Support NeoGAF

[Hawk269]

Im going to stick my neck out here but anyway. I've been playing DC lately, not lots, but seeing some of the shots i see make my jaw hit the floor. When I've played it looks nothing like the shots i see, their has been a few moments when i go yes that looks great, but to be honest their has been more times when i think it looks really bad and generally very average most of the time. I have only played F6 demo and im not saying F6 is better looking than DC at all but it is easier for to me to take terrible pics and make DC look shit than good. IMO

Same feeling I had when I bought the game. I played a lot of the game when it launched, broken on-line and all. I thought it looked great, but not spectacular like some in this make it out to be. What they are able to push visually is down to things they do really bad. Driving model is not great, it is a bumper car arcade racing game where slamming into barriers and other cars at full speed and yet still able to pull out the win. Limited to 30fps, not very good physics allows them to push other aspects of the game like visuals and effects which they have done very well at.

It is a great "arcade" racing game, it is a lot of fun, it looks great, but for me being a person that has been gaming and playing racing games since the 2600 days, I would take a game like Forza anytime of the day because it represents are more realistic depiction of racing. Driveclub is a great game to have along with Forza in that it is "COMPLETELY" different type of racing game where physics, racing line, hitting apex properly are not important at all to succeed in the game.

On a technical level, I think Forza 6 is doing a lot more under the hood than what DC is doing by a long shot. Just my opinion, so take it as you will.

 

[Aceofspades]

Im going to stick my neck out here but anyway. I've been playing DC lately, not lots, but seeing some of the shots i see make my jaw hit the floor. When I've played it looks nothing like the shots i see, their has been a few moments when i go yes that looks great, but to be honest their has been more times when i think it looks really bad and generally very average most of the time. I have only played F6 demo and im not saying F6 is better looking than DC at all but it is easier for to me to take terrible pics and make DC look shit than good. IMO

I have heard that those gifs and videos were taken from monstrous PCs rendering the game at 8k and 120fps downsampled to tiny gif or small full hd video on YT. /s

 

[carl32]

I have heard that those gifs and videos were taken from monstrous PCs rendering the game at 8k and 120fps downsampled to tiny gif or small full hd video on YT. /s

I thought people were saying fps shouldn't be mentioned in this thread. /s

 

[cakely]

While I haven't played DC myself, I have watched many people play the game via twitch and videos on youtube. My sentiments are the same about seeing it being played versus photos and gifs online. Its still a beautiful game don't get me wrong. But there is a disconnect.

I've never played Driveclub, Forza, Project Cars or Gran Turismo but I've read many threads about them on these forums and I once heard an interview with Dan Greenawalt on a podcast. My sentiments are the same. It's still a beautiful game, don't get me wrong, but there is a disconnect.

 

[GoldenCrow]

I was just thinking that. People saying DC 2D leaves aren't noticeable when playing the game, and then they go ahead and bash FM6's partially 2D crowds. Wasn't Halo Community closed because of bullshit like this?

Well the crowds are very noticeable in Forza 5, even though there is lighting applied to them you can still see the original light source and shadow as well a detachment to the situation they are in as they look like people at an office. Which you can very quickly pick out in motion in a .gif such as the one below and more noticeable on a 1080p display.

The leaves in DC at the same sort of speed, aren't noticeable in gameplay and only really noticeable if you are either going slow - which you should never really experience in the game unless you are purposely looking - or you are in photomode then you see it very quickly. The same techniques applied for two very different things with very differing end products.

The Forza 6 versions look much better but haven't played it nor do I have a way to at the moment, so I can't see how well implemented it is. With the FM5 though there are massive art direction errors, maybe it was thrown in last min to hit a deadline and certainly looks like it was a rush job but considering how visible they are with an environment that doesn't feature much vertical scenery they should have been far more refined, they looked like the images were taken on a crappy phone camera rather than a studio set up and there ideally should have been direction to costume and poses. Within any limitations that may exist there is still a lot that could have been done. For example because the game uses static lighting you know you can fake natural shadow by placing lighting in proximate direction with various assets specific for each track. It is a blemish on a game that was very well done and was very quickly called out because how out of place it looked.

 

[MaxwellParrish]

Going back to that photomode japan shot, the bamboo trees have 3D stumps, with leaves being criss-cross 2D sprites that don't rotate like the other tree leaves. The game also has a mixture of fully 3D plant leaves for smaller vegetation that gets run over by the cars.

Pretty sure that all of the near road pine tree in the Canada course are actually fully 3d or, at least, not sprite rotating based.

 

[icecold1983]

Pretty sure that all of the near road pine tree in the Canada course are actually fully 3d or, at least, not sprite rotating based.

a few trees in project cars are 3d(even those look quite bad), but most of them are flat 2d billboards.

 

[MaxwellParrish]

a few trees in project cars are 3d(even those looks quite bad), but most of them are flat 2d billboards.

Sorry,I quoted the wrong image, but I was talking of Driveclub.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

That which is the laughing stock of forza is a technological innovation elsewhere.

People laughed about it in F5 because it looked very bad in F5. MIght have been the same tech, but not used properly. Its just looked like shit and was quite noticable because mainly of the sprite people were close to the track.
In F6 its much better done, still not ideal imo, but apparently its not that easy.
Driveclub decided against using rotating sprites for people and instead went with 3D people and that doesn't look that good either(they are low poly and don't react to whats heppening on track at all.

What happened to that shit?
https://youtu.be/PLjWeMTwRVc?t=35m1s

 

[RefigeKru]

[loadsofphotos]

hah, wow

GT7 won't look better than Driveclub. It's not possible.

 

[Dictator93]

hah, wow

GT7 won't look better than Driveclub. It's not possible.

If that happened then someone needs to be fired and someone else needs a raise. I also think it is impossible if they go for a 60hz refresh.

 

[Dictator93]

People laughed about it in F5 because it looked very bad in F5. MIght have been the same tech, but not used properly. Its just looked like shit and was quite noticable because mainly of the sprite people were close to the track.

They are both as equally noticable to me. Perhaps my eyes are self-trained to identify rendering inconsistencies... but I do not think one use case is that much better than the other. If anything, I think both are used properly but both are way to close to the trackand the camera. Camera facing sprites are best when they are... idk... many many meters away if not even further.

As of their current use in both games, the quick camera translation due to their relative proximity causes the sprite rotation to be super obvious to me for both. If they instead switched to camera facing sprites further away from the camera as an LOD... instead of just being camera facing sprites the whole time... then they would have to rotate a decidedly smaller distance per frame.

EDIT: the video you posted is too low rez for me to know what you mean. lol

EDIT 2: do you mean the people moving off the track and stuff?

 

[nib95]

I didn't say that there isn't any loss of detail. I said that the details remain more noticeable. Remember that this convo starts with nib95 claiming that FM6 stands to gain more than Driveclub from gif compression... this simply isn't true, because to start with FM6 doesn't have poor texture assets that benefit from being hidden, and it doesn't contain a lot of macro details by the trackside that can look better by being shrunk down.

Nib is saying that something along the lines of this...

to this (keeping in mind that FM6 should look better in the rain)...

... is benefitting FM6 more in the comparison. Which is quite clearly BS.

Not gif compression, more just being downsized. The worse looking the game, with poorer IQ, worse track side detail, trees, foliage etc, the more they inevitably gain from being shrunken and down sampled in to gif size. Yes you will lose details and intricacies, no matter the game, but it also becomes harder to spot the flaws. The better looking the game, the less flaws there are to spot at native resolution in the first place. Unfortunately games like Gran Turismo 5/6, Forza 5/6 etc, don't have the best IQ in terms of anti aliasing, track side geometry etc, so they gain more from being downsized in such a way, as it's much harder to notice the visual flaws.

It's the reason why in GIF form GT5/6 often looks graphically superior or more realistic to Forza and DriveClub, despite the reality being different playing the game on the big screen.

 

[Purest 78]

So guys what do you think is the best looking racing game currently, overall?

Graphically There's no contest Driveclub.

 

[pixelbox]

All i was saying is that the effect in DC worked wonderfully. You have to go out of your way to see it "break" as it tricked alot of people. And then you got some people hiding behind opinions to defend whatever claiming the effect is lackluster. I say hiding because how can you object to someone's opinion? Either way, regarding to the crowd in F6 theere were some people stating, not verbatim, using sprites for crowds was a better application. It looks weird to use for pedestrians as they are always facing you at every angle which makes that stand out.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

Same feeling I had when I bought the game. I played a lot of the game when it launched, broken on-line and all. I thought it looked great, but not spectacular like some in this make it out to be. What they are able to push visually is down to things they do really bad. Driving model is not great, it is a bumper car arcade racing game where slamming into barriers and other cars at full speed and yet still able to pull out the win. Limited to 30fps, not very good physics allows them to push other aspects of the game like visuals and effects which they have done very well at.

Physics hardly has to do with anything when it comes to gfx .

 

[ps3ud0]

I still don't understand why the use of sprites for something as featureless and small as leaves in a track racer is a poor idea. Seems a cheap but effective solution and I presume with DC it's only broken when you go into photomode/free camera.

ps3ud0 8)

 

[AbandonedTrolley]

Few of my screens showing the lighting and weather in DC

 

[Dictator93]

I still don't understand why the use of sprites for something as featureless and small as leaves in a track racer is a poor idea. Seems a cheap but effective solution and I presume with DC it's only broken when you go into photomode/free camera.

It is used for the entire tree or leaf segment of the tree. It isn't inconsequentially small.
AS to regarding what is the poor idea about it visually:

If anything, I think both are used properly but both are way to close to the trackand the camera. Camera facing sprites are best when they are... idk... many many meters away if not even further.

As of their current use in both games, the quick camera translation due to their relative proximity causes the sprite rotation to be super obvious to me for both. If they instead switched to camera facing sprites further away from the camera as an LOD... instead of just being camera facing sprites the whole time... then they would have to rotate a decidedly smaller distance per frame.

 

[Conduit]

On a technical level, I think Forza 6 is doing a lot more under the hood than what DC is doing by a long shot. Just my opinion, so take it as you will.

I said that before, for example : Global illumination and advanced lightning and dynamic weather are not piece of cake for GPU which FM6 doesn't have. Take it as you will. There are other equally important things besides 60fps and physics. Btw. isn't driving physics CPU bound?

 

[ps3ud0]

It is used for the entire tree or leaf segment of the tree. It isn't inconsequentially small.
AS to regarding what is the poor idea about it visually:
If anything, I think both are used properly but both are way to close to the trackand the camera. Camera facing sprites are best when they are... idk... many many meters away if not even further.

From what Ive seen the trees close to the track that use sprites only use it for the leaf segment while trees in the far distance are full sprites AFAIK.

I understand what you are saying but I don't agree with how bad the visual imperfection is. I think it's a sensible compromise that seems to fool enough people. I actually thought it was elegant solution (in that its a good trick for what resources it uses) when I first noticed them myself.

Yes it be nice if they were all 'proper' trees but thats just not going to happen, but on the flipside I wouldn't shout about how many trees I have lining the track/environment if the vast majority of them are just sprites

ps3ud0 8)

 

[Hoo-doo]

On a technical level, I think Forza 6 is doing a lot more under the hood than what DC is doing by a long shot. Just my opinion, so take it as you will.

And I think that's an outright hilarious opinion to have, considering this is a graphics thread.

 

[Noobcraft]

Isn't driving physics CPU bound?

It doesn't have to be. I don't know how Forza handles its physics other than they are calculated 360 times per second (or did in past titles). Some of the calculations could be handled by the GPU.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Btw. isn't driving physics CPU bound?

Polyphony's recent job listing mentioned that they'll be using the GPU for physics in GT7.

 

[Dictator93]

Polyphony's recent job listing mentioned that they'll be using the GPU for physics in GT7.

Well probably not for all, but just for some (softbodies...particles). There is almost no reason to do basic hard body rigid physics on the GPU... CPUs do that extremely well.

 

[TheSpecialOne]

On a technical level, I think Forza 6 is doing a lot more under the hood than what DC is doing by a long shot. Just my opinion, so take it as you will.

Well you're entitled to your opinion no matter how wrong it may be. If you think that Forza is doing more under the hood, I think it would be best if you refrained from future technical discussions. I think it's clear to everyone that you have no knowledge on the topic and your participation is detrimental to the productivity of the conversation.

 

[TheAdmiester]

Well you're entitled to your opinion no matter how wrong it may be. If you think that Forza is doing more under the hood, I think it would be best if you refrained from future technical discussions. I think it's clear to everyone that you have no knowledge on the topic and your participation is detrimental to the productivity of the conversation.

Way to jump on someone for absolutely no reason.

Forza is a simulator (or simcade depending on how you feel about it), it's pretty damn obvious that it is indeed doing more under the hood.

 

[Conduit]

Polyphony's recent job listing mentioned that they'll be using the GPU for physics in GT7.

Cuz they will offload some CPU tasks to GPU. You know, GPGPU stuff which Cerny mentioned 2 years ago.

Way to jump on someone for absolutely no reason.

Forza is a simulator (or simcade depending on how you feel about it), it's pretty damn obvious that it is indeed doing more under the hood.

So, driving physics and 60fps are more demanding than full Global Illumination, lightning, dynamic weather, dynamic TOD for example?

 

[btags]

Cuz they will offload CPU tasks to GPU. You know, GPGPU stuff which Cerny mentioned 2 years ago.

Oh God, here we go...

I'll get some of this out of the way early. 8 GB GDDR5!!! huMA!!!! GPGPU COMPUTE!!!

 

[Conduit]

Oh God, here we go...

I'll get some of this out of the way early. 8 GB GDDR5!!! huMA!!!! GPGPU COMPUTE!!!

Did i said something wrong, man?

 

[gundamkyoukai]

Way to jump on someone for absolutely no reason.

Forza is a simulator (or simcade depending on how you feel about it), it's pretty damn obvious that it is indeed doing more under the hood.

No is does not .
Where does this idea even comes from ?
Forza or any sim could be the best driving game ever and you can have a arcade racer doing more tech stuff .
It just depends on what you using your rendering budget \ gpu power on.

 

[Dictator93]

Cuz they will offload some CPU tasks to GPU. You know, GPGPU stuff which Cerny mentioned 2 years ago.

Did i said something wrong, man?

The mentioning of offloading tasks the GPU has reached memetic proportions. It is not necessarily so special given games have been using GPU compute for a long time and already do.

Nintendo also used the words GPGPU... remember that?

 

[btags]

No is does not .
Where does this idea even comes from ?
Forza or any sim could be the best driving game ever and you can have a arcade racer doing more tech stuff .
It just depending on what you using your rendering budget \ gpu power on.

Just to be clear I think you two are talking about different things. One is saying forza has a more intensive/realistic physics engine. The other is saying drive club has more intensive/realistic graphical effects. Both of you are correct. No need to start arguments that do not exist.

 

[TheAdmiester]

Not is does not .
Where does this idea even comes from ?

The idea comes from the fact that simulating physics accurately is fucking intensive.

There's a reason that those insanely accurate simulations you see of crash tests, bridge collapses, etc aren't rendered in real time.

Take BeamNG.drive for instance. It simulates cars with physical "skeletons", basically every single point of a car is fully simulated with real-world values keyed in for weight, max stress, air resistance, buoyancy, friction, etc. It's so intensive that when spawning more than one car, the load is split at a rate of one car per CPU core. If I spawn more than four cars, it slows my i5-3570 down to a crawl, a CPU that is far more capable than the low end Jaguars in the PS4 and XB1.

And the performance isn't the fault of the graphics engine - the game isn't that great looking and the graphics engine is relatively optimised, these performance drops are all from the accuracy of the physics simulations.

Now, of course this engine is way, way, way more complex than Forza, but the majority of the points made should translate/scale across, especially when you consider the fact that Forza has some pretty sophisticated tire modelling running at all times for up to 24 cars. This engine refreshes at a rate of 360Hz, so yes, it's goddamn intensive compared to the simpler physics of an arcade racer. Driveclub's GI and SSR may start to balance the scales a little bit, but to my knowledge GPUs are much better than CPUs at calculations, so naturally, graphical effects that are well optimised and processed by a GPU are going to be less of a resource hog to execute than (typically CPU-based) physics.

 

[Hawk269]

Physics hardly has to do with anything when it comes to gfx .

Huh? So are you saying running a high level physics system which takes a big amount of resources has no barring on visual fidelity? You do realize, the more system resources they have by not having a high end physics engine allows them to use these resources for better visuals and effects right???

 

[gundamkyoukai]

The idea comes from the fact that simulating physics accurately is fucking intensive.

Take BeamNG.drive for instance. It simulates cars with physical "skeletons", basically every single point of a car is fully simulated with real-world values keyed in for weight, max stress, air resistance, buoyancy, friction, etc. It's so intensive that when spawning more than one car, the load is split at a rate of one car per core. If I spawn more than four cars, it slows my i5-3570 down to a crawl, a CPU that is far more capable than the low end Jaguars in the PS4 and XB1.

And the performance isn't the fault of the graphics engine - the game isn't that great looking and the graphics engine is relatively optimised, these performance drops are all from the accuracy of the physics simulations.

Now, of course this engine is way, way, way more complex than Forza, but the majority of the points made should translate/scale across, especially when you consider the fact that Forza has some pretty sophisticated tire modelling running at all times for up to 24 cars. This engine refreshes at a rate of 360Hz, so yes, it's goddamn intensive compared to the simpler physics of an arcade racer. Driveclub's GI and SSR may start to balance the scales, but physics are a CPU killer which makes Forza's performance incredibly impressive.

That does not change my point .
A game can have the best physics in the world does not mean it's doing more stuff tech wise.
It just doing better physics or more advance physics other tech can cost just as much or even more resources

 

[TheAdmiester]

That does not change my point .
A game can have the best physics in the world does not mean it's doing more stuff tech wise.

What? A game running these hypothetical "best physics in the world" is absolutely doing more tech-wise. Real world simulations are carried out in non-realtime by huge render farms because of their intensity. Is that not "enough stuff tech wise" for you? Physics are a crazy beast to simulate.

 

[VanWinkle]

I'm excited for the big graphical update to The Crew. The game really isn't all that bad looking when I actually played it. Last-gen style basic shaders and lighting to be sure, but those are being updated in the update. And the world is so massive and with so much variety it blows my mind.

 

[Dictator93]

That does not change my point .
A game can have the best physics in the world does not mean it's doing more stuff tech wise.

Regarding physics it would mean that it is doing more tech-wise. Rendering-wise? That is a whole other question.

 

[Hawk269]

Well you're entitled to your opinion no matter how wrong it may be. If you think that Forza is doing more under the hood, I think it would be best if you refrained from future technical discussions. I think it's clear to everyone that you have no knowledge on the topic and your participation is detrimental to the productivity of the conversation.

And you do? Is seems you are the one that does not have a clue about engines, physics and what goes into making a game. Just using one aspect of frame rate where one is 60fps vs. 30fps alone says that Forza is doing a lot more on a technical level than DC. I am not saying one looks better than the other, but when you take into account the physics engine, 60fps, 24 cars on the track, it equals that one game is doing more on a technical level.

I think and I am going to assume here, you are confusing what one game is doing technically versus one game rendering prettier graphics.

Edit: My comment about Forza doing more under the hood than DC was going against the topic of the thread, which seems to be "ONLY" about graphics according to someone who called me out on that. So if that comment was against this particular threads primary subject, I apologize if I offended anyone with that.

 

[timlot]

I'm excited for the big graphical update to The Crew. The game really isn't all that bad looking when I actually played it. Last-gen style basic shaders and lighting to be sure, but those are being updated in the update. And the world is so massive and with so much variety it blows my mind.

Is the old Crew game getting the update or is it just that wild expansion pack?

 

[TheAdmiester]

Is the old Crew gaming getting the update or is it just that wild expansion pack?

Graphic overhaul is coming to everyone, probably just for compatibility's sake. All of the cars and map expansions are in the expansion pack though.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

Regarding physics it would mean that it is doing more tech-wise. Rendering-wise? That is a whole other question.

On the physics yes but as you said rendering-wise that is not for certain .
And all those things put together make a game .
So saying a game has better physics means better tech is far from the truth .
I am using tech to encompass everything the engine doing at the same time.

What? A game running these hypothetical "best physics in the world" is absolutely doing more tech-wise. Real world simulations are carried out in non-realtime by huge render farms because of their intensity. Is that not "enough stuff tech wise" for you? Physics are a crazy beast to simulate.

So is lighting and many more effects .
You can't look at only one aspect of a game and say it's doing more tech wise.

 

[etta]

Well you're entitled to your opinion no matter how wrong it may be. If you think that Forza is doing more under the hood, I think it would be best if you refrained from future technical discussions. I think it's clear to everyone that you have no knowledge on the topic and your participation is detrimental to the productivity of the conversation.

The only thing clear is that you apparently don't know what physics computations are.

 

[Conduit]

And you do? Is seems you are the one that does not have a clue about engines, physics and what goes into making a game. Just using one aspect of frame rate where one is 60fps vs. 30fps alone says that Forza is doing a lot more on a technical level than DC. I am not saying one looks better than the other, but when you take into account the physics engine, 60fps, 24 cars on the track, it equals that one game is doing more on a technical level.

I think and I am going to assume here, you are confusing what one game is doing technically versus one game rendering prettier graphics.

Isn't the driving physics and fps CPU bound in some measure? I asked that before a few post above. Btw. DC doesn't have prettier graphics. It has technically more advanced graphics than FM6. Funny how people who defend FM6 constantly ignoring what DC doing in graphical department and try to downplay it.

What? A game running these hypothetical "best physics in the world" is absolutely doing more tech-wise. Real world simulations are carried out in non-realtime by huge render farms because of their intensity. Is that not "enough stuff tech wise" for you? Physics are a crazy beast to simulate.

The same thing.

Graphical aspects in DC which i mentioned a few posts before are nowhere near as good and technical beast to simulate like driving physics and 60fps in FM6, right?

 

[Synth]

Not gif compression, more just being downsized. The worse looking the game, with poorer IQ, worse track side detail, trees, foliage etc, the more they inevitably gain from being shrunken and down sampled in to gif size. Yes you will lose details and intricacies, no matter the game, but it also becomes harder to spot the flaws. The better looking the game, the less flaws there are to spot at native resolution in the first place. Unfortunately games like Gran Turismo 5/6, Forza 5/6 etc, don't have the best IQ in terms of anti aliasing, track side geometry etc, so they gain more from being downsized in such a way, as it's much harder to notice the visual flaws.

It's the reason why in GIF form GT5/6 often looks graphically superior or more realistic to Forza and DriveClub, despite the reality being different playing the game on the big screen.

This would all be far more convincing if you weren't quoting a post showing the compression/downsizing process having a very obviously negative effect on the game's visuals... unless of course you mean to suggest the scene in the lower image looks worse than that at full fidelity.

Gran Turismo looks more realistic when compressed/downsized into a gif because it's a game with artistically realistic lighting that becomes obvious it's a game and not real due to it that lighting being rendered at low precision. When downsized, that low precision is masked, and so the lighting is difficult to differentiate from real world footage scaled to the same size. It's acting as an equalizer between the two. Forza on the other hand has artistically unrealistic lighting, but rendered at a high precision. When you make it smaller that lighting doesn't suddenly become artistically more realistic... all that happens is that you can no longer tell it was high precision in the first place, so in GT's case you get realistic + ??? quality, and in Forza's case you get unrealistic + ??? quality. This is not of equal benefit to both at all. For another example, in GT it's not losing much by a having the field shrunk to where you can't tell it isn't a perfectly flat surface... because it actually IS a perfectly flat surface in GT. It isn't in Forza however, but you can't tell that once it's been gif'd.

All game benefit from a form of super sampling from being scaled down, but that's pretty much all Forza's benefitting from. It loses a fuckload more than that, and the scale isn't even close to being tilted to the "better" side. It's why when you gif GT the reception is often "wow, how is that possible? how can it look like that" (it doesn't), and for Driveclub you'll often here about "when I got to playing it though it didn't look as good as I expected from the gifs...". In comparison, when you get a gif like the FM6 example we're discussing, the reaction (almost exclusively from people that don't have a copy) is "no way can it possibility look that bad!" (it doesn't).

As I said before, there are some situations where Forza 6 will actually benefit from being gif'ed, but due to the nature of its details, it isn't very often... and that gif we're discussing right now certainly isn't one of them. And you already know that.

EDIT: I would also like to state that I completely disagree with the idea that the physics calculations for the driving are more computationally taxing than the dynamic ToD, weather, clouds etc.

 

[TheAdmiester]

Isn't the driving physics and fps CPU bound in some measure?

I don't see what you're trying to get at by repeating this?

If anything it proves Forza's case further. CPUs are much, much slower than GPUs. By default, any calculation running on a CPU is more intensive in proportion to available resources. GPUs can bruteforce their way through tasks with small, correctable errors, whereas CPUs are slower and more accurate to my knowledge.

 

[Stillmatic]

While I haven't played DC myself, I have watched many people play the game via twitch and videos on youtube. My sentiments are the same about seeing it being played versus photos and gifs online. Its still a beautiful game don't get me wrong. But there is a disconnect.

There really isn't. You might have just seen races in bland looking conditions. DC looks incredible in motion. All of the good looking gameplay shots you're talking about a literally screen captures of what you're seeing in motion.

Shitty capture quality (PS Share, then Youtube compression). But this is a mix of some footage Benzy has uploaded in the past, and some of mine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq0kaBru2U0

 

[etta]

Isn't the driving physics and fps CPU bound in some measure? I asked that before a few post above. Btw. DC doesn't have prettier graphics. It has technically more advanced graphics than FM6. Funny how people who defend FM6 constantly ignoring what DC doing in graphical department and try to downplay it.

It has 16.6ms more available to use and not a heavyweight physics engine in the background taking up resources. All that on a more powerful platform. And who is downplaying it?

 

[t_wilson01]

They're 60fps in the video and they're the same ingame, I don't see what's weird about how it looks.

What I find odd is how when looking at one of the windshield wipers you can see multiple blades as they move up and down. When the video is paused you only see one, but in motion there's at least two. I've just watched Gamersyde videos of Forza 6, Project Cars and DriveClub. The same happens in all of them so it doesn't seem to be due to frame rate.

In real life the wipers are affected by motion blur, so that duplicate blade is much less noticeable.

https://youtu.be/X7egK9R3GTE