Damn, just looked like different times of day. the forest in the CG looked better, but that may be the seasons, and the time of day was different, but still, really nice job. Now what would be extra good would be to see that with Nvidia's 3D display, like they had at GDC.
That's amazing. One thing I noticed at the end: The in-game shot of the asphalt shows a strong specular reflection of the sun, where the actual footage does not. The time of day seems to match. So maybe a little too much specular on the race course for the sake of showing off?
elysium: exaggerated realism is almost always a good idea for games and that was a pretty cool vid, thanks for sharing AZ, though i think the vid compression was on its side
latest issue of Popular Science has a cover story on real racing vs virtual racing.. skimmed the first few paragraphs when i grabbed it from the mail box, but they chose to compare Forza to realism instead of GT4 (gt4's physics engine recalculates 60 times a second.. Forza's does it 240 times a second)... and now you know why, after playing the demo at e3, i cant wait for this game to come out.. and have no interest in getting gt4
i tried a demo for forza, it came with mech assault 2, i cant even get around the frickin corner, only tried once though heh, i guess the power sliding mechanics are COMPLETELY different that what i'm used to, been playing burnout 3 too much also, may have something to do with it, looks sweet though
[ QUOTE ]
gt4's physics engine recalculates 60 times a second.. Forza's does it 240 times a second
[/ QUOTE ]
So GT4 runs at ~60fps and even if it recalculated million times per second you would hardly notice anything. Its just a number to boast with.
Anyways it doesnt matter how many times but WHAT you calculate.
Would have liked popular science to also include gran turismo 4 and test that out also along side forza. Would have been nice to see the comparision. as it is you'll have gt fanboys crying foul over this article and video. Can't really compare the games until forza is released to fairly critique and compare the two games. Although to find un-biased people to do that comparision.
I'm glad you all are appreciating the work. It really will be a good looking game, and I can't wait until it's released. I got a chance to work on a bunch of the tracks, and it was quite fun, but I swear that if I have to touch another guardrail, I'll jump off of a bridge.
What the designers were going for is more of a racing sim than an arcade style racer. The physics rock, and you can't do a lot of the gamey style techniques that work in some other racers. But for a game, it's as close to real racing as you can get.
Good work Ryno, looks like it was worth the grunt work. I loved the specular on the skid marks. Not realistic per se, but certainly pretty. Thanks for sharing this AstroZombie.
Toomas: does that GTR game have a clutch you have to worry about while shifting? Cause i swear i havent seen a game that does since Viper Racing, and that's from back when Sierra made good games...
Well i think it has a clutch BUT most race cars have sequential gearboxes that dont requier clutch while shifting :P
Anyways you can always download the demo to find out for sure.
Replies
Scott
Scott
gt4's physics engine recalculates 60 times a second.. Forza's does it 240 times a second
[/ QUOTE ]
So GT4 runs at ~60fps and even if it recalculated million times per second you would hardly notice anything. Its just a number to boast with.
Anyways it doesnt matter how many times but WHAT you calculate.
What the designers were going for is more of a racing sim than an arcade style racer. The physics rock, and you can't do a lot of the gamey style techniques that work in some other racers. But for a game, it's as close to real racing as you can get.
edit: posted at the same time as toomas, funny....
Anyways you can always download the demo to find out for sure.