Gran Turismo 5 Prologue The Official Thread of Glorious Cockpit View

Sep 9, 2006
1,112
0
0
nib95 said:
This is a like for like comparison. Both London tracks, both day light conditions, same vehicle et all. None of this GT5P race circuit vs PGR4 city track with weather stuff. Like for like here. Taken with the same camera, same settings, within seconds of each other (switching channel to and fro).


---





---
Both games look good, but the differences here are quite jarring. Overall it seems PGR has more modeled geometry (compare the first shots, Bizarre modeled out the larger balconies whilst Polyphony used a flat texture) and more detailed ground textures. GT has the edge in car polycounts.
 
Feb 26, 2007
34,619
2
0
tehbear said:
I could put my HDTV on eye-blinding brightness rainbow shitting mode and the dark would still be too dark because the contrast diff. is still there. They need to tone the HDR down a lot more. Please let me see my beautiful interior and the environments.
It's not so much the HDR as the surrounding buildings casting too much of a shadow. Probably realistic. But in my opinion they need to fake lighting from above as well as from a specific direction. As to light up the entire area a little. Not too much though, just a little.

I do find the extremes in contrast very realistic. But I also agree with being able to see your interior better. Which you can in tracks that don't have tall buildings every where.

It begs the question. Realism or art style?
 

Geezer

Broken water pistol loaded with piss
Oct 18, 2006
1,266
0
1,080
London, UK
nib95 said:
But yea, did you know, GT5P's London track is actually using assets from The Getaway 3? According to the lead designer, The Getaway 3 actually looks a little better than GT5P! And is of a much larger scale. Difference being, The Getaway 3 will run at 720p, 30fps. But apparently due to the sharing of assets, both games look similar in respects to the city assets.
Called it :D

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7022889&postcount=306
 
Dec 2, 2007
174
0
0
GauntletFan said:
Both games look good, but the differences here are quite jarring. Overall it seems PGR has more modeled geometry (compare the first shots, Bizarre modeled out the larger balconies whilst Polyphony used a flat texture) and more detailed ground textures. GT has the edge in car polycounts.
GT5 has dramatically higher car poly count, but from these pictures it sure doesn't show very much under actual race conditions. The car select screens and replays, sure, but in game (in race) it seems like a waste of poly budget.
 
Feb 26, 2007
34,619
2
0
GauntletFan said:
Both games look good, but the differences here are quite jarring. Overall it seems PGR has more modeled geometry (compare the first shots, Bizarre modeled out the larger balconies whilst Polyphony used a flat texture) and more detailed ground textures. GT has the edge in car polycounts.
I find it's the opposite. GT5P has more intricate geometry in most places. Trafalgar Square, in building sides etc. Where GT5P slacks on the geometry is on buildings outside of the actual track. See these comparisons.

On the far left, GT5P has more intricacies in the building trimmings. On the far right, GT5P has an actual extruded garage with railings. In PGR4 it's a flat texture. That said, look ahead, where PGR4 has more detailing on the building in the far distance, GT5P leaves it more plain. I'm guessing this is because it's part of the track in PGR4, and is not with GT5P.

---





---

Here, again the garages to the left do not have tops or trimmings with PGR4. And do with GT5P. Same for the building on the left with the balcony's. they are more prevalent with GT5P.

---





---

One other point. GT5P seems to have all the buildings properly labelled with shop names. Pret a Manger, Galleria, etc. Every building has the relevant shop sign on it. In PGR4, most are blank.
 
Sep 9, 2006
1,112
0
0
Sinnoch said:
GT5 has dramatically higher car poly car, but from these pictures it sure doesn't show very much under actual race conditions. The car select screens and replays, sure, but in game (in race) it seems like a waste of poly budget.
It's a mystery to me why these companies use the high poly cars for 'behind the car' racing in-game. There simply isn't enough pixels onscreen (even in 1080p) to render all the little rims, edges and modeled detail. An LOD model of the car mesh would eliminate most of the jaggies and actually look better. Playing NFS ProStreet I was amazed at how clean and jaggie-less the game looked and it was purely down to a lot of the details being in the texture, rather than modeled. Of course, you want the high res models for replays etc but in game, LOD models would provide a cleaner experience.
 
Dec 2, 2007
174
0
0
GauntletFan said:
An LOD model of the car mesh would eliminate most of the jaggies and actually look better. Playing NFS ProStreet I was amazed at how clean and jaggie-less the game looked and it was purely down to a lot of the details being in the texture, rather than modeled.
I haven't played ProStreet, but its very interesting that the "cheap" and easy technique of just throwing details on the texture actually gives a better presentation. I heard Pro Street was rubbish but I might rent it now just to see what you're talking about.
 
Jun 20, 2006
6,905
1
0
GauntletFan said:
It's a mystery to me why these companies use the high poly cars for 'behind the car' racing in-game. There simply isn't enough pixels onscreen (even in 1080p) to render all the little rims, edges and modeled detail. An LOD model of the car mesh would eliminate most of the jaggies and actually look better. Playing NFS ProStreet I was amazed at how clean and jaggie-less the game looked and it was purely down to a lot of the details being in the texture, rather than modeled. Of course, you want the high res models for replays etc but in game, LOD models would provide a cleaner experience.
Modeling every little detail could help them when they want car damage later though.
 

k79

Banned
Jul 6, 2007
789
0
0
dk_ said:
@ PGR4 vs GT5P

Both games look really good, but I think GT has the better lighting and car models. The surroundings (road building) are on par.

I think your TV HDMI brightness is to low, but that's just my impression.
This. Surroundings, judging from the screens, look sometimes better in GT5:p and sometimes better in PGR4. GT5:p ones are very dark though in some of the shots.Brightening some of them was most welcome.

Anywho ... some more offscreen (actual) gameplay shots from different views here:















The concrete looks damn nice in the last pic.
 
Feb 26, 2007
34,619
2
0
antiloop said:
Modeling every little detail could help them when they want car damage later though.
It's not just that. It's also because GT5 will allow full interior customisation. According to recent interviews with Yamauichi anyway. Hence why so much care has been placed on the interior. No doubt later we'll be able to tweak and customise them.
 
Jun 7, 2004
85,527
1
0
Sinnoch said:
GT5 has dramatically higher car poly car, but from these pictures it sure doesn't show very much under actual race conditions. The car select screens and replays, sure, but in game (in race) it seems like a waste of poly budget.
You can see the difference even in race. Especially the interiors as I said




This is the first generation where they've been able to take the car you see in the selection screens and actually put them on the track. In previous versions there has always been a downgrade once the car is on track compared to its selection screen.
 
Sep 9, 2006
1,112
0
0
antiloop said:
Modeling every little detail could help them when they want car damage later though.
I'm talking about bevels on panel edges and stuff like that, modeling out badges and text, that kind of stuff which you see in GT and Forza. All it does when a mesh that complex is shrunk down to a gameplay view, is give the engine more detail than it can display on screen, and the lighting engine has to display highlights which translate into jaggies and visual glitches. It's like taking a 2048 texture and displaying it at aroun 128x128 size on screen without mipping or filtering, you're just going to see a mash of pixels swimming around. NFS looks 'cleaner' and has less jaggies because they draw on details like logos, onto the texture. This doesn't look as good closeup, but from a gameplay view it makes the game look very clean - I can even drive shiny black cars without too much artefacting =)
 
Dec 2, 2007
174
0
0
SolidSnakex said:
You can see the difference even in race. Especially the interiors as I said

This is the first generation where they've been able to take the car you see in the selection screens and actually put them on the track. In previous versions there has always been a downgrade once the car is on track compared to its selection screen.
I agree the GT5P interiors are way better, but like I said above, I think rendering the interiors of all these cars is a huge waste of time. Any serious player will look at the interior view a few times, then flip it off and go back to the bumper cam so they have the best possible view for setting a good time.

DIRT had some great interior views but I couldn't play the game worth a damn with them. Had to go back to the bonnet and bumper cam to perform remotely decent.
 
Feb 26, 2007
34,619
2
0
GauntletFan said:
I'm talking about bevels on panel edges and stuff like that, modeling out badges and text, that kind of stuff which you see in GT and Forza. All it does when a mesh that complex is shrunk down to a gameplay view, is give the engine more detail than it can display on screen, and the lighting engine has to display highlights which translate into jaggies and visual glitches. It's like taking a 2048 texture and displaying it at aroun 128x128 size on screen without mipping or filtering, you're just going to see a mash of pixels swimming around. NFS looks 'cleaner' and has less jaggies because they draw on details like logos, onto the texture. This doesn't look as good closeup, but from a gameplay view it makes the game look very clean - I can even drive shiny black cars without too much artefacting =)
NFS doesn't have less jaggies. I think your TV set up is just wrong. maybe too much sharpness? Either way, I prefer the look of real life. Hence why I prefer the look of GT5P. :D

Also, what's this about interior view being a waste? All the serious players use nothing BUT the interior view. Me included! It's less cluttered in GT5P, so it's easier and more realistic to drive in. In PGR4 and DIRT the view space isn't large enough, and it all feels a bit cramped. Your view imo is too constrained. But the interior view in GT5P is very effective.

Interior view + racing wheel = pure sim.

Serious players usually go for the more realistic and often difficult approach. Hence why in games like Forza 2, some players take the easy route and have assists on, others have them off. I'm one of those that keep them off as I love a good challenge.
 
Jun 7, 2004
85,527
1
0
Metalmurphy said:
It's the only way to go. Once you go cockpit in GT5 you don't go back.
I actually haven't even played the game with the bumper cam. I used to play racing games like that though. Now it feels like there's some sort of disconnection whenever I play them like that. So I stick to the incar view as long as the game has it. And there's no reason now that they shouldn't.
 
Dec 2, 2007
174
0
0
Metalmurphy said:
It's the only way to go. Once you go cockpit in GT5 you don't go back.
Even if it looks cool, if it takes away 40% of your vision and adds a distracting hands/arm/wheel animation to the bottom of the screen its not going to be ideal for performing your best.

Of course, I'm the kind of person that ran Counterstrike in 800 res with everything turned off.
 
Mar 28, 2007
728
8
850
My map of Tassie
Sinnoch said:
I agree the GT5P interiors are way better, but like I said above, I think rendering the interiors of all these cars is a huge waste of time. Any serious player will look at the interior view a few times, then flip it off and go back to the bumper cam so they have the best possible view for setting a good time.

DIRT had some great interior views but I couldn't play the game worth a damn with them. Had to go back to the bonnet and bumper cam to perform remotely decent.
Thats a pretty fucking arrogant comment mate! I'm a 'serious' GT player and I will ALWAYS use the cockpit view.....get your head out of your arse.
 
nib95 said:
NFS doesn't have less jaggies. I think your TV set up is just wrong. maybe too much sharpness? Either way, I prefer the look of real life. Hence why I prefer the look of GT5P. :D
Just stop replying to him, he never played the game.

Sinnoch said:
Even if it looks cool, if it takes away 40% of your vision and adds a distracting hands/arm/wheel animation to the bottom of the screen its not going to be ideal for performing your best.
You mean just like irl?
 
Sep 9, 2006
1,112
0
0
nib95 said:
NFS doesn't have less jaggies. I think your TV set up is just wrong. maybe too much sharpness? Either way, I prefer the look of real life. Hence why I prefer the look of GT5P. :D
Regarding the car models, NFS has WAY less jaggies. That's not even up for debate - it comes about by the fact that they have lower detailed cars, but as much of the detail (logos, panel breaks etc) are in the texture, the game can mip them down so they don't cause jaggies. NFS is by far the cleanest racing game I've played in a while, especially in the exterior view. GT and Forza both pile on the minute detail which can't be mipped out from a distance, that's why you get so many 'interior' jaggies. GT suffers from this less than Forza for sure, but it's still there. Oh, and my TV is set up fine, thanks. (I've played it on both my DLP and LCD)

My point is, developers need to use lower detailed meshes for 3rd person racing, as it would look a lot cleaner.
 

f@luS

More than a member.
Mar 9, 2005
6,512
0
1,320
Sinnoch said:
I agree the GT5P interiors are way better, but like I said above, I think rendering the interiors of all these cars is a huge waste of time. Any serious player will look at the interior view a few times, then flip it off and go back to the bumper cam so they have the best possible view for setting a good time.

DIRT had some great interior views but I couldn't play the game worth a damn with them. Had to go back to the bonnet and bumper cam to perform remotely decent.
lol ure fos. I am serious and play only cockpit speak only for you please.

Imho while playing , GT5P look much better than pgr5 . ANd anyone complaining about any jaggy in gt5p shoulnt try pgr
 

belvedere

Junior Butler
Jun 2, 2006
9,148
1
0
I see this every day but it still amazes me just how realistic this game looks.

PD am gods.

It's astonishing that certain individuals have honestly convinced themselves that this isn't the best looking racing game ever made.

:D
 
Dec 2, 2007
174
0
0
Neo 007 said:
Thats a pretty fucking arrogant comment mate! I'm a 'serious' GT player and I will ALWAYS use the cockpit view.....get your head out of your arse.

But WHY do you use it? Because it looks cool, right? You don't use it because it helps you set better times. Anything blocking 40% of your vision of the road isn't going to help you.
 
Feb 26, 2007
34,619
2
0
GauntletFan said:
Regarding the car models, NFS has WAY less jaggies. That's not even up for debate - it comes about by the fact that they have lower detailed cars, but as much of the detail (logos, panel breaks etc) are in the texture, the game can mip them down so they don't cause jaggies. NFS is by far the cleanest racing game I've played in a while, especially in the exterior view. GT and Forza both pile on the minute detail which can't be mipped out from a distance, that's why you get so many 'interior' jaggies. GT suffers from this less than Forza for sure, but it's still there. Oh, and my TV is set up fine, thanks. (I've played it on both my DLP and LCD)
I don't think you know what you're talking about. You can clearly see in the pics I've posted, car jaggies are near non-existent. Either you haven't played it, are playing a different game, are using messed up TV settings, or have a broken TV. Actual car models wise, I could post pics of the R35 in NFS Pro Street vs GT5P. But there'd be little point. GT5P would blow Pro Street away. It's all in the details, lighting and paint lacquer.

With NFS, car models have that toy like game'ness about them. In GT5P they are near photo realistic.
 

AlphaSnake

...and that, kids, was the first time I sucked a dick for crack
Jun 6, 2004
24,097
0
0
SolidSnakex said:
I actually haven't even played the game with the bumper cam. I used to play racing games like that though. Now it feels like there's some sort of disconnection whenever I play them like that. So I stick to the incar view as long as the game has it. And there's no reason now that they shouldn't.
Same.

I even used to play in auto, too. LOL. Now I bitch about my G25's 6 speed shifter not working. ='(
 

Yoshichan

And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
Sep 1, 2006
58,595
25
1,285
-
Sinnoch said:
But WHY do you use it? Because it looks cool, right? You don't use it because it helps you set better times. Anything blocking 40% of your vision of the road isn't going to help you.
:lol :lol :lol
 
Sep 9, 2006
1,112
0
0
Sinnoch said:
But WHY do you use it? Because it looks cool, right? You don't use it because it helps you set better times. Anything blocking 40% of your vision of the road isn't going to help you.
Exactly, I love the look of in-car views as a novelty, but I'll always race in any game using the classic 'ridge racer' full screen mode. Sh*t, if you're going online to race competitively you'll want to see as much track as possible.
 
Sinnoch said:
But WHY do you use it? Because it looks cool, right? You don't use it because it helps you set better times. Anything blocking 40% of your vision of the road isn't going to help you.
Yes... it's because it looks cool... :lol


I'm sorry, do you remove the front window and dive your head to the bumper while driving with your freaking feet in real life?
 
Jun 7, 2004
85,527
1
0
AlphaSnake said:
Same.

I even used to play in auto, too. LOL. Now I bitch about my G25's 6 speed shifter not working. ='(
:lol I used to play auto also. The game that made me switch was Sega Rally 2 when I was trying to beat people on the Hardcore Gaming forum in time trials. Everyone else was using it so I noticed the only way i'd be able to to keep up with them was by using it also.
 
Sep 16, 2006
21,966
0
0
GauntletFan said:
Regarding the car models, NFS has WAY less jaggies. That's not even up for debate - it comes about by the fact that they have lower detailed cars, but as much of the detail (logos, panel breaks etc) are in the texture, the game can mip them down so they don't cause jaggies. NFS is by far the cleanest racing game I've played in a while, especially in the exterior view. GT and Forza both pile on the minute detail which can't be mipped out from a distance, that's why you get so many 'interior' jaggies. GT suffers from this less than Forza for sure, but it's still there. Oh, and my TV is set up fine, thanks. (I've played it on both my DLP and LCD)

My point is, developers need to use lower detailed meshes for 3rd person racing, as it would look a lot cleaner.
well, when you are comparing the jagged shots you post from ign etc to a game you play on your 360 I'm sure thats the case...either way, given your post history, I have severe doubts you have actually played, and will ever play, the game
 
GauntletFan said:
Stupid comparison. In real life you have peripheral vision.
And what does that have to do with the bumper cam? Does that give you peripheral vision all of the sudden?

What's the point of seeing what's left and right in a racing game anyway? Not to mention that you CAN look left and right in the cockpit view.


What the hell are you still doing trolling in GT threads anyway? You have more then proven countless times that you never even played the freaking game.

 
Jun 7, 2004
85,527
1
0
I don't really get this idea that the only way to play GT seriously is to play it from a bumper cam. Check some YouTube videos, you'll quickly see that most of the players, whether they're drifters or people doing time attacks, play with the incar view.
 
Dec 2, 2007
174
0
0
Metalmurphy said:
And what does that have to do with the bumper cam? Does that give you peripheral vision all of the sudden?

What's the point of seing what's left and right in a racing game anyway? Not to mention that you CAN look left and right in the cockpit view.
Why did you suddenly confuse realism with what is the most effective view for playing?

I know riding on the hood of the car or strapping myself to the bumper isn't realistic, but it is the most effective view for playing the game well. I think you'll have a pretty difficult time making an argument that any view in which your vision is impaired is effectively best.
 
Sep 9, 2006
1,112
0
0
nelsonroyale said:
well, when you are comparing the jagged shots you post from ign etc to a game you play on your 360 I'm sure thats the case...either way, given your post history, I have severe doubts you have actually played, and will ever play, the game
Nice try, pal. I'm talking about visuals in every racing game, and how developers need to use LOD and detail variants in a more intelligent manner. Sit back and relax, no-one's attacking your beloved console, or your game.

metalmurphy said:
And what does that have to do with the bumper cam?
The fact that games can't represent our peripheral vision (without multiple monitors or consoles displaying side views) means that cutting off the very narrow sense of space we already have with a cockpit is going to mean you're limiting yourself unnecessarily. When you're driving a car (as you'll find out when you get a little older), you'll notice most of the car's dash and your hands are in your peripheral vision, so a bumper cam is actually a more realistic interpretation of what your brain processes.

And please, stop with the trolling comments. There has been some great discussion in here without you. Talking about cockpit/bumper cams and LOD models is not trolling a game.
 
Sinnoch said:
Why did you suddenly confuse realism with what is the most effective view for playing?

I know riding on the hood of the car or strapping myself to the bumper isn't realistic, but it is the most effective view for playing the game well. I think you'll have a pretty difficult time making an argument that any view in which your vision is impaired is effectively best.
People play this game cause it's realistic, not cause it makes them drive well.
 
Feb 26, 2007
34,619
2
0
To think, I once thought the interior view in DIRT was the best thing since sliced bread. Now look how dated it looks. The evolution of interior visuals.

---





---

The craziest thing to me is that GT5P manages it at double the frame rate and a higher native resolution. Makes me wonder...if racing game visuals have improved this much in just a year, what will the end of this generation bring us?
 
Apr 20, 2007
1,322
0
0
34
London
I use in-car view. Sure, I can see less, but why do I need to see everything? I can judge where the apex is the same way I do in real life.

We aren't only playing for faster lap times. We use pro physics too, even though it's slower. Why would we do that? I wonder if you're even capable of understanding.
 

Thunderbear

Mawio Gawaxy iz da Wheeson hee pways games
May 10, 2006
3,364
0
0
Every GT thread devolves into this shit. GT is graphically superior, get over it. There's no subjectivity. The accuracy, the technical achievements etc. You can't argue against those.

Can we just focus this thread on GT or is that too much to ask?
 
Jun 7, 2004
85,527
1
0
roxya said:
I use in-car view. Sure, I can see less, but why do I need to see everything? I can judge where the apex is the same way I do in real life.
Exactly. While the view doesn't allow you to see the environments as well as you could in the bumper cam, it still allows you to see the road very clearly and that's all you really need to be able to see to drive.
 
Feb 7, 2005
15,125
0
0
33
Surrey, BC
nib95 said:
The craziest thing to me is that GT5P manages it at double the frame rate and a higher native resolution. Makes me wonder...if racing game visuals have improved this much in just a year, what will the end of this generation bring us?
Polyphony just showed what they could do. Even if dirt or need for speed were held back a year they wouldn't have turned out like gt5p.
 
Jun 9, 2006
11,338
0
1,145
steamcommunity.com
What I don't like about the graphics, but that's also for pgr and many other games, is the overused hdr-effect. The games are TOO dark and TOO bright, it's not realistic and annoying. I like the high-poly car models but it sucks that most of the time I can't see it because the shadows are too dark.
 
Oct 21, 2007
3,209
0
885
GauntletFan said:
When you're driving a car (as you'll find out when you get a little older), you'll notice most of the car's dash and your hands are in your peripheral vision, so a bumper cam is actually a more realistic interpretation of what your brain processes.

Really?

:lol