Hah... okay. I've only echoed what developers such as Cliff Bleszinski have echoed about game development.
I'm even less impressed with your alleged secondhand knowledge on the intricacies of overall game development than I am with your alleged secondhand knowledge of the inner workings of Turn 10 from 2011 to 2013.
Game development is a fight between what you want to do and what you have time to do.
Good thing I never said otherwise, and bad thing that you brought up things that barely (and rarely) factor in to
feature inclusion and development; which is what the thread is about.
Hence:
I love all of the things in your list that have nothing to do with the game's lighting engine being what it is.
They were busy working on the largest amount of cars ever in a launch title.
The hint is that they, meaning the car modelers, had nothing to do with the creation of the lighting engine; so you bringing up how many cars Turn 10 made in a thread criticizing the lighting engine for FM5 is irrelevant.
They were busy creating the most tracks ever in a launch title with the first ever laser-scanned Nurburgring.
The hint is that they, meaning the track modelers, had nothing to do with the creation of the lighting engine; so you bringing up how many tracks Turn 10 made in a thread criticizing the lighting engine for FM5 is irrelevant.
And even ignoring the meaningless buzzword that "laser scanning" has become in the past few years, it would be the first ever
promoted laser-scanned Nurburgring; assuming the
oft-
rumored factoid that PD uses proprietary (and potentially outdated) laser scanning equipment ever since the BMW Virtual Drive demo of 2004 is true.
They were busy rebuilding the sound engine for a launch title on new hardware with a brand new dedicated audio chip called SHAPE.
The hint is that they, meaning the people mixing/producing the sound recordings and/or the sound engine (since there is probably a lot of overlap in that particular field since sound engineering can be such a broad net), had nothing to do with the creation of the lighting engine; so you bringing it up in a thread criticizing the lighting engine for FM5 is irrelevant.
Thanks for proving my point.
Your point was/is evidently that the Forza 5 lighting engine is the way it is because of development challenges making the title and getting it out to the launch of the Xbone. That point has no problem on its surface, and the way you've described it is perfectly believable without deep scrutiny that no one here has the ability to really provide. The problem is that you bolstered it with things that are completely irrelevant to the topic of the quality of the Forza 5 lighting engine, then doubled down on those things that were completely irrelevant to the Forza 5 lighting engine by claiming it all fell under the nebulous concept of "game development", and have now posted a third time (with a followup edit of your first post) with the implication that those things that are completely irrelevant to the quality of the Forza 5 lighting engine are still relevant to the quality of the Forza 5 lighting engine because.
Hence:
I love all of the things in your list that have nothing to do with the game's lighting engine being what it is.
Now, if you're going to go off the handle and take that to mean that
I just don't know anything about "game development," that's really your problem. I mean, we can look at your edits:
(The lighting team had to work in sub-surfacing scattering for every car and built the lighting engine for the vehicles.)
That's not how game engines work. They don't create new lighting engines for each individual car, and any visible errors would be attempted to be corrected by the modeling team before the programmers got involved.
(The lighting team had to integrate the new lighting engine into every track.)
That's not how game engines work. They don't create new lighting engines for each individual track (even the tracks in GT5 ported from earlier titles that had static lighting still used the same process for displaying shadows and light sources as the tracks with active time change built specifically for GT5; just with the light being at a fixed location), and any visible errors would be attempted to be corrected by the modeling team before the programmers got involved.
But I'd say it's pretty self-evident:
This isn't a fanboy check list
That it became one when you started throwing out things that Forza 5 did that had nothing to do with the thing being discussed.