Hey look, a real example of DVD limiting a game. (PGR4)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm calling bullshit, half-assed development on this. They don't have to make separate textures for a night track. They can just adjust the lights. Set up a template for the track with no lighting, then keep the lighting separate from the actual track. Then when you pick the lighting condition the two combine and give you the map you want.

It's bullshit that they're "baking" the lighting into the textures. That's so lazy.
 
[quote name='DJSteel']can you imagine... right before round 3 of a fight...Please insert disc 3[/QUOTE]

:lol: I didn't mean to imply that. "Please insert disc 2 to finish this race track." :lol:

More or less, for console gamers, disc swapping is *fine* if it only needs to be done once. We talk about RPGs, but as you reach a point in the game, you are prompted to switch to disc #2, and than you are *done* with disc 1. You start your game w/ disc 2 from that point, load from disc 2, and play through until prompted to switch to disc 3.

In-game switching, back and forth, is a very different thing to suggest. Not so much "insert next disc to fight round 3," but "oh, you selected this menu option, please insert disc 2," only to have to switch the disc again later if you want to access other options.

[quote name='Puffa469']I know that COD4 has the 'HDD Required' icon on it, and I think more games should start doing the same.[/QUOTE]

really?

That's good news for 360 owners; prohibitive access to the HDD for anything other than save games and DLC has been, IMO, a major problem point for the console. Glad to see devs are able to use it. fuck them Core owners. ;)
 
[quote name='dallow']And whatever else you'll be missing in future games Zew.

besides, i've always looked at it as buying a game machine for 400, and a BD player for 200 (except i got the 20GB so my BD player was a bargain 100 bucks)
[/quote]

Yo, my SubWay here has all footlongs for 2 cents. The cookies and soda jsut cost 3 dollars each. Also, you can't just buy the sandwich.
 
[quote name='help1']Yo, my SubWay here has all footlongs for 2 cents. The cookies and soda jsut cost 3 dollars each. Also, you can't just buy the sandwich.[/quote]Sold! I was gonna get cookies and drinks anyway.
 
[quote name='help1']Yo, my SubWay here has all footlongs for 2 cents. The cookies and soda jsut cost 3 dollars each. Also, you can't just buy the sandwich.[/QUOTE]
$3.02 for a drink and sandwhich at Subway is pretty good. Do I have to buy the cookies as well?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']:lol: I didn't mean to imply that. "Please insert disc 2 to finish this race track." :lol:

More or less, for console gamers, disc swapping is *fine* if it only needs to be done once. We talk about RPGs, but as you reach a point in the game, you are prompted to switch to disc #2, and than you are *done* with disc 1. You start your game w/ disc 2 from that point, load from disc 2, and play through until prompted to switch to disc 3.

In-game switching, back and forth, is a very different thing to suggest. Not so much "insert next disc to fight round 3," but "oh, you selected this menu option, please insert disc 2," only to have to switch the disc again later if you want to access other options.[/QUOTE]

On the consumer end, disc-switching isn't that much of a problem. Honestly, I wouldn't care how many times I had to switch, if it meant extra content. But, it seems, on the developer end, it is a bit different. PGR4 will now be omitting content because of this limitation. Personally, I couldn't care less about playing at night, but, as for development on the 360, in general, this does not really bode well. It's very likely this won't be the only example of omitted content, and it could be possible that this has happened in the past. And yes, there is the solution of adding another disc, but some developers might feel that certain content might not be worth the extra time and effort of adding another disc, and that's when content, such as this, is omitted.
 
[quote name='whoknows']$3.02 for a drink and sandwhich at Subway is pretty good. Do I have to buy the cookies as well?[/quote]

Yes! ;)

You need to also buy napkins, they are that cheap. ;)
 
[quote name='help1']Yes! ;)

You need to also buy napkins, they are that cheap. ;)[/QUOTE]
Psh...screw $6 for a meal. No wonder I don't eat at Subway...too expensive :p
 
[quote name='dpatel']On the consumer end, disc-switching isn't that much of a problem. Honestly, I wouldn't care how many times I had to switch, if it meant extra content. But, it seems, on the developer end, it is a bit different. PGR4 will now be omitting content because of this limitation. Personally, I couldn't care less about playing at night, but, as for development on the 360, in general, this does not really bode well. It's very likely this won't be the only example of omitted content, and it could be possible that this has happened in the past. And yes, there is the solution of adding another disc, but some developers might feel that certain content might not be worth the extra time and effort of adding another disc, and that's when content, such as this, is omitted.[/QUOTE]

Well, if you put it that way (disc switching or nothin' at all), the choice is pretty clear.
 
Fact: DVD9 sucks.


Fact stated. Thread over.



and I definitely care about playing at night, night races are infinitely cooler than daytime, and time-of-day changes on tracks are even better.

I hope Microsoft uses the HD-DVD drive for gameplay soon, as soon as it's down to $100 or so, and when the lack of space is actually hurting devs.
 
[quote name='whoknows']Psh...screw $6 for a meal. No wonder I don't eat at Subway...too expensive :p[/quote]

Yeah but if you eat at SubBox you have to pay $5 a month to poop.
 
[quote name='DJSteel']well so much for the core being a bargain if a HDD is needed..[/quote]When was the core a bargin? I had more issues with that system for $300 than the $600 PS3.
 
If adding night racing takes up so much space that they couldn't include it on disc, how big of a download do you suppose it would be? 1GB? 2GB?

Seems like a lot for DLC, especially since premium 360's have about 12GB(?) available for the user to access.
 
it sounds like they're a bit lazy to me, but on the other hand, it could be because they added motorcycles. That's about the only thing I can think of that would make them omit something like that. It's trivial, but haven't we been enjoying tracks at all times of day since MSR on dreamcast?
 
[quote name='redgopher']I'm calling bullshit, half-assed development on this. They don't have to make separate textures for a night track. They can just adjust the lights. Set up a template for the track with no lighting, then keep the lighting separate from the actual track. Then when you pick the lighting condition the two combine and give you the map you want.

It's bullshit that they're "baking" the lighting into the textures. That's so lazy.[/QUOTE]

^^^ He's right you know. It's a trick that would be done in the 'old days' to save on rendering cycles, but shouldn't be needed on the 360. Making this discussion sort of moot.
 
[quote name='redgopher']I'm calling bullshit, half-assed development on this. They don't have to make separate textures for a night track. They can just adjust the lights. Set up a template for the track with no lighting, then keep the lighting separate from the actual track. Then when you pick the lighting condition the two combine and give you the map you want.

It's bullshit that they're "baking" the lighting into the textures. That's so lazy.[/quote]

QFT!

This excuse is bullshit. I've never had to make seperate textures when I wanted to show a scene during the day, verses at night. You setup lights in your scene, and your textures, materials, (and other environment models) react to those light sources. If they in fact are "baking" the lighting in, that's just downright retarded.

Is this the same team that did the old PGR games?
 
Well let's consider why they can't have the light be as dynamic as to creat night and day. I would guess that the cars are so detailed that the 360 cannot handle the strain of rendering the lighting while delivering the game at an acceptable framerate. This is considering that there are most likely, in a worst case scenario, up to 8 cars on screen at the same time. And if I remember those screen shots right then yeah, a bunch of those cars can easily slow down a 360 if they had to render all the lighting in that manner.

Lazy? I would think making two textures for every car is the opposite. Making dynamic lighting is much easier since it is one thing as opposed to changing every car.
 
My fear is that DLC will become this crutch for developers that leads to games with fewer features and less content.

Any part of a game that a developer is having trouble with, they can now say 'we'll just shelve that aspect of the game in order to make our ship date, and we'll work on it for a future downloadable pack.'

Any PC gamer can tell you all about the broken beta software that is sold at retail, and about big day one patches just to get the game playable. I really dont want to see console developers start to follow that routine.
 
This is rediculous... at this time, people should acknowledge that Sony had the right idea by going to blu ray. Its a win win situation, Sony gets their players in home, and developers don't have to worry about space. The thing is, we're going Hi Def, and that requires space. I have to give MS credit, they've done well with their DVD based games. I've always had a problem buying MS games on DVD for 59.99... cause at the end of the day, you're still getting at least 4.7gb worth of game. I don't mind paying 59.99 for a sony game bacause you may be 22gb worth of game (i.e. resistance) [and yes I realize that not all the ps3 games use more than 4.7gb of disc] But with that being said, the Blu ray discs are more durable than dvds... due to the special coating thats on them.. so that's a plus. Anyway, we should all agree that Sony did what was best for games.
 
I definitely agree that the dvd format is causing problems. I mean we already have heard games like Oblivion and Bioshock barely fit onto the dvd format.

I know publishers don't like multi-disc games because the costs add up. They have to manufacture at minimum twice as many discs, the shipping costs increase with more weight, etc and they have to charge the normal price. It eats into their profit so of course they prefer fitting it on 1 disc whenever possible.

Sadly most of them would rather trim out some content then pay more for 2 disc game.
 
Wow... your the first person Ive ever seen equate the quality or value of a game to the amount of gigabytes of data it takes up on a disc.


[quote name='Thomas96']This is rediculous... at this time, people should acknowledge that Sony had the right idea by going to blu ray. Its a win win situation, Sony gets their players in home, and developers don't have to worry about space. The thing is, we're going Hi Def, and that requires space. I have to give MS credit, they've done well with their DVD based games. I've always had a problem buying MS games on DVD for 59.99... cause at the end of the day, you're still getting at least 4.7gb worth of game. I don't mind paying 59.99 for a sony game bacause you may be 22gb worth of game (i.e. resistance) [and yes I realize that not all the ps3 games use more than 4.7gb of disc] But with that being said, the Blu ray discs are more durable than dvds... due to the special coating thats on them.. so that's a plus. Anyway, we should all agree that Sony did what was best for games.[/quote]
 
[quote name='Puffa469']Wow... your the first person Ive ever seen equate the quality or value of a game to the amount of gigabytes of data it takes up on a disc.[/quote]Well, duh, of course it's better. It has more giga-bites! They chomp it all up.

This whole issue just proves my point about DVD space only being an issue for lazy developers. If they'd just optimize evrything and get the day/night stuff running real time rather than hiding in textures, there'd be no problem.

Funny thing is, I think if these comments had never been made, very few people would've even noticed these things were missing from the game at release.
 
[quote name='daroga']Funny thing is, I think if these comments had never been made, very few people would've even noticed these things were missing from the game at release.[/quote]And isn't that a scary thing?
What else have we missed?
 
If you think the stuff they took out isn't worthy of DLC then DONT PAY FOR IT. Obviously it isn't a necessity in the game.
 
[quote name='dallow']And isn't that a scary thing?
What else have we missed?[/quote]Well at some point, deadlines, if not laziness, has to come into play. Every game could've had more/better content in it given enough time, but you've got to release the things eventually (unless you're 3D Realms). But when you start blaming deadlines on missing content, people just want you to delay the game to get it all set. And then when you delay it, they complain that it's not out yet.

It's a pretty lose-lose situation here. ;)
 
[quote name='dallow']Ok ok, no more "haha" comments guys.

What I'm curious is how this'll affect 360 games 2+ years down the line. (or even 1?)[/quote]

I think it means they'll come up with better compression schemes.
 
[quote name='BattleChicken']I think it means they'll come up with better compression schemes.[/quote]Is that the answer, even MORE compression?
It's basically making them do more work. Work other than making the game better to make the assets fit on the disc.
 
[quote name='Puffa469']My fear is that DLC will become this crutch for developers that leads to games with fewer features and less content.

Any part of a game that a developer is having trouble with, they can now say 'we'll just shelve that aspect of the game in order to make our ship date, and we'll work on it for a future downloadable pack.'

Any PC gamer can tell you all about the broken beta software that is sold at retail, and about big day one patches just to get the game playable. I really dont want to see console developers start to follow that routine.[/QUOTE]

That has already happened with motorstorm.
Every system has limitations somewhere.
 
I'm also surprised that this came up so soon. I figured this wouldn't be happening for another few years, but this is interesting.

I really wonder though, how much cost (actual cost) per game does it cost to add another disc. The actual DVD's themselves are rather cheap (they don't cost a $1 each, I wouldn't think). The boxes have to hold the extra disc, but again, can't imagine those are that expensive. The extra weight, how much does a DVD weigh, is it really that much. Over the bulk of games, would it cost an extra $1 to add the extra discs?
 
[quote name='Milkyman']That has already happened with motorstorm.
Every system has limitations somewhere.[/quote]That wasn't a limitation though, just a decision by the devs to get the game out sooner than they should have.

(i would have preferred waiting)

They released it early in Japan, with no online, and delayed for NA with it.
 
Hmmm....Would I rather lose nighttime mode in a racing game, or be forced to 'enjoy' the PS3 lineup...tough question there.
 
[quote name='GizmoGC']Hmmm....Would I rather lose nighttime mode in a racing game, or be forced to 'enjoy' the PS3 lineup...tough question there.[/quote]

:applause: Well said, PGR4 without day/night (I bloody hated nightime racing in PGR3 anyway) is still about 100 times better than any racing game the PS3 has to offer right now. Sorry, but them's the facts.

Dallow is right though, this is a fine example of the DVD format limiting a game, no argument there.
 
[quote name='Brian9824']I definitely agree that the dvd format is causing problems. I mean we already have heard games like Oblivion and Bioshock barely fit onto the dvd format.

[/QUOTE]

I don't think Oblivion had too much trouble fitting onto a disc. The upcoming GOTY edition packs in at least another gig of content.
 
[quote name='GizmoGC']Hmmm....Would I rather lose nighttime mode in a racing game, or be forced to 'enjoy' the PS3 lineup...tough question there.[/quote]Ahyuck ahyuck!

Well said, PGR4 without day/night (I bloody hated nightime racing in PGR3 anyway) is still about 100 times better than any racing game the PS3 has to offer right now. Sorry, but them's the facts.

Dallow is right though, this is a fine example of the DVD format limiting a game, no argument there.
Click to expand...
Don't encourage Gizmo's unstealthy trolling.

You're right though, no good 'pure' racing games on the PS3 at least in my opinion. October and GT5:prologue can't come soon enough.

And thanks for agreeing with me.
 
Why are there any comments after what redgopher said outside of the usual QFTs?

If a dev is using baked-in lighting - which seems to be the case here - and you don't know wtf that is, then you forfeit any discussion on the matter.

I gaurantee you PS3 devs use it too.
 
[quote name='Puffa469']Wow... your the first person Ive ever seen equate the quality or value of a game to the amount of gigabytes of data it takes up on a disc.[/QUOTE]

I'm not the first... why was it that Street Fighter Alpha 2 on SNES was priced at 69.99... or why was Star Wars Shadows of the Empire 59.99 - it was due to the size of their carts, those were big games for their time. Same for Strider on the genesis, extra money for bigger carts..


its not that I'm trying to say anything about the quality of the game.. its just that, blu ray allows for more game, so I'm willing to pay more money for more game. But on xbox/ps2 games were 49.99 on 4.7 disc, now with the 360 same 4.7 disc, but 10 extra dollars... you already paid for the upconverter when you bought the 360...
 
[quote name='Strell']Why are there any comments after what redgopher said outside of the usual QFTs?

If a dev is using baked-in lighting - which seems to be the case here - and you don't know wtf that is, then you forfeit any discussion on the matter.

I gaurantee you PS3 devs use it too.[/quote]Probably on some games. Good thing the BD has space for it if needed.

As for using pure realtime lights in the cities, that's a lot of rendering.
Seems easier than just making new textures, but I'm not a dev.
Maybe it's a number crunching issue.

GT5 will be using HDR lighting.
 
[quote name='dallow']

And thanks for agreeing with me.[/quote]

It's funny cos as soon as I saw this article I wondered were it would turn up on CAG, full on troll in the 360 forum was my first thought.

You've restored my faith in people posting things to invoke discussion instead of just to invoke argument, I doff my cap to thee sir :)

Anyway, I don't know what "baked-in lighting" is, so I'll shut up now.
 
[quote name='mtxbass1']QFT!

This excuse is bullshit. I've never had to make seperate textures when I wanted to show a scene during the day, verses at night. You setup lights in your scene, and your textures, materials, (and other environment models) react to those light sources. If they in fact are "baking" the lighting in, that's just downright retarded.

Is this the same team that did the old PGR games?[/QUOTE]

maybe the xbox 360 can't render real time lighting that well [which sounds stupid] however, what I'm trying to say is what if baking in the lighting is something that has to be done on the 360 due to some technical limitation. And it might not be a pure technical limitation, if you're using the 360 resouces to render the cars which such high detail, you might not have enough resources to render those same high detailed cars (or objects) in various lighting... Plus to bake in the lighting for each and every vehicle would probably require more work, than just setting up the real time lighting..
 
[quote name='benjamouth']Anyway, I don't know what "baked-in lighting" is, so I'll shut up now.[/quote]Imagine a wall with textures on it that make it look like there's light shining on it, shadows and all.

Vs a wall texture that gets shadows, lighter and darker from an actual light source being put on it.

It's basically fake/no lighting.
 
[quote name='dallow']Imagine a wall with textures on it that make it look like there's light shining on it, shadows and all.

Vs a wall texture that gets shadows, lighter and darker from an actual light source being put on it.

It's basically fake/no lighting.[/quote]

Ahh ok, thanks.
 
[quote name='benjamouth']
Anyway, I don't know what "baked-in lighting" is, so I'll shut up now.[/QUOTE]

Basically it's taking a textured environment/character/area/surface/whatever, and then running it through a light rendering engine based on what the conditions would be whenever those things are utilized in the game. In other words, the cities in a racing game at night would be rendered with night time effects outside of the game itself, done fully on a rendering farm.

Once it is fully rendered in that shading engine, the developers look at those textures and basically output them as they appear with the various light effects on them. Then, whenever they are needed in the game, they just replace that surface with the texture needed.

So for example, with PGR4, there's a set of textures for the city during the day, and a set at night. These have been rendered outside of the in-game engine. When the game loads up track1.daytime, it just assigns that texture set to the biuldings/surroundings/environment. When track1.nighttime, appears, it does the same with the second set.

This allows the system to look like it's rendering the lighting in real time, when instead it's just a bunch of textures that look like they have dynamic lighting on them.

Gears of War is a great example of this. Another good example is, say, Eternal Darkness on the Cube. Basically most of the lighting is done beforehand and just looks real, but it won't change based on what is going on. Setting off an explosive in either game wouldn't alter the lighting outside of whatever shading engine is running in-game. You could run your character into a light source and their shadow might go over the light, but really it's just going over a texture.

It's a way to take away processing power but still have it look lik everything is lit. It's also a way for a developer to be lazy about it, but I must admit I don't know how much time is needed in making baked-in textures versus creating a viable lighting engine.

However, I would like to think by now with all the bullshit surrounding the arms race of this industry that one developer in the whole goddamn industry could pull it off, but maybe not.

Edit: Dallow said the same thing, but I'm still calling his description wimpy. Because I can, you see!
 
It's also a way to offload work to production monkeys instead of having key developers work on optimizing the actual rendering code.
 
I definitely don't think that the PGR4 devs are lazy by a long shot.. there's just too much competition they're going to face on the 360. Forza, Test Drive.. Baked in lighting is a good stategy imo, as long as it looks and plays good, I don't care. If GT5 uses baked in thats not bad. Why build a lighting engine, when you can just do textures.
 
[quote name='Thomas96'] Why build a lighting engine, when you can just do textures.[/QUOTE]

You shouldn't be allowed to discuss anything. Ever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
bread's done
Back
Top