Lol omg...
Lol...
Rather than taking to opportunity to lambast the person, why not try and educate them as to why they are wrong?
Lol omg...
Lol...
Didn't see this on the last page. Thank you. I genuinely didn't know this.Think you're getting confused with broadcast standards.
I said any frame rate dip or tear is unacceptable in a sim. Any. I still think that. No one should accept any dips or tearing in a sim. It's the first most crucial point.
I'm tired of this. Back to work, and then Forza after work.
On the original Xbox when 60fps wasn't even a thing because of TV's. Really?
It's the prettiest 60fps racer for sure. Considering it actually stays there.
This thread is ridiculous. I'm done for today.
Oh they've made it better half a year after launch so it doesn't do it as much any more. While still being a awful handling sim anyway with a lackluster online implementation and career with poor environments.
I think you've got the jist that I don't like PCars. As a sim, it's poor compared to Forza. The only fully locked 60fps racing title on any console, while still being the prettiest.
Like, none of the above is true. I even provided you with video evidence to the contrary lol. And you accused me of moving goalposts....sheesh...
.
Didn't see this on the last page. Thank you. I genuinely didn't know this.
Digital Foundry's last frame rate test of Project Cars on PS4 was patch 1.04 3 months ago and although there was improvement that frame rate was still all over the place.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rn9UDcVpndk
I haven't seen any up to date test of the latest patch 3.0 and the just released patch 4.0 on consoles, but here's a frame rate comparision video of the PC version running on 4.2GHz i7, 16GB ram, and 2 GTX 970s. Frame rate still swings wildly even down to the low 40s in the rain.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aH3H5vwZWkA
If you check the PS4 section on the Project Cars forums the latest patch 4.0 released this week seem to have a few issues too.
You don't speak for everyone.
If the overall experience is good enough then people can look past things like frame drops here and there. We've seen that countless times across the history of video games. This thread is about graphics, not which game you prefer from a gameplay perspective nor whether a games physics engine is running at 360fps (which is PR shit talk BTW) or not.
Yes DC is more (not might be) accurate with the details. Look at the edges.
False, depending on the angle and lighting, carbon fiber can look very obvious and not so obvious and can be woven in different fibre direction and size.
Pagani employ seamstresses to accurately match up the symmetrical carbon weave on the cars bodywork, and even add the ‘Pagani’ name to their small screw heads. These nuances are accurately reproduced in-game.
Anisotropic lighting is used to simulate the effect of each individual thread in carbon fibre weave. The pattern of the carbon alters realistically with the lighting angle and surface curvature.
Sorry for staying off topic but what is the benefit of running the physics engine at 360 (supposedly) times a second instead of say, 240/120/60 times a second? Has T10 explained why it is like that? This is just me being armchair developer, why run the engine at 360Hz if it doesn't add any benefit compared to lower "speeds"? It surely can't be free in terms of performance.
Pagani in DC looks way higher poly than PCars too. Just look at the windshield where it meets the bottom and the seam on the door. Better lighting shaders too.
Huh? Launch game Rallisport Challenge was 60fps dead locked on the original Xbox, gameplay and replays. DOA3 was obviously 60fps too. Ninja Gaiden too of course. Rallisport 2 was 60fps in gameplay and 30fps in replays. Outrun 2 was 60fps. Etc. 60fps was such a thing during that generation that I eventually started boycotting 30fps games and still had no trouble finding games to play. I'd say that Xbox, GC, DC, PS2 all had more 60fps games than Xbox360 and PS3. Basically all arcade racers were 60fps too, 30fps suddenly became "okay" when PGR3 came around but Bizarre decided to censor the phrase "60fps" to "Badgers" on their official board because they got annoyed at all the requests and complaints about their choice to go with 30fps.On the original Xbox when 60fps wasn't even a thing because of TV's. Really?
Huh? Launch game Rallisport Challenge was 60fps dead locked on the original Xbox, gameplay and replays. DOA3 was obviously 60fps too. Ninja Gaiden too of course. Rallisport 2 was 60fps in gameplay and 30fps in replays. Outrun 2 was 60fps. Etc. 60fps was such a thing during that generation that I eventually started boycotting 30fps games and still had no trouble finding games to play. I'd say that Xbox, GC, DC, PS2 all had more 60fps games than Xbox360 and PS3. Basically all arcade racers were 60fps too, it suddenly became "okay" when PGR3 came around but Bizarre decided to censor the phrase "60fps" to "Badgers" on their official board because they got annoyed at all the requests and complaints about their choice to go with 30fps.
So yeah don't try to fool people to think that 60fps was not a thing back then.
I said any frame rate dip or tear is unacceptable in a sim. Any. I still think that. No one should accept any dips or tearing in a sim. It's the first most crucial point.
I'm tired of this. Back to work, and then Forza after work.
BigLee74 should probably indicate when they are photographing an AI car and haven't refocused.
Sorry for staying off topic but what is the benefit of running the physics engine at 360 (supposedly) times a second instead of say, 240/120/60 times a second? Has T10 explained why it is like that? This is just me being armchair developer, why run the engine at 360Hz if it doesn't add any benefit compared to lower "speeds"? It surely can't be free in terms of performance.
It's mostly PR bull. The same thing goes for PCars 600 times a second calculations. Some aspect may run at that frequency but it usually means very little especially graphically.
On the original Xbox when 60fps wasn't even a thing because of TV's. Really?
This is the best thread on GAF
I was wrong. I apologised and learnt something. Only one guy actually gave me an explanation, then a full page of LOLzoLOl.This is the best thread on GAF
No its not. A perfect example is that when your on Sebring, the controller vibrates faster due to the cracks in the road than it's actually refreshing onscreen.It's mostly PR bull. The same thing goes for PCars 600 times a second calculations. Some aspect may run at that frequency but it usually means very little especially graphically.
No its not. A perfect example is that when your on Sebring, the controller vibrates faster due to the cracks in the road than it's actually refreshing onscreen.
Well, yeah. It's not hard, especially when your going at 130mph+How could you possibly know that? You can sense that the controller vibrations are going quicker than 60hz?!
It's not really, though it doesn't necessarily translate into "feel" either. in pCARS and Forza, the physics refersh rate means the rate at which the tire and suspension physics update. For example if the car is travelling at high speed over a bump in the road and the physics refresh rate is not fast enough, that bump simply won't be calculated. Sawtooth kerbs for example are something that can't be calculated properly unless you have a really high refresh rate, and the effect has to be canned ("faked" into the physics when the car is within a kerb collision are for example). But as I said, it doesn't necessarily translate into a better feel as you also have less time for calculation during each tick, though the ticks themselves don't have to differ in feel compared to slower refresh rate.It's mostly PR bull. The same thing goes for PCars 600 times a second calculations. Some aspect may run at that frequency but it usually means very little especially graphically.
No its not. A perfect example is that when your on Sebring, the controller vibrates faster due to the cracks in the road than it's actually refreshing onscreen.
i just hope PD uses DC Tech for rain and snow.
As it's been said many times before, just because you don't notice something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.I was wrong. I apologised and learnt something. Only one guy actually gave me an explanation, then a full page of LOLzoLOl.
A reply of many from me, initiated from someone reading between the lines. Doesn't take anything from any of the points I was saying.
Seen a Forza 5 video posted, I've put many, many hours into that game and never once noticed any frame drops.
No its not. A perfect example is that when your on Sebring, the controller vibrates faster due to the cracks in the road than it's actually refreshing onscreen.
No its not. A perfect example is that when your on Sebring, the controller vibrates faster due to the cracks in the road than it's actually refreshing onscreen.
To give a more complete explanation...If you googled it, then every piece of information you find says PAL is 25fps while NTSC is 30fps. I'm not making this up.
And yet I find Forza to be poor at simulating motorsports... Guess it just depends on what you're looking for in a racing game.I think you've got the jist that I don't like PCars. As a sim, it's poor compared to Forza.
I was wrong. I apologised and learnt something. Only one guy actually gave me an explanation, then a full page of LOLzoLOl.
A reply of many from me, initiated from someone reading between the lines. Doesn't take anything from any of the points I was saying.
Seen a Forza 5 video posted, I've put many, many hours into that game and never once noticed any frame drops.
Anyway, back on topic, ps4 pics of this rubbish, shit game with terrible physics and environments that leeh doesn't like and no one else should either.![]()
GT7 will clean house come next year
GT5 photomode
I agree with that, especially with the real pic nib posted. pCARS matches it closer, with the carbon not always being extremely obvious, only when in direct light. The one in DC looks more like a stripey car, definitely looks off compared to the real one.
Precision and accuracy? Especially needed for a car game, since the pretty much all of the variables change as when the vehicle changes position. It just acts like a refresh rate, more frames = better picture, but in this case the physics are more precise.Sorry for staying off topic but what is the benefit of running the physics engine at 360 (supposedly) times a second instead of say, 240/120/60 times a second? Has T10 explained why it is like that? This is just me being armchair developer, why run the engine at 360Hz if it doesn't add any benefit compared to lower "speeds"? It surely can't be free in terms of performance.
Precision and accuracy? Especially needed for a car game, since the pretty much all of the variables change as when the vehicle changes position. It just acts like a refresh rate, more frames = better picture, but in this case the physics are more precise.
You're both right in your responses, but there are actually many more layers to how we achieve the sensation of speed. The majority are camera based effects that we spent a long time developing/tuning to help with the sensation of speed as it was really important to me that DRIVECLUB felt fast, much like it does in a real car!