I would love to be wrong. Too bad I'm not a betting man though... Just remember there was texture pop-in in that killzone trailer... Pr-rendered videos are not imune to the same types of graphical artifacts present in real-time 3D rendering. It's ALL 3D rendering, just different levels of capability. And as far as I'm concerned, the differences between "fully fledged CG" and "pre-rendered using the actual game" are both bad. Either way, I'm seeing something at one point that not representative of what I'm seeing when I'm playing the game. Let's go back to your uncharted example. I've never liked that the cutscenes showed these wonderfully expressive characters yet when I'm actually playing the game, whenever anybody talks it's coming from these dead doll faces with no emotion. They are effectively showing me something that the system isn't capable of doing. That is what any pre-rendered video is doing. Even if it's using "in-game assets" it's still showing something not possible. If it were possible, then we'd be seeing it in real time no? SOMETHING will get lost in translation. Perhaps Forza6 will be on the level of what we're seeing here in gameplay. But I don't think we'll be seeing these levels of visuals in a launch title. Let's just keep one another in mind come all the E3 announcements.

Yes

There is such a thing as LYING. Proof?

There'll be some egg on faces around here come E3, just like there was when Watchdogs got shown last year.

Hm. I never fathomed that watchdogs was pre rendered. I didn't know that anybody did. That game looks like a stepping stone to me. Looks good, but also looks like it's built to also work on current gen systems.

No, but people did argue that it was a next gen only looking title. They were wrong. It was running on a PC using an engine and assets designed for current gen.

Why would anyone think this is CG?!

What makes it so incredibly good looking?

Sure, the environments look great (but nothing that special) and the car models look great (but not significantly better than in FM4s showroom).

The only thing that obviously is CG is the backfire of the car.

Look for example at the tyre smoke. same old ugly shit. some unconnected cloud puffs. And the shadowing is still poorly done.

Only thing that surprised me is the detail of the tyre piles and the tyre wear, actually...

I'm talking purely how the cars move in the racing segments, not about any cuts/edits.

Yea that's what I thought about it from the first time I saw it. I never thought it looked good enough to purely be a next-gen title. It's kinda like that first nfs most wanted. That game looked good on 360, but clearly had xbox and ps2 bones. That's how I felt about watchdogs. I'm still anxious to see how my PC handles one of the first "next-gen" games though.

I'm baffled by the cry's of CG, seriously. Next gen hardware. What were people expecting? Some nice lens flares and some slightly updated higher res textures or something? You just need to go and have a look at the autovista models on Youtube on a console that is 8 years old, and they look pretty much the same standard as the cars in this trailer.

And lets not forget that the AutoVista models would never be able to run in F4 races. They were pretty much CG quality sans better shaders, which this seem to show.
I think the disbelief comes from all the MS hate circulating the net. They seem to think just because it could be more powerful, that it won't still look amazing...

The models in this trailer dont even come close to Auto-Vista level of detail... look at the interiors in this trailer. All blacked out, just like in FM4.

My disbelief has nothing to do with me supposedly hating microsoft. I don't hate microsoft. My disbelief comes from the fact that they've given me no reason to believe that it's real. They didn't say so at the event, and there was supposedly a tweet that was swiftly taken down. Followed by silence. Now I am HOPEFUL that this is at least somewhat accurate to what we'll be seeing at E3. But the argument is not about that. The argument isn't even about what these new systems are or aren't capable of. None of us are in a position to make those kinds of claims. The question is, and I'm capping it to highlight it, not to yell: IS THIS VIDEO REAL TIME FOOTAGE. The answer to that is no. Now, one can then infer from that that there must be some reason for them not showing real time footage. Either they just didn't have anything ready to show(My opinion) or the system really just isn't capable of that but they had to have pretty cars to show because sony did(Possible but I doubt it due to the climate of people so easily hating brands over dishonesty). So, nothing to do with hating microsoft, and not trying to make any statements about what the xbox one is or is not capable of, in summary.

These cars wouldn't be a good test of that, as the windows are small and tinted. The angle of the lighting also would have an effect on the amount of shadowing going on. If yo watch closely though, you can see the shadows being cast in the cab.

@AMDman- I thought he said that it was running on XO in the conference. Granted, he didn't say real-time, because it was obviously a video of supposed real-time footage. I don't think they intended to do stage demos of anything at that reveal, as they were saving it for E3.

The game is a launch title, so I'd expect it to be about done. It would be disastrous to show something that wasn't representative 3 weeks before they show it at e3. I don't get the denial, really, it has tons of hallmarks of a real-time game( the crowd being pretty low poly, the lower rez reflections, etc).

Wow people think thats CG? Ugh......really?

As I've said with Mr. White, those types of things have their place in Pre-rendered videos. Also, as I said with Mr. White, I hope that all of this proves to be meaningless come E3. But the fact remains that this video here. The one showed at the Xbox One event, Is not comprised of actual in-game content. And when I say that I don't mean assets. I mean actually taken from a running build of the game and edited to make that video. THAT is not what this video is. It may be using model assets but that doesn't mean much to me.

Um, not really. They announced a new console with interesting features. They just didn't cater to gamers right off of the bat. Which is actually a good thing, because it means E3 is going to be spectacularly awesome. They have to show at least a good chunk of the 15, yes, 15 games they have coming in the first year alone. That's a LOT of games to come out of the first party in the first year of release. And we still know very little about things like Xbox Live.
What we did see was actually pretty cool, even if it wasn't purely for gaming. If you're into sports, the Fantasy Football scenario is genuinely very cool. And if you've ever used a Comcast Cable box and don't feel like paying to upgrade to their new one, you're used to the most ridiculously horrible experience browsing television. If the Xbox One fixes that, that's great.
It amazes me that the announcement of a console with very little to actually complain about (and the only thing most are complaining about is the lack of gaming features/ reveals, which was already said to be left for E3 so they could give gamers a concentrated feed of games instead of catering to both markets at the same time, the casual entertainment consumers and the core gamer crowd. That's what they did in the past and it was frustrating.) Is somehow "horrible." With E3 around the corner, you need to stop freaking out and BE PATIENT. There are obviously going to be games on the Xbox One. That they didn't have a huge blowout of sequels being made on the system, which is practically what Sony did (don't get me wrong, that was a good reveal, but there weren't any more "holy shit!" moments unless you count how amazing that supposed Dragon's Dogma thing looked. And that's not even a confirmed or announced game!) does not mean they don't have games to show off.
People just need to learn that game consoles aren't just for playing games anymore. Both sides have made that clear. Microsoft wants to sell to the broad consumer base, and they understand that it's an important audience to sell to. In a couple of weeks, we'll all be finding out about the stuff we care about.
Game looks fantastic. I'm especially impressed by the depth and detail in the environments. Seeing the city stretch on ahead was pretty awesome. Forza 4 already did a pretty good job compared to the competition on environments, but they were still a bit flat and the textures were a bit lacking. This looks much, much better. Hopefully GT6 doesn't have the absolutely god fucking awful environments that 5 had. It's the one part of racing games that really needs to be stepped up, and it looks like they've done exactly that. Plus ,think how much sharper everything will look with twice the pixels. Hopefully they have figured out a better way to do the decals, though. In past games they have been pretty rough looking. Would be awesome if they used vectors instead of textures. It'd be nice to get a bit closer and show off some awesome looking decals.

EA trailer looked to me like the same old CG trailer they always do, everything about it (animations, textures, shaders, lighting, post processing) felt incredibly familiar and almost induced gagging upon viewing it. Based on the fact that the graphical fidelity on display in the forza 5 trailer was pretty much what id expect from turn 10 in the next gen and also because of the presence of realtime imperfections (aliasing, visible vertices) I'd say the raw footage for the Forza 5 trailer was probably captured in engine in real time and maybe a couple little frills were added in post (backfire, maybe the depth of field effect) along with cuts/transitions, either that or I'd say it's a very realistic target render.

I also thought it was CG trailer or carefully edited trailer. But next gen racing games should look like real. Some instances for this gen comes close to it already

taking some low quality effects (sparks, burnouts), its completely amazing.

watchdogs doest look anywhere near as good as its first reveal at E3 though

In-game Lighting quality looks same as forza 4, textures a bit better, only major improvement i see is more geometry from distant buildings.
Still i loved forza 4 so i'll be getting this.

That's not entirely true, though, is it. For one, you can go by experience and deduction. Do you know what you're are looking at i.e the differences in CGI and something generated in real time. You can deduce that cars on a racer on a console that is 8 years old looking stunning and not a million miles off this + next generation technology in hardware and dev tools = what you see is what you're going to get. You're going to get a significant jump in the level of quality, no? I would have thought that was a given with every new generation, especially one that's surpassed the usual 5 year shelf life already. Also, what if a person has some understanding or experience with actually working with CGI and building and creating both CG and video game assets? Surely these people would be in a position to tell the difference, no?

It looks the same.

You can't UV a vector. Everything has to be rasterized.