reason for standard cars other than bad management in this area. Having most of those cars made in premium from would have been a good inversion because they are going to be reused in GT6 and maybe just a bit upgraded in the next gen.
Polyphony is making what it seems is a very good and polished game to make up for the standard cars so i dont know why its hard for you guys to admit that someone made a very bad choice about the standard car thing.
- 562
- Next to Kaz
- Joeminihulkster
The time required to model cars have increased each generation. At this point PD will not be able to catch up with updating premium cars and at the same time keeping the car roster current(unless they double their modelers or outsource). It will be interesting to see if PD just drops a large chunk of gt4 cars from GT6.
SuperCobraJet
(Banned)
- 2,472
- Virginia USA
- SuperCobraJet1
I don't know how much of this thread you have read, but it hasn't been hard for quite a few to make that admission.
It's time to end this; seriously, why moan and cry over something that cannot be changed? Just accept the situation and move on! Pretty much everyone has criticized the lack of cockpits for standard cars; if you just wanted to make your voice heard, congratulations, you have and now stop it.
Everyone keep saying: "well those who use bumper cam don't care and label it as trivial". Hate to break it but if there's no cockpit-view I accept it as any adult would and move on. I will use cockpit-view but I will most of the time use bumper cam. It does not suggest I do not care for cockpit-view. Simple as that and I suggest we all accept it and move on.
Now we can get back discussing the differences between standard and premium...
Everyone keep saying: "well those who use bumper cam don't care and label it as trivial". Hate to break it but if there's no cockpit-view I accept it as any adult would and move on. I will use cockpit-view but I will most of the time use bumper cam. It does not suggest I do not care for cockpit-view. Simple as that and I suggest we all accept it and move on.
Now we can get back discussing the differences between standard and premium...
- 6,804
- The Netherlands
Well wouldn't you say it's much easier to accept and get over the lack of cockpit view if you mostly use bumper cam anyway?
So please don't tell me to move on because I'll decide myself thank you very much.
You came here describing the GT5 demo in glowing terms and described cockpit view as a trivial element which absense should be forgotten by all other elements and aspects of GT5 which I simply don't agree with.
I'm not going Halleluja yet purely based on your experience of playing the demo and you admitting you don't use cockpit view at all ( or hardly use it ).
Can't expect anyone to suddenly change their opinions simply because you saw the light.
And to be honest, the whole cockpit view issue is the only issue I care about in this whole debate so saying it's trivial will only lighten up this debate instead of silencing it ( and yes I realise it's pointless, but I just hate to be told what should or should not be deemed important ).
Bumper and bonnet aren't really fun for me unless you have a steering wheel, which perhaps you may have. Playing with bumper view with a controller feels so awkward.
I was upset at first about the whole 800 missing interiors, and I also criticized GT5 for having a very poor chase camera view, but I take that back now. It seems that PD has greatly improved the chase camera from the first version of prologue. The rear of the car appears much larger on screen and have much more movement now, so yeah I will still be sad about standard cars, but hey I can live. The bonnet view is also much better in GT5.
- 8,725
Heh, it's a wonder GT ever took off at all
I think the new bonnet view may become my view of choice, if it will support tracking of my ugly mug.
If the cockpit view magically works for me in GT5, I may lament the lack of cockpit views for the standards more.
For now, I'm more interested in the other new features, which we expect may surface from TGS in a few weeks.
Technically it is a trivial element - at least to me. We could discus immersion and the like but we bump into player preferences - like mine for bumper cam.
Maybe I was to harsh and I'll try to rephrase: it's not that cockpit-view is not important to some - like yourself - but to me it seems no deal breaker since it has nothing to do with the core experience (again, for me); the core experience is what GT has been doing since 1997. We had no cockpit-view then, and I understand times have changed and so has technology. Fact is that no other game can offer what GT5 is offering: over 200 of the best modeled cars in gaming history.
The core experience is the physics engine, the feel the game delivers, the thrill of driving.
Would I have liked to have a 1000 cars with cockpit-views? Hell yeah, in a heartbeat; and just to clarify, I do use cockpit view but still find it trivial when looking at the complete picture.
PD have worked hard to get those 200 cars to were they are now; they have also added 800+ cars just for our enjoyment; I fail to see what they've done wrong? Did I hope for cockpit-view for all the cars? Yes, I did. Was I surprised when that didn't happen? No, not the slightest.
They made a choice - a good one at that - and it simply is not realistic to expect them to deliver 1000+ cars with what we've come to expect looking at the premiums. I'd like to appreciate their effort instead of faulting them for something that could never have been achieved. So I guess it's pointless to keep on discussing it.
I understand it's important to you; In GT5P I only used cockpit-view (all other GT's I used chase-cam) and never anything else. But, when playing GT4 the last few months I used bumper cam and what do you know, I liked it a lot. The thing is I too was disappointed, and have expressed myself on this forum. But really, it's time to let go and accept what GT5 will offer.
Maybe you should be happy I described GT5 in glowing terms; there is a slight chance it actually is THAT good
- 6,804
- The Netherlands
Well thanks GT for clarifying your viewpoint or point of view and I really hope it will be that good.
Ofcourse it's a personal preference above all else and strictly speaking all elements of a game can be seen as trivial to an extend perhaps, it's the combination of all factors combined which create the full experience, was just hoping cockpit view was in the mix for all cars as to me it's an addictive new element ( which changed the way I experienced the game dramatically and that's essential in playing any game, the experience ) which I took for granted since playing Prologue.
Anyway I'm also still counting the days until November arrives, no doubt about that.
and I really hope it will be that good.Ofcourse it's a personal preference above all else and strictly speaking all elements of a game can be seen as trivial to an extend perhaps, it's the combination of all factors combined which create the full experience, was just hoping cockpit view was in the mix for all cars as to me it's an addictive new element ( which changed the way I experienced the game dramatically and that's essential in playing any game, the experience ) which I took for granted since playing Prologue.
Anyway I'm also still counting the days until November arrives, no doubt about that.
- 423
True, the tools are getting better, but not at a rate that can keep up with how quickly the standards are advancing. I can't remember exactly where I saw it, but I believe Kaz said it took half a year to model a car for GT5 on PS3, compared to a week or two on PS2 and a day on PS1.
No, they aren't very well done. Look closely and you'll find mistakes on many of FM3's cars. Polygons aren't meshed together smoothly. Lots of rough edges. 2D textures used in many places to replace where 3D models should be. Even at their fullest level of detail, they fall short. And what does it matter how good they look in the menus? Next time you play FM3, pay attention to the drop in quality right before the word "GO!" appears on the screen. It isn't pretty.
Also don't forget that most of the cars in FM3 date back to the original Xbox days as far as exteriors are concerned. Whereas PD had to make an entire premium car from scratch, inside and out, at a very high level of detail, T10 only needed to do some touch up work on the outside and add a half-baked interior.
So I'm supposed to excuse that some of the car models in FM3 are unfinished now? And how do you know T10 had an external 3D modelling company to help them out?
Clearly this isn't a cost issue. I won't deny that PD completely screwed up managing the whole standard car situation, telling us that we were to have 1000+ cars and then later correcting themselves that 80% would be recycled from GT4, polished up a bit. But with everything else they're doing, you can't expect them to pump out more car models at a consistent level of detail in this amount of time. Something's got to give. You either sacrifice quality, or you sacrifice quantity. That's it. It's disappointing, but it's the truth.
Nobody's denying that. But you have to realize it's not as simple as "hire more people, make more cars." A lot of work goes into a triple-A title like GT5. The new physics engine. The tracks. The new B-Spec mode. This will be the first GT game to feature a true online component. New disciplines like karting, NASCAR and F1 which all require their own modified physics and rules. It isn't just about cars.
- 64
- SniperSight
- 378
- 27,387
- Toronto
- NewAesthetic
- SlipZtrEm
...the bolded part: 80% of the cars in GT5. Plus GT4 did the same trick of using different car models for menus (and the stationary Photo Mode locations) than it did for the actual racing.
Don't forget that a far larger amount of GT5's cars are directly carried over from PS2 days. They haven't even seen a token shot at model improvement, whereas I've yet to see an FM3 car use the same car model and textures that you could find in FM1. There are also plenty of cars in FM3 that had their series debut in that game. Seems only right to look at both sides equally.
Well, consistent with the (really quite awesome) current level of detail achieved by the Premiums? No, we couldn't; I don't really think those 6 months could be cut down further.
But impose a maximum time of say, 4 months, per car, and I doubt we'd end up with models that only looked 2/3 as good. You run into the law of diminishing returns with this level of modeling; nobody's going to sit there and complain about a missing screw on the HKS Evo's rear bumper, or an exposed wire not being accurately modeled (or even existing) in a NASCAR interior. But you're going to notice how a Standard can't dislodge a single body part because they're all glued together because of it's archaic modeling.
It's been covered before, but the physics, B-Spec, and other discipline rules won't affect modelers in any serious way. Hiring more modelers, since that is their sole job, might not solve the problem, but it'd alleviate some of the burden right now. It's getting to the point where if they don't want to be stuck re-using decade-old assets, they're going to need to get a bigger modeling team. I can only assume Sony will allow this after initial sales figures roll in. Well, we can all hope Sony will. Percentage-wise, I think games like GT need a lot more modelers on the team than, say, games like Metal Gear, where there's a bit more freedom in many aspects of the game's design, whereas GT is supposed to be recreating everything as realistically as possible, things that are already tangible and real.
Actually, have we had any confirmation they've hit the limits for the disc, or is still all guess-work at this point? I imagine they might still have some space to go.
FendRhodes
(Banned)
- 93
- FendRhodes
I think its a shame that all cars can't be equally detailed.
Maybe in GT6 all cars will be premium.
Yup yup
Maybe in GT6 all cars will be premium.
Yup yup
gtracedriver
(Banned)
- 603
I am not sure comparison to Forza3 is good a thing at all. Although the photomode are great in Forza. It's in game gfx are pretty bad:
http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/3296/forzag.jpg
I think the best thing about PD is that not only they are great devs they are honestly interested in adding realism to GT. That is most rewarding thing. Even though standard cars do not have huge amount of polygons. Kaz will not settle for cheap or inaccurate model of cars. GT4 was made in mind considering this and they already have good details and accurate models. For obvious reasons they have shown premiums at E3 and GC I just hope they have also given enough time and are still polishing these standard cars
http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/3296/forzag.jpg
I think the best thing about PD is that not only they are great devs they are honestly interested in adding realism to GT. That is most rewarding thing. Even though standard cars do not have huge amount of polygons. Kaz will not settle for cheap or inaccurate model of cars. GT4 was made in mind considering this and they already have good details and accurate models. For obvious reasons they have shown premiums at E3 and GC I just hope they have also given enough time and are still polishing these standard cars
Last edited:
ItsHim
Premium
- 1,414
- Bavaria/Germany
Because you have to make sure they work to the same standard and there is a natural threshold where even more people won't get the job done quicker -but slower.
Take a square metre piece of land. One person needs 8 hours to dig a hole, two 4 hours. Now lets bring in 10 guys - they should do it in 48 minutes? Nope, they'll just stand on each others feet.
In addition, I assume the processing power PD house in their mainframes is a valuable asset and they have to spread that appropriately over all the areas of the development process.
I also took it for granted. I guess that's what they call cognitive dissonance. But I have to say: GT5P is to GT5 nothing more what is a crude storyboard to an animated film.
I'm far from patronising anybody. I'm glad that I can still have those GT4 cars - as a vintage pack as I call them. But even if GT5 did ship in the package that was displayed at the Gamescom, I would buy it in an instance.
It's kind of hilarious what they put in the game, and still sell it for your usual retail price. If I were in charge of PD's finances, I would have told them to release a title every two years with 12 months worth of DLC. I seriously can't see the economics working in GT5. Better not tell anybody though
Seismica
Premium
- 4,346
- Guisborough
- GTP_Seismica
The Xbox 360 is not that bad in relation to the PS3 as these two games show. Turn10 did not spend enough time on their graphics engine. PD have squeezed a lot more out of the hardware. Might not have anything to do with modelling, but the modelling wasn't the only thing Turn10 rushed.
Actually, PD were intending on using GT4 models all along. it wasn't until 2006-2007 that they decided to create high detailed models. They wanted to create them to such a high detail so they wouldn't have to be done again. A fair amount of Forzas models are ported from Forza 2. They used a technique by which the higher detailed models are computer generated I can't remember what it's called, but it basically extrapolates the existing polygons, producing a higher detailed model. But quality and accuracy are the price to pay for this shortcutting. You can see it in a lot of models that they ported over from Forza 2 (I'm not saying they're bad, i'm saying there are clear imperfections in some of the models. Honda S2000, Nissan R32 Skyline, Honda Integra etc.). The ones they created from scratch for Forza 3 look superb, from the outside, in the menus.
They did this with twice the inhouse staff, and they outsourced. Not very efficient, not very cost effective. By the next generation of consoles a lot of these models will be obsolete, because the quality among them varies so much. GT5s models are of two clearly defined quality levels.
True.
But none of GT5s cars have been rushed, and it shows.
PD chose to create highly detailed models to make them future proof well past this generation of consoles. They could have rushed 800 cockpits together for the standard cars, but that would simply have been time wasted, because they will have to re-do them eventually. We don't have to be happy about it, but the reasons for them doing so are clear.
They had strict quality control measures in place, hence why it was all done in-house. This actually reduces cost and improves efficiency. It would have cost them a great deal of money and time beyond what they already spent to outsource extra modelling work.
As much as it seems they do, PD do not have a bottomless pit of money for development. This game was created on a budget. A budget which I think they hit around the 2008 mark (Due to the longer than expected development time). I personally believe Sony ordered the development of GTPSP to offset the budget deficit for GT5s development. GT5
was always going to be released, they did the same with GT3 and GT4. And no, the takings from GT5 don't quite cover the development cost for the full game. This game was sold cheaply, as low as £15/$20. The retailers take a huge chunk of that. I don't even think they made $20million profit from the sales of Prologue.I suspect if you take an average annual spending over the course of development of both GT5 and Forza 3, GT5 will actually have been cheaper to develop. But I have no evidence to back that up as Microsoft and Turn10 have not released any information about that...
But then on the next generation of consoles, where other developers start making cars of the sort we're seeing of the premiums in GT5?
You see, if PD had made all cars to the same level of detail. The time constraints mean they'd maybe managed 80k models. Not only would they be below the level of detail shown ingame in Forza, Shift, TDU2, etc. they would have to be re-done AGAIN for the next console generation. It would simply be a waste of time. PD chose quality. And because they can, they added all their old cars in for good measure, because 1000 is better than 200.
Last edited:
