Support NeoGAF

[Momentary]

You don't say?

But the poster of that images took a png from YT and a jpg direct from PC2? Makes no sense if so.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/133840177@N02/

i don't think the GT one is YT.

It's not. I don't know where this youtube talk came from.

It REALLY pisses me off that people think I just tried to misrepresent the game. I give two shits about what is graphical king. What I care about is people misrepresenting what the actual game looks like with photomodes. It's like a straight up lie. That is not the game people are playing. I don't care if the screenshot is from a beta either. That's the current state of the game. When the new build comes up feel free to update the screenshot.

That's why I can't stand this thread. You got people posting photomode screens like it actually represents the game and then when you actually have a real in game shot people start coming up with stupid excuses and start backtracking like hell.

All these car games look excellent and some do things better than others. Hell I'm more excited about GT Sport than any other racing game and I don't even have a console to play it on. But unless the new beta pulls out some IQ wizardry, it just can't compete in the IQ department along as well, from what I've seen so far, track detail. Also car models in game are not representative of what's shown during these "scapes" it think it's called?

I'm hoping PS4 Pro takes care of some of this. Lighting already looks amazing. And if the low poly cars have already been taken cared of in newer builds then that's even better.

I love graphics in racing games, but it doesn't save it in the end. I'm still playing Assetto Corsa on PC right now just because it's the kind of racing I like... and it is definitely not the best looking racing game out there.

 

[rodrigolfp]

It's the same in all camps, you simply don't see someone who loves PC2/FM7/GTS post pics where it looks bad, the pics or videos where these games look are always posted by someone with an agenda to make that game look bad. There are no unbiased posts of that kind here.

I am sure that the owner of that pic "loves" all the games he has on his galery and is not trying make things look bad.

It's not. I don't know where this youtube talk came from.

It REALLY pisses me off that people think I just tried to misrepresent the game. I give two shits about what is graphical king. What I care about is people misrepresenting what the actual game looks like with photomodes. It's like a straight up lie. That is not the game people are playing. I don't care if the screenshot is from a beta either. That's the current state of the game. When the new game comes up feel free to update the screenshot.

That's why I can't stand this thread. You got people posting photomode screens like it actually represents the game and then when you actually have a real in game shot people start coming up with stupid excuses and start backtracking like hell.

All these car games look excellent and some do things better than others. Hell I'm more excited about GT Sport than any other racing game and I don't even have a console to play it on. But unless the new beta pulls out some IQ wizardry, it just can't compete in the IQ department along as well, from what I've seen so far, track detail. Also car models in game are not representative of what's shown during these "scapes" it think it's called?

I'm hoping PS4 Pro takes care of some of this.

I love graphics in racing games, but it doesn't save it in the end. I'm still playing Assetto Corsa on PC right now just because it's the kind of racing I like... and it is definitely not the best looking racing game out there.

Yep. Pretty clear some people here are just defence force warriors. AC is my favorite too and really is not the best looking one for sure. But the physics are so good...

 

[theWB27]

I can already see a response about best that they could do given weak hardware, blah blah

I commend you guys keeping lastword relevant...at their level you wonder if they're enjoying the labels on the box more than the game.

 

[TheAdmiester]

That's the whole point of the video, to show that racers even way back then could have gotten away with that, but they felt it was staple and important enough to include it....else it would be jarring and ridiculous especially for a sim racer with enduro races et al...You're now making excuses on car lengths and widths..SMH... as if games like GT5 didn't have proper pitstops with over 1100 cars...

Car widths and lengths isn't an excuse when they directly influence the pitstops, and there are more things to focus on.

At the end of the day, pitstops are a matter of priorities. GT5 might've had working pitstops for 1100 cars, yes, but it was also missing a lot of way more fundamental things, and it had an insane amount of dev time compared to a Forza game.

 

[Momentary]

And on the same note the screenshot is from a very old build of the game. So I'm sure the floodgates are opening up tomorrow. But hopefully people include some in-game shots. GTSports lighting is going to look excellent and hopefully there are some Pro upgrades for everything else.

 

[Gestault]

And on the same note the screenshot is from a very old build of the game. So I'm sure the floodgates are opening up tomorrow. But hopefully people include some in-game shots. GTSports lighting is going to look excellent and hopefully there are some Pro upgrades for everything else.

My flash drive is ready, lol

 

[KageMaru]

One of the most visual/staple things in a racer should not be discussed in a visual thread? You know how many times you have to pit in endurance races? Perhaps you should start dealing with what is, because this is not fake news, and yet, you don't want it presented. But yes, I'll be sure to run it by you before I hit submit next time, sir

I don't understand what I have to deal with. I'm not denying anything, the game lacks a proper pit stop. Didn't realize it was one of the most "visual/staple" things in racing games. It's clear you only think that about an element you only see for a few seconds because it's something Forza lacks in. It's also clear that 20 year old racers have no place in this thread and you're only trolling. Basically with you, anything GTS excels in is critical, but anything Forza excels in is less important.

 

[TheAdmiester]

Basically with you, anything GTS excels in is critical, but anything Forza excels in is less important.

Oof.

Spoiler

Just so my reponse isn't entirely useless, here's a Forza shot I thought came out nicely.

 

[leeh]

Pretty embarrassing how much the people who post the most in here will do anything to shine a negative light on Forza.

I'm sorry you've waited 4 years for a game with no content guys, it's fine to make yourself feel better by saying yours looks the best.

 

[Fess]

You mean a still image interrupting gameplay is less jarring? I find that hard to believe.

I would have liked that more yes, the car could drive in to the pit then the image could fade away, then a pit crew image, then fade to gameplay again as the car has started driving out of the pit. A ghost pit crew is super lazy.

 

[Hoo-doo]

I don't think anyone here thinks that properly animated pit crews are essential for a racing game. It's just extra cherries on the cake and if done right it increases immersion by a lot.

Guess I'm biting the bait again.

Because 100-200 cars =/= 700 cars? Either the games get the pit stops perfectly right for 10 to 20 cars, or they have a generic solution that works for a few hundred. Invisible/magic pitstops is Forza's idea of "generic for almost a thousand". Is it perfect? God no, but has any game this generation done it better with a similar amount of cars? Nope.

Like I said, PC2 strikes the closest balance of car count to pit animation detail, and even that has issues such as driving through things or things not lining up right.

Your part about implying that older games have more attention to detail is horseshit even for your standards so I'm not even addressing that.

I get that it's not 'current-gen' and all, but GT6 has around 1200 cars in total (including DLC) and yet they still had proper pit crew animations.

Pretty embarrassing how much the people who post the most in here will do anything to shine a negative light on Forza.

I'm sorry you've waited 4 years for a game with no content guys, it's fine to make yourself feel better by saying yours looks the best.

Haha wow, contender for absolute saltiest post of the generation? Yeah breh, you're totally above all this ��

 

[KageMaru]

Pretty embarrassing how much the people who post the most in here will do anything to shine a negative light on Forza.

I'm sorry you've waited 4 years for a game with no content guys, it's fine to make yourself feel better by saying yours looks the best.

Just because they took the series in a different direction, that doesn't mean the game has no content. What we've seen of GTS looks very impressive and should be recognized.

 

[TheAdmiester]

I get that it's not 'current-gen' and all, but GT6 has around 1200 cars in total (including DLC) and yet they still had proper pit crew animations.

That's where this would come in again, just replace GT5 with GT6 since it's the same situation:

At the end of the day, pitstops are a matter of priorities. GT5 might've had working pitstops for 1100 cars, yes, but it was also missing a lot of way more fundamental things, and it had an insane amount of dev time

 

[Behlel]

Pretty embarrassing how much the people who post the most in here will do anything to shine a negative light on Forza.

I'm sorry you've waited 4 years for a game with no content guys, it's fine to make yourself feel better by saying yours looks the best.

Your contributions in this topic is pretty much the same of the one that shit on forza, do you think that you're better then those people?

 

[Jack The Nipper]

I just do not like forzas visuals, no matter if they are 8k or what they have. The overall look, textures has never looked realistic and always left me feeling they aren't good for what they actually show.

Gran Turismo has always gotten this right for the hardware they are on since PS1, and the driving model in itself has always felt better as well.

I have never played project cars but the interaction with car to car seems far ahead of GT and Fora which is about the only thing it gets right over GT for me (forza)

 

[theWB27]

I would have liked that more yes, the car could drive in to the pit then the image could fade away, then a pit crew image, then fade to gameplay again as the car has started driving out of the pit. A ghost pit crew is super lazy.

I don't think lazy means what you want it to mean here. To call different aspects of games getting more care than others lazy strikes me as willful consumer ignorance.

 

[l2ounD]

So it's dynamic because you can see the sun even though Forza uses a similar system? It's really hard to take some of you serious when you move the goalpost to very specific definitions. The opposite of dynamic is static and this does not look static to me:

Also HZD is a good example because it shows that it's the end results, not the implementation, that matters. For anyone to say a method is acceptable in one game but the same method is not in another, that's some impressive levels of hypocrisy.

I dont know if you're serious or if you read my discussion with Synth. Or maybe didnt understand where I was coming from. I'd be happy to discuss it with you.

I mean my main point the whole time was thinking it was disingenuous to call it dynamic ToD when the sun is not dynamic (being static) or something along that line.

Even Synth said;

I don't think you can (you may have read my post pre-edit, which made it sound like you could). The clouds cover the sun to obscured that it doesn't move, but then the sky darkens to give the impression of it having set whilst you couldn't see it.

If it doesnt move isnt it static? So I dont know what goalpost I'm moving, maybe you can clear that up.

And Horizon's end result is that it has a dynamic sun i.e. it moves across the sky and casts dynamic shadows.

Thats typical of games that have dynamic ToD is it not? I mean GTA has it. PCars2 has it. What else... Far Cry Primal.
They all do it but not FM7, Correct? And I said it before;

thats not to say what FM7 is actually doing isnt impressive as well cause it does look good.

 

[Hawk269]

I am getting GTS regardless as I love having all the top racers (Forza 7, PCars 2 etc.). I have not followed GTS that much, but I read a lot of about people saying there is a lack of content. I know from reading that there are about 200 cars or so which is plenty for me, but what specifically is making people say it has lack of content? It is limited tracks? Something else?

 

[KRaZyAmmo]

I am getting GTS regardless as I love having all the top racers (Forza 7, PCars 2 etc.). I have not followed GTS that much, but I read a lot of about people saying there is a lack of content. I know from reading that there are about 200 cars or so which is plenty for me, but what specifically is making people say it has lack of content? It is limited tracks? Something else?

I think it's the fact there's no actual career mode like in past GT games. The offline content that I know what it has are...Driving School mode, Mission mode, Circuit Experience, and Racing Etiquette (locked in the demo).

 

[Gestault]

I am getting GTS regardless as I love having all the top racers (Forza 7, PCars 2 etc.). I have not followed GTS that much, but I read a lot of about people saying there is a lack of content. I know from reading that there are about 200 cars or so which is plenty for me, but what specifically is making people say it has lack of content? It is limited tracks? Something else?

The traditional single-player career is sort of paired back to a four-part tutorial/training/video series that gives the ins-and-outs of race procedure and technique. That's what has a lot of people spooked.

I think the raw content issue is in part because the car count is less than expected given the franchise's history, and the track count is sort of the minimum you'd want in general. Last gen, a lot of the talking points explaining the premium vs standard car quality divide was that they were taking extra time to work out details for the premium cars that would let them carry over almost directly to next-gen, but that apparently didn't pan out (we're at a fraction of the GT6 premium count). Forza 5 as a launch title had more car content in 2013 (and the same ballpark for track content) as GTS will have this year, and F5 was criticized heavily for having as little content as it did for the style of game.

 

[cooldawn]

Horizon Zero Dawn? What's this thread about again? Should we add BOTW and Witcher 3 to the discussion too? At least go with GTA instead where you can drive a car.

I was a reference to someone else using Horizon Zero Dawn, not me.

I've mentioned this before, but the weather "deciding to kick in randomly" is not really a factor in it being dynamic or not (time of day doesn't randomly decide to kick in either, and is typically predetermined from the start with a set time and speed for it to pass). This was already posted, but it's probably worth repeating here, as we're now getting into assumptions about what the system is capable of versus what is visible to the player.

I know we use terms differently but that’s what I want to get to…what the system is capable of because that will provide the answers.

I admit I don’t subscribe to how pre-defined systems are dynamic. Real-time denotes a moment-to-moment constant, like the changing time of day. Dynamic contains variables that are variable themselves. Both systems paired provide fully dynamic environmental conditions. A completely dynamic system, or even a part dynamic system, would present the player with more variations at the start and during a race.

During our Turn 10 visit, we could see how the developers could tweak lighting and weather on the fly during runtime, as easily as a movie colourist grades footage.

If the system was a rigid and inflexible as you suggest, it would basically break the rewind (or replay) functionality for example.

Why not let it run it’s course without any pre-defined instances for more variation? Let the sun shine bright at high-noon and foul the sky with dim grey clouds and rain in the afternoon. Turn 10 need to control how the players experiences changing conditions because there is no dynamic light from the sun and there are no dynamic shadows. Scripted weather helps to hide it all while giving the player a reasonable experience of changing conditions.

Also HZD is a good example because it shows that it's the end results, not the implementation, that matters. For anyone to say a method is acceptable in one game but the same method is not in another, that's some impressive levels of hypocrisy.

Horizon Zero Dawn is a really bad example. During the day it looks really good but there are several issues with it’s systems. First, although the sun is a light source the world it illuminates doesn’t always obscure it’s effect i.e. a rising/setting sun behind large geographic objects still show rays through those objects or show the point of where the sun is behind an object. Now you mention it the transition from day through dusk to night feels completely scripted because it’s sped up at a rate jarring to the rest of the experience. Even worse the night seems to illuminate the environment just as much as the day. Finally, the dynamic shadows can be manipulated, either pushing time forwards or backwards. Its a mess.

The end result is not a standard I’d like to see in video games. Only during the daylight hours does the systems show potential.

You should have known what I meant by pre-defined when I referenced the demo which has the storm roll through exactly the same way every race. Whether the randomization is done before or during the race, it's not done in the same pre-defined way every race.

Also IIRC, Forza 7 uses the same system as Forza Horizon 3, they even used the same 12K camera to grap assets for the sky. So if you think one is acceptable, then the other should be as well.

Regarding HZD, the Fable games last gen used a similar system and that had moving shadows too. Doesn't make it any more "dynamic" than Forza 7.

I honestly don't understand the mental gymnastics some of you are performing. It's like admitting anything good about the weather and ToD system in Forza 7 would bring you literal pain.

I didn’t say it’s always the same. I did say there's probably a section of pre-defined states the game can chose from so yeah, mixed with variables (track, time of day, number of laps etc…) each race has the potential to feel different.

Assets are assets. Nothing more. It’s how you use them that makes the difference. It’s nothing to do with being acceptable for one and not the other.

I’ve already commented on Horizon Zero Dawn above.

Let’s just put it this way. I’ve been playing with dynamics systems in racing games since 2010 but, in 2017, with more resources, first party developers aren’t stepping up. Turn 10 have systems in place to suggest a dynamic world. And then there's Gran Turismo Sport, which is a complete fail.

It's nothing to do with mental gymnastics because I’m pissed at both of them. If Forza Horizon 3 can do it, why not the premier racing franchises in the console industry.

 

[exmachina64]

I don't think anyone here thinks that properly animated pit crews are essential for a racing game.

They most certainly are.

 

[Hoo-doo]

They most certainly are.

Can you explain? How does an animated pit crew tangibly change the gameplay?

Because I see it as immersion-enhancing window dressing, mostly. I'd hardly call it interfering with the game itself if the pit mechanics themselves are unchanged.

 

[Gestault]

They most certainly are.

More than a few people may disagree with you, on it being "essential." Even just in terms of the visual presentation, there's been a looong history in racers of having workarounds to showing an actual pit-crew performing the work (whether for an artistic solution, or a tech one). Not the weakest of which has been showing the interface to let the player choose changes that "covers" the crew in the process.

Agree to disagree.

 

[Sini]

They most certainly are.

None of the racing games I've loved had pit crews so what now?

 

[PackAPunchedMick]

They most certainly are.

Turn 10 were too busy implementing loot boxes to worry about pit crews

Priorities.

 

[Hawk269]

The traditional single-player career is sort of paired back to a four-part tutorial/training/video series that gives the ins-and-outs of race procedure and technique. That's what has a lot of people spooked.

I think the raw content issue is in part because the car count is less than expected given the franchise's history, and the track count is sort of the minimum you'd want in general. Last gen, a lot of the talking points explaining the premium vs standard car quality divide was that they were taking extra time to work out details for the premium cars that would let them carry over almost directly to next-gen, but that apparently didn't pan out (we're at a fraction of the GT6 premium count). Forza 5 as a launch title had more car content in 2013 (and the same ballpark for track content) as GTS will have this year, and F5 was criticized heavily for having as little content as it did for the style of game.

Thanks to you and the other poster for answering. For me car count has never been an issue as traditionally in racing games, I only use about 2 dozen cars depending on what the race requires...I was never one of the "got to get all". Track count is important because I like the variety in racing tracks and environments. It sounds like the major thing is the career mode or lack of career mode. I know of a few friends that are fans of the series, but not members of any gaming forums are going to be crushed about the career as that is where they spent a lot of time in. Still getting the game regardless as I love racing games and usually will buy most of them. For me if there are decent amount of tracks and on-line racing is well implemented I will be happy. I know visuals will be good so no worry with that.

 

[Putty]

Pretty embarrassing how much the people who post the most in here will do anything to shine a negative light on Forza.

I'm sorry you've waited 4 years for a game with no content guys, it's fine to make yourself feel better by saying yours looks the best.

Pure. 24ct. Gold

 

[Gestault]

Thanks to you and the other poster for answering. For me car count has never been an issue as traditionally in racing games, I only use about 2 dozen cars depending on what the race requires...I was never one of the "got to get all". Track count is important because I like the variety in racing tracks and environments. It sounds like the major thing is the career mode or lack of career mode. I know of a few friends that are fans of the series, but not members of any gaming forums are going to be crushed about the career as that is where they spent a lot of time in. Still getting the game regardless as I love racing games and usually will buy most of them. For me if there are decent amount of tracks and on-line racing is well implemented I will be happy. I know visuals will be good so no worry with that.

Remember how much of the discussion on boards like NeoGaf are sort of hyper-critical, so I have a feeling the pre-emptive criticism may end up being overblown when people really sit down and play GTS. We know they've gotten the overall presentation and net-code in a good place over the course of the betas. 175+ cars is nothing to sneeze at if they've curated things well.

 

[thelastword]

You mean a still image interrupting gameplay is less jarring? I find that hard to believe.

Tbh, everything being discussed here is relative. That is, you compare racers against each other to see how different visual features stack up.......It's no rain on F7, it's just that it was lauded so high on many counts. I heard it will be the best looking racer, it will have the highest quality models, it would have dynamic weather, 4k textures et al, but none of that has been transformative to what I see on screen....4k textures? but I see lots of weak textures in the enviro still and on tracks. No headlights in tunnels, when other racers have headlights from the time the sun starts to go down or when it gets dark in tunnels, it's missing lots of dynamism. Same with how weather/tod looks and is triggered, the weaker lighting system to complement TOD or different conditions as well, it's just not there or convincing...

Now back in the day when I played Forza1 at 30fps, GT was 60fps on PS2. The PS3 GT racers went really ambitious which is good, but the framerate was not locked...I always said Kaz tried to do too much with resolution in the 720p era.. GT5 and 6 could have been 720p with 2xMSAA and they could have given us better shadows, never had to reduce the smoke effects quality and provide a locked 60fps, but Kaz is ambitious and granted, it's why I love his vision and didn't mind the dips in GT5......But Kaz went 1280 *1080p and 1440*1080p for GT5/6 on top of Dynamic Weather and TOD. Now granted, I also loved high rez games on my 1080 panel at the time, but did Kaz really have to go to those pseudo 1080p resolutions when most of the first party racers on the 360 were only 720p and some were not even 720p and missing AA as well?

I said all this to say, I would be ok with 720p last gen with dynamic weather and TOD at a locked 60fps in GT, but I know if given a chance I would play at the higher rez with the dips anyway. So what does Forza do well? I would say from the time they went from 30fps, their framerate has been solid. I think their best balance in terms of performance and visuals has been Forza 4 though, minus some of the jaggies that you could see on that title, but it looked good and run well. The recent Forza's I think lack a good balance of visuals and ATD to the framerate, I agree that framerate is king, but it's also easy to see why they have maintained their in-game framerates at 60.....I'm more inclined to ambitious racers which try to push better visuals and realism and have a knack for good ATD. so in a visual faceoff thread like this, you will just see me supporting such racers for their said accomplishments...

 

[Fess]

I don't think lazy means what you want it to mean here. To call different aspects of games getting more care than others lazy strikes me as willful consumer ignorance.

Well to me it seems lazy. Same thing with GTS if it has no camera shake. Some things you just take for granted at this point and skipping those things means that they'll have to get used getting criticised for it. That's how the media is moving forward. If we're going to just talk about what's good then we won't see the media advance as fast. I would've hoped others to think the same way instead of just defending everything about their favorite games.
And people here need to chill a bit, everytime someone says something bad they get called out being a fanboy. I've said it before, I love Forza 7, it's an amazing racer, I'm having a ton of fun with it and would currently rate it 9/10 without hesitation. But it isn't without it's faults. If it was I would give it a 10.

 

[TheAdmiester]

Tbh, everything being discussed here is relative.

Everything being discussed here is also being conveniently ignored by you.

But the sentiment about "framerate? Don't need that when I've got muh Kaz-vision" is funny so there's that at least.

 

[paperspace]

⁣

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

Pretty embarrassing how much the people who post the most in here will do anything to shine a negative light on Forza.

I'm sorry you've waited 4 years for a game with no content guys, it's fine to make yourself feel better by saying yours looks the best.

Now this is real salt.

 

[Synth]

I know we use terms differently but that's what I want to get to...what the system is capable of because that will provide the answers.

I admit I don't subscribe to how pre-defined systems are dynamic. Real-time denotes a moment-to-moment constant, like the changing time of day. Dynamic contains variables that are variable themselves. Both systems paired provide fully dynamic environmental conditions. A completely dynamic system, or even a part dynamic system, would present the player with more variations at the start and during a race.

Why not let it run it's course without any pre-defined instances for more variation? Let the sun shine bright at high-noon and foul the sky with dim grey clouds and rain in the afternoon. Turn 10 need to control how the players experiences changing conditions because there is no dynamic light from the sun and there are no dynamic shadows. Scripted weather helps to hide it all while giving the player a reasonable experience of changing conditions.

Yes, it's easier to provide a better illusion of the time passing by controlling the transitions as a result of the limited range it has. If we were to image the system as a clock face for a moment... Forza would basically have an hour hand that can only move between 9 and 12. You could freely move it using the dials at the back anywhere within that range at any time, but you can't ever access the area between 1 and 8.

You can already verify that they could in fact the let the weather hang if desired, because if it's possible to pause its transition simply by not driving any further and it's also possible for it to be progressed by AI whilst you're not driving, then there's no technological limitation that would prevent you manipulating it's coming and going at any time, and at any rate. The game is already demonstrating this, just not in the ways we'd usually expect it to be.

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

So far ahead. Wow.

A closed beta compressed YouTube footage, come on.

 

[Momentary]

A closed beta compressed YouTube footage, come on.

That's not youtube footage. This is the crap that I'm talking about right here.

 

[thelastword]

I commend you guys keeping lastword relevant...at their level you wonder if they're enjoying the labels on the box more than the game.

Lol, I knew the person behind that question was loaded, not the question mind you ...Thanks for the compliment though, I love you guys... Carry on then...

 

[theWB27]

Well to me it seems lazy. Same thing with GTS if it has no camera shake. Some things you just take for granted at this point and skipping those things means that they'll have to get used getting criticised for it. That's how the media is moving forward. If we're going to just talk about what's good then we won't see the media advance as fast. I would've hoped others to think the same way instead of just defending everything about their favorite games.
And people here need to chill a bit, everytime someone says something bad they get called out being a fanboy. I've said it before, I love Forza 7, it's an amazing racer, I'm having a ton of fun with it and would currently rate it 9/10 without hesitation. But it isn't without it's faults. If it was I would give it a 10.

It has nothing to do with being a fanboy...it has everything to do with calling devs who put this much care into these titles being called lazy because tech/time doesn't allow them to cover every base that would make these games more authentic.

Calling the things missing from these games lazy is crazy considering what we're getting even with the worst of the racers in here.

Tbh, everything being discussed here is relative. That is, you compare racers against each other to see how different visual features stack up.......It's no rain on F7, it's just that it was lauded so high on many counts. I heard it will be the best looking racer, it will have the highest quality models, it would have dynamic weather, 4k textures et al, but none of that has been transformative to what I see on screen....4k textures? but I see lots of weak textures in the enviro still and on tracks. No headlights in tunnels, when other racers have headlights from the time the sun starts to go down or when it gets dark in tunnels, it's missing lots of dynamism. Same with how weather/tod looks and is triggered, the weaker lighting system to complement TOD or different conditions as well, it's just not there or convincing...

Now back in the day when I played Forza1 at 30fps, GT was 60fps on PS2. The PS3 GT racers went really ambitious which is good, but the framerate was not locked...I always said Kaz tried to do too much with resolution in the 720p era.. GT5 and 6 could have been 720p with 2xMSAA and they could have given us better shadows, never had to reduce the smoke effects quality and provide a locked 60fps, but Kaz is ambitious and granted, it's why I love his vision and didn't mind the dips in GT5......But Kaz went 1280 *1080p and 1440*1080p for GT5/6 on top of Dynamic Weather and TOD. Now granted, I also loved high rez games on my 1080 panel at the time, but did Kaz really have to go to those pseudo 1080p resolutions when most of the first party racers on the 360 were only 720p and some were not even 720p and missing AA as well?

I said all this to say, I would be ok with 720p last gen with dynamic weather and TOD at a locked 60fps in GT, but I know if given a chance I would play at the higher rez with the dips anyway. So what does Forza do well? I would say from the time they went from 30fps, their framerate has been solid. I think their best balance in terms of performance and visuals has been Forza 4 though, minus some of the jaggies that you could see on that title, but it looked good and run well. The recent Forza's I think lack a good balance of visuals and ATD to the framerate, I agree that framerate is king, but it's also easy to see why they have maintained their in-game framerates at 60.....I'm more inclined to ambitious racers which try to push better visuals and realism and have a knack for good ATD. so in a visual faceoff thread like this, you will just see me supporting such racers for their said accomplishments...

Locked 60 frames at all times is preeeetty ambitious. I can't help but think that if Kaz had put performance over everything else it'd be more of a focus for you.

Lol, I knew the person behind that question was loaded, not the question mind you ...Thanks for the compliment though, I love you guys... Carry on then...

I follow the thread and really don't post...but I always find it funny how you don't think you have a clear bias. There's nothing wrong with it...I just don't see why you try and deny it.

 

[KageMaru]

I dont know if you're serious or if you read my discussion with Synth. Or maybe didnt understand where I was coming from. I'd be happy to discuss it with you.

I mean my main point the whole time was thinking it was disingenuous to call it dynamic ToD when the sun is not dynamic (being static) or something along that line.

Even Synth said;


If it doesnt move isnt it static? So I dont know what goalpost I'm moving, maybe you can clear that up.

And Horizon's end result is that it has a dynamic sun i.e. it moves across the sky and casts dynamic shadows.

Thats typical of games that have dynamic ToD is it not? I mean GTA has it. PCars2 has it. What else... Far Cry Primal.
They all do it but not FM7, Correct? And I said it before;

I knew someone would use my avatar eventually lol well played.

I was under the impression that the sun was almost always obscured, not that it was static. You can see in the GIF I posted that when it's in view, the sun does appear to move. I also thought that the game had dynamic shadows reflected by the time of day. I know it has shadows created by the headlights of other cars and that should be a more demanding effect.

Also as I've mentioned before, I'm not sure we should keep looking at other games to how ToD should be implemented as the "correct" way when those other games can't hold a solid 60fps on consoles.

I wish I had these games to take a closer look. I refuse to buy Forza until they fix it on PC (even though my PC is out of commission at the moment) and I can't bring myself to buy GTS without a proper career mode as I don't race online much at all.

Horizon Zero Dawn is a really bad example. During the day it looks really good but there are several issues with it’s systems. First, although the sun is a light source the world it illuminates doesn’t always obscure it’s effect i.e. a rising/setting sun behind large geographic objects still show rays through those objects or show the point of where the sun is behind an object. Now you mention it the transition from day through dusk to night feels completely scripted because it’s sped up at a rate jarring to the rest of the experience. Even worse the night seems to illuminate the environment just as much as the day. Finally, the dynamic shadows can be manipulated, either pushing time forwards or backwards. Its a mess.

The end result is not a standard I’d like to see in video games. Only during the daylight hours does the systems show potential.


I didn’t say it’s always the same. I did say there's probably a section of pre-defined states the game can chose from so yeah, mixed with variables (track, time of day, number of laps etc…) each race has the potential to feel different.

Assets are assets. Nothing more. It’s how you use them that makes the difference. It’s nothing to do with being acceptable for one and not the other.

I’ve already commented on Horizon Zero Dawn above.

Let’s just put it this way. I’ve been playing with dynamics systems in racing games since 2010 but, in 2017, with more resources, first party developers aren’t stepping up. Turn 10 have systems in place to suggest a dynamic world. And then there's Gran Turismo Sport, which is a complete fail.

It's nothing to do with mental gymnastics because I’m pissed at both of them. If Forza Horizon 3 can do it, why not the premier racing franchises in the console industry.

We'll have to agree to disagree because I think the ToD implementation in HZD works great. The rate of transition is a design choice, not a technical limitation. I also don't agree that night illuminates the world as much as it does during the day. It doesn't look anything like that on my calibrated HDR TV.

I also don't agree about these studios not stepping up. They both did what they thought best with the situations they were give. It's not like either studio is just phoning it in.

Last I don't understand why you keep bringing up Forza Horizon 3 to support your point when it uses the same methods as Forza 7. The tech used in Forza 7 came from Horizon 3.

I'm more inclined to ambitious racers which try to push better visuals and realism and have a knack for good ATD. so in a visual faceoff thread like this, you will just see me supporting such racers for their said accomplishments...

We'll see you supporting Sony racers, that's all you needed to say. No matter what, we'll see you supporting Sony racers.

 

[exmachina64]

Can you explain? How does an animated pit crew tangibly change the gameplay?

Because I see it as immersion-enhancing window dressing, mostly. I'd hardly call it interfering with the game itself if the pit mechanics themselves are unchanged.

More than a few people may disagree with you, on it being "essential." Even just in terms of the visual presentation, there's been a looong history in racers of having workarounds to showing an actual pit-crew performing the work (whether for an artistic solution, or a tech one). Not the weakest of which has been showing the interface to let the player choose changes that "covers" the crew in the process.

Agree to disagree.

None of the racing games I've loved had pit crews so what now?

Turn 10 were too busy implementing loot boxes to worry about pit crews

Priorities.

Sarcasm, guys.

 

[Hoo-doo]

Sarcasm, guys.

You need to learn how to do sarcasm.

 

[thelastword]

Locked 60 frames at all times is preeeetty ambitious. I can't help but think that if Kaz had put performance over everything else it'd be more of a focus for you.

I follow the thread and really don't post...but I always find it funny how you don't think you have a clear bias. There's nothing wrong with it...I just don't see why you try and deny it.

Wow a hidden message, not there when I read it, but there when I quote it...cool....



Anyway, yes, locked 60 frames is great, it's not like GT has been 30fps though, but it's also important to push visuals, ATD and general immersion in games and a perfect 60fps is not the only element to achieve that. As I said, a good balance of visuals and framerate is what is going to give the most authentic experience, If you can do that at a perfect 60fps great, but basic things like pit crews, good lighting, nicely detailed tracks, headlights in tunnels, basically, more dynamic elements and systems should all be equally focused on as well.....Perhaps higher refresh mirrors and reflections can do well to push immersion at your 60fps refresh just the same...

 

[thelastword]

We'll see you supporting Sony racers, that's all you needed to say. No matter what, we'll see you supporting Sony racers.

Well, if Sony racers are what that's pushing that then yes, if MS then yes, If Nintendo? same applies.....

Sorry about that DP, I swear there was another post already...

 

[Louis Cyphre]

Wow a hidden message, not there when I read it, but there when I quote it...cool....



Anyway, yes, locked 60 frames is great, it's not like GT has been 30fps though, but it's also important to push visuals, ATD and general immersion in games and a perfect 60fps is not the only element to achieve that. As I said, a good balance of visuals and framerate is what is going to give the most authentic experience, If you can do that at a perfect 60fps great, but basic things like pit crews, good lighting, nicely detailed tracks, headlights in tunnels, basically, more dynamic elements and systems should all be equally focused on as well.....Perhaps higher refresh mirrors and reflections can do well to push immersion at your 60fps refresh just the same...

The game looks stunning but there is no excuse if there are frame drops on the Pro.

 

[Not Drake]

ATD and general immersion

Excuse me, but what does ATD stand for?

 

[Synth]

The game looks stunning but there is no excuse if there are frame drops on the Pro.

The fact that there's a resolution mode and a frame rate mode basically says there will be unless you play it at 1080p.

 

[Fess]

Perhaps higher refresh mirrors and reflections can do well to push immersion at your 60fps refresh just the same...

Yup, the windscreen reflections in GTS are awesome, and the vibrations in Forza, like how the steering wheel vibrates at high speed, how the dashboard in cockpit view slightly turns in the turns in Project Cars, like the driver is looking where the car goes instead of straight ahead, rattling exterior parts like mirrors, wings, wipers, etc, the camera shake when going really fast and in bumps, and bigger shake when smashing into other cars, the upward/downward motion of the dashboard when accelerating/braking, etc. It's all minor details but still really important and it all adds up to give you better immersion.

 

[Putty]

Yup, the windscreen reflections in GTS are awesome, and the vibrations in Forza, like how the steering wheel vibrates at high speed, how the dashboard in cockpit view slightly turns in the turns in Project Cars, like the driver is looking where the car goes instead of straight ahead, rattling exterior parts like mirrors, wings, wipers, etc, the camera shake when going really fast and in bumps, and bigger shake when smashing into other cars, the upward/downward motion of the dashboard when accelerating/braking, etc. It's all minor details but still really important and it all adds up to give you better immersion.

Mash em all together and you have the perfect experience. Reality though...

 

[thelastword]

The game looks stunning but there is no excuse if there are frame drops on the Pro.

Well way back in the beta, PRO was pretty solid already, so it bodes well........

Excuse me, but what does ATD stand for?

"Attention To Detail", all the little features and graphical flourishes, even sound, that will add to the immersion...Sometimes, things you may not even able to capture properly in a screen like some of the effects and debris, birds etc in DC...Seeing how well a car is modeled, reflections off the environment and off other cars, exhaust fumes from mufflers, sparks off low lying and GT and touring cars, wheel calipers lighting up realistically especially at night, proper pit crews, good animations in the cockpit, driver's gloves, good textures and leathers, nicely done dashboard that looks and behaves like the real thing in cockpit view...


When all these little things come together, there is nothing that immerses you more, you appreciate all the effort that went into making the experience as authentic as possible and as true to form...