Your thoughts about "standard" vs. "premium"

[Tenacious D]

T10 seemed to do exactly that with the showroom car models.

So, I take it you either just admire the Forza 3 models in the showroom/garage and squint at the in-game and replay graphics so you can't see the flaws, or they're so bad you could never race them?

(me, paraphrase) Outsourcing is always more expensive than doing it yourself.

Actually usually it's the exact opposite... the very point of outsourcing is that even after said other company takes some profit, they are focusing on this type of business exclusively and probably in volume so can still do it cheaper than you could. It's the very essence of the outsource market and why things like temp agencies, per diem companies and contract jobs exist.

I have personally seen many outsourcing operations where it cost the company far less to pay someone else to do it than to hire their own.

Dev, Dev, Dev... as usual, you are so... you.

I suppose in dealing with you, I need to think like a politician dealing with a reporter who can go where I'd never dream of taking things. So, backing up a bit, I'll explain why this has no bearing.

Yes, outsourcing in general can be much more cost effective, but this is in the context of physical labor and manufacturing of physical goods and products. The reason temp secretaries are cheaper is because you're paying them less than an established employee who will get benefits and raises - and the temp company will take some of this money on top of that. And the savings for a company are even greater vs union labor which these days in many cases is increasingly overpaid. In the case of autoworkers, teachers and the like, pensions are becoming a killer burden.

In manufacturing, it's the same but different. Subcontracting companies offering manufactured components for larger assemblies make huge volumes of products, as they sell these items to many different companies.

Now with computer modeling companies, as far as I know, there is no cottage industry of home businesses of geeky 20-somethings straight out of college cranking out fenders, windshields, brake assemblies or even entire car models for any racing game company to buy. While I have thought of such notions for things like war games, where a developer would love to have a ton of environmental assets available such as interior items for abandoned houses, damaged windows, doors and walls and what not, I'm unaware of any such deal.

From everything I can see, every company has a modeling team which does all the creating of game assets. Unless the game gets bogged down in production issues, and in order to keep content up, they hire out, and from my knowledge of the biz, even with bidding to keep costs from exploding, they have to pay a pretty penny for premium content.

There is a huge difference between a company that cranks out 100 million 9mm nuts and bolts, and a modeling company that does one time custom work. Of course, you would ignore that for the sake of argument, wouldn't you.

You certainly thought it through, but did you just think it or do you know it? Because it seems a lot of the things you think are only possibly true and not backed up by any actual data.

I'll see you and raise you ten.

Like i said before, outsourcing does not mean it's a bad model.

For those of us who have had to deal with Turn 10's games through three iterations, in their case, it sure the heck can...

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.

I used to think this, until it occurred to me how Polyphony operates. A few of us have discussed this before.

PD is much like a family, or even a ninja clan. The employees are fiercely loyal to Kaz. Because of this, they put out pretty close to 110% vs what other companies get. Heck, from what I understand, Kaz had a small hotel built into Polyphony HQ for his people, so they could take a real break from work from time to time, rather than crawl under their desks to cots. While everyone doesn't live there, it does seem a good deal of them do.

Because of this, quality of work puts most other developers to shame, and security is as tight as a high tech intelligence bureau. As far as I know, other than one slip by a head of SCEA over the karts, there have been zero leaks. And of course, this wasn't from Polyphony itself.

We all want a nice big modeling team working on GT6, and I've urged all of you Standard car naysayers to make a fuss to SONY to fund Polyphony enough to perhaps even double the modeling team. But these new hires in PD are apparently going to be very carefully screened for not just quality of work but company loyalty. And I want this tradition of complete loyalty to continue, so not any degreed modeling artist will do.

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

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

Just to ping off of this post, M$ is in a completely different position, because they don't actually make anything. Their product is software, the result of hoards of people typing on computers all day.

SONY however, has to manufacture stuff. And if they were rolling in cash, they wouldn't have had to sell off assets, such as blue laser manufacturing plants to Toshiba, or buy their HDTV display screens from Samsung.

How can an opinion be definitive?

I guess I should have put that in quotes. Think... countless remarks by Dan Greenawalt from last year.

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'?

I respect Amar's opinions and all of his contributions to this board (and the GT community online, in general), but Standards are always going to be about opinions. There are a few images of them out there that look really good (Tomcat's work with the Evo III in the full game video/images thread, or his GNX). Then there are ones like the Pescarolo that are hovering around, that look like garbage. There are obviously different levels of quality under the Standard umbrella.

I don't remember anything in Prologue looking like that.

So in one sentence, you can differ on how Standards look, then in another, you throw the whole thing out the window.

How about, "The Pescarolo looks like garbage... to me."

Maybe I should paraphrase analog on this: Don't apply your views to everyone.

Frankly, I'm about to watch that Le Sarthe Standard car race yet again, and if you guys think it looks hellacious and wouldn't want to participate in it because you might see a polygon on a car or a sawtoothed shadow... wow, you guys can have that!

You guys play GT5 however the heck you want. But as for me, I'm gonna enjoy the hell out of 1000 some odd cars!

(Oh, about the "monopoly" comment: I misread your original post. I took it as you saying the only difference between Sony and Microsoft is that one is a monopoly that needs our money (whereas the other doesn't). While it's best left to another thread, and not this one, it's odd how anti-MS you are when Apple is hardly a good example of market-friendly fair play).

Well, you'll have to educate me on how Apple is attempting to invade numerous markets with the intent of hostile absorption. Sorry, I'm not up on that.

1280x1080.

Well, that's the internal resolution of Prologue. I'm not sure that GT5's resolution has been established. But even if it still is at 1280 horizontal, I'm fine with that. Prologue looks photo-real in most cases to me, and there are plenty of stories of people who walked in on it and thought they were seeing racing film from The Speed Channel. I'm unaware of any 360 game which is 1080p internal, and in fact, some games aren't even 720p, such as Halo 3.

When we all get our hands on GT5, I do expect a few people to come in here and make "Oh GAWD!" posts. But while they're complaining, I'll be racking up experience and shooting pics.

And by the way, Scottracer's pic is in Photomode, which has extra effects applied which aren't in-game. The Cooper pic with the faceted headlights is actually in-game. Since M$ signed me up for another year of their flocking Live without my permission, I might pop off an actual LOD bot car image. It makes the Cooper pic look like a centerfold.

 

[Scotracer]

I'm unaware of any 360 game which is 1080p internal, and in fact, some games aren't even 720p, such as Halo 3.

And by the way, Scottracer's pic is in Photomode, which has extra effects applied which aren't in-game. The Cooper pic with the faceted headlights is actually in-game.

From here:

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1113344&postcount=3

There's two full retail titles and a few XBLA games that are native 1080p.

And no it's not in-game. That's a replay with the camera focused on an AI car far from the player's car so the LOD is low. I've put over 80 hours in to Forza 3 and I can assure you it doesn't look like that.

What about in moving replay's? In game to him I think he means real time or real world, not photo mode.

I don't really know what you mean. Forza 3, in real time, does not look like that Mini picture posted above. The same way the BMW 1 series in real time GT5P doesn't look like that. It's a stupid picture made to make GT5 look like gods gift to gamers when in factuality, in real-time, there's not a huge difference in terms of modelling or textures between GT5P/5 and Forza 3. I've owned both.

Both the Forza 3 and GT5 use the same system of running super-duper models in their photo modes and replays but in gameplay tone them down to solidify frame-rates.

 

[Devedander]

Well, that's the internal resolution of Prologue. I'm not sure that GT5's resolution has been established. But even if it still is at 1280 horizontal, I'm fine with that. Prologue looks photo-real in most cases to me, and there are plenty of stories of people who walked in on it and thought they were seeing racing film from The Speed Channel. I'm unaware of any 360 game which is 1080p internal, and in fact, some games aren't even 720p, such as Halo 3.

Ironically while a lot of games are not even 720 now, they tend to be lower native resolution on the PS3 than the 360... RDR is a recent example, but there have been many...

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=247104

So, I take it you either just admire the Forza 3 models in the showroom/garage and squint at the in-game and replay graphics so you can't see the flaws, or they're so bad you could never race them?

So are you intentionally dodging or did you not read your own quote? You were inferring it's not possible to do... where the models were used ultimately has nothing to do with whether it is possible or not... speaking of politicians, you are good at changing the subject when you are wrong.

Now with computer modeling companies, as far as I know, there is no cottage industry of home businesses of geeky 20-somethings straight out of college cranking out fenders, windshields, brake assemblies or even entire car models for any racing game company to buy. While I have thought of such notions for things like war games, where a developer would love to have a ton of environmental assets available such as interior items for abandoned houses, damaged windows, doors and walls and what not, I'm unaware of any such deal.

There is quite the industry... it's called developing nations. Remember outsourcing isn't limited to your own country, outsourcing can be financially beneficial if you do it to a country that can pay lower wages for any number of reasons. You listed unions and benefits... the same cost level of cost cutting can be achieved simply by hiring in countries where standard of living and average wage is lower.

You are making up arguments that could be, but then not running them through much of a self challenge before posting them.

From everything I can see, every company has a modeling team which does all the creating of game assets. Unless the game gets bogged down in production issues, and in order to keep content up, they hire out, and from my knowledge of the biz, even with bidding to keep costs from exploding, they have to pay a pretty penny for premium content.

There are benefits to an in house team also. It's a balancing act that a good manager can pull off. It's one you can see from T10 in Forza if you actually focus on the metrics of creating models and not the metric of game design choice and where to use what level of detail.

But in house isn't a perfect affair either...

Look at the right exhaust on this r8

 

[WolfRacer543]

I wasn't talking specifically about Forza's graphics... I was talking more about how they create the 3D models for the cars.



Unfortunatly its not quite that simple. CAD files cannot easily be translated into low-ish polly meshes that aren't horribly inefficient. You end up with a very high polly mesh which is pretty much the same as what you end up with when you laser scan a car.. And as you know its ALLOT harder to make a polly mesh less complex than it is to make it more complex (meshsmoothing etc) so the car surfacing technique seems to be the optimal technique for creating cars.. you get pollys exactly where they should be IRL, you end up with a mesh that isn't ridiculously dense but also retains good efficiency and at if the mesh you create is too "low-poly" you just whack a mesh-smooth iteration on it and bam you have a damn fine looking car model. I have done a bit of that type of surfacing in my past as well as laser scanning and I have always found it allot easier with the manual points model.

If you really want to cover both bases.. Laser scan the car at the same time!

I'm not sure what meshes are required for 3D modelling, but I can throw anywhere from a few thousand to about a million triangular polygons on a CAD model of a car in, ooh, about 5 minutes. It'll be optimised around curvatures to avoid any "blockiness", so sharp curving sections will be made from several hundred polygons while large flat sections will be made up of only a handful of elements. That's just using an automatic mesh generator, hence why it'll only take about 5 minutes (2 of those minutes are taken up opening the program and importing the CAD geometry ). With a day to burn it wouldn't be hard to get a pretty good quality polygon mesh over a model.

Of course that's assuming a triangular mesh is suitable for a game I dont mesh cars for the sake of making 3D models, I mesh them to analyse their structure or fluid flows around them. So no idea if that's what you need.

If you want to make a fully structured quad surface mesh that'll take a bit longer, you're basically having to manually define each point anyway. Whether you get those points off a laser scanned CAD model or from bits of tape on a car shouldn't make a huge difference. You're just getting X, Y, Z points either way.

 

[gtracedriver]

From here:

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1113344&postcount=3

There's two full retail titles and a few XBLA games that are native 1080p.

And no it's not in-game. That's a replay with the camera focused on an AI car far from the player's car so the LOD is low. I've put over 80 hours in to Forza 3 and I can assure you it doesn't look like that.

I don't really know what you mean. Forza 3, in real time, does not look like that Mini picture posted above. The same way the BMW 1 series in real time GT5P doesn't look like that. It's a stupid picture made to make GT5 look like gods gift to gamers when in factuality, in real-time, there's not a huge differen ce in terms of modelling or textures between GT5P/5 and Forza 3. I've owned both.

Both the Forza 3 and GT5 use the same system of running super-duper models in their photo modes and replays but in gameplay tone them down to solidify frame-rates.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZOW9ttdsL8

Also Forza3 looks like Forza2 at times lol Replay and race is same on GT5P

 

[SlipZtrEm]

For those of us who have had to deal with Turn 10's games through three iterations, in their case, it sure the heck can...

You don't need to outsource to have a bad model. Working in-house doesn't guarantee a good one.

So in one sentence, you can differ on how Standards look, then in another, you throw the whole thing out the window.

How about, "The Pescarolo looks like garbage... to me."

Maybe I should paraphrase analog on this: Don't apply your views to everyone.

Frankly, I'm about to watch that Le Sarthe Standard car race yet again, and if you guys think it looks hellacious and wouldn't want to participate in it because you might see a polygon on a car or a sawtoothed shadow... wow, you guys can have that!

You guys play GT5 however the heck you want. But as for me, I'm gonna enjoy the hell out of 1000 some odd cars!

Okay, maybe "garbage" wasn't the best term. How about "lower-quality than any other current-gen racing game"?

Your stance doesn't have much of a pair of legs to stand on past utter favourtism if you can sit here and complain about low-LoD bot cars when something like this (the player's own car, in replay mode) is so poorly-handled and gets your seal of approval. This isn't about whether or not people will consider Standards "good enough"; you've made it pretty apparent that some people will accept nearly anything. My point has always been that the level of detail, both polygon-wise and texture-wise, is well below the standard set in 2010. That Pesky shot really drives the point home. Can GT5's astounding lighting engine make up for that in motion, from far away? Oh, absolutely; it's a pretty obvious statement that from far enough away, the differences between Standards and Premiums become non-existent. But I've seen enough close-up images of both FM3 cars, and GT5 Premiums, to say that the paper-thin, super-pixeled wing supports of that LMP are yes, garbage, to me. Though really, I want to see someone honestly state that that looks good to them.

I've seen some pretty darn good Standard shots (the Evo III at SSR7, the GNX in the dirt [particle pixelization aside, the car looks great]), so I'll admit that in some cases, Standards are looking pretty good (though their lacking in the feature department is something more serious, to me). So, in some cases, I've been wrong about Standards (and in others, right).

You? Dev brings up a good point; you like hopping from one subject to the other. I wonder why that is.

 

[Luminis]

Also Forza3 looks like Forza2 at times lol Replay and race is same on GT5P

Which is exactly the same with Gran Turismo 5. It looks like Gran Turismo 4 at times (thanks to the standard cars). So, what's with the high horse? And those huge pictures?

 

[LaBounti]

And no it's not in-game. That's a replay with the camera focused on an AI car far from the player's car so the LOD is low. I've put over 80 hours in to Forza 3 and I can assure you it doesn't look like that.



I don't really know what you mean. Forza 3, in real time, does not look like that Mini picture posted above. The same way the BMW 1 series in real time GT5P doesn't look like that. It's a stupid picture made to make GT5 look like gods gift to gamers when in factuality, in real-time, there's not a huge difference in terms of modelling or textures between GT5P/5 and Forza 3. I've owned both.

Both the Forza 3 and GT5 use the same system of running super-duper models in their photo modes and replays but in gameplay tone them down to solidify frame-rates.

Forza does not use the high detail models in Replays or in gameplay. I've pointed out many times the F40 has a 2D engine in replays and missing interior detail In game it uses the same model from Forza 2. Same with FM3 models the 599 FX has a 2d checkered board mesh in replays, switch to photomode the grill is made of polygons or is a high res normal map because it shines.

Do I have to make a video of the F40 for you to believe me? The F40 has a flat 2d texture for its engine in replays. In GT5P the F40 is the same inside and out in replays including full 3d engine. GT5P has no photo mode.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Which is exactly the same with Gran Turismo 5. It looks like Gran Turismo 4 at times (thanks to the standard cars). So, what's with the high horse? And those huge pictures?

I should add; apologies for the one huge GT5 image. I didn't want to resize as the pixelization would be lost. Perhaps I should switch that to a link...

Forza does not use the high detail models in Replays or in gameplay. I've pointed out many times the F40 has a 2D engine in replays and missing interior detail In game it uses the same model from Forza 2. Same with FM3 models the 599 FX has a 2d checkered board mesh in replays, switch to photomode the grill is made of polygons or is a high res normal map because it shines.

Do I have to make a video of the F40 for you to believe me? The F40 has a flat 2d texture for its engine in replays. In GT5P the F40 is the same inside and out in replays including full 3d engine. GT5P has no photo mode.

LaBounti's right; GT5 seems to use the highest LoD (the Photomode model) in-race, at least for the player car. Closer inspection will probably give us all a better idea of how the different LoD's are determined, but for now, if I ran a Time Trial of a car in GT5, it'd look just as it would when I switch over to Photomode. I definitely prefer this course of action 👍

 

[Scotracer]

Forza does not use the high detail models in Replays or in gameplay. I've pointed out many times the F40 has a 2D engine in replays and missing interior detail In game it uses the same model from Forza 2. Same with FM3 models the 599 FX has a 2d checkered board mesh in replays, switch to photomode the grill is made of polygons or is a high res normal map because it shines.

Do I have to make a video of the F40 for you to believe me? The F40 has a flat 2d texture for its engine in replays. In GT5P the F40 is the same inside and out in replays including full 3d engine. GT5P has no photo mode.

Okay I stand corrected but please look at the photo-travel/official picture releases of the 1950s/60s racers and then the comparison with in-game pictures and the engine model was far less detailed. I'll see if I can dig it up.

 

[LaBounti]

I'm more concerned with moving pictures The F40 is my favorite Ferrari of all time so I pay much attention to its details.

 

[Flatspotter]

Look at the right exhaust on this r8

Just FYI that's from damage earlier on in the race where the rear brushed along the wall and bent the exhaust...

 

[VXR]

T10 were not given enough time to optimise FM3 after finishing FM2 and having another game out before the end of 2009.

If T10 manage to include a new lighting engine, optimise the engine to show equal LoD across the 8 cars, keep 60fps and add in the weather that they've toyed with conceptually, what will people have to diss about its graphics then?

Why not just embrace them both? I've been in awe of GT5 screens this weekend, trying to make a silk purse from the sow's ear that is NFSHP's often shoddy landscapes and just fired up FM3 for a bit and if people think FM3 looks bad in-game, don't dare touch NFSHP!

@flatspotter? Bent it through the bumper, with no visible exit wound? Yeah, sure...

 

[homerjfong]

@flatspotter? Bent it through the bumper, with no visible exit wound? Yeah, sure...

well i don't know if the car actually got damaged or not, but pd did not model it like that

maybe you should stop judging things without facts..

 

[airjoca]

Check this video. 1080p 60fps standards LMP at La Sarthe.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=SN37ZWU0

If you pause at 0:05 in this video, you get this:

Standards do look bad...

 

[Metfanant]

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.

Bahahaha! Do you honestly think a game can sell as many copies as Grab Turismo games do without casual gamers making up the vast majority of them?

 

[VXR]

So they might not have modeled it like that prior to damage, but that is a glitch, regardless.

 

[Tenacious D]

Ironically while a lot of games are not even 720 now, they tend to be lower native resolution on the PS3 than the 360... RDR is a recent example, but there have been many...

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=247104

Who is this "they" you spend no time at all finding?? Jeepers, and you say I make unsubstantiated claims?

I have to do all the work around here. Now I did manage to find some tidbits netyonder, but you guys might be surprised how many flagship games for the 360 aren't exactly HD quality. I picked a few examples out which I was pretty sure weren't old games 2008 or earlier, because back then, not too many games were decent resolution.

360

Alan Wake = 960x544 (4xAA) - As per gamefest presentation
Call of Duty: Black Ops = 1040x608 (2xAA)
Darksiders = 1152x648 (no AA)
Final Fantasy XIII = 1024x576 (2xAA)
Halo 3 = 1152x640 (no AA)
Marvel: Ultimate Alliance = 1280x720 (2xAA)
MK vs DC = 1040x624 (2xAA)
Ninja Gaiden 2 = 1120x584 (2xAA)
Prototype = 1120x640 (2xAA)
Sacred 2: Fallen Angel = 1920x1080 for any HD output (including PC res), 1280x960 for 4:3 output, 1376x768 for 480p widescreen (no AA)
Sonic Unleashed = 880x720 (2xAA)
Tomb Raider: Underworld = 1024x576 (2xAA) - depth buffer is 1040x576
Virtua Fighter 5 (demo) = 1024x1024 (4xAA)


PS3

Call of Duty 4 = 1024x600 (2x AA)
Jericho (demo) = 996x560 (2x AA)
Marvel: Ultimate Alliance (screenshot) = 1920x1080 (no AA)
Metal Gear Online = 1024x768 (2xAA, temporal)
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriot = 1024x768 (2xAA, temporal)
MK vs DC = 1024x576 (QAA)
Sacred 2: Fallen Angel = 1280x720 when sub-HD output selected, 1920x1080 for any HD output (no AA)
Silent Hill: Homecoming = 1024x576 (no AA)
Sonic Unleashed = 880x720 (blur filter)
Virtua Fighter 5 (screenshot) = 1024x1024 (no AA) , 1024x768 en mode 1080p

I'm not sure why fighting games prefer lower resolutions. Maybe so more alternate frames can be loaded at once, for punch actions or something. I highlighted Sacred 2 for the heck of it, because I'd expect a non-intensive RPG to have a higher definition. Maybe that's why FFXII is so low, or because it had to be multiplat, but I doubt we'll ever know on that.

And then there's this:

GT5 Prologue (demo) = 1080p mode is 1280x1080 (2xAA) in-game while the garage/pit/showrooms are 1920x1080 with no AA.

So, Dev, if showroom resolution is what really matters to you, maybe I have a bone to toss you.

But what really surprised me was this:

XBLA

1942: Joint Strike = 1280x720 (4xAA)
After Burner Climax = 1280x720 (4xAA)
Battlefield 1943 = 1280x720 (no AA)
Bionic Commando: Rearmed = 1280x720 (no AA)
Boogie Bunnies = 1920x1080 (4xAA)
Call of Duty: Classic = 1280x720 (4xAA)
Commando 3 = 1280x720 (4xAA)
Dead Rising 2: Case Zero = 1280x720 (2xAA)
Hydrophobia = 960x672 (2xAA)
Ikaruga = 540x720 (4xAA, centered on 1280x720 frame)
Invincible Tiger = 1280x720 (4xAA, classic mode), 640x720 or 1280x360 (S3D mode), see here for more.
Lara Croft and The Guardian of Light = 1024x576 (2xAA)
Rez HD = 1280x720 (4xAA)
Serious Sam HD = 1120x630 (blur filter)
Splosion Man = 1280x720 (2xAA)
TMNT: TiT Re-shelled = 1280x720 (no AA)
Trials HD = 1280x680 (no AA, black borders)
Wolf of the Battlefield: Commando 3 = 1280x720 (4xAA)


PSN GAMES

1942: Joint Strike = 1280x720 (4xAA) or 1920x1080 (2xAA)
Blast Factor = 1920x1080 (no AA)
Bionic Commando: Rearmed = 1280x720 (no AA)
Calling All Cars (screenshot) = 1920x1080 (4x AA)
Commando 3 = 1280x720 (4xAA) or 1920x1080 (2xAA)
Echochrome = 1920x1080 (2xAA)
Elefunk = 1920x1080 (4xAA)
Forbidden Siren = 1024x512 (4xAA)
Go Puzzle = 1920x1080
GTHD = 1440x1080 (no AA) - Vehicle selection is rendered at 1920x1080
High Velocity Bowling = 1920x1080 (no AA)
Locoroco Cocoreccho = 1920x1080 (2x AA)
Mainichi Issyo = 1440x1080 (4xAA)
Pixel Junk Monsters/Racers/Eden = 1920x1080
Rocketmen = 1920x1080 (2xAA)
Rub'a'dub = 1600x1080 (no AA)
Snakeball = 1280x1080 (no AA)
Stardust HD = 1280x1080 (no AA)
Sudoku = 1920x1080
Super Rub-a-Dub = 1600x1080
Tekken 5 Dark Ressurection (screenshot) = 1920x1080 (no AA), not always?
Warhawk = 1280x720 (4xAA)
Wipeout HD = dynamic-framerate-dependent 1080p framebuffer (1280x1080 to 1920x1080)
Wolf of the Battlefield: Commando 3 = 1920x1080 (2xAA)

(me) So, I take it you either just admire the Forza 3 models in the showroom/garage and squint at the in-game and replay graphics so you can't see the flaws, or they're so bad you could never race them?

So are you intentionally dodging or did you not read your own quote? You were inferring it's not possible to do... where the models were used ultimately has nothing to do with whether it is possible or not... speaking of politicians, you are good at changing the subject when you are wrong.

Okay, so now what am I dodging, and what am I wrong about?

Let's just do some step-retracing, shall we??

Well, if they just farmed out the work on the standard cars (which would mean it would take even less time to make them than it took to upscale the GT4 versions), we might have ended with 500 standard cars that are actually on the same level as the current standard in the inddustry and with, say, partially modelles interior.

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.

T10 seemed to do exactly that with the showroom car models.

So, I take it you either just admire the Forza 3 models in the showroom/garage and squint at the in-game and replay graphics so you can't see the flaws, or they're so bad you could never race them?

Just so I have this straight, it's perfectly fine for T10 to farm out work to Cambodia or whatever, and it doesn't matter what issues the cars have, as long as they look impeccable in the showroom?

Dude, you can win that argument as long as you like. 👍

There is quite the industry... it's called developing nations. Remember outsourcing isn't limited to your own country, outsourcing can be financially beneficial if you do it to a country that can pay lower wages for any number of reasons. You listed unions and benefits... the same cost level of cost cutting can be achieved simply by hiring in countries where standard of living and average wage is lower.

You are making up arguments that could be, but then not running them through much of a self challenge before posting them.

Oh no, pants on fire, Dev. I've addressed this a number of times. See above for the latest restatement of my opinion on the matter.

You don't need to outsource to have a bad model. Working in-house doesn't guarantee a good one.

I think even Turn 10 would agree with that.

Okay, maybe "garbage" wasn't the best term. How about "lower-quality than any other current-gen racing game"?

(post stretching piccie snip)

Your stance doesn't have much of a pair of legs to stand on past utter favourtism if you can sit here and complain about low-LoD bot cars when something like this (the player's own car, in replay mode) is so poorly-handled and gets your seal of approval. This isn't about whether or not people will consider Standards "good enough"; you've made it pretty apparent that some people will accept nearly anything. My point has always been that the level of detail, both polygon-wise and texture-wise, is well below the standard set in 2010. That Pesky shot really drives the point home. Can GT5's astounding lighting engine make up for that in motion, from far away? Oh, absolutely; it's a pretty obvious statement that from far enough away, the differences between Standards and Premiums become non-existent. But I've seen enough close-up images of both FM3 cars, and GT5 Premiums, to say that the paper-thin, super-pixeled wing supports of that LMP are yes, garbage, to me. Though really, I want to see someone honestly state that that looks good to them.

I've seen some pretty darn good Standard shots (the Evo III at SSR7, the GNX in the dirt [particle pixelization aside, the car looks great]), so I'll admit that in some cases, Standards are looking pretty good (though their lacking in the feature department is something more serious, to me). So, in some cases, I've been wrong about Standards (and in others, right).

You? Dev brings up a good point; you like hopping from one subject to the other. I wonder why that is.

I'll address this whole thing below.

Which is exactly the same with Gran Turismo 5. It looks like Gran Turismo 4 at times (thanks to the standard cars). So, what's with the high horse? And those huge pictures?

Is this hyperbole? Exaggeration? Flat out lying, Slip?

I get it dude. You hate (at least some of) the Standards (quantity unknown but likely substantial), and anyone that goes along with that reasoning is A-OK with you, no matter how flawed the logic, or completely lacking thereof. Anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot. Heck, you even make up points I haven't said. I know where we sit in your food chain, believe me.

Now of course, you can cringe every time you think you might want to drive a Standard car, never touch them, or heck, decide one day they're not bad at all. I don't care. But if you host a race and decide to boot me just because I have a Standard car, I think one of us would be lacking in maturity.

Sorry, am I putting actions in your mouth? My mistake.

Anyhow, I have a story to get back to. Chow, y'all.

 

[Tornado]

I'm pretty sure Deve was referring to multiplatform titles being lower res/lower detail on the PS3 than 360.

 

[VXR]

If they look good in the showroom on this game, in the next one they could well look that good whilst racing, with enough effort spent on it.

Like PD, they have future-proofed their models, although in the two-year timeframe, they've only been able to do that for the next game, not the next game on the next console as PD have.

 

[sumbrownkid]

Standards do look bad...

So you're gonna lose sleep over this also?

Standards look fine from a distance.

It's when you get all Sherlock Holmes over it is when any game loses its fun.

 

[Spagetti69]

What would you call an acceptable distance^

If PD didn't want you going Sherlock Holme on it. Why put dandelions in?

 

[sumbrownkid]

What would you call an acceptable distance^

Obviously not.

It's like looking at a hot girl's face for pores you know?

And I don't really notice the dandelions. But kudos to PD for putting them in there I guess.

 

[Spagetti69]

I don't look at the face.

 

[sumbrownkid]

I don't look at the face.

Touche...

 

[Rodpunisher]

Standards do look bad...

Some look bad... some don't... but showing pics of good looking standard cars won't let people complain about it... and that's not the point of this thread

Lambo Countach

FTO

RUF yellow bird

 

[MidianGTX]

There are definitely some standards that haven't been cleaned up to quite the same uh... standard... as others. I'm not gonna worry about it, the majority of my cars will be premium and I still consider the others a bonus. If they look jagged on track I'll just think of it as a nod to the GT games of the past. It's all about the bigger experience to me, amazing graphics all round would be lovely, but there's so much more to Gran Turismo.

 

[JDMKING13]

There are definitely some standards that haven't been cleaned up to quite the same uh... standard... as others. I'm not gonna worry about it, the majority of my cars will be premium and I still consider the others a bonus. If they look jagged on track I'll just think of it as a nod to the GT games of the past. It's all about the bigger experience to me, amazing graphics all round would be lovely, but there's so much more to Gran Turismo.

Yes sir nice post. 👍

 

[TorqueHappenS08]

A pink LFA.. That black countach is sex, so is the ZR1,Yellow bird and all the other "better" looking standards, That is so weird, Some standards look eons better compared to others. Seriously starting to think PD targeted some standard cars to Look way better then the others.

 

[TT3AZ]

I really like the standard ones, mainly because there are 800 of them, and im not really fond of the premium list either, many of my favorite cars are missing. Thank god that all my favorites are in game in some form.