Your thoughts about "standard" vs. "premium"

[gtracedriver]

^^^ thanks for high res pics

 

[Luminis]

Or perhaps MY understanding of a game engine is incorrect. I think I probably need to do more research on what constitutes as a "game engine".

Well, actually, you are not wrong per se, it's just that every game needs a game engine. Those can be developed for a single game and used on only that one, or the engine can be, basically, sold as a 'standalone', so to speak, so that other developers might use it.

But, in general, a game engine is just the 'backbone' of the game, compromised of the different aspects of the game, such as the data management system, input management, physic engine, graphic engine and so on and so forth.

It's more like a car's platform. You might use this platform just for a single car, or it might be shared by a host of different cars.

 

[Akira AC]

Or perhaps MY understanding of a game engine is incorrect. I think I probably need to do more research on what constitutes as a "game engine".

The game engine also includes the developing tools,but the difference between "game engine" and "developers tools" is the scripting,while the game engine can be compress in a single software(the case of a developing tool)it also has to be scripted according to the need of the user(in this case game engine)and that is what makes a "game engine",but in the case of PD they have to make the game engine by themselves,because of the calculations and physics variables they cant use a pre existing base software,so they have to develop this by themselves(or in case improve the GT4 engine which seems to be what they have done so far)so chill out but in case of something:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_engine

although wikipedia is not always so accurate,better someone should fix its content sometimes.

 

[Devedander]

Disagree 👎 Physics engine is really hard to script and a lot of glitches in the engine came come by because of bad compilations of the code,so therefore for a complex game engine there will be always troubles in the code and ,so in that aspect(even if gtracedriver don't know a thing about programming)he is right and you probably would be wrong in that statement.

Ummm... sure a physics engine is complicated and any portion of a game probably undergoes a lot of debugging but unless they have decided to bypass modules there is no reason it would slow down other parts of the game development.

I think you need to go back and get a little context there..

EGO engine does 720p 30fps. All their racing game use it. It was developed of this gen. It took them some years to make it. All are facts!!!

Perfect example of observing and drawing conclusions instead of actually understanding what causes those facts to be true.

BTW comparing game engines by virue of the frame rates they render at and resolution is pretty much useless... it's not an apples to apples comparison.

Also you are taking a game company that has cranked out numerous games in the meantime using that engine... some very advanced games as well.. your argument holds no water based on the few facts you put forth. It's not entirely impossible but you are not offering any solid reasoning why it is how you say and not any number of other reasons.

The reason it takes them time is because they had to incorporate weather in F1, design 18-19 tracks F1 2010 cars. They already have Turkish GP, SPA in grid. New physics engine and support 24 drivers and of course sound and other things.

It's not impossible, but its also not necessarily true. You are darwing conclusions from assumptions here... even if that were the case with that game, it does not in any way back up your previuos claim that the seperate parts are complex and thus cannot be done simultaneously.

Unreal engine has also been constantly updated. Games using that engine take further a year or two using the same engine.

GT on PS3 is brand new engine they developed and also added lots of things like 3D, day/night cycles, variable weather and so on. GT5 supports both 720P,1080P 60fps and 30fps in replays. It takes time 💡

Do you think I and you can make it in a year. I think will can earn millions of $ then Sony will hire us and PD will be sacked

You are getting all wrapped up in broad generalities again.

You realize by now you could have easily posted a few examples and detailed ideas backing your previous claims? Instead you have continued to toss around facts and suggestions none of which clarify or make your original arumgent anymore solid.

I honestly think the problem here is you dont know what you dont know... I know exactly why what you say makes no sense and I am askig you to clarify it knowing you cant... I think you just don't understand enough about what youa re talking about to realize what I am asking of you.

Seriuosly... why would you not be able to work on seperate parts of a game simultaneoulsy.

 

[Akira AC]

Ummm... sure a physics engine is complicated and any portion of a game probably undergoes a lot of debugging but unless they have decided to bypass modules there is no reason it would slow down other parts of the game development.

I think you need to go back and get a little context there..

Sorry didn't read the context,but while is no enough reason to slow down the whole thing,it does takes its time(specially if they integrate weather system)

 

[RedSuinit]

Ummm... sure a physics engine is complicated and any portion of a game probably undergoes a lot of debugging but unless they have decided to bypass modules there is no reason it would slow down other parts of the game development.

I think you need to go back and get a little context there.

So wait, this whole "game engine" thing is on topic because he was saying that the "game engine" prevented other areas of the game from being developed? That means I just posted on the subject I said I wasn't going to post on without even knowing it.

 

[Luminis]

So wait, this whole "game engine" thing is on topic because he was saying that the "game engine" prevented other areas of the game from being developed? That means I just posted on the subject I said I wasn't going to post on without even knowing it.

Yep, that was the whole point of this (somewhat pointless) debate; his opinion that PD had to finsih the 'game engine' first before they could start to work on other parts of the game, such as the content.

But, since everyone kept on telling him that it's not really related in the way he thought, you didn't really post on the topic you didn't want to post on. Or... Something... Kinda...

 

[gtracedriver]

Ummm... sure a physics engine is complicated and any portion of a game probably undergoes a lot of debugging but unless they have decided to bypass modules there is no reason it would slow down other parts of the game development.

I think you need to go back and get a little context there..



Perfect example of observing and drawing conclusions instead of actually understanding what causes those facts to be true.

BTW comparing game engines by virue of the frame rates they render at and resolution is pretty much useless... it's not an apples to apples comparison.

Also you are taking a game company that has cranked out numerous games in the meantime using that engine... some very advanced games as well.. your argument holds no water based on the few facts you put forth. It's not entirely impossible but you are not offering any solid reasoning why it is how you say and not any number of other reasons.



It's not impossible, but its also not necessarily true. You are darwing conclusions from assumptions here... even if that were the case with that game, it does not in any way back up your previuos claim that the seperate parts are complex and thus cannot be done simultaneously.



You are getting all wrapped up in broad generalities again.

You realize by now you could have easily posted a few examples and detailed ideas backing your previous claims? Instead you have continued to toss around facts and suggestions none of which clarify or make your original arumgent anymore solid.

I honestly think the problem here is you dont know what you dont know... I know exactly why what you say makes no sense and I am askig you to clarify it knowing you cant... I think you just don't understand enough about what youa re talking about to realize what I am asking of you.

Seriuosly... why would you not be able to work on seperate parts of a game simultaneoulsy.

You can work on 3d models, cars and so on ... but there is a limit. Example GT5 can hold a max of 16 cars beyond that their engine cannot handle it. So they have to keep in mind if they model say every high poly cars and all amazing environments GT5 engine will give problems like running at low frames or the game will crash or something.

How can I give you precise answer, may be I can but why should I try to prove it

But whatever I have posted are not my own claims. Lots of things are internet so you can search it if you want to know or read in some magazines and books and see what exactly are the reasons from the developers themselves.

 

[Luminis]

You can work on 3d models, cars and so on ... but there is a limit. Example GT5 can hold a max of 16 cars beyond that their engine cannot handle it. So they have to keep in mind if they model say every high poly cars and all amazing environments GT5 engine will give problems like running at low frames or the game will crash or something.

You know, that's part of the design process. Getting the parts of the game to match each other.

You still don't have to finish one of the assets to work on the other.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I'll take this time to point out that I'm very curious how the game won't be a model of slow-down and frame-rate stuttering: GT5P's cars are apparently half the poly count, and having four nearby on track when I'm driving shows some noticeable lag.

 

[ZoidFile]

I'll take this time to point out that I'm very curious how the game won't be a model of slow-down and frame-rate stuttering: GT5P's cars are apparently half the poly count, and having four nearby on track when I'm driving shows some noticeable lag.

I think this is one reason for using the rolling-start principle. With a rolling start, you will not see too much vehicles with full LOD at once. Note, that the vehicles roll behind each other and not side by side. Also some of the GT5 tracks seem to be even more lowpoly than the ones from Prologue, especially Le Sarth, Tuscany and the Dunsfold Aerodrome. Maybe they decided to cut down the track details for a larger racing-grid.

 

[Devedander]

Sorry didn't read the context,but while is no enough reason to slow down the whole thing,it does takes its time(specially if they integrate weather system)

The context was some mess of techie terms supposedly explaining why you can't work on multiple parts of the game simultaneously because it gets complicated and such situations...

You can work on 3d models, cars and so on ... but there is a limit. Example GT5 can hold a max of 16 cars beyond that their engine cannot handle it. So they have to keep in mind if they model say every high poly cars and all amazing environments GT5 engine will give problems like running at low frames or the game will crash or something.

Um yeah... probably or something... this is precisely the kind of thing that betrays where you are coming from.

The very problem you address doesn't support your claim at all that one can't be worked on while the other gets worked on. This same issue is part of the dev process of any game... and it doesn't stop any of them from having concurrent development.

Again you don't really understand what you are talking about which is making you come to conclusions which, in your limited understanding, make sense but really dont'.

How can I give you precise answer, may be I can but why should I try to prove it

Well... because you can't... what you said makes no sense and you have spent pages dancing around it trying to get away from giving any specific examples other than saying "well that game took a long time and it doesn't perform up to the specs of what Gt5 will". The problem of coures being that what you claim it proves is only one of many possible reasons why the facts you list occured and isn't even a likely one considering those who actually understand the process also understand why it's not an issue.

Why should you explain it? Because you keep trying to purport things to be true in a debate and you are being asked to back your arguments... that's pretty much the only reason. And it's pretty much the entire reason to even be posting here.

But whatever I have posted are not my own claims. Lots of things are internet so you can search it if you want to know or read in some magazines and books and see what exactly are the reasons from the developers themselves.

Ummm I have spent years doing just that.. in fact I have also spent years programming and learning about the process of creating programs/games...

And all that understanding has lead me to realize you are not making any sense.

And what you have posted are not your claims? You claimed them... you posted them... are you saying somewhere else you just took someone elses post about multipel things not being possible to work on simultaneously? If so please link.

I do not have to do research to back up your claim (which i happen to know is at the very best highly unlikely).

So yeah... I think it's pretty obviuos here... you got caught blatently spewing stuff you totally dont understand and you are trying to back peddle.

I really don't undersatnd why people have to do stuff like this... what does pretending you know something you don't on the internet get you? It just screws up the conversations people with legitimate points have.

Oh and for the record, I believe it's technically against the AUP to post things lies or things that are untrue... I would think a large part of the reasoning behind that is to prevent people from jumping in and saying a bunch of stuff that's not true and just stirring up trouble.

 

[II IVORBIGUN II]

Ummm I have spent years doing just that.. in fact I have also spent years programming and learning about the process of creating programs/games...

Considering your vast experience and knowledge maybe you should contact PD and ask them for a job. With your expert skills we might end up with more than 200 premium cars.

 

[Dapper]

https://www.gtplanet.net/gt5s-head-tracking-underwhelming-but-damage-looking-beautiful/

Some cockpit mention in there...

 

[Lil Ape]

https://www.gtplanet.net/gt5s-head-tracking-underwhelming-but-damage-looking-beautiful/

Some cockpit mention in there...

"Face-tracking using the PS Eye works on the 200 cars with cockpits"
WTF!

 

[Organ-Donor]

I'll take this time to point out that I'm very curious how the game won't be a model of slow-down and frame-rate stuttering: GT5P's cars are apparently half the poly count, and having four nearby on track when I'm driving shows some noticeable lag.

Weird, I play GT5P in 16 car grids, and very seldom do I encounter any frame rate problems. Games like GTA4 framerate drops happen all the time, and almost seems as if the game is being played with a strobe light it gets so bogged down. But as far as GT5P, if it does occur it is highly unnoticeable.

 

[Tenacious D]

I'll take this time to point out that I'm very curious how the game won't be a model of slow-down and frame-rate stuttering: GT5P's cars are apparently half the poly count, and having four nearby on track when I'm driving shows some noticeable lag.

I'm curious too, though not because of game lag, which I've never experienced in Prologue. Replays are another matter.

Kaz said a year or so ago that he's trying to get more than 16 cars on track at once, and I'm pretty sure that means Premium cars. Standard cars... who knows how many can be on track at once? I'm thinking that since the heavy lifting will be calculating the physics of those cars rather than graphics as well, that 24 Standard car races should be doable. Or... dare I say it, 32?? I don't know if that prospect excites anyone, but it works for me.

I'll be the first to agree that GT has been an AMAZING series so far. But that still doesn't mean they should get away with murder.

Someone is taking this topic WAY too seriously.

 

[Tornado]

Those screens were released in 1920x1080 shortly after. 100% pure GT4 models. Nothing more.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but that Miata wasn't in GT4.

 

[chepu]

Face-tracking using the PS Eye works on the 200 cars with cockpits and lets you look around...

*Waits patiently for people saying that it doesnt clears anything and that standard cars dont have interior view, cockpit view, BUT THEY HAVE DASH VIEWWW HURRRRR....

 

[Organ-Donor]

Face-tracking using the PS Eye works on the 200 cars with cockpits and lets you look around...

*Waits patiently for people saying that it doesnt clears anything and that standard cars dont have interior view, cockpit view, BUT THEY HAVE DASH VIEWWW HURRRRR....

It doesn't clear anything up that standard cars don't have interior view
(Read above quote for context of response)

 

[Talon]

^^ Exactly, they didn't say standard cars don't have dash view. There's still hope!

 

[kingcars]

Whoa man, murder is a bit strong. Lazily recycling last-gen assets to hit the all-important bragging right numbers is probably more acceptable .

Someone is taking this topic WAY too seriously.

Hmmm I guess the sarcasm didn't come across too well...not to mention that it's a figure of speech, not meant to be taken literally

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I'm curious too, though not because of game lag, which I've never experienced in Prologue. Replays are another matter.

Kaz said a year or so ago that he's trying to get more than 16 cars on track at once, and I'm pretty sure that means Premium cars. Standard cars... who knows how many can be on track at once? I'm thinking that since the heavy lifting will be calculating the physics of those cars rather than graphics as well, that 24 Standard car races should be doable. Or... dare I say it, 32?? I don't know if that prospect excites anyone, but it works for me.

The easiest way for me to recreate it is to take a tuned car to HSR with a 16-car grid. Hit the beginning of the S turn and there's usually a bunched up group of AI and you can see some noticeable framerate issues. It's minimal and not enough to ruin a lap (not nearly as bad as GTA), but it's definitely there.

See, I think that could do a bit to easing this whole Standard thing.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but that Miata wasn't in GT4.

PD released a small disc when the NC was released that had it and a track or two (I believe no more than a handful, anyways). So it technically is a GT4 era car, I guess. Odd that they didn't throw it into PSP though.

Hmmm I guess the sarcasm didn't come across too well...not to mention that it's a figure of speech, not meant to be taken literally

Hey man, I know. I just like my wording better .

 

[gtracedriver]

The context was some mess of techie terms supposedly explaining why you can't work on multiple parts of the game simultaneously because it gets complicated and such situations...



Um yeah... probably or something... this is precisely the kind of thing that betrays where you are coming from.

The very problem you address doesn't support your claim at all that one can't be worked on while the other gets worked on. This same issue is part of the dev process of any game... and it doesn't stop any of them from having concurrent development.

Again you don't really understand what you are talking about which is making you come to conclusions which, in your limited understanding, make sense but really dont'.



Well... because you can't... what you said makes no sense and you have spent pages dancing around it trying to get away from giving any specific examples other than saying "well that game took a long time and it doesn't perform up to the specs of what Gt5 will". The problem of coures being that what you claim it proves is only one of many possible reasons why the facts you list occured and isn't even a likely one considering those who actually understand the process also understand why it's not an issue.

Why should you explain it? Because you keep trying to purport things to be true in a debate and you are being asked to back your arguments... that's pretty much the only reason. And it's pretty much the entire reason to even be posting here.



Ummm I have spent years doing just that.. in fact I have also spent years programming and learning about the process of creating programs/games...

And all that understanding has lead me to realize you are not making any sense.

And what you have posted are not your claims? You claimed them... you posted them... are you saying somewhere else you just took someone elses post about multipel things not being possible to work on simultaneously? If so please link.

I do not have to do research to back up your claim (which i happen to know is at the very best highly unlikely).

So yeah... I think it's pretty obviuos here... you got caught blatently spewing stuff you totally dont understand and you are trying to back peddle.

I really don't undersatnd why people have to do stuff like this... what does pretending you know something you don't on the internet get you? It just screws up the conversations people with legitimate points have.

Oh and for the record, I believe it's technically against the AUP to post things lies or things that are untrue... I would think a large part of the reasoning behind that is to prevent people from jumping in and saying a bunch of stuff that's not true and just stirring up trouble.

I have given all valid reasons. You are just denial.

There is no lies in my post. I have read lots of article regarding such thing and can understand how difficult it is to do something like this. The fact of the matter is, it is guys like you who do not known and understand it. The attention to detail they put in GT5 and to get everything working is very difficult. 5yrs 200 cars or 40cars/year is definitely a horrible stats. But there is so much into it, I guess you will never understand that.

 

[RedSuinit]

I have given all valid reasons. You are just denial.

There is no lies in my post. I have read lots of article regarding such thing and can understand how difficult it is to do something like this. The fact of the matter is, it is guys like you who do not known and understand it. The attention to detail they put in GT5 and to get everything working is very difficult. 5yrs 200 cars or 40cars/year is definitely a horrible stats. But there is so much into it, I guess you will never understand that.

He understands just fine. His posts wreak of intellect, even if there are times when he is stubborn and won't admit the possibility of him being wrong. However in this case, he isn't. He and I don't see eye to eye, but in this instance, I'm with him.

However I think I am with him for a different reason. Your primary language is clearly not english, and I think there is a rather large amount of information that you THINK you are giving, but since your primary language is not english you don't understand that you really aren't presenting your thoughts well. To those of us whose first language is english, your arguments are broken, and aren't explained very well. Whilst you may indeed know what you are talking about, you aren't doing a very good job of representing yourself, which isn't really your fault. To me it seems like there is a very large language barrier issue. Dev has a hard time understanding you, and you are also clearly having a hard time understanding the real questions and issues behind his posts.

 

[DingoDile]

^^ Exactly, they didn't say standard cars don't have dash view. There's still hope!

they said from last year but we don`t like to accept it

 

[II IVORBIGUN II]

He understands just fine. His posts wreak of intellect, even if there are times when he is stubborn and won't admit the possibility of him being wrong. However in this case, he isn't. He and I don't see eye to eye, but in this instance, I'm with him.

However I think I am with him for a different reason. Your primary language is clearly not english, and I think there is a rather large amount of information that you THINK you are giving, but since your primary language is not english you don't understand that you really aren't presenting your thoughts well. To those of us whose first language is english, your arguments are broken, and aren't explained very well. Whilst you may indeed know what you are talking about, you aren't doing a very good job of representing yourself, which isn't really your fault. To me it seems like there is a very large language barrier issue. Dev has a hard time understanding you, and you are also clearly having a hard time understanding the real questions and issues behind his posts.

I think some are misreading what he is trying to say. What gtracedriver is saying is GT5 has taken longer to develop than say GT2,3,4 because they threw away the old code and wanted to develop from scratch. The only other GT game that has taken this long is GT1 because again this had to be developed from scratch. Now Kaz has stated that GT6 won't take aslong as GT5 because it will use the assets from GT5, whether these assets can be called a game engine I don't know.

No doubt though that some are so arrogant on this thread that they believe they know more than Kazunori.

 

[Luminis]

they said from last year but we don`t like to accept it

Did they? If so, I must've completely missed it when they talked about standard cars and their cockpits a year ago.

Anyways, this 'worst case coming true' feeling is getting more and more nagging...

I've got to admit, I'm kinda worried about what that trend forebodes for the features we have only heard about, but not seen yet... Read, track editor, customisation, weather.

No doubt though that some are so arrogant on this thread that they believe they know more than Kazunori.

How could someone dare to criticise him?! Kazunori's always making the right decisions! Always!

Well, personally, I assume he's a human being and, thus, could make a mistake once in a while, but what do I know...

 

[II IVORBIGUN II]

How could someone dare to criticise him?! Kazunori's always making the right decisions! Always!

Well, personally, I assume he's a human being and, thus, could make a mistake once in a while, but what do I know...

Im not saying he doesn't make mistakes but merely suggesting that when it comes to developing a racing game he knows what hes doing.

 

[Luminis]

Im not saying he doesn't make mistakes but merely suggesting that when it comes to developing a racing game he knows what hes doing.

I was just being sarcastic... At times, I just get the feeling that that's the general aproach some people are taking towards all things PD/GT/Kaz. Not saying that you are one of them, though.

But, yeah, my reaction was probably unwarrented. So I guess I owe you an apology