Support NeoGAF

[Tripolygon]

I think this is not a fact, it is an opinion..

No it is not an opinion, it is a fact and you are just being stubbornly obtuse as is emblematic of a lot of forum discussions. People's inability to see where they are wrong. And no, Driveclub does not change LOD when you go into photomode or during replays.

This is the correct English version of the statement you both were so giddy about.

Huge strides have also been made in landscape expressions. See each and every leaf on a tree as it sways in the wind. Weather, time and the age of the tree are considered when reproducing it in the game, right down to its bark. Even the asphalt possesses unique characters, regarding its size, grain and distribution of the asphalt surface. Thanks to advanced data capturing and the perceptional talents of the artists, Gran Turismo approaches landscape reproduction from every aspect.

While you may not notice the level of detail in the cars and tracks while driving in normal gameplay, you will see it in replays and in Photo Mode where you can study the images up close.

And heck even the literal translation does not imply that these detail does not exist during gameplay, only that they may not be perceptible but they are there upon closer inspection. You were just eager to run with a narrative that doesn't exist.

 

[Synth]

And no, Driveclub does not change LOD when you go into photomode or during replays.

Unless you're playing time trial, yes it does. This has been confirmed earlier in this thread, and the differences aren't subtle.

 

[Noobcraft]

Unless you're playing time trial, yes it does. This has been confirmed earlier in this thread, and the differences aren't subtle.

It's dependant on the number of cars on the track. More cars = less detailed car models in gameplay. When switching to photomode you can watch them swap in real time which is kind of cool (and totally not unique to Driveclub)

Found a gif

 

[Sebmugi]

I noticed that the LOD on cars appear from 7 cars on tracks .. but in no case there is a change on the rest the vegetation or other element of the scenery ^^
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=823807&page=176

The green mark indicates the photo mode without post processing
one car

with competitors

 

[Synth]

I noticed that the LOD on cars appear from 7 cars on tracks .. but in no case there is a change on the rest the vegetation or other element of the scenery ^^

This isn't really true either. Whilst I don't think there's any difference to the geometry, there are differences to the texture filtering and shadow detail (and especially range) that have a notable impact on the scenery.

Photomode's in pretty much every game leads to significant improvements across the board. They're an idealised version of what the game would look like if the realities of performance weren't a factor.

 

[Chittagong]

Eh, just downloaded Driveclub again, this time for my PS4 Pro for play on my 85" 4K TV. Pretty blurry, in my opinion. Are there any proper 4K racing games on PS4 Pro?

 

[Sebmugi]

This isn't really true either. Whilst I don't think there's any difference to the geometry, there are differences to the texture filtering and shadow detail (and especially range) that have a notable impact on the scenery.

Photomode's in pretty much every game leads to significant improvements across the board. They're an idealised version of what the game would look like if the realities of performance weren't a factor.

What is good in the photo mode of driveclub is that as long as the camera is in motion the treatment post process does not start .. it is easy to see the changes when there are

 

[Synth]

What is good in the photo mode of driveclub is that as long as the camera is in motion the treatment post process does not start .. it is easy to see the changes when there are

That may be true, but that never makes it to the photomode shots that then populate threads, and are used for direct comparisons.

 

[Sebmugi]

That may be true, but that never makes it to the photomode shots that then populate threads, and are used for direct comparisons.

This is not false and yet in some cases I find that the photo mode treatment removes or smooths out some details that are more pronounced without .. Especially with light and rainy conditions

I would do 2/3 in 4k PNG comparative to see ^^

 

[sems4arsenal]

Hope Rushy's team take their time and build a decent engine. Every Codies title looks average graphically.

 

[Yautja_Warrior]

Hope Rushy's team take their time and build a decent engine. Every Codies title looks average graphically.

I just hope Codemasters let them do a Motorstorm type game again. Something crazy like MS: Apocalypse, with all the weather and destruction, with different paths opening each lap + current gen graphics would be awesome.

 

[Tripolygon]

Unless you're playing time trial, yes it does. This has been confirmed earlier in this thread, and the differences aren't subtle.

I'm aware that DC changes car LOD in some game modes and based on number of visible cars on track, but we aren't talking about cars but tracks and scenery.

That may be true, but that never makes it to the photomode shots that then populate threads, and are used for direct comparisons.

That is why video comparisons are the best. The world is in motion and everything is dynamic. I also find that nobody is deluded that the photomode screenshots are representative of the actual image quality. In fact what most people are excited about DC is when it is in motion and dynamic weather kicks in.

 

[boneyjangles]

2007.

I'm glad someone posted PGR - stunning looking, creative and interesting city tracks, good memories. Those gifs confirm I don't have too much nostalgia bias with my memories, very pretty and 'real' looking.

I'm a long term GT fan, if anything, but if you push me to answer what racing games I've enjoyed most over the years it might be PGR, MotoGP Ultimate Racing Technology, and Rallisport challenge. All on Xbox, all individual, all memorable and brilliant in their own ways, all now dead. (and Driveclub, the spiritual successor to PGR in my head, now dead too unfortunately).

Racing as a genre is a broad category. And one I used to get excited about more, you'd get stuff like Burnout popping up and mixing things up. Now we seem to exist in this state of there being a bunch of GT-like games trying to out compete each other for how knobbly the curbside detail on Willow is. I'll just stick with GT I guess? Same shit on multi-platform, or same shit on Xbox doesn't really excite me (visually or in general).

 

[Korezo]

Eh, just downloaded Driveclub again, this time for my PS4 Pro for play on my 85" 4K TV. Pretty blurry, in my opinion. Are there any proper 4K racing games on PS4 Pro?

Probably wipeout.

 

[Spukc]

If DC would get a Pro Patch to fix its image quality it would be king for me.

yup dc with a pro patch would be killer

 

[Synth]

I'm aware that DC changes car LOD in some game modes and based on number of visible cars on track, but we aren't talking about cars but tracks and scenery.

That's fair. I didn't really consider the context as you only stated that Driveclub doesn't change LOD, rather than the tracks/scenery doesn't. Though there are still numerous other aspects of photomode that have a notable affect on the tracks/scenery in photomode versus ingame.

I agree with your point though, that there's nothing wrong with stating that you typically can't appreciate many of the details that exist within a game (especially racers) during normal gameplay, so there's nothing really to mock regarding that quote. I do also agree with MaLDo however in that there can often be a poor balance between things that the user will never notice during actual gameplay, and other aspects that will stare them in the face at pretty much every moment.

That is why video comparisons are the best. The world is in motion and everything is dynamic. I also find that nobody is deluded that the photomode screenshots are representative of the actual image quality. In fact what most people are excited about DC is when it is in motion and dynamic weather kicks in.

I completely disagree in regards to nobody being deluded by photomode screenshots. If that weren't the case they wouldn't be used so prominently to face-off aspects of a game's graphics directly against another's (because what would be the point if their invalidity was obvious to everyone that saw the comparison?). We've been seeing this happen constantly over the course of this thread, including the recent nonsense comparison Yiazmat made a few pages back. That one was obviously quickly pointed out as ridiculous due to just how egregious it was, but there have been loads other less blatant comparisons made (many of them by dumb) that were essentially co-signed by a lot of peeple in here. It's what's previously lead to the whole argument regarding what is and isn't affected by photomode in Driveclub (with it being previously argued that essentially nothing other than AA/AF was changed). It's also why there are so many impressions from people that picked up Driveclub later exclaiming how it doesn't look anywhere near as good as its portrayal on these forums lead them to believe it would.

Both still shots and videos unfortunately come with their own flaws. The videos comparisons usually come from youtube, where compression tends to obscure finer details from one, whilst normalising IQ issues from another. It's definitely not as bad as gifs tend to be though, we as has been shown again on this page, a previous gen game can appear as though it boxes with the best looking racers of the current generation, due to how few of the game's weakness show through, whilst making its strength look even stronger than usual. It becomes especially problematic now, with various games now running in 4K, with details that wouldn't even be fully resolved on a 1080p feed even in direct from the console itself.

 

[Inf3cted_b3ast]

I get that photo mode shouldn't be used in comparisons but I haven't seen someone use photomode of one game and gameplay of another game in a comparison. It's always photomode of both games. This extends to gifs as well. People say driveclub looks good only in small gifs but when a gif is made comparing Driveclub to another game how come only Driveclub benefits from that?

 

[Synth]

I get that photo mode shouldn't be used in comparisons but I haven't seen someone use photomode of one game and gameplay of another game in a comparison. It's always photomode of both games. This extends to gifs as well. People say driveclub looks good only in small gifs but when a gif is made comparing Driveclub to another game how come only Driveclub benefits from that?

It basically depends on what the game's strengths and weaknesses are, and how they are affected by the process of being compressed into gifs or Youtube. Games with a lot of larger graphical embellishments (and this includes stuff like unnaturally large raindrops) will benefit from being compressed into a gif which hides less impressive texturing, than a game that has a lot of smaller details (highly detailed surface textures, or tiny streaks of rain) as the same things hiding aliasing, also cause these details to basically become invisible, which gives the impression that the game simply lacks details and just looks flat in general. This was most apparent with a gif of FM6 that was floating around earlier in the thread (expired now so I can't show it here), where the road had basically been reduced to a flat grey block with no details, with the same happening for the green grass on either side. The shiny surface made it obvious it was supposed to be raining, but you couldn't actually see any rain as those details hadn't survived the process of being compressed into a video and then downsized into a gif, much like any aliased edges tend not to.

If you were to put FM7 gif against the PGR4 gif recently posted, most of what makes FM7 obviously more impressive during actual gameplay would be lost. You wouldn't notice how much better the resolution is, how much more details there are in the textures, it being twice the framerate, etc. Instead it would run the very real risk of looking comparatively basic and bland, because it would have mostly grass to the side of the track (with individual details lost, so it simply looks like green mush) whilst PGR4 has all these buildings, railing and shit that in the gif look damn near photorealistic, despite how poor they actually look ingame by today's standards.

As for photomode vs gameplay, that was exactly what Yiazmat tried to pull recently, but had also happened quite a lot in comparisons with Projects Cars and Need for Speed 2015 previously. Regardless though, even photomode vs photomode is stupid, because the different games sacrifice different aspects to remain playable, and the heavier these sacrifices lean towards image quality, the more photomode will benefit it in comparison.

 

[soundscream]

It basically depends on what the game's strengths and weaknesses are, and how they are affected by the process of being compressed into gifs or Youtube. Games with a lot of larger graphical embellishments (and this includes stuff like unnaturally large raindrops) will benefit from being compressed into a gif which hides less impressive texturing, than a game that has a lot of smaller details (highly detailed surface textures, or tiny streaks of rain) as the same things hiding aliasing, also cause these details to basically become invisible, which gives the impression that the game simply lacks details and just looks flat in general. This was most apparent with a gif of FM6 that was floating around earlier in the thread (expired now so I can't show it here), where the road had basically been reduced to a flat grey block with no details, with the same happening for the green grass on either side. The shiny surface made it obvious it was supposed to be raining, but you couldn't actually see any rain as those details hadn't survived the process of being compressed into a video and then downsized into a gif, much like any aliased edges tend not to.

If you were to put FM7 gif against the PGR4 gif recently posted, most of what makes FM7 obviously more impressive during actual gameplay would be lost. You wouldn't notice how much better the resolution is, how much more details there are in the textures, it being twice the framerate, etc. Instead it would run the very real risk of looking comparatively basic and bland, because it would have mostly grass to the side of the track (with individual details lost, so it simply looks like green mush) whilst PGR4 has all these building railing and shit that in the gif look dear near photorealistic, despite how poor they actually look ingame by today's standards.

As for photomode vs gameplay, that was exactly what Yiazmat tried to pull recently, but had also happened quite a lot in comparisons with Projects Cars and Need for Speed 2015 previously. Regardless though, even photomode vs photomode is stupid, because the different games sacrifice different aspects to remain playable, and the heavier these sacrifices lean towards image quality, the more photomode will benefit it in comparison.

Yeah I love PGR but I hate those gifs. They have been posted on GAF in many threads and I know that's not how the game looks when your actually playing it. It still holds up well, but posting it in gif form makes it look amazing. Gifs are kind of the worse way to show what a game actually looks like because your never going to be playing a game in such a small window (unless its OG doom and your pc cant handle it)

 

[eso76]

2007.

Incredible.
Yeah, gif and all but the shit PGR was pulling on the 360 was just crazy.
Though I believe the second gif might be from the intro, that was basically the photomode equivalent in video form (better IQ, motion blur etc).

 

[icecold1983]

Incredible.
Yeah, gif and all but the shit PGR was pulling on the 360 was just crazy.
Though I believe the second gif might be from the intro, that was basically the photomode equivalent in video form (better IQ, motion blur etc).

It did look really good. I remember trying it and it blowing away any racing game on the pc too

 

[Sebmugi]

Well, I did some comparison with the camera free photo mode, with and without post treatment .. has you to see. ^^

On the left, the "before" and on the right, therefore, the "after" treatment

 

[Tripolygon]

Well, I did some comparison with the camera free photo mode, with and without post treatment .. has you to see. ^^

On the left, the "before" and on the right, therefore, the "after" treatment

Shadow, AA and AF appear to improve after treatment.

It is very clear that gifs and direct captures do not hide or "normalize" Driveclub IQ issues any more than it does other games. DC IQ is bad in stills before photomode refines the AA, AF and Shadow. While these methods of comparison are inherently flawed because compression kill details, this thread is not and has never been about objective scientific methods of comparison it was just a means to curtail thread derailing from each games respective OT while also allowing people to express their thoughts on these games. Lets not pretend somehow that comparisons that favor DC have been bias while others have been purely objective. When we are comparing lighting, weather effects, environmental details and car detail (texture quality and polygon); screenshots, gifs and videos are enough to highlight the differences between these games. When we are comparing image quality like shadows, AA, AO, AF, gifs are a flawed means to do that but direct capture screenshots and high-quality videos with high bitrate are enough to highlight them as Digital Foundry shows all the time.

High bitrate capture from gamersyde.
https://www.gamersyde.com/hqstream_forza_motorsport_6_rain_fail-35586_en.html
https://www.gamersyde.com/hqstream_driveclub_norway_2_race-33760_en.html

 

[Klocker]

It basically depends on what the game's strengths and weaknesses are, and how they are affected by the process of being compressed into gifs or Youtube. Games with a lot of larger graphical embellishments (and this includes stuff like unnaturally large raindrops) will benefit from being compressed into a gif which hides less impressive texturing, than a game that has a lot of smaller details (highly detailed surface textures, or tiny streaks of rain) as the same things hiding aliasing, also cause these details to basically become invisible, which gives the impression that the game simply lacks details and just looks flat in general. This was most apparent with a gif of FM6 that was floating around earlier in the thread (expired now so I can't show it here), where the road had basically been reduced to a flat grey block with no details, with the same happening for the green grass on either side. The shiny surface made it obvious it was supposed to be raining, but you couldn't actually see any rain as those details hadn't survived the process of being compressed into a video and then downsized into a gif, much like any aliased edges tend not to.

If you were to put FM7 gif against the PGR4 gif recently posted, most of what makes FM7 obviously more impressive during actual gameplay would be lost. You wouldn't notice how much better the resolution is, how much more details there are in the textures, it being twice the framerate, etc. Instead it would run the very real risk of looking comparatively basic and bland, because it would have mostly grass to the side of the track (with individual details lost, so it simply looks like green mush) whilst PGR4 has all these buildings, railing and shit that in the gif look damn near photorealistic, despite how poor they actually look ingame by today's standards.

As for photomode vs gameplay, that was exactly what Yiazmat tried to pull recently, but had also happened quite a lot in comparisons with Projects Cars and Need for Speed 2015 previously. Regardless though, even photomode vs photomode is stupid, because the different games sacrifice different aspects to remain playable, and the heavier these sacrifices lean towards image quality, the more photomode will benefit it in comparison.

Great post

 

[l2ounD]

As for photomode vs gameplay, that was exactly what Yiazmat tried to pull recently, but had also happened quite a lot in comparisons with Projects Cars and Need for Speed 2015 previously. Regardless though, even photomode vs photomode is stupid, because the different games sacrifice different aspects to remain playable, and the heavier these sacrifices lean towards image quality, the more photomode will benefit it in comparison.

Are you talking about these? Are those PC shots from photomode?

 

[Fredrik]

Brand new engine


It's highly unlikely I'm afraid. There is no dev-team at Sony on DC anymore, and we're busy working on something new.

You're doing multiplats now, aren't you?
Please please please release on PC too and just go nuts maximizing the engine! I want a new "But can it run Crysis?" situation!
And full steering wheel and triple screen support of course.

 

[DD]

You're doing multiplats now, aren't you?
Please please please release on PC too and just go nuts maximizing the engine! I want a new "But can it run Crysis?" situation!
And full steering wheel and triple screen support of course.

Rushy and some of the Evo guys are with Codemasters now, so... yep, it will probably come to PC too.

 

[Fredrik]

Rushy and some of the Evo guys are with Codemasters now, so... yep, it will probably come to PC too.

Just probably? Since I started playing Forza Horizon 3 on PC and saw the benefit of having more power even with my old 980ti I don't think I will touch console racers anymore, well unless they're Play Anywhere I guess so I still have the PC version. And I mean just think about something Driveclub- or Motorstorm-like running on PC pushing a 1080ti to it's limits!

 

[Momentary]

Really enjoy seeing Porsche in games again. The in-game blur here looks pretty good to me.

 

[Synth]

Are you talking about these? Are those PC shots from photomode?

I was referring to this post, which was then followed by this. Though looking back on it, it wasn't a photomode shot, but a non-gameplay menu shot, but it still a daft comparison to be making.

 

[Shaneus]

Yeah I love PGR but I hate those gifs. They have been posted on GAF in many threads and I know that's not how the game looks when your actually playing it. It still holds up well, but posting it in gif form makes it look amazing. Gifs are kind of the worse way to show what a game actually looks like because your never going to be playing a game in such a small window (unless its OG doom and your pc cant handle it)

Thankfully there are plenty of not-GIFs of PGR4 in HD to swoon over. Still does look really good to me.

 

[23qwerty]

It's dependant on the number of cars on the track. More cars = less detailed car models in gameplay. When switching to photomode you can watch them swap in real time which is kind of cool (and totally not unique to Driveclub)

Found a gif

wow I haven't seen this gif in like 2 years

 

[HF2014]

Wait. Was looking for more info about GT Sports, and read it wont have dymanic time and weather. But will we be able to start any race tracks with static weather and time?

 

[LordOcidax]

so 215 pages in we all decided driveclub is still unbeaten?.

Amen

 

[Gestault]

Wait. Was looking for more info about GT Sports, and read it wont have dymanic time and weather. But will we be able to start any race tracks with static weather and time?

I don't think we have a definite yes or no on whether we can choose exact times, and we don't know if weather options are universal across all tracks (and still no confirmation of wet racing).

I'd bet we'll have announcements on both those fronts closer to launch.

 

[Sebmugi]

Speaking of GT sport, here are 2/3 screens of version 1.08 ^^

 

[JlNX]

I don't think we have a definite yes or no on whether we can choose exact times, and we don't know if weather options are universal across all tracks (and still no confirmation of wet racing).

I'd bet we'll have announcements on both those fronts closer to launch.

Has there been any images of the weather released yet at all, because I know they have said there will be weather just not dynamic. It's getting close to release and I had hoped they would have shown it in a trailer by now.

EDIT: This is all I could find: http://www.dualshockers.com/gran-turismo-sport-will-have-damage-and-weather-polyphony-optimizing-for-60-fps/

We also learn that the inclusion of weather is planned, but this time around Polyphony Digital isn't going to implement dynamic weather, and we'll be able to select it at the start of the race. This decision was taken because dynamic weather involves a trade off in terms of quality, and the development team decided to prioritize quality this time around.

 

[Gestault]

Has there been any images of the weather released yet at all, because I know they have said there will be weather just not dynamic. It's getting close to release and I had hoped they would have shown it in a trailer by now.

If you mean wet weather, it's straight-up not confirmed to be in the game. The closest is that there's a type of tyre for it. Otherwise we've seen various levels of sunny-to-overcast, and pre-race fog in the trailer.

 

[HF2014]

Has there been any images of the weather released yet at all, because I know they have said there will be weather just not dynamic. It's getting close to release and I had hoped they would have shown it in a trailer by now.

EDIT: This is all I could find: http://www.dualshockers.com/gran-turismo-sport-will-have-damage-and-weather-polyphony-optimizing-for-60-fps/

Yeah, i hope there is weather. It would be a major step back. Honestly dont care about it being dynamic honestly, but having no option to set tracks at night, different weather would be very dissapointing.

 

[Sebmugi]

I put it so that every choice of time of day and night will have, variant in term of weather, rain, mist, etc.. It would be good like that, for me

 

[rashbeep]

If you mean wet weather, it's straight-up not confirmed to be in the game. The closest is that there's a type of tyre for it. Otherwise we've seen various levels of sunny-to-overcast, and pre-race fog in the trailer.

Link?

Seriously disappointing if true

 

[HF2014]

If you mean wet weather, it's straight-up not confirmed to be in the game. The closest is that there's a type of tyre for it. Otherwise we've seen various levels of sunny-to-overcast, and pre-race fog in the trailer.

If there is no weather, no purchase for me. No seriously, whats the problem with every new generations of console, a new game from last gen have to come tone down from it? Look NHL, same crap, missing tons of modes you were having on previous gen. Forza? Missing tons of tracks from 360 version. Now a racing game with no weather because its the first one? Not only i found having 19 tracks a bit dissapointing , unless for sure they plan to release some as DLCs, but just a set time per track would be boring. I mean look at the competition. On no seriously, its a no buy for me if i dont see it.

 

[JlNX]

Yeah, i hope there is weather. It would be a major step back. Honestly dont care about it being dynamic honestly, but having no option to set tracks at night, different weather would be very dissapointing.

Yep, I'm still waiting for a racing game that really pushes the boat out when it comes to weather. Racers don't seem to expand upon rain, storms, sunny, overcast, dry or wet and rarely you get fog or snow/snow-storm. It's a great way to have the same track feel completely different and give a lot more visual variety. I want to see humid weather with heat rays and water vapour, cold weather were the track has ice in places and mist, windy weather that actually effects the surroundings blowing stuff on to the track or in front of the driver, sandstorms or sleet/hail, of course all of these can affect the simulation as well. Even better if they started mixing multiple of them together like snow and lighting storms, I had hoped with FH3 Blizzard Mountain we would get snow and snow storms on some tracks in FM7. If a racer is really going to push the boat out when it comes to a deep weather system then It's probably going to be a Horizon (as a open world racer) or Evo's new game .

 

[fresquito]

Yep, I'm still waiting for a racing game that really pushes the boat out when it comes to weather. Racers don't seem to expand upon rain, storms, sunny, overcast, dry or wet and rarely you get fog or snow/snow-storm. It's a great way to have the same track feel completely different and give a lot more visual variety. I want to see humid weather with heat rays and water vapour, cold weather were the track has ice in places and mist, windy weather that actually effects the surroundings blowing stuff on to the track or in front of the driver, sandstorms or sleet/hail, of course all of these can affect the simulation as well. Even better if they started mixing multiple of them together like snow and lighting storms, I had hoped with FH3 Blizzard Mountain we would get snow and snow storms on some tracks in FM7. If a racer is really going to push the boat out when it comes to a deep weather system then It's probably going to be a Horizon (as a open world racer) or Evo's new game .

That would be Project CARS 2.

 

[DD]

Yep, I'm still waiting for a racing game that really pushes the boat out when it comes to weather. Racers don't seem to expand upon rain, storms, sunny, overcast, dry or wet and rarely you get fog or snow/snow-storm. It's a great way to have the same track feel completely different and give a lot more visual variety. I want to see humid weather with heat rays and water vapour, cold weather were the track has ice in places and mist, windy weather that actually effects the surroundings blowing stuff on to the track or in front of the driver, sandstorms or sleet/hail, of course all of these can affect the simulation as well. Even better if they started mixing multiple of them together like snow and lighting storms, I had hoped with FH3 Blizzard Mountain we would get snow and snow storms on some tracks in FM7. If a racer is really going to push the boat out when it comes to a deep weather system then It's probably going to be a Horizon (as a open world racer) or Evo's new game .

Take a look at Dirt 4 if you haven't yet (and Driveclub, of course).

 

[Vorg]

If there is no weather, no purchase for me. No seriously, whats the problem with every new generations of console, a new game from last gen have to come tone down from it? Look NHL, same crap, missing tons of modes you were having on previous gen. Forza? Missing tons of tracks from 360 version. Now a racing game with no weather because its the first one? Not only i found having 19 tracks a bit dissapointing , unless for sure they plan to release some as DLCs, but just a set time per track would be boring. I mean look at the competition. On no seriously, its a no buy for me if i dont see it.

Because they have to update the assets for the new generation of consoles and that takes a lot of time, effort and money. Look at all the shit gt5 got for the ps2 models.

 

[Noobcraft]

Because they have to update the assets for the new generation of consoles and that takes a lot of time, effort and money. Look at all the shit gt5 got for the ps2 models.

Hasn't slowed T10 down at all.

 

[Synth]

Hasn't slowed T10 down at all.

To be fair, it kinda has which is why it's taken so long for things like wet weather and night racing to hit Forza Motorsport at all. If anything the more rapid recent feature expansions is probably a result of splitting the tech with Playground Games over the last few iterations.

That said though, it's still not excusable at this point. A Gran Turismo equivalent of FM5 would be reasonable in the first year or two of the PS4's life... but we're in year four now. Even considering the generation jump, that's more than enough time to have a far more feature complete entry than Gran Turismo Sport is. Polyphony are just crazy slow.

 

[Inf3cted_b3ast]

Hasn't slowed T10 down at all.

Didn't Forza 5 launch with 200 cars or something?

 

[Noobcraft]

Didn't Forza 5 launch with 200 cars or something?

Yeah, but they've added something like 500 cars since 2013. Polyphony has had insanely long Dev cycles as of last gen.