Gran Turismo 5 Creator Begs Forgiveness Over Frame Rate Issues

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Gran Turismo 5 Creator Begs Forgiveness Over Frame Rate Issues

image

Try as it might, Polyphonal Digitial can't squeeze out any more power out of the PS3, which means that Gran Turismo 5 won't be quite as pretty as it had hoped.

Polyphony Digital head Kaz Yamauchi has apologized to expectant Gran Turismo fans, saying that the game occasionally drops below 60 frames per second when the on-screen action becomes too hectic. He said that frame rate had been a major issue for the team, and it was working hard towards perfecting the game.

Speaking to PSM3 Magazine, Yamauchi said that the Polyphony engineers were constantly complaining about having to try and achieve a sustained frame rate at a resolution of 1080p, but that he thought it was important to try and get the game as smooth as possible. He was adamant that the dips wouldn't be frequent, just when there was a lot of things going on at once. He gave the example of starting a race in 16th place while it was raining, and said that 15 other cars on-screen all at once, all kicking up sprays of water at the same time, meant that the game might not be running at 60 fps for a few moments.

It's not clear whether the frame rate issues caused the game's most recent delay. Yamauchi's comment about perfecting the game suggests that Polyphony needed more time, but some sources suggest that it was actually problems caused by Sony's insistence that the game use more up-to-date firmware that caused the game to miss its production window by a few days, which caused a knock on delay of a few weeks.

Without knowing how far the game drops below sixty, it's hard to decide whether Yamauchi is apologizing over nothing or not. If the frame rate practically halves, then sure, that seems like something worth mentioning, but if it's just a couple of frames, I think most Gran Turismo fans will forgive him - if they even notice.

A new release date for Gran Turismo 5 has yet to be announced, but it should be some time this year.

Source: CVG

Permalink

Well, given I can't really tell the difference between 40fps and 60fps, I doubt this is much to worry about (unless, as Logan said, it drops to 25-30)

Wow, that kinda seems a bit anal to me. 60 FPS is pretty alright. Yeah, I know that the human eye can see drops below 66 FPS but considering how graphics-heavy this game is (in my opinion the GT series has always been more of a tech demo than a fun racing game) it shouldn't worry quite so much about it unless it's game affecting.

Either way, I won't be buying it anyway.

They seriously want it to look beautiful. I mean it is insane how much the release date gets pushed back. At this rate, Gran Turismo 5 will be incredible but will come out in 2061 on the PS7.

As long as its above 40 why should we care? It is still smooth looking at that rate.

If I'm playing it on a standard-definition TV, does it affect me then?

I think I can understand what Kaz Yamauchi means, as console gamers expect "perfect" frame rates he feels that there might be backlashes.

but remember this people, if you are going to scorn him for this then you must stop playing games altogether as this might be a common issue in the future as consoles are merging the line with PCs

My response is meh. I mean, there are games out there that are perfectly fine at 30fps, so long as it doesn't dip below that it should be perfectly fine and barely noticable.

I like the last sentence.

A new release date, should be released this year. Meaning the game, will probably be out next year.

Unless they rerererererelease the release date.... again.

Can't fault the guy for wanting perfection. and i do appreciate him apologizing for what could amount to nothing at all! XD safe to say the game will be polished to a mirror shine when if it releases!

So did they do the graphics first and gameplay second? Seems it would be easier to make the game so that it can run at 60fps (if that was there goal) and then make the graphics as great as possible without impeding the 60fps. Seems obvious to me. I for one think how shiny do they need a car? You can always throw more polygons at it to make it better - eventully they will get to the point where adding an extra 3000 polygons per car will not make any difference to the car - visually speaking.

Let the back-peddling begin. 5 years and a whole bunch of hype and bullshit from Sony and im still yet to see why this game is worth about 4 codemaster's titles in terms of time to create. 5 years guys, you should have at least locked in the framerate

Logan Westbrook:
Without knowing how far the game drops below sixty, it's hard to decide whether Yamauchi is apologizing over nothing or not.

There's no good gameplay reason why the game can't be fixed to, and maintain, a steady 30fps. Nobody would notice the difference unless they were looking for it. The funny thing is that the cause here is purely Sony's posturing on PS3 graphical power - they just really feel that they need Gran Tourismo running at 60fps @ 1080p for console wars marketing. They probably already have the commercials in production.

A steady framerate, even a lower one, is much better than having dips. This goes double for any game that relies on reflexes. And the situations where the dips are going to occur - when there's a lot of action on the screen - is exactly the time that you don't want your framerate to suffer.

Well with more figures, it would be easier to know if the fuss he made was validated or not.

I can only hope the compromise between framerate and visuals will still satisfy those who'll play the game :/

voorhees123:
So did they do the graphics first and gameplay second? Seems it would be easier to make the game so that it can run at 60fps (if that was there goal) and then make the graphics as great as possible without impeding the 60fps.

Yup that they did. Being a simulation it's not a bad thing really; unless the game crawls, but surly the'd switch out the textures and use lower poly models if it was a serious issue?

One of the simulation review sites had a play a couple of years ago and complained that it was too 'consoley'. They recently got another chance to try it out and found it far more realistic, polyphony said they threw out the old simulation engine and bolted in a new one in the last year.

DTWolfwood:
Can't fault the guy for wanting perfection. and i do appreciate him apologizing for what could amount to nothing at all! XD safe to say the game will be polished to a mirror shine when if it releases!

I can. Dammit I want to play this game. I wanted to play it years ago. Hell, the Forza franchise has released three full games in the same time frame. I can accept minor frame rate losses and the fact that it doesn't have every car ever, just gimmie!

So let me get this straight, you announced this game back in 2005, probably been working on it for at least a year at that point. And after 6 YEARS, you still haven't found a way to deliver on the promises you made all those years ago?

You know what? Keep your expensive and probably-the-same-as-Forza sim racer. I've been having fun playing Burnout Paradise, Midnight Club: LA, and now I have to look forward to Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit 2. And those are multiplatform. For a PS3 exclusive? I've got Modnation Racers to go nuts with and it's probably 1000x more enjoyable than a tedious racing sim.

Just bear in mind that I also did not like Forza too greatly since I just enjoy racing and not having to tweak a car in order to race effectively

How pathetic and shallow...
Then again, because this is supposed to be a simulation, once the gameplay is as realistic as possible, there's nothing left to do but make it look and sound pretty.

shoulda put it on pc brah.

What are people on about, 40fps and the like? That'll still look as jerky as 30, if not worse.

I'd be alright with it if they just lock it at 30 (or 25 in my area, i suppose). It'll seem transparent because it won't be _jumping back and forth_ between "smooth enough" and "insanely smooth", or jittering between the two several times a second. That kind of change is very noticable, but a game locked at 30 looks just fine.

GT has always had framerate issues down the years, I could understand it on the PSX, and it wasn't too terrible on the more complex bits of the PS2 releases... but, seriously? GT4 was already gorgeous in a number of areas, so... can't they just back off the polygons by a few percent in the least obvious areas? Lose one of the less impressive effects in a scene? Have fewer raindrops? Slightly lower rez water FX? Or a cunning combination of a very slight reduction in all of those? ANYTHING to keep it ticking along internally at 60.001 or higher?

Or, hell, I'm sure an HDTV in the NTSC regions will still accept PAL 50Hz as a valid rate, and it'll still be at 1080p. Why not quietly choose that as the standard, and tweak the settings til it runs smooth at that?

Edit: and as others have said... the gfx were already pretty good... just, for the love of god, get working on the vehicle =and driving= physics, sound and range in your so-called ultimate driving sim. If I take the plunge on this one and have to put up with yet more shoddy manual clutching, lack of actual automatics (even in cars that never had a manual and dragsters that all use torque converter 2-speeds), 2-cylinder engines that sound the same as V6s, engine limiters that instantly drop you 1000rpms rather than missing single beats until the speed falls back from 6501 to 6499, wierd handling round the banked sections, a hundred variations on some godawful japanese family slab but half the major euro models not even having a single representative, etc, then I may have to give up on the series altogether.

If they didn't tell us, would we really have noticed? Without using a FPS counter.

Megacherv:
If I'm playing it on a standard-definition TV, does it affect me then?

It's a PS3 limitation, so yes, it probably does.

It didn't bother me when playing Shadow of the Colossus, so it shouldn't be a major issue.

I'm probably going to get flamed for this, but I think that's one major fail in terms of game design. If it dips too far, you're sacrificing smooth gameplay so the game can look pretty. That is not something you should ever do. I'd rather have it look less pretty and play smoothly throughout than have it stutter and play like crap whenever things get tense, which by the way is exactly when you're going to notice that the frame rate is dropping and it will piss you off immensely if you get fucked over because of it.

mjc0961: exactly. particularly in a game such as this where precise reactions are EVERYTHING. wanna bet it'll jerk alluvasudden just at the point where you needed to clip the apex then jam on the brakes JUST so... and then you're in the wall, or the no.2 AI you had been carefully holding off slips past?
(OK, that's less likely if we're falling 60>30 or even 60>20, rather than say 25>8, but you still lose finesse, and the very exacting demand for it at the higher levels could make it a fatal issue)

I signed up just for this article! Games like Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2&3 both run at 30FPS and we all know how astounding those games look. Even Insomniac games said they will never make another 60 FPS game again as the benefits of using 30FPS are so much better. Is this guy really that upset about not having perfect 60FPS all the time? Makes me wonder how large the dips really are because if its just down to 40-50 that is laughable as its still amazingly smooth and this guy is just a perfectionist. If it dips under 30 then maybe he really does have something to apologize about!

Virgil:

A steady framerate, even a lower one, is much better than having dips. This goes double for any game that relies on reflexes. And the situations where the dips are going to occur - when there's a lot of action on the screen - is exactly the time that you don't want your framerate to suffer.

I can attest to this. Forza 3 runs at 60fps during racing, but only 30fps during the replays and the transition between the 2 when you cross the line and it switches to the replay camera can be quite jarring, fortunately you're longer racing or controlling your car when this happens.

There's also sometimes a slight, momentary drop in frame-rate if you're downloading something large from Live and the "....... download complete" notification pops up, which can cause you to lose concentration and mess up if this sudden and unexpected change in consistency occurs during a complex bit of racing.

In a racing game, a lower but consistent frame-rate is infinitely more preferable that a higher frame rate which may occasionally drop.

With Forza 3 it's easy to forgive the graphical sacrifices Turn 10 made (like "only" 720p native resolution, poorer particle effects and non-persistent tyre marks) when you have a steady frame-rate and consistent gameplay.

Begging? I think only the really, really obsessed would have noticed had he not pointed it out. It isn't that big of a deal, I wouldn't even really notice if it dropped the frame rate when things get tough for the console.

Some people are just perfectionists I guess. I wouldn't have even mentioned it.

lacktheknack:

Megacherv:
If I'm playing it on a standard-definition TV, does it affect me then?

It's a PS3 limitation, so yes, it probably does.

It didn't bother me when playing Shadow of the Colossus, so it shouldn't be a major issue.

Yeah, but I won't be running it at 1080p, are you sure?

Megacherv:

lacktheknack:

Megacherv:
If I'm playing it on a standard-definition TV, does it affect me then?

It's a PS3 limitation, so yes, it probably does.

It didn't bother me when playing Shadow of the Colossus, so it shouldn't be a major issue.

Yeah, but I won't be running it at 1080p, are you sure?

Check the screenshot.

Too much detail, you're going to get dips below 60 FPS.

Which you won't notice, by the way.

Well, I respect them for admitting it. Honestly, there are other games I can think of right off the bat that had a shitty framerate yet looked beautiful.

Case in Point: SoTC.

bbonds007:
I signed up just for this article! Games like Uncharted 2 and Killzone 2&3 both run at 30FPS and we all know how astounding those games look. Even Insomniac games said they will never make another 60 FPS game again as the benefits of using 30FPS are so much better. Is this guy really that upset about not having perfect 60FPS all the time? Makes me wonder how large the dips really are because if its just down to 40-50 that is laughable as its still amazingly smooth and this guy is just a perfectionist. If it dips under 30 then maybe he really does have something to apologize about!

Objects aren't passing you at 200 mph in a first person shooter. It is absolutely essential that a racer frame-locks at 60 FPS. That said, it is EXTREMELY impressive to even hit 60 FPS AND 1080P with the PS3's horsepower, let alone frame-lock at 60.

Personally, I don't like the hard sim style of GT, and will be sticking with the arcadey (but not too arcadey) Codemaster titles :).

Also, you mentioned "benefits" of using a 30 FPS lock . . . I'd say the main benefit is the toleration of shoddy engine code. We'll see what the consoles are really capable of, when Carmack's new engine hits the streets :)

Megacherv:
If I'm playing it on a standard-definition TV, does it affect me then?

Yes, consoles don't support scaling. In fact, having the game try to average pixel values into larger blocks might slow it down more.

Jesus Phish:
I like the last sentence.

A new release date, should be released this year. Meaning the game, will probably be out next year.

Unless they rerererererelease the release date.... again.

I read that as the release date being this year, not that they'd announce the date this year.

freedomweasel:

Jesus Phish:
I like the last sentence.

A new release date, should be released this year. Meaning the game, will probably be out next year.

Unless they rerererererelease the release date.... again.

I read that as the release date being this year, not that they'd announce the date this year.

I'd be amazed if that game shipped before 2011.

Asehujiko:

Megacherv:
If I'm playing it on a standard-definition TV, does it affect me then?

Yes, consoles don't support scaling. In fact, having the game try to average pixel values into larger blocks might slow it down more.

Mmkay then, I understand

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here