Your thoughts about "standard" vs. "premium"

[Sapphire-Wolf]

That Pescarolo looks pretty damn awful.

 

[Luminis]

To be honest it just looks like the gt5 shot has been taken then zoomed in and edited hence the pixelation. I would be suprised if they let something like that through

You know, the 'I can't believe this is real, they'd never do this!' sentiment is nice and all, but it was said about a few other things as well that turned out to be real

 

[the Interceptor]

To be honest it just looks like the gt5 shot has been taken then zoomed in and edited hence the pixelation. I would be suprised if they let something like that through

Download the direct-feed HD video here (link may be temporarily unavailable), the car really does look like that in the game.

To me it seems they didn't port the higher-res photomode model of this car to GT5, rather than the standard in-game model. Why they did this is beyond me, especially since there are standard cars which look fine. They probably wanted to improve the details of the standard cars by hand, ran out of time and just put them in regardless of their current state.

 

[risuku13]

That Standard Miata pic looks like from GT2 running on a PS1 emulator. I'm not sure if the menus/buttons are from GT5, though, but it is easy to overlay or superimpose. Assuming this is fake, the chopped image was first displayed on a screen before finally capturing it with an iPhone 4 / iOS 4.1.

If it's real, then probably just a direct port from GT4 with little enhancements. I wouldn't expect much from Standard, though. Considering the thing PD did with the rims! But this kind of quality is not acceptable for GT5.

 

[paulpg87]

here hd standard footage, they sucks. Amar " looks like prologue cars while racing" is clearly a ********. It's gt4 hd nothing more and nowhere near prologue.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0HqUZyvY1s&feature=player_embedded

 

[Luminis]

Download the direct-feed HD video here (link may be temporarily unavailable), the car really does look like that in the game.

To me it seems they didn't port the higher-res photomode model of this car to GT5, rather than the standard in-game model. Why they did this is beyond me, especially since there are standard cars which look fine. They probably wanted to improve the details of the standard cars by hand, ran out of time and just put them in regardless of their current state.

Well, there's only a few things I can think of that would PDd stop from using the photo mode models.
The models maybe didn't support stuff like the roll overs, were never meant to have a moving suspension or it's down to the damage model. Maybe PD had a very basic damage model in place for one of the early GT4 builds and worked their way from their.

I can't really think of any other reasons, at least not right now

 

[mikeybaby85]

Those pics are definately photoshoped, it's laughable to think the standard cars look that bad. People will disagree with me alot on this but all standard cars are missing are interiors, the outside of the car will look pretty much as good as the outside of a premium model, I promise. Anyway I'm a bumper cam or interior driver :- )

 

[CoolColJ]

The Taxigamer jaggies reeks of 1080i interlace capture, maybe?

Not many capture cards can do the full 1080p at 60fps capture, so they most likely did it at 1080i.
Most of their pics looked interlaced, especially when you look at the crowds in that pic

 

[paulpg87]

http://www.easy-upload.net/fichiers/Tsukuba_Circuit5.20101120203814.jpg

 

[Rodpunisher]

@paulpg87..That is a huge pic... could you at least post the link to the pic or a pic in a smaller size?

 

[the Interceptor]

Those pics are definately photoshoped, it's laughable to think the standard cars look that bad. People will disagree with me alot on this but all standard cars are missing are interiors, the outside of the car will look pretty much as good as the outside of a premium model, I promise. Anyway I'm a bumper cam or interior driver :- )

The Taxigamer jaggies reeks of 1080i interlace capture, maybe?

Not many capture cards can do the full 1080p at 60fps capture, so they most likely did it at 1080i.
Most of their pics looked interlaced, especially when you look at the crowds in that pic

Watch the video. This is no photoshopping and no interlace problem, the car really does look like that in GT5.

 

[djKyoto]

The more I see of these standard model car's texture mapping, the less I want to know about them. Those really do look pretty poor.

 

[Nauraushaun]

The standard cars do look pretty awful. Check out the texture on the back of this Chaparrel, it's a mess.
http://www.gtpla.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/specialstageroute53.jpg

I accepted this sort of laziness from GT PSP, which was basically a long over-due mock-up of GT4 on PSP, using GT4 assets...I did NOT expect it from GT5. Especially considering the reason GT PSP was 5 years late is because they were literally working n GT5 that whole time.
GT5 should've had twice the team members. We'd have a better product, and we would've had it last November.

 

[P3nT4gR4m]

The Taxigamer jaggies reeks of 1080i interlace capture, maybe?

Not many capture cards can do the full 1080p at 60fps capture, so they most likely did it at 1080i.
Most of their pics looked interlaced, especially when you look at the crowds in that pic

As soon as I watched those taxigamer clips I knew something was rotten in denmark. No way would they release something that looked that bad. I mean, okay, I was expecting the worst. Maybe sub-prologue but GT2/3 quality? Come on.

Videos are alarming, tho. Got a bit of a fright. Thanks for putting my mind at rest 👍

 

[the Interceptor]

As soon as I watched those taxigamer clips I knew something was rotten in denmark. No way would they release something that looked that bad. I mean, okay, I was expecting the worst. Maybe sub-prologue but GT2/3 quality? Come on.

Videos are alarming, tho. Got a bit of a fright. Thanks for putting my mind at rest 👍

Sorry, but this is not an interlacing effect. There definitely are artifacts of being a direct-feed-video grab in the discussed picture, such as the crowds on the right and also the road texture in the foreground. But the rough edge of that wing is not caused by interlacing. This becomes apparent when you watch the video.

The assumption of CoolColJ is just that - an assumption. If it were true, all of their videos would suffer from similar effects, which they don't. This is a low-res texture being used, face it guys!

 

[CoolColJ]

But how can a texture effect the edge of a car, that should be polygons, not texture - very strange!

 

[Luminis]

But how can a texture effect the edge of a car, that should be polygons, not texture - very strange!

Because it was modeled with a pretty low amount of polygons right from the start. You wouldn't notice the jaggyness on a SDTV, but in HD, it's pretty appearent.

 

[CoolColJ]

It still doesn't make sence, the jaggies are larger than the pixels themselves!

If if you use a low poly object it would just look more hexagon like, rather than a smooth surface. A hexgon doesn't have jaggies on the flat edges

High vs low poly

 

[the Interceptor]

The polygons form the shape, the textures cover it. Textures also eat graphics performance, so they usually aren't of very high resolution. The rough edges appear because the actual texture image is pretty low-res and is being stretched/upscaled onto the area it covers on the car.

It is similar to when you take a small picture and upscale it with a simple program like Windows Paint. Clever software dithers and thus produces a somewhat unsharp, yet acceptable picture. Paint uses the brute force method (don't know if it still does, but it used to) and doubles the neighbour pixels as often as it has to until the picture is large enough. That however produces said rough, pixely edges.

 

[CoolColJ]

Well It still doesn't make sense, and I do dabble in 3D rendering. Low res textures just go blurry when mapped onto a low poly object, but the edges are still crisp. A square remains a square with a low res texture.

Must be a bug with the something in the render pipeline. Maybe they use alpha maps there, which also sounds strange.

 

[shirakawaa]

It still doesn't make sence, the jaggies are larger than the pixels themselves!

It's because in previous games, many details were modeled through artistic texture work in order the reduce the number of polygons to the minimum possible while still looking good. The problem is that old textures have been made at a rather low resolution, which was more than enough and ok for the PS2 era, but are showing all their limits now.

What in GT4/Standard cars looks like a round window for example, might instead actually be a square window (many less polygons) with an overlayed texture having a transparent circular area.

 

[CoolColJ]

It's because in previous games, many details were modeled through artistic texture work in order the reduce the number of polygons to the minimum possible while still looking good. The problem is that old textures were at a fairly low resolution, which was more than enough and ok for the PS2 era, but are showing all their limits now.

What is GT4 looks like a round window for example, might instead actually be a square window (many less polygons) with an overlayed texture having a transparent circular area.

Well the 1280x960 photo mod pics in GT4 aren't exactly low res, more than 720p, and I don't see this stuff. Just so weird

 

[the Interceptor]

Well It still doesn't make sense, and I do dabble in 3D rendering. Low res textures just go blurry when mapped onto a low poly object, but the edges are still crisp. A square remains a square with a low res texture.

That depends on how you stretch the texture onto your object. Example:

My current avatar in its original form:


Upscaled to 400% with good algorithm:


Upscaled to 400% with bad algorithm:


EDIT:

Well the 1280x960 photo mod pics in GT4 aren't exactly low res, more than 720p, and I don't see this stuff. Just so weird

That's because there were a lot of cars (don't know if all) available in a higher-res version for the photomode. The performance of the PS2 just wasn't up to speed to use these models in-game, but for the static images of the photomode, these were perfect. One would think that PD used the latter models to port such cars to GT5, but obviously they didn't, at least not for every car.

 

[Rodpunisher]

The standard cars do look pretty awful. Check out the texture on the back of this Chaparrel, it's a mess.
http://www.gtpla.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/specialstageroute53.jpg

I accepted this sort of laziness from GT PSP, which was basically a long over-due mock-up of GT4 on PSP, using GT4 assets...I did NOT expect it from GT5. Especially considering the reason GT PSP was 5 years late is because they were literally working n GT5 that whole time.
GT5 should've had twice the team members. We'd have a better product, and we would've had it last November.

Compared to MW2 it looks great..lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6Vf6pY9aZ4

 

[shirakawaa]

Well the 1280x960 photo mod pics in GT4 aren't exactly low res, more than 720p, and I don't see this stuff. Just so weird

It's just that you have never really noticed that. Try posting some closeups of GT4 models in the Photo Mode. You will see the same problems.

 

[Rodpunisher]

Standard Zonda looks great

http://www.gtpla.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/specialstageroute521.jpg

More standard cars. These ones look fine for me:

http://www.gtpla.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/autumnringmini1.jpg

http://www.gtpla.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/specialstageroute58.jpg

http://www.gtpla.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/specialstageroute71.jpg

http://www.gtpla.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/specialstageroute512.jpg

 

[CoolColJ]

EDIT:That's because there were a lot of cars (don't know if all) available in a higher-res version for the photomode. The performance of the PS2 just wasn't up to speed to use these models in-game, but for the static images of the photomode, these were perfect. One would think that PD used the latter models to port such cars to GT5, but obviously they didn't, at least not for every car.

The only difference I'm aware of is the wheels in GT4

Anyway this a replay photomode pic from GT4. The arches while not perfectly smooth, aren't mega jaggy . Even the wheels, as low poly as they are,
are still flat on the edges

 

[Lucas]

Pescarolo from GT4 looks better.

*Pescarolo*
*Different Pescarolo*

wtf pd!!!!

If you pay a little more attention to the picture, you will notice they are not the same cars. Just saying, I'm not sure how different must the two cars be in GT4. 👍

CoolColJ, keep in mind the jagginness (sp?) depends on the car. Compare the arches of that Impreza 22B to those of a Skyline GT-R R34. The difference is huge.

 

[P3nT4gR4m]

That depends on how you stretch the texture onto your object. Example:

My current avatar in its original form:


Upscaled to 400% with good algorithm:


Upscaled to 400% with bad algorithm:


EDIT:That's because there were a lot of cars (don't know if all) available in a higher-res version for the photomode. The performance of the PS2 just wasn't up to speed to use these models in-game, but for the static images of the photomode, these were perfect. One would think that PD used the latter models to port such cars to GT5, but obviously they didn't, at least not for every car.

You seem to be missing the point a bit. Perhaps because you don't understand the part played by the 3d mesh in all of this. Low res textures would not affect edge definition in any way shape or form. Pixelation on the wheel arches like the kind in the videos could only be caused by a really terrible 3d engine running at an unbelievably low resolution. By the looks of those videos maybe PS1 or below. Certainly not HD.

 

[the Interceptor]

You seem to be missing the point a bit. Perhaps because you don't understand the part played by the 3d mesh in all of this. Low res textures would not affect edge definition in any way shape or form. Pixelation on the wheel arches like the kind in the videos could only be caused by a really terrible 3d engine running at an unbelievably low resolution. By the looks of those videos maybe PS1 or below. Certainly not HD.

And still, the extreme pixelation on that rear wing does exist. And we know that GT5 is running a hi-res engine. So where does it come from?