Support NeoGAF

[Doube D]

ye i don't understand this as well. Why do you people downplay the one x360 game that actually has something going for it. The rest are hi rez xbox ports but this one seems nice. Let the kids have their fun fellas.

 

[Gek54]

Doesn't matter if they're in sync or not, a 30fps camera records a frame every 33ms, and a 30fps source shows a frame every 33ms as well. Since there must be at least 33ms between each frame in the source vid, it's impossible that the camera can record two frames at once. Think about it. I don't know about the forza stuff you're mentioning.

Yes but if the camera and the source are not in sync then the camera will record the source between updates.

Forza does the exact same thing and again its only 30fps:

You can see the people have the appropriate motion blur but the camera catches two frames of Forza and Forza is 30FPS

Why do you hate MS so much? Why do you have to argue that stuff is inferior without knowing it for a fact?

I dont Hate MS, I love Forza but I am just pointing out that this PGR3 video does nothing to indicated that the game was shown runnging at 60fps and again if anything it proves it was only running at 30fps.

 

[Virgin Wii]

Overall, looks awesome. Hopefully the crowds will only be seen from a distance (no zooming in before and after races). They're not quite good enough to blend in with all the other awesomeness.

 

[Barnimal]

the forza vids look nowhere near as smoove as PGR3. come on. the framerate GIF was a tip and todays showing was the final blast all over the face of the naysayers. SKEET SKEET.

 

[thorns]

Yes but if the camera and the source are not in sync then the camera will record the source between updates.

Forza does the exact same thing and again its only 30fps:

You can see the people have the appropriate motion blur but the camera catches two frames of Forza and Forza is 30FPS

That's probably because the cam itself is moving.

There's no such thing as a camera and source being "synched". Let me explain like this:


if the line represents time: | is when a cam captures a frame and x is each frame on the video:

if both are 30fps different possibilities are:
|x---|x---|x---|x---|x---|x---|
|-x--|-x--|-x--|-x--|-x--|-x--|
|--x-|--x-|--x-|--x-|--x-|--x-|
|---x|---x|---x|---x|---x|---x|

something like
|x---x|----|x--x|----|x--x|-x--|
is not possible because then the source wouldn't be putting out a frame every 33ms, the time between first and second frame would have to be less than 33ms, which is not possible if the video is a steady 30fps.

 

[Blimblim]

Yes but if the camera and the source are not in sync then the camera will record the source between updates.

Forza does the exact same thing and again its only 30fps:

You can see the people have the appropriate motion blur but the camera catches two frames of Forza and Forza is 30FPS

It's because these guys used field blending for deinterlacing the video instead of something more intelligent like motion compensation.
My camcorder video of Forza definitely does not show blending at all :
http://www.xboxyde.com/leech_1097_en.html
And there is a difference between field blending (done on the PC side when deinterlacing) and frame blending (done on the camcorder side)

 

[WHOAguitarninja]

Gek is right. If it's 60fps, it should show 3 frames.

And it does.



EDIT - Thorns, that only works if the camera captures frames instantaneously. It captures a frame over a period of time, like a photo camera, so Gek is actually right here.

Remember that a frame is held onscreen until the next is displayed. If they're at all out of sync, it will grab both. The frame held over, and the new frame.

However, if it were running at 30fps, there is absolutely no way it could capture 3 frames as shown above.

 

[Doube D]

Yes but if the camera and the source are not in sync then the camera will record the source between updates.

Forza does the exact same thing and again its only 30fps:
http://members.cox.net/gek54/gek54/images/forzaFPS1.jpg
http://members.cox.net/gek54/gek54/images/forzaFPS2.jpg
You can see the people have the appropriate motion blur but the camera catches two frames of Forza and Forza is 30FPS






I dont Hate MS, I love Forza but I am just pointing out that this PGR3 video does nothing to indicated that the game was shown runnging at 60fps and again if anything it proves it was only running at 30fps.

Wow, shog ownage part 2?? LOL. nicely done my friend. The point isn't whether the final game will be 60 fps (or indeed if the video is 60fps). The point is that arguments trying to prove that a 30fps recording is sufficient evidence are simply retarded. Aside from the technical flaw which gek already addressed, utilizing (SMOOTHNESS) is simply stupid. Go watch tv (~25 fps). Does it look choppy to you? MUST BE 60fps!!!

 

[Gek54]

That's probably because the cam itself is moving.

Cammera movement would only stretch the image not show two distinct frames.


Thanks morbidaza, finally someone with some sense.

 

[thorns]

Wow, shog ownage part 2?? LOL. nicely done my friend. The point isn't weather the final game will be 60 fps (or indeed if the video is 60fps). The point is that arguments trying to prove that a 30fps recording is sufficient evidence are simply retarded. Aside from the technical flaw which gek already addressed, utilizing (SMOOTHNESS) is simply stupid. Go watch tv (~25 fps). Does it look choppy to you? MUST BE 60fps!!!

tv is 25fps but real life is "infinite fps". And you're retarted.

Gek is right. If it's 60fps, it should show 3 frames.

nm ok I understand it now.

 

[Blimblim]

Shouldn't it still capture 2?

Depends on the deinterlacing method.

 

[Doube D]

tv is 25fps but real life is "infinite fps". And you're retarted.


nm ok I understand it now.

Actually "real life" isn't infinite fps. Seriously where do you come up w/ this bs? Real life is defined by the number of photons your eyes "see" and more precisely by the number your brain can compute in a given time frame… and this is strictly quantized in nature. That is why most people can't recognize rates over 80 hz. Moreover, on an even more fundamental level, time itself is quantized, meaning that yes, the world skips from one frame to the next. No such thing as infinite fps in any sense. Not that this has ANY relevance to what I previously stated. ;p

 

[WHOAguitarninja]

Actually "real life" isn't infinite fps. Seriously where do you come up w/ this bs? Real life is defined by the number of photons your eyes "see" and more precisely by the number your brain can compute in a given time frame… and this is strictly quantized in nature. That is why most people can't recognize rates over 80 hz. Moreover, on an even more fundamental level, time itself is quantized, meaning that yes, the world skips from one frame to the next. No such thing as infinite fps in any sense. Not that this has ANY relevance to what I previously stated. ;p

EDIT - I should clarify what I had here for a second, it is highly suspected time is quantized in some form, especially in theories of quantum gravity. But it is probably not quantized in a manner as simple as you are describing,a simple "stop-go", as that brings a very fundamental problem into the workings of relativity.

More over, the "saturation" point for your eyes is about 72 fps, however the actual brain/eye combo doesn't exactly see in frames the way a camera or tv does, as residual images are left in the eye in a manner that is independent of "refreshes"(which I don't think they've ever actually measured convincingly), which creates an absolutely perfect blur that isn't replicated in ANY digital device.

 

[dorio]

If we have to go through all this technical analysis to determine if a game is running at 30fps vs. 60 then doesn't that suggest that the difference is minimal and not worth the time arguing about it in the first place. If the game runs like it does in that video then that's all I care about. Everything else is just a meaningless number to me. It's like how many polygons are in a scene; I could care less as long as I don't see polygonal edges.

 

[Doube D]

I should just point out that I'm fairly certain it's not known for sure that time itself is quantized. I know it's an idea that's out there, but I'm pretty certain it's not known for sure.

More over, the "saturation" point for your eyes is about 72 fps, however the actual brain/eye combo doesn't exactly see in frames the way a camera or tv does, as residual images are left in the eye in a manner that is independent of "refreshes"(which I don't think they've ever actually measured convincingly), which creates an absolutely perfect blur that isn't replicated in ANY digital device.

Ah very good. A fellow physics buff?? Anyway yes, it hasn't been proven that time is quantized but leading theories predict it to be (which is absolutely weird if you think about it). Proving it would require devices capable of distinguishing rates far below even femto seconds and they simply don't exist. As is, the Plank second 10^-44 secs is considered the smallest unit of time.

Also the thing about residual images iv never heard before. Very interesting. Though im wondering if it is your eyes that maintain the residual image/polarization or if it is maintained post transduction in the visual cortex.

 

[WHOAguitarninja]

Ah very good. A fellow physics buff?? Anyway yes, it hasn't been proven that time is quantized but leading theories predict it to be (which is absolutely weird if you think about it). Proving it would require devices capable of distinguishing rates far below even femto seconds and they simply don't exist.

Also the thing about residual images iv never heard before. Very interesting. Though im wondering if it is your eyes that maintain the residual image/polarization or if it is maintained post transduction in the visual cortex.

Yep, majoring in it and math at UMD college park =)

Thats a good question as to where it is maintained. Honestly I'm not sure. If you want to find some answers, the most interesting stuff i've read about residual images comes from some tests where they flashed pictures of aircrafts infront of military people (pilots I think) for REALLY short time spans(like 1/700th of a second or something like that) and they were able to correctly identify the aircraft due to it being present in the residual image for a breif time.

Honestly I would think it would be kept in the cortex as I would think having a residual image stuck in your eye could impair it's ability to see new things, but it's 3 am so my logic is probably freaking awful right now =)


EDIT - actually...thinking back, I'm not sure if I'm remembering quite correctly about how the residual image is stored independent of "refreshes" from the eye. I could've completely made that up. It seems logical though, as residual images have been argued to be a defense mechanism so that we can be alerted to things even if we don't see them for long at all(although that is obviously speculative). If that is true, it would seem to funtion most effectively as being independent as if the image came near to a new "refresh"(that is...assuming it refreshes in frames...i'm not sure this is the case), it would be nearly useless unless it was held longer. So I think I'm right, but I could be wrong there.

 

[Doube D]

ah very cool. I have a shit load of friend at UMCP though I myself am from nyc (lived down there last yr though). I was a physics major n bio heh. anyway, thanx for the heads up. I'll check it out n good luck.

 

[Barnimal]

Gek is right. If it's 60fps, it should show 3 frames.

And it does.



EDIT - Thorns, that only works if the camera captures frames instantaneously. It captures a frame over a period of time, like a photo camera, so Gek is actually right here.

Remember that a frame is held onscreen until the next is displayed. If they're at all out of sync, it will grab both. The frame held over, and the new frame.

However, if it were running at 30fps, there is absolutely no way it could capture 3 frames as shown above.

*rubs hands together*

 

[Shogmaster]

Wow, shog ownage part 2?? LOL. nicely done my friend. The point isn't whether the final game will be 60 fps (or indeed if the video is 60fps). The point is that arguments trying to prove that a 30fps recording is sufficient evidence are simply retarded.

Hey asswipe, read my posts and tell me where I was owned. You are fucking retard that needs to be hooked on phonics:

- Each frame camcorder records, at least two frames have apeared on the screen (and usually 3, due to staggering).

Now, where was I owned again?

Aside from the technical flaw which gek already addressed, utilizing (SMOOTHNESS) is simply stupid. Go watch tv (~25 fps). Does it look choppy to you? MUST BE 60fps!!!

If you didn't trip over yourself to claim my supposed ownage, you might have realised that my post was about proving that difference between 60fps and 30fps video source can be seen on mere 30fps video. And I have done that exactly. I never claimed that the pic of the two frames frozen was proof positive of 60fps.

Also, if the video being shown and the camera capturing is in sync, it will capture only 2 source frames frozen per frame.

 

[Gek54]

Now, where was I owned again?

Right around here:

All you tools who can't comprehend how we can see 60fps smoothness on a 30fps video...bla bla bla

There are absolutely no GPR3 screens with the cars being motion blurred. The footage is 60fps. Let's move on.

Also, if the video being shown and the camera capturing is in sync, it will capture only 2 source frames frozen per frame.

Would you like to know the probability of that actually happening?

 

[Gek54]

I never claimed that the pic of the two frames frozen was proof positive of 60fps.

Yeah you more or less did.

All you tools who can't comprehend how we can see 60fps smoothness on a 30fps video, wrap your simple brains around this:
....
- Each frame camcorder records, at least two frames have apeared on the screen (and usually 3, due to staggering).
- Camcorder records a frame that is a blend of at least two frames, if not 3.

You are on a roll shoggy.

 

[Doube D]

Yeah you more or less did.



You are on a roll shoggy.

Ah leave the guy alone gek. After the "but those robots are too smooth, can't be done..." debacle, why bother? lol

 

[Shogmaster]

Right around here:

Every single one of those statements I made are absolutely true. Prove it otherwise case by case or shut up.

Would you like to know the probability of that actually happening?

Hey, I never said it was high probablity. I actually said it's likely to see 3 frames blended. Never the less, it can happen.

Yeah you more or less did.

And you are more or less a retard. Point out where I said so. All I wanted was to try and prove that 30fps video can show evidence of 60fps, and I did exactly that.

You are on a roll shoggy.

Right over your stanky ass.

 

[Gek54]

Gek is right. If it's 60fps, it should show 3 frames.

And it does.

Oh, damn. I was thinking that shot was from the E3 vid. Ok, yeah, the footage was 60fps...WOO!

*eats crow* yum.

 

[Blimblim]

Latest Bizarre update about yesterday's Summit

Japan was host to the Xbox Summit on Monday, and Bizarre Creations was in on the ground floor.

This week our very own Nick Davies was shipped out to Japan to give the press some info on PGR3. Talking at the Xbox Japan Summit, Nick outlined some further details on the third Project Gotham Racing in the series, as well as showing a new trailer from of the game.

Some points that were covered at the Summit:

* The new Route Creator allows you to design your own tracks, and share them online over Xbox Live.
* It is now possible to drive any car, at any time. You can buy your favourite super car at the beginning of your career, and use it right through to the completion of the game if you wish.
* 80 high-powered automobiles are featured in PGR3. You'll be able to drive the most desirable collection of super cars ever featured in a game, such as the Ferrari 430, the Lamborghini Gallardo, and the McLaren F1 LM.
* Fully motion captured, 3d crowds react to your racing. They will cheer the cars as they race past, and move away from the barriers if you crash.
* Our new sound engine uses 30 individual samples; this is 3 times more than in PGR2.
* On average, each car is rendered using 80,000 polygons. This consists of approximately 40,000 for the interior, and 40,000 for the exterior. To put this in perspective, PGR2 used only 10,000 polys per car.
* Along a similar sort of lines, the geometry of only the Brooklyn Bridge structure uses the same number of polygons as an entire city in PGR1.

We look forward to giving out more information on PGR3 in the future. Keep checking back to Bizarre Online for more updates.

 

[Gek54]

* Our new sound engine uses 30 individual samples; this is 3 times more than in PGR2.

Is this the same as channels?

 

[Blimblim]

Is this the same as channels?

I could be wrong, but I believe it's the number of actual engine "sound" samples (recorded) that can be blended/changed to create the final sound of the engine.
Just my guess.

 

[dicklaurent]

Same as channels then.

 

[Gek54]

It says sound engine so I assumed it meant the game engine that handles all of the sound for the entire game not just the engine sounds. Now if they flipped it and said " Our new engine sound use 30 individual samples.."

?

 

[Blimblim]

Same as channels then.

Not as I meant it then, channels would mean 30 samples being played at a time, I just meant they have 30 different samples to use for creating the final engine sound.

 

[dicklaurent]

Yeah, that makes more sense. 30 samples make up one engine.

 

[Blimblim]

Heh. Edit.

Just my guess. Using 30 channels just for the engine sound would not really make sense.
Edit: Heh. My message makes no sense

 

[Gek54]

Playing 30 different sounds at once requires at least 30 sound channels.

 

[Wax Free Vanilla]

* On average, each car is rendered using 80,000 polygons. This consists of approximately 40,000 for the interior, and 40,000 for the exterior. To put this in perspective, PGR2 used only 10,000 polys per car.

And they've still got angled wheel arches on the cars, you suck Bizarre Creations.

 

[Shogmaster]

And they've still got angled wheel arches on the cars, you suck Bizarre Creations.

Arches are incredibly smooth in the new video. Huge difference from the first shots.

 

[flipswitch]

shit! Then we'd need a 30.1 channel set up!

 

[Gek54]

:lol No, not speaker channels.

 

[dicklaurent]

Playing 30 different sounds at once requires at least 30 sound channels.

Yeah, the sound chip is probably able to output enough sound channels in total to do it like this (256? 512?).. but I am thinking of it more now as 30 different sound samples is the total sound range of an engine, so all 30 samples will probably not have to be played simultaneously.

But umm.. thinking about how to make sense of that line off the update is giving me a headache now so I will stop, even if I am completely wrong and it doesn't make sense.

 

[cyberheater]

Playing 30 different sounds at once requires at least 30 sound channels.

No it doesn't. You can software mix the samples to a single stream on the fly. Only a single sound channel is needed.

Care to pull anything else out the air or are you finished with your trolling on this subject.

 

[Gek54]

No it doesn't. You can software mix the samples to a single stream on the fly. Only a single sound channel is needed.

Care to pull anything else out the air or are you finished with your trolling on this subject.

Yeah you can but I have yet to hear it done without sounded like shit compared to using the hardware channels.

 

[dicklaurent]

I disabled it already. Sheesh.

 

[cyberheater]

Yeah you can but I have yet to hear it done without sounded like shit compared to using the hardware channels.

Then you obviously know nothing about software mixing.

All highend music studios use music software that uses software mixing. Every pop song is done using software mixing.

Your a troll. Go away...

 

[Gek54]

Music mixing? I am talking about in game sound being overlayed effectively in real time.

 

[sly]

Hey Gek54, what is that in your avatar?

 

[Gek54]

Hey Gek54, what is that in your avatar?

Petter Solberg's WRC Subaru WRX

 

[sly]

Petter Solberg's WRC Subaru WRX

I thought it was a Motor Storm clip :lol

 

[cyberheater]

Music mixing? I am talking about in game sound being overlayed effectively in real time.

Music or sound effects. It's the same.

I take it no retraction from you then.

Pity some folks can't admit when there wrong.

 

[Gek54]

No its not the same. Tell me what game uses software mixing instead using multiple hardware channels. The 360 has 256 channels so if they use 30 just for the engine then they should have plenty left for all the other sounds. I dont know where you got off thinking I was some how trolling PGR3 by talking about sound channels.

 

[Blimblim]

Btw, the sound mixing on Xbox 360 is done in... software. There is no dedicated sound chip like on Xbox.

 

[Gek54]

But it still uses audio channels.