Malcolm9
Member
Thank you for your detailed response, much appreciated.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Next-gen Racing Graphics Face-off | (Next-gen means current-gen)
- Thread starter Gestault
- Start date
Thank you for your detailed response, much appreciated.
nelsonroyale
Member
GT has the lighting down, it just needs to up the quality of environmental assets next gen. I think the topography is no pretty good, as is how details come together in the distance...but the vegetation needs to be all 3d next gen...I've been complaining about the vegetation since GT3
MilkyJoe
Member
Well that's slightly different to what we've seen.
Prithee Be Careful
Industry Professional
ResidentDante
Member
So got to play the GTS demo yesterday on a PS4 phat, and I've played quite a bit of FM7 on a Xbox One S, no HDR on either, but here are some thoughts in comparison:
-GTS has the upper hand on tarmac and some of the environment textures, they just look more detailed. Guessing the Xbox One X texture pack will close the gap.
-Scenery looks about to be on the same detail level imo, Forza 7 seems to have a little less static scenery with a bit of moving stuff thrown in to liven the passing scenery up a tad more.
-Actual in-game car models look pretty on par, while cars into the distance both loose quite a bit of detail fairly quickly. Both games suffer from aliasing.
-GTS nails lighting more consistently. Although Forza can look just as good at times, while other times a bit off. I do like the dynamic weather approach in FM7 though, would be nice with a similar thing in GTS.
-Forza 7 seems to have the more clean image quality with better IQ, GTS has quite a bit of blurring going on.
-Cockpit view in GTS is nice, looking back on the analogue stick shows me a view through the back window which I enjoyed as a nice detail. Forza 7 cockpit is more immersive with more shaking etc, while GTS' looks somewhat static. Project Cars beat them both here though. I like that I can change the FOV in GTS though!
-Rooftop cam in GTS is a joke, could they really not be bothered to place a proper hood cam on the 86 chassies they have? Exterior camera in GTS is also very strange and requires tweaking in the options which seems really unnecessary.
-The seaside track and oval in GTS look great, while the rally track looks like a poorly designed 3D environment, it really stood out as ugly. Then again why play rally in a racer like this when Dirt etc has this covered so well?!
-Do we need huge, low res sparks constantly flying in the oval GTS? The sparks in GT3 were much less frequent and more subtle, even back then.
-The AI in GTS seems to jsut drive in a line with a set gap between each car, while the drivatar stuff in FM7 goes completely beserk at times with a destruction derby. Guess both need an overhaul here.
While the visuals heights of GTS look better than Forza 7, the consistency in FM7's visuals are better I think.
And the whole "GTS is a generation apart" BS needs to stop immediately, it's an embarrassing and stupid remark. They are clearly both very close visually, focusing on slightly different visual approaches. Both are beautiful racers on stock hardware for this gen.
-GTS has the upper hand on tarmac and some of the environment textures, they just look more detailed. Guessing the Xbox One X texture pack will close the gap.
-Scenery looks about to be on the same detail level imo, Forza 7 seems to have a little less static scenery with a bit of moving stuff thrown in to liven the passing scenery up a tad more.
-Actual in-game car models look pretty on par, while cars into the distance both loose quite a bit of detail fairly quickly. Both games suffer from aliasing.
-GTS nails lighting more consistently. Although Forza can look just as good at times, while other times a bit off. I do like the dynamic weather approach in FM7 though, would be nice with a similar thing in GTS.
-Forza 7 seems to have the more clean image quality with better IQ, GTS has quite a bit of blurring going on.
-Cockpit view in GTS is nice, looking back on the analogue stick shows me a view through the back window which I enjoyed as a nice detail. Forza 7 cockpit is more immersive with more shaking etc, while GTS' looks somewhat static. Project Cars beat them both here though. I like that I can change the FOV in GTS though!
-Rooftop cam in GTS is a joke, could they really not be bothered to place a proper hood cam on the 86 chassies they have? Exterior camera in GTS is also very strange and requires tweaking in the options which seems really unnecessary.
-The seaside track and oval in GTS look great, while the rally track looks like a poorly designed 3D environment, it really stood out as ugly. Then again why play rally in a racer like this when Dirt etc has this covered so well?!
-Do we need huge, low res sparks constantly flying in the oval GTS? The sparks in GT3 were much less frequent and more subtle, even back then.
-The AI in GTS seems to jsut drive in a line with a set gap between each car, while the drivatar stuff in FM7 goes completely beserk at times with a destruction derby. Guess both need an overhaul here.
While the visuals heights of GTS look better than Forza 7, the consistency in FM7's visuals are better I think.
And the whole "GTS is a generation apart" BS needs to stop immediately, it's an embarrassing and stupid remark. They are clearly both very close visually, focusing on slightly different visual approaches. Both are beautiful racers on stock hardware for this gen.
Prithee Be Careful
Industry Professional
Your personal judgement might not be the most reliable - actual side-by-sides reveal a fairly stark disparity:
700+ Cars vs 150(+-) cars
Some models will of course look worse.
Maybe we should compare a higher quality Forza 7 Cockpit?
JackAubrey
Member
To add to this as someone who has played both in HDR.
1, GTS HDR implementation is better than FM7. FM is a bit too dark and when boosted then loses out at the top end. However I think Horizon 3 has them both beat when it comes to HDR.
2, I'd say 8/10 times Forza looks better in race than GTS, certainly much less sterile. But due to the dynamic lighting you do get overcast races in Forza that look pretty flat.
3, GTS replays are far better. Forza camera work is poor. But GTS replays focus more on the car to try to hide some poor scenery. The various effects at work in GTS replays are superb, but I think it's the camera work more than anything that make them look much better than FM7. I'd love to see what FM looked like with good replay cameras.
4, GTS cockpit view is a bit sterile. And it's a shame there's no proper hood view. Forza 7's new "driver" view is something that GTS could have done with.
5, When looking its best GTS is the better looking game. But Forza 7 is much more consistent - and is doing more in terms of number of cars on the track, weather etc. The GTS low points are more obvious due to the inconsistency. Like playing the rally track and just thinking "eeewww".
6, Outside of race GTS is obviously the better looker - the focus on scapes etc.
7, I wish GTS had more options for the HUD. It's very much all or nothing. And the all is a bit much. FM7 offers more choice here.
They are both good looking games. One reaches some dizzying heights. The other is more consistent. With camera/car movement, weather, lighting changes, - Forza is more thrilling in race. GTS is a lovely showcase of cars, and replays and scapes are amazing. Though I'd prefer more of the focus to the most important part - in race.
Thanks to yesterday's improved Nvidia driver I've been playing more PC than Xbox FM7 over the last 24 hours. Playing in 4KHDR. It'll be interesting to see how similar the Xbox One X version is to that or whether there are some other tricks for that version. Oh for a replay mode that did justice to how FM7 looks in 4K. GTS owners are in for a treat when it comes to replays. But I race more than I replay.
I'm still unsure whether to get GTS for my Pro. At times it's gorgeous. But it feels a bit soulless to me. And my last four games purchases are Dirt 4 (PC), WRC 7 (PC), PCars 2 (PC) and Forza Motorsport 7 (PC/Xbox). I might be too full of cars for now
AbandonedTrolley
Member
From what I've seen you could compare cockpits all day long and there would still only be one winner. Forza just doesn't seem to nail their shaders and lighting as well as PD do. I mean that leather on the Mazda looks awful and what's going on with the top of the dash on the left?
dr guildo
Member
To be fair, this is my fault, the first and last shot are zoomed samples from the photomode tiny display screen.
JackAubrey
Member
There are no subtleties here are there. Any difference is "stark", anything not as good as another thing is "awful."
Are cockpits all that matter in a racing game, though? For me, they're basically irrelevant as I only play with behind the car camera. And I think Forza 7 maxed on PC (no dynamic optimization), 4K HDR, looks better than GTS on PS4 Pro.
The HDR in GTS is better, though.
AbandonedTrolley
Member
Oh not at all but he was mentioning about using a different cockpit but I really don't think that would help.
PC will/should always look better, but then you have to think 'would' Gran Turismo look even better than that if that was run on the hardware available in your PC. The PC should always be able to brute force better resolutions/AA/textures due to the nature of their build and power.
they outsource their modelling, a requirement to maintain their short release schedule. how much can they love cars when they're not even building them themselves? the fact is when you get someone else to do your work you lose your ability to maintain any semblance of consistency. quality control goes out the window. the forza interior model in that example looks like something you'd buy off turbosquid in the mid price category...it's...adequate, i'd maybe use it in a scene where it wasn't the main focus of an image, but it hardly meets the standards i would associate with this current gen. i mean, it's all well and good having native 4k resolutions, but when your cars look faceted as hell with shoddy model work and materials i'm not sure it's a combination that's particularly flattering. you should be attempting to hide that stuff not make it more obvious.
i honestly think forza motorsport needs longer dev cycles so they can improve on stuff like this. i get the impression they don't have the time to craft things as well as they should be.
JackAubrey
Member
Definitely. FM7 starts too dark. And in the in-game tuner if you raise the dark level you lose highlights at the top end.
I'm sure they could fix it. But I don't know if they will.
Meanwhile in Horizon 3 they had this nailed and the HDR looks amazing. One of many things that worked great in Horizon 3 and for some reason they didn't carry over to Motorsport.
JackAubrey
Member
Not all formula one teams make their own ignition systems. I think they hate motorsports. Filthy casuals.
ResidentDante
Member
That's a worst case scenario though, the FM7 interior is done really rough and the leather texture should be replaced as it's grainy as hell on that car. But just viewing out of the front window when driving, or setting the camera outside the car they look very alike visually on the cars.
So if Turn 10 are having so much time issues, why does it take Polyphony four years to make a track looking like this:
Sloppy 3D modelling goes both ways on GTS and FM7 in parts, you're getting extremely one-sided, as you have consistently done in the past against Forza games on this forum.
As a racing game developer myself (not working on those franchises), your post is really infuriating.
This post is really silly. Modeling a car in high detail, coupled with scanning and everything you need to do is a tremendous effort. You have no idea what you are talking about and simply have no clue about game development. Saying T10 does not love cars is just hilarious and makes you look like a fool.
dr guildo
Member
Replays are ProPerfMode@60fps.
Sorry, I am confused. Replays run at 60 fps on the Pro? And also, do they add any extra graphics settings over normal gameplay?
AbandonedTrolley
Member
DoF and motion blur
Stupid post of the day.
Pretty much every IT company in software/games outsource in some way or another.
It's a model, how it looks in-game with lighting/materials is due to T10 not the company who created the model.
Maybe higher-LoD car models and higher MSAA as well? I guess we need Digital Foundry to suss the replays out. They do look really good even on OG PS4, I'm impressed with the IQ in gameplay and replays.
ethomaz
Banned
There are different Replay modes in game.
- PS4 Amateur 30fps Replay (the one you see in external cameras): add motion blur and possible some more post processing (? to be fair it looks just motion blur... AA is the same).
- PS4 Amateur 60fps Replay (cockpit/internal view): gameplay graphics without any change.
Now I dont have a Pro so I guess/believe the same options is available on Pro HQ mode as PS4 Amateur and the difference is Pro Perf. mode where all Replays are 60fps.
Any Replay shot with internal/cockpit view you are looking at gameplay graphics without changes (I cant really confirm that for Pro like I said).
Aliasing is the same on replay that means same AA... LOD are the same... DoF is questionable but I believe there is no change too.
Motion blur is the big apparent change in external cameras... internal camera looks the same as gameplay.
Peterthumpa
Member
lol, what's up with this "PS4 Amateur" slang now.
And yeah, you're right about the Pro differences.
DoF isn't questionable, there's none in gameplay but it's used to great effect in replays.
I just can't see them doing 30fps replays just for some motion blur, it's not that costly for performance.
That sums it up perfectly thanks!
Well, can't say I agree. Graphics are tied to performance. I said it a few dozen pages before: you could easily make a mind blowing game that has the best graphics - when it would run at 20 fps. It would be the clear winner of this thread but nobody would want to play it because of the bad performance. So sure, performance is also part of this thread and rightfully so.
One of the bigger issues with the internet in general. There is no range in description or opinion. It's either amazing or crap.
It's crazy that you would double down on this when there are plenty of developers who outsource work in multiple genres. Do you think there are no quality checks when they receive a car and would just accept anything? IIRC they don't even outsource all of the work.
And to question the amount of investment a team has because their development model differs from another demonstrates such a high level of nativity that it's embarrassing.
Did you try out HDR on both the PC and Xbox? I only got to try the PC demo since I don't own an Xbox but I'm curious how the output compares. In my experience with other games, HDR has been a bit hit or miss on the PC with other games.
And some people wonder why more devs don't post on the fanboy fueled forum GAF can be at times.
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
This is essentially why GTS is on top and why PD are adamant to keep all modelling in house: they want to model it themselves and keep the quality.
More importantly, less people would even want to look at it. Games with better performance look better in motion as well. Separating the two makes little sense.
That post was drivel. Not that I'm shocked to see you co-signing it though.
Watching explanations like "outsource = bad, good studios don't outsource" is so simplistic, it's like watching a Sega fan cling to "blast processing" after seeing a commercial in the 90s. People have no clue about the relative talent of the modellers, in or out of the studio. Those who've worked in *any* office setting involving outsourcing probably cringe any time it comes up.
Yuuuup.
TBiddy
Member
This thread has it all. Junior arm chair developers with a CV only containing meaningful neogaf posts like TLW, as well as senior project managers which can even judge projects for games they don't play on consoles they don't own as well as people knowing what's good for a game and by this even inducing shaking heads from actual game developers.
wumster3000
Member
Yeah, Some people really have no clue what they are talking about. It makes it easy to appreciate the technical experts here. Conversely, it makes it easier to spot the fanboys and want to be experts and there are a lot in this thread.
AbandonedTrolley
Member
Yeah I mean I personally HATE when Sony outsource their remasters to two bit fly by night studios like BluePoint /s
Exactly. When your targeted frame rate determines how much time you have to render each frame, frame rate should definitely be part of the discussion.
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
If you're going to reply then its best to actually have a reply.
Except I never said that: more like outsourcing can lead to quality loss, especially when you have a high bar like PD, and its evident to see in racing titles like Forza. Choosing where to outsource is important ( and can be beneficial) but lets not act like outsourcing isn't also done to do things cheaply and quickly.
I think we can get rid of that "high bar" myth if we look at the last few entries in the GT series.
transformer
Member
It should. I would add that a stable, high, frame rate adds much to the graphics of a game while playing it. In my opinion, I'll take 60fps with all the compromises that come along with it everytime with simulation style racing games. I think it not only plays better with 60 fps, but looks better too. This won't come out in screenshots, but I don't play screenshots.
You can honestly look at a game and tell what assets have been outsourced?
eso76
Member
Mr. PlayStation
Member
wait so what's wrong with it again?
Prithee Be Careful
Industry Professional
Yup, look what it did to Horizon Zero Dawn. Game is rough as fuck thanks to asset outsourcing...
FlutterPuffs
Member
I get what Psycho Mantis has to say actually. Have a couple of friends who work in outsourcing, and their job is to create models, textures quick.
Not to say that the assets are at a horrendous quality though, but when it comes to Forza vs Gran Turismo, I'd say it would be very difficult for outsourced companies to create assets that are at the level Polyphony modelers/texture artists can do. Also with top devs like Valve, Naughty Dog etc who are filled to the brim with the best in the industry.
Remember that most of these works are given to the lowest bidder.
Not to say that the assets are at a horrendous quality though, but when it comes to Forza vs Gran Turismo, I'd say it would be very difficult for outsourced companies to create assets that are at the level Polyphony modelers/texture artists can do. Also with top devs like Valve, Naughty Dog etc who are filled to the brim with the best in the industry.
Remember that most of these works are given to the lowest bidder.
LukasTaves
Member
Most likely outsorcing has nothing to do with it, but rather it's a matter of budget and how much content you have to do.
Even if both games had the same budgets (and they do not) Forza would have less allocated to each car because it has so much more cars to model.