-
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
Self_Destructive
Member
And the fact that it looks like clay in the daytime and over-embellishes in its artistic freedoms. It's a neat looking arcade racer that looks good in very specific conditions.. very mediocre in every other way. Which is why the studio was disbanded.
Oh well.
dr guildo
Member
Engineering wise, absolutely. Though I think with that in mind, it's not like it "doesn't count" because of the framerate. I think Driveclub is a mixed bag visually (not even in retrospect, it always had trade-offs), but credit where it's due with the post-processing, particle systems, and lighting.
I mean, the difference is massive here.PCars 2 (PC) / GT Sport Beta
Forza Motorsport 5 looks the best purely based on the scene. Just looks more natural compared to it's successor and the new boy.Same source https://forums.forzamotorsport.net/turn10_postst104371_What-s-happened-to-graphics.aspx
FM5
FM6
FM7
This is a graphics thread, not a performance thread. Forza Horizon 3 deserves to be in here was well, especially because it looks better than Forza's mainline games. Driveclub, on many levels, is still a generation ahead.
Nice
thelastword
Banned
And I'm pretty sure I mentioned more than clear skies, I mentioned better foliage (trees hanging over the track and full of volume), better shadows etc....The fog and shafts are not even high quality. Consistently running highly detailed trees etc is more technically impressive than implementing some cheap fog which masks distant and environmental details....and some cheap shafts on occasion.....
As opposed to...something like this
As a matter of fact, F7 has something weird going on with it trees, there's lots of weird 2d artifacts.
Generally, it has already been proven that environmental detail has taken drastic cuts in F7, but not just that, even shadows, reflections, lighting (in some respects).....Lots have been downgraded here...
Reflections here for 1, and that white mask on F7 side masking detail.
Weaker rain quality on F7, again lots of fog to mask detail, while you can see the trees and environment detail is still there in F6.....Those wipers differences though.....Eh.
More rain spray and less fog hiding details in the immediate environment as you pass by...The stands are not a blur....
That cheap fog yet again masking environment and distant detail against DC.
Again, Forza 4 went for a more realistic look, better reflections, better lighting and better foliage and environmental detail in many respects.
Now that above was the point I was making.....I could show you the weak foliage/tree quality beneath the fog in F7, but I have since deleted the demo, even outside of weather and in clear skies it's visible, even more so actually, and it's a step down from a few Forza's that came before it...
I have always maintained that Forza 4 was the best looking one from a visual perspective....Of course, the newer ones introduce newer visual features and higher rez, but at a price of course.....
That's not fair at all. The studio closing down likely had more to do with sales and was highly unlikely related to any technical merits. Besides, outside of IQ issues, the game looks great. Saying DC look like clay is no different than those other posters who claimed Forza looked like plastic. Its all silly.
I'm not trying to say it doesn't count but it should be compared within context and ideally with other 30fps racers. I also agree that they deserve credit where it's due. However a lot of those features you listed were likely possible because it's running at 30fps. In no way am I trying to say it's not a good looking game, especially for it's time of release, but it's not an apples to apples comparison when putting it alongside other 60fps racers.
I understand it's a graphics thread, just like I understand the kind of impact framerate has on the graphics. When a 60fps game has 16.6ms to render a frame while a 30fps game has 33.3ms to render the same frame, frame rates should be kept in mind when discussing graphics. Just like it should be noted if a game is open world versus a game using specific courses or tracks. It all impacts the graphics, so it should all matter.
Edit:
You couldn't tell the difference in the pictures below. Your analytical abilities are crap and your bias is blinding. Other than pushing your agenda, I'm not sure why you're here.
icecold1983
Member
any 1080p game is going to have poor IQ on a 4k 50+ inch screen wtf are you even posting this for? driveclub was never designed to play on 4k tvs
NullPointer
Member
This.
And on my 60" TV it has always looked bloody amazing, and far better than the competition. But hey it is 30fps and focused on providing an incredible sense of speed and those crazy environmental visuals rather than an advanced simulation on real world tracks. Different priorities, different end results.
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
just leaving this here. PC2 vs real life:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBbJ6X3957c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJvZr5BCsBQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBbJ6X3957c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJvZr5BCsBQ
ethomaz
Banned
It is Pro but the IQ is way better and there are more details in the actual build compared with Beta.
GTSs IQ is right now ahead any other racing game on consoles... of course we need to see Forza 7, pCARs 2, etc running on XB1X yet.
icecold1983
Member
gt sport will remain the best. forza 7 at 4k with 8x msaa has more temporal aliasing than gt sport on the pro
FlutterPuffs
Member
I agree as well.
Forza 7 looks a lot cleaner, tracks in rainy weather + that Dubai track looks amazing.
but Gran Turismo 7 just looks more... natural.
Man this thread will be a hoot once both comes out. Looking forward to all the gifs, videos, and arguments.
Crayon
Member
I only started playing driveclub two weeks ago. At first I was not that impressed with the graphics rain or shine. After playing more I think I'm appreciating them more. It actually does remind me of motorstorm where when I take a look at the graphics closely, there are rough spots everywhere. Butduring gameply those details are hard to notice while the lighting, post and more global qualities create a good impression.
I'm still not blown away but the graphics are very good and maybe more importantly have a somewhat unique look.
I'm still not blown away but the graphics are very good and maybe more importantly have a somewhat unique look.
Jaguar Victory
Member
You couldn't tell the difference in the pictures below. Your analytical abilities are crap and your bias is blinding. Other than pushing your agenda, I'm not sure why you're here.
You can really tell the difference in image quality on the white road makers on the left.
flipswitch
Member
Motion blur?
Inf3cted_b3ast
Member
Forza 7 vs GT Sport beta
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGwwBokHLeU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGwwBokHLeU
PCARS 2 has THE most detail with their cars in terms of showing suspension work even in closed body cars like the Ginetta GT3. A lot of racing games have floating wheels that don't even connect to the hub half the time. Forza 7 does this with cars in-game while their in motion. It looks so bad.
PCARS damage models are also amazing. Hoods and wheels flying off showing under carriage components, engine components, and wheel components. None of these other games come remotely close to it.
icecold1983
Member
not close
60 fps games both targeting 1080p. gt sport has a much faster console as the baseline while also smartly choosing TAA over more expensive msaa. polyphony is also better when it comes to visuals
AbandonedTrolley
Member
Yep I'm really hoping though that they've finally matched Turn10 in their insistence on a 60FPS LOCK
thelastword thinking process*
Anyway, finally got a chance to try F7 on X1 and i'm really pleased, was expecting to be somewhat disappointed considering certain screens etc. but once everything gets in motion, damn
l2ounD
Member
https://youtu.be/UuKjrklDLvw?t=11
Is there another TOD on that track for Forza? I know there is a rainy version.
TheAdmiester
Member
Yep. Bar a select few, every track's "Day" option really just means Dry, since it'll still randomly select from a few times of day/cloud sets.
MilkyJoe
Member
Weaker rain quality on F7, again lots of fog to mask detail, while you can see the trees and environment detail is still there in F6.....Those wipers differences though.....Eh.
More rain spray and less fog hiding details in the immediate environment as you pass by...The stands are not a blur....
That's some cherry picking, even for you.
https://youtu.be/GFvwkSBg398?t=14
Give that a whirl you puerile maniac.
AbandonedTrolley
Member
Come on, no need to change the watermark on Forza Motorsport 1 images
The track looks really good, but god that windshield looks awful
Reinstalled Driveclub the other day inspired by this thread. It doesn't look as good as I remembered, but still looks nice. The rain effects are still stellar though, the way the drops run down the screen from the top when you brake hard etc etc.
But more to the point, it's dynamic weather; I'll take that any day over better barrier textures or whatever. Running a long race and having the time of day and weather changing all the time makes for a much more interesting race.
But more to the point, it's dynamic weather; I'll take that any day over better barrier textures or whatever. Running a long race and having the time of day and weather changing all the time makes for a much more interesting race.
MilkyJoe
Member
l2ounD
Member
Driveclub has its moments and was definitely cool https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RStvcWIWVPc
The next game to do cars/bikes... The Crew 2?
Self_Destructive
Member
The track looks really good, but god that windshield looks awful
Those windshield wiper and rain effects look way more realistic than Driveclubs.
Now my question is... why doesn't the PC version look like that? I tried the same car on the same track and it's not even close.
Hopefully this is just a bug that needs fixing.
Polygonal_Sprite
Member
Most games in general are like that, especially 60fps games and especially racing games. MK8D looks horrendous in screens but beautiful in motion. Games were never meant to be picked apart per frame. Im not knocking you guys for doing it as its fun to read but thats the reality. Video games are several factors layered on top of each other and many of the issues seen in screen shots completely melt away when playing due to concentration, immersion and hopefully fun.
In terms of DC, I think taking into account when it released should be remembered when criticising certain aspects of its visual weak points. Its incredible what the team achieved on a brand new console inside its first year. Its such a shame well never get even a bump to 1440p on the Pro.
ResidentDante
Member
FlutterPuffs
Member
Looks dull and the textures in the background looks shit.Real life?
I'll stick with video games thanks.
Self_Destructive
Member
I appreciate 3D trees, but if having no leaves is the trade-off I'll take 2D bitmaps over these thank you very much
MilkyJoe
Member
Why did you take a screenshot through a dirty jam jar?
Definitely looks closer to Forza
I don't ever L-O-L but that is an L-O-L
l2ounD
Member
Why did you take a screenshot through a dirty jam jar?
Is that picture ment to be better?
Why did you take a screenshot through a dirty jam jar?
Is this supposed to be a massive improvement?
Edit: beaten.
Self_Destructive
Member
It's clearer. If you guys can't see that, then I dunno what to say. :|
AbandonedTrolley
Member
True, but it still looks behind GT:Sport. If you can't see that, then I dunno what to say. :|
Sure. But it doesn't change the track geometry or lighting, which is basically what the comparison was about.
It's very clearly better, to the extent that I'd worry for you if you can't see any difference.
Why did you take a screenshot of a YT video when the screenshot before was PNG without compression?
Prithee Be Careful
Industry Professional
FM7 is a wierd one - graphically it seems to be a genuine step back over previous iterations (particularly the lack of colour depth) and it's really hard to see why because Turn 10 have never been slouches in the graphics department.
l2ounD
Member
I mean it is a slightly clearer image but it could have been a straight screencap of the game, it wouldnt have helped in the comparison.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGwwBokHLeU
So how was it better?
TBiddy
Member
I'd guess that adding dynamic* weather to FM7 over FM6 takes it toll on the XB1. They'd have to find the resources somewhere.
Also, this thread is embarrasing to read at times.
Because clearer is better?
That's not to say that it becomes better than the GT shot (which could likely be clearer also), but it definitely looks better than the first FM7 shot. You can for example see that there are grass details, rather then a completely undefined green soup 5cm from the camera.
I'm not typically fond of attempting direct like-for-like comparisons where there are inherent variables regardless though. The main thing that makes the GT image look better to me is the lighting, that whilst partially is a result of GT having better lighting in general, it's also quite clearly not attempting to portray the same ToD. Using this comparison you could almost make the arguement that GT looks better than the real thing, based on the real-life picture posted.
Similar threads
- Poll