Support NeoGAF

[test_account]

You guys keep saying "that's not how development works"...

Meanwhile the ONLY developer to do it develops their games that way.


They did it for Forza Motorsport 2, Forza Motorsport 3, Forza Motorsport 4, Forza Motorsport 5 and Forza Motorsport 6.

Forza Horizon has never shown the media without being locked at 30 either.

Yes, Turn10 made sure that their game would meet their aim at locked 60fps. That doesnt mean that the game was constantly running 60fps throughout the whole developement of course. They naturally had to optimize the game in such a way to make sure that their game didnt drop below 60fps. That requires much testing and tweaking.

The point regarding "thats not how developement works" is that just because a game isnt running at locked 60fps some time during the developement and publicly being shown in such state, this doesnt necessarily reflect what the final product would be. Turn10 could easily had shown Forza not running at 60fps if they wanted to. Even if they did that, it doesnt take away from how the final product turned out to be.

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

What's hilarious is that you're actually gullible enough to believe a game coming out in 6 months is only at 50% completion.

You cannot release in 6 months and be 50% complete.

On top of this, they chose to have that media event and they chose to show off the build they had.

You don't even know what you're talking about is the funny thing here.
50% quality was the phrase used. Furthermore, % markers in game development are not linear with time, and we've had numerous studios also say such things.

 

[Stillmatic]

Weather and Night racing has never been done on consoles with a locked 60(1080p) and 24 cars on track.

Oh dear...

 

[karma2578]

Just throwing this out there but maybe only locked at 60 on Neo as that's supposed to be the VR console

 

[Iztok Mravlja]

True, because technically DC is so far away is not even worth the comparisson.

It's a 30 fps racing game, so yeah far away, but not in the direction you think.

Besides, to any racing game fan, the two might as well be in different genres, they have as much in common.

The real "problem" for GT is Forza, which is able to do all of this and on inferior hardware, to boot.

 

[FordGTGuy]

http://www.polygon.com/2016/3/17/11256142/sony-framerate-60fps-vr-certification

That sounds pretty definitive to me. Obviously it remains to be seen if this happens in practice, but if they're developing for VR it kind of goes without saying that their target is 60FPS doesn't it?

All that means is that they are going to cripple the game even more in order for it to run on VR.

Oh dear...

What? You know one, would love to see it.

Yes, Turn10 made sure that their game would meet their aim at locked 60fps. That doesnt mean that the game was constantly running 60fps throughout the whole developement of course. They naturally had to optimize the game in such a way to make sure that their game didnt drop below 60fps. That requires much testing and tweaking.

The point regarding "thats not how developement works" is that just because a game isnt running at locked 60fps some time during the developement and publicly being shown in such state, this doesnt necessarily reflect what the final product would be. Turn10 could easily had shown Forza not running at 60fps if they wanted to. Even if they did that, it doesnt take away from how the final product turned out to be.

Actually if you look back at my posts I said.

It was a locked 60 from the moment they showed it to the media.

 

[Mascot]

Not to mention Sony has said that any game going in for VR certification will be turned away if it isn't constantly 60FPS...

Is this the same Sony that originally said all Ps3 games must be 60fps, before quitely backtracking at a later date ..?

 

[GinoFelino]

Just because they say VR requires 60 doesn't not mean it's a locked 60.

All that means is that they are going to cripple the game even more in order for it to run on VR.

This is going nowhere faster than Kaz leaves the studio every day to go trial-race another fancy race car.

So long, thread.

 

[NullPointer]

Just because they say VR requires 60 doesn't not mean it's a locked 60.

If the alternative is that it makes people sick and thus undermines VR, I'm going to assume PD is going to do whatever it takes to lock 60fps.

 

[hesido]

A disaster in the making.

 

[Shin-chan]

Is this the same Sony that originally said all Ps3 games must be 60fps, before quitely backtracking at a later date ..?

No? Clearly not?

If you can't see a difference between pre PS3 era Sony and present Sony I don't know what to tell you.

As I said, it remains to be seen just how strict they are with that requirement but what's the point in assuming it's complete bollocks from the get go, especially when they're putting resources into helping devs get there?

 

[Bitch Pudding]

Well if you read my initial posts on the subject you'd see why, also if we're going to talk about developing a 60 fps console sim racer it's hard to leave Forza out as it's the only one to do it.

Neither Kaz nor PD have said that a locked 60 is a goal, they clearly haven't reached a locked 60 and even showed off the game at a media even with tons of tearing and frame drops.

Just because they say VR requires 60 doesn't not mean it's a locked 60.

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

hahaha
perfect

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

http://www.polygon.com/2016/3/17/11256142/sony-framerate-60fps-vr-certification

That sounds pretty definitive to me. Obviously it remains to be seen if this happens in practice, but if they're developing for VR it kind of goes without saying that their target is 60FPS doesn't it?

Actually the headline on that article is inaccurate when you read the quotes in the article.

"I know I'm going to get flagged for this," Norden said to a packed crowd of hundreds of eager faces, "but there’s no excuse for not hitting framerate. ... You cannot drop below 60 fps. Period. Ever. I can’t stress that enough.

"If you submit a game to us and you drop down to 30 or 35 or 51 we’re probably going to reject it," he added, a little more equivocally.

"Probably" being the key word here. I'd imagine first party getting a pass when needed..!

 

[FordGTGuy]

If the alternative is that it makes people sick and thus undermines VR, I'm going to assume PD is going to do whatever it takes to lock 60fps.

For VR sure.

The point I'm trying to make is that right now... on TVs it isn't managing to do it let alone on a VR device where it's even more demanding.

I would be internally screaming at the mess that is GTS too.

 

[Stillmatic]

What? You know one, would love to see it.

It was referring to you moving the goal posts. I didn't see the disclaimer you had where old features added to a game that has a locked framerate at 60 with 24 cars on track was automatically cutting edge.

 

[Mascot]

No? Clearly not?

If you can't see a difference between pre PS3 era Sony and present Sony I don't know what to tell you.

As I said, it remains to be seen just how strict they are with that requirement but what's the point in assuming it's complete bollocks from the get go, especially when they're putting resources into helping devs get there?

My point was, big corporations say a lot of things. Some of those things even turn out to be true.

 

[garyizraw]

Forza looks good has good frame rate an resolution. Very dissapointed to see they can't match their creative design, is the game releasing this year ??

 

[FordGTGuy]

It was referring to you moving the goal posts. I didn't see the disclaimer you had where old features added to a game that has a locked framerate at 60 with 24 cars on track was automatically cutting edge.

I didn't say it's cutting edge.

I said it's not playing it safe. Guys, please read parent posts before starting a page long discussion over a misunderstanding on what we're talking about.

My point was, big corporations say a lot of things. Some of those things even turn out to be true.

Funny thing is that in the very article, as pointed out above, directly contradicts the title.

 

[Odorono]

My point was, big corporations say a lot of things. Some of those things even turn out to be true.

I was promised 4D graphics with the PS3 too, bastards.

Forza looks good has good frame rate an resolution. Very dissapointed to see they can't match their creative design, is the game releasing this year ??

This November (hopefully).

 

[garyizraw]

This November (hopefully).

Judging Sony's history id say it's going to be delayed at least once

 

[test_account]

Actually if you look back at my posts I said.

It was a locked 60 from the moment they showed it to the media.

I know, i was just saying that Turn10 technically could have released sub-60fps footage if they wanted to. But even if they did that, it doesnt mean that their goal of reaching locked 60fps was less important.

I'm not arguing that GTS will run at locked 60fps or not just to have mentioned that. My point is just that you cant look at an early in-developement build and say that this means that they're not taking stable framerate seriously.

 

[kikonawa]

Im cool with this. Imagine how great dc would be at 60fps...

And why should i see the sun set and go up again in a 20 minute race?

 

[GHG]

Turn 10 aren't in control of the players.

Exactly, and that's why Drivatars are the worst idea ever.

 

[Synth]

Exactly, and that's why Drivatars are the worst idea ever.

Nah, they're a great idea that the player should be able to opt out of. I much prefer how the drivatars are currently to the ridiculously robotic AI seen in most other racers (especially now with limited aggression). Drivatars are mostly great now imo, compared to the horror show they often were at FM5's launch. They're something the improve continuously over time.

If someone doesn't like them, they should be able to choose to play with simpler, hand-crafted AI routines (or a curated pool of "approved" Drivatars) until it reaches the point they're happy with though. What I'd like would be for the Drivatar's AI to be implemented into the game, but without it pretending to be a ghost of someone I know. Just have M. Rossi drive like someone at the upper end of my skill level bracket.

 

[Omnii-chan]

Rain in Forza 6 had a major impact on gameplay/handling though.

I see your point, it's a cool addition.
At the time of playing it all I could think was the work which went into it could have gone into other things, but it does play a big hand in being a racing sim = car vs track.
Suppose it's better than always driving dry tracks.

 

[The Artisan]

Two completely different types of racing games.

well they're both racing games with realistic graphics, one of which has both dynamic weather and time.

 

[Risk Breaker]

I didn't say it's cutting edge.

I said it's not playing it safe. Guys, please read parent posts before starting a page long discussion over a misunderstanding on what we're talking about.

Getting non-dynamic weather in September 2015 after 6 main games (and 2 already on XB1) is not playing it safe according to you, okay. Which also implies (and you said it's the only console game to do it, which also implies it) that it is cutting edge. Unless you're forgetting that GT5 did have dynamic weather in 2010 on a previous generation, then it's playing it safe

I guess if GTS is 1080/60 at release with fixed weather and 24 or more cars, people should be pretty damned pleased with that, I mean, Forza, the great, cutting edge leader of the racing genre only started doing it a few months ago.

You're going to have to pick a side, man. Either GTS is disappointing because GT5 had a more complete feature 6 years ago regarding weather and time, and thus Forza also is disappointing, or GTS is incredibly promising because it'll achieve the same thing as Forza currently does at least.

Protip: I'm on the disappointed camp because I really liked those features, but doesn't mean I won't value GTS for what it is in itself.

 

[pager99]

It's a 30 fps racing game, so yeah far away, but not in the direction you think.

Besides, to any racing game fan, the two might as well be in different genres, they have as much in common.

The real "problem" for GT is Forza, which is able to do all of this and on inferior hardware, to boot.

Wtf do people keep saying this for Forza does not have dynamic weather and time of day, it's static like GT sport, sure it's 1080 60 and has dynamic puddles but let's not start inventing a narrative which doesn't exist

 

[Sorc3r3r]

What is it a Gran Turismo?

Never see you again indeed XD.

 

[GHG]

Nah, they're a great idea that the player should be able to opt out of. I much prefer how the drivatars are currently to the ridiculously robotic AI seen in most other racers (especially now with limited aggression). Drivatars are mostly great now imo, compared to the horror show they often were at FM5's launch. They're something the improve continuously over time.

If someone doesn't like them, they should be able to choose to play with simpler, hand-crafted AI routines (or a curated pool of "approved" Drivatars) until it reaches the point they're happy with though. What I'd like would be for the Drivatar's AI to be implemented into the game, but without it pretending to be a ghost of someone I know. Just have M. Rossi drive like someone at the upper end of my skill level bracket.

AI doesn't have to be robotic if it's created well enough. The way I see it is that this Drivatars system was them taking a shortcut (through leveraging cloud/big data technologies) instead of handcrafting their own intelligent AI system that is believable enough while also respecting the player and other AI drivers. The current system works somewhat on certain tracks but is an absolute shitshow on other tracks, regardless of the difficulty level and with the limit aggression setting turned on.

Wtf do people keep saying this for Forza does not have dynamic weather and time of day, it's static like GT sport, sure it's 1080 60 and has dynamic puddles but let's not start inventing a narrative which doesn't exist

The puddles in Forza are as static as they come. They do not disperse when cars drive through them and the exact same size and location every single race and every single lap. That's an area that they drastically need to improve for them to be believable and also useful in the context of racing.

 

[MouldyK]

I'm not a Sony Gamer, but...

If Forza Horizon 3 decided not to have Dynamic Time of Day or Dynamic Weather and said it was for the Framerate to be better...and they didn't hit a Locked 60...i'd be annoyed.

 

[wowbaggerBR]

So, the excuse that was the PS3 being hard to develop for now is the constraints of PSVR.

Poliphony Digital can get away with anything.

 

[Synth]

AI doesn't have to be robotic if it's created well enough. The way I see it is that this Drivatars system was them taking a shortcut (through leveraging cloud/big data technologies) instead of handcrafting their own intelligent AI system that is believable enough while also respecting the player and other AI drivers. The current system works somewhat on certain tracks but is an absolute shitshow on other tracks, regardless of the difficulty level and with the limit aggression setting turned on.

Well, that's why I say it should be optional. If you don't like the implementation, then you'd be able to simply go back to the old approach. As I've said though, I think in the vast majority of cases the AI in racing games has been worse (and far less convincing of actually being a person) than Drivatars have been at this point. It's only really Long Beach where I find myself thinking "hmm, this isn't really working".

Using human player data for AI in any game where the human and cpu are supposed to be on even footing makes sense to me.. it's just shaping the data afterwards to filter some of the more erratic behaviour that needs to improve... but then look at Gran Turismos AI racers, and tell me it's the approach rather than the execution that's the defining factor here. Handcrafting an AI system that does what you want wouldn't be that dissimilar a process to tuning the Drivatar system to ignore some of the human player's more undesirable traits. They'd still be pouring over actual human tendencies and reactions to various situations in order to craft the AI. The main difference would be that the system wouldn't be flexible to adapt to any situations it hasn't already been prepared for.

 

[Noobcraft]

The puddles in Forza are as static as they come. They do not disperse when cars drive through them and the exact same size and location every single race and every single lap. That's an area that they drastically need to improve for them to be believable and also useful in the context of racing.

Puddles tend to aggregate in the exact same places because they rely on gravity. Variable wetness on the track would be nice (light rain vs the current downpour) and some visual effects when driving through them would be nice, but at the end of the day their impact on handling is probably the best modeled in any racer, and GTS should look to emulate that.

 

[lukeskymac]

I'm pretty sure VR needs 90fps and as high a resolution as possible to run comfortably. Sony is using 60fps and a frame doubler in the VR headset to create the illusion of 120fps. However it seems like the PS4 isn't powerful enough to run VR games that look nicer then something from the PS2 Era. ( which is why they are making Neo)

Left the baity-est part for last, 8/10.

 

[test_account]

So, the excuse that was the PS3 being hard to develop for now is the constraints of PSVR.

Poliphony Digital can get away with anything.

Just curious, in what are they getting away with anything? Kaz himself said that PS3 was hard to develope for, in fact he said that it was a nightmare in the recent GTS press conference. He also said in the same press conference that GTS started out as being compatible with VR. If that reflects on the game's graphics overall is hard to say.

 

[scorcher59]

the power of PS4 the blank canvas and now they come up with the whole "to keep the framerate" schtick?
It took a hit on performance on PS3 but then you'd expect that since it was a very old system but what's the excuse this time around?

 

[test_account]

the power of PS4 the blank canvas and now they come up with the whole "to keep the framerate" schtick?
It took a hit on performance on PS3 but then you'd expect that since it was a very old system but what's the excuse this time around?

The excuse is what you say, to keep the framerate. Its only a matter of how the hardware power is being diverted and how they prioritize different things. They could easily have made the design choice to make dynamic time of day and dymanic weather if they wanted to, but they focus the hardware power on different things. Simply a design choice.

 

[AstroNut325]

Legit question:

What is the hardware requirement on PC to have a 1080p 60fps racing simulation with dynamic TOD + weather simultaneously with 12+ cars on the grid?

Edit:
Found this:

So a Titan X can't hit 60fps at 1080p with rainy conditions in PCars?

 

[Synth]

Edit:
Found this:


So a Titan X can't hit 60fps at 1080p with rainy conditions in PCars?

I wouldn't base the requirements on a PC game at high settings, considering that would far outstrip the console versions (where the PS4 performs better than the values you have there for the same game). A Titan X would absolutely murder Driveclub at 60fps for example if it were identical to the PS4 version in all other aspects.

 

[Dee Dah Dave]

No big deal really. Compromises have to be made on weak hardware and the budget is better spent elsewhere. How much weather or time change do people need in the space of 5 laps anyway?

It's understandable why Turn10 did it and the same goes for Polyphony. Providing the rest of the game is rock solid of course

 

[sviri]

What makes development of GT so difficult and take so long, as compared to something like Forza?

 

[Oh God Why]

Mods, can we change the thread title to "Gran Turismo Sport vs every other current gen driving game", please?

Spoiler

This game does not look good

 

[AstroNut325]

I wouldn't base the requirements on a PC game at high settings, considering that would far outstrip the console versions (where the PS4 performs better than the values you have there for the same game). A Titan X would absolutely murder Driveclub at 60fps for example if it were identical to the PS4 version in all other aspects.

Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that there isn't a single game in existence that runs at 1080p 60fps with dynamic weather + TOD AND have a 20+ cars on the track.

For f***s sake... this looks amazing to me:

New video is really good. quality isn't great, but that lighting! :O

These guys are nice too:

The Cabinet of Dr. Calligari in a GT game!

If getting a solid 1080p 60fps experience at the sacrifice of dynamic weather + TOD, so be it. I'll take that quality of visuals and locked framerate.

 

[IISANDERII]

Meh, dynamic weather was an annoying random variable which got in the way anyway. I'll miss the sunsets and sunrises during enduros though but it's definitely not a deal breaker either.

 

[Big Takeover]

Legit question:

What is the hardware requirement on PC to have a 1080p 60fps racing simulation with dynamic TOD + weather simultaneously with 12+ cars on the grid?

• Windows 2000/XP
• 1.8 GHz Intel Pentium 4 or equivalent
• 512 MiB RAM
• 1.7 GiB free hard disk space
• DirectX 8.1 compatible graphics card with 64 MB VRAM
• Keyboard and Mouse

Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that there isn't a single game in existence that runs at 1080p 60fps with dynamic weather + TOD AND have a 20+ cars on the track.

Hmmm

 

[paperspace]

Hmmm

30fps tho

 

[Outrun]

I don't want to sound harsh, but where the fuck is the oversight for this project?

Sony and DP should be better than this.

 

[Synth]

Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that there isn't a single game in existence that runs at 1080p 60fps with dynamic weather + TOD AND have a 20+ cars on the track.

I assume you mean on console, which makes me wonder why you even bring the PC up tbh. Project Cars on PC at console-like settings isn't hard to run consistently above 60fps. It doesn't require prohibitively high specs to do stuff like that... it's simply a matter of priorities. And by that I don't mean sacrificing 60fps. An up-port of GT6 for example could run on a PS4 with dynamic ToD and weather, and have plenty left over to up the car count to 20+ whilst maintaining 60fps. But they instead spent the resources on other graphical elements... and tbh I don't think they balanced the tradeoff that well.