That is true but I would F1 2013 also has a decent damage model, accurate tyre wear and pitstop model, dynamic weather effects and lighting changes with cloud systems and really good AI, safety car and flag rule systems too. Granted the 1080p thing isn't there but you compare that to GT6 trying to run 1080p and getting 20 or 30fps on some tracks. Surely running 720p and using better visuals is better than struggling to run 1080p?
A few thing need to be understood here. The first is that Kaz finds it imperative that his games run at 60 fps, to retain the sort of realistic feel and one-to-one immediacy between the controls and the image on the screen that is ideal for racing. This GT6 manages to do at least some of the time, even at 1080p, only occasionally dropping due to particle effects and more cars on screen. Running GT6 at 720p evens out the frame rate somewhat, but it still leaves little room for any extra effects over what the game already adds. That video of F1 2013, that's what, 24 fps? Computationally, that's far less work than even the 60-fps-some-of-the-time of GT6. F1 2013 also feature a lot less detailed 3D models than GT6, so it's no surprise Codemasters can add so many more wet weather visual effects. As it stands, in dry weather F1 2013 can't hold a candle to GT6, whose lighting engine and fine detail remain superior.
The rest of the stuff you mentioned, they've got nothing to do with the PS3's graphics performance and everything to do with Polyphony's limitations in terms of resources, which should be discussed in another thread.
Again, I've said this in another thread, if they got rid of the duplicate cars and the pointless cars like the Dihatsu Midget as well as the track duplicates then it'll save no end of space in the game to add these kinds of visuals and to find a way of utilizing them at 1080p.
Eliminating those duplicates aren't going to bring those effects back. The effects went missing not because of a lack of space on the Blu-Ray disc, but because of the PS3's limitations.
I mean, if GT4 can do what it did on a PS2 then GT6 should be able to do nearly double that on PS3.
As mentioned by people earlier, the PS2 had a faster screen fill rate than the PS3, which left Polyphony with more room to add effects while still preserving 60 fps. That seems to be impossible to do with a PS3.
I have F1 2013 on a low budget Desktop PC, on the lowest possible settings running at 20fps constant (in rain). The PS3 version is lower quality than the PC version I know but the frames are a constant 30fps (they're locked at that) and it is 720p resolution. I don't know what PS3 systems and TV's you get in Croatia but over here it all runs nicely on what we have.
I think you're still underestimating how much more demanding 60 fps is compared to 20-30 fps.
Project Cars is the same story as F1, that's a PS3 game (as well as other formats) and again has all the stuff GT should have.
The PS3 and Xbox 360 versions of Project CARS has been cancelled. I'm assuming that if it were to be released on the PS3 it would probably look a lot like Shift 2.
I can't see where all of the polygons in Gran Turismo are considering 80% of their cars were created on the PS2. They had less polygons in the entirety of GT4 than F1 2013 has in one car.
Firstly, get the "80% Standard cars" stat out of your head -- it was true in GT5, but not anymore. It's probably around 60-70% now. In any case, there are still a good few Premiums in each race, which are far more detailed than the average car model in F1 2013. Not to mention the tracks themselves have a lot more detail than the ones in F1 2013.
Secondly, I think your math skills need reevaluation. Let's say a car in F1 2013 has about 100,000 polygons, and every car in GT4 has about 5,000. One F1 2013 car would only make about 20 GT4 cars.
But what would I know, I'm just an uneducated nitwit. I'll go back to Nintendo DS and play Mario Kart instead. 👍
Jeez, what a way to respond to a little criticism.
Also, points off for being yet another person to call Polyphony lazy.
.
