Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Gran Turismo 6' started by Dionisiy, Jun 19, 2014.
It's the same channel, probably YouTube/Google+ name.
Oh, I thought it was a different channel given that the older related videos pertaining to VGT cars and the Kazumentary are under Gran Turismo Official instead of GTTV.
Yeah, YouTube is mixing the names in a confusing manner, but you can hover over both channel names to you'll see the same channel card and URL.
I wish the video was more about the racing. I felt it went all over the place and talked too much about the audience.
I absolutely loved this!
Does anyone know the name of the songs that were used? They were absolute ear candy!
I'm waiting to watch it, but would Shazam work?
Unless I'm mistaken (but doubt it), a purely PD produced video.
And yes, with only a few tangible links to GT so far as the clip is concerned, it's not overly related to GT6.
But, once again, I'll state that this is what the PitStop blog is about.
It's all about this sort of thing.
GT related 'news', that isn't directly official regarding the latest version of the game.
At least the arguments, of which I was lambasted at the time, that the blog was created to answer GTPlanet Q&A questions have faded away.
(*Ridiculous notion BTW, but one that many argued at the time*)
Makes me want to get on a plane and be there for next years event.
@Aussie_HSV Maybe if GTP and PD collaborate to create an app of sorts. ME NO KNOW
It would surely bridge the GT fanbase closer to the makers. Or creators. I don't feel like meeting my maker just yet lol
And yes, I agree, a link like that could benefit both parties.
I'm not sure what that App. would try to achieve/inform?
But it sounds like an original idea.
Could be thread worthy.
No, but it could be a legitimate application that Jordan and Kaz could focus some of these leagues from GTP into the game. Jordan's the community leader and Kaz has the content. DOI! seriously though
(PS4's features allow for streaming, SHARE play and all... and more shtuff we plebs aren't able to implement, but can be apart of)
"GT6 Track Path Editor"
I need my compensation...NOW!
What does this mean ?
Exactly what I am thinking of!
Cannonball Run, Death Race, etc.
They should had listed all the things that cannot be done using GT6 track editor:
-tracks longer than 10km
-tracks with elevation changes
-tracks with tight turns/chicanes/hairpins
-tracks with varying width
-tracks with varying camber
-tracks that have a main straight shorter than 500m
-tracks with crossover section (figure 8 tracks like Suzuka, stuff like the loop at Cape Ring, etc)
I wonder why the limitation on tight hairpins and chicanes. These are essential features in many race tracks and I don't see any hardware or software limitation for this.
I suspect it's due to the way they're handling trackside object placement.
At first, I though it was that but when you select a section and set it on "tight corner" then you can't use trackside objects anymore...
Iirc there's a minimum distance between track edge and barriers, you can't have a barrier right on the edge of the track, that's probably one of the reasons for the restrictions on tight turns.
I'm disappointed that for death valley, there is absolutely no run off. At all.
Sounds like they need to customize the software a little more to accommodate these very common race track features. Maybe GT7.
Probably because it's been sixteen months since anyone at PD acknowledged their own Q&A publicity stunt existed and this "blog-style service" is mostly ignored nowadays anyway, but hey. What would we do without you to educate the unwashed masses once again?
I'm thinking it might be a quick and dirty way to prevent tracks that can't be completed or glitch out. The V-Rally 2 example people were bringing up when the app launched was significantly more powerful, but it was also common to accidentally create a track with geometry that the graphics engine couldn't render correctly; and somewhat more difficult but still simple to accidentally do a track with messed up timing sectors and even tracks that couldn't be completed, and you wouldn't know until you went to test it. Now couple that with the length of time it takes to have the PS3 generate your track...
It's possible this was just them playing it safe so they don't have to try and troubleshoot any such issues.
Like, a minute? Doesn't seem that bad.
I'd eat a few track abortions in order to have some more control and ability to make really interesting tracks.
I think it's like @GTPorsche said, it's due to their trackside object placement. The objects have a strip running alongside the track, and a really tight corner would fold that strip over on itself. Probably causing graphical issues. It doesn't speak too highly of Polyphony's skill that they were unable to solve that particular issue. I mean, the obvious solution would have been to have additional point types, so instead of only straight and curve, we could also have angle bend and hairpin. These could then have custom object placements which would suit them.
Seems like an easy fix, but as with everything Polyphony we'll never know why they didn't take the easy option.
Maybe they thought about it and its just unfeasible and not part of the plan or strategy and budget maybe. They made the Course Maker a little more feature friendly and not in some other ways compared to GT5's one.
They are probably happy with it as it is for GT6. They might be making the one for GT7 more feature rich to include and allow the user to set track side camber and elevation among other options etc.. etc..
I would think PD and their developers would have the knowledge and expertise to program these features into the game if they wished to wouldn't you?
If it isn't a limitation, it could be that Kaz just overlooked or didn't want users to have this much control over Course maker. But we can all guess to high heaven and know one has the correct answer here.
For instance Kaz had this amazing idea to allow you to add custom wings and paint them or change tyre sizes. It was something to do with customization but I'm not sure which feature it was, nevertheless he made a statement that the idea never entered his head.
So he has the developers, the talent and the know how, but a lot of ideas just never pop into his head. He wakes up one day and a light turns on, when say T10 had already thought of and integrated the same thing in their games long before he had the idea to do something similar.
Honestly? No. I wouldn't assume that. Because the other option is...
...that Kaz is either an idiot or an hole. Didn't want users to have that much control? Who would remove creative control from a course maker? An hole.
Which is why people give Polyphony stick for not paying attention to other games in the genre.
Then again, if you're not able to foresee that your users may want 90° bends and tight hairpins on their tracks even without prompting from other games, you shouldn't be designing a course maker. Seriously, it's not even remotely possible that they didn't consider that. They could have made the prototype and played with it for half an hour, and at least one person on the team would have noticed that they couldn't make corners as tight as they wanted.
I'm going with it being a limitation, because it's impossible that they didn't think of hairpins in a racing game, and the other option that Polyphony had the tech to do it and removed it from the system makes me want to punt a kitten.
Hell, I get salty thinking about it as a limitation even, because it took me all of about 30 seconds to come up with an adaptation to their system that I'm pretty sure would work with minimal interference, and yet it's not there.
It's more like Tornado said.
I've tested it out relentlessly and it's not much about the trackside placement. It's how they adapt the track path to the underlying terrain topology.
The curves while initially calculated as an arc, are broken down in polygons (not the 3d computing only but those visible straight lines in the road paint to form a curve). Each "step" has a minimal distance to adapt or "smooth" the topology underneath. If you diminish those steps too much you'll have each adapting alone.
Even with their current limits, I've made curves where there were exploded polygons forming tall and sharp/hard edges where even the texturing couldn't follow with floating side road paintings.
Now not only that, they'd have to deal with side surface overlap in more acute angles, having to decide priority between areas and what not.
Lack of track width per section is the same.
An idea would be offering pre-modelled types of curves but perhaps that is too much as well (and maybe unnecessary) for a game they are moving out.
I do hope they arrive in a more organic and adaptable way to integrate tracks and objects to space in the next game.
So Imari I wasn't implying that Kaz would purposely remove creative control and therefore restrict it.
So know one knows the real reason why he has made the course maker like he has. Can other Games studios do better?
Course generator in GT5 was only a basic course creator / generator and look how limited that was.
Well I reckon its a Limitation of the 3d modeling software platform which can't be done on the Cell processing engine PS3, or in fact the Gran Turismo OS itself, could that be possible?
Or maybe Kaz does not have the best project managers and design and creation strategy in the first place.
Do you think PD themselves know how to do it properly?
Are there other games out there that allow the sort of control over track creation that you guys expect?
I know nothing about CAD and 3D modelling but it seems to me some of you think that the features and control you are expecting aren't that hard to implement. So is it in fact a technical hurdle on the PS3 or not?
You guys must know how to do this stuff yourself. And does anyone know which software they are using?
I reckon it all comes down to money and politics as always seals the deal. Even though they had 2 years to do it. Maybe thats all he could come up with, maybe that's just the simple answer! I don't know and don't pretend.
All I know is I'm not having good luck with Android emulation software and I'm not buying a tablet.
OR it could simply come down to PD not having the Skill they need to adapt the software to accommodate these features.
This is just a string of buzzwords. There is no Gran Turismo OS, there is Gran Turismo: The Game. There is no Cell processing engine, there's just the Cell processor and it's just a slightly fancy CPU. Whatever 3d modelling software platform limitations there are have been built into GT by Polyphony, so that's on them.
And maybe the sky is blue.
Of course he doesn't. Look at their work over GT5 and GT6, and it's inconsistent at best. Some stuff is great, some stuff is awful, a lot of stuff is somewhere in between.
I prefer to think that they don't, because as I said, the other option is that they're holes.
I don't know about anyone else, but for me, yep.
Computing doesn't work like that. At least not for something like generating a track, where you've more or less got as much time as you want to process it.
The technical barrier is that a computer can only perform so many operations per second, and only has so much bandwidth between it's various parts. That's the hard limit of what can and cannot be done. Below that, it's simply a matter of being clever about doing what you want done in the least amount of operations possible. So while it may be expensive to create a ninety degree corner with their basic corner algorithm, because it has to manually recalc the track edges to stop them glitching, it's probably relatively cheap if you write a custom algorithm to deal specifically with ninety degree corners.
Then it's about whether you want to spend the manpower to write that algorithm, but Polyphony's a well-funded company.
Ah, the old "if you can't do better you're not in a position to criticise". I can never figure out whether that's an ad hominem or it's own category of fallacy altogether. It turns up an awful lot when people object to others criticising the design of Gran Turismo.
They're using Unity for the app, which doesn't really matter one way or the other as it's just providing data to the game. Gran Turismo itself is custom.
I don't know and don't pretend,
All I do is just defend.
My heroes know what's best
and all the rest
are mumbling stumbling weirdos.
Got a smartphone? It works fine.
Yep. It's always possible that they just suck. Although you watch, you'll find that's not a terribly popular opinion either. People would much rather point fingers at the PS3 because so complicated instead of just say "hey, you know what, maybe PD aren't actually very good at this".