old version of the track (more polished now) but shows some of the 3d trees in the day:
-
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
old version of the track (more polished now) but shows some of the 3d trees in the day:
old version of the track (more polished now) but shows some of the 3d trees in the day:
Do you have a link to the video version?
LiquidNarwhal
Banned
To be fair to thecloser I'm on the boat that says DC is a step above PC as well, his arguments might have flaws but to dismiss them completely because you don't like or agree with his argument is asinine in itself.
BishopLamont
Banned
Not when his argument basically boils down to 2D trees and rain every time.
NullPointer
Member
I read Closer's arguments as being that DriveClub has an amazing presentation that is consistent across times and conditions, whereas Project Cars looks drab except under certain lighting and weather conditions, like rain, as he specifically mentioned before.
Makes sense to me any way, though I'm sure we'll see drab DriveClub shots at some point.
Right?
Makes sense to me any way, though I'm sure we'll see drab DriveClub shots at some point.
Right?
Do you agree with thecloser that there's nothing PC does better than DC?
I'm not arguing which game looks better. In my opinion both look great. You can pause the game in either game and start nitpicking everything. Low res asphalt here, low poly fence there. The important thing is that it looks great while you're playing and I think both games do. The point I wanted to get across as that we shouldn't dismiss a game graphically after someone posts some unfinished 2d environment assets. PCars isn't perfect and there is still lots of work to be done but its shaping up really well. It plays great on ps4 (I've heard) and even more impressive on a monster PC.
I assure you, I'm not dismissing the merits of anything. Just the particular person being irrational and ignoring points and evidence brought up in conversation because they requested it, who then decide it doesn't count because it contradicted their point. He has to raise a good point for it to have merit. That's not a comment on Driveclub or any other game. I'd have loved to see him post more screenshots or footage of Driveclub, since that's the whole point of the thread, and it's something he seems to have a lot of respect for.
Because Project Cars is on PC, it has the potential for unlimited resolution and unlimited framerate.
It is completely, absolutely capable of being 100% aliasing free, meaning no shimmering at all of distant objects. If we are going for an objective, evidence based support for the claim that Project Cars looks better, that's what you get.
Pretty much everything else will be based on opinion, but you can't argue with PC offering 4k (and beyond!) resolutions and 60fps(and again, beyond!) frame rates.
Also, Mr. Roderick made this fantastic Project Cars GIF in to 2013 Game GIF thread that I think is worth sharing here.
NullPointer
Member
Didn't see that posed as a question, but no, I wouldn't. pCars is a PC game, so there's no real limit to its capabilities on the whole, but at the very least it does weather and if I'm not mistaken has a full damage model that can affect a car's performance. Those two alone mean it does some things better, right off the bat.
But both are also in development, and it'll be a different matchup once we see running console versions of each that we could put head to head. (I've got a console bias here to be sure, and my PC hasn't been able to play pCars like all the awesome shots above)
I also think he's a bit confused as to what '2D' means.
I see no 2D trees anywhere.
That's where closer was wrong. He swept DC's misgivings under the rug while lamenting everything that wasn't perfect with Pcars. Even the places where Pcars performed better there was a caveat because DC couldn't produce that same image. We also don't have DC in our hands in order inspect it the way we can Pcars at its unfinished state.
It wasn't really closer's opinion as much as he/she thinks DC trumps every racer on every front.
I just don't understand how people can accept or tolerate playing a racing game @ 30fps in this day and age. Project Cars and Forza should be the clear winner because of their framerates alone. Drive Club can look like real fucking life for all I care and I still wouldn't play it!
Namco was able to push 60fps in Ridge Racer in 1996 on the PS1 FFS! I mean C'mon, 30fps in 2014...WTF??? Totally unacceptable. Of course this is just my humble opinion.
Namco was able to push 60fps in Ridge Racer in 1996 on the PS1 FFS! I mean C'mon, 30fps in 2014...WTF??? Totally unacceptable. Of course this is just my humble opinion.
I'm honestly wondering if he was being serious about this point, because the image he quoted for the bad-looking " 2D trees" looks particularly well-done, 2D or not. His whole set of responses was strange.
The idea that effects like rain that one game does but the other can't (or at least hasn't yet) don't count for one of the "single pieces of evidence" for why Project Cars in any way exceeds Driveclub sounded outright silly. I wasn't sure if he was deliberately highlighting that they hadn't shown any rain implementation for Driveclub or not. His idea that if you disabled some effects like DoF, the game would look worse underneath was a stretch to start with since the pic came from real gameplay footage. This was stranger in particular because it seemed like a subtle nod to how you could see what the Driveclub road textures looked like without the motion blur going from the last batch of videos. His nitpicky "i see a tree that would look bad but its too dark to see it" was just odd.
Unless he also disregards captures from official direct-feed 1080p footage for Driveclub, I don't know how those are defensible opinions to have. It seemed like it was his assertion that one game was more consistent than the other, but he didn't illustrate that well, and in doing so, brought the opposite points to light. And I don't mean little things either. This was straight-up how roadside details looked at native res less than a week ago, and it was the highest bitrate they'd supplied:
That's Driveclub gameplay (cropped, not zoomed). In motion, the gameplay looks gorgeous, and some areas shine more than others, but it still fundamentally undermines his premise.
Alternatively, when we see the game without shitty compression, it will look even more impressive (see: Infamous).
I had missed these. Looking fantastic, particularly the F1 @ Long Beach
pop_tarts
Member
Thanks yeah so this is pretty much my take on it when worried well enough to understand. And excuse my excitement for Gran Turismo as I enjoy the license taking portion of the game, it still feels cartoony as well in 60fps, but maybe I'll try out your theory with playing the same game on PC with 30 and 60 fps with a steering wheel and maybe I too will understand what all the fuss is about with this debate.
Insane Metal
Member
Incredible how distant from DC's lighting F5 is. Those webm's let it clear that T10 needs to improve it asap.
This ^^^
Would also have made sense to call it a current gen thread too rather than putting next gen = current gen in brackets lol
I've a feeling that Project CARS is going to be the best out of the lot...it's looking very impressive from what I've seen so far.
drugstore_cowboy
Member
I wouldn't swap Forza's frame rate for DC's lighting.
Nor the physics sim
Insane Metal
Member
Welp since I prefer arcade racers... I would. But I'm not saying Forza is a bad game, not at all, probably the best launch game from the two consoles.
TheFNEffecT
Member
That just looks....wow......
NullPointer
Member
Yeah. I don't mind if Forza loses these matchups, but I do think its one game that has been very underestimated in terms of its presentation.
Every car in the game is created to Autovista standard, and its not a separate mode you load up any more. The main career menu for the game is your current car, in autovista, ready to go.
Its has AA issues, but amazingly enough, when racing they aren't as apparent as some of the DriveClub footage because powerlines and other aliasing-prone details aren't as much in your direct area of focus - though that might be a very similar case for DriveClub when you're doing the actual driving.
The fact is that Forza has baked in lighting and racing conditions, even while its added a lot more trackside detail and movement and life, but the core is static all the same. The end result is still gorgeous even while lacking in variety.
I'm just glad at this point that I'll be able to play most if not all of these games. The only one that worries me is Project Cars, because if I have DriveClub and Forza I'm not sure that Project Cars has enough to set it apart to make me want to pick it up. And I say that as an early project funder for pCars and huge fan of the Shift series (which got me into real race physics and techniques and sim racers by way of trying to suck less in those games). I'll just have to see how it all settles out.
Apophis2036
Banned
Nice to see some Forza 5 love, game looks fantastic. Will be the first game I buy when I get my XBone this Winter !
killatopak
Member
The same way people praised and tolerated PGR and Forza Horizon?
MK8's image quality destroys any hope it could've had.
As much as I agree that 30 is a bit low for a racer, why do people always act as if more power instantly equals a higher frame rate. The possibility for sixty fps has always existed, but developers have to decide to push detail or refresh rate. This is not a new thing, nor will it change in the future. Evolution could easily go for 60 fps if they wanted to, they just would not have all the graphical effects they deem necessary. Whether you agree with this or not, that is another issue, but don't cite previous gen games being at 60 fps as some sort of indictment against evolution. They are not technically incompetent, they made a design decision and are sticking with it.
The lack of anti-aliasing is really a damn shame. I rerendered a few scenes with AA, and it looks so much better.
plank
Member
If it would mean a lock down 60fps even in two player then I for one wouldn't mind the aliasing.
MrChowderClams
Member
Damn, project cars looks insane 0_0
Made a few webms of NFS Rivals on PC. In-game is downsampled from 3600x1800 to 1920x1080 with everything cranked up. It looks surprisingly good in motion.
http://a.pomf.se/xjcynk.webm
http://fat.gfycat.com/LimpLimpIvorygull.webm
http://a.pomf.se/jqragu.webm
Made a few webms of NFS Rivals on PC. In-game is downsampled from 3600x1800 to 1920x1080 with everything cranked up. It looks surprisingly good in motion.
http://a.pomf.se/xjcynk.webm
http://fat.gfycat.com/LimpLimpIvorygull.webm
http://a.pomf.se/jqragu.webm
DC looks astonishing, detail across the board is nuts, 30fps but I've been playing 30fps racers for years. Forza 5 hits 60fps which is great but I find it incredibly sterile everywhere else (sound aside). Not seen a great deal of Cars, but sometimes it looks great, other times not so great. All things considered DC wins for me. Let's see what happens when it releases and Cars releases.
travisbickle
Member
Unless he also disregards captures from official direct-feed 1080p footage for Driveclub, I don't know how those are defensible opinions to have. It seemed like it was his assertion that one game was more consistent than the other, but he didn't illustrate that well, and in doing so, brought the opposite points to light. And I don't mean little things either. This was straight-up how roadside details looked at native res less than a week ago, and it was the highest bitrate they'd supplied:
That's Driveclub gameplay (cropped, not zoomed). In motion, the gameplay looks gorgeous, and some areas shine more than others, but it still fundamentally undermines his premise.
Or the "just a bit better quality than Youtube footage" as most people call it.
Shyakugaun
Banned
So i just saw some Project Cars videos that changed my life lol, i really had no Idea the game looked that Good O_O, i'd still give the edge to Driveclub when it comes to Environments, it looks almost real, but Project Cars looks overall better Graphically, it might be a unfair advantage though due to the super high resolutions, and superior Hardware, definitely buying PC on PC when it releases!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vR9hyzqLli4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tO4y4iUoKJg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vR9hyzqLli4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tO4y4iUoKJg
No, it's the Formula A in Spa from Project Cars
Worthless to compare to a track like the Nurburgring that hasn't had any polish yet.
The 2D crowds is bull by the way, they're modelled in 3D.
I'm glad you posted these. Honestly, that first video is great to compare with the recent DriveClub Canada forest footage, and lets be real hear, in terms of lighting accuracy, shadowing, environmental scale, lushness, geometry, detail, scope, shaders, reflections, post processing etc, DriveClub pretty much walks all over ProjectCars, by a good margin. See here.
http://youtubedoubler.com/cvc1
Comparing the two in the above doubler, ProjectCars lighting wise shares much in common with many current gen racers, it's quite clearly video game like, whereas DriveClub looks far more photo realistic, and in that small window often appears near life like. ProjectCars doesn't come close to replicating the level of realism showcased in DriveClub.
2D trees in PS4 game? seriously?
--------
What? Both have SSR. Both have high quality motion blur, both have similar post processing techniques, both have low res shadows, PCars has higher quality cubemaps [DC is just awful in that department].
Lighting accuracy? How did You even measure that?
DC has much better art and has already finished track in comparison to PCars, but going by DC direct feed shots i would really call environments more rich, because assets are really very low poly. Evolution was definitely smarter with poly budget allocation though.
The best environments have NFS Rivals.
Those videos are old. The first video shows an old version of the track, before they even started the polish pass. The second video is even older.
It's fun how you state your opinions based on a few videos as facts. Go buy your exclusive game for your beloved system, but don't try to look like an objective God, please.
Canis lupus
Member
Pretty much. Can't believe people are arguing which game has the best environments, it's obviously Driveclub. The discrepancy is so big between Driveclub and other racers. People gotta give credit where credit is due, the environmental details is one area where DC is unmatched.
Haha. Nib commenting on these matters is always fun.
2D trees in PS4 game? seriously?
--------
What? Both have SSR. Both have high quality motion blur, both have similar post processing techniques, both have low res shadows, PCars has higher quality cubemaps [DC is just awful in that department].
Lighting accuracy? How did You even measure that?
DC has much better art and has already finished track in comparison to PCars, but going by DC direct feed shots i would really call environments more reach, because assets are really very low poly. Evolution was definitely smarter with poly budget allocation though.
The best environments have NFS Rivals.
You can keep quoting that one bad screen grab from an obviously old build, and ignoring all the new gameplay vids if you like.
First of all, they don't have the same lighting model. DriveClub features full dynamic global illumination for a start. There's also other things like volumetric light affected clouds, physics based foliage and tree's which have their own self shadowing etc, better lighting from tertiary light sources, better reflections on vehicles, on windshields, dirt and mud on windshields, fully geometric tree's versus many 2D one's (some are 3D), better rock surface properties and shaders, and just overall far more realism in the look. It's not just down to art, it's mainly down to lighting and overall environmental details and scope. About the only thing I can say PCars has DriveClub topped is overall IQ, that is resolution, anti-aliasing etc (subject to PC hardware). Maybe some (not all) of the textures.
You don't need technical terms to see that, you just watch the best similar track and lighting condition footage from either game, and the difference is clear as day.
And I'm sorry, but NFS Rivals environments don't compare either. Not by a long shot. Bare in mind this is direct feed capture versus screen grabs from a video.
drugstore_cowboy
Member
Doesn't make sense to compare stills or gifs. Forza's visuals are limited by T10's commitment to 60fps, like last gen they'll continue to improve as the team get to know the system and optimise more. Drive Club seem to be built around a gorgeous but demanding lighting solution.
Forza 6 or 7 vs GT7 will be better, everything is in place for PD to deliver without the compromises they faced last gen, I wonder if they'll go for such a heavy lighting model or show some restraint and reuse the more than capable one they have for better performance.
Forza 6 or 7 vs GT7 will be better, everything is in place for PD to deliver without the compromises they faced last gen, I wonder if they'll go for such a heavy lighting model or show some restraint and reuse the more than capable one they have for better performance.
eso76
Member
like Others have said, though, that Pcars video is OLD
this is a more recent build of that track and the difference in terms of trackside detail is huge. Lighting is also a lot better, but that might be because different TOD
http://youtu.be/fcC7MP1EC7E
i still think DC environments look more detailed but this video shows a much smaller difference
this is a more recent build of that track and the difference in terms of trackside detail is huge. Lighting is also a lot better, but that might be because different TOD
http://youtu.be/fcC7MP1EC7E
i still think DC environments look more detailed but this video shows a much smaller difference