Andy Tudor: Gran Turismo and Forza Are Playing Catch Up With Project CARS 2

[PzR Slim]

People become emotional when people trash things that they like.

Wow! The irony.

 

[ghostrider135]

I have to say I believe PCars 2 will be ahead of the competition, The career of PCars was brilliant I expect more of the same, The graphics again were up there with the best, The sounds also up there with the best, The physics when you finally fiddle with the settings enough worked fantastically.

Gran Turismo ONLY looks best (When you look past the reused assets)
Forza ONLY has the best car list and livery creator.
NFS 2015 ONLY had an equally good livery creator imo.
Some believe AC has the best Physics, I don't agree.
Also to add PCars had a freaking pit radio coming through the freaking controller

I haven't pre-ordered yet but I intend to, I have played the GT:S beta and I believe PCars 2 will piss all over it.

 

[doblocruiser]

If I look at the 3 games that are coming out this year I have different reasons for buying/not buying them.

• FM7: Don't own an Xbox anymore so I'll pass. I enjoyed the Forza series a lot but I simply won't buy any Microsoft related gameconsole anymore.
• GT Sport: BETA has left a very bad taste in my mouth but lightingmodel and photomode are impressive. Will get it eventually but only for photomode. There are quite a few cars that I like a lot but the series has me in doubt for a long time.
• PCARS2: I like the presentation of the raw motorsport, the sheer variety of classes and tracks. Weather and Livetrack are a nice bonus. Even with the lack of some cars this game has convinced me the most so far.

The way I feel right now is that I will buy PCARS2 when it comes out because it is the only game that gets me excited to race. SMS enthusiasm for their product and the passion for Motorsports really has shown so far and they achieve to get that message accross.

 

[UKMikey]

People become emotional when people trash things that they like.

Sometimes they even develop "tunnel vision" regarding their favoured sim of choice.

If a product is sufficiently advanced from the others its manufacturers shouldn't need to have to put the competition down.

The fans will do it for them. Ha ha, just kidding.

FM7: Don't own an Xbox anymore so I'll pass. I enjoyed the Forza series a lot but I simply won't buy any Microsoft related gameconsole anymore.

Luckily you no longer need an MS related console to play FM7. However, I feel the same way about PlayStation unfortunately. I bought an Xbox at launch for Forza 5 and later switched to PC but decided to wait for a compelling racing exclusive to arrive on the Sony machine before shelling out for one. I'm glad I waited. GTS's emphasis on online only competition is a big disincentive to me to have to buy a console just to play it.

 

[05XR8]

GT & Forza dropped the ball at a time when they were on top of their game. To me, Shift/Shift2 were the foundation to target those two franchises.

PC1 just took the thrill of offline racing, to the next level with combative AI. Regardless of the AI behavior and physics problems, what it did was showcase HOW offline racing should be: exciting. That's how GT1-4 are(my thumb is going numb, just remembering the 300km races). Fun & exciting.

PC2 is going to be insane. While I enjoyed certain race series in Forza, it wore off faster than I thought would. I'm trying to fathom the improved handling, AI, track conditions, weather, graphics and how my senses are going to deal with it all. Not only am I hyped, many of my dream cars are in the game. Not to mention the amount of tracks. PC1 gave me a taste. PC2 is going to be the well prepared main course.

I feel GT & Forza need to catch up to what they were known for: the complete package. That's what PC2 is showing us. It's a complete experience.
GT never had a livery editor. From GT1-4, it didn't need one. They were creative with the authentic and imagined RM liveries we got.
Forza had the offline never ending championships. It varied a degree, each time I started from the eco hatches.

PC2 ticks all my boxes. Had I not read the honest reviews from gtp members, I would have missed out on a start of something big on consoles.

 

[Brend]

GT & Forza dropped the ball at a time when they were on top of their game. To me, Shift/Shift2 were the foundation to target those two franchises.

I absolutely loved the style and atmosphere of Shift II, probably one of the best in the genre at nailing that aspect of racing. It's just a shame it fell so flat gameplay wise (on a pad at least).

 

[HardRock]

For the weather effects, Driveclub is still the king.

Some specific rain effects do look awesome in it, I agree, but nothing is free, and in case of the Driveclub the price is a locked 30 FPS. PC2 looks very similar in the rain (just looked up videos to compare) and while it won't be locked at 60 FPS, it won't be locked at 30 either and doesn't just offer rain and generally static weather conditions. Driveclub is definitely better if someone's primary concerns include the simulation of water droplets on the windscreen and I'm not writing that to be snarky.

Concerning technologies, Pcars 1 was supposed to have the 'most advanced tire physics' but still felt like crap...

The two is completely unrelated. It does have the most advanced tire simulation in many regards, but how driving the cars feel is largely down to force feedback and how the forces that are coming from the physics are balanced or presented to the driver. In PC2 the physics was expanded upon, while setting up the FFB will be more intuitive and from everything I've heard and read from multiple news outlets so far, much better out of the box as well.

 

[FordGTGuy]

This is a whole lot of fuss about nothing. The clickbait title totally misrepresents what Andy Tudor actually said by deliberately removing the most important thing: the context.

We talked directly about the context in another thread.

He brings up three main points.

Project Cars having a dynamic weather system in 2015 while Forza Motorsport took until 2017.(Although as we can bring up a million times, this had to do with not compromising performance and nothing to do with the incapability of Turn 10 to implement such a feature; see as Forza Horizon 2 had dynamic weather in 2014 or a year before Project Cars released.)

Project Cars supporting VR, which is a completely fair point but they aren't exactly the only ones doing this in the console market(GT Sport.).

Project Cars in 2015 could run at 12K; first off I just want to say that this one is just silly. The point to make here is that this was done on a computer that in 2015 would have easily cost $2200+ in graphics cards alone, the point about Forza 7 doing it has to do with the fact that it's hitting 4K on a $500 Xbox One X.

Project Cars = Offer as many features as possible at the detriment of performance.

Forza = Offer the best performance possible at the detriment of features.

Pick your poison.

GT & Forza dropped the ball at a time when they were on top of their game. To me, Shift/Shift2 were the foundation to target those two franchises.

PC1 just took the thrill of offline racing, to the next level with combative AI. Regardless of the AI behavior and physics problems, what it did was showcase HOW offline racing should be: exciting. That's how GT1-4 are(my thumb is going numb, just remembering the 300km races). Fun & exciting.

PC2 is going to be insane. While I enjoyed certain race series in Forza, it wore off faster than I thought would. I'm trying to fathom the improved handling, AI, track conditions, weather, graphics and how my senses are going to deal with it all. Not only am I hyped, many of my dream cars are in the game. Not to mention the amount of tracks. PC1 gave me a taste. PC2 is going to be the well prepared main course.

I feel GT & Forza need to catch up to what they were known for: the complete package. That's what PC2 is showing us. It's a complete experience.
GT never had a livery editor. From GT1-4, it didn't need one. They were creative with the authentic and imagined RM liveries we got.
Forza had the offline never ending championships. It varied a degree, each time I started from the eco hatches.

PC2 ticks all my boxes. Had I not read the honest reviews from gtp members, I would have missed out on a start of something big on consoles.

PCars is not a complete experience but it's also not trying to be.

I can't drive a 2017 Ford Raptor with 900 hp and slicks in PCars 2 but that's not the point of PCars.

Don't try to imply PCars is something it's not.

Forza also isn't a complete experience, Forza isn't about having qualifying, flags or penalties in racing while PCars is.

Honestly, nothing is a "complete experience" as none of these games offer everything that all the games offer.

 

[shoemaker]

Not to mention that sms actually release games, whereas pd just talk about them and give excuses for non release. By the time gt sport comes out, x box one x will be out, they will have mahaged to skip a whole console generation cycle !

 

[FordGTGuy]

Not to mention that sms actually release games, whereas pd just talk about them and give excuses for non release. By the time gt sport comes out, x box one x will be out, they will have mahaged to skip a whole console generation cycle !

Out of any of the devs we can talk about here PD is definitely the one that needs an intervention.

Their first game on a new console and four years after the release of GT6(in the time frame of PCars, PCars 2, Forza 6, Forza 7 and AC.) they have delivered a game without a career mode, removed upgrading, removed dynamic ToD, removed dynamic weather and a much smaller car and track list; and they want $60 for it.

 

[Greek]

Sometimes they even develop "tunnel vision" regarding their favoured sim of choice.

If a product is sufficiently advanced from the others its manufacturers shouldn't need to have to put the competition down.

The fans will do it for them. Ha ha, just kidding.

They will learn.

Competitors like to have fun too.

 

[SlowBloke]

Your reading too much into it guys. Any exposure is good exposure.

With that in mind Andy did a great job with the bold statement.

I hope he takes the personal attacks and negativity shown on the chin and doesnt take it personally.

That aside each sim has pros and cons and everyone has their list of priorities - you will never agree - but the more you talk about it the more your thinking Project Cars 2

Those who dont like Project Cars are actually helping preorders and sales the louder they are. Probably exactly the opposite of what they set out to do.

That is pretty powerful marketing !

 

[FordGTGuy]

Your reading too much into it guys. Any exposure is good exposure.

With that in mind Andy did a great job with the bold statement.

I hope he takes the personal attacks and negativity shown on the chin and doesnt take it personally.

That aside each sim has pros and cons and everyone has their list of priorities - you will never agree - but the more you talk about it the more your thinking Project Cars 2

Those who dont like Project Cars are actually helping preorders and sales the louder they are. Probably exactly the opposite of what they set out to do.

That is pretty powerful marketing !

While I get the point your making, I can tell you that these stories on places like the xbox one subreddit are not going over well.

I don't completely agree with any exposure being good exposure.

You don't honestly think that Xbox One launch exposure was good for it, do you?

 

[HardRock]

Project Cars in 2015 could run at 12K; first off I just want to say that this one is just silly. For one, it wasn't 12K; it was three 4K monitors which isn't even close to 8K let alone 12K.

1 4k monitor: 3840x2160
3 4k monitors: 11520x2160

Hence 12k. I just wanted to clear this up, otherwise I largely agree with you. It's all about compromises between the various titles. Honestly, this shouldn't be controversial, since all development teams have limited resources, not allowing them to focus on every aspect of driving or racing, while the consoles themselves put a limit on what can be achieved with reasonable framerates as well.

 

[UKMikey]

It looks like Andy Tudor is merely reprising an even more combative Destructoid interview if their article is anything to go by.

 

[FordGTGuy]

1 4k monitor: 3840x2160
3 4k monitors: 11520x2160

Hence 12k. I just wanted to clear this up, otherwise I largely agree with you. It's all about compromises between the various titles. Honestly, this shouldn't be controversial, since all development teams have limited resources, not allowing them to focus on every aspect of driving or racing, while the consoles themselves put a limit on what can be achieved with reasonable framerates as well.

I removed the 12K part of my post, I've said in another post before that I don't even understand most of these arguments.

People keep arguing as if both games offer the same experience with the only difference that one does it better than the other.

 

[HardRock]

It looks like Andy Tudor is merely reprising an even more combative Destructoid interview if their article is anything to go by.

Yes, and the writer keenly pointed out what is happening:

"Project CARS isn't going to be a game that ever has a marketing budget the size of Forza. It could quietly be very good with each passing installment, only noticed by the relative few who care. It could live in the shadows of those first-party racing behemoths. Or it could make some noise and rattle some cages, effectively shouting "actually, we're better than those guys."

SMS are raising the stakes with this kind of marketing. It may turn off some people, sure, but it does increase their exposure and given how good the product is shaping up this time (I'm really having a hard time finding people who tried PC2 and say or write negative things about it), if this kind of talk gets people to see what it is all about, that could be a huge win for SMS. In the end, people tend to remember the product, not the marketing, but the latter leads people to the former, one way or another.

I removed the 12K part of my post, I've said in another post before that I don't even understand most of these arguments

Got it. To be absolutely clear, I didn't reply to your post to argue (I even said I largely agree with where you stand), just to point out a factual error in your post.

 

[FordGTGuy]

Got it. To be absolutely clear, I didn't reply to your post to argue (I even said I largely agree with where you stand), just to point out a factual error in your post.

No worries.

We are here to talk about video games, not go to war. lol

 

[FuriousDemon]

Everyone will forget about the interviews and will just enjoy the game. If the pad handling on consoles will be as good as what we saw in recent Italian videos and if the performance is not any worse, we'll have a gem on our hands. I'm confident it'll run great on my PC, just hope console people can enjoy it properly too. Really crossing my fingers there is indeed a massive QA effort on consoles as Ian promised.

 

[05XR8]

We talked directly about the context in another thread.

He brings up three main points.

Project Cars having a dynamic weather system in 2015 while Forza Motorsport took until 2017.(Although as we can bring up a million times, this had to do with not compromising performance and nothing to do with the incapability of Turn 10 to implement such a feature; see as Forza Horizon 2 had dynamic weather in 2014 or a year before Project Cars released.)

Project Cars supporting VR, which is a completely fair point but they aren't exactly the only ones doing this in the console market(GT Sport.).

Project Cars in 2015 could run at 12K; first off I just want to say that this one is just silly. The point to make here is that this was done on a computer that in 2015 would have easily cost $2200+ in graphics cards alone, the point about Forza 7 doing it has to do with the fact that it's hitting 4K on a $500 Xbox One X.

Project Cars = Offer as many features as possible at the detriment of performance.

Forza = Offer the best performance possible at the detriment of features.

Pick your poison.



PCars is not a complete experience but it's also not trying to be.

I can't drive a 2017 Ford Raptor with 900 hp and slicks in PCars 2 but that's not the point of PCars.

Don't try to imply PCars is something it's not.

Forza also isn't a complete experience, Forza isn't about having qualifying, flags or penalties in racing while PCars is.

Honestly, nothing is a "complete experience" as none of these games offer everything that all the games offer.

Of course it's a complete experience. Some say they don't need dynamic weather to enjoy a game. They don't need a live track to enjoy a game. They don't need livery editor to enjoy a game. They don't need 1000 cars to enjoy a game.

I referenced the two most popular racing games, as they gave complete experiences, even without online play at the time.
Why isn't PCars trying to be a complete experience, if that's what it is? Features are optional. What makes it complete is that excitement I mentioned. You read that, right?

Go back and check GT1-4. Complete experiences. Check FM4. Complete experience. I have no doubt PC2 IS that.

 

[SlowBloke]

While I get the point your making, I can tell you that these stories on places like the xbox one subreddit are not going over well.

I don't completely agree with any exposure being good exposure.

You don't honestly think that Xbox One launch exposure was good for it, do you?

Im not saying every new person hearing about it will buy it. Increased exposure means people will consider it.

Some will buy regardless, some not in a million years - their minds are made up - its the other guys that are of interest in this scenario.

Funny thing is for pcars 1 there are a lot of very negative people but it still sold way above their expectation even after the game was out long enough for the negative crew to greatly get stuck in. Once you really digest the negative comments you can filter out the ridiculous arguments pro and con and start to see a pattern of the reasonable arguments / points for and against.

Then a consumer decides - but the key thing initially was getting them to that place of deciding. You will catch more fish with a bigger net. In this scenario Andy had a big net

 

[FordGTGuy]

Of course it's a complete experience. Some say they don't need dynamic weather to enjoy a game. They don't need a live track to enjoy a game. They don't need livery editor to enjoy a game. They don't need 1000 cars to enjoy a game.

I referenced the two most popular racing games, as they gave complete experiences, even without online play at the time.
Why isn't PCars trying to be a complete experience, if that's what it is? Features are optional. What makes it complete is that excitement I mentioned. You read that, right?

Go back and check GT1-4. Complete experiences. Check FM4. Complete experience. I have no doubt PC2 IS that.

You're not completely understanding what I mean.

When I say complete experience, I mean offering everything that every racer could possibly offer.

Forza Motorsport has upgrading, silly cars, large car list, tons of normal street cars and a priority on performance over features.

Project Cars has proper motorsport rules, qualifying, lots of tracks and a priority of features over performance.

Forza Horizon has a large open world, large car list, and a bunch of silly fun experiences.

You can't get a single game that is going to have all of the features and performance; so I wouldn't say that there is a such thing a "complete experience"; these games all offer unique experiences.

 

[HardRock]

You can't get a single game that is going to have all of these features and performance; so I wouldn't say that there is a such thing a "complete experience"; these games all offer unique experiences.

Right, it would be more accurate to say that PC is going for the most comprehensive, regulated track racing experience, with some road racing possible, and with cars that suit both. That said, even in this more limited definition, it is of course missing a couple of series. Motorsport is truly a vast enterprise.

 

[Masscot]

We talked directly about the context in another thread.

He brings up three main points.

Project Cars having a dynamic weather system in 2015 while Forza Motorsport took until 2017.(Although as we can bring up a million times, this had to do with not compromising performance and nothing to do with the incapability of Turn 10 to implement such a feature; see as Forza Horizon 2 had dynamic weather in 2014 or a year before Project Cars released.)

Project Cars supporting VR, which is a completely fair point but they aren't exactly the only ones doing this in the console market(GT Sport.).

Project Cars in 2015 could run at 12K; first off I just want to say that this one is just silly. The point to make here is that this was done on a computer that in 2015 would have easily cost $2200+ in graphics cards alone, the point about Forza 7 doing it has to do with the fact that it's hitting 4K on a $500 Xbox One X.

Project Cars = Offer as many features as possible at the detriment of performance.

Forza = Offer the best performance possible at the detriment of features.

Pick your poison.

Does FM7 really have a proper dynamic weather system, ie one that isn't limited to certain tracks, and one that is procedurally generated? I'm asking because I genuinely don't know.

We also need to look at formats. I admire Turn 10's unwavering insistence on a rock-solid 60fps on relatively weak hardware but I can play pCARS on my PC at 4k/60, and get a much deeper and feature-rich experience than I can in FM6. pCARS 2 will offer an even deeper and richer experience (for me) than FM7 is ever likely to, and both will be performing equally flawlessly on my hardware.

I'll probably still pick FM7 up for the car porn because it does look gorgeous and a lot of fun, but if Apex is anything to go by I'll probably be playing it in chase cam with a joypad rather than cockpit view with a FFB wheel.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

I'm not one who generally gets involved in these type of threads, but the conversation, and what I read on these pages lately in both Forza and PCars forums, I guess has suckered me in too.

I might sound harsh, but I'll try to be fair. 👍


I must have watched 4 or 5 interviews with Andy during E3.
And on most accounts I had no issues, and thought he put his case forward well.

To be honest, there was one interview I thought had a bit of cringe factor about it.
And considering the interview in this news item/thread is a new one to me, then I guess that's saying something.

I won't be linking to it.
But the terminology used, along with some bold statements, and also (on first impression) body language, "arrogance" is certainly a term I could see people using.

But moving past that, I think he did a good job.
Sure, there's a few moments he perhaps could have done without, but as a whole he did precisely what he needed to do, and what he should be doing.
And that's talk up the game.

I do however have a few issues.

For one, no matter how much he spoke, he refused to say the words "Forza" or "Gran Turismo".
And the more I watched him, the more prevalent it became.
Now, perhaps in the world of Marketing this is the preferred option.
But as a "regular guy on the street" it became obvious, and frustrating.

Surely if you are confident in your product, simply referring to your competitors by name shouldn't be an issue.
And then take them to task over what you think you do better.
In fact, I would have much preferred to hear him say it.
But instead, his approach of using "other games" continually, and particularly in the condescending voice he used, wasn't a good look.

Second, the way when referring to the other games, he continually compared PC to console.
My issue here is that at no point did he have the grace to mention this difference.

Things like (paraphrasing) We did 4k back in 2015.
And then proceeded to mock his competitors, ignoring that they themselves only did that on PC.
Same with VR.
(paraphrasing) VR available across the whole game from day 1.
Yeh Andy, but again, only on PC.
No VR at all on console, and yet the comment was targeted at his competitors, on console.

Dynamic weather (paraphrasing) Back in PC1, everyone else is playing catch up.
Again, misleading.

My point is, a continual show of lack of respect for his competitors.

Now, I think "arrogance" is too strong a word.
For that matter "condescending" is probably too strong a word.
But hopefully you see where I'm aiming here.

Continually hiding/construing/seemingly intentionally misleading people regarding PC vs console.
And the continued lack of respect shown to his competitors by never naming them once.
And it wouldn't surprise me if those two things aren't linked.

But as I said, on a whole he did a good job selling his product.
Once those things stood out to me, it was hard to ignore.
But again, moving beyond that one interview, and a few lines here and there, he did exactly what he should be doing.
And more often than not, he did it well.
And credit to him for that.


PCars2 is shaping up to be an excellent game.
I sincerely hope they haven't gone down the road of* AC and concentrated so hard on the PC version, that console players feel like second class citizens.
Which at this stage is still some concern to me.
But nevertheless, essentially a certain purchase here.


I would like to post a couple of other unrelated comments.

I see some were suggesting Forza was "arrogant" for including the reveal of the Porsche in their presentation.
I hope those people didn't trip over the McLaren that PCars2 brought to E3.

And this endless focus on "realism" in this game, and yet some of the reasoning I read here.
When I see options that clearly...... actually, it's time I stopped.



Apologies for the longer than anticipated post.


*Late edit.
Changed "on" to "of".
Could be a little bit of OCD, but once spotted it needs correcting.

 

[TokoTurismo]

One of the things people like is taking a road car and turning into a race car that could compete in those leagues.

I'm one of those people who adores this concept since GT2. As a car enthusiast, Forza has become the one game I prefer. It's a game about 'car culture' and the joy of turning cars into competitive machines against your rivals.

The fact that FM7 will feature a "track day" option online, similar to GT5/GT6's free run, I'm a very happy camper because I suck at racing after my last session in FM6 yesterday (and the people I raced with ruining it) other than FH3. So now I prefer to just modified cars in Forza to various specs for diversity (pretty much like in FH3), test and chill.

I like PCars 2's approach in motorsport culture, featuring different kinds of cars, disciplines and lots of tracks to explore! The RX events has me hooked, and both @PzR Slim and @05XR8 have me convinced that PCars 2 really did fixed the issue with the pad. Thanks you two btw.

Although hardcore, I will love to try it out just for the rallycross discipline, much like in TOCA Race Driver 2/3 where I would go through the events just to get to the rally events of it.

GT Sport sort of has me confused however. I'm unsure what it wants to be. On one hand you have a iRacing-type game that focuses online competition, but on the other hand you have a game that focuses too much on looks and graphics like in the past.

It still lacks my interest sadly as it looks and sounds "meh" to me. I mean we already have pCARS for the concept it's supposedly trying to aim, and it seems to have you buy cars judging by it's earlier screenshot. It maybe my first GT I won't be purchasing I'm afraid. :\

 

[crowhop]

I find it highly dangerous to claim that Project CARS 2 is 'in another league' against any other racing game given it hasn't released yet. The first game acts as reason enough to remain tight-lipped before you/other consumers have actually played the title.

Last thing we want is a situation similar to the first game's pre-release compared to post-release, where damage control was through the roof because Project CARS wasn't the Christ and savior of racing games.

Features wise, it's looking like it'll be a step above the class but I wouldn't say that's the be all, end all, for the genre. Let's see how it turns out when the finished game is released in September.

Highly dangerous? Should we be terrified?

I think it is "highly dangerous" for a writer to single out a phrase from it's context and scrutinize it without conveying to the reader the context from which the phrase was taken.

Should people be skeptical of something a business states publicly about its own product and competition? Yes, a wise person always is.

But, within the scope of the entire interview, was Andy Tudor right in what he said that other games are playing catch-up? Yes, absolutely. Project CARS took the Racing Genre on Console and PC to a new level by doing things other, bigger titles (specifically Forza and Gran Turismo, because they were the competitive reference of context at E3) have not to this point. We can debate on how well they implemented all the features they added which other games simply do not offer, but there is no debate about Project CARS being first-to-market in including many, many features for a Racing-focused game.

Tudor rattled off VR and Time and Weather, but he could have just as well mentioned having something as basic as a comprehensive and fully customized Race Weekend built into the Career Mode. This certainly wouldn't have made any splashy headlines, but it is a crucial aspect that should be mentioned as the foundation of just how technically advanced Project CARS was. From the very bottom to the very top of Career Mode in Project CARS one had the full option of a Practice Session, Qualifying Session and Race Session set at the length you chose while having Weather, Dynamic Time, Tire Wear, Fuel Consumption and Damage on for all tracks. And all of this against quality AI which could be tuned to your preference. Did GT6 or F6 have these rudimentary features in 2015? No. Will GTS or F7 have them in 2017? No.

And what about Online? Did GT6 or F6 have these basic features Online in 2015? No. Will GTS or F7 have them in 2017? Again, no.

So on the topic of catching up to Project CARS 2, GTS and F7 aren't even on level with the original title. Now, the importance of these features largely comes down to personal preference on what you want in a Racing Game or if you simply prefer a Car Game. For people who want a Racing Game, the original title and Part 2 will be the be-all, end-all because it is the only game on the market that offers these elementary features. And how well they pull off all of these features off will determine if the game draws in more than just the Racing Game enthusiasts.

 

[Brend]

Highly dangerous? Should we be terrified?

I think it is "highly dangerous" for a writer to single out a phrase from it's context and scrutinize it without conveying to the reader the context from which the phrase was taken.

Should people be skeptical of something a business states publicly about its own product and competition? Yes, a wise person always is.

But, within the scope of the entire interview, was Andy Tudor right in what he said that other games are playing catch-up? Yes, absolutely. Project CARS took the Racing Genre on Console and PC to a new level by doing things other, bigger titles (specifically Forza and Gran Turismo, because they were the competitive reference of context at E3) have not to this point. We can debate on how well they implemented all the features they added which other games simply do not offer, but there is no debate about Project CARS being first-to-market in including many, many features for a Racing-focused game.

Tudor rattled off VR and Time and Weather, but he could have just as well mentioned having something as basic as a comprehensive and fully customized Race Weekend built into the Career Mode. This certainly wouldn't have made any splashy headlines, but it is a crucial aspect that should be mentioned as the foundation of just how technically advanced Project CARS was. From the very bottom to the very top of Career Mode in Project CARS one had the full option of a Practice Session, Qualifying Session and Race Session set at the length you chose while having Weather, Dynamic Time, Tire Wear, Fuel Consumption and Damage on for all tracks. And all of this against quality AI which could be tuned to your preference. Did GT6 or F6 have these rudimentary features in 2015? No. Will GTS or F7 have them in 2017? No.

And what about Online? Did GT6 or F6 have these basic features Online in 2015? No. Will GTS or F7 have them in 2017? Again, no.

So on the topic of catching up to Project CARS 2, GTS and F7 aren't even on level with the original title. Now, the importance of these features largely comes down to personal preference on what you want in a Racing Game or if you simply prefer a Car Game. For people who want a Racing Game, the original title and Part 2 will be the be-all, end-all because it is the only game on the market that offers these elementary features. And how well they pull off all of these features off will determine if the game draws in more than just the Racing Game enthusiasts.

Aw petal, did you read the article or just the headline? Scrutinize is used so incorrectly here it's ridiculous. A headline isn't scrutiny, it literally acts as an introduction to what the article focuses on.

Your opinion in the rest of this post is fair enough but please don't act like your opinion is absolute. It's frankly embarrassing how you act like any racing game fan couldn't enjoy another series more than Project CARS. There are plenty. This is a competitive genre.

With such a one way street attitude on the subject of racing games, you've just earned yourself a fast-track ticket to my block list. Enjoy.

 

[crowhop]

Aw petal, did you read the article or just the headline? Scrutinize is used so incorrectly here it's ridiculous. A headline isn't scrutiny, it literally acts as an introduction to what the article focuses on.

Your opinion in the rest of this post is fair enough but please don't act like your opinion is absolute. It's frankly embarrassing how you act like any racing game fan couldn't enjoy another series more than Project CARS. There are plenty. This is a competitive genre.

With such a one way street attitude on the subject of racing games, you've just earned yourself a fast-track ticket to my block list. Enjoy.

Petal? You're a representative of this site, dude. Act a little more mature when faced with fair rebuttal, please. Whatever tone you read my post in, I recommend changing it to a more balanced one.

You know you've made it when you've been blocked by a writer from a site you're on.

 

[FordGTGuy]

I'm one of those people who adores this concept since GT2. As a car enthusiast, Forza has become the one game I prefer. It's a game about 'car culture' and the joy of turning cars into competitive machines against your rivals.

The fact that FM7 will feature a "track day" option online, similar to GT5/GT6's free run, I'm a very happy camper because I suck at racing after my last session in FM6 yesterday (and the people I raced with ruining it) other than FH3. So now I prefer to just modified cars in Forza to various specs for diversity (pretty much like in FH3), test and chill.

I like PCars 2's approach in motorsport culture, featuring different kinds of cars, disciplines and lots of tracks to explore! The RX events has me hooked, and both @PzR Slim and @05XR8 have me convinced that PCars 2 really did fixed the issue with the pad. Thanks you two btw.

Although hardcore, I will love to try it out just for the rallycross discipline, much like in TOCA Race Driver 2/3 where I would go through the events just to get to the rally events of it.

GT Sport sort of has me confused however. I'm unsure what it wants to be. On one hand you have a iRacing-type game that focuses online competition, but on the other hand you have a game that focuses too much on looks and graphics like in the past.

It still lacks my interest sadly as it looks and sounds "meh" to me. I mean we already have pCARS for the concept it's supposedly trying to aim, and it seems to have you buy cars judging by it's earlier screenshot. It maybe my first GT I won't be purchasing I'm afraid. :\

I love upgrading cars but I have to admit that the thing I enjoy most in Forza Motorsport is lapping stock vehicles around random tracks.

I feel that in Forza when a car is stock it has the most character and feels unique but when you start doing the same upgrades to every car they start to lose that unique feeling.(I'm not saying they still don't drive differently but they do drive more similar.)

Highly dangerous? Should we be terrified?

I think it is "highly dangerous" for a writer to single out a phrase from it's context and scrutinize it without conveying to the reader the context from which the phrase was taken.

Should people be skeptical of something a business states publicly about its own product and competition? Yes, a wise person always is.

But, within the scope of the entire interview, was Andy Tudor right in what he said that other games are playing catch-up? Yes, absolutely. Project CARS took the Racing Genre on Console and PC to a new level by doing things other, bigger titles (specifically Forza and Gran Turismo, because they were the competitive reference of context at E3) have not to this point. We can debate on how well they implemented all the features they added which other games simply do not offer, but there is no debate about Project CARS being first-to-market in including many, many features for a Racing-focused game.

Tudor rattled off VR and Time and Weather, but he could have just as well mentioned having something as basic as a comprehensive and fully customized Race Weekend built into the Career Mode. This certainly wouldn't have made any splashy headlines, but it is a crucial aspect that should be mentioned as the foundation of just how technically advanced Project CARS was. From the very bottom to the very top of Career Mode in Project CARS one had the full option of a Practice Session, Qualifying Session and Race Session set at the length you chose while having Weather, Dynamic Time, Tire Wear, Fuel Consumption and Damage on for all tracks. And all of this against quality AI which could be tuned to your preference. Did GT6 or F6 have these rudimentary features in 2015? No. Will GTS or F7 have them in 2017? No.

And what about Online? Did GT6 or F6 have these basic features Online in 2015? No. Will GTS or F7 have them in 2017? Again, no.

So on the topic of catching up to Project CARS 2, GTS and F7 aren't even on level with the original title. Now, the importance of these features largely comes down to personal preference on what you want in a Racing Game or if you simply prefer a Car Game. For people who want a Racing Game, the original title and Part 2 will be the be-all, end-all because it is the only game on the market that offers these elementary features. And how well they pull off all of these features off will determine if the game draws in more than just the Racing Game enthusiasts.

Are we really going back to this dumb argument?

They are different games doing different things that offer different experiences.

If PCars is on another level with race setups then Forza is on another level with upgrading and online community features.

We can go back and forth arguing all day because the fact of the matter is that they aren't the same game and claiming one is in another league is just silly and sounds trollish.