GT6 Mt Panorama demo at EB Expo, Sydney

CARS' one looks very promising, it's no longer the wide and dumbed down version that Shift had, although even Shift's Nurb is better than FM's one.

 

I'm merely offering it as a potential alternative explanation.


Frankly, we know from what PD has said in the past that they work from photographs and GPS data. That's an accepted method for them and we all know it.

I'd imagine that if someone wanted to claim that they were using another method of track data collection, that would require some evidence.

Honestly, if PD was laser scanning I'm pretty sure we'd hear about it. There's no point if you don't tell anyone about it. It's a fairly large advertising point to not be using.

 

You did: http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/gt6-how-video-games-can-influence-sports-car-design/?_r=1

“For a single track, we take over 100,000 photos and laser scan the track surface, and we also use images captured from helicopters and satellites,” Mr. Yamauchi said. “The discrepancy of track accuracy is down to plus or minus one centimeter. We do the same for cars; we take several hundred photos for each car, laser scan the surface, the exterior, the interior, the instrument panels.”

He said that building a digital recreation of a track took about a year and a car six months. There are about 170 people working on programing and graphics.

 

Again-

PD (Kaz) also said the above about including laser scanning tracks.

 

This.

PD seems to shout about their links to manufacturers, how GTA turns gamers into racing drivers. But this only gets a mention in a blog, be it a large one, but not at E3, TGS or anywhere else including their own site?

Something doesn't add up, and the guys interviews are known for translation errors, so excuse people if they still seem skeptical.

 

I must have missed that one. Thanks.

It's much more plausible to me that they're laser scanning if they've actually mentioned it. I assumed they hadn't.

 

It's a much bigger PR point to mention manufacturer collaborations and how the game gives you an opportunity to become a real race car driver, considering this would appeal to even non-gamers. Boasting about laser scanning a track would appeal to us dedicated gamers but I doubt the general public or casual players even really care. It makes me wonder if casual gamers even know Polyphony laser scans their cars.

 

I don't see why people make distinction between, for example, laguna seca as a "standard track" and nurburgring as a "premium" track. Maybe the environment textures are not as goos as with nurburgring, but the layout is identical to the real one. Maybe they sometimes spend more time making high textures but every real tracks are identical when it comes to the layouts, same for motegi, laguna seca...

 

If it helps, I think that Nurb has "standard" textures too, only Madrid and Eiger can be considered "Premium" in my eyes.

 

Looks pretty good,1 small gripe though,the track seems awfully narrow or is it just me??

 

There's something weird about it, it just doesn't look right to me aswell.

 

Yea agreed,watching racing there in real life 3 cars can side by side and from that footage 2 cars can barely run side by side. In terms of the elevation changes they seemed to have it fairly spot on which a lot of other games hav failed at,can't wait to cut some laps around there!!

 

Christ, the track IS narrow in real life, guys.

 

Day/Night and Weather cycle perhaps?

 

I was not talking about that, reread.

Haha, THIS. In real life, it's nearly impossible to get 3 cars side by side on bathurst and so will be in GT6

 

Which is why I HOPE users will be patient to pass. If the new physics, aero, tyre model are good enough with stock race/road cars, racing should be more realistic. Well, challenging anyway.

 

I find most tracks in GT appear narrower in the game than they really are. Watching Nurb replays for example from the birdseye view, the track always looks much wider than it does from the hood or cockpit cam I'd normally use. I think Bathurst will look even narrower due to the ominous walls along the side of the track.

 

That narrow looking tracks coming from the too narrow FOV of GT5/6...

 

A narrow FOV makes the track look wider. The track will take up a larger proportion of the width of the screen with the FOV at 55° than it will with the FOV at 90°.

 

Custom FOV is used on this video - 97% screen angle and 63 degree angle of view. Gives better wider field of view without causing fish eye or the chase cam car looks tiny. 65 degree also works great.



Sorry if OT.

 

When I set up the FOV to 59° in GT5 using the secret menu. The Ring looks wider and not even narrower.

 

Ehm... I think that rather wider FOV makes the track narrower on the screen, not the opposite way

 

^ That's probably because default GT5 field of view angle is around 55 degree, any higher will make the camera sits further back, gives wider view, makes the car smaller too. This also affects replay cam angle and track view angle when in pre-driving menu.

Please tell me, does the track looks narrower there ?

 

Here my Custom FOV set to 59° on Top Gear Test Track. The track looks wider.

55°

59°


I think we go too OT now though.

 

Then tell me how wide the real track is.

 

Laguna Seca in GT5 is NOT up to date and identical to real life.

 

What's wrong then?

Looks pretty good to me.

 

I think that the high wall are the ones that make it look narrower than it actually is. Are those that high in real life?

 

I think it's just the camera angle. The fact that it was a messy lap and he had to avoid the mobile chicanes might give the perception that it is narrower also. I think it is actually as narrow as the Monaco Grand Prix Circuit in some sections.

 

Maybe that's the impression that you get because all is seen at a far distance and you see more but really the track becomes narrower.



Anyway that is aproximate, your photos were not taken at the same angle, but you can get the idea.