Evolution of Racing-Game Graphics

1970-1989

Gran Trak 10, 1974 (The gran-daddy)

Night Racer, 1977

Pole position, 1982

Chequered Flag, 1983

Enduro, 1983

Revs, 1984

Out run, 1986

Super Sprint, 1986

Final lap, 1987

Hard drivin', 1988

Chase H.Q. , 1988

Super Monaco GP, 1989

Ironman Stewarts Super Off Road, 1989

1990-1999 

Indianapolis 500. The Simulation, 1990

Formula One Grandprix (Worldcircuit in USA), 1992

Ridge racer, 1993

Super Mario Kart, 1993

Crusin' USA, 1994

Destruction Derby, 1995

Sega Super GT, 1996

Gran Turismo, 1997 (23 December)

Colin McRae Rally, 1998

Need for Speed III Hot Pursuit, 1998

Midtown Madness, 1999

2000-2009 

Midtown Madness 2, 2000

007 Racing, 2000

Metropolis Street Racer, 2000 "Project Gotham Racing -1"

Gran Turismo 3 A-spec, 2001

Project Gotham Racing, 2001

 Rallisport Challenge, 2002

Burn-Out 2, 2002

Need for Speed Hot Pursuit II, 2002

Apex, 2003

Sega GT 2002, 2003

Need for Speed Underground, 2003

Project Gotham Racing 2, 2003

Rallisport Challenge 2, 2004

Gran Turismo 4, 2005

Forza Motorsport, 2005

Project Gotham Racing 3, 2005

Need for Speed Carbon, 2006

Test Drive Unlimited, 2006

Colin McRae Dirt, 2007

Forza Motorsport 2, 2007

Project Gotham Racing 4, 2007

Gran Turismo 5: Prologue, 2007 in Japan; 2008 rest of the World

Race Driver: GRID, 2008

Fuel, 2009

Need for Speed SHIFT, 2009

Colin McRae Dirt2, 2009

Forza Motorsport 3, 2009

2010-2019

Blur, 2010

Gran Tursimo 5, 2010

Kinect Joyride, 2010

Formula 1 2010, 2010

WRC 2010, 2010(Download only)

Dirt 3, 2010/2011

Driver San Francisco, 2010/2011

Need for Speed Hot Pursuit, 2010/2011

Forza Kinect, 2011

TRF wrote:

Racing games always tend to have better graphics than most other genres. Has anyone else noticed that? Still, I don't expect anything to beat GT5 in console graphics for awhile. Right now it's probably the best-looking and most-detailed game on consoles, and possibly ever.

I myself prefer action-racers like Blur to sim-racers like Gran Turismo.

TRF wrote:

Racing games always tend to have better graphics than most other genres. Has anyone else noticed that? Still, I don't expect anything to beat GT5 in console graphics for awhile. Right now it's probably the best-looking and most-detailed game on consoles, and possibly ever.

I myself prefer action-racers like Blur to sim-racers like Gran Turismo.

DemonWolf wrote:

Shocking!! :O

Excellent work, can't believe you've done all this Must've taken a long while.

It's amazing though. Btw does Forza Kinect look any better than Forza 3?

Blixtstorm wrote:

Gran Tursimo 5, 2010

Kinect Joyride, 2010

Formula 1 2010, 2010

TRF wrote:

Racing games always tend to have better graphics than most other genres. Has anyone else noticed that? Still, I don't expect anything to beat GT5 in console graphics for awhile. Right now it's probably the best-looking and most-detailed game on consoles, and possibly ever.

I myself prefer action-racers like Blur to sim-racers like Gran Turismo.

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

Racing games always tend to have better graphics than most other genres. Has anyone else noticed that? Still, I don't expect anything to beat GT5 in console graphics for awhile. Right now it's probably the best-looking and most-detailed game on consoles, and possibly ever.

I myself prefer action-racers like Blur to sim-racers like Gran Turismo.

um, does GT5 have a camera feature in which you can take move around the track freely and take photos?
I bet that if it did and you went around with that camera you would see some horrible flaws. Racing games only look good when in motion, they rarely look that good when you slow down and go near textures. Gow Coo, Heavy Rain, uncharted 2, Alan Wake, Gears and even Fable have better graphics than GT5 imo.

TRF wrote:

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

Racing games always tend to have better graphics than most other genres. Has anyone else noticed that? Still, I don't expect anything to beat GT5 in console graphics for awhile. Right now it's probably the best-looking and most-detailed game on consoles, and possibly ever.

I myself prefer action-racers like Blur to sim-racers like Gran Turismo.

um, does GT5 have a camera feature in which you can take move around the track freely and take photos?
I bet that if it did and you went around with that camera you would see some horrible flaws. Racing games only look good when in motion, they rarely look that good when you slow down and go near textures. Gow Coo, Heavy Rain, uncharted 2, Alan Wake, Gears and even Fable have better graphics than GT5 imo.

Who the hell cares? You're driving at 150+ miles per hour. Why would Polyphony Digital work on little details that you're not even going to see?

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

Racing games always tend to have better graphics than most other genres. Has anyone else noticed that? Still, I don't expect anything to beat GT5 in console graphics for awhile. Right now it's probably the best-looking and most-detailed game on consoles, and possibly ever.

I myself prefer action-racers like Blur to sim-racers like Gran Turismo.

um, does GT5 have a camera feature in which you can take move around the track freely and take photos?
I bet that if it did and you went around with that camera you would see some horrible flaws. Racing games only look good when in motion, they rarely look that good when you slow down and go near textures. Gow Coo, Heavy Rain, uncharted 2, Alan Wake, Gears and even Fable have better graphics than GT5 imo.

Who the hell cares? You're driving at 150+ miles per hour. Why would Polyphony Digital work on little details that you're not even going to see?

exactly. That's the point. They won't work on those tiny little details which every other genre does. The only thing that deserves credit in racing games are the cars themselves.

TRF wrote:

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

Racing games always tend to have better graphics than most other genres. Has anyone else noticed that? Still, I don't expect anything to beat GT5 in console graphics for awhile. Right now it's probably the best-looking and most-detailed game on consoles, and possibly ever.

I myself prefer action-racers like Blur to sim-racers like Gran Turismo.

um, does GT5 have a camera feature in which you can take move around the track freely and take photos?
I bet that if it did and you went around with that camera you would see some horrible flaws. Racing games only look good when in motion, they rarely look that good when you slow down and go near textures. Gow Coo, Heavy Rain, uncharted 2, Alan Wake, Gears and even Fable have better graphics than GT5 imo.

Who the hell cares? You're driving at 150+ miles per hour. Why would Polyphony Digital work on little details that you're not even going to see?

exactly. That's the point. They won't work on those tiny little details which every other genre does. The only thing that deserves credit in racing games are the cars themselves.

Every other genre works on those details because it's more noticeable. The lack of detail in the tracks and environments (which still look pretty good anyways) aren't going to affect the look of the game, since you're not going to notice them.

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

Racing games always tend to have better graphics than most other genres. Has anyone else noticed that? Still, I don't expect anything to beat GT5 in console graphics for awhile. Right now it's probably the best-looking and most-detailed game on consoles, and possibly ever.

I myself prefer action-racers like Blur to sim-racers like Gran Turismo.

um, does GT5 have a camera feature in which you can take move around the track freely and take photos?
I bet that if it did and you went around with that camera you would see some horrible flaws. Racing games only look good when in motion, they rarely look that good when you slow down and go near textures. Gow Coo, Heavy Rain, uncharted 2, Alan Wake, Gears and even Fable have better graphics than GT5 imo.

Who the hell cares? You're driving at 150+ miles per hour. Why would Polyphony Digital work on little details that you're not even going to see?

exactly. That's the point. They won't work on those tiny little details which every other genre does. The only thing that deserves credit in racing games are the cars themselves.

Every other genre works on those details because it's more noticeable. The lack of detail in the tracks and environments (which still look pretty good anyways) aren't going to affect the look of the game, since you're not going to notice them.

Of course. But you said it's one of the most detailed games ever on a console.
Which is untrue. You've said it yourself:" the lack of detail in the tracks and environments"

honestly... tut tut, contradictions...

TRF wrote:

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

Racing games always tend to have better graphics than most other genres. Has anyone else noticed that? Still, I don't expect anything to beat GT5 in console graphics for awhile. Right now it's probably the best-looking and most-detailed game on consoles, and possibly ever.

I myself prefer action-racers like Blur to sim-racers like Gran Turismo.

um, does GT5 have a camera feature in which you can take move around the track freely and take photos?
I bet that if it did and you went around with that camera you would see some horrible flaws. Racing games only look good when in motion, they rarely look that good when you slow down and go near textures. Gow Coo, Heavy Rain, uncharted 2, Alan Wake, Gears and even Fable have better graphics than GT5 imo.

Who the hell cares? You're driving at 150+ miles per hour. Why would Polyphony Digital work on little details that you're not even going to see?

exactly. That's the point. They won't work on those tiny little details which every other genre does. The only thing that deserves credit in racing games are the cars themselves.

Every other genre works on those details because it's more noticeable. The lack of detail in the tracks and environments (which still look pretty good anyways) aren't going to affect the look of the game, since you're not going to notice them.

Of course. But you said it's one of the most detailed games ever on a console.
Which is untrue. You've said it yourself:" the lack of detail in the tracks and environments"

honestly... tut tut, contradictions...

It is one of the most detailed games on the console, not in the environment, but in the car and character models. It's like complaining that Doom doesn't have a ceiling. You're not going to see the ceiling anyway, so what's the point of designing one? What's the point of making the track and environment ultra-detailed if you're not going to see it?

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

DemonWolf wrote:

TRF wrote:

Racing games always tend to have better graphics than most other genres. Has anyone else noticed that? Still, I don't expect anything to beat GT5 in console graphics for awhile. Right now it's probably the best-looking and most-detailed game on consoles, and possibly ever.

I myself prefer action-racers like Blur to sim-racers like Gran Turismo.

um, does GT5 have a camera feature in which you can take move around the track freely and take photos?
I bet that if it did and you went around with that camera you would see some horrible flaws. Racing games only look good when in motion, they rarely look that good when you slow down and go near textures. Gow Coo, Heavy Rain, uncharted 2, Alan Wake, Gears and even Fable have better graphics than GT5 imo.

Who the hell cares? You're driving at 150+ miles per hour. Why would Polyphony Digital work on little details that you're not even going to see?

exactly. That's the point. They won't work on those tiny little details which every other genre does. The only thing that deserves credit in racing games are the cars themselves.

Every other genre works on those details because it's more noticeable. The lack of detail in the tracks and environments (which still look pretty good anyways) aren't going to affect the look of the game, since you're not going to notice them.

Of course. But you said it's one of the most detailed games ever on a console.
Which is untrue. You've said it yourself:" the lack of detail in the tracks and environments"

honestly... tut tut, contradictions...

It is one of the most detailed games on the console, not in the environment, but in the car and character models. It's like complaining that Doom doesn't have a ceiling. You're not going to see the ceiling anyway, so what's the point of designing one? What's the point of making the track and environment ultra-detailed if you're not going to see it?

Doom doesn't have a ceiling?!?!?!

*takes it off top 10 best looking games of all time list*

lol the point is, if you're going to claim a game is the most detailed, it has to be detailed from all areas. Far away, zoomed in up close, in motion, still, etc

Which unfortunately, no game really has nailed. :/ (except Crysis of course)

But yeah.... racing games just can't be considered to have the best detail, maybe they can be seen as some of the best looking games or you could say the graphics are amazing, yeah but the detail? Naw.

Blixtstorm wrote:

TBH none of you seem to know graphics in games...

Take for example Halo Reach, barely holding 720p at 30fps, barely.
It has lower textures and lower framerates then Forza 3. Forza 3 runs 720p at 60fps constantly with AA, compared to no AA in Halo.


Taking that in to consideration, slowly racing/cruising the roads instead of as you say at 150 mph reving the engine of a Ferrari is much more pleasing watching a man in combat suit breathing heavy while running with a blurry world.


As for racing games, they have always set the standards for game graphics. Take this generation for example, GT5 will be the first game from Sony running at 60fps and 1080p native.

Drawing the conclusion for racing game graphics based from the game engine from GTA IV (Midnight Club LA) does not give the it a fair point.

Racing is for men, boys play shooters.

DemonWolf wrote:

Blixtstorm wrote:

TBH none of you seem to know graphics in games...

Take for example Halo Reach, barely holding 720p at 30fps, barely.
It has lower textures and lower framerates then Forza 3. Forza 3 runs 720p at 60fps constantly with AA, compared to no AA in Halo.


Taking that in to consideration, slowly racing/cruising the roads instead of as you say at 150 mph reving the engine of a Ferrari is much more pleasing watching a man in combat suit breathing heavy while running with a blurry world.


As for racing games, they have always set the standards for game graphics. Take this generation for example, GT5 will be the first game from Sony running at 60fps and 1080p native.

Drawing the conclusion for racing game graphics based from the game engine from GTA IV (Midnight Club LA) does not give the it a fair point.

Racing is for men, boys play shooters.

Actually, no...

boys play with cars when they're children.
usually only adults are in the possession of guns.
so men play shooters and boys play racing games.

Anyway, we're not discussing graphics. We're discussing detail.