Support NeoGAF

[Summer Haze]

Damage is softly creep.

What does that even mean?

Spoiler

I agree, that makes zero sense. Well, that's Misterxmedia for you.

 

[kyser73]

Damage is softly creep.

What does that even mean?

In Soviet Russia damage is softly creep up on you.

 

[3JORN]

GTA V is a lovely looking game, but it certainly wouldn't perform the same if you replaced all of the characters and NPC's with Ellen Page's Beyond model and all of the vehicles with the cars from Gran Turismo 6.

Case in point, Forza Horizon doesn't look as good as Forza Motorsport. Totally objectively if we looked purely at polycount and frame rate.

Right now, Drive Club would not look as good if it was an open world game, something has got to give. This isn't a criticism of Drive Club in any way, it is simply a fact.
People have mentioned the draw distance being huge, but are perhaps misunderstanding the function of reduced draw distances. You don't need to reduce the draw distance if the assets being rendered aren't demanding. In the case of background mountains, they are likely to be low geometry and low texture resolution, as anything higher quality would be wasted.

If the photo mode allows you to fly out of the car and get a foot away from distant trees and mountains that you wouldn't otherwise get near, then people are free to dig up this post.

It's not confirmed to be the photo mode but during the Gamescom presentation (also on this same article) the devs were able to pause and get an overhead view of the current race and flew to the clouds, gifs of it were already posted here.

 

[coiler]

@OT Evo never made a bad game, but all that social crap makes me worried, so I'll play PS+ first

 

[amar212]

That expensive setup and he's using a DFGT.

Those are Polyphony offices IIRC

 

[Insane Metal]

From Rushy:

Ah, damn

 

[stryke]

That expensive setup and he's using a DFGT.

Budget ran out

 

[lukeskymac]

well, according to the style you are thinking, they could have made it not only open road, but open world as well as 60hz too.

What?! Now I'm convinced you're the one with no idea what both of us are talking about.

hell, they could have made tuning too, physical upgrades and livery editors, right?

Uhhh....

oh, great! an unreleased yet game, does it better than a day1 game.
or you say it does.

It's a day one multiplatform 3rd party game. Absolutely not the same as Ryse or Killzone.

And I "say it does"? Are you going disagree with this?

well, the team that made rivals was a team made by criterion and a bunch of other guys too.
i'm not very sure where are you going with this "pedigree" thing of yours... you might have to rethink.
plus, nfs as a franchise has a lot more "pedigree" than whatever you are mixing your thoughts in.

You might have a point with Criterion, but NFS?
Pffffhahahaha

 

[thelastword]

Physics calculations take up marginal resources. This is a big myth started by PC sim racers to diminish console games. You still hear comments even by people like Darwin of ISR saying things like "might have to scale back the physics for console" etc. The truth is that the calculations are so light weight that they run them much faster than the actual frame rate just because they can. GT5 was running its physics 1000 times a second for example. You could triple GT5's physics calculations and still have a high frequency physics model that can very easily run on console.

I know myself from playing around with Unity that I could add as many AI cars as I wanted and I could not impact on frame rate (provided I didn't draw them nor ran their AI calculations). Your simulation can be as realistic as you like and its not going to handicap the graphics (obviously to a certain extent).

Also: " whether it comes from being an early gen PS4 title or the fact there isn't enough grunt". These two are the same thing. Why do you think early titles are less pretty? Do you think devs just leave the chips idle so they can make the graphics of early games worse? More 'grunt' is unlocked by finding more efficient techniques as coders get more experienced with the hardware. As the metro last light devs have recently said, consoles enjoy a 2X performance advantage over PCs because of the static nature of the hardware and closer to the metal APIs. You will see games like DC absolutely blown away graphically on PS4 in a few years when the devs learn more tricks to pull on the hardware. So this grunt you talk about is there right now, I am sure DC could ran at 60fps if it were in development at the end of the PS4 life cycle rather than the start.

Great post right there. If I could add a bit, open world games are not necessarily more technically demanding than closed-level games. It's simply a developer's choice, yet while an open world will have to cater to more npc's, if you look at their ai, it's beyond basic at best. There may be more on the screen in terms of geometry, but there's a lot of shortcuts too, not all buildings can be entered or explored etc.., many are just paperweight in many of our recent open world games.

I appreciate open world games like Crisis and Just Cause a bit more based on their locale, it lends more credence to the term "open world" based on the location and the freedom that you have in the island/jungle type setting where you can take to the air, sea or roam large expanses of land in an instant and just feel that freedom there, yet our more heralded open world games doesn't capture that same freedom feel.

People asking for open world in a racing game really saddens me . 'Open world' really needs to die in racing games. Just have a sleek cool looking menu instead of making me drive for nothing untill i find a race.

Two great posts back to back, I will say that it is one of those things where I don't see the fascination. I love racing games, but I detest open world racing games and judging by recent sales of games like Driver San Francisco, Forza Horizon, Midnight Club L.A and Burnout Paradise when you compare them to the burnouts of the PS2 era it's really a huge step back in sales and appeal. The recent Need for Speed Rivals did not light any fire saleswise either.

 

[Y2Kev]

Open world racing games pretty much have to compromise on the racing due to the nature of open world design, but it does add other benefits that people enjoy. Not me, really, but I find most open world games lacking in general.

 

[freakzilla3000]

Looks incredible. This is one of the many reasons why I am getting a PS4.

 

[thelastword]

Open world racing games pretty much have to compromise on the racing due to the nature of open world design, but it does add other benefits that people enjoy. Not me, really, but I find most open world games lacking in general.

It was the underground series that really burnt me on open world racing games, (the series that started the craze actually). Traffic pop-ins, racing the clock then suddenly I crash into a lamp post that just popped-in or it may have been a car or another piece of geometry, it was simply insane.

Maybe it was the technology that existed back then but it wasn't a good impression on me. I'd take my track racing with good ai anyday, I will learn the track and improve my times, racing shouldn't be destruction derby, leave that for another genre.

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

Open world racing games pretty much have to compromise on the racing due to the nature of open world design, but it does add other benefits that people enjoy. Not me, really, but I find most open world games lacking in general.

I agree, the actual 'racing' in open world racers is always compromised to some extent. Perhaps that's due to the fact there's less focus on mastering layouts as in linear track racing games.

 

[le-seb]

Maybe it was the technology that existed back then but it wasn't a good impression on me. I'd take my track racing with good ai anyday, I will learn the track and improve my times, racing shouldn't be destruction derby, leave that for another genre.

You can't generalize from one game, though.

As a counterexample I've found that Burnout Paradise was a treat playing on the PS3.
From my point of view, it was near perfect on a technical level.

However, I'm with you regarding the race selection, there's nothing like a well done menu.
Having to drive through the whole map to select a race is quickly becoming tiresome, and the main reason why I've stopped playing this game.

I'm glad DriveClub uses a far more effective race type -> location > track selection menu (and so glad the races load so fast!).

 

[lukeskymac]

Great post right there. If I could add a bit, open world games are not necessarily more technically demanding than closed-level games. It's simply a developer's choice, yet while an open world will have to cater to more npc's, if you look at their ai, it's beyond basic at best. There may be more on the screen in terms of geometry, but there's a lot of shortcuts too, not all buildings can be entered or explored etc.., many are just paperweight in many of our recent open world games.

But don't you know that with that line of thinking, you're implying that Driveclub could have been open world and 60fps as well????

Open world racing games pretty much have to compromise on the racing due to the nature of open world design, but it does add other benefits that people enjoy. Not me, really, but I find most open world games lacking in general.

The one thing I enjoy in open world racing games, though, is just picking a car I like and mindlessly driving around. It reminds me of people requesting an "free roam" mode in DC where you just pick a car and a track and drive around as fast or as slow as you want, probably pausing multiple times to take some pics of the environment.

It was the underground series that really burnt me on open world racing games, (the series that started the craze actually). Traffic pop-ins, racing the clock then suddenly I crash into a lamp post that just popped-in or it may have been a car or another piece of geometry, it was simply insane.

I hate that even in the recent open world NFSs similar stuff happens. As in, cars (in)conveniently appearing at that sharp turn you are making and completely ruining your current race. Even in free roam they are a pain. Although, I do recall Rivals having a lot less of those issues.

 

[Windom Earle]

It was the underground series that really burnt me on open world racing games, (the series that started the craze actually). Traffic pop-ins, racing the clock then suddenly I crash into a lamp post that just popped-in or it may have been a car or another piece of geometry, it was simply insane.

Maybe it was the technology that existed back then but it wasn't a good impression on me. I'd take my track racing with good ai anyday, I will learn the track and improve my times, racing shouldn't be destruction derby, leave that for another genre.

For some reason NFS underground was actually one of the few "open world" racing games I enjoyed. Maybe because the concept wasn't so played out back then. God, NFS Most Wanted was bad...

 

[RadarScope1]

Great preview.

Has anyone ever addressed what the 30 fps lock might mean for remote play? There will of course be some lag because it's unavoidable, but I wonder if the fact that it's 30 fps on both the big and small screen means the experience will translate especially well to the Vita?

 

[serversurfer]

http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=128408021

From the The Tomorrow a Children Uses Cascaded Voxel Cones Tracing thread.

Awesome. TYVM <3

 

[leadbelly]

I'd agree with this. I forst noticed it in the Canada video they released a few months back. The mountains felt huge, instead of them just looking huge...it's hard to describe, and I have no idea how they've pulled it off, but you're right, the sense of scale is just spot-on. The environments are very realistic not just in how they look, but in how they feel, it looks like the car is actually racing in a part of the world....instead of just on a track with some pretty environments. Nothing looks artificial or flat.

A really good job from Evo. They should be proud.

I know what you mean. I was wondering if it has to do with the fact that they have simulated the curvature of the Earth. The mountains feel right because they sit right within the world, with a natural curvature.

 

[serversurfer]

But don't you know that with that line of thinking, you're implying that Driveclub could have been open world and 60fps as well????

Of course it could've been. Why do you think being open world has anything to do with frame rates? You can have an open world game that runs at 1000 Hz, or a broom closet that runs at 30 Hz.

World size and frame rates are almost completely unrelated.

 

[lukeskymac]

Of course it could've been. Why do you think being open world has anything to do with frame rates? You can have an open world game that runs at 1000 Hz, or a broom closet that runs at 30 Hz.

World size and frame rates are almost completely unrelated.

I guess I should have put /s at the end. Read above.

 

[DirtyLarry]

I am starting to wonder myself if they have this unbelievably gorgeous 30 FPS mode and are pushing all of the bells and whistles that they can with it because perhaps they are going to have a fairly good looking stripped down 60 FPS Morpheus supported mode down the line.

 

[pixlexic]

Open world racing games pretty much have to compromise on the racing due to the nature of open world design, but it does add other benefits that people enjoy. Not me, really, but I find most open world games lacking in general.

I am play NFS rivals right now thinking how much I really do not like open world racing games.

Just let me start a freaking a race! not go find one.

 

[Seanspeed]

Open world racing games pretty much have to compromise on the racing due to the nature of open world design, but it does add other benefits that people enjoy. Not me, really, but I find most open world games lacking in general.

'Compromise'? Wouldn't say that at all. Makes it sound like the racing is superior in closed-track racers, which is just a matter of opinion. Its simply different.

I am starting to wonder myself if they have this unbelievably gorgeous 30 FPS mode and are pushing all of the bells and whistles that they can with it because perhaps they are going to have a fairly good looking stripped down 60 FPS Morpheus supported mode down the line.

Would make much more sense to just make the game 60fps in the first place.

 

[nib95]

I am play NFS rivals right now thinking how much I really do not like open world racing games.

Just let me start a freaking a race! not go find one.

That's the main issue with open world design. Making the filler content and travel more exciting. Same issue with games like Skyrim, AC Black Flags, WatchDogs and all the rest. At first traveling around from location to location is fun despite being time consuming, because you're exploring, collecting, experiencing new things, but eventually fast travel becomes your best friend. Getting the balance right is a tough proposition.

 

[serversurfer]

I guess I should have put /s at the end. Read above.

lol My bad.

'Compromise'? Wouldn't say that at all. Makes it sound like the racing is superior in closed-track racers, which is just a matter of opinion. Its simply different.

You forget that a developer's time is finite. Any time spent designing the roads that lead between the racetracks is less time being spent on the tracks themselves.

You may find that a worthwhile compromise, but it's a compromise nonetheless.

 

[Seanspeed]

You forget that a developer's time is finite. Any time spent designing the roads that lead between the racetracks is less time being spent on the tracks themselves.

You may find that a worthwhile compromise, but it's a compromise nonetheless.

That's not a compromise. That's just a different type of game. Traveling around in between races is a core feature of open-world racing games and the entire point of having an open-world design.

You're compromising on the time you spend racing, but not necessarily compromising on the quality of the racing itself.

 

[serversurfer]

That's not a compromise. That's just a different type of game. Traveling around in between races is a core feature of open-world racing games and the entire point of having an open-world design.

You're compromising on the time you spend racing, but not necessarily compromising on the quality of the racing itself.

How does the developer spend less time working on the racing, yet still end up with a product of equal quality? That's a pretty neat trick.

 

[Navid]

Edit: Sorry for off-topic post, I seem to make quite a few of these in Driveclub threads which is probably for the best in hindsight..

Physics calculations take up marginal resources.

Not really, it just depends how deep you want to go with your simulation model, if we are speaking about the tire to track grip calculation in a vacuum then yeah, its hardly a big deal...

But if anyone wants to simulate everything that physically goes on in a race, collisions and accurate soft and rigid body destruction, tires shedding their rubber, flat spotting and punctures happening, the engine and gearbox being simulated with wear and damage in mind, the track surface evolving with weather accurately cm by cm rather than as a whole and it being affected by all the individual marbles, gravel and dust/dirt that are carried onto it and so much more all going on... now it's a whole other matter.

All racing games, sim or otherwise, take shortcuts on most of this stuff... because the resources needed if they were going to track, calculate and take into account interactions between all these millions of individual objects accurately rather than realistically it would be crazy in terms of resources needed.

 

[metareferential]

But you can! it's right there in the options.

I can play with a multi-monitor setup, but I can't choose to run the game at 4k, right?

 

[Seanspeed]

How does the developer spend less time working on the racing, yet still end up with a product of equal quality? That's a pretty neat trick.

The time spent on something doesn't automatically make it better than something else, especially when that 'something else' is a different type of thing. You also have no idea how much time these devs spent on what.

Its also worth remembering that in open-world racers, these roads the devs are building *are* the racetrack, basically. Designing the world is intrinsically linked to the quality of the racing itself.

There is no compromise. The 'fun' of these games is merely achieved in different ways.

 

[Y2Kev]

'Compromise'? Wouldn't say that at all. Makes it sound like the racing is superior in closed-track racers, which is just a matter of opinion. Its simply different.


Would make much more sense to just make the game 60fps in the first place.

Well, sure, it's an opinion, but I think I covered the "it's different" bit by suggesting that it adds other things that closed-circuit racers don't have. I don't find this to be a controversial use of the word compromised.

 

[Wax Free Vanilla]

So why aren't Evos supporting Logitech wheels the HID way like War Thunder? Is Sony stopping them because of their exclusive deal with Thrustmaster?

Explain Rushy.

 

[Bluenova]

Evo doing all the right things. Stormy night-time racing will be amazing.

Anyone concerned about the gameplay, well have you played motorstorm?

 

[ProfessorMoran]

The time spent on something doesn't automatically make it better than something else, especially when that 'something else' is a different type of thing. You also have no idea how much time these devs spent on what.

Its also worth remembering that in open-world racers, these roads the devs are building *are* the racetrack, basically. Designing the world is intrinsically linked to the quality of the racing itself.

There is no compromise. The 'fun' of these games is merely achieved in different ways.

If a developer spent less time on a track, then the quality would go down compared to more time spent on it, period. Development time is finite, when you spent your time on 100 miles of track versus 10000 miles you're able to put alot more detail into making it better. Yes you're able to dick around in an open world racer but the quality of the racing is not as good.

 

[Windom Earle]

Fact: GTA4/5 are the best open world racing games.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

If a developer spent less time on a track, then the quality would go down compared to more time spent on it, period. Development time is finite, when you spent your time on 100 miles of track versus 10000 miles you're able to put alot more detail into making it better. Yes you're able to dick around in an open world racer but the quality of the racing is not as good.

These statements sound pretty reasonable, but we're still assuming same number of developers and same number of track/gameplay designers per team. As well, all the developer time spent, in general, may not be aimed specifically on the gameplay itself and maybe more focused on the visuals and non-playable elements of the game.

If we're talking Horizon 2 versus Drive Club, one is a bigger refinement of an established template they can bring to start their title off faster and further into its final state than the other, which seems to be much less focused, in terms of development time, on gameplay and instead getting a new engine up and running which eats into overall time in development. Horizon 2 benefits from tested engine and development tools from Forza 5, and its car models and core gameplay simulations and features. That's time and work saved and turned into more focus on the game itself, which was, again, roughly massed out in the first game. I don't think anyone can say for certain that one has had more time in the oven than the other, when it comes to gameplay development time and its polish. It's also another thing to note that Horizon 1 featured plenty of what was essentially closed courses embedded into the open road map, while its sequel refines that with open world structure. I also wonder what the differences are in team size between the two, Evolution and Playground, because in addition to sharing its assets and tech, PG gets the assistance of Turn 10.

 

[le-seb]

^
Why are you even bringing some DC/FH2 comparison here?

Just pretend we're comparing Evolution Studios doing a closed track racer vs Evolution Studios doing an open road racer, because that's where the discussion is, and not "what if EvoS could reuse GT engine/assets...".
Thanks.

 

[benny_a]

I don't know why it's all of a sudden about Forza Horizon 2 vs. Driveclub instead of the concept of open world vs. closed circuit and the allocation of a fixed amount of resources for the two tasks.

Edit: Well, 10 seconds too late.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

^
Why are you even bringing some DC/FH2 comparison here?

Just pretend we're comparing Evolution Studios doing a closed track racer vs Evolution Studios doing an open road racer, because that's where the discussion is, and not "what if EvoS could reuse GT engine/assets...".
Thanks.

*sigh*
I guess I shouldn't have named them specifically in the post, but it was clear, to me, what was being talked about. I'll go ahead and edit for the hope that no one will derail further by following my own post.

 

[serversurfer]

The time spent on something doesn't automatically make it better than something else, especially when that 'something else' is a different type of thing. You also have no idea how much time these devs spent on what.

There are still some holes in your logic though. First, you seem to be assuming it's actually possible to design the perfect track, and once perfection has been achieved, no additional effort will ever improve it. Next, even if it never takes more than X hours to achieve racing perfection, you're still assuming the dev actually has >X hours to work with. Lastly, you're ignoring the fact that if the dev spent 900 hours designing nine perfect tracks and only 100 hours on the connecting roads, he could've built a tenth, perfect track instead of making a bunch of boring connectors.

Incidentally, skipping the connectors to focus on the tracks is also a compromise. All engineering is but a series of compromises.

Its also worth remembering that in open-world racers, these roads the devs are building *are* the racetrack, basically. Designing the world is intrinsically linked to the quality of the racing itself.

There is no compromise. The 'fun' of these games is merely achieved in different ways.

I find racing on city streets to be terrifically boring, and find racing on purpose built tracks to be far more engaging. Granted, the dev can make the entire city a giant racetrack and plop some houses and swing-sets alongside to make it seem like you're racing through suburbia, but I've raced through suburbia, and that's not what it's like. Thus, you're trading realism for fun; another compromise.

Again, you may find this particular compromise more appealing than another, but that doesn't make it any less of a compromise.

 

[red731]

The roads are wet and so am I.

 

[plainr_]

Fact: GTA4/5 are the best open world racing games.

This poster knows what's up.

 

[Shyakugaun]

Graphics are amazing but those Driving Mechanics still looks so sketchy, i really hope it handles well or that would ruin the game for me, hate driving games with shitty handles

 

[DirgeExtinction]

Graphics are amazing but those Driving Mechanics still looks so sketchy, i really hope it handles well or that would ruin the game for me, hate driving games with shitty handles

Doesn't look any different from other arcade-ish racers, to me.

Then again, I'm not much into racing games.

 

[Branson]

Graphics are amazing but those Driving Mechanics still looks so sketchy, i really hope it handles well or that would ruin the game for me, hate driving games with shitty handles

It really is the most important part of this game for me. I could care less if the clouds are moving in coordination to the waves or moon or whatever.

 

[TheCloser]

Fact: GTA4/5 are the best open world racing games.

That's because open world means you are free to do anything and gta is the best at it. Open world racing games are completely pointless. You can only race and there are no other activities apart from racing therefore it is not really open world. Open space racing? Sure but not open world. I associate the term open world with the freedom to do anything, go anywhere, etc. This is why gta is the best open world racers and that's a #truthfact.

 

[serversurfer]

Fact: GTA4/5 are the best open world racing games.

Maybe they've improved things since Vice City, but I found the driving in GTA to be pretty terrible. It was all but impossible to actually follow the traffic regulations and avoid having my Wanted level go up.

It was very unrealistic and disappointing, so I just pulled over in a park and listened to the radio. "Go anywhere and do anything," my ass.

 

[Wynnebeck]

Graphics are amazing but those Driving Mechanics still looks so sketchy, i really hope it handles well or that would ruin the game for me, hate driving games with shitty handles

It really is the most important part of this game for me. I could care less if the clouds are moving in coordination to the waves or moon or whatever.

Uh driving mechanics look sketchy? I'm not following.

 

[Windom Earle]

That's because open world means you are free to do anything and gta is the best at it. Open world racing games are completely pointless. You can only race and there are no other activities apart from racing therefore it is not really open world. Open space racing? Sure but not open world. I associate the term open world with the freedom to do anything, go anywhere, etc. This is why gta is the best open world racers and that's a #truthfact.

Yup, fully agreed. Also the driving physics are pretty fun and the game has crazy jumps, etc.

Maybe they've improved things since Vice City, but I found the driving in GTA to be pretty terrible. It was all but impossible to actually follow the traffic regulations and avoid having my Wanted level go up.

It was very unrealistic and disappointing, so I just pulled over in a park and listened to the radio. "Go anywhere and do anything," my ass.

Well yeah. That's why I didn't mention the old GTAs. Physics were already improved in San Andreas but 4/5 are on another level.