...you mean, like Standard cars in GT5? At least be consistent, man. PS2 level graphics in HD "blow" when they're not GT, but when they are, like GT5, they're... what's the word you've used to describe Standards? Beautiful? Stunning?
Maybe you have a cruddy monitor. Most PC games have pretty poor graphics... let me rephrase this a bit to be more clear.
MOST PC GAMES HAVE PRETTY POOR GRAPHICS!
By this I mean they have poor lighting, shadowing and textures. Even the colors look washed out. While GT4 on the lowly PS2 often looks like Speed Channel video, most PC games look like CG unrealities. They aren't pretty in any way, shape or form. They have 2D trees. Garages that look as bad as the poor models joked about from other games. I hope this is clear to you now: MOST PC games. I've only seen videos of iRacing because I'm not rich enough to rent a game to the tune of way more than $100 a year, and pricey DLC on top of that.
Just going by videos on the 'tube of iRacing, their graphics are great. Their lighting/shading/reflection work isn't up to par with GT, I'll definitely say that, but their modelling and realism are great. Their replays are also incredible, the Formula Mazdas looking more than a few times like a TV F1 presentation.
One could ask if you just don't want to give any other series the chance. iRacing is definitely the product of enthusiasts, and even if T10 farms out some modelling (a point you'll make sure to bring up, sometimes even unrelated), they definitely do have an affinity for the "cult of cars". It shows in their car roster.
If you want to pay for my subscription to iRacing, by all means! I'll PM you my Paypal account and I'll jump right in! But I'll warn you that I want all the content too.
See, I own GTR Evo, GTR2, Live For Speed and rFactor, as well as all three Forzas. Games that don't require huge rental fees, except for Live. You probably aren't aware, but I bought them because I wanted to explore those better physics the sims offered when I raced Prologue into the ground. I even bought a $20 copy of Enthusia, although I utterly hated it. If you want to talk about false advertising, just compare the "demo" videos to the game itself. Utter forgery by Konami. Anyway...
The only one I haven't spent any time at all on is rFactor because the game design and user interface is utter crap. I mean, looking for the auto/manual option for almost half an hour is NOT fun. And when I did finally get going, it felt like center-of-gravity pivot physics which made it seem like the world was rotating under my car. I mean,
fake car. LFS felt more real to me anyhow, but they messed up the tire models in their attempt to find the magic formula. Still very good, but having tires quickly turn to butter when you exceed the tire life is a bit grouch inducing. I haven't tried LFS in a while though, so maybe they fixed that. But rFactor and LFS both have fake car lists, and LFS has a wretchedly limited car and track count. Plus LFS is buggy on my PC.
GTR... it was fun for a while. I like the driver views (other than cockpit). There are a decent selection of race cars, though the liveries are mostly bland or ugly. Nice range of tracks. Nice physics, in fact all three have nice physics, though I prefer LFS's. Damage was... mostly mechanical, but okay. But the graphics were ugly. The A.I. in all three games are unimpressive, and I got banged around about as much as in GT. And I
loved how the bot cars in GTR clog chicanes. Not. 👎 And I ended up just using a few cars in GTR, mostly one BMW. It felt cold, sterile and uninvolving. It got old quickly, so I went back to Prologue and GT4. The sun came out, birds sang, and peace and harmony ruled.
Okay, the physics in GT4 are mediocre in comparison, but Prologue is surprisingly close. And even GT4's graphics stomp the PC games. The extortionist iRacing aside. And I think you're familiar with my experience with the Forzas. So, as for not giving other games a chance... sure.
It's only okay to be a fanboy if you're in the GT camp, right?
Works for me.
GT is a product. If I'm paying money, like any other product, I have the right to complain about parts I'm unhappy with. Standard cars aren't annoying to me on their own; I'll use them, no doubt about it. But for them to be the majority portion of a game that'll be released nigh-on 6 years after the last full entry in the series is what bothers me. We could've got them years ago since they're just what PD showed us as GTHD/Vision.
Yes, but the gaming public shot that idea down, and that was the original idea of GT4 HD, not just the "buy everything" iRacing model.
And when people bring up the other aspects of the game, I still feel like it's a cop-out. Am I excited for weather and time of day? Of course! I don't doubt, implemented properly, all the new features of GT5 are going to be incredible. I'm sure I'll enjoy it more than GT4, and play it for years. But the topic is the two-tier system, and it's the giant glaring weakness for GT5, imo. They may have been the standard on PS2, but their wide-spread presence in GT5 just makes it more obvious they are from the old school of modelling cars; they are quite useless going into the future of racing games, at least one where the goal is realism in regards to a damage model (and customization).
I understand, but I have to remind everyone about a minor point.
See, we don't have the game yet. I got a lot of grief from McLaren way back in the day - yes, he's always been like this - because I hadn't played a PC sim game for years since discovering Gran Turismo, other than brief stints in NFS. I got GTR and... well, it wasn't pleasant. I couldn't connect with the cars at all. The driver views were hideous, and the best I could use was a poor chase cam which afforded a rotten view of the road. And so I couldn't take turns properly with the upper class racing cars, meaning nothing but frustration and mediocre finishes in the middle to end of the pack. Lower class racing was much better, but it angered me that a game had to be so frustrating, and so technical that you couldn't fathom all the options, back then anyway. You could even adjust the radiator cap! Mac cut me some slack when I finally got my feet wet and could speak from experience. I think I destroyed that game, as much from the Star Force copy protection issues as the horrible racing.
And this is the thing. We only have a rough idea of what we're getting with those Standard cars. Journalists and interviewers have been quite impressed. Sean Cole says they're about as good as Prologue models in quality. A couple of sources, besides OPM, have said that Standard cars would have cockpits. A couple of video interviews have indicated that all the assets in GT5 would be brought up to the same level of quality. And don't forget, this
could include Standard tracks.
Have any of us seen the finished product? No, and there are two months or so more work going into it.
In one sense, all this caterwauling and complaining can serve to drive (pun pardon
) the Master and his team to improve the content. Oh, did I say Master? I'm going to continue to use that title, because I see nothing comparable to Gran Turismo. Maybe the ridiculously expensive iRacing is, but I have my Paypal PM handy if you want to fund a few years worth of it. I'm sure not going to spend that kind of money, because I sincerely doubt it's hundreds of dollars better than Gran Turismo. And I just can't see it as being as slick, cool and involving. I've already tried - bought and spent time with - other games, and they leave me wanting.
This is how PD gets the car numbers it does. Forza's number might be lower, but it's got just as much variety.
Hmm... I don't agree with this at all. Even if you're limiting yourself to car
classes, any Forza fan will acknowledge that the car list is thick with exotics, supercars and race cars, and DLC the same. Even if you want to joke about 10,000,000 Skylines, WRXs and Evos, Gran Turismo is the only game I can race the MR2 Mk I, 240 SX hatchback and Sileighty. Some prefer the Forza model. I prefer Gran Turismo.
Shouldn't we compare the same cars?
Like this?
You may find this laughable, but I thought the first GT4 pic was from Forza. This just confirms to me that the Standard cars are being unfairly criticized, and even before you've seen them. After all, we aren't going to be playing GT5 on a PS2, last I checked...
Why does the rest of my post give reasons for that?
Of course there aren't technical problems behind this, but artistic and design ones.
Standard cars are rendered by the same engine as the Premiums, but it would be completely ridiculous to drive with a low-poly C5 against a high-poly C6 for example, the difference in the 3D models is huge.
From Dravonic's above pic comparison, I'm not seeing much "hugeness."
Okay, I'm anxious to be racing in GT5 in a few hopefully short months, Standard cars - possibly tracks and all. But even a graphics addict like me wants to race Standards and Premiums together. And snap Photo Mode pics.
It's hard to let it sink, isn't it? Unfortunately that's what they are. No amount of laughs or smileys will change that. And with the car models being the same, there is little difference showing them in GT4's rendering engine or GT5's.
Well, says you. Other's mileage may vary.
My point being, if they are indeed standard model assets in better game engine, they look more than good enough to me. Even if they are standard models in a rendered video where the cars have been key framed, they are still good enough for me. Remember, we are looking at the assets here to see if they stand up to HD. I feel they do.
Seriously, how can you not see the relevance?
There is something know as texture resolution which happens is some PC games and even GOW collection which is basically a PS2 port clearly looks much sharper. Irrespective of 3D models they will be huge bump, they can also use tiling and various other things that expert in PD should be knowing. So I find these PS2, PSP comparison really silly
My thoughts exactly. And hopefully by now, I've made them a little clearer.
