The GT Sport Epic Whining and Crying Thread

[syntex123]

Six pages already? *facepalm*

 

[ImaRobot]

Sure, it's exactly what I'm talking about . In other screens both of these are fully smooth, just like that Mercedes. View attachment 547972 View attachment 547973


It worked like that in GT6 too with cars that had it. I don't know how the tesselation works in GTS but since we already had fully tesselated cars on track in GT6 on PS3 I really doubt it will look worse here.

Well the difference here is that one is a photomode scape location, where the vehicles will 100% of the time look way better, smoother, and have better lighting than anything you see in game. I thought tesselation was a thing used for objects that are a good distance, not something that is within close proximity to you.

 

[eran0004]

unfortunately the races dont take place in photom8de.

And why would they do that? They don't use different textures for gameplay and photomode. What may be different is the sampling of the textures, the light, the shadow resolution and the antialiasing. It's not the same assets as in GT6.

Well the difference here is that one is a photomode scape location, where the vehicles will 100% of the time look way better, smoother, and have better lighting than anything you see in game. I thought tesselation was a thing used for objects that are a good distance, not something that is within close proximity to you.

Adaptive tesselation typically changes progressively with the distance to the object (in theory it could start already at 1 mm from the camera and then progressively drop until the car is 1 km from the camera), but it may also be changing depending on how busy the scene is. In GT6 you often see the tesselation going down when there are many cars close to the camera.

In the case of the SLS AMG GT3 car, I doubt that it's because of the distance or because the scene is busy as the other cars doesn't have the same issue. It might just be that this particular model tesselates incorrectly during gameplay for whatever reason.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I think some of you are misunderstanding the nature of a Whinging and Crying Thread. This is the place you're supposed to be able to Whinge and Cry without fear of someone coming in to tell you that you are wrong for feeling negative about the game or to refute your opinions. We do have a lengthy discussion thread for that. So unless you want people to start visiting the Epic Praising and Crying Tears of Joy and telling people they are wrong for loving what they've seen so far I'd think twice about refuting claims made in a thread that isn't supposed to be really rational to begin with.

Disclaimer: I'm not telling someone not to post here obviously, that's not my place, just consider what you are posting and where you are doing it.

 

[ImaRobot]

Adaptive tesselation typically changes progressively with the distance to the object (in theory it could start already at 1 mm from the camera and then progressively drop until the car is 1 km from the camera), but it may also be changing depending on how busy the scene is. In GT6 you often see the tesselation going down when there are many cars close to the camera.

Interesting, so its constantly changing in all kinds of different situations. I figured it was just something to do with modeling and the distance from you and the object, and thought it was only for things that where farther away. That sounds taxing on the system, doesn't it? I wonder if that is what caused issues in past games.

 

[OHM_fusion]

Well the difference here is that one is a photomode scape location, where the vehicles will 100% of the time look way better, smoother, and have better lighting than anything you see in game. I thought tesselation was a thing used for objects that are a good distance, not something that is within close proximity to you.

Dynamic tessellation is used since GT6 on some car models, so that instead of having diffrent LOD (level of detail) models for in game (on track) and Photo travel, you can dynamically adjust detail.

The point is, in GT6, on a PS3 we have already seen fully tessellated models on track. The same car model, for example an Aston Martin one-77 can have smooth wheel arches in photo travel if you focus on them but they can also be blocky when the game reduces the polygons to save resources. The same can happen on track, as seen in GT6.




Based on this, it's irrelevant if you are looking at the car in photo travel or on track. If they could achieve that on a PS3 I really really doubt that somehow those cars would be constantly low-poly on a PS4, regardless if it's on track or photo mode. It would defeat the purpose of even using the tessellation technology.

 

[ImaRobot]

You guys keep quoting my post but it's like no one actually played GT6.
Dynamic tessellation is used since GT6 on some car models, so that instead of having diffrent LOD (level of detail) models for in game (on track) and Photo travel, you can dynamically adjust detail.

And the problem with quoting your post is what? I asked a question, because I have not spent hardly enough time on GT6 to be able understand the method. I had a basic understanding, and @eran0004 happened to explain it well enough without unnecessary sass. Still, now that I know more, this method sounds problematic, and I'm wondering if frame rate issues where somehow associated with that.

The point is, in GT6, on a PS3 we have already seen fully tessellated models on track. The same car model, for example an Aston Martin one-77 can have smooth wheel arches in photo travel if you focus on them but they can also be blocky when the game reduces the polygons to save resources. The same can happen on track, as seen in GT6.

I wasn't debating that. I already knew that, which is what I've started my post out with.

Based on this, it's irrelevant if you are looking at the car in photomode or on track. If they could achieve that on a PS3 I really really doubt that somehow those cars would be constantly low-poly on a PS4, regardless if it's on track or photo mode. It would defeat the purpose of even using the tessellation technology.

It's not irrelevant, because what's possible on photomode is not what's going to be representative of actual gameplay. It never will be. Either way, again, I wasn't talking about that in the first place. I was just mentioning that your comparison between that Subaru, which was likely pulled from an in game shot, is not something that you can compare to a still scape, which is obviously going to look vastly superior to anything seen while you're actually playing. The seperate photomode locations will always look better than the in game photomode as well. That's why the photos you pulled just don't work in this case and are not representative than anything other than the still scape photomode.

 

[Johnnypenso]

You guys keep quoting my post but it's like no one actually played GT6.
Dynamic tessellation is used since GT6 on some car models, so that instead of having diffrent LOD (level of detail) models for in game (on track) and Photo travel, you can dynamically adjust detail.

The point is, in GT6, on a PS3 we have already seen fully tessellated models on track. The same car model, for example an Aston Martin one-77 can have smooth wheel arches in photo travel if you focus on them but they can also be blocky when the game reduces the polygons to save resources. The same can happen on track, as seen in GT6.




Based on this, it's irrelevant if you are looking at the car in photo travel or on track. If they could achieve that on a PS3 I really really doubt that somehow those cars would be constantly low-poly on a PS4, regardless if it's on track or photo mode. It would defeat the purpose of even using the tessellation technology.

You're operating under the assumption that the number of polys used in game is the same as in photomode and I don't think that's the case.

 

[OHM_fusion]

And the problem with quoting your post is what? I asked a question, because I have not spent hardly enough time on GT6 to be able understand the method. I had a basic understanding, and @eran0004 happened to explain it well enough without unnecessary sass. Still, now that I know more, this method sounds problematic, and I'm wondering if frame rate issues where somehow associated with that.



It's not irrelevant, because what's possible on photomode is not what's going to be representative of actual gameplay. It never will be. Either way, again, I wasn't talking about that in the first place. I was just mentioning that your comparison between that Subaru, which was likely pulled from an in game shot, is not something that you can compare to a still scape, which is obviously going to look vastly superior to anything seen while you're actually playing. The seperate photomode locations will always look better than the in game photomode as well.

No problem, haha. It's a discussion. Sorry if you interpreted my response as being rude or something, as it was not my intention. Technically this method is supposed to help the framerate, but no one except PD really knows if it does.


Photomode was never representative of gameplay in terms of AA, shadows, resolution, shaders and so on. Never said it was. But since we are talking about car model geometry, I'm pretty sure tessellation allows for full detail even on track. Hell, it was possible in GT6 so it's not unreasonable to think it's possible here on a ps4. I could be wrong of course.

You're operating under the assumption that the number of polys used in game is the same as in photomode and I don't think that's the case.

I'm operating under that assumption because that's the way tessellation worked in GT6, did it not?

 

[ImaRobot]

You're operating under the assumption that the number of polys used in game is the same as in photomode and I don't think that's the case.

This is my point. Photomode is always going to be the absolute best in terms of that, whether it be in game or in a scape. The Scapes are going to be significantly more detailed than even the in game photomode selections, even if you're only using one car on track, and being as close as possible to it. Going off @eran0004 post about Tesselation, at basically all times during a race, the detail is constantly changing, only going down from a set point, never surpassing that point.

Photomode was never representative of gameplay in terms of AA, shadows, resolution, shaders and so on. But since we are talking about car model geometry, I'm pretty sure tessellation allows for full detail even on track. Hell, it was possible in GT6 so it's not unreasonable to think it's possible here on a ps4. I could be wrong of course.

In terms of everything about the car, and the lighting, actually. Read my reply to @Johnnypenso. Tesselation doesn't allow for full detail like that of photomode, as the detail is changing to accomdate conditions and amounts of vehicles. What it's doing is allowing the most possible amount of detail, within certain conditions. It will never, ever match photomode, especially scape locations.

Photomode scapes is at the games best, 100% of the time. Doing things that aren't possible within actual gameplay.

 

[Lucas]

It's a racing game and people are more worried about the graphics than the actual racing (flags, events, disciplines, mechanics, physics, REAL DAMAGE, and throw some track and crowd graphics in because GT6's sucked).

It's no wonder GT has been in decline for a decade already.

 

[Johnnypenso]

This is my point. Photomode is always going to be the absolute best in terms of that, whether it be in game or in a scape. The Scapes are going to be significantly more detailed than even the in game photomode selections, even if you're only using one car on track, and being as close as possible to it. Going off @eran0004 post about Tesselation, at basically all times during a race, the detail is constantly changing, only going down, not up.

Tesselation reduces or increases polys on the car depending on how far away it is. It saves you from having to create different LOD models for cars which is the way most games handle it. But there is still a maximum poly count in game that is significantly less than in photomode for obvious reasons and I expect this to be the case in GTS.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Depends on photomode location, on track and photo travel in GT6 can be different depending on the car ( older premium or newer with tesselation ) In GT6, when on track during replay, photomode polys ( picture taken ) is the same with real time running replay poly, no change. This can be easily seen on the R34 GTR rear lights ( the red brake lights are low poly when on track, regardless real time play/replay or photo mode/picture taken )

With PS4 and GTS super premium, it will be different than with GT6 varied poly quality. I haven't seen photo taken from replay yet for GTS with cars from previous GT like the Evo X.

 

[ImaRobot]

Tesselation reduces or increases polys on the car depending on how far away it is. It saves you from having to create different LOD models for cars which is the way most games handle it. But there is still a maximum poly count in game that is significantly less than in photomode for obvious reasons and I expect this to be the case in GTS.

I wont be able to find it, because its so old, but there was a breakdown about the LOD and Polys used between different situations within a game. The list broke it down by having a set amount of cars on track, compared to having a single car on track, compared to an actual photomode as well as the set locations for photomodes. The photomodes always was the highest, and for obvious reasons, like you mention.

Depends on photomode location, on track and photo travel in GT6 can be different depending on the car ( older premium or newer with tesselation ) In GT6, when on track during replay, photomode polys ( picture taken ) is the same with real time running replay poly, no change. This can be easily seen on the R34 GTR rear lights ( the red brake lights are low poly when on track, regardless real time play/replay or photo mode/picture taken )

It doesn't depend on the car really. Because the same car in photomode scapes will look better than the same car in gameplay, or even the gameplays photomode. We are not talking about replays, but actual in game situations while playing, and its photomode as well.

 

[SimTourist]

It's a racing game and people are more worried about the graphics than the actual racing (flags, events, disciplines, mechanics, physics, REAL DAMAGE, and throw some track and crowd graphics in because GT6's sucked).

It's no wonder GT has been in decline for a decade already.

Maybe it's because Kaz spent 20 minutes talking about photo mode, and hasn't said a single word about the things you mentioned.

 

[FordGTGuy]

It's a racing game and people are more worried about the graphics than the actual racing (flags, events, disciplines, mechanics, physics, REAL DAMAGE, and throw some track and crowd graphics in because GT6's sucked).

It's no wonder GT has been in decline for a decade already.

Actually, complaining about graphics is justified and here is why.

It's the first Gran Turismo on a brand new piece of hardware that is much more powerful then the last system. A system some people might have even bought specifically to play a new Gran Turismo in higher fidelity. The other reason is because of the amount of time you have to wait between Gran Turismo releases which makes you expect leaps in quality because of the long development time. If graphics didn't matter then you might as well just stick with GT6 on PS3.

The other things you brought up are definitely important and things like physics even more so but graphics do matter.

Well it could easily be both in which case the game is either delayed or releases in 6 months nowhere near 100% complete.

Either way, it's a bad thing to claim that you're only 50% done with a game that has to launch in 6 months.

 

[ImaRobot]

It's a racing game and people are more worried about the graphics than the actual racing (flags, events, disciplines, mechanics, physics, REAL DAMAGE, and throw some track and crowd graphics in because GT6's sucked).

It's no wonder GT has been in decline for a decade already.

A games photomode will always get as much attention from me than the actual racing aspect of the game as well. The fact that they themselves focus on outright beauty before racing, it's not hard to understand the concern. That, as well as the fact that the focus on photomode was obviously a big one as well.

 

[FordGTGuy]

A games photomode will always get as much attention from me than the actual racing aspect of the game as well. The fact that they themselves focus on outright beauty before racing, it's not hard to understand the concern. That, as well as the fact that the focus on photomode was obviously a big one as well.

I think he is referring more to the people disappointed by the in-game graphics then people that are focusing on the photomode.

 

[TokoTurismo]

Some posters on here told us that gtsport would blow the other games out of the waters for graphics. Remember when driveclub was revealed? that was a wow moment, the only thing that wowed yesterday was photomode but that isn't a game. I had to laugh at people saying gtsports would be the greatest thing since gt6, why don't these people realise PD are done? They are no longer relevant beyond marketing hype and a big backer, time for them to call it a day and bring in more creative young people.

The same has been said about GT5P, GT5 and GT6 as well. Look how those titles turned out? Yep, blew the competition... Seriously it's time for certain people to stop giving PD free passes. PD kept us in the dark for 3 years and a couple of months, and this their best effort..... It's pathetic because I followed GT since GT2 and it really disappoints me to see PD wind up like this.

I wanted to stay positive about GTS during the tease and yesterdays reveal (and during the hype which was the most funnest thing I've ever participated in ), but the reveal IMO was just disappointing, and the same can be said about the trailer seriously did PD really make that? PD ain't even trying anymore and are trying their very hardest to stay relevant when really they're just constantly failing as they try.

Also I keep hearing about this "50% completion" for the game. 3 years. 50%... *Flips table* If that is true than you can bet half of it went into making Photomode, which shouldn't even be there because this title is meant to be a freakin' racing sport based title (similar to pCARS). Don't know how PD hasn't gotten shut down yet. EVO were so talented and did a much better job than those lazy butts at PD, yet 🤬 Sony shut them down.

Also the car list. Yeah that's right, Forza 5 gotten flak for having only 200 cars, 200, all of which were rebuilt from scratch. GTS's car list is 70% lesser than it, some "believed" to be built from scratch and others being fictional such as the Subaru Impreza Gr.3. So PD better get the same flak that Forza had back in 2013, because "but it's a motorsport game" should NOT be an excuse to give PD a free pass again. And before pCARS gets mentioned, it also got the same flak too but it wasn't as massive as FM5.

 

[ImaRobot]

I think he is referring more to the people disappointed by the in-game graphics then people that are focusing on the photomode.

After rereading, you're right. My point can still flow with that, though.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Also the car list. Yeah that's right, Forza 5 gotten flak for having only 200 cars, 200, all of which were rebuilt from scratch. GTS's car list is 70% lesser than it, some "believed" to be built from scratch and others being fictional such as the Subaru Impreza Gr.3. So PD better get the same flak that Forza had back in 2013, because "but it's a motorsport game" should NOT be an excuse to give PD a free pass again. And before pCARS gets mentioned, it also got the same flak too but it wasn't as massive as FM5.

Your math is off.

The car count discussion is something I'm genuinely curious to see. As you mentioned, there were plenty of folks in the GT section that took T10 to task for "only" 200 cars in FM5 at launch in 2013. Now, PD rocks up with almost 140 after exactly three years since the PS4's release (unless there's a delay).

What makes the situation even more complicated is that GT Sport seems to be a full-priced title. I guess they were right by saying it was more substantial than a Prologue, but that means the game can't fall back on its budget price as the reason for significantly less content than is expected of a GT game.

PCARS is different because its a new franchise: they've never sold themselves as a title with hundreds of cars. But for GT and Forza, that big list is an expected selling point.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

It doesn't depend on the car really. Because the same car in photomode scapes will look better than the same car in gameplay, or even the gameplays photomode. We are not talking about replays, but actual in game situations while playing, and its photomode as well.

GTS ?

In GT6, premiums cars are not the same in polys. The Aston Martin One 77 is great, while RE Amemiya RX7 or the Efini RX7 '91 are not, even when in photo travel. Some of the newest cars like Countach 25th Anniversary is awesome, wheel details for example much better than older GT5 premium like Efini RX7. This is overall poly quality, of course different photomode will have different LOD on the same car ( photo travel vs gameplay/replay ), usually seen in interior details, tail lights, headlights, wheel arches etc. What I was trying to say was gameplay LOD and replay photomode is the same in GT6, I usually take pics after doing time trial laps, hit the replay button next to start, then take pics, the R34 GTR rear lights as an example is the same regardless gameplay or on the pictures I took.

I think this is what PD mean by super premium, we may see different level of premium quality, similar like in GT6 ( newly added cars in GT6 vs GT5P/5 cars )

I'm curious with Evo X in GTS, will it be similar to GT6 ?

 

[OHM_fusion]

This is my point. Photomode is always going to be the absolute best in terms of that, whether it be in game or in a scape. The Scapes are going to be significantly more detailed than even the in game photomode selections, even if you're only using one car on track, and being as close as possible to it. Going off @eran0004 post about Tesselation, at basically all times during a race, the detail is constantly changing, only going down from a set point, never surpassing that point.


In terms of everything about the car, and the lighting, actually. Read my reply to @Johnnypenso. Tesselation doesn't allow for full detail like that of photomode, as the detail is changing to accomdate conditions and amounts of vehicles. What it's doing is allowing the most possible amount of detail, within certain conditions. It will never, ever match photomode, especially scape locations.

Photomode scapes is at the games best, 100% of the time. Doing things that aren't possible within actual gameplay.

Now, I know there are more important things to discuss in this thread, but I still don't think it works the way you guys say it does, so I'll respond anyway.

I just put in GT6 to compare. I bought a car that as far as I know uses tessellation- Acura nsx concept. Took it to photo travel and took some pics. Now, those pics are supposed to show that model at it's highest poly count/quality, right? I think we agree on that.

Now, you guys say there's no way for an in-game, on track model to have that polycount/quality, right? But I took the same car to the Nurburgring, single race with 10 cars. I played the replay of that race, and checked the model (you know, where you can walk around on track) before even entering photo mode, and the car still looks as smooth as in the photo travel mode. Again, this is on track, in game but not even entering photo mode. Sure, the resolution is worse, shadows are horrible, shaders are worse, AA is worse, lighting is worse etc. but the car geometry (on the outside at east) looks the same to me. The wheel arches are smooth, certainly nowhere near as blocky like the mercedes pic from GTS that started this whole discussion. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm blind but that's what I see.

This is why I believe the GTS pics show tessellation glitching and not necessarily proof of blocky, low poly in-game cars on PS4.

 

[eran0004]

Interesting, so its constantly changing in all kinds of different situations. I figured it was just something to do with modeling and the distance from you and the object, and thought it was only for things that where farther away. That sounds taxing on the system, doesn't it? I wonder if that is what caused issues in past games.

It's probably a little more taxing on the CPU than simply using different level-of-detail meshes, but if it's used correctly it can free up a lot of rendering time, as it would allow the GPU to only render as much details of the scene that is actually needed. But the reason why it's used has probably more to do with the fact that it allows you to use more detailed models, as only the details near to the camera are fully rendered.

I don't know you have any specific issues in mind, but if it's the usual thing about the dropping framerate I think it's more a case of generally pushing the system a bit too far rather than specifically about the adaptive tessellation.

 

[ImaRobot]

GTS ?

In GT6, premiums cars are not the same in polys. The Aston Martin One 77 is great, while RE Amemiya RX7 or the Efini RX7 '91 are not, even when in photo travel. Some of the newest cars like Countach 25th Anniversary is awesome, wheel details for example much better than older GT5 premium like Efini RX7. This is overall poly quality, of course different photomode will have different LOD on the same car ( photo travel vs gameplay/replay ), usually seen in interior details, tail lights, headlights, wheel arches etc. What I was trying to say was gameplay LOD and replay photomode is the same in GT6, I usually take pics after doing time trial laps, hit the replay button next to start, then take pics, the R34 GTR rear lights as an example is the same regardless gameplay or on the pictures I took.
View attachment 548072



I think this is what PD mean by super premium, we may see different level of premium quality, similar like in GT6 ( newly added cars in GT6 vs GT5P/5 cars )

I'm curious with Evo X in GTS, will it be similar to GT6 ?

It doesn't matter if different cars have different polys. We are talking about one specific vehicle will always look better in a scape rather than the same exact vehicle in game play. Always.

Now, you guys say there's no way for an in-game, on track model to have that polycount/quality, right? But I took the same car to the Nurburgring, single race with 10 cars. I played the replay of that race, and checked the model (you know, where you can walk around on track)

I'm totally forgetting that you can't just pause the screen and go into photomode in game, it's been a while. Before I get to your point, that is something this game greatly needs as well.

Which doesn't make much sense, because according to @eran0004 the tessellation should be affected because of how many cars are in proximity. It is normal for games with photomodes to lower detail when there is multiple cars on the track as well. If its anything to go by, if that Subaru has a tessellation error, then it would seem that tessellation actually does effect car geometry, as it's obviously changing.

This is why I believe the GTS pics show tessellation glitching and not necessarily proof of blocky, low poly in-game cars on PS4.

It can very well be that, but even going off the pictures we've seen so far, the photomode landscapes look 100x better than anything we've seen from the actual game and that is why I was saying you can't use them as a comparison. That's what my original discussion was about, and how they shouldn't be used to show a difference. I'm not even sure if there is tessellation in the photomode landscapes in the first place, why would there need to be? It seems like something to help with performance, more than anything.

However, to add to your point. If a car was modeled like that, it will have the same modelling errors in photomode as well.

 

[Robin]

I know most people wouldn't care but is anyone disappointed at the standard games boxart? I presume it is indeed the final version as it's being displayed everywhere.

It looks like it was done in paint, it's not classy and man that black wording and generic font looks terrible . I was really expecting an all white and gold affair much like the promo material we have seen up until this point. It really could have been better in so many ways, all the previous games box art were decent efforts, but not this IMO.

 

[Spagetti69]

I know most people wouldn't care but is anyone disappointed at the standard games boxart? I presume it is indeed the final version as it's being displayed everywhere.

It looks like it was done in paint, it's not classy and man that black wording and generic font looks terrible . I was really expecting an all white and gold affair much like the promo material we have seen up until this point. It really could have been better in so many ways, all the previous games box art were decent efforts, but not this IMO.

The real boxing simulator.

 

[FordGTGuy]

I know most people wouldn't care but is anyone disappointed at the standard games boxart? I presume it is indeed the final version as it's being displayed everywhere.

It looks like it was done in paint, it's not classy and man that black wording and generic font looks terrible . I was really expecting an all white and gold affair much like the promo material we have seen up until this point. It really could have been better in so many ways, all the previous games box art were decent efforts, but not this IMO.

Looks like they put the same amount of effort into the boxart as they did into the game.

 

[rronak95]

I agree with most of what is being said here.

My biggest gripe with Gran Turismo in general is how unbelievably late PD is. Gran Turismo may have the best driving physics and a large community, but others competitors are making the Gran Turismo series look like a joke. It amazes me how Sony doesn't step in and control what goes on at PD.

-Photomode looks great, but who really cares. Think of how many more tracks or cars PD could have modeled instead.
-livery editor is 6 years too late. Since its new to the series it won't be as advanced as Forzas livery editor.
- Only 130 cars. It was acceptable to have ps2 cars in a game released in 2013, yet we aren't received the premium cars from gt5 and gt6. Didn't Kaz claim the premium cars were basically detailed enough to be for a ps4 game?
-Sound still sucks. ****ing fix it. There are only 130 cars.
-Immesrsion. Gt4 even had wind noise at high speeds. Include wind, rattling, shaking, etc.

I complain because fans have been asking for many fixes for years and we still haven't got them. PD's budget is insanely high, they need to stop spending it on stupid shut like photo mode and dynamic weather.

 

[Mulan]

Yamauchi may talk of all the innovation going into this game, and that it “could be called Gran Turismo 7”, but you’ll have to be an expert to notice it. I’m certainly not, and this still feels very much like the Gran Turismo of old, just with a new – though not as new as I was expecting – coat of paint.
- Taken from Trusted Reviews, and no damage was another thing.