Forza Motorsport 6 Demo Frame-Rate Test (Digital Foundry)

So Forza 6 brings us static night and static rain + puddles.

Not complaining but I hope for Forza 7 they expand on that and do dynamic day/night cycles, changing puddles (to some degree) and basically expand cars and tracks as always :)

Can´t do everything with a production cycle of 2 years.

With static rain and night Forza has finally caught up to GT3 at least! (Well, Forza 1 actually had static night racing). I really think T10 should be freed from this brutally short production cycle. Series has been stagnant for a while now. Another thing it has in common with GT I guess.
 
This thread has been properly derailed, we are now talking about COD?, WTF?

The thread is about the technical analysis of the demo, which, in a nutshell, is perfect, 1080p and 60fps, with zero tearing.

Simply because people can't pick holes in that, they resort to sniping at things like IQ, to say rubbish like, the IQ is horrible, or the IQ "isn't very good", is borderline ridiculous.


If you are comparing it against DC, then you need to factor in the technical differences as to why DC can provide better IQ, it's not running at 60fps, in the time DC renders a single frame, FM6 renders two.

The physics engine is running a shedload more calculations than the one in DC is.

You'll always get comparisons of the two due to, they are both racing games, but they are both doing very different things, to appeal to a different demographic.

But bottomline, T10 have done some seriously impressive stuff here technically.
Cant knock the frame rate. Cant knock the cars. Cant knock the music. Cant knock the gameplay.

Time to make fun of those buildings on a hill in the background and that crowd members' hat which doesnt look so hot!
 
I really think T10 should be freed from this brutally short production cycle. Series has been stagnant for a while now. Another thing it has in common with GT I guess.

That's actually an interesting discussion point, however, not suitable for the technical analysis thread.
 
With static rain and night Forza has finally caught up to GT3 at least! (Well, Forza 1 actually had static night racing). I really think T10 should be freed from this brutally short production cycle. Series has been stagnant for a while now. Another thing it has in common with GT I guess.

GT3 ran at 60fps and 1080p without any drops at all?

Who says the series has been stagnant?
 
GT3 ran at 60fps and 1080p without any drops at all?

Who says the series has been stagnant?

GT3 was on the PS2 and was in fact 60fps. No idea about resolution but it didn't really matter back then since we were all playing on CRT's.

There is a case to be made about Forza being "behind the curve" in certain elements such as dynamic weather and time of day and the fact that we are only now getting static rain and seeing night return after all those years. But then they are ahead in other elements of the game vs the competition so it's all a wash really. It depends on what an individual looks for in a racing game and how much importance they place on certain elements.

I think they could have greatly benefitted from having a longer dev cycle for this game in particular. I'm in the opinion that Forza 5 really didn't need to even exist since it was so disappointing in so many ways and that this should be the 1st mainline title that we are seeing from them. If they had that amount of time and the budget of the 2 games combined I'm sure we could have potentially seen something truly special from them. This is all off topic though and probably for another discussion.
 
GT3 ran at 60fps and 1080p without any drops at all?

No, but it goes to show we had racing sims with pre-baked conditions for over 14 years now. As others said, the main attracion of night racing/rain are changing conditions.

Who says the series has been stagnant?

Forza 5 was one of the worst games in the series (microtransactions, scaled back scope, etc.).

Anyway, to not derail the thread I'll leave it at that.
 
Cant knock the frame rate. Cant knock the cars. Cant knock the music. Cant knock the gameplay.

Time to make fun of those buildings on a hill in the background and that crowd members' hat which doesnt look so hot!

Btw saw that on the RIO track there are 3d spectators now mixed in with sprites in the demo. So that's pretty cool.
 
Some direct feed screenshots here of the final game https://translate.google.es/transla...-de-forza-motorsport-6/47500&anno=2&sandbox=1

Forza-Motorsport-6-27.jpg


Forza-Motorsport-6-10.jpg

Ugh. Did they deliberately pick bad shots? And why are these in the demo tech-discussion thread?
 
Here's the same spot but this time from a different angle.
fm6caayn10zps3w.png
Something is wrong with the host, that image does not fully load in, it does not display properly.

Got bored, took some shots with the free cam.
Can't see any of those shots......


As for these images....
Forza-Motorsport-6-27.jpg


Forza-Motorsport-6-10.jpg


They're not too flattering, apart from the low detail buildings, the low res grass patches are really unsightly, looks really bad for a 2015 racer.
 
One thing I'd like to see DF do is do a framerate stress test, I have not seen 24 cars on screen (bunched up) with lots of 3D puddles. The footage they showed is pretty tame to be honest, lets see footage of what's being touted the most for part 6, 24 cars and 3D puddles.
 
With static rain and night Forza has finally caught up to GT3 at least! (Well, Forza 1 actually had static night racing). I really think T10 should be freed from this brutally short production cycle. Series has been stagnant for a while now. Another thing it has in common with GT I guess.

I'm curious as to how someone could look at say, Forza 3 and Forza 6, and say that the series hasn't improved much in visuals or gameplay.

That would be the definition of stagnation.
 
I guess you can pick bad shots from every game out there.

Yep. FM6 looks far better during play than those shots suggest. That site either must have an agenda, are just shit at taking good photos, or are just good at taking shit photos.
 
It's great that it keeps a solid 60fps, demo really does feel smooth as can be.

For me the issue is that it's clear that this has come as the expense of the background, crowd etc. they may not be 2D but they look so flat and undetailed. Cars and tracks look relatively good though which is the main part but still it's disappointing.
 
Yup people really like to complain about stuff over here but Turn 10 is definitely an incredibly talented developer to get this kind of performance with this much going on, to see that not even a single frame is dropped is pretty much wizardry imo. Can't wait for the full game to arrive!

I am not sure I would call it wizardry (you can see the corners cut quite obviously just by looking at how the game renders things). BUt it definitely shows a level of dedication toward a goal!
 
Something is wrong with the host, that image does not fully load in, it does not display properly.


Can't see any of those shots......


As for these images....
Forza-Motorsport-6-27.jpg


Forza-Motorsport-6-10.jpg


They're not too flattering, apart from the low detail buildings, the low res grass patches are really unsightly, looks really bad for a 2015 racer.

You simply don't see that while playing.
 
You simply don't see that while playing.
Hey, I absolutely love turn 10's policy of an un-fleeting 60fps, but never thought they would have to cut back so much to meet their target for a new gen game........This is a 2013 console and I'm still seeing asset quality and lighting from years and years gone by, even the cars don't look all that great on track........
 
Hey, I absolutely love turn 10's policy of an un-fleeting 60fps, but never thought they would have to cut back so much to meet their target for a new gen game........This is a 2013 console and I'm still seeing asset quality and lighting from years and years gone by, even the cars don't look all that great on track........

Please stop while you are ahead...

There is a clear difference between these versions and versions on last gen, in FX on screen, polygon counts on screen, AF used, textures (texture resolution) and PBR and IBL.
And the amount of grass used..

And the physics engine that's next-gen.
 
I am not sure I would call it wizardry (you can see the corners cut quite obviously just by looking at how the game renders things). BUt it definitely shows a level of dedication toward a goal!
I doubt you can see that in gameplay though, Turn 10 has focused on what really matters and manage to cram surprisingly great graphics into a rock-solid 60fps engine. I sometimes have to double-check and confirm that people aren't trolling and posts Driveclub or Horizon 2 pics and gifs. That is wizardry. It really shouldn't be that close to graphics-focused 30fps arcade racers.
What's cool too is that they didn't listen too much to the graphics complaints after Forza 5 and lowered the framerate and/or the resolution just to compete in the still pic graphics race like so many other devs this generation. I honestly belive that Rise of the Tomb Raider, Uncharted 4, Gears of War 4, Driveclub, NFS, etc would all be pushing out 60fps if more people had talked about the framerate than the graphics and resolution during these last 2 years. All these devs aimed for 60fps in the start of the generation, but something happened, and now we're back to 25-30fps being the norm.
 
What's so demanding about dynamic weather? It's a sunny day and all of a sudden some clouds show up and it gets darker and it starts to rain. Doesn't it all depends on how detailed you want it? Personally I don't care, it's not dynamic weather and time of day that makes me love racing games, it's the cars, speed, competition and grinding speed running type of gameplay. The puddles made a huge different though, those need to be standard from here on.

Dynamic weather demands dynamic lighting (sun-lit warm environment transitioning to darker, grayish hue due to cloudy conditions). Their decision to go with prebaked solutions for the track lighting and shadows seems like a deliberate choice to meet that 1080/60 target.

As for these images....
Forza-Motorsport-6-27.jpg


Forza-Motorsport-6-10.jpg


They're not too flattering, apart from the low detail buildings, the low res grass patches are really unsightly, looks really bad for a 2015 racer.

Well, that's a narrow-minded view of things. You talk as if they have a choice, given their clear unwavering performance goals and constraints of the hardware. And pointing out obvious visual compromises doesn't contribute much to the overall tech discussion if you're gonna ignore everything new they've introduced in this year's title. I'm all for highlighting flaws (as if people really can't see them but sure), we should also show areas of improvement if you wanna come off as an enthusiast of all things visual tech (which you don't seem to be).

Anyway, something I've noticed with this year's crowd 2D sprites is that other than using 3D rendered models (as opposed to photos of real people), the sprites also react properly to lighting, ie normal-mapped, like the tree sprites in DriveClub.

Edit: Here's what I mean:

ekyu7yla7ps9f.gif


Thanks to MouldyK for the original video
 
I honestly belive that Rise of the Tomb Raider, Uncharted 4, Gears of War 4, Driveclub, NFS, etc would all be pushing out 60fps if more people had talked about the framerate than the graphics and resolution during these last 2 years. All these devs aimed for 60fps in the start of the generation, but something happened, and now we're back to 25-30fps being the norm.

That´s a general problem that you don´t see the 60 fps in all the screenshots (and most videos) prior to launch.

And graphics still sell ...
 
Something is wrong with the host, that image does not fully load in, it does not display properly.


Can't see any of those shots......


As for these images....
Forza-Motorsport-6-27.jpg


Forza-Motorsport-6-10.jpg


They're not too flattering, apart from the low detail buildings, the low res grass patches are really unsightly, looks really bad for a 2015 racer.

I was going to buy and enjoy hundreds of hours of Forza 6 until I discovered how horrible it looks when you point the free camera at grass you never seen when racing, and low poly buildings at odd angles behind the spectator stands. Shame on you Turn 10.
 
They're not too flattering, apart from the low detail buildings, the low res grass patches are really unsightly, looks really bad for a 2015 racer.
Textures in those shots got murdered by compression. This is what the grass on Sebring looks like in direct captures of gameplay.
Screenshot-Original.png


Screenshot-Original.png


Screenshot-Original.png
 
How many races are involved in a league in F6? I've been playing a lot of F5 and FH2 to get my hub tier up (not gonna make it past tier 5 I think, sadly) and while I enjoy the FH2 world/atmosphere a lot more, one thing that fatigues me about F5 is just how many bloody races each league is.

I liked the bite sized nature of FH2, each league was basically 3-5 races and then you move on. F5 each one is 8-10 and it really, really starts to drag on especially once you get to "everything is 4+ laps" races.

Still pre-ordered digital F6, I just enjoy this kind of game as casual play when I wanna unwind for 30 minutes. I will miss the Top Gear guys though, I actually loved just hopping in between league selection menus just so I could hear one of the three guys wax on about a certain class of car.
 
Please stop while you are ahead...

There is a clear difference between these versions and versions on last gen, in FX on screen, polygon counts on screen, AF used, textures (texture resolution) and PBR and IBL.
And the amount of grass used..

And the physics engine that's next-gen.
Are you just parroting what Turn 10 and marketing guys said. This is not a PR thread, it's tech thread. What you see is not a lie, it's close to the final product, or at least the last two shots are from the final product.

Are you going to deny what you see, the flat lighting, the low poly/rez track detail because you want a better impression of the game to linger on your mind? This is a tech thread, not a leave Britney....errr...Forza alone thread. This is where we scrutinize the graphics. No one here will say to you don't buy Forza, we're just looking at the technical elements. There's no reason to get any panties bunched up.

It's also not wise to throw terms around, just because you hear it, you're talking about great textures, where are they, talking about AF, the game hardly has AF, you're talking about PBR, please show me.....are you talking PBM on cars and the coined up 3D pools? which are both underwhelming. Cars, don't look especially impressive in forza 6, so no matter how many tech terms you use, it's all about what's on screen and it's quality.

People/devs will do the very least to throw a tech term out, that doesn't mean anything, it's all about it's application and how good the implementation is. It's just like a dev saying we have AF but is only using 2x AF instead of 16x. Or a dev saying we have great filtering, but is using trilinear. You're not blind you can see for yourself, but you need to get a clue.

Further to that, you're talking IBL in one of the flattest looking AAA racers since last gen. The lighting system is not impressive and IBL has been a thing for the series since Forza 4, don't pretend that it's some new found wizardry, the lighting is still flat in F6 and it's one of the reasons the cars look so cartoonish and unrealistic.

As for the physics, it's all the same, just words, big numbers extrapolated and bullet points, it's all PR. Of all the racers you've played, does Forza have the best physics and the best driving model to you? I suspect if the dev told you that Forza 1 was 60fps you would believe that too, despite knowing better after the very first race.

I doubt you can see that in gameplay though, Turn 10 has focused on what really matters and manage to cram surprisingly great graphics into a rock-solid 60fps engine. I sometimes have to double-check and confirm that people aren't trolling and posts Driveclub or Horizon 2 pics and gifs. That is wizardry. It really shouldn't be that close to graphics-focused 30fps arcade racers.
What's cool too is that they didn't listen too much to the graphics complaints after Forza 5 and lowered the framerate and/or thecresolution just to compete in the still pic graphics race like so many other devs this generation. I honestly belive that Rise of the Tomb Raider, Uncharted 4, Gears of War 4, Driveclub, NFS, etc would all be pushing out 60fps if more people had talked about the framerate than the graphics and resolution during these last 2 years. All these devs aimed for 60fps in the start of the generation, but something happened, and now we're back to 25-30fps being the norm.
Seriously? I mean you must be joking bu....t. I think there's also the expectation that people want great looking games at 1080p 60fps, we've had a few already and as consumers we want more, not a farfetched expectation right? There's nothing wrong in wanting great graphics and great framerate. The only thing I can say about Turn 10 is that if that's the best they could do, and that's all they could muster with the hardware, fine I just expected a bit more for IQ even for the XBO from a first party.

Well, that's a narrow-minded view of things. You talk as if they have a choice, given their clear unwavering performance goals and constraints of the hardware. And pointing out obvious visual compromises doesn't contribute much to the overall tech discussion if you're gonna ignore everything new they've introduced in this year's title. I'm all for highlighting flaws (as if people really can't see them but sure), we should also show areas of improvement if you wanna come off as an enthusiast of all things visual tech (which you don't seem to be).
There was PBM in Forza 5 for cars, what's new besides the uhhhh "3D" puddles and extra cars. Perhaps you can do a F5 to F6 comparison to show the huge improvement F6 brings. Perhaps you can touch on PBM, IBL, Shadows, AF, textures etc.....
 
There was PBM in Forza 5 for cars, what's new besides the uhhhh "3D puddles and extra cars. Perhaps you can do a F5 to F6 comparison to show the huge improvement F6 brings. Perhaps you can touch on PBM, IBL, Shadows, AF, textures etc.....

24 cars on track
Rain
Night racing

Amongst other things. I like how you namedropped tech terms and never thought to think the simplest of features might affect the game visually (or brought something new in that dept). But if you can't figure out how they do, I'll be glad to help.
 
Are you just parroting what Turn 10 and marketing guys said. This is not a PR thread, it's tech thread. What you see is not a lie, it's close to the final product, or at least the last two shots are from the final product.

Are you going to deny what you see, the flat lighting, the low poly/rez track detail because you want a better impression of the game to linger on your mind? This is a tech thread, not a leave Britney....errr...Forza alone thread. This is where we scrutinize the graphics.
It's funny that you like to use low resolution gifs and highly compressed jpegs to make your statements, and continue to ignore the direct captures people are sharing if they contradict what you're saying.
 
24 cars on track
Rain
Night racing

Amongst other things. I like how you namedropped tech terms and never thought to think the simplest of features might affect the game visually (or brought something new in that dept). But if you can't figure out how they do, I'll be glad to help.
So these are the features you were referring to? That a series in 2015 is just getting rain and night racing....In any case, I would like to see some 24 hour races in rain and at night to see how it taxes the engine relative to framerate...

Btw, I didn't bring up the tech features, sinnergy did, he highlighted them as bullet points as if these effects and features are a million times better in F6, most of what he mentioned were already implemented in previous Forza's; IBL, PBM, I mean..AF and the others. Doesn't change the effectiveness of their implementation here.

It's funny that you like to use low resolution gifs and highly compressed jpegs to make your statements, and continue to ignore the direct captures people are sharing if they contradict what you're saying.
PNG's are always welcomed Noob, the images look better, but I can see still the low rez patches. In any case I don't think it's the worse looking feature in F6.

theWB27 said:
So...You came into a tech thread and are choosing to ignore the tech because it's not the greatest looking racer available?
I wasn't aware that tech threads was only about framerate.......
 
Are you just parroting what Turn 10 and marketing guys said. This is not a PR thread, it's tech thread. What you see is not a lie, it's close to the final product, or at least the last two shots are from the final product.

Are you going to deny what you see, the flat lighting, the low poly/rez track detail because you want a better impression of the game to linger on your mind? This is a tech thread, not a leave Britney....errr...Forza alone thread. This is where we scrutinize the graphics. No one here will say to you don't buy Forza, we're just looking at the technical elements. There's no reason to get any panties bunched up.

It's also not wise to throw terms around, just because you hear it, you're talking about great textures, where are they, talking about AF, the game hardly has AF, you're talking about PBR, please show me.....are you talking PBM on cars and the coined up 3D pools? which are both underwhelming. Cars, don't look especially impressive in forza 6, so no matter how many tech terms you use, it's all about what's on screen and it's quality.

People/devs will do the very least to throw a tech term out, that doesn't mean anything, it's all about it's application and how good the implementation is. It's just like a dev saying we have AF but is only using 2x AF instead of 16x. Or a dev saying we have great filtering, but is using trilinear. You're not blind you can see for yourself, but you need to get a clue.

Further to that, you're talking IBL in one of the flattest looking AAA racers since last gen. The lighting system is not impressive and IBL has been a thing for the series since Forza 4, don't pretend that it's some new found wizardry, the lighting is still flat in F6 and it's one of the reasons the cars look so cartoonish and unrealistic.

As for the physics, it's all the same, just words, big numbers extrapolated and bullet points, it's all PR. Of all the racers you've played, does Forza have the best physics and the best driving model to you? I suspect if the dev told you that Forza 1 was 60fps you would believe that too, despite knowing better after the very first race.

Seriously? I mean you must be joking bu....t. I think there's also the expectation that people want great looking games at 1080p 60fps, we've had a few already and as consumers we want more, not a farfetched expectation right? There's nothing wrong in wanting great graphics and great framerate. The only thing I can say about Turn 10 is that if that's the best they could do, then that's all they could muster with the hardware. I just expected a bit more for IQ even for the XBO from a first party.

There was PBM in Forza 5 for cars, what's new besides the uhhhh "3D puddles and extra cars. Perhaps you can do a F5 to F6 comparison to show the huge improvement F6 brings. Perhaps you can touch on PBM, IBL, Shadows, AF, textures etc.....
Nah I'm not joking but maybe I can't spot the tiny details some of you keep going on about, don't know, they honestly all look very very similar. But I respect your negativism, we all have different things we focus on and different ways to discuss stuff, I guess I'm more focused on the positives than the negatives this time, and I'm known for being an extreme framerate nut so it's kind of hard to impress me with just graphics if the framerate is bad while it's easier to impress me with the graphics if the framerate is also good. Again, locked 60fps with graphics like this is pretty insane going by what we've seen so far this generation. Seeing the indy car race on a projector screen and controlling it with a TX wheel had me grin and go wow wow haha wow etc :D
I'm sure Gran Turismo will top it though, if they just get enough time to optimize the engine, but until then Forza is king.
 
So these are the features you were referring to? That a series in 2015 is just getting rain and night racing....In any case, I would like to see some 24 hour races in rain and at night to see how it taxes the engine relative to framerate...

Btw, I didn't bring up the tech features, sinnergy did, he highlighted them as bullet points as if these effects and features are a million times better in F6, most of what he mentioned were already implemented in previous Forza's; IBL, PBM, I mean..AF and the others. Doesn't change the effectiveness of their implementation here.


PNG's are always welcomed Noob, the images look better, but I can see still the low rez patches. In any case I don't think it's the worse looking feature in F6.

There are some racers in 2015 that can't reach a locked 60fps.
 
It's abundantly clear in his posts, no visual improvement deserves a mention unless it's big enough. He claims he acknowledge Turn10's efforts given the restraints, trying to convince us he's coming from a position of reasonable understanding and yet he has these ridiculous expectations of how a 1080/60fps should look like on the system.

For example, better IQ? Sure. But then they might've meant they would'nt have been able to implement more 3D crowd models (however little or sparse they still appear to be). Let alone 2D normal-mapped sprites as opposed to the flat, out of place (lighting wise) photo-based ones in F5. Or they might've not been able to create a night setting that introduces dynamic lighting from cars (and your car casting shadows of others). Or they might've not been able to implement rain, which features relatively-accurate reflections on wet tracks and pools, both of which have different levels of diffuse quality (presumably these reflections were done by SSR)

So these are the features you were referring to? That a series in 2015 is just getting rain and night racing....In any case, I would like to see some 24 hour races in rain and at night to see how it taxes the engine relative to framerate...

See my above reply.

You're not getting a single argument out of me about the game looking ugly. Fuck yes I think it does, compared to certain other racers. But I'm not letting my pride get in the way of appreciating a developer's efforts. Unlike you.
 
Folks..just use the ignore function of the forum and stop feeding him

It's hard to do in threads like this where he's so persistent with his bullshit cause people keep quoting him.

He's full of it and most everyone knows it. Some don't tho and others just can't help themselves and just feel that they need to respond, further feeding his bull.

The game looks great and it seems there's a big discrepancy between still shots and what you see in motion. The game looks great in motion and it's 60 fps. Should be great to play judging by the demo as well.
 
Folks..just use the ignore function of the forum and stop feeding him

Or, you know, prove someone wrong instead of hitting the ignore button.

What's specifically different about the things sinnergy mentioned? I mean, either party could be talking out of their ass in here.
 
I do wish that Forza offered dynamic this and that because I really enjoy those elements, but that won't stop me from playing it. Puddles physics are incredible.
 
Anyway, something I've noticed with this year's crowd 2D sprites is that other than using 3D rendered models (as opposed to photos of real people), the sprites also react properly to lighting, ie normal-mapped, like the tree sprites in DriveClub.

Edit: Here's what I mean:

ekyu7yla7ps9f.gif


Thanks to MouldyK for the original video

The crowd sprites in F5 did the same thing.
 
The game looks great and it seems there's a big discrepancy between still shots and what you see in motion. The game looks great in motion and it's 60 fps. Should be great to play judging by the demo as well.
The thing is, locked 60fps in itself makes a game look great because of the smoothness, and the faster the game moves the better 60fps gets compared to 30fps.
A still pic of Mario Kart 8 vs seeing Mario Kart 8 in a fast race - that's a night and day difference in the visuals alone. And Forza is no different. Personally I'd say that 60fps is just as important for the looks as any other graphical tech if not more so.
 
Or, you know, prove someone wrong instead of hitting the ignore button.

What's specifically different about the things sinnergy mentioned? I mean, either party could be talking out of their ass in here.

Well when Driveclub hits a locked 60fps on an acknowledgedly more powerful console then we can talk about Forza looking ugly while adhering to a lock 60fps with a physics engine running at 360fps.
 
The crowd sprites in F5 did the same thing.

They do? They all seem flat, there seems to be no shading on the sprites, and compared to the ones in F6, they look so flat:

6xmgKMM.png


If the sprites in F5 do react to lighting, then that pretty neat. I'd imagine they made a normalmap using some software like this:

2wxSGDJ.png
 
Well when Driveclub hits a locked 60fps on an acknowledgedly more powerful console then we can talk about Forza looking ugly while adhering to a lock 60fps with a physics engine running at 360fps.

The original post didn't mention Driveclub or any other game. Who exactly are you talking to? It was about the technical improvements between F5 and F6.
 
Anyway, something I've noticed with this year's crowd 2D sprites is that other than using 3D rendered models (as opposed to photos of real people), the sprites also react properly to lighting, ie normal-mapped, like the tree sprites in DriveClub.

Edit: Here's what I mean:

ekyu7yla7ps9f.gif


Thanks to MouldyK for the original video

That's pretty neat! Probably O.T. but I kind of don't understand how this work on a 2d image technically. Anybody would be able to explaine me or give me a link that explaine it?

EDIT : Sorry, I've seen that it's already been explained while I wrote this post.
 
That's pretty neat! Probably O.T. but I kind of don't understand how this work on a 2d image technically. Anybody would be able to explaine me or give me a link that explaine it?

Haha I think I just did with my last post above. But aside from how that Sprite Dlight tool works, I would assume the normal-maps (lighting information) applied on these Forza sprites was generated when the original 3D crowd models were created. Kinda like this:

normalmaphqyoc.jpg
 
That looks bad to me because I don't like flat grass textures. I wish for volumetric grass. Or at least all of that to be billboard grass instead of a flat texture with some billboards.
Maybe next gen I guess. Crysis 3 is the only game I can think of with grass like you're describing.
 
Top Bottom