Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Gran Turismo 6' started by syntex123, Feb 27, 2015.
What are the last 5%?
Maybe the quality(resolution) of texture?
I think he's talking about the black interior.
Oh yeah, of course.
Well, missing interiors are a lot more than 5%
Just took some convertibles in GT6 to get some interior shots (why did PD remove the glitch from GT6..) and the results I get are quite good, here are some:
Imo I think there is still some potential available in these premium models, just the PS3 not being able to render everything.
The VGT cars need better texture, lighting and shading to be PS4 ready. No mention about the interior. lol
Better lighting? Can you explain what do you mean by that? If you refer to having better reflections and such with the environment, then ok, I get it, but I don't know what you mean by better lighting.
The cars itself already have awesome textures, always talking about being on PS3, but even with that they're damn impressive. I think the models we see during the gallery in the VGT menu are the models with the full amount of polys that PD created them, but that's also the reason why they're only shown in those situations. The game suffers even having to render a single car.
The Lexus is a great example, you can see the car in the pits but the FPS are in the ground. You can clearly see they are doing more that the PS3 can handle, the same goes with the Subaru, the light is gorgeous and the details are great, but the same situation happens there too.
Right now, with the amount of cars they have being Premium models, I believe they can make the jump to PS4 applying those high quality assets they've mentioned and take the time to improve or remodel the tracks, physics and all the features they DESPERATELY need to be a 2015/16 game.
Regarding the standars cars, it's always the same, they have history, I get it, and I love it, but having a car with PS2 graphics it's embarrasing. I don't think that even if they conserve all the cars they do nothing to improve the quality.
But, IF they stick to that idea of having all of them, they will have to make them premium as soon as they can, otherwise, having a Nissan GT-R with a PS2 car it's going to be like playing a game from the 90's....
please tell me youre kidding.
I don't think lighting is a per-car thing. If the reflections and lighting seems off, then the cars have been modelled with surfaces that aren't as reflective, or more reflective than you expect. In other words, it's intentional.
Still. The cars need to be redone and completely beefed up to look modern era on the PS4. Here's an F1LM in Driveclub, shot while on track.
PD can not bring the textures and lighting from GT6 on PS3 to PS4. They need to be reworked entirely.
I agree that the textures and lighting need to be redone.
However I think it's less of job to do that than to remodel a whole complete car. The 3D meshes are there, now it's just add on layers and boom, tasty textures. Or so I think....
The tread looks 2D to me.
the lack of bump mapping makes it appear that way, if it did have a bump map it would appear to clip through the ground.
Thanks for great pics!
Is this Audi logo?!!
Wikipedia said that KTM X-Bow's engine is 2.0 L Audi turbocharged I4.
Lighting is a graphics engine thing, not a 3d model thing. I seriously doubt pd will reuse the engine they used in gt6, and definitely not without making huge improvements to it.
Nop, because I was talking about being on PS3, as I said, "The cars itself already have awesome textures, always talking about being on PS3"
If you compare them directly with a game made from the ground up for PS4, of course, they're going to look horrible, but still, those are pretty good considering the hardware. Besides, we can't see that level of detail while playing because we're racing, BUT, if we zoom in to take a picture it's a great thing to have.
I'm not saying it's not important, because I'm NOT, but there are plenty of games that looks amazing at the distance and when we zoom in to see the details they are a massive let down. That being said, I prefer they save resources to be able to make a better game, with more cars on track, better physics and weather, but if we're going into PH mode, then ok, let's crank up the engine to have even better details, like they're doing in a way right now.
In the other hand, as Pseudopod said, lighting is something that the engine handles, it's not an 3D element per se.
Here are some pics I took, without editing, straight from the game. You can't deny they look awesome but if we are going to PS4, they need to maintain at its minimum that level of fidelity.
He's not saying the modeling isn't bad, the modeling is good for PS3, not quite PS4 ready, but the textures. The blurred and pixelated text, the weird looking tire sidewall, matte rim finish and lug nut.
GT has never really had amazing textures. Sure it may be the PS3's fault, but that quality won't be acceptable in PS4.
Gt are games which come out in their times, you can not really make the comparison since there are no GT's on next gen. If you look back when the premium cars first appeared in GT5Prologue for instance, this game was praised for the absolute crazy realistic looking cars. It still looks amazing today, despite being 7 years old. It was also for me that I saw the incredible leap of the new gen offered by the PS3.
A few seem to be forgetting the thread title.
No one is disputing that in Photomode GT looks great on the PS3, its if they are good enough for the PS4 that is the question.
I'm not really making a comparison that a PS4 game looks better than a PS3 game shockingly, it's that GT has to match Driveclub's Standards on graphical quality when it comes to GT7.
Yes, GT was praised for being astounding on PS3, but saying "these cars are ready for the PS4" may sound like a safe thing to say, but when you look at what is already done on the PS4, you then realize where the bar has truly been set.
About all the older Premium cars need is just a little bit of a smoothing job, to put them up to the level of the Vision GT cars and the newer cars being added along with them.
It's pretty much a no brainer that textures and lighting will improve with the game engine itself, probably even surpassing this arbitrary bar that's apparently already set according to some.
That doesn't really follow logically, no. The lighting engine will automatically improve with a better rendering engine because it would be part of the better rendering engine. As such, the car lighting isn't really that relevant to this discussion in the first place, because it is independent of the actual asset quality.
But there's no more guarantee that Premium cars will automatically improve to PS4 asset quality than there was with the Standard cars automatically improving to PS3 asset quality.
That would only happen with something like displacement mapping, and you'd displace into the tyre to avoid the problem of "clipping" anyway.
"Bump mapping" allows for per-pixel lighting to give the effect of surface variation on what is in fact a large (many pixels) plane surface in hardware, without moving that surface (polygon); that picture epitomises bump mapping, certainly on the sidewall.
PD can use "tessellation" to good effect and brute force a displacement effect, no need for a screen-space method. (assuming PD get scene complexity metering and scaling properly sorted)
Parallax occlusion mapping could work, too, but its uglier than screen-space displacement and keeps the same "flat" geometry like bump mapping does (it's basically bump mapping with screen-space parallax-inferred pixel displacement and occlusion).
Each method has its application.
Unless, in the spirit of "future proofing", the textures used in the PS3 games are downscaled from those actually authored for the Premium cars.
I have no idea what you just said, but I completely agree.
Is your resume up to date?
More tool engineers needed, eh? Interesting. That implies new content production methods, new types of content outright, streamlining of existing production methods, some kind of automation or all of the above.
Had to look up what a technical artist is, though; they basically act as technical advisers to the art team, to inform them of what techniques they can use to achieve certain artistic effects in the game. They are expected to research, prototype and work with the art teams to implement those new techniques, incorporating them into an existing production workflow. They need to iterate technical prototypes with the (graphics / graphics engine) programmers to ensure compatibility with the rendering environment and existing effects, data structures etc.
That would cover testing and choosing which kind of displacement / bump mapping to use for which bits of the scene.
I can see how that's related to the tool programmers, too. It's possible they're trying to set up some automated conversion system to cope with differences in required data formats between the consoles. Tessellation for all cars?
I don't qualify, incidentally.
At which point we can only hope they did a better job of future proofing this time than when the same thing was claimed for the Standard cars in the run up to GT5. Kaz has been a lot more vocal about it this time around, so fingers crossed.
Totally agree with Griffith500 on this one. In truth, the most likely scenario of what is going on here is some sort of semi-interperplactic rendering which is therefore using the mapping scenarios from the previous wireframes to piggyback the dimensions off of, and thus map the wheels correctly in-game. If you look closely at the images posted on page 17, you can see this demonstrated where the surface area of the tyre wireframe meets the universal floor-plane.
It wouldn't surprise me if PD is already implementing the concept of semi-vented interlinings on flat plane four dimensional architecture to their newer models that are the so-called "PS4 ready".
If you're into 3D rendering and modelling, I can recommend a great guidebook written by a good friend of mine, Theo Sturgeon, that goes into great detail on the concepts of interperplactic rendering. It's really at the cutting edge of the stuff here and it's great to see a company like PD actively utilising such techniques to make GT even more realistic!
Yes. But no.
I prefer the cross-plane four myself.
I remember the "future proof" claim in respect of the Standards only in the context of GT4's launch blurb / interviews. I have not been able to find evidence of it after the effect, in any context, however. I am glad you remember it, too, though.
In my mind, it was most likely a reference to GT:HD in its original incarnation; and then PD went and shot themselves in the foot by modeling cars that are "too detailed for PS3".
If all they have to rework for PS4 are the textures (on the Premiums), we're already in a much better situation (than Standards on PS3). I'd be more worried about the older tracks (Seattle being the prominent example) - which may simply be being re-made for PS4, skipping PS3 entirely.
I only remember it because Famine referred to it a few times when people were wondering what the rather oddly worded explanations from the original GT5 Standard car interview might have meant. In that context, though, it seemed an awful lot like the "better than we can do on the PS2" models (or however Kaz worded it) ended up looking identical at best all the way through GT6, even after they went and redid some of them from scratch.
In any case, it's a real shame that Sony so thoroughly gutted the GT website of the interviews and press releases from GT5 and back (I recall it having information going all the way back to GT:HD) when they redid it the whole thing after GT6 was announced, because it makes a lot of fact finding much harder when so many game sites of the time just linked to it for news.
Ah, the "separate" photomode models and the "time trial beauty queens" (e.g. selected convertibles). Wasn't that sort of started with GT2? The cars looked better (wheels, mainly, "reflections" also) in the garage / dealership than on track. I'd love to see those old PS1 assets in a "museum" section of the game, for fun.
"Knowing" Kaz, any comments of improvements for Standards on PS3 (in GT5) were likely to do with shading and lighting, and that's valid - at least, that's how I interpreted the idea of Standards in GT5 way back when (I can understand how people got the "wrong" idea).
Similar changes will make the primary difference for Premiums on PS4, too. Remembering that, with the Premiums, a lot of the texture effects are shader-based, and vice-versa, it's technically, certainly potentially, a different situation (from the plain diffuse texturing for detail on PS2).
I feel like I'm losing my marbles at the lack of evidence for these things I think I seem to remember, didn't realise it was due to the website revamp!
The TT website (huh, so they recycled the background for GT:HD at E3 '06) similarly disappeared off the face of the earth, sometime after GT6 released - you used to be able to view all the bikes in the game on the Japanese site (the other regions went long ago).