Driveclub's PRE ALPHA OLD CODE E3 DEMO doesn't look that impressive to me. .
Car models had more polygons when racing. GT5's car models are the same in photo mode and racing unlike Forza 4. Forza 4 has a much higher polygon count car in Vista then when you are actually playing the game.
hopefully there will be a demo to try it out.
I liked the original Motorstorm demo and bought it later.
So GT5 doesn't reduce polys for cars that are further away?
The detail on the car in GT5 is much better. Thx Toxa
I still think DriveClub looks better than both of them. Although GT5 has more realistic lighting.
Fuck me, I legitimately thought that first image was a photo and the second was a video game screenshot to compare it to.
GT's lighting is just insane.
The detail on the car in GT5 is much better. Thx Toxa
I still think DriveClub looks better than both of them. Although GT5 has more realistic lighting.
How about we compare both games when they are out?.
Woooo! GT5 vs FM4 2.0!
Seriously, people..?
Seriously people, bad recordings. Watch these two vids.
http://www.gamersyde.com/stream_driveclub_e3_gameplay_showfloor_external_view-30252_en.html
http://www.gamersyde.com/stream_driveclub_e3_gameplay_showfloor_cockpit_view-30251_en.html
Shadows and lighting are fantastic. Clouds even leaving shadows on meadows and the valley in the distance etc.
DriveClubs pitch is simple: its a pretty, super-realistic racing game that allows friends to connect with one another online. It may not sound like a novel concept, but the depth of DriveClubs social features is actually quite ambitious.
It is all about driving within groups of people and how it connects to your social life and your social networks, essentially, Evolution technical art director Alex Perkins told IGN. The whole social element is always to reward somebody and find somebody to connect with. As you learn and play better, you just adjust.
In MotorStorm we always tried to get the sense of feel and location and were doing the same thing now. Its just that were trying to treat it more cinematically. Its like if you go out for a film, you shoot whats really there and then you grade it and treat it and polarize it and do all those sort of coherent ritual grading and feeling to everything afterwards, and were trying to approach it more in that way.
You see that sunset? Perkins asked. Because of the way the clouds are formed, youre the only one who will ever see that sunset. Youll probably be the last one to see that. It gives us a bigger hill to climb if we have to try to make that thing work all the time every time, but it gives a sense of reward and depth every time you play. Its a cinemagraphic feeling to things. Its like we capture things as they are in real life, and then make it look and feel how we want it to.
For terrible racers such as myself, your car will acquire damage as you collide with every solid surface you can find, and all of those changes are reflected on the body of the car itself if you switch to DriveClubs third-person external view. Yes, DriveClub does allow you to opt out of its first-person perspective, though according to Perkins, first person was chosen as the default to give players more of a connection, as well as more of a sense of the cars speed and location, by showing them what theyd see if they were actually driving.
Evolution has mimicked the entire dashboard and interiors of the dozens of cars included in DriveClub, and Perkins explained that the studio worked with manufacturers to ensure that all cars were exactly as they should be.
All the lights, everything works as it does in the car. All the manufacturers were like if youre going to put that level of detail in, its got to work as it does in real life, he told us. We actually get the cab data they built. Everything from the manufacturer comes from their 3D cabinet. Wed take that and then convert it and put it into the cars. So we are exactly as accurate as the manufacturer.
Seriously people, bad recordings. Watch these two vids.
http://www.gamersyde.com/stream_driveclub_e3_gameplay_showfloor_external_view-30252_en.html
http://www.gamersyde.com/stream_driveclub_e3_gameplay_showfloor_cockpit_view-30251_en.html
Shadows and lighting are fantastic. Clouds even leaving shadows on meadows and the valley in the distance etc.
I think we need some direct feed videos. We won't know which one looks better until release date, but I have confidence Evolution could improve the visuals.
But the irony is that Driveclub HAS this kind of stuff due to its dynamic lighting, while other racers discussed here don't. You can in fact see light play on trees as you approach them, lights and shadows coverage moving over the meadows etc. I do however think that they either don't play up this aspect of visuals enough, or the dynamic lighting can't compete snapshot-for-snapshot with offline precomputed lightmaps, or simpy their lighting takes too much of a toll on the engine so other things have to suffer (image quality or whatever else people are complaining)Drive Club, beyond its technical problems, is nothing impressive in the setting chosen.. A sad sad countryside with dull colors and not a lot of light.. It's the light direction that works most of the time in a game. Here you don't have any light play on the distant trees, nothing to make people dream a little.
Fuck me, I legitimately thought that first image was a photo and the second was a video game screenshot to compare it to.
GT's lighting is just insane.
IGN just did a good piece about this game (Drive Club, the one game that started this thread)
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/06...+twitter&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social
this doesn´t sound so bad..
Motorstorm was truly an underrated racing series. Probably because last gen was shooters galore. I hope racing games make a comeback because I really like racing games.
There is some direct-feed broll available (not allowed to distribute it as is though). It shows the track from the E3, who looks boring, and another in the middle of snowy mountains who look quite a bit better due to the much more vivid lighting and lots of trees alongside the track. It's all replay footage though, so it's got a lot of effects going on that wouldn't happen during gameplay (dof, especially).
Still, I think the biggest issue is basically that this track sucks visually.
But the irony is that Driveclub HAS this kind of stuff due to its dynamic lighting, while other racers discussed here don't. You can in fact see light play on trees as you approach them, lights and shadows coverage moving over the meadows etc. I do however think that they either don't play up this aspect of visuals enough, or the dynamic lighting can't compete snapshot-for-snapshot with offline precomputed lightmaps, or simpy their lighting takes too much of a toll on the engine so other things have to suffer (image quality or whatever else people are complaining)
To me, on these blurry offscreen videos the game looks great, and I can clearly tell how less 'fake' it looks due to all the lighting changes, compared to Forza or GT. But I think that so many people complaining about visuals can't be wrong and that in person things don't look so good, as it probably falls apart somewhat, upon closer look to a non blurry screen.
There is some direct-feed broll available (not allowed to distribute it as is though). It shows the track from the E3, who looks boring, and another in the middle of snowy mountains who look quite a bit better due to the much more vivid lighting and lots of trees alongside the track. It's all replay footage though, so it's got a lot of effects going on that wouldn't happen during gameplay (dof, especially).
Still, I think the biggest issue is basically that this track sucks visually.
lol love post like these, you can always use them to tell the people who played the game vs the ones who didn't