Support NeoGAF

[Fess]

Trust me, play it.

Okay I'll do that, just waiting for my youngest one to fall asleep then I'll go all in on GTS tonight, I've been waiting far too long for this game

 

[c0de]

Okay I'll do that, just waiting for my youngest one to fall asleep then I'll go all in on GTS tonight, I've been waiting far too long for this game

I'm also waiting that wife and son finally sleep...

 

[rodrigolfp]

Please, I don't post pictures in the Screenshots thread to be used in arguments here. I thought the first shot was pretty good and that the lightning in the second one very natural.

I deleted as you didn't like :\

 

[Gaenor]

I deleted as you didn't like :\

It's appreciated, but I didn't mean to tell you what to do with my previous post.

I posted these images on a public forum, so they're not mine anymore and you can do whatever you want with them really. But what I meant was that I really didn't took and expected these shots to be used as bad examples in a thread known to be filled with "fans" of both sides (not saying you are btw).

 

[cyen]

So, can anyone post GTS gameplay photos? Not replay or photomode please.

 

[rodrigolfp]

It's appreciated, but I didn't mean to tell you what to do with my previous post.

I posted these images on a public forum, so they're not mine anymore and you can do whatever you want with them really. But what I meant was that I really didn't took and expected these shots to be used as bad examples in a thread known to be filled with "fans" of both sides (not saying you are btw).

I used your shots because they are gameplay and didn't like the amount of edges on side mirrors and some other things on your first shot. On the second the only good things are the ground and grass textures, but far away this textures looks bad due to bad AF, i think.

 

[Gestault]

So, can anyone post GTS gameplay photos? Not replay or photomode please.

If you're in the US, the general-access full-game preview (as opposed to PS+) will be up at 6 pm EST (?), so you may see more media pop up a little after then. EU has been live for a bit.

 

[Gaenor]

I used your shots because they are gameplay and didn't like the amount of edges on side mirrors and some other things on your first shot. On the second the only good things are the ground and grass textures, bad far aways this textures looks bad due to bad AF, i think.

Obviously the game isn't perfect, far from it actually. I haven't been as impressed with the gameplay graphics as I am with the replays and photomode shots. But I guess that is the case for a lot of games, especially racing ones imo.

 

[rodrigolfp]

Obviously the game isn't perfect, far from it actually. I haven't been as impressed with the gameplay graphics as I am with the replays and photomode shots. But I guess that is the case for a lot of games, especially racing ones imo.

Not perfect, but based on your shots, i think PC2 has more polys on cars and ofc because pc version here it has good AF.

 

[Ryu Hayabusa]

So, can anyone post GTS gameplay photos? Not replay or photomode please.

4 gameplay screens

 

[cyen]

4 gameplay screens

Thanks! Nice shots

 

[ShutterMunster]

DOF & Motion Blur seem to be the only real differences between 30 and 60FPS replays. The jaggies appear the same regardless, which leads me to believe AA isnt being changed much.

Someone with more graphics knowledge may be able to spot other post processing additions but it ain’t night and day like some in this thread seem to be hoping for.

...strange thing for one to hope for.

 

[c0de]

4 gameplay screens

Ah, the third pic shows the Forza approach for grass: a flat texture with lines of grass applied hear and there.

 

[c0de]

https://youtu.be/Vidu3c7RROc
Drop to 54 fps on amateur... Solid on pro but I hope they iron out the issues soon.

 

[rodrigolfp]

4 gameplay screens

Jpg's are not doing justice.

 

[Gestault]

Base PS4 is looking perfect almost all the time from the analysis footage coming through. High framerate mode on the Pro struggles pretty regularly on replays, but overall performance is looking very nice (and obviously 30 fps mode is flawless). Nothing below 50 fps on any version. For pre-launch, this is looking great.

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

 

[psn]

This was already the case with both predecessors and it works. Again, I don't want to downplay the replays but they have nothing to do with the game when you actually play it (and to be honest honest, I never cared for replays in a racing game).

The replay doesn't look that much better than the actual race imo. Sure, there is DOF and maybe a better AA or sth, but you act like there is a day and night difference. The actual race looks impressive as well.

 

[c0de]

The replay doesn't look that much better than the actual race imo. Sure, there is DOF and maybe a better AA or sth, but you act like there is a day and night difference. The actual race looks impressive as well.

Then we disagree. A big part of the replays posted have effects that are not present in the game at all.
The fact that they run at 30 fps tells you there is a lot more going than in actual gameplay and from what I've played until now, nothing looks like the replays.

 

[Gestault]

Totally divorcing this from anything re: graphics detail or performance; If you can't see how compositionally the replays are an "apple" to gameplay's "orange," people won't see eye-to-eye with you. Gran Turismo games handle the camera movements and background control particularly well, which is why I think there's the perception of that divide.

 

[Momentary]

Then we disagree. A big part of the replays posted have effects that are not present in the game at all.
The fact that they run at 30 fps tells you there is a lot more going than in actual gameplay and from what I've played until now, nothing looks like the replays.

I agree. The replays I've seen look a lot better than what's being shown while in game. The image quality definitely improves and there are post processing effects added.

 

[psn]

Then we disagree. A big part of the replays posted have effects that are not present in the game at all.
The fact that they run at 30 fps tells you there is a lot more going than in actual gameplay and from what I've played until now, nothing looks like the replays.

The framerate is not a good indicator for what is going on in the replay, as a good AA alone could be the reason for the performance hit. Also: it is locked, so it could hover at 45 or 50fps average and would still be limited to 30. Not saying that it Is because I don't know the unlocked average, but it could. I just finished the sprint race with the mazda and it looked stunning, then I watched the replay and I saw DOF, better AA but aside from that there was not much of a difference for me.

 

[MaLDo]

4 gameplay screens

This is from a Pro at "4K" ?

 

[Self_Destructive]

I agree. The replays I've seen look a lot better than what's being shown while in game. The image quality definitely improves and there are post processing effects added.

PD's replays have always been excellent and a step above the competition. There's a few reasons why that is, and one of them is the way they focus on and around the cars. They do a great job at hiding or minimizing the visible flaws of the games.

I've always said though that during gameplay, it starts to fall apart.

 

[Momentary]

The framerate is not a good indicator for what is going on in the replay, as a good AA alone could be the reason for the performance hit. Also: it is locked, so it could hover at 45 or 50fps average and would still be limited to 30. Not saying that it Is because I don't know the unlocked average, but it could. I just finished the sprint race with the mazda and it looked stunning, then I watched the replay and I saw DOF, better AA but aside from that there was not much of a difference for me.

Higher quality motion blur is added as well. From what I've seen. This is actually pretty good really. It means the engine is pretty scalable, which could mean that they will be using this as a platform rather than pushing new installments every so often. It could mean they'll be updating this with new cars and tracks all the way through the PS5. All they'd have to do is scale up post processing and track/car models during gameplay. They've already shown that those assets are already in the game.

I actually find this pretty exciting. I'd definitely buy a PS5 if this is the route they decide to go with this franchise.

PD's replays have always been excellent and a step above the competition. There's a few reasons why that is, and one of them is the way they focus on and around the cars. They do a great job at hiding or minimizing the visible flaws of the games.

I've always said though that during gameplay, it starts to fall apart.

But at the same time it shows, like I stated above, that there is room to scale the engine for better hardware. Which is something I think you stated before.

 

[ShutterMunster]

Then we disagree. A big part of the replays posted have effects that are not present in the game at all.
The fact that they run at 30 fps tells you there is a lot more going than in actual gameplay and from what I've played until now, nothing looks like the replays.

There are 60FPS replays on Pro and outside of Motion Blur and DOF reductions they appear virtually identical. We have side by side examples of this: https://youtu.be/Vidu3c7RROc

 

[LordOcidax]

After a few hours playing the demo... In game Forza looks alot better, replays looks really cool in GTS because the lighting and the blur effect in some objects, but the graphics are pretty inconsistent. I am pretty sure that DF is going to favor Forza by a fair margin. Still, i prefer GT because the driving physics, is waaaay better than Forza.

 

[ethomaz]

There are two type of Replays in GTS.

- 30fps Replays (Pro Graph. Mode and external view): these add motion blur (more post processing effects?)

- 60fps Replays (Pro Perf. Mode and Car/Cockpit view): identical to gameplay

The gameplay IQ (Replay 60fps) in OG PS4 is unbelievable good... no other console game in OG console came close to it. Said that the IQ in Pro graphics mode match even high-end PC racing games... there is no racing game on console that reach this level of graphic quality right now.

 

[rashbeep]

After a few hours playing the demo... In game Forza looks alot better, replays looks really cool in GTS because the lighting and the blur effect in some objects, but the graphics are pretty inconsistent. I am pretty sure that DF is going to favor Forza by a fair margin. Still, i prefer GT because the driving physics, is waaaay better than Forza.

i think gt has better lighting than forza in general, but it does seem as inconsistent when it comes to track quality

that rally track straight up looks unfinished

 

[ghibli99]

Damn, that GTS rally course looks like arse. Maybe TOD matters, but... ugh.

 

[KageMaru]

There are two type of Replays in GTS.

- 30fps Replays (Pro Graph. Mode and external view): these add motion blur (more post processing effects?)

- 60fps Replays (Pro Perf. Mode and Car/Cockpit view): identical to gameplay

The gameplay IQ (Replay 60fps) in OG PS4 is unbelievable good... no other console game in OG console came close to it. Said that the IQ in Pro graphics mode match even high-end PC racing games... there is no racing game on console that reach this level of graphic quality right now.

Do we know what type of AA they use? I asked before but don't think anyone had an answer. I know earlier demos had a PPAA in use but was wondering if it was switched to anything else.

 

[Synth]

Said that the IQ in Pro graphics mode match even high-end PC racing games... there is no racing game on console that reach this level of graphic quality right now.

After a few hours of play, I am of the opinion that this is utter nonsense. Currently I'm only downsampling the "quality" mode on a 1080p displayed (my 4K display arrives tomorrow tho, yay!), but it looks nowhere near comparable to when I downsample 4K on PC on the same screen. I would imagine the difference would only be more pronounced on an actual 4K set.

 

[LordOcidax]

i think gt has better lighting than forza in general, but it does seem as inconsistent when it comes to track quality

that rally track straight up looks unfinished

Agree with you, the lighting in GTS is better than Forza, but the overall package in term of graphics i think that Forza takes the crown... also i think it looks more polished. Sometimes in GTS you can spot a lot of repetitive assets in the track (Also the shadows in the trees) and it looks really weird... the overall quality in GTS is not that good. But GTS replays tends to look a lot more realistic than Forza thats for sure... But for me, is more important the in game (While driving) graphics than replays.

 

[Gingen]

Agree with you, the lighting in GTS is better than Forza, but the overall package in term of graphics i think that Forza takes the crown... also i think it looks more polished. Sometimes in GTS you can spot a lot of repetitive assets in the track (Also the shadows in the trees) and it looks really weird... the overall quality in GTS is not that good. But GTS replays tends to look a lot more realistic than Forza thats for sure... But for me, is more important the in game (While driving) graphics than replays.

yes, ingame graphics is very important....

and GT wins by far

 

[Gingen]

Brands hatch details

 

[Hoo-doo]

Agree with you, the lighting in GTS is better than Forza, but the overall package in term of graphics i think that Forza takes the crown... also i think it looks more polished. Sometimes in GTS you can spot a lot of repetitive assets in the track (Also the shadows in the trees) and it looks really weird... the overall quality in GTS is not that good. But GTS replays tends to look a lot more realistic than Forza thats for sure... But for me, is more important the in game (While driving) graphics than replays.

I think GTS spends a lot more attention to detail. And with that I don't just mean the lighting, interiors, physics and models, but also the actual motorsport, with very realistic pit crews and animations, proper flags, pacecars etcetera.

 

[Baroquemantic]

yes, ingame graphics is very important....

and GT wins by far

I wouldn't say 'by far' based on these two images. The interior looks better in GT, but the games look relatively close here.

I think both games look good. GT has better looking lighting, in my opinion, but Forza Motorsport now has dynamic time of day so that even things out a bit.

Edit: Those track detail shots look really nice, though.

 

[KORNdoggy]

Brands hatch details

These look nice. Great attention to small details. I like that the tires in the barriers are bald. And the transitions between surfaces all look natural. Seen way too many hard edge grass textures in other racers.

 

[wumster3000]

I wouldn't say 'by far' based on these two images. The interior looks better in GT, but the games look relatively close here.

I think both games look good. GT has better looking lighting, in my opinion, but Forza Motorsport now has dynamic time of day so that even things out a bit.

Edit: Those track detail shots look really nice, though.

From playing both, I have to give GT its props as far as lighting goes. It’s looks really good. But that dynamic weather and rain soaked track and cars pit Forza over the top for me. It adds another layer of graphical immersion IMO.

But GT is a great looking game. It’s beautiful.

 

[carsar]

Trees and bushes look so pretty on your photomode screenshots, Ingame trees look ugly as hell, though. I guess shadow draw distance is the reason

 

[rodrigolfp]

yes, ingame graphics is very important....

and GT wins by far

Different ToD again. -_-zzzzzzzzzz

 

[psn]

Different ToD again. -_-zzzzzzzzzz

Does it really matter? Look at the sun visors, the shifting knob and all the other details. Look at the textures / shaders. Not that its bad for a racing game, it's still good. Polyphony Digital is just untouched in that regard imo.

This is GT6, photomode of course. But shows their attention to detail:
https://imgur.com/a/ugoDF

 

[rodrigolfp]

Does it really matter? Look at the sun visors, the shifting knob and all the other details. Look at the textures / shaders. Not that its bad for a racing game, it's still good. Polyphony Digital is just untouched in that regard imo.

This is GT6, photomode of course. But shows their attention to detail:
https://imgur.com/a/ugoDF

For the lighting, is does matter a lot!

 

[KORNdoggy]

Does it really matter? Look at the sun visors, the shifting knob and all the other details. Look at the textures / shaders. Not that its bad for a racing game, it's still good. Polyphony Digital is just untouched in that regard imo.

This is GT6, photomode of course. But shows their attention to detail:
https://imgur.com/a/ugoDF

The poor modelling in forza really stands out. There is faceting everywhere. It gives off the impression you would expect from both studios given their release shedules. Where one loves cars and motor racing and wants to capture every small detail of them as bast as they can and can seemingly take as long as they want to achieve that. Where the other is just on a conveyor belt rushing to churn out the next one before their 2 years are up outsourcing everything to anyone with not much in the way of quality control.

Speaking exclusively in regards to modelling and materials here.

 

[ethomaz]

Maybe I’m missing something...

Are you guys comparing GTS on base PS4 to Forza 7 on PC???

Forza 7 looks obvious better... only GTS on Pro with HQ mode give a try compared with F7 on PC... in this case I agree GTS sometimes looks better but sometimes F7 looks better.

Right now imo: F7 PC >= GTS Pro HQ > GTS Pro Perf. >> GTS PS4 >>> F7 XB1.

And in my view F7 PC is just not the looker because Turn 10 limited it to downscale to XB1... Turn 10 had a big room to improve on PC.

 

[wumster3000]

Maybe I’m missing something...

Are you guys comparing GTS on base PS4 to Forza 7 on PC???

Forza 7 looks obvious better... only GTS on Pro with HQ mode give a try compared with F7 on PC... in this case I agree GTS sometimes looks better but sometimes F7 looks better.

Right now imo: F7 PC >= GTS Pro HQ > GTS Pro Perf. >> GTS PS4 >>> F7 XB1.

And in my view F7 PC is just not the looker because Turn 10 limited it to downscale to XB1... Turn 10 had a big room to improve on PC.

I’m comparing PC to Pro and I think it’s F7 >= GTS. They both offer graphical elements that the other doesn’t. But, as I stated, the wet tracks during a sun set and wet cars are phenomenal looking. We can’t deny that.

Edit: I’m playing both in 4K HDR.

 

[pixelation]

Forza's weather ain't all that. In game camera mode shows the water dropplets hitting the window yet they leave no trace/smudge when wiped off like in other racing games like... say... DriveClub.

 

[TrojanBlade]

yes, ingame graphics is very important....

and GT wins by far

GT looks way better than Forza at least in this shot...no comparison.

 

[psn]

Maybe I’m missing something...

Are you guys comparing GTS on base PS4 to Forza 7 on PC???

Forza 7 looks obvious better... only GTS on Pro with HQ mode give a try compared with F7 on PC... in this case I agree GTS sometimes looks better but sometimes F7 looks better.

Right now imo: F7 PC >= GTS Pro HQ > GTS Pro Perf. >> GTS PS4 >>> F7 XB1.

And in my view F7 PC is just not the looker because Turn 10 limited it to downscale to XB1... Turn 10 had a big room to improve on PC.

You're missing the fact that IQ is not everything.

 

[Noobcraft]

You're missing the fact that IQ is not everything.

Having rain and amazing skyboxes helps Forza some. The two games trade off visually from what I've seen.

 

[ethomaz]

You're missing the fact that IQ is not everything.

Sure but that is a graphic thread...