Why 2d trees are the way to go
- Thread starter Rens10
- 126 comments
- 18,613 views
- 8,725
Makes you wonder how much other detail is forfeited to allow for the spectators and associated gubbins, as seen in the latest videos from the 24hr race.
People are always going to get pissy about the apparent lack of features and details, but at the end of the day PD need to present a balanced product - stylistically, and gameplay-wise (chiefly); physics, AI, sound and graphics; content, UI, "career" mechanisms etc.
I'm sure they'll strike a damned good balance, considering all gamers' expectations / "needs".
- 2,080
- Oslo, Norway
- KaAre_kaNin
Yeah the latest versions of nurburgring did suprise me with all the detail along the road
3D trees or not, PD will push the limits of the ps3 like no other game developer have done! 
TokyoDrift
(Banned)
- 1,800
Now sure which trees you were looking at, but the ones I could make out had the usual 2D X shape. What it does highlight is the fact that when you are at high speed, they look very convincing. To me that is all that matters.
Zer0
(Banned)
- 1,624
Just the fact that the close Grand Canyon trees are not X billboards or sprite based front camera 2D trees.
I agree with the rest, a track like Nurburgring with 3D trees will waste the resources of even the most powerful PC and possible will end looking less realistic than the actual one, that look very impressive as a whole!
Last edited:
- 2,679
- United States
- tjger
Great picture , great trees, but it shows trees that aren't effected by seasonal changes. How much memory would be needed to record seasonal changes based on weather data? We could hire someone to sit and watch trees at the various circuits and input the findings on the web.
- 6,804
- The Netherlands
Dynamic weather is one thing, but implementing seasonal changes is asking too much as it is only visual and irrelevant to the gameplay in my opinion.
I'm not betting on seeing snow ( apart from the courses which have snow permanently ofcourse ) and whether rain appears in the summer season with fully blossomed trees or in the autumn with a few leaves left is frankly not making the experience very different.
I'm not betting on seeing snow ( apart from the courses which have snow permanently ofcourse ) and whether rain appears in the summer season with fully blossomed trees or in the autumn with a few leaves left is frankly not making the experience very different.
- 1,175
I completely, sincerely agree. I want MORE cardboard.
PD's tunnelvision quest for photo-realism: In one way I respect them for it and it's become their signature, but I also think it's kind of insane. A perfect appearance is seductive but it's only ever the surface and doesn't equal love
Gameplay, atmosphere, physics, feeling, excitement - these are the keys to my heart.
PD's tunnelvision quest for photo-realism: In one way I respect them for it and it's become their signature, but I also think it's kind of insane. A perfect appearance is seductive but it's only ever the surface and doesn't equal love
Gameplay, atmosphere, physics, feeling, excitement - these are the keys to my heart.
- 4,815
- SoCal
- GTP_MooCow
It is beyond me how we can have car-lovers who consider themselves as tree-lovers and tree-huggers. How is that even possible???... are you some kind of perverted Green?? how can you root for MotorSport AND being an Environmental protection activist at the same time?
It would be the same thing as having someone from the NRA who is also member of PETA ??! ....
it's not impossible, but wouldnt you be wasting you time in contraction no???
No matter what, 2D tree are the best solutions for today's need, if it were easily implemented, Kaz would have not hesitated! I, for one, respect his choice and would think he made the best executive decision to save time, because believe it or not, GT5 is a huge game! Creating an "ideal scenario" with an almost perfect reality takes time.
And if we can save time AND a few trees in the process, wouldn't that be great everyone should be happy!
It would be the same thing as having someone from the NRA who is also member of PETA ??! ....
it's not impossible, but wouldnt you be wasting you time in contraction no???
No matter what, 2D tree are the best solutions for today's need, if it were easily implemented, Kaz would have not hesitated! I, for one, respect his choice and would think he made the best executive decision to save time, because believe it or not, GT5 is a huge game! Creating an "ideal scenario" with an almost perfect reality takes time.
And if we can save time AND a few trees in the process, wouldn't that be great
everyone should be happy!
Last edited:
- 1,175
Amen brother. Amen..👍
- 1,048
- GTP_bullie77
Well... PeTA is known by their previous terrorist actions against companies and people, and their radical views and objectives to mankind... 
- 3,241
- Desert Island
- GTP_DAN_
^^ Blend wisdom and rationality, and then there you go! 👍 Awesome dude, just what I was thinking.
What's next? Greenpeace is going to buy a Bugatti Veyron for transportation?
- 8,725
I get what you're saying, and how you've used it to illustrate a point - to which I agree - but I can't help myself about this apparent polarity you've placed between environmentalism and motorsport. The two are almost certainly not exclusive of each other, at least no more so than something like horse racing would be, given the correct measures.
I consider myself a "rational environmentalist", but I'm a total petrol head at the same time. Running cars on methanol, or other alternative fuels (I'm certain we'll see electric race series soon) is a marginal improvement, assuming the production of these alternative fuels are environmentally responsible. The real crime is the noise pollution! Although, I doubt the trees mind that.
Sadly, industry takes a minimal action approach, only doing the things it has to by law, or that it feels may save money (certain CO₂ scrubbing "bolt-ons" for example). Also, being a member of the NRA doesn't mean you have to shoot animals
Aaaaanyway, It'd be great if there were a Hi-Fi-assets mode (memory permitting, of course) for photomode, though not at all essential.
- 283
- GTP_ParkerMO125
I have a t-shirt that says PETA- People Eating Tasty Animals
Sorry 👍
Sorry 👍
I have to agree. Unless it's really distracting while playing the game I don't obsess over aesthetic details.
- 812
- 1,409
- mileret
You are making it easier when you are giving a words never said to someone's mouth, mate.
We car nuts are driving our RWD cars all the day through windy roads and forests and know wery well how surrounding really looks. So draw back the veiling, crusade defenders of Gran Turismo and let your blind GT love just slightly remember how real things around the way look.
There is no contradiction when I am curious how modern game designer allow some 500.000 polygon car to be in the enviroment full of 1 (ONE) polygon objects. This is even more apparent on the 'ring when those twenty pixel branches are almost sticking into your windshield.
About ten years ago, I already got normally looking trees as well as skidmarks so let me consider those cardboards and burnt rubber resulting in clean pavement as a shame of GT today. Thank you.
Timppaq
Premium
- 5,137
- Helsinki
- GTP_Timppaq
Wow, how good does the new games look. 
Watching the first vid on op after that is something
I'm really happy with gt5 trees btw. They made all the things better that matter to me. Sorry for you guys who feel unhappy about the trees. Keep the word up, maybe you'll get lucky with ps4 and can also be happy with the game.. 👍
Watching the first vid on op after that is something I'm really happy with gt5 trees btw. They made all the things better that matter to me. Sorry for you guys who feel unhappy about the trees. Keep the word up, maybe you'll get lucky with ps4 and can also be happy with the game..
👍
TokyoDrift
(Banned)
- 1,800
Well said 👍
The problem is, too many people, for whatever reason, are protective of GT5 like it's their own child. Woe betide anybody who speaks ill of any aspect, because there will always be people ready to back Kaz up with all kinds of technical and emotional reasoning.
Personally. I'm happy with the way it looks, and think the gameplay is fantastic. However, there are things missing (or done poorly) in the game that have been seen many times before on lesser platforms. Shame really.
I played Crysis, it's a nice foliage engine, suited for screen shots but not analysis in motion - boy did it look unimpressive in motion compared to something like Uncharted 2 or God of War 3. It ran like crap on my recent-ish PC and had loading pauses from section to section, and a very inconsistent (low) frame-rate. Oh, and the final boss was completely bugged in DX10 making the game impossible to finish without switching out to DX9.
Keep hearing it brought up as the "best looking game TM" It's really not unless you are stuck in the old PC mindset where techy stuff/high resolution textures are more important than art, animation, effects and lighting.
Nothing in that engine was as detailed as GT's vehicle models . It specialised in foliage. So using a very demanding PC based foliage engine used as the yardstick for what GT's trees should look like is unfair. Different engine, different goals.
- 1,762
- NG9
- Shin_Roh
Personally i dont take into consideration brand loyalty when talking about GT5, i just comment on what i see. And what i see is very realistic physics engine coupled with extremely detailed car models never been seen before on lesser platforms. Awesome really.
There has to be a trade off somewhere. There's no such thing as a perfect game, however hard Kaz tries. And if you're really honest with yourself, driving those roads in the snarling twitching beast of your choice with accurate physics FAR exceeds the look of the trees. Right!? If you watch the 24hr cockpit video with your wheel or joypad in hand, pretending you were driving it, you wont even notice them. You'll be looking down the road, where your focus should be.
Seismica
Premium
- 4,346
- Guisborough
- GTP_Seismica
My first time reading this thread.
From the title I expected in depth insight and reasoning behind why 2D trees are better for the game.
Maybe a modeller's or game developer's insight into how much processing power and memory it would take up.
Maybe a few examples, with videos to match to show the very little difference.
Maybe some graphs to show the relative performance.
Maybe some other stuff to go with it, to really put it to the complainers and to convince them that 2D trees are better in this generation of gaming.
But what we actually got was a quick list of reasons why PD have 2D trees, which people already know about in general.
From the title I expected in depth insight and reasoning behind why 2D trees are better for the game.
Maybe a modeller's or game developer's insight into how much processing power and memory it would take up.
Maybe a few examples, with videos to match to show the very little difference.
Maybe some graphs to show the relative performance.
Maybe some other stuff to go with it, to really put it to the complainers and to convince them that 2D trees are better in this generation of gaming.
But what we actually got was a quick list of reasons why PD have 2D trees, which people already know about in general.
- 4,880
- CoolColJ, GTP_CoolColJ
The vehicles in Crysis don't look so good, so what's the point?
If GT5 was a first person shooter, then you tree loves might have a point to complain about, but it isn't. And Crysis fans don't complain about vehicles because it's not the point of the game.
Oh the rally video posted above - how many cars on track? Just 1, and a very low poly one at that, draw distance is very short, background is a picture etc. Case closed
Have you seen how far GT5's draw distance is? It's quite a far, as popup is not much of an issue. That tells you why things are done the way it has. Things like draw distance and distance detail - hence 1080p was a goal - are much more important things to a driving game than sheer geometric complexity. Draw distance and geometric detail are opposing forces.
That's one reason why some tracks in GT4 were undrivable for me, poor draw distance and jaggy/flickering details made it hard to judge driving lines and corners. That Seoul city track was one of the worst for that!!
If GT5 was a first person shooter, then you tree loves might have a point to complain about, but it isn't. And Crysis fans don't complain about vehicles because it's not the point of the game.
Oh the rally video posted above - how many cars on track? Just 1, and a very low poly one at that, draw distance is very short, background is a picture etc. Case closed
Have you seen how far GT5's draw distance is? It's quite a far, as popup is not much of an issue. That tells you why things are done the way it has. Things like draw distance and distance detail - hence 1080p was a goal - are much more important things to a driving game than sheer geometric complexity. Draw distance and geometric detail are opposing forces.
That's one reason why some tracks in GT4 were undrivable for me, poor draw distance and jaggy/flickering details made it hard to judge driving lines and corners. That Seoul city track was one of the worst for that!!
- 1,175
While I don't disagree with you at all, I do have something to say about this: These people pop up in every thread, and so do the people who, instead of joining with the sensible/light-hearted discussions taking place, pick out the stupidest reply and take it way too seriously, feeling it's their duty to set this mofo straight. Both just as bad as each other imo. [/rant]
Anyway, on topic: Red Baron, It's basically WAY easier to make trees look normal and nice when the resolution is only 640*480 or whatever those games were (COlin McRae was amazing btw)
Now that GT5 runs in 1080P, I imagine trees are one of the biggest headaches when it comes to aesthetics vs. performance vs. processing power. Similar to when Kaz spoke about their difficulty modelling damage. They've made cars out of 500,000 polygons and then it becomes a huge headache to damage these cars or have them ripped to pieces in a realistic way. And this brings me on to a bigger point:I personally WISH that they would drop the 60fps 1080p thing and give themselves the breathing space to have dynamic weather, better damage, day/night, even more cars! (total, and on track), more advanced AI, more interactive environments (yes, skidmarks
but also more moveable/deformable objects around track boundries) Just think of all the lovely things we could have. They don't say "okay we have the PS3 to work with people! GT5 is going to have an amazing damage model, dynamic weather and night cycles, dynamic environments, and it's going to look as good as we can manage", they say: "We will have 1080p, 60fps, 500,000 polygons on a car, 18megapixel photomode, 3D, and we will see what features can handle that".
Last edited:
TokyoDrift
(Banned)
- 1,800
See what I mean?
I acknowlege that I'm generally happy with the way the game looks, and think the gameplay is fantastic, but it's wrong to point out that there are areas of the game that are clearly, and somewhat unnecessarily, weak... Forget the trees, I really don't care about those to be honest. They do the job adequately, and as you imply, are only in your peripheral vision anyway, and at speed look fine.
However, when you see a car wheelspin or slide across the tarmac and not leave any kind of mark, ever, that's a bit lame these days. Sure, they would probably not be persistent throughout an entire race, and people would argue that if they can't do them properly they should not do them at all. Well, I'd argue the same about damage, because right now (purely based on what we have seen, not what we have been told), be it down to licensing or otherwise, that's looking like a total joke for production cars.
Yes, it's about the physics and how the cars look and handle. Yes, some things have to give, but let's be reasonable here, we are not talking about increasing the on-screen car count to 24, or rendering the shadows using real-time ray tracing.
I don't ever recall saying there is such a thing as a perfect game. I also realise that this discussion is pointless because the game is what it is and Kaz is in control, not us. However, as a statement of fact, games from over 10 years back have been including fundamental basics that are completely missing. Sure, GT5 also does things that racing games of old could only dream about, but that's to be expected.
