Getting tired of the 2D Scenery...

[Samus]

For those of you saying Deep Forest is horrible for photomode, just lower the speed setting on the camera. The background is blurred, see? Problem solved. If you need a pic with better trees/better scenery in the background but with a faster camera speed, there are tracks that have this, or the photo vacation area.

That doesn't solve the problem for racing though does it? You really can't fail to notice the flat tree walls all the way around.

 

[JediRage]

@those who say the PS4 will give PD the chance to do everything right.
Really? They'll just waste all the processing resources on modeling cars to the very extreme like they did with GT5. They will end up modeling the wires and rods inside the body of the car that no one will ever see and waste I dont know how much percentage of the video memory.

They have lost the forest for the trees. Project management is about distributing resources. Just because the PS3 has limited video memory does not mean that assigning disproportionate amounts of memory to the cars and surroundings is a logical choice. If you have limited resources, make it so that the components have a comparable amount of memory assigned so that the whole things looks cohesive.

I agree that the surroundings look drab, especially Autumn Ring, yuck. I bought the GT5 and PS3 hype, never again. Also it seems Sony agents are out in force starting to hype up the PS4. Seems like its just around the corner.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

If you read Digitial Foundry's technical analysis of GT5 then you would know they concluded:

"Gran Turismo 5 is in many ways a remarkable technical achievement over and above the range of cool little features Polyphony has implemented. In terms of the basic graphical make-up of the game, the level of detail Polyphony Digital crams into a 60Hz refresh effortlessly seems to exceed the quality of many, if not most, of the 30FPS racers out there."

Or how about IQ Gamer (a site specialising in the image quality of games stated) who stated:

"What is impressive, is that PD have managed to get GT5 running at a mostly stable 60fps across both display modes whilst pushing around a large amount of alpha on screen, along with several highly complex, high poly car models. The use of a full 720p FB with MSAA, and 1080p with QAA plus TAA at 60fps is surely pushing the RSX and PS3’s pixel fill-rate through the roof. So, seeing such consistent levels of performance is a real testament to PD’s coding team and the engine they’ve managed to create in working within such tight constraints."

But forget expert analyses, apparently you know best, with your vast experience of game development on the PS3....

+1

This is what impressed me the most. I have said it many times on here that PD are pushing the boundaries the most compared to any other game I've seen on the PS3. I'm amazed how they are getting the cars to run so well and even if they released the game on 360, the car in-game will look just as good. Most of the wow factor in GT is due to the highly talented developers at PD. Didn't Kaz say the coding staff were crying the fact they had to do everything at 1080p at close to 60FPS.

 

[Samus]

People need to stop quoting 1080p, the game is not 1080p. It's 1280x1080 upscaled to 1080p.

@those who say the PS4 will give PD the chance to do everything right.
Really? They'll just waste all the processing resources on modeling cars to the very extreme like they did with GT5. They will end up modeling the wires and rods inside the body of the car that no one will ever see and waste I dont know how much percentage of the video memory.

They have lost the forest for the trees. Project management is about distributing resources. Just because the PS3 has limited video memory does not mean that assigning disproportionate amounts of memory to the cars and surroundings is a logical choice. If you have limited resources, make it so that the components have a comparable amount of memory assigned so that the whole things looks cohesive.

I agree that the surroundings look drab, especially Autumn Ring, yuck. I bought the GT5 and PS3 hype, never again. Also it seems Sony agents are out in force starting to hype up the PS4. Seems like its just around the corner.

Exactly. The cars in Forza 3 might not look at good as the premium cars in GT5 but at least everything is balanced in that game, the cars and the tracks are all comparable. In GT5 it seems all they focused on was making sure the cars looked great and neglected the rest. I can't feel immersed or feel like I'm playing a photo reaslistic game if the photo realistic cars are tearing through tracks that don't look much better than PS2.

 

[maxpontiac]

Thats just an ignorant response; dont take me too seriously. Their props are almost inexcusable. This isn't the 90s any more, they have planes made into cross sections with an opacity map and a color map. It is literally 2 double sided polygons for most trees and plants, and spectators are all 1 polygon.

I for one don't take you seriously because you act like you are one of the only ones who can offer a "expert" opinion on this issue. Plus, I am sure you and the topic creator could have found a thread with this very issue.👎

 

[Blitz187]

On Cape Ring when I am doing GT Academy, everytime I am coming around the last turn before the straight I have a perfect view straight ahead of the mountains and the trees and see a bunch of not so cleverly stacked 2d trees plaguing the countryside...I feel like they could have at least placed these 2d trees to look a little more authentic.

Never noticed this and again.... Are you that fast and good that you can look around at scenery while racing at full speed? Not having a dig at you here.... but if a person is in a heated battle online with someone that person wont be checking out the splendid 2D trees alongside the track... Atleast I know I wouldnt be... Is it really THAT big of an issue that youre caught looking at trees more than the track?

 

[dzidza]

People need to stop quoting 1080p, the game is not 1080p. It's 1280x1080 upscaled to 1080p.



Exactly. The cars in Forza 3 might not look at good as the premium cars in GT5 but at least everything is balanced in that game, the cars and the tracks are all comparable. In GT5 it seems all they focused on was making sure the cars looked great and neglected the rest. I can't feel immersed or feel like I'm playing a photo reaslistic game if the photo realistic cars are tearing through tracks that don't look much better than PS2.

Then why are you still playing it, play more balanced game, GT5 is hurting you. I just don't get you. Other game is better for you, and you don't play it, but rather you play GT5

 

[G.T.Ace]

People need to stop quoting 1080p, the game is not 1080p. It's 1280x1080 upscaled to 1080p.

1280x1080 is still "1080p", it's just not "real FullHD".
And even 1280x1080 is still a huge improvement over 720p.
Actually, a lot of games, especially multiplatform games, don't even have 1280x720, but are upscaled from a much lower resolution (very noticable most of the time).

 

[Saidur_Ali]

@those who say the PS4 will give PD the chance to do everything right.
Really? They'll just waste all the processing resources on modeling cars to the very extreme like they did with GT5. They will end up modeling the wires and rods inside the body of the car that no one will ever see and waste I dont know how much percentage of the video memory.

They have lost the forest for the trees. Project management is about distributing resources. Just because the PS3 has limited video memory does not mean that assigning disproportionate amounts of memory to the cars and surroundings is a logical choice. If you have limited resources, make it so that the components have a comparable amount of memory assigned so that the whole things looks cohesive.

I agree that the surroundings look drab, especially Autumn Ring, yuck. I bought the GT5 and PS3 hype, never again. Also it seems Sony agents are out in force starting to hype up the PS4. Seems like its just around the corner.

The premium cars are the ones they will use in PS4. Also PD are the best when it comes to optimization and distributing resources on the PS3 IMO. PS4 will be at at a minimum 10 times more powerful than the PS3, and expect PD to be finally at a level playing field as most game developers will be pushing for 60FPS and 1080p.

People need to stop quoting 1080p, the game is not 1080p. It's 1280x1080 upscaled to 1080p.



Exactly. The cars in Forza 3 might not look at good as the premium cars in GT5 but at least everything is balanced in that game, the cars and the tracks are all comparable. In GT5 it seems all they focused on was making sure the cars looked great and neglected the rest. I can't feel immersed or feel like I'm playing a photo reaslistic game if the photo realistic cars are tearing through tracks that don't look much better than PS2.

I personally think GT5 did a lot better job than Forza 3. The cars in GT5 look a lot better in-game than Forza 3 which uses a low detail model in races and the environments look more like reality in GT5. For example check the real life tracks such as the Nurburgring GP track on both games and then compare them to real life.

 

[DanDiplo]

People need to stop quoting 1080p, the game is not 1080p. It's 1280x1080 upscaled to 1080p.

You clearly don't understand what 1080p is. A definition:

"1080p is the shorthand identification for a set of HDTV video modes that are characterised by 1,080 lines of vertical resolution (1,080 horizontal scan lines)[1] and progressive scan (meaning the image is not interlaced, unlike the 1080i display standard)."

Note that it doesn't state the horizontal resolution. This is usually implied by the aspect ratio (so an a 16:9 wide-screen TV you would expect this to be 1920 pixels), but it doesn't have to be.

So GT5 is running at 1080p, but it is also upscaled a little on most HD TVs because of the 16:9 aspect ratio.

 

[GT Motion]

One thing that really gets me irritated is these people saying its a great achievement for getting such things out of a PS3, when the game itself does not run to its full potential because the PS3 is not powerful enough.

GT5 was supposed to be released soon after PS3 launch, it was delayed for years and Kaz knew that the game was going to be built for the PS3 yet his team developed a game that outperforms the PS3 capabilities so we are stuck with things like 2d trees, pixelated shadows and smoke, standard cars.

I mean, I really think they could have given us a better PS3 version of GT5, since this will be the only GT title the PS3 will see besides prologue.

So pretty much PS3 just got a version of GT5 that is handicapped because the system can't handle the graphic load. I really wish they would have focused on making a game that would run properly on the PS3, rather than max out the PS3's graphics on the cars and put everything else to complete rubbish.

 

[Big Ron]

If you read Digitial Foundry's technical analysis of GT5 then you would know they concluded:

"Gran Turismo 5 is in many ways a remarkable technical achievement over and above the range of cool little features Polyphony has implemented. In terms of the basic graphical make-up of the game, the level of detail Polyphony Digital crams into a 60Hz refresh effortlessly seems to exceed the quality of many, if not most, of the 30FPS racers out there."

Or how about IQ Gamer (a site specialising in the image quality of games stated) who stated:

"What is impressive, is that PD have managed to get GT5 running at a mostly stable 60fps across both display modes whilst pushing around a large amount of alpha on screen, along with several highly complex, high poly car models. The use of a full 720p FB with MSAA, and 1080p with QAA plus TAA at 60fps is surely pushing the RSX and PS3’s pixel fill-rate through the roof. So, seeing such consistent levels of performance is a real testament to PD’s coding team and the engine they’ve managed to create in working within such tight constraints."

But forget expert analyses, apparently you know best, with your vast experience of game development on the PS3....

+1

That, what nobody cares about. But that´s the really impressive job PD did.

The graphic whores just see textures, polygons and 2d trees, but not how much technical power works inside the GT5 engine.

 

[Samus]

Then why are you still playing it, play more balanced game, GT5 is hurting you. I just don't get you. Other game is better for you, and you don't play it, but rather you play GT5

Why does this argument/retort always come up? Just because there are aspects I don't like or things I can still enjoy the game. I don't play Forza 3 anymore because I completed it and it's now old, I can still comment that it was more balanced than GT5.

1280x1080 is still "1080p", it's just not "real FullHD".
And even 1280x1080 is still a huge improvement over 720p.
Actually, a lot of games, especially multiplatform games, don't even have 1280x720, but are upscaled from a much lower resolution (very noticable most of the time).

1280x1080 is not 1080p. 1080p is 1920 x 1080 progressive scan. It's not like Full HD and HD ready that are ambiguous, 1080p is what it is. 1280x1080 isn't it.

Secondly 1280x1080 isn't a massive difference over 720p at 1280x720, it's just 360 extra lines.

 

[GT Motion]

+1

That, what nobody cares about. But that´s the really impressive job PD did.

The graphic whores just see textures, polygons and 2d trees, but not how much technical power works inside the GT5 engine.

I understand the achievement, but what good is smoke and rain effects if they look like complete **** because they cant run properly on the PS3 hardware. PD knew the game was going to be made for the PS3 yet they still made a game that the PS3 couldn't handle. i.e. Shadows, smoke, water, dirt etc

 

[BigYoSpeck]

It's funny when people say PD could have done a lot better. I'm suprised how much they could push the PS3 to do, more so than any other game on the console. PD programming ingenuity has overcome many of the limitations, see how they got tyre smoke and weather effects running at such a high frame rate. Look at GT PSP also as an example. PD got things as close to right as possible, the only thing I think they should of done is dumb down the shadows to have a higher frame rate and also get rid of the complaints of them being jagged. They didn't because they tried to push the boundaries as much as possible and technically it is impressive.

Personally I'd say Uncharted 2 takes the crown as the best visuals of this generation. Yes it's 720p and yes it's a 30fps game but it's jaw dropping.

Technically the engine in GT5 may be very impressive, I mean those shadows are a result of a very sophisticated dynamic lighting system. But the result is not. In the first GT one of the major steps up from other PS1 games was the reflective cars. Those reflections weren't real reflections, they were a clever use of a systems limited resources to give an effect. PD seem to have abandoned that intelligent way of thinking and instead now approach anything that it has to be done for real even if the end result is not effective.

 

[G.T.Ace]

Secondly 1280x1080 isn't a massive difference over 720p at 1280x720, it's just 360 extra lines.

The difference is huge, here, just because I have the feeling you can't imagine it:

White shows 1280x720, black 1280x1080 (already a LOT more information) and grey 1920x1080 or what 1280x1080 would be upscaled like in GT5.

 

[4743hudsonj]

Heres an interesting thing. GT HD had a smaller track and no other cars to hadle etc, but look at the difference. Open them all up in tabs and flick between them. The difference is massive.

GT HD:
http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/0/4/5/7/0/1080p_GT.jpg.jpg

GT5 Prologue:
http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/0/4/5/7/0/New_Prologue_003.jpg.jpg

GT5:
http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/0/4/5/7/0/1080p_GT5.jpg.jpg


I understand why the game doesnt look like HD did but its still how the game should have looked!

 

[Saidur_Ali]

I understand the achievement, but what good is smoke and rain effects if they look like complete **** because they cant run properly on the PS3 hardware. PD knew the game was going to be made for the PS3 yet they still made a game that the PS3 couldn't handle. i.e. Shadows, smoke, water, dirt etc

Well the other option is not having them at all. I think they run very well personally on the PS3 hardware.

Personally I'd say Uncharted 2 takes the crown as the best visuals of this generation. Yes it's 720p and yes it's a 30fps game but it's jaw dropping.

Technically the engine in GT5 may be very impressive, I mean those shadows are a result of a very sophisticated dynamic lighting system. But the result is not. In the first GT one of the major steps up from other PS1 games was the reflective cars. Those reflections weren't real reflections, they were a clever use of a systems limited resources to give an effect. PD seem to have abandoned that intelligent way of thinking and instead now approach anything that it has to be done for real even if the end result is not effective.

GT5 for me takes the crown technically. Obviously Uncharted look better in visuals as it runs at 30FPS at 720p. If it didn't then you have to seriously question the development team.

PD are thinking very intelligently and pushing a system with 256 system ram and 256mb GPU ram to run a game at 1080p at 60FPS and 16 highly detailed cars in motion, with many effects.

 

[GT Motion]

Since this conversation has turned into pretty much a graphical letdown/achievement debate, does anyone know if the shadow issue can be fixed? Can they tweak the graphic settings in an update to make them run properly or are we just screwed forever?

 

[Saidur_Ali]

Since this conversation has turned into pretty much a graphical letdown/achievement debate, does anyone know if the shadow issue can be fixed? Can they tweak the graphic settings in an update to make them run properly or are we just screwed forever?

They will have to have a Eureka moment to do it and think they are working on achieving just that. The only other option they have if they don't discover how to make it better is to dumb down the shadows.

 

[GT Motion]

They will have to have a Eureka moment to do it and think they are working on achieving just that. The only other option they have if they don't discover how to make it better is to dumb down the shadows.

I wouldn't mind having them dumbed down if it meant they wouldn't look like living moving black blobs

 

[Parnelli Bone]

That doesn't solve the problem for racing though does it? You really can't fail to notice the flat tree walls all the way around.

I've noticed them, sure. And I thought "that looks crappy, but oh well...off to the races". :shrugs: Didn't bother me at all!

I understand the achievement, but what good is smoke and rain effects if they look like complete **** because they cant run properly on the PS3 hardware. PD knew the game was going to be made for the PS3 yet they still made a game that the PS3 couldn't handle. i.e. Shadows, smoke, water, dirt etc

Personally, I'd rather have them in the game looking a little substandard at times, than not have these effects in the game. I'll agree with you about the rain looking weird, but I love the smoke effects. 👍

 

[ESCUDO 1800hp]

You lost me here. What does RE4, where you walk around (maybe run occasionally) have to do with GT5, which has us flying thru hairpins and bouncing over rumble strips? Explain, sir.

Capcom basically did the impossible with RE4. Very weak console (Gamecube) and a true visual masterpiece. Best of the decade. Gameplay is irrelevant to the programming ingenuity (which hey, it got better reviews than GT5 across the ENTIRE board).

I guess you would like Crysis graphics and Super Mario Kart physics. I guess you bought the wrong game 👎

Hardware lesson: Physics rely on the CPU. Graphics rely on the GPU. The PS3's GPU/Memory is at question here, not the CPU. The PS3's CPU is extremely powerful and isn't holding the game back in any way.

But forget expert analyses, apparently you know best, with your vast experience of game development on the PS3....

Oh the irony. I worked on many games for the PS1 and PS2 (the implementation side, not drawing or storyline), but none for the PS3 (I left the field). However, I still have a better understanding of game development for the PS3 than those "expert" reviewers.

 

[Big Ron]

Hardware lesson: Physics rely on the CPU. Graphics rely on the GPU. The PS3's GPU/Memory is at question here, not the CPU. The PS3's CPU is extremely powerful and isn't holding the game back in any way.

PS3-lessons for you: because most parts of the PS3 games are calculated with the processor and less things with graphics card (because of the low memory), you cannot calculate every visual thing with the graphics card and it obly has the task to support the CPU, but the CPU itself takes much of this stuff.

 

[dzidza]

PS3-lessons for you: because most parts of the PS3 games are calculated with the processor and less things with graphics card (because of the low memory), you cannot calculate every visual thing with the graphics card and it obly has the task to support the CPU, but the CPU itself takes much of this stuff.

👍, saved me a comment

 

[ESCUDO 1800hp]

PS3-lessons for you: because most parts of the PS3 games are calculated with the processor and less things with graphics card (because of the low memory), you cannot calculate every visual thing with the graphics card and it obly has the task to support the CPU, but the CPU itself takes much of this stuff.

Actually, yes, nearly every visual thing is calculated with the GPU doing the great majority (80%+) of the processing. The only exception I can think of is special effects.

Textures: GPU
Shaders: GPU
Shadows/Lighting: GPU

Physics: CPU, important but not visual
Effects (smoke, ect.): CPU

 

[BTBAM]

The lake in Trial Mountain looks so bad that it's not even funny.

 

[BigYoSpeck]

PD are thinking very intelligently and pushing a system with 256 system ram and 256mb GPU ram to run a game at 1080p at 60FPS and 16 highly detailed cars in motion, with many effects.

They were fixated on 1080p in a game that is showing the system is struggling to keep up with their desired visuals.

They went with 16 insanely detailed cars on track in a game that is struggling to keep up with the visual demands, in a game where track detail is criticized and where the AI is criticized.

They went for the dynamic lighting and day/night transitions at the cost of the worse shadows I've seen in a PS3 game. Technical achievement on one hand but it's what it looks like that matters. GT5 may not have had the visual feature but it looked good.

They didn't use intelligent solutions to achieve an effect, they went for a technically impressive way of doing something on a system not up to the task of fulfilling it while maintaining a high level of visual quality.

In the 4 years of development since GT:HD they only made slight visual improvements, and a whole chunk of technically impressive additions that in many ways compromised the visuals to the point that a lot of people consider GT:HD to actually look better on the whole.

 

[Big Ron]

Actually, yes, nearly every visual thing is calculated with the GPU doing the great majority (80%+) of the processing. The only exception I can think of is special effects.

Textures: GPU
Shaders: GPU
Shadows/Lighting: GPU

Physics: CPU, important but not visual
Effects (smoke, ect.): CPU

Take Uncharted 2 as example. Do you think, those visuals are only calculated with 256 mb gpu memory? On my old computer, my 256mb graphics card wasn´t able to play NASCAR RACING SEASON 2003 on full settings...and that game was an visual average.

It was often noticed, that developers do most stuff with the CELL-cpu and the gpu- unit is just a supporter.

 

[Griffith500]

They will have to have a Eureka moment to do it and think they are working on achieving just that. The only other option they have if they don't discover how to make it better is to dumb down the shadows.

We're basically in the realms of original research there, I think. Cue keynote speech and Gran Turismo 5 (patched) footage at the next SIGGRAPH event...

----------------

GT:HD looks "better" in 1080p simply because its framebuffer is 1920 x 1080. We should compare it in 720p, that's where image quality and effects, scenery etc. will really make the difference, rather than absolute sharpness. I mean, I've seen GT4 running at full 1080p (emulator), it's pretty sharp, but it doesn't look better than GT5.

I think GT5 looks great overall. I can still be amazed by it when come back to the game and I see the demo running, after a short hiatus. Someone summed it up nicely earlier in the thread: it's disappointing when you notice the little shortcomings in the scenery, but it's not game breaking. To be honest with you, I'm more annoyed by the colour compression that PD uses to save bandwidth costs. But I don't see anyone else complain about that!

The technical achievements have absolutely everything to do with the appearance of the game. Without them, it wouldn't look half as good, or we simply wouldn't have had certain features. I'm amazed that the Nürburgring looks the way it does - the game clearly only loads a small portion at a time, including the distant scenery "shell" and texture, then streams in and populates that area with the high-detail stuff as needed. That's why stuff tends to go missing, and is also the reason why pop-in is inconsistent and sometimes very jarring. To have that level of data-streaming going on at the same time the game is running 16 cars, and the graphics / effects looking the way they do is mind-boggling!

But, there's always room for improvement. 👍