GT5 - Very 2D Trees

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]

[QUOTE="Hakkai007"]

I play on 1680x1050 and 8XCSAA which can make a big difference in some areas. Even going from 8XMSAA to 8XCSAA made a difference.

Hakkai007

Wut? 16xCSAA has more or less the same Quality of 8xMSAA.

Did I say 16x?

Also the difference is better seen in motion. Pictures cannot do the AA justice.

And here are some nice pics of one of the cars.

Erm, i have an nvidia card too, one alot more powerful than yours, i know what the various settings look like in motion.

You were saying that going to 8xcsaa made a big difference from 8xmsaa yet 16xcsaa only just matches 8xmsaa, those options are for performance, Nvidia's big thing about them was that 16xcsaa could reach 8xmsaa levels while only taking the performance hit of 4xmsaa. you might be getting confused with 8xQcsaa but 8xcsaa is worse than 8xmsaa but better than 4xmsaa

16xQCsaa>8xMSAA>8xQCSAA>16xCSAA>8xCSAA>4xMSAA>2xMSaA>non

Nerdy argument.Fightingfan

This is gamespot... we play games...what do you expect

Trees again ha? Never understood people's obsession over trees. They are probably one of the dumbest things you can have in a race track. Skid off the course and smash in to a tree.

Trees again ha? Never understood people's obsession over trees. They are probably one of the dumbest things you can have in a race track. Skid off the course and smash in to a tree.

Kahuna_1

The game is a sim which is about realism, many tracks in real life have trees, and if its rally its given it will have trees VERY close to the track. So it makes sense to have trees. Not having trees would be the dumbest thing ever for a racing sim or rally game.

Its just constant excuses.

[QUOTE="Kahuna_1"]

Trees again ha? Never understood people's obsession over trees. They are probably one of the dumbest things you can have in a race track. Skid off the course and smash in to a tree.

Snagal123

The game is a sim which is about realism, many tracks in real life have trees, and if its rally its given it will have trees VERY close to the track. So it makes sense to have trees. Not having trees would be the dumbest thing ever for a racing sim or rally game.

Its just constant excuses.

Yeah I know what you are saying, I personally would never put trees anywhere near a track if I designed one. Again though, how can the PS3 render 3D trees with everything else going on. There simply is not enough ram. People need to be reasonable.

[QUOTE="Hakkai007"]

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]

Wut? 16xCSAA has more or less the same Quality of 8xMSAA.

ferret-gamer

Did I say 16x?

Also the difference is better seen in motion. Pictures cannot do the AA justice.

And here are some nice pics of one of the cars.

Erm, i have an nvidia card too, one alot more powerful than yours, i know what the various settings look like in motion.

You were saying that going to 8xcsaa made a big difference from 8xmsaa yet 16xcsaa only just matches 8xmsaa, those options are for performance, Nvidia's big thing about them was that 16xcsaa could reach 8xmsaa levels while only taking the performance hit of 4xmsaa. you might be getting confused with 8xQcsaa but 8xcsaa is worse than 8xmsaa but better than 4xmsaa

16xQCsaa>8xMSAA>8xQCSAA>16xCSAA>8xCSAA>4xMSAA>2xMSaA>non

They must have screwed up with the naming then.

8XCSAA is listed after 8XMSAA and is harder on performance it also looks better.

this is how it is listed in the settings.

2MSAA -> 4xMSAA -> 8XMSAA -> 8XCSAA -> 16XCSAA -> 8XQCSAA

people i hope you realise that 2D trees doesnt mean BAD environments... have you seen the track details like the Rome track??? forget for 1 second the trees and watch all the rest buildings, track/ground detail, lighting and other small details which make the tracks in GT5 look so realistic and beautiful.. but no people apparently only care about trees around the track... eehhh

I'm more bothered by the artificially restricted track. Necessary evil I guess. But they should at least change the impact sound. And ****in' sparks flying. You're hitting a wooden fence, not a rock. Or turn the fence into a low stone wall maybe? And make the thing crumble a bit when you slam into it so it feels even less artificial.

And get rid of the invisible walls, that type of thing has no business being in a game from 2010.

I'm not too worried about 2D trees in a racing sim. If this was Bear Grylls Forest Exploration 2 than maybe I would care a little

BPoole96

It would be just as realistic as man vs. wild then.

Stupid thread. The trees at 1:25 were pretty poor but all the others looked decent by PD's standard of foliage.

I won't have time to look at trees when I'm busy trying not to crash.

I won't have time to look at trees when I'm busy trying not to crash.

ChaltierX

Its a shame that when you do crash (into a tree) not only will the tree look bad but the damage on the car as well.

lol

"2D Trees = Fail Game" =/= Fact

This is a lame arguement. Where's that Comic?

[QUOTE="erglesmergle"]

The trees look more 2D than ever. Check out 1:25. Even though Im not going to be driving up to trees to observe them, it does feel CHEAP that trees are two intersecting pieces of paper. I can see the game being marked down for this.

Thoughts?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oD6AyNb7o4&feature=player_embedded#!

Jrfanfreak88

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]

[QUOTE="Hakkai007"]

Did I say 16x?

Also the difference is better seen in motion. Pictures cannot do the AA justice.

And here are some nice pics of one of the cars.

Hakkai007

Erm, i have an nvidia card too, one alot more powerful than yours, i know what the various settings look like in motion.

You were saying that going to 8xcsaa made a big difference from 8xmsaa yet 16xcsaa only just matches 8xmsaa, those options are for performance, Nvidia's big thing about them was that 16xcsaa could reach 8xmsaa levels while only taking the performance hit of 4xmsaa. you might be getting confused with 8xQcsaa but 8xcsaa is worse than 8xmsaa but better than 4xmsaa

16xQCsaa>8xMSAA>8xQCSAA>16xCSAA>8xCSAA>4xMSAA>2xMSaA>non

They must have screwed up with the naming then.

8XCSAA is listed after 8XMSAA and is harder on performance it also looks better.

this is how it is listed in the settings.

2MSAA -> 4xMSAA -> 8XMSAA -> 8XCSAA -> 16XCSAA -> 8XQCSAA

No, 8xCSAA is worse than 8xMSAA.

True 8x Multisampling (8xQ) is better than 8x CSAA and usually slightly worse than 16xCSAA (each of which only use 4x Multisampling.) Unlike 8xCSAA, 8xQ does not use any coverage samples..it is pure multisampling.

Quality-wise, AA levels would be listed something like this:

4x4SSAA > 3x3SSAA> 32xS > 16xS > 8xSQ > 2x2SSAA > 32xQCSAA > 32xCSAA > 16xQCSAA > 16xCSAA > 8xQ > 8xCSAA > 4xMSAA > 2xMSAA

GT5 is one of the best looking console games ever made. Are you criticizing it's graphics? :?ArtisTool

Trees are so overrated, right DiRT 2?

:P

lol

"2D Trees = Fail Game" =/= Fact

This is a lame arguement. Where's that Comic?

LegatoSkyheart

2D Tree's?! So not buying it. Because it totally effects the gameplay and everything.

[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]

lol

"2D Trees = Fail Game" =/= Fact

This is a lame arguement. Where's that Comic?

shinrabanshou

*the comic*

Yes! That's the one!

[QUOTE="shinrabanshou"]

[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]

lol

"2D Trees = Fail Game" =/= Fact

This is a lame arguement. Where's that Comic?

LegatoSkyheart

*the comic*

Yes! That's the one!

2D Tree's?! So not buying it. Because it totally effects the gameplay and everything.

Easyle

The trees look like textures versions of the trees on that Drakhan game for the SNES, but that's ok, probably wouldn't pay too much attention to the trees while playing the game.

Lolz at this thread.

racing game. about the cars, and the track.

not a tree game.

[QUOTE="stereointegrity"]im more focused on racing then the trees ohwell cars still look better then any out thereHakkai007

Not as good looking as Dirt 2 cars.

Trees are so overrated, right DiRT 2?

:P

Stevo_the_gamer

Wow really looks better than both 360/ps3 (FM3/GT5) can you tell me which version is this please?

OMG NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! the horrible 2d trees will cause the game to be unplayableJ-WOW

...not even close... Dirt 2's lighting engine is great, making them look better, but no, the models are terrible...zero_snake99

The models terrible? Not as good as GT5, sure, but no one was saying they were. Dirt 2 balances great looking environments with great lighting, effects and damage with good looking cars. Its far more balanced, its harder to find flaws when all aspects full inline with each other. GT5 has great looking cars and not much else, the environments look poor and the damage weve seen so far awful and so it stands out so much more.

People worrying about trees and actually thinking that those Dirt 2 screens look great is just crazy. I'm sorry but that Dirt 2 pics look good but not realistic at all.And oh yea trees are over rated :)Now I'm moving on to the next thread. Sorry, but this game is just gourgous and if you that nit picky about the trees when you are clearly over looking the entire package, then by all means don't buy this game and save your money.

P.S. what the heck one more

GreyFoXX4

holy ****, you mean that isn't real life?

^WTF, even i didn't think GT5 looked this good.

replay mode is going to be insane.

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"] ...not even close... Dirt 2's lighting engine is great, making them look better, but no, the models are terrible...Snagal123

The models terrible? Not as good as GT5, sure, but no one was saying they were. Dirt 2 balances great looking environments with great lighting, effects and damage with good looking cars. Its far more balanced, its harder to find flaws when all aspects full inline with each other. GT5 has great looking cars and not much else, the environments look poor and the damage weve seen so far awful and so it stands out so much more.

So another words Dirt2 is balanced down to the lowest common dominator? And that is fine, while your over looking the beauty of the entire package of GT5 just to nit pick the oddities, and this is fine aswell? Doing things like this just keep progression stagnant, and doesn't allow innovation to drive graphics or the industry further. GreyFoXX4

Which is the lowest common dominator?

[QUOTE="GreyFoXX4"] So another words Dirt2 is balanced down to the lowest common dominator? And that is fine, while your over looking the beauty of the entire package of GT5 just to nit pick the oddities, and this is fine aswell? Doing things like this just keep progression stagnant, and doesn't allow innovation to drive graphics or the industry further. Snagal123

Which is the lowest common dominator? 360 or PS3?

Lmao off, but when trying to look at the big pics of Dirt2 here on GS, the large image that appeals is of Halo3 lol. This happens to everyone that I click on.

Lmao off, but when trying to look at the big pics of Dirt2 here on GS, the large image that appeals is of Halo3 lol. This happens to everyone that I click on.

GreyFoXX4

[QUOTE="Snagal123"]

[QUOTE="GreyFoXX4"] So another words Dirt2 is balanced down to the lowest common dominator? And that is fine, while your over looking the beauty of the entire package of GT5 just to nit pick the oddities, and this is fine aswell? Doing things like this just keep progression stagnant, and doesn't allow innovation to drive graphics or the industry further. GreyFoXX4

Which is the lowest common dominator? 360 or PS3?

Well i haven't posted any pics so not sure what your on about there.

I never said Dirt 2's models were bad, i said they were not as good as GT5, no racing game is, and thats GT5s flaw, everything is put into the cars. I like abit of consistency and balance it makes for a better looking game overall not just racing games.

GT5 on SW has been hyped as the greatest game ever, but it isin't.Its also being hyped as selling millions. I hate to tell everyone this but the days of the racing games are over, while they use to be a massive industry driver they aren't anymore, the FPS/TPS has taken over. Racing games don't hold the power they use to. I know it will sell well, just not as well as some think, times have changed.

Good luck winning any races if you're just focusing on trees.

[QUOTE="Hakkai007"]

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]

Erm, i have an nvidia card too, one alot more powerful than yours, i know what the various settings look like in motion.

You were saying that going to 8xcsaa made a big difference from 8xmsaa yet 16xcsaa only just matches 8xmsaa, those options are for performance, Nvidia's big thing about them was that 16xcsaa could reach 8xmsaa levels while only taking the performance hit of 4xmsaa. you might be getting confused with 8xQcsaa but 8xcsaa is worse than 8xmsaa but better than 4xmsaa

16xQCsaa>8xMSAA>8xQCSAA>16xCSAA>8xCSAA>4xMSAA>2xMSaA>non

Velocitas8

They must have screwed up with the naming then.

8XCSAA is listed after 8XMSAA and is harder on performance it also looks better.

this is how it is listed in the settings.

2MSAA -> 4xMSAA -> 8XMSAA -> 8XCSAA -> 16XCSAA -> 8XQCSAA

No, 8xCSAA is worse than 8xMSAA.

True 8x Multisampling (8xQ) is better than 8x CSAA and usually slightly worse than 16xCSAA (each of which only use 4x Multisampling.) Unlike 8xCSAA, 8xQ does not use any coverage samples..it is pure multisampling.

Quality-wise, AA levels would be listed something like this:

4x4SSAA > 3x3SSAA> 32xS > 16xS > 8xSQ > 2x2SSAA > 32xQCSAA > 32xCSAA > 16xQCSAA > 16xCSAA > 8xQ > 8xCSAA > 4xMSAA > 2xMSAA

Hmm then the gaming developers are dumber than you and messed up on the AA order. They should get fired and you should take their job. ^^

[QUOTE="GreyFoXX4"]

Lmao off, but when trying to look at the big pics of Dirt2 here on GS, the large image that appeals is of Halo3 lol. This happens to everyone that I click on.

ferret-gamer

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"][QUOTE="GreyFoXX4"]

Lmao off, but when trying to look at the big pics of Dirt2 here on GS, the large image that appeals is of Halo3 lol. This happens to everyone that I click on.

Hakkai007

the low-resolution guy on the right ruins it.

[QUOTE="Hakkai007"]

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"] GT5 may have better car models but Dirt 2's enviroment and interaction with said environment are far superior.HelloMoto56

the low-resolution guy on the right ruins it.

Well when you have like 50 of those guys running around they make them low res for a reason.

I'm not too worried about 2D trees in a racing sim. If this was Bear Grylls Forest Exploration 2 than maybe I would care a little

BPoole96