Motion blur and DOF are just to create illusion that game looks better IMO. As i sad, not real graphical changer during replays IMO.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Gran Turismo Sport Unveiling live stream discussion (incl. FIA Championship gameplay)
- Thread starter bombshell
- Start date
Motion blur and DOF are just to create illusion that game looks better IMO. As i sad, not real graphical changer during replays IMO.
nowheretorun
Member
Ok. I can see that as no doubt they'll be plenty of impressions although none 'quite' the same as seeing it for yourself.
Btw, that gif showing the outside cockpit cam really highlights the quality of the lighting (obviously being a gif doesn't show IQ but you can still tell how the lighting sits within the game assuming its not bullshit being only on replay?) so here's to seeing if they improve other areas to match that.
Does real life look flat to you?
dat lighting hnnnggg
Someone needs to gif this section in GT6 during the same tod.
Nothing revealed yesterday was next gen, PD are developing with their heads firmly in the sand. Its patently clear at this point that Kaz does not play any other sims.
How could they have taken years of fan complaints and completely ignored them. Only to show up years later with a slightly cleaned up GT6. The sound effects being so poor at this point is inexcusable.
So many excuses in this thread for what have been serious problems across multiple games.
"Its only 50% done!" - 3 years into the PS4 cycle with 6 months to go. Hard to believe a studio is that inept.
"Graphics aren't great because of VR" - That must be why the base game of PCars looks terrible /s. On PC when running PCars in VR all you do is turn down/off the settings.
"but photomode" - People are still falling for this. Replays/photomode are far less taxing than gameplay and can easily up the eye candy.
"Its an old build" - This excuse can be used right up till release day and is a catch all for shortcomings.
"It has a livery editor now" - From the short clips shown, its still inferior to what Forza has had for years now.
I have never been so disappointed in a first party release. Having played PCars(Vive/PC/PS4), F6, FH, DC and seen devs trying to push boundaries its depressing to see all the glamour around this game (lavish events). When the package being sold has gone nowhere in all these years. This version of the game should have come out in 2013.
How could they have taken years of fan complaints and completely ignored them. Only to show up years later with a slightly cleaned up GT6. The sound effects being so poor at this point is inexcusable.
So many excuses in this thread for what have been serious problems across multiple games.
"Its only 50% done!" - 3 years into the PS4 cycle with 6 months to go. Hard to believe a studio is that inept.
"Graphics aren't great because of VR" - That must be why the base game of PCars looks terrible /s. On PC when running PCars in VR all you do is turn down/off the settings.
"but photomode" - People are still falling for this. Replays/photomode are far less taxing than gameplay and can easily up the eye candy.
"Its an old build" - This excuse can be used right up till release day and is a catch all for shortcomings.
"It has a livery editor now" - From the short clips shown, its still inferior to what Forza has had for years now.
I have never been so disappointed in a first party release. Having played PCars(Vive/PC/PS4), F6, FH, DC and seen devs trying to push boundaries its depressing to see all the glamour around this game (lavish events). When the package being sold has gone nowhere in all these years. This version of the game should have come out in 2013.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
Which is fine but it sure would have been nice to let us know and change the damn GT website from 'starting early 2016'. They had seven months........and please no one use the semantics of they never said there would be a beta download!
I'm sure a public beta for a game like this does require a lot of resources but are you then saying Sony/PD aren't big/capable enough to do it?
Your arguments are bad too. Especially the bolded ones. There are 2 different builds. Replay doesn't add polygons, lighting or similar that can be so different compared to real gamplay. Spectator mode is just like B-Spec mode in previous GT's. Are B-Spec mode graphically different from A-Spec? NO!
PD is, almost literally, the worst gaming company in the world when it comes to unveiling, explaining and demo'ing their own products. I don't know what's to blame, their head-honcho, some old Japanese working mentality, or whatever, they need to sort their shit out. Even though they seem completely oblivious to it, I hope all the criticism online and in outlets gets to them one way or another.
There are footage of two different builds already, those "old build" posts refer to the trailer with unfinished Nurb vs the Nurb footage from the event which obviously look different:
up the trailer, down the gameplay...
why polyphony?
While replays may not "add polygons", there is a certain amount of post processing that goes on in replays that isn't present in gameplay.
nowheretorun
Member
Doesn't matter if its an illusion or not if the affect is the same.
They are not bad but valid. Of course replay can add anything - it only depends on what you do with the free resources. You are speaking like you actually know but you don't because you are not building that game. Fact is: Replay mode frees up resources and this can't be denied. You say they don't use it for more polygons but there is no proof behind that because we don't have any comparison shots that support your argument.
Also Kysen only said "Replays/photomode are far less taxing than gameplay and can easily up the eye candy." - you are free to argue what exactly he said instead of just saying "but it doesn't add polygons!" because that is not what Kysen said.
Maybe potential negative reaction is the cause for the cancellation of the beta, rather than the time constraint issue.
TheAdmiester
Member
Actually it is different in BSpec. If you aren't using a normal gameplay camera and are spectating your car from a replay angle, it adds DOF, motion blur, and some slightly nicer lighting while cutting the game to 30FPS (and sometimes still dips)
We know from previous GT games they will look just like the bottom gif. All that ever changes in replays is framerate and filters. The difference in graphics in the gifs is massive world detail, obviously it wasn't finished in the trailer.
SolidSnakex
Member
It would've been a large scale beta from a company that's never done anything like that before. The only time I even remember them doing a beta was back during the PS2 days when they did an extremely small beta for GT4Online. But it's easy to see how a large scale beta could go wrong. Just look at what happened with SFV's beta on multiple occasions.
I ask you : What's the graphical differences between B-Spec mode ( which is basically a spectator mode in GTS ) and A-Spec mode in previous GT's?
My arguments are valid.
As i said, DOF, motion blur ( which also exists during real gameplay and i didn't noticed better lightning during replays in previous GT's ) are not graphical changer.
The criticism has been around for years and its only gotten louder. The whole sound thing (no pun intended) and the hiring of someone from outside their "inner circle" is a sign that maybe they have started to listen (or someone at Sony has started prodding them with a very large stick).
TheAdmiester
Member
They clearly are graphical changes, at the very least in GT's engine.
If they weren't a drastic change then why would it suddenly struggle to keep half the framerate when it's enabled?
Sidewinder
Member
Lol, that's quite the difference, well done PD!
You are confusing power with visual effect. Anyway they probably just locked it at 30 because it couldn't hold 60 with them on, that doesn't equate to "struggle to keep half the framerate".
IMO, they're not. I explained it in previous posts and i won't repeat it again. It's annoying now. I'm done. I said what i wanted to say.
blastprocessor
The Amiga Brotherhood
If Driveclub runs at 60fps on Neo the visuals here will look out of date overnight. But l do think Polyphony are getting surreal with the lighting. That ring clip shows how close they are. The AA and motion blur on the replays look good too. Hopefully the Physics have advanced because Forza 6 Apex feels really good.
TheAdmiester
Member
It does struggle, that's my point. It caps at 30 but I saw framedrops FROM 30, to what looked like 20 or 15. It was noticeable on the stream, and it seemed to have a certain pattern to it (when the camera zooms out because the car is near it) to where I'm pretty certain it wasn't just the stream dropping frames.
Oh wait you are talking about a half finished game seen on an internet stream? Go away.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
I don't disagree with this. My beef is that all the PR from PGW indicated we would be getting a beta to play. If this was never going to be the case, or was but things changed, then why not make this clear?
Someone at GTP said this London event was billed as the final beta test so clearly they chose or planned to go that route without clearing up any misunderstanding on the fans part.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
That said, looking at those Scape shots above, something looks off with their paint shader(s).
Graphics Horse
Member
Scape mode is fantastic! I think I'll spend more time in that rather than game itself!
Was this place in GT5/prologue's attract mode? Looks familiar.
The point in adding polygons might not happen is perhaps valid but not as a response to one guy saying that replays allows for more graphical features and then you say "but there are no added polygons".
SolidSnakex
Member
I don't disagree with the idea that they should've announced the cancellation earlier. But they may have viewed it from the point that if they announced it at the reveal where they also released a bunch of footage and a release date, then maybe people wouldn't take it so hard.
Melfice7
Member
Scape mode is fantastic! I think I'll spend more time in that rather than game itself!
I for one never gave two shits about photo mode in the 3 games that it was available
I'm still shocked sound and collision physics being stuck in the 90's
THE:MILKMAN
Member
Well for me announcing it as soon as they knew would have given them some respect points FWIW....
Interesting reading the Videogamer quotes from Kaz on the cancellation:
Kaz said:
So if I understand this correctly, it takes PD three months to do a gold master so that gives them ~15 weeks to work on the game. Not a lot of time at all given the impressions from the likes of Videogamer.
I'm just really disappointed that the scapes and photomode seem amazing and polished and yet the actual game has many problems(according to Videogamer/EG). This is what I can't get my head round.
Sorc3r3r
Member
I agree, the best thing?
With Pcars and Assetto Corsa coming to the ps4, GT is no more a must buy, now if they want my money they need to actually made a sim that checks all the competion boxes and goes beyond, it's not the case, right now with GTS and i don't care no more.
SolidSnakex
Member
He's probably taking into account the time needed to polish it and the window needed in case it fails certification. GT5 went gold only three weeks before its launch. But this in general is the reason why we don't see many actual demos these days. It's just not worth the time for many developers to take part of the game aside and polish it, bug check, and run it through certification. The stuff that they show at gaming shows don't have to go through that because it's expected that they're unfinished and if they crash or even break the console it doesn't really matter because it's not happening to a consumer.
TheAdmiester
Member
Who pissed in your cornflakes? There's no way a game that's had 3+ years of dev time and is due November is only 50% finished, unless there are a lot of delays ahead.
But I do like how as soon as I backed up my argument you suddenly played the "BUT UNFINISHED" card.
AbandonedTrolley
Member
I agree that something doesn't add up really, 50% finished in 3 years, yet can finish up, go through QA and get gold in under 6 months?
darkinstinct
...lacks reading comprehension.
GT doesn't use higher LOD cars in replays? Cause every other racing game does.
I just played a bit of pCARS with my Fanatec wheel, two tablets/two phones running pCARS Dash, and Crew Chief in my headset telling me what a wanker I am for getting held up by the car in front. You know what? PD can keep GTS for all I care. There's been nothing shown in the past couple of days (bar a few JGTCs) that tempts me.
What a fucking huge disappointment it's all been.
What a fucking huge disappointment it's all been.
TheAdmiester
Member
Exactly. If the game has less than six months left, and they almost saw it fit to release a beta, then what we see now seriously isn't going to be that different from release.
GT5 and 6 already had performance issues in both their gameplay and replay modes, but apparently it's wrong to point out that Sport had them too.
3+ years of dev time? They released GT6 2.5 years ago, also don't forget about add-ons/patches for GT6 so actual time they spent on developing GTS is less than that.
Classic Kaz...
He will spend enormous amounts of time and money to make 100 photomode locations so you can take pictures and make carte postales, instead of using those funds and workforce, to improve GT's game design which is really archaic by now.
3-4? years of development for this reveal... scratch my fucking head really...
Oh look at them awesome locations I can take pictures of my car... this is obviously a more important feature of a racing game, rather than weather effects, day/night cylces, proper A.I., a worthwhile campaign that doesnt involve grinding my way to the next car, with repeated and dull events etc etc etc
bu...but... photomode! Day 1!! /s
He will spend enormous amounts of time and money to make 100 photomode locations so you can take pictures and make carte postales, instead of using those funds and workforce, to improve GT's game design which is really archaic by now.
3-4? years of development for this reveal... scratch my fucking head really...
Oh look at them awesome locations I can take pictures of my car... this is obviously a more important feature of a racing game, rather than weather effects, day/night cylces, proper A.I., a worthwhile campaign that doesnt involve grinding my way to the next car, with repeated and dull events etc etc etc
bu...but... photomode! Day 1!! /s
Bitch Pudding
Member
I think the graphics are fine, not mind blowing but it's doing the job and will look great in VR. That sound though... Fuck it's really bumming me out
That's my summary as well. Although the cars look superb and the lightning exceeds the already superb DC.
paradise_circus
Member
the majority of the photomode locations are photographs like in the autovista modes of forza.
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
Scapes are different than previous photomodes.
AbandonedTrolley
Member
They still need work though, they need the areas and spaces calculated for the lighting to work etc. They aren't just a photo background and it's still time being spent on them. I'm not going to knock them for them just yet until I see the full feature set, but if this comes without day/night or weather then it's clear that Kaz has no idea what game he is being paid to make!
TheAdmiester
Member
Sequels typically start development just as the previous one's production starts winding down. If GT6 released December 2013 and PD claims it's roughly 3 months to master and release, they must've finished work on it in around September 2013. I was slightly off by saying 3+ years but we're getting close to a full 3 years of development.
Either way, even if the dev time was, let's say 2 years, it doesn't seem like development is very well paced when they're at 50% with about 3-6 months to go after said years, does it?
EDIT: Also, in most game devs it seems that a small team is branched off for post-release support while the sequel is full steam ahead. If anything it should be addon development that is slow while the sequel is developed at a good pace (which would explain the complete lack of DLC for GT6 after being promised stuff like "a track a month"). Then again, we are talking about PD so it could be absolutely anything.