So riddle me this Sup Forumsentlemen

So riddle me this Sup Forumsentlemen

Why are car sims seemingly so ahead regarding graphics? Pic related I just learnt that it was a screenshot from GT which blew my fucking mind.

So yeah HOW

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=rzZCGAl38Ko
videogameszone.de/Gran-Turismo-5-PS3-133781/News/Gran-Turismo-5-Die-haesslichsten-Grafik-Fails-der-Rennsimulation-802252/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

The developers focus heavily on physical simulations, and as such, they are very good at mathematics. This lends them to also being very good at realistic graphics simulation.s

because they have one object they can spend 16ms rendering. And mechanical things don't need many animations

Keep in mind that racing games also have some of the best grass, sunlight, rain, water, and texturing of any genre.

Well yeah, they don't have much else to render besides that, so it gets a lot more attention and focus.

cars aren't real so they aren't hard to make look real

But how real can if our eyes aren't real.

They are certainly ahead than most games in terms of graphics, but screenshots are slightly better than in-game graphics. Their screenshot modes usually up the visuals that cannot be sustained during live gameplay.
A good example is Assetto Corsa, you can get mods for it that let you take extremely realistic looking screenshots but those visual filters don't work during regular gameplay because they are too demanding. And pretty much all new racing games come with Screenshot modes now that let you swing the camera around.

>cars aren't real

>small maps that seem large because the track often doubles-down on itself through the corners
>only a few moving models
>good use of fog and distance blurring
>the impetus to accurately recreate actual vehicles that exist in as high a quality as possible
>with the camera low to the ground, imperfections such as texture tiling on grass are less visible
>with the distance from the track to structures like audience stands being quite far, you are never close enough to see the low res textures
>

That's a nice picture
Please post more

Because mechanical/inorganic objects are a lot easier to make look real. They have way less details than a person or animal/creature would. A car is very simple in comparison. So if you have good lighting and textures it will look real. Also they have technology to rip textures straight from a photo or something along those lines, the road textures look realistic because they are actual textures of a road. Usually the trees and grass and such looks less convincing, and it's further away from the two points of focus, the car and the road. So really it's just these two things they have to nail.

Good fucking Lord

Can't say I have any more m8 sorry
And most people thought it was a real car too so never bothered to look up similar stuff

Anything that isn't human and is pretty easy to render because it doesn't have many moving parts nor does it have any emotion or personality. How they get the lighting, shading, and shadows on point is pretty impressive though. Also the physics in driving sims are insane when you think about it. BUT when you get to things like "cosmetic damage" then it becomes pretty hard to render that. I hope BeamNG destruction physics are incorporated into driving sims in the near future.

...

Mostly the shaders and lighting.
Other genres of games are addicted to brown bloom lighting.

High res textures for car-shaped things are pretty easy to do.

The lighting and physics are more impressive imo, at least for true sims.

because they don't have to render as much. tracks are just black tarmac, green trees, and blue sky blurred together during 99% of gameplay. the only thing the player notices with any consistency is their car, which is modeled immaculately.

also gt's photo mode cheats by upping the render quality, actual gameplay doesn't look as good

Wait, which GT is it?
I stopped playing racing games, because i couldn't upload my own decals, but this changes everything if we can.

>i thought the screenshot was a real photo

fugg this new fangleld techno fooled me

GPU Mining, duh

They render the video in the farm and just stream it to your monitor in real time

Besides what everyone else has said, racing games often use 3d models (for the vehicles) based on the real deals, either from the gaming company getting access to the manufacturer models themselves, or by 3d scanning the vehicles.

The lighting on the back of that car looks amazing. I'm sure that's some sort of screenshot mode that looks better than actual gameplay. Considering it's a console game, there are probably jaggies everywhere and billboard trees during actual gameplay. But it sure is a pretty screenshot.

Theatricality and deception. Most of them plaster the screen with effects and rely on you moving fast to not notice that everything actually kind of looks like shit apart from the cars. And in the photo modes they just crank up the resolution and filtering because they no longer have to worry about rendering anything else.

gt sport

Holy shit, too bad driving games are utterly boring without a good steering wheel and the one I have gave up on working properly some time ago. Doing the same thing over and over again also gets boring, at least in fps you can have some fun by changing up tactics or weapons. In racing if you wanna win, you'll have to have a specific set up for each track and weather combo and stick with them unless you wanna get laughed at.

>first time seeing GT Sport
oh boy

Also there's not much in the way of player interaction with a lot of those elements so they can really just be static loops. Would you really notice a patch of grass you're passing at 160mph moves in exactly the same way over and over? Now if you were on foot and walking through it like in, say, an elder scrolls game then yeah you'd totally notice it because you're moving toward it much slower and it's in your fov for way longer. Plus you're likely to interact with it.

Holy shit, were it not for the headlights that would be near perfect as well

>first time seeing fake paused renders in screenshot mode

lighting > *

The r34 isn't bad, the rx7 is a travesty tho

This. GT looks like utter ass in real time.
youtube.com/watch?v=rzZCGAl38Ko

Sony have been pulling this bullshit since PS2.

Basically

Oh okay I'm literally retarded I didn't realize they just inserted the car models in photos or ultra pre-rendered backgrounds

>the rx7 is a travesty tho
you deserve a painful death

He meant the headlights which look straight out of a PS3 game in the screenshot

Fucking this. I hated driving games when I was playing with just a controller, then years back I wanna say 04 I had a roommate that had a really fucking expensive wheel, shifter and pedals setup with force feedback so strong that it could pull the wheel right out of my hands, and he got me to try GT 3 or 4, whichever was the most recent at the time... And it was an instant addiction. My father worked for Mercedes Benz USA so we got to lease them super fucking cheap or buy them at a steep discount (they didn't want employees and their families being seen in anything else) so when I drove the SL65 AMG in it's stock configuration in the game, it was identical to the real thing in every way, so it was nice to see what it would be like to drive it with it pimped and tuned, up to 999HP. It would yank the wheel out of my hands if I took turns at more than 210mph.

Anyway, the point is, with a GOOD wheel and pedals they're fucking incredible games, but without real feedback they're boring as fuck.

Depends if it's photo mode from an ingame race replay or from Scapes/photographs. The great thing about GT Sport is that even though you know Scapes is just a photo trick, it's still exceptionally well done and impresses.

>Pic related I just learnt that it was a screenshot from GT
wait what the fuck

see

They're not though, I don't know about console driving games but games like Pcars 2 and Forza Horizon 3 are supposed to have amazing graphics but I think they look like ass in gameplay especially if you turn off motion blur. Screenshots are bullshots.

Would love to see what they could do on the PC.

I think grass and the doodads in sims look like shit. Trees and things like that. The only good stuff are the roads and cars

If it really is pre-rendered and not in game then it's not fascinating at all. I myself could render something close to this. Lighting, given the right software and minimal study of shaders, optics and so on is what really pushes the boundary of realism. Cars are one of the easiest beauty shots to make but realistic hair/fur to this day is hard as hell to replicate

webm related, this is what an actual racing simulator that focuses entirely on the physics model of the car looks like.

do ignore radical larry in the pace car.

This is rFactor 2. It doesn't need fancy graphics or a photomode. The depth of simulation is beautiful enough.

>poorly lit image of a solid-shiny-rigid object

CGI has been good at car for years. it's just easier to simulate a shiny solid object.

you will notice that hte only foliage in the image is the out-of-focus in the distance trees.

show an image where they feature cars running on grass and i will be impressed

>the absolute state of gran autismo
videogameszone.de/Gran-Turismo-5-PS3-133781/News/Gran-Turismo-5-Die-haesslichsten-Grafik-Fails-der-Rennsimulation-802252/

this. cars are made out of flat surfaces, pretty easy to make it realistic compared to what other games have to show: humans. Humans are the things which are easiest for us to tell if theyre real or not because of how our brain works. Lifeless objects like cars don't have that effect.

>see forza has rx-7

>it is rare

FML I JUST WANT BE RUNNING TO THE 90'S

Because modelling and rendering man made objects has always been easy as fuck.

relatively little to render, it's just cars, close shit you can't make out well because it's moving fast, and distant shit which can be almost if not actually 2D and look just fine
as long as the cars and the road in front of you looks great, the rest can suffer

-- oh, and keep in mind the backdrop is almost if not entirely static
no people walking around, no interactive things anywhere, it's just a model, much easier on cpu and memory than something like an open world game

Exactly this.

God dammit gt4 had some of the best tracks that will never get hd ports.

wtf have graphics really come this far?
just look at this cube
it's indistinguishable from a real cube

not a cube, doesn't have sharp edges

neither does the real one

because animating a solid block of steel with only a few moving parts is way easier than animating human-like characters while preventing uncanny valley to boot.

in truth, racing sims are behind the curve given how easier it's for them to implement new stuff.

in this one I lost.

cubes in real life don't exist

speak for yourself. The first thing I do in any racing game is go into first person camera and explore the track