I thought they only had reused the physics engine and the assets.
You're sure they're also sharing the same graphics engine???
-
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.
Next-gen Racing Graphics Face-off | (Next-gen means current-gen)
- Thread starter Gestault
- Start date
You're sure they're also sharing the same graphics engine???
They do, but PG added dynamic shadows and lighting, while FM5 had pre-baked lighting. Overall lighting in FH2 is miles ahead of FM5 and I hope they implement it in FM6.
ninjablade
Banned
Being on PS4 DC is bound to have better graphics, it also enjoyed a longer dev cycle than any Forza while only having a fraction of Forza's features and content. A large focus was put on graphics, but other aspects are pretty shallow. But that's not the topic of this conversation. I think it's still remarkable how good Forza games look despite being on weaker hardware while maintaining 1080p and stable 60/30fps seeing how the majority of devs fail to hit that target on xbone.
Obviously it's heavily modified, but yeah. It was really obvious in earlier builds where they even had the exact same lens flare and foggy orange sunshafts that you see in Forza 5.
Really no reason to go through the effort of writing an entire renderer from scratch when F5's was perfectly competent. They only had two years and you don't want to end up with something like DC at launch or - god forbid - The Crew.
FM6 will look light years ahead of FM5. T10 just had everything against them from a development perspective.
GT7 is gonna be amazing on ps4.
Well, at least the 10% of content created specifically for PS4
I'm still gonna bash Kaz for including ps2 cars and tracks in a PS4 game.Red Chocobo
Banned
Gran Turismo has two sides.
When it looks bad, it looks BAD. But when it looks good, it looks FUCKING AMAZING.
Sadly, I think this inconsistency will be with the series for a while. Due to some strange choices by it's creator.
When it looks bad, it looks BAD. But when it looks good, it looks FUCKING AMAZING.
Sadly, I think this inconsistency will be with the series for a while. Due to some strange choices by it's creator.
Which doesn't mean anything, considering DC's a new IP started from scratch while Forza's a now well established IP reusing previous assets and algorithms.
Yep, even prologue bullshots from 2007 still look more real than most of these next gen racers. A mess.
What you can see in DC vs FH2 isn't the same as what you can drive to. Driveclub can use low detail assets for distant objects without that object having to then look comparable to the rest of the game once the player drives up to it. Horizon 2's scenery is densely populated in all directions, not just those that follow the tracks route. It's not really comparable at all.
So what are we arguing about now?
The only difference I see is that some parts of the scenery won't be reachable / seen closely in DC.
But the whole shit you see on your road from the start of the track to its end will be.
Asset LOD changes - and thus prior loading - are a thing in DC, too.
That it didn't really enjoyed a longer development cycle.
Yea, I know LOD changes are a thing in both games, the point I was making is that highly detailed assets are only required for things that the player can see up close. There's a large difference between what this entails in Driveclub, compared to Horizon 2.
It'd be like me taking an image of Ryse or The Last Of Us where you can see far off into the distance, and using that to compare the game's graphical scope to something like Just Cause 2. It just doesn't work as a comparison. Being able to control what a player can see, and from what angles is a huge benefit.
New DriveClub timelapse video
The clouds from 1:10 onwards look pretty damn amazing.
The clouds from 1:10 onwards look pretty damn amazing.
1.21Gigawatts
Banned
Incredible.
And on top of that, it's all bullshots. Anyone who thinks a multi-platform game with nothing like the budget of something like Forza is going to compete.... PCars might look great on my gaming PC, but I hold out no hope of it being as good as Forza 5 (never mind Forza 6) on my XB1 or PS4. Also, it's not even going to look as good on my gaming PC as the bullshots and bullgifs being flung around in this thread.
It's just like DriveClub. The gameplay footage looks terrible compared to the .gifs and pics everyone was drooling over for the past year. Reality is a bitch.
Technically no PC screenshot is really a bullshot. I don't think many here are expecting the console version of Project Cars be amongst the best looking racers... everone saying Project Cars looks best is referring to the PC version.
The pics and clips are taken directly from the game and it looks exactly like in the shots. The "photomode" is just a noclip dev camera and you can just fly around. I also take my screenshots and videos with msi afterburner so it captures what is actually shown on screen.
Pretty sweet. It's amazing we can play these games.
Some comments based on this video:
1. The cloud tech looks really advanced. I'm still not sold on the results, though. They don't look like clouds use to look. They look like rain clouds (and only a certain type of rain clouds). Nonetheless, a huge step in the good direction, but I'm not sure I prefer the results over more conventional techniques right now.
2. Textures seem to be underwhelming. It's hard to judge based on a YT video, but doesn't seem they're anything to write home about.
3. The lightning in general looks very nice, but doesn't look very realistic. I like the style direction, but I wouldn't dare calling it realistic. Realistic lighting is "boring" most of the time. The lightning here is clearly designed to look enticing all the time.
Bullshit post talking about bullshots. If your PC can't handle max settings is nobody's fault. You might be really butthurt when you resort to calling bullshots on screengrabs taken directly from gameplay.
I can't see "highly detailed assets" in FH2 but on the cars and some of the festival things.
Doesn't mean they don't look good in FH2 (they really do) or that DC assets are all great (shit no, tons of low detailed textures), but I'm not convinced there is such a gap as you're picturing.
Looking forward for DC photomode to settle this.
Lys Skygge
Member
Soooooo gooood!
I take photos for a living. As a photographer you tend to notice lighting more often than an average person. The people at evolution absolutely nailed the lighting! It's not flashy, over saturated, other worldly....it's just real! Races during midday and no clouds look so boring and flat...but that's how it is in real life! Sunrise/sunset give a beautiful orange glow, night is actually dark, overcast has diffused lighting. It all just looks so real.
Evolution did an amazing job and I cannot wait to see how this game looks with the weather update!
Krisprolls
Banned
They're wrong anyway. DC lighting is just better.
The game (PCars) is not even released so people should just stop talking about that one until it is.
Auto-Reply
Member
I love videos like this, looks great and very natural in the lighting department. But I also think the clouds look off. A quick google-image search of "clouds" and I am reminded of how defined and unique clouds can look, they are all the same in Drive Club.
Still looks great overall and reminds me on the pCars dynamic weather video someone linked here (or in another thread?) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tO4y4iUoKJg&hd=1
LukasTaves
Member
Lighting/Shader quality is top notch on FH2. They, not much different than DC simulates light scattering through the atmosphere and every light/shadow is dynamic. Both also have physically based shading. There are some materials I think is even better handled in Forza like car paints.
AFAIK road reflections are handled in screen space on FH2 as well, they just don't use it for car reflections, they are still using the framebuffer trick from the PGR days. But they are dynamic, just can't handle all scenarios very well (like car-car reflection on same cameras).
When you say Global Illumination do you mean indirect lighting? Is this being used on DC? Which method? Something more of the lines of enlighten or a completely dynamic like Crytek's?
Ridiculously good. Not just the volumetric clouds, but the way they react to light, the way everything reacts to the wind, the way clumps of mist, fog etc float around the tracks and so on. Just all looks incredible, and gives more individuality and unique personality to tracks than I think has ever been done. Some literally look wildly different based on the lighting, the positioning of the clouds and sun etc, beyond simple dark to light and vice versa.
Driveclub uses fully dynamic global illumination, which is beyond even the implementation of GI in Crysis 3. In-fact, I believe it's the first game to actually use it.
travisbickle
Member
These are very sped up time-lapses. We've had months of people complaining about the "boring lighting" because it is realistic as you say and has long periods of flat lighting with overcast weather.
Well, by highly detailed, I mean in comparison to the level of detail typically used for more distant objects. Like that crowd example... if you could never get near that crowd, there would probably be no version of the model displaying the detail the second set of picture show.
The lighting is better yea... that doesn't make people wrong because aspect A is better in Driveclub. Someone could just as easily say you're wrong because aspect B is so much better in Project Cars. The lighting in GT5 can be considered better than the lighting in Forza 5... but I'm not going to take anyone seriously who tries to tell me it's the better looking game overall (obviously not including photomode silliness).
Also Project Cars not being out doesn't mean a thing if people are currently playing it on their machines. It's not going to suddenly look a lot worse on full release. This isn't a Driveclub case of being fed perfectly selected and touched up images.
1.21Gigawatts
Banned
LukasTaves
Member
The main issue on open world vs closed track is not much even what is accessible or not, but freedom of movement. In a closed track race you now the player can only go forward or backwards on the track, that gives you predictability, so you can crank up assets as much as your engine can possibly take and after tuning you can make sure it still runs great.
You can't do that on an open world game (at least not to the same level) because the player can go anywhere, so you can't throw everything your engine handles at once, you have to make sure that on any giving point the player might go anywhere and the minimal amount of late asset streaming as possible.
Having said that, FH2 seems to use some tricks, when a race starts it seems to look a bit better than roaming on the open world, and they do restrict the player direction through the means of checkpoints or in some cases even a closed track circuit. I think that's how they can hold against DC despite being open world.
Not to mention the same was said about the foliage quality lol. Far more realistic lighting and foliage is not as good, apparently...
LukasTaves
Member
What they are using? Any more details? I couldn't find anything on Google XD
I think you're mistaking dull color palete with boring lighting. I think the light in DC is very vivid in all situations, but the color palete of the scene is quite dull. The contrast created is very interesting and an artistic choice that I applaud. But I wouldn't say the lighting looks very realistic. I don't think it was ever the aim either.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
Yeah I was curious as well and couldn't find any technical papers like the Crytek ones that outline their method in detail.
Vroadstar
Member
I agree it looks so real especially using dashboard view with no hud. Just imagine the same time lapse video but with the weather update! The future DC screenshot thread using photo mode will be insane
They haven't detailed it, just mentioned that they're using full dynamic global illumination. In other words the suns positioning is dynamic, along with approximations from it, unlike other games that use GI.
Dictator93
Member
You may want oto back that up with actually technical information before saying that
That sounds similar to all dynamic global illumination simulations. Including Cryengines, Dunias, and even battlefields, and fox engines.
You may want oto back that up with actually technical information before saying that
That sounds similar to all dynamic global illumination simulations. Including Cryengines, Dunias, and even battlefields, and fox engines.
Other games, including Crysis 3, Shadow Fall etc, use approximations pre-calculated based on a fixed sun position do they not?
KKRT00 to pop out of nowhere in 3.. 2..
Lol. He's said it himself before. Bare in mind, CryEngine 3 does support full dynamic global illumination, it's just not implemented in the release build of Crysis 3 for whatever reason. I'm assuming because it's so damn taxing.
KKRT00 to pop out of nowhere in 3.. 2..
Never played Crysis 3, but wouldn't it simply be because it doesn't have a dynamic day/night cycle, so there would be no point in moving the Sun about?
Dictator93
Member
THE LPV injection method from Crytek works on a fully dynanic sun position. None of it is precalculated. I
It is in the release builds, it is just the time of day doesnt change and the global modifier is set very low (it does not contribute THAT much). ALso, it is not that taxing as long as you take advantage of its time slicing.
I wonder why some of the tree's appear to be floating, or have a disconnect from their shadows?
Dictator93
Member
Two reasons:
1. Shadow bias problems (every game has these except for like doom 3).
2. If the trees were placed with a large brush that was not terrain aligned it could lead to things floating a tiny bit off the ground.
^ That can be true. Not the case here though
There's a quick drop off ridge/shoulder there of a a foot or two
Hard to see in a moving gif though. Watch right as my car gets on the road...you see the image jerk suddenly.
It's why the shot gets kinda wiggly..I lost traction and weaved when I went over it before getting to them..lol. The "light" color between the tree and shadow is grass blurring.
There's a quick drop off ridge/shoulder there of a a foot or two
Hard to see in a moving gif though. Watch right as my car gets on the road...you see the image jerk suddenly.
It's why the shot gets kinda wiggly..I lost traction and weaved when I went over it before getting to them..lol. The "light" color between the tree and shadow is grass blurring.
Shyakugaun
Banned
LOD Gifs from Horizon 2 for fun. Big Gifs FTW!
Amazing, make more
Auto-Reply
Member
LOD Gifs from Horizon 2 for fun. Big Gifs FTW!
Goddamnit, that looks ACE
I have to say it again, I want to play this in vr, turn my head and look out the side window and see something like that, must feel amazing.
Some stuff in FH2 is floating
I found a vineyard outside one of the towns where half of it was 50cm above the ground and the other half was 50cm under. The reality of building an open world I guess.
It wouldn't surprise me if the all the vegetation was hand-placed. Hard to see something like that happening in a procedural system like The Crew.