*NEW* GT-R gameplay on the Nurb!

[krisa9977]

It looks like new Ring is the copy of GT4. I don't thing that's bad, because GT4 Nordschlife was almost perfect, but I wish they fixed a little inaccuracies such as Hatzenbach curb that supposed to be flat for cutting that corner. Anyway, I don't think it's a big deal.

 

[Stonemonkey]

I dunno if it's the video quality or that it's recorded off screen that's making it more noticable but the change in mipmapping levels on the armco stands out a bit. Watch the left hand barrier a couple of car lengths ahead on the downhill section after turn 1 and around turn 2. It carries on throughout the clip but to varying degrees.

 

[G.T.Ace]

Ever played PGR4? The Ring got full modeled 3D trees you feel like you driving through a forest with an awesome wideview on the hills. It's possible. But probably not with GT5 cause of the performance.

At 720p and does the game even run with 60 frames per second?
Not to mention that the cars have a lot less polygons, that there are only 8(?) cars at once and that the track itself isnt as accurate as the GT5 version.

 

[rkk01]

Some trees, in Germany, near Nurburg (well in the Ardennes forest anyway - quite close)

Designed for viewing on the PS3 at 50' and 350 mph......

... get a grip, of course it CAN be done.

 

[G.T.Ace]

At 720p with roughly 30 frames with a completely different engine.

 

[CoolColJ]

and they're not 3D trees either

They use the same technique PD did....

 

[DK]

Who was driving the Gallardo from 1:55-2:05? The motorsport equivalent of either a Soviet-era juicer in the Olympics or Mahmoud Ahmadinejabad in an election?

 

[Seismica]

Some trees, in Germany, near Nurburg (well in the Ardennes forest anyway - quite close)
*snip*

Designed for viewing on the PS3 at 50' and 350 mph......

... get a grip, of course it CAN be done.

I really don't understand how that image supports the 3D tree argument in any way because they are not 3D trees... And like stated, lower resolution, lower framerate etc.

If you wanted i could show you a close up of Modern Warfare 2 scenery on PS3, because apart from the odd trees here and there that are actually 3D, all the bushes etc. are all 2D textures just sort of floating in mid-air. You wanna know why? Because their appearence does not matter, as long as it looks semi-real.

 

[paulpg87]

You guys are hilarious.

Who cares if it's the GT4 Nurb in high resolution. GT always got compliments on how accurate the GT4 Nurb was, so why change it? Update the graphics and leave it alone in my opinion. Sheesh.

5 years of Ai that is totally crap... i dont' care about nurburg in hd.. this video shows gt4 in hd with a cockpit view. Nothing more.

 

[Exorcet]

I must be some optimist, I hardly see anything objectionable in that video. The track is fine, the physics seem much better, and there's a bunch of new (compared to GT4) cars.

If GT5 ended up being GT4 with new physics (and less poorly thought out structure like no GT mode cars in arcade mode and utterly terrible race diversity in GT mode) I really couldn't complain. Even if it was just the physics that got improved that would be enough, and the AI can be avoided by simply going online.

Speaking of AI does anyone know anything about it? Or is everyone simply making stuff up and assuming that the AI shown here is the latest version?




And one last thing...

SOMEONE DRIVE THE ACR!

 

[CodeRedR51]

5 years of Ai that is totally crap... i dont' care about nurburg in hd.. this video shows gt4 in hd with a cockpit view. Nothing more.

......................

I must be some optimist, I hardly see anything objectionable in that video. The track is fine, the physics seem much better, and there's a bunch of new (compared to GT4) cars.

If GT5 ended up being GT4 with new physics (and less poorly thought out structure like no GT mode cars in arcade mode and utterly terrible race diversity in GT mode) I really couldn't complain. Even if it was just the physics that got improved that would be enough, and the AI can be avoided by simply going online.

Well said.

 

[Seismica]

And one last thing...

SOMEONE DRIVE THE ACR!

Yeah we need to see the ACR in action! Its probably my favourite modern American car. Don't like Corvettes...

 

[Viktor Navorsky]

The complaining never ends... now the non-3d trees... , c´mon, you´re racing at full speed and concentrated , why in the name of god would you care about the non-3d ( a.k.a semi realistic ) trees? There should be squirrels too? And some wild life should cross the road too .. yeah, without that would be sooo unrealistic... [/sarcasm]

 

[RedBaron]

The complaining never ends... now the non-3d trees... , c´mon, you´re racing at full speed and concentrated , why in the name of god would you care about the non-3d ( a.k.a semi realistic ) trees?

Because watching the replays of cars made of half million polygons and put into world full of one polygon cardboard trees can hurt our eyes?

Everyone can see it, only fanboys are closing their eyes like Jack Black in the movie Shallow Hal.

 

[Viktor Navorsky]

The game is about cars, not trees.... to me its perfectly reasonable one of the most important things in the game being the cars ( graphically speaking ) . Offcourse the trees are also important, we dont want race in a paper-made world... but that trees are fine, compared with some games. I really enjoy more an state-of-art car , then a super fancy tree.. that i will barely notice.

 

[G.T.Ace]

Because setting the car made of half million polygons into world full of one polygon cardboard trees seems to be weird idea?

Everyone can see it, only fanboys are closing their eyes like Jack Black in the movie Shallow Hal.

Yeah sure, everyone who say the trees are fine is a fanboy.
If this is true, everyone who says the opposite is a troll.👍

 

[RedBaron]

Are you defending the right thing? Do you really find the idea to lower car polys to 400k and raise the look of the scenery with that 100k polygons so bad?

 

[DonZonda]

Are you defending the right thing? Do you really find the idea to lower car polys to 400k and raise the look of the scenery with that 100k polygons so bad?

I'd support it 👍

 

[Viktor Navorsky]

If you are so concerned about trees, buy a real tree and put it in the middle of your living room.. that should work. Simulation at its best!!

 

[G.T.Ace]

It doesnt work that way, you cant just say "i take polygons from here and put them there". But thanks for that comment, it proves that you have no idea what you are talking about here and do whatever you want. Im sick of explaining this technical stuff all the time, i just need to check if this forum has an ignore function and then hope that no one will quote you in the future.

EDIT: Thank god...

 

[Viktor Navorsky]

Thats it... i´m leaving the discussion

 

[Ferrari Modena]

Are you defending the right thing? Do you really find the idea to lower car polys to 400k and raise the look of the scenery with that 100k polygons so bad?

The cars aren't displaying all 500k polys on screen at one time !

Their priorities seem good to me. 16 cars, 60fps, beyond 720p, weather, and beautiful lighting that puts other racing games to shame. I'm glad they spent the polygon budget recreating those gorgeous cockpits, instead of adding track detail. Although it would be nice to keep everything and get even more detail from the tracks. GT6

 

[Ardius]

Hmm, I agree that the trees shouldn't matter too much because you are hardly looking at them when playing the game.
The only time its really an issue is when you are watching a replay...which at the Nurburgring it tends to have a lot of trees featuring...it does break the great graphics you are watching.

Imagine you were watching a film where only the characters were detailed and everything else was way below that quality. You would surely notice and it would impact the experience, sure, the main point of films is to enjoy the dialogue, the acting and the story. But it does still effect the overall experience if the settings are visibly of inferior quality.

If we had no replays, it would be no problem. I think in the end I'm not going to be especially bothered about it. I play GT mainly for the racing and I enjoy the replays from time to time but its not the focus of the game. As long as they get the racing right and the core graphics (the cars and the main track, not the surroundings especially) I will be happy. After all I didn't really notice the trees at Eiger much except when I wasn't watching the action in a replay.

I don't even really care about the 3D (or rather 2D) crowds. As long as it isn't like the old sims where they were really obvious cardboard-like add-ons on the side of the track and are only noticably bad if you concentrate on them.

 

[Dan_]

Dunno - It's GT5 so I haven't tried it:tdown:.... but I could easily imagine the TT demo physics at speed on the ring could be quite a challenge...

The GTR is docile, it has a little bit of oversteer if you're enter too hard in a turn, but it's AWD so no drama, it has overpowered brakes, powerful acceleration and a racing-like stiff suspension, so in a few words....it's a piece of cake to master.

The TT physics are stupidly hard when you play with a pad ( like me ), it's hard but not impossible, the car behaviour is predictable if you commit only little mistakes ( one big mistake and you're out of the track ), so it may be not that hard at all using a wheel.

 

[blademask]

I dunno...

GT5 1080p/60fps/12+cars...1000cars...

Cardboard trees are kinda one of those things that you just have in the gaming world today. At no time am I ever distracted by them, in Forza3, or GT5p. GT5's car porn factor of photo-reality makes up for its trees. If that kills the replay for you, I cant imagine you enjoying any other games.

 

[czechmate]

At 720p and does the game even run with 60 frames per second?
Not to mention that the cars have a lot less polygons, that there are only 8(?) cars at once and that the track itself isnt as accurate as the GT5 version.

I dont know but a game that took less than 2 years to develope and came out almost 3 years ago managed to have pretty much everything that people here are asking GT5 to have.

beautiful car models,3d trees,3d animated crowds,3d fences/guard rails, rain, night races,skid marks,interiors of cars modelled,great car sounds.. I dont know, after 6 years you would think PD could have figured out how to incorporate all this in 1080p at 60fps or atleast some of these features, although 30fps is pretty much all you need anyways.

here's a few examples of what a 3 year old game looks like.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27285635@N07/3370068513/sizes/o/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27285635@N07/3370093141/sizes/o/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27285635@N07/3370089323/sizes/o/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27285635@N07/3370911092/sizes/o/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27285635@N07/3370073387/sizes/o/

 

[Emet_PL]

Don't forget PGR4 cars have less polygons than in GT5. Also PGR4 runs at 30fps and that's the main differenc.

 

[RedBaron]

Don't forget PGR4 cars have less polygons than in GT5.

Polygons, polygons, polygons. If the car had 80.000 polygons then nobody cares because it wouldn't be visible in common circumstances. But scenery set of few polygons is the weakest point now.

 

[rkk01]

and they're not 3D trees either

They use the same technique PD did....

I realise that - but they appear to have more volume than the cruciform trees in GT5P.

My point was that trees don't matter any more in the pic that I posted than they do in GT. They're not a direct part of the experience, but they add to the immersion. I guess their appearance is more important during the replays / photo mode etc.

The sim shown needs to populate many square miles with ground objects - not just a thin screen around a track perimeter. I find the arguments about what can and can't be done with the PS3 hardware somewhat exasperating - especially when we get told of how many x00,000 polygons go into each car, and we can't see (or rather fully appreciate) those when racing either.

For what it's worth, the trees on GT5P and the GT5 videos that we have seen are certainly "fit for purpose" for a racing game - but isn't that the same as saying that they are merely adequate, ok, ish. Not, therefore, in the "blown away" category that KY etc seem to be promoting for this game...?

 

[JacoJa]

I’m struggling to see why people are disappointed with the A.I. After watching this video, I found that every incident in the race was caused by the GTR driver making wreckless decisions (if it were in real life). Driving slowly on the exit of a fast corner... cutting infront of cars in the braking points, etc. Are the AI suppose to do 200kph to 0 in half a second?