If only they had 40+ person multiplayer on consoles... That would be incredible.
-
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.
Digital Foundry: Project CARS Performance Analysis (PS4/XB1)
- Thread starter bombshell
- Start date
eso76
Member
What i said is:
IF you capped the number of opponents to 15 and always raced in the sun (thus matching FM5 features), Project Cars would probably run just as smoothly.
Rock solid framerate in all weather conditions and with such a large grid wasn't going to happen. Too many variables with a heavy impact on performance at play; you need so much headroom to deal with those extreme scenarios, you'd have to make the game look much worse in typical conditions (the majority of time).
We'll see what T10 does with FM6. Not having rain at this point, or even dynamic TOD, would really hurt them but i have a feeling they won't be in AGAIN.
Now your full of shit gt6 was a technical mess along with last gen assets. Higher resolution than majority of xbone games, you need to be ran out of this thread with your bullshit.
qa_engineer
Member
I've been lurking in the thread for a while but have yet to comment because I wanted to see high quality video. Now that I've seen the 60 fps video on Gamersyde I can definitely say the ghosting is very noticeable on the windshield wiper and is distracting, almost disorienting. The ghosting isn't noticeable on the other cars as the screenshots suggest, at least for me it isn't.
Uhm, GT6 - 1440*1080 = 1555200 pixels
Average Xbone game - 1600*900 = 1440000 pixels.
Can check it for yourself. It's not the most polished experience but then again the ambition is astounding, dynamic lighting/weather, 16 cars on track, volumetric smoke with dynamic shadowing, hell even the backdrops aren't 2D images like in Forza/PCars but actual terrain.
AbandonedTrolley
Member
Being fair GT6 runs at 1440x1080 = 1,555,200 pixels
Project Cars on XB1 runs 1600x900? = 1,440,000 pixels
So it was pushing more than this, admittedly not greatly, but still more and on VERY old hardware
Beaten
Tried the game on PC last night. Definitely a game for a wheel. Gamepad had me spinnign out of control all over the palce. There's just not enough nuance and accuracy ona gamepad's triggers and analog stick.
Still, the game looks gorgeous. I was running on ultra settings with SMAA at full, getting 60 FPS on my 780ti. Pretty sweet.
The UI is a bit of a emss though. Nto very intuative, and I can't seem to quit the game via gamepad.
Any recommendations on a wheel?
Still, the game looks gorgeous. I was running on ultra settings with SMAA at full, getting 60 FPS on my 780ti. Pretty sweet.
The UI is a bit of a emss though. Nto very intuative, and I can't seem to quit the game via gamepad.
Any recommendations on a wheel?
qa_engineer
Member
FYI even Gran Turismo 5, which ran great on PS3, had nearly the same amount of pixels rendered on screen at 1280x1080, or 1,382,400 pixels.
Yeah, people don't give PD enough credit, despite all the shortcomings in game design, from the technical point of view GT has always been ahead of the pack, on top of pushing a resolution that's isn't uncommon on currentgen at 60fps (with drops, but still) on a system with 256mb of VRAM and a crappy GPU they were also pushing some things other devs like T10/SMS didn't even dare to pursue like dynamic lighting/weather, 16 car grids, animated pitstops and so on. I think right now people underestimate just how ambitious a PS4 GT might be, given what they've achieved on PS3 and now having a straight forward architecture with 10 times better specs at their disposal. Hell, even if they just made a lazy port of GT6 it would easily compete with Forza5/PCars from the graphics perspective. We ain't seen shit yet.
Fredrik
Member
I never mentioned any specific games but I'm sure I lack some technical knowledge because to me it makes no sense that AAA games in general seems to have better optimization. My belief is simply that Nintendo aren't trying to get Ultra HD PC graphics to run on WiiU, they've accepted that the system can't cope with that and they're just great a hitting that sweet spot were the game worlds have the right size and amount of details for the console to still manage to maintain the targeted 60fps. And why wouldn't that work for PS4 and PCars too? Same tracks and cars but less details and graphical effects, less cars on track, lower resolution = better performance? It works on the PC version, why not on PS4?
Ran great compared to what nfs. Put it along forza, and no, it didn't run great. Gt6 also ran horrible with tearing and dropping frames. If your going to criticize pcars then don't use gran turismo as any benchmark.
Put it in 720p mode on a track with pre baked lighting and no weather and it run just as well as forza.
Journey
Banned
The old Xbox ran games at higher resolutions as well, doesn't really mean anything if you're not running the same assets.
I wasn't suggesting it doesn't exist, I've seen the still shots of it already. I was saying that it is hardly headache inducing if you look at an actual 60fps video of it and that the uploaded 30fps video on youtube exaggerates the effect because it will be missing frames, compounding the issue. I agree that an option is good.
The problem is these consoles are nowhere as powerful enough to target 60FPS while furthering visual fidelity.
It's just not possible.
These consoles need to aim for a locked 30FPS while pushing the graphics. The difference between this generation and last, is little and not helped by the large textures of newer titles, aiming for a demanding 60FPS, etc., etc.,, that are preventing us from seeing a big leap to next generation.
Console gamers will continue to yell "60 FPS or nothing" when in reality, they are preventing better graphics to be pushed and spreading the console can be a PC mentality among developers.
It's just not possible.
These consoles need to aim for a locked 30FPS while pushing the graphics. The difference between this generation and last, is little and not helped by the large textures of newer titles, aiming for a demanding 60FPS, etc., etc.,, that are preventing us from seeing a big leap to next generation.
Console gamers will continue to yell "60 FPS or nothing" when in reality, they are preventing better graphics to be pushed and spreading the console can be a PC mentality among developers.
Sticky&Sweet
Banned
The framerate is unacceptable.
You and I remember GT5 very differently. The backdrops have basic geometry but for the most part they are just google maps satellite footage overlayed on a few polygons.
https://youtu.be/4dSkJl70pgY
nowifenolife
Member
Wow please please please sort out this blur ghosting issue for the ps4 sms, my eyes hurt due to constantly trying to focus the ghost blur, its the same feeling you get when say if you dont wear glasses and you try someones on your eyes hurt but not as bad... when in cockpit view most things outside the windshield blur on and off, the blur lasts too long, theres no way i can spend more than 30 mins on this, it feels like im going bogeyed, im not talking about depth of field either as i turned that off.
does anyone else's eyes hurt?
does anyone else's eyes hurt?
Insane Metal
Gold Member
Wow, this thread is looking pretty bad right now. Time to bail out I guess.
Shin-Ra
Junior Member
Whenever someone says this I always think back to The Orange Box on 360 - handled by Valve internally.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/the-orange-box-review
The 360 version of the Orange Box was generally considered a highly competent port, two years after 360 launched.
Fredrik
Member
Or aim for locked 60fps while pushing the graphics as far as possible without sacrificing a single frame drop? There's plenty of power in these consoles.
Yes, the game will initially get slaughtered on message boards when people compare it to Driveclub etc in still pics but few people will complain once it's actually played if they're interested in the genre and not just the graphics, nothing makes more sense for this genre than focusing on maintaining 60fps. Hopefully SMS can manage to patch it up with a weather on/off option or something, or a 20/40 cars on track option (similar to Motorhead on PS1 - aren't some racing devs from DICE on this team?) - Until then I'll be playing on PC instead or sitting on the fence waiting, haven't decided what to do yet.
Which is why i wouldn't be surprised if Forza 6 and GT7 ran at 1080p 60fps locked with all dynamic lighting/weather etc. With the right programmers you can squeeze blood out of a stone to certain degree. I don't know much about SMS but i assume they are a lot smaller team /budget than T10 and PD, so with that in mind i think they have done a good job.
Cars and tracks are of comparable quality to Pcars/Forza5, so the point stands.
I'm not sure what you take issue with there, that only shows his point. That is 3D terrain, not a 2D backdrop. This is a 2D backdrop
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kY4AuZkzi2E
Cars and track, are you nuts. Put the games next to each other then claim that bullshit. PD have never done tracks better than forza.
Up until Forza 5 they had the better Nurburgring.
Yeah, the terrain in the new circuit tracks stretches for miles with geometry. People are thinking Polyphony created it with something else in mind for the future (course maker compatible?)
Images courtesy of Wax.
I agree. They (or at least Sony) did the best job possible at the time given the price and power budgets. But this console generation should end rather sooner than later. Exclusive games like The Order look really good, but mult-iplatform games so far have disappointed me especially with bad AA. I'll probably build a gaming PC for my living room soon, if the alternative is to live with shitty aliasing and unlocked frame rates (and I would be ok with 30fps, as long as it is locked, and not fluctuating all over the place).
I played less than 5 mins and turned it off
I cant stop seeing the bluring so much i feel motion sickness and want to vomit.I'm very slow to reply to this, but the one of the SMS render developers replied in the CARS thread and described a lot of the game's details. With AF, for example, there are different levels used for different things. Off the top of my head, only the white lines use 8x AF, and other things use lower levels, apparently to save a little performance.
At first SMS just said they changed the AF from 4x to 8x on consoles without specifying anything. It was a bit misleading to be honest as I thought they meant everything on the road and not just white lines...
Wait wat? Jeez really now? Ps4 can handle 8 times what ps3 did, this is considered a little difference? And use this game with limited budget and resources to prove how this generation can't handle 60 fps it's really unfair. What they reached it's remarkable but doesn't mean with more budget and resources we can do better.
So it's just the white lines that are 8x with everything else and especially the tarmac that's between 2-4x? I think it would have been more fair to generalize the AF is 4x as DF pointed out.
No....not even close. Not in poly count, not in track detail, not in texture detail, not in trackside detail.
qa_engineer
Member
I'm not here to compare pcars to any other game. I was simply pointing out that GT5 ran at 1280x1080, which is nearly the same pixel count as most xbox one games at 1600x900..
Having spent almost a day with the PS4 version now I'd just like to say, there's a lot of alleged racing game fans in this thread believing in the bogeyman and cutting off their noses to spite their faces. Sure, it currently has its bugs and glitches (easily patched) but the game is utterly absorbing and totally thrilling. Graphical performance for 99% of the time in normal circumstances is absolutely stellar.
No....not even close. Not in poly count...
And what exactly do you think the polycount in GT is to make such a claim? Because you're dead wrong btw. GT5 has 200k polygons for the car models 500k in photomode. PCars has 60k. GT6 goes one step further and does the impossible, it does adaptive tessellation on a 9 year old console so talking about poly count is meaningless:
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/insane-polycount.307395/
it has some truly amazing graphics for a game on a console thats almost a decade old.
8X difference means shit when when the PS3 was 7 years old when the PS4 launched. A laptop CPU is more powerful than a PS3 CPU. I am not saying the game looks bad but consoles are not going to be pushing graphics at 60FPS with reasonable settings to PC. Developers should be focused on pushing graphical fidelity the best they can instead of aiming for PC-like settings (1080p, 60fps), but we have helped cause this obsession.
Yes GT6 performed worse than Forza but it did shit ton on a PS3 at a fairly high resolution, ofcourse the quality of its effect is worse than Project Cars but again it was on PS3 and gave out comparable performance while doing things that no other developer even attempted. And Project cars is providing similar performance with a machine that is 8 times more powerful with some 25% resolution boost and increased precision and quality of effects.
Just to say that you are moving goal posts here, no use bringing PC or the age of the older gen in argument here when you yourself said in your own post that the new consoles are not really powerful compared to the old one. It does not matter if a mid end PC outperforms or if a laptop has a better CPU, hell even the PS3 has a better CPU (in some aspects) than PS4.
The person who quoted you was arguing against your point about new consoles being barely an improvement over older ones. The comparison here is solely between a PS3 and PS4 wand by that merits a PS4 is a considerable improvement as 8x is a big jump.
Just to say that you are moving goal posts here, no use bringing PC or the age of the older gen in argument here when you yourself said in your own post that the new consoles are not really powerful compared to the old one. It does not matter if a mid end PC outperforms or if a laptop has a better CPU, hell even the PS3 has a better CPU (in some aspects) than PS4.
The person who quoted you was arguing against your point about new consoles being barely an improvement over older ones. The comparison here is solely between a PS3 and PS4 wand by that merits a PS4 is a considerable improvement as 8x is a big jump.
I'm talking about Forza 5. Derp
I'm not taking a shot at GT, the series is amazing, especially on the hardware it's on. I'm not, and I don't think anyone is, saying otherwise. GT7 should be awesome.
It's absolutely stupid to say the tracks and cars are on par with Forza 5 in poly count, track (and trackside) detail, textures, etc. It does have weather and other features that are nice, but saying cars and tracks are comparable, that's not honest in the least bit.
Anyone saying so looks ridiculous. ESPECIALLY in gameplay. If you think they're comparable, you're not playing them both in HD on the same setup. Some tracks in F5 probably have more track detail, texture detail, laser level detail, and trackside detail than multiple GT5/6 tracks put together. A single track can have hundreds of cars across parking lots, RVs, food vendors, attractions, miles of view distance on top of that. Take Sebring for example, the trackside detail is just incredible....to the point of being ridiculous. I'd love to know the polycount of just the vehicles/tents/buildings lining it.
I don't have PCars so I can't comment on it.
Just silly...and this is a PCars thread anyway. I'm done with the conversation.
Did my own capture last night of some racing in the wet with 20 AI cars. My main discovery is that racing in the wet is really hard.
I don't know how to get a fps counter on your xbone capture either, if someone knows how to do that I would appreciate knowing.
https://youtu.be/22F8PxujGTo
I don't know how to get a fps counter on your xbone capture either, if someone knows how to do that I would appreciate knowing.
https://youtu.be/22F8PxujGTo
Stop trying to derail this fucking awesome Forza vs Gran Turismo pissing contest, damn you!
You can't show framerate counts on the captures. Unless you mean you have the computer software/hardware that did the counting and wish to overlay it on the capture.
Oh...sorry.... GT was good up to 4, then it got shit and I moved to xbox and Forza
I capture using a Live Gamer Portable, in the preview screen on the PC I can turn on Fraps and it shows the fps, but I can't record the overlay.
Would love to know how DF and the like do it.
Shin-Ra
Junior Member
Polyphony still the champ of photo-mode user-made bullshottery.
TheAdmiester
Member
Fairly sure the 200k figure is definitely not in game. The Xbox One can't handle that for Forza's ingame models (which are around 60-100k IIRC), so there's no way the PS3 hardware can, especially with up to 16 cars on screen.
Also, your figure of the pCARS model quality is wrong. SMSRenderTeam stated that every car has an LODX model, which is used for Ultra model quality and the player's car renders at that level. I can't remember the exact figure but I'm pretty sure that at those settings the player's car is 200-250k polygons in gameplay. If we're just going for highest number of polygons, then Forza 5's models win, with Forzavista models (interior, exterior and engine details all rendered) being around 1m polygons.
I don't know how because 60fps ultra and max AA is impossible with SLI 970 unless probably in practice mode with clear skies.