Turn10 has put online this week's pitpass report, with a new video showing a race between a BMW and a Mercedes. In that Pitpass report, you'll also find a good coverage of the awesome Famitsu review score - 9/9/9/9.
The second and second to last shots look great. Some of the replay shots have poor angles with some of the gameplay shots looking much better. Nice to see a steady stream of media leading up to release. Now aftering watching the video the bloom just drives me nuts. They would do better to just turn it off in many situations, not to mention it would also decrease noticable aliasing.
I was sooo hyped for this game...UNTIL...I played the demo about 10 times and absolutely HATED the replay camera choices. I want TV style replays. WTF is Turn10 thinking?
Commented on 2007-05-19 17:25:14 In reply to team56th
Posted by team56th
I don't think so. Jaggies or not, clear and fine view of huge tracks are immersive, I think.
Motion blur wouldn't kill the immersive/long draw distance unless you were turning very fast, which would be realistic. The areas most affected by motion blur in normal driving would be areas on the left and right sides of the screen.
Commented on 2007-05-19 20:10:29 In reply to kurtfire44
Posted by kurtfire44
I was sooo hyped for this game...UNTIL...I played the demo about 10 times and absolutely HATED the replay camera choices. I want TV style replays. WTF is Turn10 thinking?
Every track has different camera angles suited for it. Also how are you not going to buy a game because you don't like the camera angles in the replays? What a lame excuse to pass up a great game.
Commented on 2007-05-19 20:12:56 In reply to italianice
Posted by italianice
aliasing.
doesnt look good, imo. no excuse for that much aliasing, especially seen in the demo.
Its runs FSAA 2 in realtime and FSAA 4 in replays. Want an excuse? The physics engine and everything else running at one time. Sometimes you must sacrifice graphics to get great gameplay. But it doesn't really matter because once you get used to it you won't notice it at all.
Commented on 2007-05-19 20:39:21 In reply to FordGTGuy
This message is in "Boulet Time" (TM), If you still *really* want to see it, click here
Posted by FordGTGuy
Every track has different camera angles suited for it. Also how are you not going to buy a game because you don't like the camera angles in the replays? What a lame excuse to pass up a great game.
Commented on 2007-05-19 21:31:44 In reply to synce
Posted by synce
The demo turned me off from the game. I think Gran Turismo 5 will wipe the floor with it.
What in 2009? Gran Turismo's physics engine will never be on par with Forza's. No matter how good you can make a racing simulator look its nothing if you can't make it realistic first.
I was kinda turned off by the demo until i got the hang of it, the game forces your to upgrade your driving skills to another level unlike games like PGR or even GT. I would say, if your going to get this game, the MS Wheel is almost a must if your willing to spend that type of money on it, i must say after using it for this game, i dont really think i can got back to using the controller.
it looks great, and i love realistic racing games so this is a must-have for me :) too bad my 360 is out for repair so i cant check out the demo just yet :(
by the way, is it possible to use the MS Wheel in the demo?
Commented on 2007-05-20 00:59:47 In reply to RC_Master
Posted by RC_Master
lol, the top half of the cone in pic three is in focus, while the bottom is all blurred.
weird or what?
This is an artifact of the way they are doing motion blur.
When rendering the scene, you have your normal output colour buffer (ie, what you see), however often times you have secondary buffers. You always have a depth buffer too - so things appear at the correct depth order - however you don't *display it*.
How is this related?
For Depth of Field, you need to know the distance of each pixel from the camera. Well, you have the depth buffer, so thats no problem.
For motion blur, you need to know the *motion* of each pixel. Or more precisely, the velocity in screen space (usually x/y).
You then go through each pixel, read it's velocity as a linear direction across the screen, and then take a few samples along that line. Average them up, and display them.
So... The cone..
If you think about it, in that particular picture, almost all the motion vectors will be large values on the x-axis, as the camera is panning. Except the car.
So take the cone in particular - the pixels where the cone suddenly are no longer blurred - just happen to be the pixels of the car. Which just happens to not be moving much in screen space, so aren't getting blurred.
Of course, those pixels have no idea there is a fast moving cone right next to them.
It's a performance trade off. Basically, all the actual cone pixels *are* blurred, just not all the neighbour pixels.
The other visual oddity that occurs because of this, is the car's shadow is motion blurred, even when the car is not.
I hope that all makes sense. This is the way pretty much every game does motion blur.
I WANT THIS! Yesterday I bough the 360 steeringwheel, and man it's good. It works perfectly with the demo, the force-feedback is SO firm, if you get in a drift, you feel the wheels losing their grip :D.
Commented on 2007-05-20 22:54:48 In reply to FordGTGuy
Posted by FordGTGuy
What in 2009? Gran Turismo's physics engine will never be on par with Forza's. No matter how good you can make a racing simulator look its nothing if you can't make it realistic first.
Why does everyone assume GT5 won't improve on the franchises physics? Not that I agree with the post you're replying to.. Forza 2 has no direct competition for at least a year the way I see it. I can't think of any reason not to buy it if you like this sort of racing game.
The whole sim thing doesn't appeal to just everyone though.
Commented on 2007-05-20 23:47:38 In reply to GriftGFX
Posted by GriftGFX
Why does everyone assume GT5 won't improve on the franchises physics? Not that I agree with the post you're replying to.. Forza 2 has no direct competition for at least a year the way I see it. I can't think of any reason not to buy it if you like this sort of racing game.
The whole sim thing doesn't appeal to just everyone though.
I didn't say GT5 won't improve on the physics i'm just saying that they most likely won't match Forza Motorsport 2's physic engine.
Loakum
@Driftwood Awesome! I’m loving it! It does show a much crisper picture and the frame rate looks good! I was playing Stella Blade and Dragonball Soarkling Blast! :) (2 Weeks ago)
Driftwood
@Loakum: enjoy, the one Sony sent us will be there on launch day. Coverage will follow asap. (2 Weeks ago)
Loakum
*takes a large sip of victorious grape juice* ok….my PS5 pro arrived early! So much winning! :) (2 Weeks ago)
Driftwood
@reneyvane: non ils l'ont publié le 1er octobre et je crois que tu l'avais déjà linkée. ;) (5 Weeks ago)
reneyvane
Factornews à joué à KingdomComeDeliverance2 au Gamescom 2024 mais ne publie sa preview que maintenant ? [url] (7 Weeks ago)
CraCra
Y a un souci sur les forums ? (8 Weeks ago)
nostradamus
very few with religious beliefs are naive or zealots, but for sure don't find amusing their beliefs being thrown in for clout. maybe STFU with that discourse? (11 Weeks ago)
Driftwood
Download is now functional again on Gamersyde. Sorry for the past 53 days or so when it wasn't. (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
Another (French) livestream today at 2:30 CEST but you're welcome to drop by and speak English. I will gladly answer in English when I get a chance to catch a breath. :) (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
GSY is getting some nice content at 3 pm CEST with our July podcast and some videos of the Deus Ex Mankind Divided preview build. :) (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
For once we'll be live at 4:30 pm CEST. Blim should not even be tired! (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
More Quantum Break coverage coming in a few hours, 9:00 a.m CEST. (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
We'll have a full review up for Firewatch at 7 pm CET. Videos will only be tomorrow though. (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
Tonight's livestream will be at 9:15 GMT+1, not GMT+2 as first stated. (> 3 Months ago)
Patreon
All comments (31)
Commented on 2007-05-19 14:27:23
Commented on 2007-05-19 14:32:54
Commented on 2007-05-19 14:49:05 In reply to hitman47
Commented on 2007-05-19 15:38:56
Commented on 2007-05-19 15:44:35 In reply to Redneck
Commented on 2007-05-19 15:58:19weird or what?
Commented on 2007-05-19 16:19:31
Commented on 2007-05-19 17:06:42
Commented on 2007-05-19 17:25:14 In reply to team56th
Commented on 2007-05-19 18:40:48doesnt look good, imo. no excuse for that much aliasing, especially seen in the demo.
Commented on 2007-05-19 19:34:59
Commented on 2007-05-19 20:10:29 In reply to kurtfire44
Commented on 2007-05-19 20:12:56 In reply to italianicedoesnt look good, imo. no excuse for that much aliasing, especially seen in the demo.
Commented on 2007-05-19 20:24:22
Commented on 2007-05-19 20:39:21 In reply to FordGTGuy
Commented on 2007-05-19 21:31:44 In reply to synce
Commented on 2007-05-19 22:19:46
Commented on 2007-05-19 22:42:42by the way, is it possible to use the MS Wheel in the demo?
Commented on 2007-05-20 00:24:32 In reply to Redneck
Commented on 2007-05-20 00:59:47 In reply to RC_Masterweird or what?
When rendering the scene, you have your normal output colour buffer (ie, what you see), however often times you have secondary buffers. You always have a depth buffer too - so things appear at the correct depth order - however you don't *display it*.
How is this related?
For Depth of Field, you need to know the distance of each pixel from the camera. Well, you have the depth buffer, so thats no problem.
For motion blur, you need to know the *motion* of each pixel. Or more precisely, the velocity in screen space (usually x/y).
You then go through each pixel, read it's velocity as a linear direction across the screen, and then take a few samples along that line. Average them up, and display them.
So... The cone..
If you think about it, in that particular picture, almost all the motion vectors will be large values on the x-axis, as the camera is panning. Except the car.
So take the cone in particular - the pixels where the cone suddenly are no longer blurred - just happen to be the pixels of the car. Which just happens to not be moving much in screen space, so aren't getting blurred.
Of course, those pixels have no idea there is a fast moving cone right next to them.
It's a performance trade off. Basically, all the actual cone pixels *are* blurred, just not all the neighbour pixels.
The other visual oddity that occurs because of this, is the car's shadow is motion blurred, even when the car is not.
I hope that all makes sense. This is the way pretty much every game does motion blur.
Commented on 2007-05-20 12:39:48anyone knows what scores the first Forza got?
Commented on 2007-05-20 15:57:08
Commented on 2007-05-20 22:54:48 In reply to FordGTGuyThe whole sim thing doesn't appeal to just everyone though.
Commented on 2007-05-20 23:47:38 In reply to GriftGFXThe whole sim thing doesn't appeal to just everyone though.
Commented on 2007-05-21 03:59:28 In reply to FordGTGuy