Your thoughts about "standard" vs. "premium"

[Dravonic]

Dude! do you guys not read?! The M5 model is around 200k polygons, which according to KY is half the amount of polys as GT5 cars. These cars can run just fine in GT5 but they can't in Forza because the xbox360 is outdated and weak.

To my final point. If PD outsourced their modeling, we would have like 500 premiums right now.

I don't see you mentioning poly count anywhere in that post. If you did mention it before, I'm sorry, I jumped in the thread and only read this page, so I missed it. But 200k triangles with interior, wheels and everything?

Anyway, I do agree that outsourcing would increase the premium car count but I'm not sure it should be the way to go. I'd say they should have hired more modelers, even if temporarily.

 

[fitftw]

Casual gamers don't play Gran Turismo. I'd wager a guess that this will be the first GT for maybe 5% of buyers. Everyone else knows about the Standard/Premium difference.

 

[trini_gangsta]

Casual gamers don't play Gran Turismo. I'd wager a guess that this will be the first GT for maybe 5% of buyers. Everyone else knows about the Standard/Premium difference.

Lol you can't be serious...Only people who religiously follow GT5's development on the Internet will know about standard/premium. I'd say that is like 5% of buyers.

 

[gaming25]

What what what?


Whew!! That's good to know! You better go tell most people they don't c are about swapping rims, becuase most people seem to be pretty up in arms about it right now... how silly of them since they dont' care! You tell them what they care about and set the record straight ok?

You didnt quote when I did told you about what they said on their website.

Anyway, Gran Turismo forums makes up less than 1 percent of GT users. Many websites posters are actually surprised at the complaining in this forum.

 

[gaming25]

Again, are you the spokesperson representing "most people"? If you don't care about changing the wheels (which many, including me, really liked to personalize their cars in previous games in a subtle way, in fact often the only way apart from some rather distasteful and generic rear spoilers) doesn't mean that most people don't mind it.
Right now, the fact Standard cars are even having this ability removed compared to the game they're essentially ported from seems another step backwards but since I don't care much for Standard cars at all it doesn't concern me very much, although even I was surprised by this fact, that doesn't mean that the people who did look forward to the Standard cars (the love that dareth not speak its name) aren't going to miss this feature.
You might seriously start to do some research into what "most people" actually want or don't care for, before you claim to know what it is and act as their spokesman, last time I checked I was still part of "most people" and you sure as hell don't speak for me.

You took what I said out of context. I meant how big of a deal of it is to them posting it on their website.

 

[Luminis]

People keep stating this as if you can go to the local WalMart and buy 500 high resolution car models for pennies on the dollar. I know I have to keep repeating myself endlessly on this because some people just flat out refuse to listen.

SONY isn't made of money like a certain American monopoly. Well, since "monopoly" apparently has no real meaning here, I'll use the term "market hostile mega-corporation." I'm sure this will satisfy Slip. Japan is in rough economic straits rather like Europe, perhaps better, perhaps worse, but not good. Which means that every Yen spent is quite valuable and needs to be justified.

"Farming out work" or contracting work from modeling companies is much more expensive than doing it in-house. Even assuming the cost per model is the same or a bit less, you have to buy the time of the company so they can make a profit, and this is expensive. Perhaps you could go to third world countries, but a certain other game has demonstrated the perils which can crop up from this tactic, not to mention security issues.

GT5 has already cost SONY at least $80 million dollars. I have a feeling that Kazunori probably pitched a budget of $40 - 50 million. So after the budget perhaps doubling in cost, do you think SONY would like to see another multi-million dollar bill on top of that, when they already invested in one of the best modeling houses on the planet?

Check your facts. SONY, as a company, amkes more revenue than Microsoft and is worth more.

Every time someone mentions how farming out work is no-brainer awesome sauce without thinking things through, I'm going to quote this post.


amar212 has stated definitively that in-game, the Standards look on par with the cars from Prologue. Maybe some of you might want to go into his thread and school him on this.

Well, the look of things is rather subjective. Given that pictures rarely lie, I just like to judge that for myself.

 

[-Cheezman-]

Check your facts. SONY, as a company, amkes more revenue than Microsoft and is worth more.

Sony: 2010 Income, $342 million
Microsoft: 2010 Income, $24.098 billion

Sony Revenue: Total $77.205 billion
Microsoft Revenue: Total $62.484 billion

 

[StogyBear]

I don't see you mentioning poly count anywhere in that post. If you did mention it before, I'm sorry, I jumped in the thread and only read this page, so I missed it. But 200k triangles with interior, wheels and everything?

Anyway, I do agree that outsourcing would increase the premium car count but I'm not sure it should be the way to go. I'd say they should have hired more modelers, even if temporarily.

Sorry it was mentioned earlier in the thread. But ya PD is using the old method of modeling. I think what Turn10 is doing is much more efficient. Drawing out the polygon lines on the actual car and scanning it into the computer saves months of work. You can finish a car from start to finish in a few weeks and it will be more accurate. All they would have to do is texture and model the insides of tail lights and stuff.

here's a video of what I'm talking about. It's pretty crazy that they can do this now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1r9RzpZX5hg

 

[analog]

You took what I said out of context. I meant how big of a deal of it is to them posting it on their website.

I know the context you put it in but even within this context the response I gave to the part I selected still counts, you still say the reason they didn't mentioned it on their site is due to "most people" (whoever they might be) not caring for changing the wheels on their cars.

Most people dont care about changing the rims for standard cars for a GT game. Most people might care about the interior view for GT, which is why they talked about it on their website.

See? The part I bolded is the part I responded to, I didn't put it out of context as the reasoning (part of which I quoted) for you main point ( the actual context) still remains questionable in whatever context you chose to put it in.
So my original response still stands, do some research before claiming to know what "most people" want or not, if you just lazily assume everyone likes the same things you do, you're making a serious misjudgement.

 

[Scaff]

Well, the look of things is rather subjective. Given that pictures rarely lie, I just like to judge that for myself.

As a photographer I can assure you that pictures almost always lie.....



...a promo shot I took for a friends band, the original had a drain-pipe, air-con unit and one person was looking in a different direction from the others. Not to mention a huge amount of rain smear has been removed from it.

In other words this picture most defiantly tell a different story to the original, pictures lie.


Now while you are correct that looks are subjective, to simply dismiss the opinion of someone who has seen them first hand is a bit dramatic. Keep in mind that it gives everyone else free rein to dismiss your opinion out of hand, even when you have seen them first hand. After all you can't expect a to be held to a different standard than the one you apply to others.


Scaff

 

[MidianGTX]

...a promo shot I took for a friends band, the original had a drain-pipe, air-con unit and one person was looking in a different direction from the others. Not to mention a huge amount of rain smear has been removed from it.

Sweet, Professor Snape is in your friends band

 

[Dravonic]

As a photographer I can assure you that pictures almost always lie.....



...a promo shot I took for a friends band, the original had a drain-pipe, air-con unit and one person was looking in a different direction from the others. Not to mention a huge amount of rain smear has been removed from it.

In other words this picture most defiantly tell a different story to the original, pictures lie.

I don't think this apply in this case though, do you? I mean, we are judging the look of standard cars from pictures that weren't modified in any way. So they are representative of what we are going to see when the game is playing in our TVs.

 

[eSZee]

Yeah, definitely different case.

 

[Dravonic]

Yeah, definitely different case.

Actually, I just realized he was probably talking about that Miata pic and it does look somewhat odd. However, I'm not using that picture alone to judge how standard cars look. It's not like there isn't plenty of other standard car footage out there.

 

[Scaff]

I don't think this apply in this case though, do you? I mean, we are judging the look of standard cars from pictures that weren't modified in any way. So they are representative of what we are going to see when the game is playing in our TVs.

How do you actually 100% know they have not been modified in anyway?

Did they still have the EXIF file attached? Did you check the EXIF file for each one? Would you have know what work had been done on the image I attached had I not told you?

Simple fact is that picture can and often do tell misleading stories, so a claim that pictures rarely lie is rather inaccurate. That's the point I was making.

However my main issue with the comment I quoted was in regard to dismissing the opinion of those who have actually seen it running.


Scaff

 

[Peter]

I don't think this apply in this case though, do you? I mean, we are judging the look of standard cars from pictures that weren't modified in any way. So they are representative of what we are going to see when the game is playing in our TVs.

He's saying that, for all we know, the pictures were modified. We have no proof of it, and they are even more pixelated than they were in GT4, so a photoshop isn't out of the question. And we shouldn't dismiss anyone who says they could be shopped, as someone whose covering up the fact that they are shocked by it.

 

[dylansan]

Where is this Miata picture everyone's fussing over?

 

[eSZee]

Where is this Miata picture everyone's fussing over?

I'm assuming.

 

[Devedander]

How do you actually 100% know they have not been modified in anyway?

Scaff

I would think in much the same way we know amar isn't some sony shill... we use our best judgement and try to crossverify with multiple sources.... We don't know 100% but that's true of almost everything here.

Occams razor: its far more likely that amars personal taste is reflected in his comments than that multiple standard pictures were carefully doctored and or suffered from some odd camera issue that resulted in exactly the issues we see...

And of course every ones opinions can be dismissed... Many of us have been routinely dismissed for quite a while on nothing more than a hope and theory how things will be better later/that was an old build/must not be a final copy/itll be fixed with dc/you unlock it at xxlevel. No surprises there...

BTW what would the EXIFdata do? It can be faked pretty easily and only really tells you camera and exposure information...

Not that I put a lot of weight behind this tool, but it does look like it hasn't been tampered with much :http://errorlevelanalysis.com/permalink/6005c78/

 

[Dravonic]

How do you actually 100% know they have not been modified in anyway?

Did they still have the EXIF file attached? Did you check the EXIF file for each one? Would you have know what work had been done on the image I attached had I not told you?

Simple fact is that picture can and often do tell misleading stories, so a claim that pictures rarely lie is rather inaccurate. That's the point I was making.

However my main issue with the comment I quoted was in regard to dismissing the opinion of those who have actually seen it running.


Scaff

And I agree with your point. As I pointed out in my previous post, I just remembered a possibly modified picture that can be one of the lying ones you talked about. However, I feel you meant we shouldn't use pictures to judge how standard cars look, because for all we know, they can be bogus. Sure a few can, but would you say that all of them are? Or even that a significant amount of them are?

My main issue with your comment is you're apparently undermining the opinion of those who have not actually seen it running, even though they too have seen it running in pictures and videos around the web. Just disregard the few odd ones like that Miata one, and anyone can form a valid opinion on the subject, as far as I can tell.

 

[Luminis]

How do you actually 100% know they have not been modified in anyway?

Did they still have the EXIF file attached? Did you check the EXIF file for each one? Would you have know what work had been done on the image I attached had I not told you?

Simple fact is that picture can and often do tell misleading stories, so a claim that pictures rarely lie is rather inaccurate. That's the point I was making.

However my main issue with the comment I quoted was in regard to dismissing the opinion of those who have actually seen it running.


Scaff

Well, you are right, it's a bit steep to just dismiss the opinion of someone who's seen the game first hand.

The sole reason I posted this was because most of the footage I've seen of the standard cars indicated (to me), that it's not something that's easily overlooked. Then again, that might be due to the fact that, while playing, you're focused on actually racing and, thus, don't notice the difference that much. I can only guess, really. It's just that, well, I look at the standard car footage and think to myself 'will I really be able to not notice that'?

 

[Scaff]

And I agree with your point. As I pointed out in my previous post, I just remembered a possibly modified picture that can be one of the lying ones you talked about. However, I feel you meant we shouldn't use pictures to judge how standard cars look, because for all we know, they can be bogus. Sure a few can, but would you say that all of them are? Or even that a significant amount of them are?

Back up just a second, your attributing things to me that I've not said.

I simply pointed out that the statement 'pictures rarely lie' is incredibly inaccurate, and clarified this by showing how easily a picture can be manipulated and it not be obvious.

I'm simply trying to illustrate that its a false premise. I didn't attribute it to any picture, others did that.

My main issue with your comment is you're apparently undermining the opinion of those who have not actually seen it running, even though they too have seen it running in pictures and videos around the web. Just disregard the few odd ones like that Miata one, and anyone can form a valid opinion on the subject, as far as I can tell.

I'm not doing any such thing.

I have not undermined anyone's opinion at all, quite the opposite. I said that to dismiss Amar's comments out of hand was a strange thing to do, particularly given the weight that comments from people who have not seen the game running first hand are allowed.

I wholeheartedly agree that anyone can form an opinion on anything, however that opinion has to be given reference and context.

Well, you are right, it's a bit steep to just dismiss the opinion of someone who's seen the game first hand.

The sole reason I posted this was because most of the footage I've seen of the standard cars indicated (to me), that it's not something that's easily overlooked. Then again, that might be due to the fact that, while playing, you're focused on actually racing and, thus, don't notice the difference that much. I can only guess, really. It's just that, well, I look at the standard car footage and think to myself 'will I really be able to not notice that'?

Exactly the point I was trying to make.

I for one have held back from posting a definitive opinion on standard cars for exactly this reason, until I can judge them for myself, in context, I can't say for sure what my real view on them will be.

I welcome the range and choice them offer, I may well hate the reality of them. I don't yet know for sure. What I do know is I will be damned if I'm going to put myself in a position that I end up looking a fool backtracking on.



Scaff

 

[RedSuinit]

Edited: Didn't write it.

 

[Spagetti69]

I'm assuming.

That looks a bit rough. Seems the standards are of varying levels.

 

[TiZzla]

That looks like something from GT1

 

[radiofrog]

Yeah, c'mon, does anyone really believe that miata pic? Here's from GT3:

That looks like a more likely source. But no, I still don't like the standards anyway.

However, I am beginning to understand what took so much work on the premiums. Check out these RDK pics (personally, I think the text in the headlight is overkill; cool, but overkill):
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=132225&page=302#post4161533

 

[Devedander]

Nice shop chop, whoever made that. LOL. Biggest giveaway, the lack of a shadow in the bottom right corner. You are looking at tarmac that is CLEARLY underneath the car. Yet there is no shadow, even though CLEARLY by the shadow of the mirror the light is coming from the top left to bottom right. Yet, no shadow.

I am not so sure it's shopped... http://errorlevelanalysis.com/permalink/6005c78/


I think it's a worst case scenario shot... probably this is a replay shot and the standard is an AI car and the camera has been trickily positioned to see it more closely than the game would like to let you. Remember with standards the game prevents you from zooming in too far... this may be why.

Another thing that makes me think it's not a shop is that while the textures and shadow are horribly low res, you can see the body lines around the wheel well are smoothly rendered (it's polygonal looking but the crease is smooth, not much aliasing going on) and the actual wheel well cutout has the same rough edge we saw on that C5R shot a long time ago when the whole "standards are GT4 models" thing first came out...

As for the missing rear shadow, you will notice in radiofrogs picture, the miata's high tail end leads to much less shadow under the back. It may be part that and part just how the shadows are being rendred... we have seen in some other shots that cars (especially more distant) get little or no under car shadow.

That looks like something from GT1

GT1 didn't run anywhere near that resolution... if you look at the actual geometry rendering the polygons are quite visibly high res...

Had those models been used the blockiness of the geometry would be massively notable.

 

[RedSuinit]

Edited: I didn't write it.

 

[Devedander]

I don't believe it's a GT1 shot. However, I firmly believe it is a fake, based on the reasons I have shown above. You have an error analysis tool based on the number of times an image had been saved. HOWEVER if the source file for both backdrop and vehicle have been saved the SAME number of times. Which is a distinct possibility. I still think it is a shop. Look at the shadows. They're all wrong.

It's true the ELA is not the end all when it comes to stuff like this but looking at the picture (not it's contents) it's a very well done shop if it is one... the histogram shows no truly odd spikes, the grain is consistent across, the edges of the car do not show an unusual sharpness compared to the background, the edges of the soft top agains t the fence appear to bloom slightly as is often the case with a camera shooting a light source with dark and light edges adjacent... it's possibly it's a shop but the effort to blend it in so well was significant then.

If you really zoom in on the picture you can actually see the pitch and screendoor effect of the display and it lines up properly all the way across the body of the car down into the menu portion... that's a hard one to fake without smuding detail and giving away the grain.

And as for that rear shadow the lighting seems to be comming from behind us as the viewer at about 1 oclock (via the tree shadows in the background) and if the miata has a high enough back end, it's entirely possible the shadow is properly obscured by the body of the car at the rear... also it's possible the under car shadow in this instance is crap and low quality as is ithe shadow of the rear view on the body...

Could be shopped, but I've done a lot of shops and if that is, it's a pretty darn good one.

 

[regnar]

Firstly there is quit a bit of difference in quality between premiums & standards, premiums being far superior no doubt, but to give it a fair assessment of the image you need to compare apples to apples. With enough people out there with the game someone should be able to take a photo of both the standard & premium cars in photo mode at the same location & lighting.

Theirs a number of variables in the image taken of the Miata.

- The image was taken from a screen grab, captured from a video camera or Point n' Shoot camera of unknown resolution.
- Close up on a TV with unknown picture quality,
- The person might have done additional work with photo shop, such as reduce pixel resolution.

The other image floating out their that I saw this image being compared to was of a premium taken in photo mode.