Artistic is subjective
Graphics as in technical rendering features, Forza 7 on Scorpio will have gts beat. Especially if it has dynamic weather and TOD that'll be a given win
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Next-gen Racing Graphics Face-off | (Next-gen means current-gen)
- Thread starter Gestault
- Start date
Artistic is subjective
Graphics as in technical rendering features, Forza 7 on Scorpio will have gts beat. Especially if it has dynamic weather and TOD that'll be a given win
Bearing in mind the same game must play on XB1...So XB1 would need dynamic bits...
icecold1983
Member
i dont understand the hype over FH3 sky boxes. its a flat texture/gif applied to a large ceiling
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvZATn50D6c
actually impressive 3d sky and clouds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4l39926dJ4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rehixq5omsE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvZATn50D6c
actually impressive 3d sky and clouds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4l39926dJ4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rehixq5omsE
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
You mean T10 purposely decide on making the game look unrealistic.....sure.
Not when the end goal for simulators is something pretty objective: a realistic look.
Outrun
Member
That is their artist license, not a technical inability.
GTS looks stunning.
FORZA 7 will do to.
No the end goal for simulators is physics not how shiny a piece of car is
ResidentDante
Member
At least FH3's skyboxes look supersharp in 1080p, Driveclubs clouds may have volume but man they look like looking at blurred clouds without wearing glasses.
Because it looks fantastic (arguably better than volumetric clouds because they are actual images of the sky), has a lot of variety, and is (probably?) much less computationally expensive than volumetric solutions.
icecold1983
Member
at least one part of your statement is accurate. yes rendering a flat, moving texture to a few large polygons is less computationally expensive than rendering 3d volumetric clouds that properly receive and transmit volumetric light and shadows
I find it funny how he talks about looking "realistic" and then says that. FH3 is the most realistic sky i've seen in any game. Just any given second i take a look around it is amazing.
Also it's not just simply a texture in the sky. The devs had to model the sky from the video recordings of the 12k res skies. They had to model the sun and lighting to go through the clouds and have the clouds cast shadow on the terrain below. I believe FH3 sky tech costed more in production costs than anything before. Their 12k camera is one of a kind and manning the hours to record everything and then go through all the footage to use in the game is alot of work
I don't think Forza has ever targeted a realistic look, they always have very saturated colours.
The sky looks awesome in Horizon, but the game doesn't look that realistic to me, it's pretty stylized with it's beautiful exaggerated colour palette.
I mean DC's look great but so does FH3's, sure DC's might be more complex but at the end of the day if both solutions look great then both are "impressive".
Either way, I hope the use the skybox tech for FM7.
The game is stylized but the sky itself is realistic. I mean it is real life captured in 12k goodness lol
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
Don't act like visuals are not a crucial aspect. You're playing video games for a reason. You're in thread called Next-Gen Racing Graphics Face-off for a reason.
How do you know that? Just because they have failed to accomplish it?
Graphics isn't the end goal for simulators. Simulators of anything is about simulating anything accurately through physics. Look at air plane simulators, space simulators, anything that is used for real training is all about physics not how much POM is used.
Ever since racing simulators were made the top priority has and always will be physics. I don't know what you are trying to deny that is a fact
If graphics were what mattered you'll see gt and forza only operating at 30fps with dips so they can push the max graphics they can. But no you don't see that. Why? They want the responsiveness and physics to be portrayed the best it can.
Summer Haze
Banned
Why does GTS' replay mode look better than the gameplay I see? Better motion blur or something?
I'm absolutely certain it will not. Maybe not even look better. Turn 10 don't exactly have a reputation for making stuff look really good...
...even in this replay you can see car doesn't look at entirely comfortable or at home on-track. It looks docile. It basically boils down to this...Forza 6 replay
...except I would go one stage further, like...
...it doesn't matter how powerful the hardware is on one side or the other. You give Turn 10 and Polyphony Digital the exact same hardware and 100% of the time Polyphony Digital will come out way ahead.
Turn 10 should be able to complete with Gran Turismo Sport. I expect Scorpio to give them a little boost of sorts to at least match Polyphony Digital overall. If it surpasses Gran Turismo Sport, then good on them.
By the way, all the above refers to visuals.
But if we're talking about graphics as in technical rendering, Forza 7 will easily beat gts at it. Having 4k textures, higher lod car models, 4k native, locked 60fps, dynamic weather and etc it is not contest. Now if you're talking about artistic/subjective then yea both games will be comparable. But make no mistake technically Forza 7 will be better
It doesn't matter how it's done. What matters is what is shown. PGR4, for example, had heavily stylized visuals, yet it had some great "wow" to it without seeming to show that it's trying too hard to look cool. It doesn't pursue GT's photo-realism. Instead, it kinds of look like a movie or a music video, and it looks great! And since Microsoft had killed the PGR franchise, I see no problem if Turn 10 try to move into this direction aesthetically, because their usual path always ends with people saying "eh, GT looks better", which is a shame because PD isn't exactly a studio worth all the praising it gets.
Outrun
Member
Come on man.
The aesthetic since the original Forza has been one of saturated colours.
There is nothing wrong with the car models in Forza. I would like a more advanced lighting solution however.
That car looks docile? It looks perfectly placed and reacts realistically with the slight correction on exit. The only thing I'd expect is a tad of tire smoke, but I'm presuming that's hardware blocking.
The only reason Polyphony would come out on top is due to them taking an extra half a decade to make the same game.
icecold1983
Member
its a moving texture applied to a few large polygons. none of their 12k camera work has anything to do with whats actually being calculated and rendered. let me guess, you were one of the people who panned the fluid simulation in driveclub and claimed forza was much better and more realistic
potatohead
Member
Unreal how real this looksWillows spring 360° ^^
It's hard to make a steady pace XP
Pgr is sick too the real successor to nfs for me
Why would they not mute the colours like other racing sims do if it wasn't the case? You think they can't do that also? They clearly don't want to aim for photo realism, especially in Horizon.
Aye, and it looks fantastic for it, using up a lot less resources than say the pretty but wasteful volumetric clouds in DC.
El-Pistolero
Member
Their lighting solution, for one, is better than whatever it is that the Forza team has been toying with...
Dictator93
Member
I am not sure that is a very good argument in a thread about graphics, but in terms of priorities to make DC 30 fps? Probably.
how can you say that when PD used standar car models, not having locked 60fps and bad sound design?
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
Talking about FM and again where is the notion that they are not aiming for photo realism coming from?
Achieving photo realistic looks is not done by simply muting colours.
Stop being obtuse. Never said physics were not a priority. Again:
Again i was responding to your statement which is false. That is not the end goal for simulators. You can say you prefer realistic graphics for simulators but ALL simulators end goal isnt. It's physics
No, but the fact they aren't even doing that says a lot, GT and Forza have always gone for very different looks.
I wouldn't call GTS palette muted or less colorful than Forza 6 though. The other sims with desaturated color don't really look realistic at all. Forza actually looks more realistic than AC and pCars imo.
Forza 6
GTS
pCars
Asseto
Inf3cted_b3ast
Member
Is Forza 7 on base Xb1 going to have dybamic weather as well?
I'm sure they can. Gt6 had it on ps3. FH3 and Motorsport share the same engine
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
Thats was in response to the graphics of this genre: the end goal for graphics being photo realism. Come on dude follow the convo.
Perhaps they feel it looks realistic to them.
And having realistic graphics or stylized isn't what determines if a game is graphically better. What makes a game better graphically that isn't subjective are things like AF, res, dynamic lighting, dynamic weather, texture quality, polygons pushed, etc. Not if a artistic choice for a dev on any game. This thread is about graphics and thus is about the things I listed
SolidSnakex
Member
Dictator93
Member
Yeah, they've got the look of WS nailed down
Does the gameplay actually have object motion blur? Or is it like FM6, which turns off per object blur in gameplay for some reason.
I don't see any motion blur ingame at all...Be fabulous if Pro offered some blur features...
LukasTaves
Member
Not a fan of the constant pop in and super low dashboard reelection quality, and the shadows seems rather inconsistent in gt sport.
But turn 10 seems to be on another level now. A game released almost 2 years ago, with less dev time, on a weaker hardware and they still come out on top is mind blowing given how far ahead PD was of everyone else a few years ago.
Aside from lighting, AA, car models and trackside detail you mean? And one that's still in Beta?
TheAdmiester
Member
Yup, actually it's a case of no motion blur vs. motion blur + DoF. It's been the case for GT since GT3 or so I believe, there's a huge disconnect between replay visuals and gameplay.
By your logic, is photogrammetry unimpressive because it's "just pictures of real things"?
UpUpDownDown
Member
Moar gifs pls!
Each has their strengths and weaknesses but they all look SO DAMN GOOD!
Each has their strengths and weaknesses but they all look SO DAMN GOOD!
If you want to measure games by that metric, do it properly. GT Sport will be facing off against FM7 which we haven't seen yet.
SolidSnakex
Member
So do that when 7 lands...But for now we have 6...which is the version being compared...
Point is it's silly to compare and say one is better than the other when one clearly isn't finished/out...
Similar threads
- Poll