By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Gran Turismo Sports Reviews - 76 Metacritic (44 Reviews) - 77 OpenCritic (44 Reviews)

Hynad said:

torok said:

I think you didn't understand this. The models they created for the PS3 have dozens of millions of polygons. The Ps4 can't handle more than dozens or hundred thousands per car. The PS2 models were below what the PS3 could render. The PS3 models are beyond what the best PC today could do. You couldn't even tell they were reused. They probably did exactly that and are just saying that to avoid having people that don't understand a thing about rendering complaining.

What the heck are you on about?

The 3D models created for the PS3 game, the original ones, are high quality. They were downgraded to be used on the PS3 game. They are the same they will use on the PS4, if they are including a car that was in the previous games.

When you create a model for a game, like GT6, it has dozens of millions of polygons and extremely detailed maps and textures and so on. They are so detailed that they can't be rendered in real time in any hardware. So, to use it on the PS3, they downgrade it until it is simplified enough (using part of the information of the better models to improve the simplified rendering). But they still have the original models.

Putting it in direct terms:

- Offline renders of GT6 models: millions of polygons, extreme quality maps, massive textures.

- GT6 in-game (simplified version of the models above): hundreds of thousands of polygons, low quality maps, low quality textures.

- GTS in-game (less simplified version of the models above): also hundreds of thousands of polygons, better quality maps, better quality textures.

So, for a PS4 game, they will just downgrade less the original models. That's how you do it today, it's the standard on rendering. DonFerrari wants to compare it with the reuse of PS2 models on the PS3, but the original offline renders of the PS2 models were not great, so they should not be reused. Nowadays the models created are ridiculously good so they have more margin to be reused.

All this discussion is just an attemp to explain the difference between offline vs realtime rendering.

DonFerrari said:
 

I'm on the same confusion.

Have they took the model of the GT-R in GT5 and called it a mercedes in GTS so no one complain?

What are you talking about, man? I'm talking about reusing models for cars that were in GT5/6 and are on GTS. Do you know at least the basics of 3D modeling? It looks like you don't here, since you are assuming the models created for GT6 are not adequate. There's no point in recreating them, they will just do it for cars that are new to GTS. It's not like EVERY single car on GTS was not on GT5/6. It's quite obvious that the ones who DON'T have to be modeled from scratch here. I don't really get you point.

If you want to continue, post a good and reasonable technical explanation why the models (the original, not the in-game ones) created for GT6 are not good enough. I have the impression you don't know how this works.



Around the Network
torok said:
Hynad said:

What the heck are you on about?

The 3D models created for the PS3 game, the original ones, are high quality. They were downgraded to be used on the PS3 game. They are the same they will use on the PS4, if they are including a car that was in the previous games.

When you create a model for a game, like GT6, it has dozens of millions of polygons and extremely detailed maps and textures and so on. They are so detailed that they can't be rendered in real time in any hardware. So, to use it on the PS3, they downgrade it until it is simplified enough (using part of the information of the better models to improve the simplified rendering). But they still have the original models.

Putting it in direct terms:

- Offline renders of GT6 models: millions of polygons, extreme quality maps, massive textures.

- GT6 in-game (simplified version of the models above): hundreds of thousands of polygons, low quality maps, low quality textures.

- GTS in-game (less simplified version of the models above): also hundreds of thousands of polygons, better quality maps, better quality textures.

So, for a PS4 game, they will just downgrade less the original models. That's how you do it today, it's the standard on rendering. DonFerrari wants to compare it with the reuse of PS2 models on the PS3, but the original offline renders of the PS2 models were not great, so they should not be reused. Nowadays the models created are ridiculously good so they have more margin to be reused.

All this discussion is just an attemp to explain the difference between offline vs realtime rendering.

DonFerrari said:

I'm on the same confusion.

Have they took the model of the GT-R in GT5 and called it a mercedes in GTS so no one complain?

What are you talking about, man? I'm talking about reusing models for cars that were in GT5/6 and are on GTS. Do you know at least the basics of 3D modeling? It looks like you don't here, since you are assuming the models created for GT6 are not adequate. There's no point in recreating them, they will just do it for cars that are new to GTS. It's not like EVERY single car on GTS was not on GT5/6. It's quite obvious that the ones who DON'T have to be modeled from scratch here. I don't really get you point.

If you want to continue, post a good and reasonable technical explanation why the models (the original, not the in-game ones) created for GT6 are not good enough. I have the impression you don't know how this works.

Hynad was asking you how can they use the model and say it isn't the base model.

There were details and techniques they didn't use. And you are still to justify if they are recycling models why didn't they use all the premium assets?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Errorist76 said:

Here’s a thorough and fair review by Inside Sim Racing.

They seem to like it.

https://youtu.be/QAiumRUyy2g

So people that like Racing simulation appreciate the game? Seem Red Bull also liked.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

torok said:
Hynad said:

What the heck are you on about?

The 3D models created for the PS3 game, the original ones, are high quality. They were downgraded to be used on the PS3 game. They are the same they will use on the PS4, if they are including a car that was in the previous games.

When you create a model for a game, like GT6, it has dozens of millions of polygons and extremely detailed maps and textures and so on. They are so detailed that they can't be rendered in real time in any hardware. So, to use it on the PS3, they downgrade it until it is simplified enough (using part of the information of the better models to improve the simplified rendering). But they still have the original models.

Putting it in direct terms:

- Offline renders of GT6 models: millions of polygons, extreme quality maps, massive textures.

- GT6 in-game (simplified version of the models above): hundreds of thousands of polygons, low quality maps, low quality textures.

- GTS in-game (less simplified version of the models above): also hundreds of thousands of polygons, better quality maps, better quality textures.

So, for a PS4 game, they will just downgrade less the original models. That's how you do it today, it's the standard on rendering. DonFerrari wants to compare it with the reuse of PS2 models on the PS3, but the original offline renders of the PS2 models were not great, so they should not be reused. Nowadays the models created are ridiculously good so they have more margin to be reused.

All this discussion is just an attemp to explain the difference between offline vs realtime rendering.

DonFerrari said:

I'm on the same confusion.

Have they took the model of the GT-R in GT5 and called it a mercedes in GTS so no one complain?

What are you talking about, man? I'm talking about reusing models for cars that were in GT5/6 and are on GTS. Do you know at least the basics of 3D modeling? It looks like you don't here, since you are assuming the models created for GT6 are not adequate. There's no point in recreating them, they will just do it for cars that are new to GTS. It's not like EVERY single car on GTS was not on GT5/6. It's quite obvious that the ones who DON'T have to be modeled from scratch here. I don't really get you point.

If you want to continue, post a good and reasonable technical explanation why the models (the original, not the in-game ones) created for GT6 are not good enough. I have the impression you don't know how this works.

This is simply not true. All cars in GTS were newly modelled for a reason. Quality above quantity. Just one car in GTS takes 4-6 months to model. The cars are modelled in 8K sufficient detail so they can use them for the next gen version.



shikamaru317 said:

User reviews are even lower than the critic reviews. 6.3/10 on Metacritic; 3.6/5 on Best Buy US, 2.5/5 on Amazon US, UK, France, and Germany; 1.8/5 on Gamestop US. People aren't happy, seems a good many people didn't know about the online focus, lack of a proper campaign, lack of full customization, and low car and track counts beforehand and just bought the game because it carried the GT name, and now they are disappointed with their purchase.

User reviews say nothing. Most of them are Forza fans bombing the franchise anway as some kind of revenge for what happened to Forza 7.

Plus people buying a game without informing themselves about it. Who’s fault is it really?! Since the first reveal PD never made a deal about what the game will be.



Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
Errorist76 said:

Here’s a thorough and fair review by Inside Sim Racing.

They seem to like it.

https://youtu.be/QAiumRUyy2g

So people that like Racing simulation appreciate the game? Seem Red Bull also liked.

Real car and racing lovers seem to love the game. Casuals just don’t get it.



Errorist76 said:
DonFerrari said:

So people that like Racing simulation appreciate the game? Seem Red Bull also liked.

Real car and racing lovers seem to love the game. Casuals just don’t get it.

I'm pissed with the loss of my loved career and 1200 option of cars, but I understand the direction and hope they iron it out and are successfull. But most of the GTS threads people were going to bash in VGC had people that either don't like racing or like arcade racing to complain about GT, it was funny. Some were real fans of GT that were unhappy with the changes, and we will have to see how this will affect the overall sales. Stil, the score is totally untrue of the quality of the game. I can understand someone not passionatd about sim or missing older GT giving low 80's, but anything below 80 for a game like this is like trolling.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:
Errorist76 said:

Real car and racing lovers seem to love the game. Casuals just don’t get it.

I'm pissed with the loss of my loved career and 1200 option of cars, but I understand the direction and hope they iron it out and are successfull. But most of the GTS threads people were going to bash in VGC had people that either don't like racing or like arcade racing to complain about GT, it was funny. Some were real fans of GT that were unhappy with the changes, and we will have to see how this will affect the overall sales. Stil, the score is totally untrue of the quality of the game. I can understand someone not passionatd about sim or missing older GT giving low 80's, but anything below 80 for a game like this is like trolling.

You already said you'd never rate a GT game below a 10, and that was before the game was even out and you could play the final version. It's not trolling to not blindly give a game a great score just because of its name.



Errorist76 said:
torok said:

The 3D models created for the PS3 game, the original ones, are high quality. They were downgraded to be used on the PS3 game. They are the same they will use on the PS4, if they are including a car that was in the previous games.

When you create a model for a game, like GT6, it has dozens of millions of polygons and extremely detailed maps and textures and so on. They are so detailed that they can't be rendered in real time in any hardware. So, to use it on the PS3, they downgrade it until it is simplified enough (using part of the information of the better models to improve the simplified rendering). But they still have the original models.

Putting it in direct terms:

- Offline renders of GT6 models: millions of polygons, extreme quality maps, massive textures.

- GT6 in-game (simplified version of the models above): hundreds of thousands of polygons, low quality maps, low quality textures.

- GTS in-game (less simplified version of the models above): also hundreds of thousands of polygons, better quality maps, better quality textures.

So, for a PS4 game, they will just downgrade less the original models. That's how you do it today, it's the standard on rendering. DonFerrari wants to compare it with the reuse of PS2 models on the PS3, but the original offline renders of the PS2 models were not great, so they should not be reused. Nowadays the models created are ridiculously good so they have more margin to be reused.

All this discussion is just an attemp to explain the difference between offline vs realtime rendering.

What are you talking about, man? I'm talking about reusing models for cars that were in GT5/6 and are on GTS. Do you know at least the basics of 3D modeling? It looks like you don't here, since you are assuming the models created for GT6 are not adequate. There's no point in recreating them, they will just do it for cars that are new to GTS. It's not like EVERY single car on GTS was not on GT5/6. It's quite obvious that the ones who DON'T have to be modeled from scratch here. I don't really get you point.

If you want to continue, post a good and reasonable technical explanation why the models (the original, not the in-game ones) created for GT6 are not good enough. I have the impression you don't know how this works.

This is simply not true. All cars in GTS were newly modelled for a reason. Quality above quantity. Just one car in GTS takes 4-6 months to model. The cars are modelled in 8K sufficient detail so they can use them for the next gen version.

It's not just the outside, the inside, the handling, the sounds, all the possible adjustments and effect those have on the handling need to be remodelled as well. You can't sinply import the old models into a new simulation engine. You can still fully customize or tweak the cars in GTS, just not buy silly generic upgrades like weight reduction 1, turbo charger 2 etc. You can however still unlock or upgrade the ability to adjust the power ratio and weight adjustments to make cars conform to a certain class or performance rating. (In bring your own car sp races, you can still beef your car up with mileage points if you have trouble catching the AI) You can even adjust tcs, braking balance and fuel economy while racing.

I wonder what the response would have been if GT7 launched like Forza 5. GT6 was accused of being stale and unnecesary. The opinion was that they should have kept supporting GT5 instead and kept adding to that., instead of splitting the userbase. Plus the online was heavily criticised for not being good enough compared to the competition, recycled cars and tracks were ugly and had no place in 2013.

PD listened, made a new platform with online and  a healthy racing community in mind and only premium highly polished content, and the backlash is even greater! Now suddenly the stale campaign of GT6 and generics car upgrades are highly valued. Plus trial mountain and Sarthe would look really bad next to the 4K HDR tracks, they were stretching it pretty far already on ps3. The few sections I've driven on the new Nurburgring look phenomenal. (Good thing, the license tests that use that track are hard!)

But I guess stale > renewed focus.

I hope they keep adding to GT Sport and keep the userbase together from now on.



DonFerrari said:
Errorist76 said:

Here’s a thorough and fair review by Inside Sim Racing.

They seem to like it.

https://youtu.be/QAiumRUyy2g

So people that like Racing simulation appreciate the game? Seem Red Bull also liked.

Not sure about that.  Reading the forums there are a lot of people feeling the review did not cover a lot of stuff missing from the game that they enjoyed with the previous series.  When all is said and done, people just do not like paying 60 bones for a pretty much MP only game.