Psycho_Mantis
Banned
Is this actually DriveClub....mother of god
-
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
Is this actually DriveClub....mother of god
I absolutely DESPISE when games do this. If I think something is cool enough to record, I'll record it!! Typically these auto-recorded videos are never anything of interest to me and some games do them at the most ridiculous of times (like for every Ultra you ever perform in Killer Instinct Classic).
There needs to be a system-level option to disable this imo.
Tomeru
Member
Why do you act like its getting in your way?
Just because I'd rather "My Clips" be filled with clips that I choose to record, and not 10 KI Classic videos a day (from a single arcade mode playthrough), or random Ryse kills and FH2 jumps that I don't care about. FH2 hasn't been too bad tbh, but a lot of games with this functionality, have it attached to conditions that will occur far too frequently.
Prior to the added video sharing functionality (liking and trending), it was also making the clips hub for these games completely worthless as only 1 in every 20 or so clips wouldn't be an auto-recorded moment that looked exactly like all the others. It's not a bad functionality to have, but it should be completely optional to have enabled.
1.21Gigawatts
Banned
I own neither but I've spent a few hours with both games.
FH2 is definitely the more consistent looking game.
But Driveclub is definitely the better looking game.
The amount of details, the foliage quality, the lighting, the little things like refelections here and there, the texturework, the variety, all this is superior in Driveclub, sometimes vastly superior.
Image quality however is superior in FH2. Its not a big difference in motion, though.
I think foliage in FH2 looks pretty last gen, the amount of it is next gen, but the look isn't good. But also not that noticable in motion. What I did notice in motion is the lack of foliage variety.
That's not a glitch, that's the foliage shadow refracting through the windscreen.
I see some people have brought up textures. Here are some from just a few feet away...yet they're still pretty freaking good looking. I've not seen another arcade racer this detailed within a few feet.
Figure I'll grab some random shots I've taken from the hundreds I've done across the game.
It is.
Figure I'll grab some random shots I've taken from the hundreds I've done across the game.
Transition from asphalt to dirt/gravel
Random grass shot texture
Random building
Random Fair Equipment
Asphalt to gravel to grass
A Hanger at the airport
Asphalt to dirt to grass
It is.
EightBitNate
Member
Shandy is that FH2? Looks great.
Forza Horizon 2 Time Lapse on hill side....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5sA7gRt69s&feature=youtu.be
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5sA7gRt69s&feature=youtu.be
Awesome. I wish it was a hood cam though instead of 3rd person.
That's a really cool vista for that.
eso76
Member
Both amazing looking games.
a lot more advanced than anything else, actually.
I doubt there are weather forecast softwares so accurate
I wonder if they could somehow use a similar tech for smoke and dust from cars one day.
a lot more advanced than anything else, actually.
I doubt there are weather forecast softwares so accurate
I wonder if they could somehow use a similar tech for smoke and dust from cars one day.
The tech is awesome, but the result is far from ideal. In fact, I'd say old tech looks more convincing, although probably not as impressive.Both amazing looking games.
a lot more advanced than anything else, actually.
I doubt there are weather forecast softwares so accurate
I wonder if they could somehow use a similar tech for smoke and dust from cars one day.
drugstore_cowboy
Member
Which game using this old tech looks better?
See how I used the word convincing, rather than best. Arma 3 skies look far more convincing than DC's under most circumstances, IMO. Project CARS, from the latest blend and soft clouds videos I've seen (they're private to WMD members at the moment) also looks more convincing in general. The tech in PC is following a different approach, maybe not as advanced, but I find it more believeable and flexible for the purpose it's following (which is not doing timelapse videos, but having the whole package when it comes to time and weather cycles).
ninjablade
Banned
gran turismo 5 or 6 probably
warning most of these are bullshots of gran turismo 5
of course DC destroys gran turismo 5 graphically during gameplay being that it's on a console 10x more powerful, but is the lighting engine worth all the sacrifices there making, 30fps, IQ and AF are not as great as they should be.
I see some people have brought up textures. Here are some from just a few feet away...yet they're still pretty freaking good looking. I've not seen another arcade racer this detailed within a few feet.
Figure I'll grab some random shots I've taken from the hundreds I've done across the game.
It is.
These are awesome. Really wish both games had better AF to see longer stretches of high res ground textures.
Both amazing looking games.
a lot more advanced than anything else, actually.
I doubt there are weather forecast softwares so accurate
I wonder if they could somehow use a similar tech for smoke and dust from cars one day.
GT5/6 smoke are volumetric and probably comes the closest. The particle resolution could still use some work though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy34t6kBTqk&t=0m08s
The previous vs thread for Forza/Gran Turismo seemed to do a good job of keeping other discussion threads a little neater, and made a heck of a fun "Reader's Digest" of the best of the genre. Screenshots, gifs and webms are all good. The only rules I'd like to see adhered to are as follows:
(1) Please name the game. In the title, in the post, whichever. Yes, it may be obvious to a lot of us, but it just keeps things simpler for everyone.
(2) Specify if it's from a photo mode or real-time.
(3) Please be careful with quoting long/large image-posts. It's gonna be choppy enough in here for mobile users as it is.
Mario Kart 8 Gameplay:
The format's down to whatever the person contributing them wants to use. That being said, things like the Lynda.com tutorial for how to easily produce WebM content might be worth a look for those of you thinking about contributing media.
Edit: FasTRapid gave the following formatting tip:
Those MK8 gifs are a really bad selection. They're only showing mono colored environments from an MK Wii retro stage with nothing going on. Wouldn't it have been better to use something from a more detailed track like Toads Turnpike or Rainbow Road?
That sounds like it would be a worthwhile contribution to the thread.
drugstore_cowboy
Member
GT can still look great overall imo, that shot in the daylight is better than I remember. The game always looked at it's most convincing when the sun was low or stuck behind a cloud.
a lot more advanced than anything else, actually.
I doubt there are weather forecast softwares so accurate
I wonder if they could somehow use a similar tech for smoke and dust from cars one day.
Warhawk had pretty cool volmetric clouds.
a lot more advanced than anything else, actually.
I doubt there are weather forecast softwares so accurate
I wonder if they could somehow use a similar tech for smoke and dust from cars one day.
Hopefully we'll see something like this on the current generation:
Maybe PD could pull something close to that, they still have the best smoke imo
and just for comparison here's Driveclub's smoke
I spent some time going back and forth between the two games. In Driveclub's favor, it has WAY better lighting, and much more impressive environments in scope and detail. For FH2, there is so little aliasing that the image looks WAY cleaner than DC. Seriously, looking back and forth, there is aliasing everywhere in DC, and it really tarnishes the image. I realized that the image is not necessarily softer than FH's like I had initially thought; it's just more the aliasing getting in the way of greatness. Also, FH2 has a proper bokeh-based DoF, while DC has an outdated and ugly looking blur filter.
It's a shame that DC has so much aliasing, because it's the only thing that stands in the way of an otherwise much more impressive looking game.
It's a shame that DC has so much aliasing, because it's the only thing that stands in the way of an otherwise much more impressive looking game.
Are you sure you've got sharpness turned all the way down on your set? Artificial edge enhancements can really exasperate juggles. Calibration can help a lot too!
It's pretty good. The middleware Evolution Studios used for these clouds seems to be TrueSky by Simul and have been used in other games as well, like Arma 3. I think also Ubisoft is using it in some of their games.
Yup, I do, and it's calibrated properly. I didn't realize there was such a discrepancy until I kept switching inputs between the two games. Then I started noticing all the little areas everywhere that there is aliasing that is nowhere to be found on FH2.
ninjablade
Banned
LOL this is exactly how i feel based on watching HQ gamersyde videos, although i find overall driveclub to be more impressive, still the ps4 is 40-50% more powerful, it should have a much better looking game, is that lighting engine taxing the ps4 that much? a 30fps racer on PS4 should having amazing IQ and AF, i'm sorry but there is no excuse.
Driveclub has a bunch of simulations like wind, cloud, dust particles, atmospherics and a bunch of other nonsense. Evolution, IMO, might have missed the forest for the trees with this game. I look at their trailers and bullshots and I think "yeah, 30fps justified." I look at the screens people are posting and I don't get quite get it.
The weirdest thing to me about the game are the honestly low-quality implementations of post-effects like depth of field and motion blur.
NullPointer
Member
How many console games are running real-time global illumination?
I have no idea, but if somebody else is pulling off that lighting with better IQ that'd definitely be a fair point.
The game doesn't screenshot well, nope. But in motion its absolutely fantastic - the whole effect of all of it coming together can be breathtaking at times. At a lot of times really.Driveclub has a bunch of simulations like wind, cloud, dust particles, atmospherics and a bunch of other nonsense. Evolution, IMO, might have missed the forest for the trees with this game. I look at their trailers and bullshots and I think "yeah, 30fps justified." I look at the screens people are posting and I don't get quite get it.
I don't think the "ps4 is 40-50% more powerful, it should have a much better looking game" is really fair. They're completely different developers, prioritizing different things. Playground also had the advantage of having assets from this generation to work with, whereas Evolution had to build everything from the ground up. And the lighting, combined with the fully volumetric cloud cover and other simulations IS very taxing, I'm sure.
It is very disappointing that there is so much aliasing in DC, and I hope maybe Evolution can go something about it even post-launch, but the game is still amazing looking. The lighting and sky systems are well beyond any other racing game.
I don't think there's a single other game out there that uses real time dynamic global illumination with time of day properly replicated. Pretty sure DriveClub is the first game in history to have it, and I'd imagine it'd be highly taxing.
ninjablade
Banned
Driveclub has a bunch of simulations like wind, cloud, dust particles, atmospherics and a bunch of other nonsense. Evolution, IMO, might have missed the forest for the trees with this game. I look at their trailers and bullshots and I think "yeah, 30fps justified." I look at the screens people are posting and I don't get quite get it.
The weirdest thing to me about the game are the honestly low-quality implementations of post-effects like depth of field and motion blur.
exactly we got this running 60fps on a console 10x less powerful, 4 years ago, if driveclub was 60fps or looked like the bullshots then i would be impressed.
StudioTan
Hold on, friend! I'd love to share with you some swell news about the Windows 8 Metro UI! Wait, where are you going?
I'm not sure how you can try to claim it's someone's TV when we have images in this thread that show pretty poor IQ with DC with lots of aliasing:
Look at the hood of the car, for instance.
DC has a better lighting system but certainly has much worse IQ.
Driveclub has a bunch of simulations like wind, cloud, dust particles, atmospherics and a bunch of other nonsense. Evolution, IMO, might have missed the forest for the trees with this game. I look at their trailers and bullshots and I think "yeah, 30fps justified." I look at the screens people are posting and I don't get quite get it.
The weirdest thing to me about the game are the honestly low-quality implementations of post-effects like depth of field and motion blur.
I agree.
SO Canada has a million trees? the clouds are 3d? There are wind physics that effect the way water ripples?
Wtf does any of that matter if the cost of having those things results in poor IQ and chappy blur, no aliasing, af ect.
I actually do think drive club looks good, but even up to the release of the game I wondered why evolution focused on that stuff so much. Why map out a huge swath of land in 3d when the game is a circuit racer?
I'm not a programmer by any means but it seems they could have taken another less demanding solution for lighting and the environment and it's associated physics and vastly improved games IQ.
While clouds and global illumination are nice, when I'm racing I don't really pay much attention to the details around me anyway, so most of the time I'm not seeing the rippling water or the wind blowing the trees, instead I'm staring at my jagged dash, or jagged rear end of my car.
I'm also not convinced that these environmental physics are doing anything for the actual driving part of the game. It's not a sim anyway. How much difference could it actually make? How much does it really matter?
The fact that forza horizon 2 looks nearly as good, sometimes better and is open world speaks volumes about how important it is to put effort into the right areas for a given genre.
Edit.
Also, seeing time lapse of both games weather systems makes me think that forza horizon 2 clouds and weather are fine, they move in real time, cast shadows and seem to do everything that drive club clouds do. But cost less system resources to do. Drive club clouds just seems like there are more of them then anything else.
drugstore_cowboy
Member
Just how demanding was Sega Rally Revo's deformable terrain?
Horizon has done night and rain, wondering if they'd have a bash at that next.
Horizon has done night and rain, wondering if they'd have a bash at that next.
NullPointer
Member
As long as they integrate all of the rally stuff from the H1 expansion into Horizon 3 everything else would be gravy.
I honestly expected a bigger jump from H1 to H2, but I don't doubt for one second what Playground can and will achieve given the time and comfort with the new hardware.
I'm not sure how you can try to claim it's someone's TV when we have images in this thread that show pretty poor IQ with DC with lots of aliasing:
Look at the hood of the car, for instance.
DC has a better lighting system but certainly has much worse IQ.
man the textures in the game just kill me. the mip levels are severe.
drugstore_cowboy
Member
Really would have liked to see Rally return to Horizon, as bare bones as it was I had more of a rush playing it than any point in the main game. Haven't played enough of H2 to compare the games yet though.
Like F5 I wasn't expecting huge things at the beginning of the gen, hope the games do enough to stay fresh next time.
You're looking at a still, presumably on a laptop or PC monitor, where jaggies are going to appear far worse than they do in the game on an actual HD TV whilst being played, especially in motion. Driveclub's IQ is far from perfect, and indeed jaggies do show up, but overall the IQ is still actually decent. Not really much different to NFS or other racers in that regard, and there are actually racers out there with worse IQ, such as Forza 5 for example, which has worse anti aliasing and anisotropic filtering compared to Driveclub.
NullPointer
Member
Am still very much in love with Forza 5. It was a great upgrade, the performance was absolutely 100% solid, and Turn 10 made the choice not to go the premium + standard route like GT5, instead focusing on less content of higher quality. I definitely agree with that choice. Drivatars need some work, but the idea behind them is absolutely rational if you want to see true to life intelligence behind other cars on the track.
For Forza 6 I expect to see some more changeable driving conditions, but only once Turn 10 knows they can provide it without budging that pitch perfect framerate. Until they can do that they're right to hold off on adding a lot of the stuff they know we've all been clamoring for for years.
Those priorities don't always come across in the screenshots and gifs, but in the on-track in-game experience, where is where all of this ultimately matters.
Has there ever been a better time to be a driving/racing fan than right now? Even these graphical debates show how great we have it, no matter our choice of platform. We've got it so damn good right now, and there's still plenty coming down the pipe.
BruiserBear
Banned
Thanks for reminding me how fucking amazing GT 5/6 can look. Holy shit. I just hope they don't compromise on framerate/tearing next time. I consider those non negotiable aspects of a sim racer.
This post summarizes my general feelings on the Forza franchise. There are some very smart people at Turn 10 and Playground. It seems like they make the right call in every situation, at least in terms of things that matter to me. Prioritizing 4xMSAA for FH2 was the right call IMO.
This post summarizes my general feelings on the Forza franchise. There are some very smart people at Turn 10 and Playground. It seems like they make the right call in every situation, at least in terms of things that matter to me. Prioritizing 4xMSAA for FH2 was the right call IMO.
I'm not sure how you can try to claim it's someone's TV when we have images in this thread that show pretty poor IQ with DC with lots of aliasing:
Look at the hood of the car, for instance.
DC has a better lighting system but certainly has much worse IQ.
That aliasing is from the very low res reflections on the car.
Driveclub has a bunch of simulations like wind, cloud, dust particles, atmospherics and a bunch of other nonsense. Evolution, IMO, might have missed the forest for the trees with this game. I look at their trailers and bullshots and I think "yeah, 30fps justified." I look at the screens people are posting and I don't get quite get it.
The weirdest thing to me about the game are the honestly low-quality implementations of post-effects like depth of field and motion blur.
Exactly how I feel.
Looking at the all the other stuff they're doing (http://blog.us.playstation.com/2014/06/05/51-details-about-driveclub-on-ps4/) I wish they would have rather made good IQ (at the very least decent AA/AF) a priority
I don't care about fair. I care which console is producing the better looking game when they get a first party AAA game on them.
Let's ignore the power differences clueless fanboys have calculated and look at these games.
FH2 actually BEATS DC in some areas of image quality.... and it's OPEN WORLD! Holy shit. I'd seen all the screen shots and gifs and I didn't think FH2 had a chance. But in the end, DC looks worse than what was posted beforehand and FH2 looks better. Everyone was saying "Driveclub has jagged power lines, but I'm sure it'll be fixed by launch!" Instead it has more jaggies.
Add on top of that functioning weather and it's not even close. FH2 OWNS this. And if anyone wants to use this game as a referendum on consoles. .. the XB1 is more powerful using this measuring stick.
You don't seem to understand the image quality does not necessarily correlate with system power. It also doesn't have anything to do with whether or not it's open world. If its graphical fidelity was better than DC AND it was open world, THAT would be worthy of praise. However, DC easily beats FH2 in graphical fidelity.
It's also absolutely ludicrous to factor in FH2's weather effects as a way to say it looks better than DC. It's not indicative of FH2's engine being better than DC's, as DC is getting it soon and the effects started late in the dev cycle (hence the delay), and the effect itself can't be directly compared to DC's current lack of one.
In regards to your bizarre drivel at the beginning of your post, I don't really know how to respond to such nonsense.