Graphics Discussion/Comparison Thread, v. 2

[Pureshooter]

DC looks better no doubt, but the only time the real disparity hits is during rain effects masking their environments. Their rain effects are downright crazy good looking, everything else is average to insane.

This is how I feel as well. DC has the best rain and lighting effects (particularly from the sun) in any racing game. When it positions itself to put these effects on display, it is really incredible.

However, in pretty much every other area it is just okay. In particular there were a few night races I tried (no rain) where everything just looked flat and somewhat dull. If you want to focus just on the highlights of DC then it does look incredible, but it does not maintain that level of graphic fidelity throughout.

 

[Frozpot]

DC looks better no doubt, but the only time the real disparity hits is during rain effects masking their environments. Their rain effects are downright crazy good looking, everything else is average to insane.

I've got to say though, I'd like to see T10's art team have a sit down with DC's just to get some pointers on their materials. F6 looks great, but last night I saw some cargo netting over a window, and it looked like plastic. That's a silly oversight, there is no reason cargo netting should be shiny.

Did they use photogrammetry for their materials in DC? They look nearly perfect. I'd love to see others follow suit, but that stuff comes at a cost, so perhaps lower iterations of it. I'd also like to know what tech they are using for their reflections. The care they took to replicate light really is unmatched.

 

[de3d1]

This is how I feel as well. DC has the best rain and lighting effects (particularly from the sun) in any racing game. When it positions itself to put these effects on display, it is really incredible.

However, in pretty much every other area it is just okay. In particular there were a few night races I tried (no rain) where everything just looked flat and somewhat dull. If you want to focus just on the highlights of DC then it does look incredible, but it does not maintain that level of graphic fidelity throughout.

Yeah if you see DC in any comparison to Forza, it'll be with rain 90% of the time because it needs to be. The other 10% are under ideal conditions were the lighting in DC happens to be really good and on a portion of a track that looks great. Forza can't compete with that, its consistently great looking versus insane on limited areas. That's why DC has a lot of "wow" moments, it looks average, then suddenly awesome, lots of up and downs.

 

[de3d1]

I've got to say though, I'd like to see T10's art team have a sit down with DC's just to get some pointers on their materials. F6 looks great, but last night I saw some cargo netting over a window, and it looked like plastic. That's a silly oversight, there is no reason cargo netting should be shiny.

Did they use photogrammetry for their materials in DC? They look nearly perfect. I'd love to see others follow suit, but that stuff comes at a cost, so perhaps lower iterations of it. I'd also like to know what tech they are using for their reflections. The care they took to replicate light really is unmatched.

Some of their materials and environments looks awesome, agreed, but like I said in my previous post you get to a different portion of the track and it looks like they let the regular artist's apprentice do some of the work. Insane, almost real, then shotty.

Tons of screens like this or worse, granted there's some motion blur going, but a lot of this looks last gen, but you drive another half kilometer and suddenly it looks insane.

 

[Frozpot]

Some of their materials and environments looks awesome, agreed, but like I said in my previous post you get to a different portion of the track and it looks like they let the regular artist's apprentice do some of the work. Insane, almost real, then shotty.

Tons of screens like this or worse, granted there's some motion blur going, but a lot of this looks last gen, but you drive another half kilometer and suddenly it looks insane.

That doesn't look bad, imo, just not the uber-real fanboys will have you believe. That is a LOT of blur though. Still, I know that screens rarely give an accurate impression anymore.
The PBR doesn't look as good as that used in FarCry 4 in that shot. Of course FC4 still blows my mind sometimes, but it also ran at 30fps.

DC has some great foliage, too. My main issue with the game is that the graphics are pretty much the ONLY thing people talk about, whereas Forza 6, while it still looks phenominal, is almost always talked about from a gameplay/features standpoint. Tells you all you need to know, really.

 

[Kvally]

I've got to say though, I'd like to see T10's art team have a sit down with DC's just to get some pointers on their materials. F6 looks great, but last night I saw some cargo netting over a window, and it looked like plastic. That's a silly oversight, there is no reason cargo netting should be shiny.

Did they use photogrammetry for their materials in DC? They look nearly perfect. I'd love to see others follow suit, but that stuff comes at a cost, so perhaps lower iterations of it. I'd also like to know what tech they are using for their reflections. The care they took to replicate light really is unmatched.

I don't think Turn 10 artists are limited. I think Forza is limited by console status. They have to give and take to compensate. There is a reason that Witcher 3 doesn't look as good as The Order. In the case of Forza, if the team gave up the huge simulation racing physics engine, the damage physics, cut the car count in half, eliminated ForzaVista, eliminated 90,000 liveries, and custom parts and tuning, dumped tire deformation, they would free up the resources to have their rain look similar to DriveClub's rain.

What is the point of great graphics (The Order), when you get a metascore of 63, and then Witcher 3 with a metascore of 92....or in the case of DriveClub (score of 71 and broken for months and months) and Forza with a score of 8 8.

These are consoles. There is only so much they can do on them. I am sure if Turn 10 had access to a powerful gaming PC (that is, if MS let them put Forza on PC), and they could focus all their resources there, then they could get a game that is the size and scope of Forza, and sprinkle on the rain of DriveClub. Forza has to give, DriveClub has to give. They give in different ways and different areas. Look where it put them in the eyes of the critics and gamers, review wise.

 

[Frozpot]

I don't think Turn 10 artists are limited. I think Forza is limited by console status. They have to give and take to compensate. There is a reason that Witcher 3 doesn't look as good as The Order. In the case of Forza, if the team gave up the huge simulation racing physics engine, the damage physics, cut the car count in half, eliminated ForzaVista, eliminated 90,000 liveries, and custom parts and tuning, dumped tire deformation, they would free up the resources to have their rain look similar to DriveClub's rain.

These are consoles. There is only so much they can do on them. I am sure if Turn 10 had access to a powerful gaming PC (that is, if MS let them put Forza on PC), and they could focus all their resources there, then they could get a game that is the size and scope of Forza, and sprinkle on the rain of DriveClub. Forza has to give, DriveClub has to give. They give in different ways and different areas. Look where it put them in the eyes of the critics and gamers, review wise.

Eh, sure, but when it comes to materials like this, it's often a matter of where you set your parameters. They simply didn't set it right in the instance of the Cargo netting. It is literally a value you change. The specular level is too high and the roughness is too low. What you are describing would apply to going to real-time lighting instead of a baked scenario like Forza has. The netting I refer to is dynamically lit already. It's a matter of how you handle your settings, not adding anything. I figure it's just someone who didn't spend much time thinking about that particular element, but it IS an attention to detail thing. The team behind DC really spent a lot of focus on getting the little things just right on another level.

What is the point of great graphics (The Order), when you get a metascore of 63, and then Witcher 3 with a metascore of 92....or in the case of DriveClub (score of 71 and broken for months and months) and Forza with a score of 8 8.

I have already said this. It's perfectly fine to give DC it's props when it really sets the bar visually. I often talk about the give and take between visuals/performance and what makes something impressive can vary depending on implementation and the balance struck. On a whole and as a game, Forza dumps on DC from a great height, imo, but that doesn't mean I can't appreciate what they've achieved as well.

 

[de3d1]

If you haven't played DC in rain, you are not a true graphics whore.

 

[starseeker]

If you haven't played DC in rain, you are not a true graphics whore.

I would like to, but I am worry that the TV & PS4 will be damaged by the rain.

 

[Kvally]

but it IS an attention to detail thing. The team behind DC really spent a lot of focus on getting the little things just right on another level.

But see, I don't agree "entirely". They might have focused on SOME things that look right on another level. But then they lost focus on other things that are not even at level. Have you seen some of the graphics otherwise in DC outside of the rain? Flat last gen roads that are void of any surface details, flat 2D trees in many areas, some cars with hubcap like rims when in motion (almost like universal asset for a certain speed). Sometimes the game looks completely last gen. Even dual shockers have stated that the game has to be seen in motion to look that good because that is where they add the motion blur, effects, film grain, camera shaking.

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/10...n-motion-on-ps4-than-in-gameplay-screenshots/

When you see inconsistencies like that, I fail to find that focus or attention to detail. Sometimes cars look like they are floating with no shadows.

But yes, at times, the game looks great too. It reminds me of GT 5 sometimes and the premium and standard cars, and tracks.

 

[Frozpot]

But see, I don't agree "entirely". They might have focused on SOME things that look right on another level. But then they lost focus on other things that are not even at level. Have you seen some of the graphics otherwise in DC outside of the rain? Flat last gen roads that are void of any surface details, flat 2D trees in many areas, some cars with hubcap like rims when in motion (almost like universal asset for a certain speed). Sometimes the game looks completely last gen. Even dual shockers have stated that the game has to be seen in motion to look that good because that is where they add the motion blur, effects, film grain, camera shaking.

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/10...n-motion-on-ps4-than-in-gameplay-screenshots/

When you see inconsistencies like that, I fail to find that focus or attention to detail. Sometimes cars look like they are floating with no shadows.

But yes, at times, the game looks great too. It reminds me of GT 5 sometimes and the premium and standard cars, and tracks.

I suspect that "hub cap" look is due to motion blur, and many games this gen look much better in motion because of the nature of using materials over textures. You have to see the light moving over the surface to see/appreciate the detail. Forza looks better in motion too. That's what Dual Shockers was talking about. How stills don't capture the way light plays over surfaces. We can talk about how games look in stills all day, but we don't play them in stills, and if you can "fake" your way to an incredible looking game, that's good design.

You are right though, I don't have the game, and I've only seen vids of the weather in DC. I've only played the demo at the store, and I found it underwhelming compared to the hype- even to FM5 playing next to it. I'd truely have to see them side by side to see how they compare, as I know that Forza 6 looks much better in person than in vids.

 

[Sasquatch Montana]

Driveclub always looked worse. Worse then Forza 5.

It lost every other meaningful comparison (fewer cars, worse physics, absent splitscreen) "We are targetting 60fps". It never lived up to the open world promise and dynamic weather at launch (which came months later) with a year long delay and shipped without basic features like a replay mode (dafuq?) and a broken online mode.

For this (Day 1 direct feed gameplay if you must know)

I would say Driveclub fans will lie even to themselves, if they truly believe it's "a generation ahead" of Forza 5, let alone 6 or Horizon 2, but since it seems Evolutions days are numbered, there won't be that many in the long term.

 

[de3d1]

Driveclub always looked worse. Worse then Forza 5.

It lost every other meaningful comparison (fewer cars, worse physics, absent splitscreen) "We are targetting 60fps". It never lived up to the open world promise and dynamic weather at launch (which came months later) with a year long delay and shipped without basic features like a replay mode (dafuq?) and a broken online mode.

For this (Day 1 direct feed gameplay if you must know)

I would say Driveclub fans will lie even to themselves, if they truly believe it's "a generation ahead" of Forza 5, let alone 6 or Horizon 2, but since it seems Evolutions days are numbered, there won't be that many in the long term.

It does look really great in certain instances though. There are short parts of tracks that under the right conditions(rain + night) look near real. I will say, if they attempted to lock the framerate at 60fps, it wouldn't even look like the same game at all, much less doubling the amount of cars onscreen etc etc.

 

[This_Hard_Land]

Driveclub always looked worse. Worse then Forza 5.

It lost every other meaningful comparison (fewer cars, worse physics, absent splitscreen) "We are targetting 60fps". It never lived up to the open world promise and dynamic weather at launch (which came months later) with a year long delay and shipped without basic features like a replay mode (dafuq?) and a broken online mode.

For this (Day 1 direct feed gameplay if you must know)

I would say Driveclub fans will lie even to themselves, if they truly believe it's "a generation ahead" of Forza 5, let alone 6 or Horizon 2, but since it seems Evolutions days are numbered, there won't be that many in the long term.

Really? Are we really doing...this?

1) The lowest form of fanboy graphical debate/comparison, is when both sides go and look for the worst looking pic they can find of the opposing game. Why would denigrate yourself like this? Especially when we have 1080p, 60fps video on youtube where people directly compare both games. Go back to page 5 and look at the video I posted. DriveClub is entirely on another level compared to anything else on console right now within the genre.

2) "It lost every other meaningful comparison (fewer cars, worse physics, absent splitscreen)". I might even agree with you here if this was typed anywhere except the Graphics Discussion/Comparison Thread. Do number of cars, worse physics, and absent splitscreen really have anything to do with graphics? Shouldn't we be focusing on car models, lighting, environments, and effects? That seems a little more appropriate in a thread like this.

3) "We are targetting 60fps". Yeah...they probably were.

4) "It never lived up to the open world promise..." Umm...when did Evolution Studios ever promise an open world game?

5) "...and dynamic weather at launch (which came months later) with a year long delay." Wait, you think we should compare Forza 6's visuals to the DriveClub of yesteryear? How does this make sense?

6) "...and shipped without basic features like a replay mode (dafuq?) and a broken online mode."..................Graphics Discussion/Comparison Thread.


The only thing I'll agree with the DriveClub detractors here is that DriveClub does look uneven. It does not look significantly better than Forza 6 in three area's...Certain tracks aren't that impressive. The game doesn't shine when the sun is directly overhead, and I'd even say that night racing doesn't look distinguishable when you're isolated on track and there are no other cars around. However, in all other area's, the game is best in class. The video's don't lie.

 

[This_Hard_Land]

Please watch the above video and tell me if, at 2:08, that's really Forza 6. It might be Forza 4 and the fanboy who created the video is just trolling.

 

[Dno69]

Horizon 2 would be a better comparison though. Even though it's open world and DC is closed circuit.

I'd like to see Projet Gotham return for a like for like comparison.

The dynamic lighting and weather in DC is sweet as hell though.

 

[de3d1]

Please watch the above video and tell me if, at 2:08, that's really Forza 6. It might be Forza 4 and the fanboy who created the video is just trolling.

Well, its definitely geared to make Forza look bad, but I like how all the videos of Driveclub are required to be in the rain for a proper comparison.

Watch the end of the video to see where this guy's loyalty stands lol.

 

[This_Hard_Land]

Here's another video from someone a little less trollish.

It's tough to say but I think Forza 6 might have an edge in the rain department. They're definitely going for something a little different and it definitely looks better when cars are stopped and you're in the car.

With that being said, I think I've now seen enough comparison video's. DriveClub, in my opinion, looks close to a generation apart. Forza 6 almost looks like a launch title and DriveClub looks like an end of generation title.

 

[Dno69]

I think it does as well. But I think it has a lot to do with the different art styles. And different type of racing.

It will be interesting to see Need for Speed on Xbox One and see what kind of image quality that game pushes.

 

[Dno69]

I actually think rain is something that Forza 6 doesn't do very well. Except for how it behaves on the windshield. The puddles are cool. The track looks pretty good

Forza looks best when the sun is low and the shadows are long. It's not dynamic but it's pretty.

But are great looking. One more than the other. One is more fun than the other.

 

[Dno69]

THL, can we get some sunny day comparisons.

 

[TDbank24]

There's some things DriveClub does better and some things Forza 6 does better. Like people have already said. I know which game is better, and that's Forza 6. Oh, this is the graphics debate thread? Nevermind me then.

 

[This_Hard_Land]

THL, can we get some sunny day comparisons.

Here you go.

 

[de3d1]

I want to see a similar looking environment for each to compare, I'll look around. That track in DC is one of the best imo.

 

[Dno69]

I like the motion blur used in DC. It makes the 30fps look smooth and realistic.

Forza's 60 fps is so nice though.

We need a Project Gotham and DC 2 comparison in the future.

 

[The Living Tribunal]

Here you go.

In third person break lights reflecting off the pavement.
Realized Project Cars is the only one to do that.

 

[Oblong]

I wish some Indie company would produce a racing game with 1 unlicensed car running on 1 corridor track. Have it run at 10fps with floaty physics. Make it an Xbox One exclusive. But pump the crap into the graphics with all those high tech catch words to make it absolutely stunningly photo-realistic. Then wait to see if THL goes on an on for 3 pages arguing it is the most beautiful racing game ever made.

Just a dream I had.

 

[This_Hard_Land]

I wish some Indie company would produce a racing game with 1 unlicensed car running on 1 corridor track. Have it run at 10fps with floaty physics. Make it an Xbox One exclusive. But pump the crap into the graphics with all those high tech catch words to make it absolutely stunningly photo-realistic. Then wait to see if THL goes on an on for 3 pages arguing it is the most beautiful racing game ever made.

Just a dream I had.

I think it's generally accepted that if your game runs at a solid 30 fps, you can't really knock it in terms of graphics in that area. I think if you're game starts running less than 30, especially 10 (that's awful), people start criticizing the graphics by saying the game chugs or is choppy.

It's certainly a weird grey area that everyone has a different opinion on though. Forza 6 hit 60 and it benefits in certain areas, but Turn 10 clearly had to make graphical compromises in order to reach that number.

 

[The Living Tribunal]

I think it's generally accepted that if your game runs at a solid 30 fps, you can't really knock it in terms of graphics in that area. I think if you're game starts running less than 30, especially 10 (that's awful), people start criticizing the graphics by saying the game chugs or is choppy.

It's certainly a weird grey area that everyone has a different opinion on though. Forza 6 hit 60 and it benefits in certain areas, but Turn 10 clearly had to make graphical compromises in order to reach that number.

Meh. IMO 60fps is needed in a racer.
I've finally played DriveClub and while it does look better than Forza 6 (in certain areas) I personally can't tolerate the 30fps.
Game looks good but still feels slower than other 60fps racers.

 

[Bgamer90]

Forza 6 could have looked a whole lot better than Forza 5 but Turn 10 decided to put the extra power into more cars on the track, better physics (driving and rain/puddles), and better A.I. and it paid off as Forza Motorsport 6 plays better than any other sim console racer (and the game's reviews pretty much back this up).

I find it a bit sad to see the game being constantly compared to racers that have different goals/focuses -- though, at the same time it pretty much explains (at least to me) why Gran Turismo suffered after GT3. The series focused more on visual details than racing/gameplay thus causing the series to drop in quality from how it was during the PS2 days (at least in my and many other peoples opinion). Seems like it's what a lot of (other) people want though.