-
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.
Simply the most photorealistic racer this gen, gt4 2 new vids
- Thread starter cobragt3
- Start date
Yea I am, do you have proof?Fight for Freeform said:
http://www.angelfire.com/alt/cobragt/topgearscan.jpg
copy and paste only
http://ps2.ign.com/mail/2004-02-23.html
Read the first part with canyon in the title
Look at this model
Since you are so smart at picking out what uses photos, tell me what texture in that model uses a photo, if you answer correctly, I wont say anything on this ever.
AlphaSnake
...and that, kids, was the first time I sucked a dick for crack
m0dus said:
Ahahahahaha. Oh, God. I'm so scared. We'll have WORDS! WORDS! *shivers in fear* It's your ignorance that annoys the living shit out of me. All you do is talk out of your ass. Like kPop said...you know nothing.
Hehehe..."we'll have words." Oh, God that's rich.
AlphaSnake
...and that, kids, was the first time I sucked a dick for crack
Fight for Freeform said:
Photos aren't made up of polygons and wouldn't have seams. Burns, doesn't it?
I dont understand you. I'll say it clearly. The vid with the Bspec shown was being played on the big screen by a ps2, it was no vid. That other vid was encoded and the second vid looks like gt4 :| you have to be kidding me. Do this, play the 2 new vids and set each vid to the pitcrew scene and compare, it all looks the same. It might be the camera work that makes you think that or either you are blind. Look at the Nurburgring portion of the vid, looks the same as the other Nurb vids I have seen but with fancier camera angles, that's all.m0dus said:
AlphaSnake
...and that, kids, was the first time I sucked a dick for crack
DopeyFish said:
...
Wow...just...Goddamn.
...
Just...
...I fear for humanity.
AlphaSnake
...and that, kids, was the first time I sucked a dick for crack
pj325is said:Really? So someone drew the entire grand canyon?
PD really does have great artists..
....
Uhh...it's called modelling. You know, like...they modelled the Grand Canyon...sort of how they modelled 650 cars! You can do a lot with a computer these days.
Edit: Oh and once again...for the ignorant: photos don't have polygons and seams.
So because it has a line going down means it's a photo? I have seen things like that in gt2 , does that mean gt2 uses photos? Assumptions can only get you so far and I posted a link and mag that prove my point, stop avoiding it.pj325is said:Really? So someone drew the entire grand canyon?
PD really does have great artists..
....
AlphaSnake said:
Oh, ok. So they modelled a photorealistic grand canyon for use on one track, then the purposely added a seam to the model to..break the illusion of realism? ..I'm a little confused.
P.S. One photo can't have seams, but two photos right next to eachother sure as hell do. For an example of this, please look at the left side of the gt4 pic I posted.
shpankey
not an idiot
Am I mistaken or aren't most textures in all games from photos? I always kind of thought that's how it worked (except for most Nintendo games that is).
Not saying I know (cause I don't know shit about this stuff) but I always just thought that's how it worked. If not, guess I learned something new.
Not saying I know (cause I don't know shit about this stuff) but I always just thought that's how it worked. If not, guess I learned something new.
theory: people fetishize gran turismo to such a degree that it, rather than reality, has become the standard for "photorealism." so when people say gran turismo is the most photorealistic racer on the market, really what they're saying is that gran turismo looks more like gran turismo than any other game does. which is of course totally meaningless.
the gran turismo games look great, but i don't think they feature any occult lighting or animation techniques that other games can't recreate. gt's style is no more photorealistic than that of forza or any number of other racers, and some of those other games have more detailed models and textures. of course gt4's framerate puts it ahead of forza overall. but that's a different issue.
the gran turismo games look great, but i don't think they feature any occult lighting or animation techniques that other games can't recreate. gt's style is no more photorealistic than that of forza or any number of other racers, and some of those other games have more detailed models and textures. of course gt4's framerate puts it ahead of forza overall. but that's a different issue.
AlphaSnake
...and that, kids, was the first time I sucked a dick for crack
pj325is said:
*sigh*
The seam ends right above. If it were a photo(s), then the seam would continue and break up the canyon all the way in the distance. That said, take a look at the very right and notice a sloppy/smeared texture. Why would a photo have a smeared texture?
As already explained by Polyphony, they modelled all of the backgrounds. They are made out of polygons. They are not photos as so many of you think they are. Stop the denial. A photo would look a lot flatter than that. Not to mention it'd be increasibly obvious in a replay (some games have used photos as backdrops, and during replays you could tell).
cobragt3 said:
RE your IGN link: Wow, that information is AT LEAST 3rd hand. PD > (> translator?) SCEA > IGN, hardly convincing.
The other link is just as underwhelming. Maybe he was talking about the scene as a whole, and not just the background? Also, render doesn't just mean polygons, anything you see on your computer screen has been rendered, even.....photographs.
AlphaSnake
...and that, kids, was the first time I sucked a dick for crack
Just an FYI: A "photo" background has a bit of "float" (for lack of better word) to it when you see it in replays -- or even, in some cases, playing the actual game.
AlphaSnake said:
Well I'm no game designer, but from what I've noticed in games, as your line of sight becomes nearer to parallel with a texture, it becomes more and more blurry. I've also noticed that games use big textured boxes for skies, and in gt4's case, the walls, so the camera's perspective isn't straight on, making the texture blurrier.
You mean, as explained by ign on scea's behalf who was speaking on PD's behalf?
AlphaSnake
...and that, kids, was the first time I sucked a dick for crack
pj325is said:
1) Eh? Then there are quite a number of pits on that canyon that should be smeared because they aren't parallel to the camera. That isn't the case. Not to mention that texture is actually pretty on par with the camera...
2) Har. But no. I was told this personally at E3 2003; this was back when I gave a shit about gaming and writing about it as a living.
i don't for a moment believe that that grand canyon backdrop is fully modeled. look at the foreground for fuck's sake: the terrain is angular, poorly textured, and made of like 7 polygons. if they had a billion polygons to spend on a ridiculously detailed grand canyon backdrop, you'd think they'd divert a couple to make the actual track look decent. maybe the distant background is a highly detailed texture slapped on a simple polygon mesh to make it move properly in relation to the camera. but that just makes it a glorified skybox. it's more 2d than 3d.
AlphaSnake said:
There are no pits, it's just a flat wall with a picture on it, or maybe something similar to what drohne said. I think it's kind of hard to judge the angle of the far left picture, the "steep angle makes it blurry" thing was just a theory.
PD -> PR guy -> you
Second hand to you, third to me. Not a whole lot better, and I wonder, did you also hear about the great online play at that event?
There is no seam in prlogue as is show in the picture. I have been up and down grand canyon and there are no seams to be found. The background is made up of several polygons that give it a correct sense of depth. The textures are not pictures but life like art that help add depth to the polygons. That background is not one big texture on a huge globe as most seem to believe. You have to play the game to fully understand just how good it looks especialy in motion, or just sitting there in your car enjoying the view.
AlphaSnake
...and that, kids, was the first time I sucked a dick for crack
pj325is said:
Once again. Har. But no. This is from Kaz/Translator > me. It was the one and only question I bothered asking him.
But me? I'm off to bed. Toodles, children. Keep it real, m0dus.
Gek54 said:
Ok, let's assume for a second that they're not photographs, which I still don't accept, why wouldn't they just use a photo and bend it around their simple geometry? They could have just had someone from SCEA fly over to the grand canyon with an advantix camera, take a panoramic picture or two and send the film to PD. They could have in a few hours what would take an artist god knows how long to paint.
Gek54 said:Again, there is no seam to be found at all in the game. I dare anyone to recreate that seam and show us.
Hopfully this helps you all understand how much modeling there is in the grandcanyon background. This is more or less what the geometry looks like.
That seems plausible, but I still think the texture is a photograph(s). It would take way too much time to draw something, with that level of detail, that people will see for like 5 minutes total in a several hundred hour game.
seismologist
Banned
This game looks incredible. Wow.
Can't believe this is gonna be running on one of those tiny PS2s.
Can't believe this is gonna be running on one of those tiny PS2s.
I wasn't saying that they were just 2D, most of the texture work (sans the cars) are photowork. I'm not saying they just take the photos and smack them on there... they touch it up and fix things for proper transitioning. Oh and I wasn't talking about reference shots, the guys had some big machine take pictures every few feet of the track.
I can't find the pictures of the dudes doing it, as it was posted a couple years ago here on GA. :/
I can't find the pictures of the dudes doing it, as it was posted a couple years ago here on GA. :/
