Do You Class GT5 Prologue as a Sim

[Rusty*]

Iv'e recently been playing some of my old PC sims (GTR 2 etc) and due to the need to find a patch, it led me to the sim racing forums, where they had a thread debating whether GT5P compares with the likes of SIMBIN titles, rFactor etc. Now I can think of a few reasons why you can't really compare the two
1. GT5P is a demo, (we'll use GTR2 as our example) GTR2 is a full game
2. Not one car from GTR2 is in GT5P
And the reason which in my opinion is the most important is -
3. How many of these debaters have actually driven a FIA GT Spec car round Spa, or conversly, how many have driven a GT-R around Fuji.

Point 3 leads to my question. Do you class GT5P as a sim and why? Personally I do not think I'm qualified to answer the question in full. My partial answer would be that in the game, the cars do exactly what I've seen or heard they do from drivers/shows etc which is a simulation in my mind anyway

Yes thats right, some people don't take into consideration that GT5 PROLOGUE is still basically a large DEMO.
As for the people talking about Car damage, that is coming in GT5. Besides there's more to Driving and Car simulation than just Car Damage. I mean to say to them...its not a Crash simulator.
I do class GT5P as a Simulator, GT5P has the basics there, but GT5 will be a very comprohensive simulator, it will put the critics to shame.:tup:
They willl see.
Peace,
Rusty*

 

[Rykon Zero]

Is GT5P a sim? That's like asking if yogurt is a dairy product. Of course it is! GT5P is of course a sim game, and a good one at that, despite it's demo title. The reason it doesn't stack up against rFactor and those others is that those are the best sims. I have a go-kart, but even though it's got a centrifugal clutch and the inability to turn right, I still class it with go-karts.

 

[cmpinberkeley]

LOL, it's about $13 per month (with a year sub) and you get $60 credit towards new content... but you probably knew that, right?

And, it's been out of "beta" for almost 6 months. It's definitely the pinnacle of sim racing at the moment, not a beta, and not cheap.

That said, I definitely consider GT5P a sim. Forza 2 was the best on a console before GT5P, but cockpit view, G25 support, and overall feel (despite limited tracks/cars) makes GT5P the closest you can come to a PC sim on a console. Yes, damage would be a huge plus (collision physics need attention first, as has been mentioned) but IMO we're still driving the most accurate console simulator available.

I agree unimental. For a console game, I consider GT5P a decent driving sim with the potential to be really good after they implement all the things we've been asking for and think are coming.

I have not played GT5P, however, since September when I started with iRacing. iRacing is absolutely the pinnacle of simulating tracks, cars and the racing experience. I can't get enough of it, and while the cost is high compared to what we are used to, it is the best recreational money I have spent in a long, long time...and I do lots of fun things.

I really wish that PD would look very closely at the things iRacing is doing and steal shamelessly. Then GT5 could be a very good sim and also cater to the needs of the casual gamer.

 

[P1]

GT5 is a sim compared to other console racing games but not compared to PC games.

 

[RAVELLRON]

GT5 is a sim compared to other console racing games but not compared to PC games.

the best answer!!!!!!👍

 

[Mad94d]

GT5 is a sim compared to other console racing games but not compared to PC games.

+2:tup:
The closest I can get to a sim is GT5 because I don't have a wheel for my computer. Or I can drive my Go-kart, but I don't get enough time to drive it.

 

[boiltheocean]

GT5 is the best for Console but PC does better.

I would consider GTR and GTR2 to be amazing sims, I was at donington when they had a stand running a demo before the original GTR was realeased and they had actual drivers comming in and racing on it against everyday people like me. All the drivers seem to approve of it and I loved it, thats why I went out and bought my Momo wheel.

 

[dzidza]

GT5 is a sim compared to other console racing games but not compared to PC games.

GT5 isn't a sim yet, unless your working with PD.

And to be honest, gt5p is very close to pc sim. The only thing that i like in iracing over rfactor is the penalty system. In i racing you don't have a verity of cars to choose, and one other thing that you all are forgetting, iracing doesn't have a production cars, only racing cars, so to be that bold and say that iracing is much better sim the gt5p is a bit off.

It's easy to make a super sim with 6 different class series, but why don't they try with 50 different. By the time iracing has that number of cars in game i will be grandpa :-).

It all comes down to does one prefer. I don't think any of us have driven f430 normal, then immediately f430gt (race car) and then same car in the gtp5 or iracing or rfactor on the same track. So to me all this comparison, and questions which is better sim is unnecessary.

one year of iracing is 156$, plus more to buy new cars and tracks. All that money for what, better physics then gt5p. It's not that better to justify all that money. And in gt5 full you will have 150+ cars, and i assume 40+ tracks for only 60$ + plus you will get a set of knives, preferably Shogun Knives ;-)

 

[dzidza]

GT5 is the best for Console but PC does better.

I would consider GTR and GTR2 to be amazing sims, I was at donington when they had a stand running a demo before the original GTR was realeased and they had actual drivers comming in and racing on it against everyday people like me. All the drivers seem to approve of it and I loved it, thats why I went out and bought my Momo wheel.

They are paid to approve the game, same are citroen rally drives that will be playing gt5p, they will say it's the best sim they have tried, and that gtp5 is so close to real driving, and that they used it to learn tracks and etc.. Don't believe everything they say.

 

[homeforsummer]

In my opinion, it's a sim.

The handling feels realistic enough to me to consider it as such. I can't compare it with any of the PC sims (apart from maybe LFS) because for games like GTR2 I've not driven full-on FIA GT cars before. I have however driven a race prepared MINI Cooper on a track, and GT5P's representation of a Cooper S feels pretty accurate when you put it on some grippy tyres.

That's good enough for me, and I'm happy to assume that the other cars in the game all handle pretty accurately too.

 

[Fuzzy]

Mixed feelings.

 

[Poncha]

GT5 is a sim compared to other console racing games but not compared to PC games.

+3

I voted mixed feelings. GT certainly simulates car physics much better than most other console driving games, and for me, strikes a good balance between an "arcade" and simulator feel.

But compared to something like Live For Speed, it's not as good a sim.
http://www.lfs.net/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_for_Speed

 

[homeforsummer]

Live For Speed has good physics, but it's hard to call it a full sim when the majority of the cars are "made up". Ideally a sim should have real, licenced cars, so at least they can be "simulating" real vehicles.

 

[Poncha]

Agreed, LFS is "technically" (i.e. in terms of physics) a better simulator. GT is a better representation of vehicles.

In the end, I'd chose GT in a heartbeat over any other driving game (have been playing since GT1, and GT is the main reason why I have a PS3 )

 

[RedBaron]

Graphics wise it's no discussion, but GT still have very long time till the car movement will look and feel so believable like this:



And it's mainly because of that aged and simple N1-R3 tyre system with no deformation and no relation to real tyre models. So PD, hurry up and unleash that whole cell power for even better simulation! Even fair financial offer for those guys behind LFS does have sense for both sides.

 

[RedBaron]

.

 

[homeforsummer]

Graphics wise it's no discussion, but GT still have very long time till the car movement will look and feel so believable like this:

That's a great illustration of the physics in LFS (genuinely impressive), but again remember that there are a little more than a dozen, made up cars in LFS (and a couple of real ones) which they can write physics for.

PD not only have to try and make game physics replicate real cars, but then do the same for hundreds and hundreds of models. And then they have to make it commercially successful and to do so it has to have some concessions towards accessibility, and LFS isn't the most accessible racing game ever...

 

[RedBaron]

PD not only have to try and make game physics replicate real cars, but then do the same for hundreds and hundreds of models. And then they have to make it commercially successful and to do so it has to have some concessions towards accessibility, and LFS isn't the most accessible racing game ever...

I hear "more quantity than quality" whispering somewhere between rows of this paragraph And I mean it would really worth it to have this level of simulation, even with less cars.

 

[Mad Matt]

The video above doesn't look that good to me. The cars seem to float a little and the movements seem exaggerated.

The tyre deformation is good though.

 

[eight6er]

It would be a dream come true if a gt game had physics as good as lfs physics. I would prefer 50 cars that handle right rather than 700 that dont.

 

[neil_1980]

nope its not a sim in my eyes... LFS is getting close mind.

however its not what id consider an arcade racer either so id guess it sits somewhere in the middle

 

[Juice476]

PC sims do the little things, If you jump a curb in GTR you break you suspension. In GTR it rains, it has day to night, it has a radio, it has pit lanes that you have to drive, You can fully stall the car. The car setup is detailed, the online is solid, the crashes and damage are detailed. You can turn on and off your lights, and wind sheild wipers. The list of the little details the little extras is what puts PC sims over the top.

PC sims are just more detailed. But a PC can do things that a PS3 will cant so.......Also games like GT are "dumbed down" so they can sell better. With all the money PD has could they make somthing close to Rfactor, LFS, GTR, iRacing? Yes but it wouldnt sell. Hardcore PC sim racing is a niche.

 

[supersonic-88]

PC sims do the little things, If you jump a curb in GTR you break you suspension. In GTR it rains, it has day to night, it has a radio, it has pit lanes that you have to drive, You can fully stall the car. The car setup is detailed, the online is solid, the crashes and damage are detailed. You can turn on and off your lights, and wind sheild wipers. The list of the little details the little extras is what puts PC sims over the top.

PC sims are just more detailed. But a PC can do things that a PS3 will cant so.......Also games like GT are "dumbed down" so they can sell better. With all the money PD has could they make somthing close to Rfactor, LFS, GTR, iRacing? Yes but it wouldnt sell. Hardcore PC sim racing is a niche.

I agree with this too. Its often the little things that can make something better than the rest. Also the AI/Offline racing is much better in PC sims. I know the cover of GT games says 'the real driving simulator' but i dont think thats an excuse for poor AI, when the whole game is basically about racing others. I cant remember one occasion where i had a memorable offline race on a GT game, where as i have had countless on PC sims. Yes racing online is an alternative but i shouldnt have to, even though i enjoy it.

It feels like to me, PC sims have a more complete package & better experience than GT provides. On consoles yes, the GT series is the best available in my mind, but overall it certainly isnt. It feels often like PD are more concerned about putting in so much content, that they do infact forget the little things. I would much rather these features listed, than thousands of cars, perfect grahpics, etc.

Hopefully GT5 will have some of the stuff mentioned

 

[Wolfe]

That's a great illustration of the physics in LFS (genuinely impressive), but again remember that there are a little more than a dozen, made up cars in LFS (and a couple of real ones) which they can write physics for.

PD not only have to try and make game physics replicate real cars, but then do the same for hundreds and hundreds of models.

Not quite.

Each game has one, single physics engine by which every car is governed. When you choose a car, its specifications are plugged into that physics engine. No special treatment, just a list of numbers. Live for Speed is realistic because its physics engine is very detailed and accurate. It doesn't matter that the cars don't actually exist, because they accurately represent their listed specifications, and will behave similarly to any real car with similar specifications.

Polyphony Digital also only has to write one engine, and while they do have to sort out the specifications for each car, it's not the painstaking work you make it out to be. It's just data entry (and we at GTP tend to pick out the few errors they make, such as GT4's GTI with the identical gears). If you think there are any shortcomings in GT5's physics, PD has no excuse for them, other than perhaps catering to a more casual market.

 

[homeforsummer]

I hear "more quantity than quality" whispering somewhere between rows of this paragraph And I mean it would really worth it to have this level of simulation, even with less cars.

Nah, not really. Of course it'd be nice to have that level of simulation as in LFS, but I wouldn't want numbers of cars to be sacrificed. If the physics stay the way they are at the moment I wouldn't be unhappy, they get better in every GT game. And I'd still call it a simulation. I stand by my original point, which brings me on to...

Polyphony Digital also only has to write one engine, and while they do have to sort out the specifications for each car, it's not the painstaking work you make it out to be. It's just data entry (and we at GTP tend to pick out the few errors they make, such as GT4's GTI with the identical gears). If you think there are any shortcomings in GT5's physics, PD has no excuse for them, other than perhaps catering to a more casual market.

I'm aware that the game "universe" will have the same physics parameters, but the PD team still have to test every car and gather data, and then somehow translate the results they find into every individual car in the game. Whether they do it with number crunching or not it's a much larger task than doing number crunching for a dozen made-up cars.

They also clearly concentrate much more than the PC sim developers on making the game look great. I know graphics aren't everything, but if they weren't something at the very least then we'd have no reason to improve them. And the graphics, even in GT5P, are way, way ahead of any PC sim I've ever seen.

I'm not saying GT5P has as impressive physics as LFS, because it doesn't. But putting it down for such a reason is unfair because the other aspects of the game (especially once the full GT5 is released) will more than make up for any discrepancy in physics between it and the sims people consider the most accurate. And it's obvious the game has to be at least slightly accessible to a wider range of people. I think a few too many people on GTP get a bit high and mighty and consider themselves much more important than the casual gamers...

And let's consider the concept of interpretation. What if the physics in GT5P are how PD interpret real physics to be? What if they spend more time making it "feel" like real car than doing things entirely in numbers like LFS do?

And remember, the physics in GT5P are still very impressive. Anyone who's driven an actual car will tell you that.

 

[magburner]

Despite my reservations, and the fact that I voted for 'mixed feelings', I will say that GT is a simulation. There are inconsistencies, but then again no simulation is perfect. As far as consoles go though, I'd rate it highly (without having played Forza or any other console race sim).

One thing that maybe needs to be clarified a little is what exactly are PD simulating? Gran Turismo has always been touted as a 'Real Driving Simulator'. This was true with the original Gran Turismo, but the franchise has shifted more towards racing cars even though they still cater for regular production cars. I would like to see a clear line between the setup options for race cars and production cars, because at present, there seems to be little difference.

 

[Zer0]

Not quite.

Each game has one, single physics engine by which every car is governed. When you choose a car, its specifications are plugged into that physics engine. No special treatment, just a list of numbers. Live for Speed is realistic because its physics engine is very detailed and accurate. It doesn't matter that the cars don't actually exist, because they accurately represent their listed specifications, and will behave similarly to any real car with similar specifications.

Polyphony Digital also only has to write one engine, and while they do have to sort out the specifications for each car, it's not the painstaking work you make it out to be. It's just data entry (and we at GTP tend to pick out the few errors they make, such as GT4's GTI with the identical gears). If you think there are any shortcomings in GT5's physics, PD has no excuse for them, other than perhaps catering to a more casual market.

Kazunori explains, "Each time a car manufacturer announces a new mechanism and a thesis is submitted we then study and add the new mechanism to our simulation model."

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y44/zerit0/gtscan4.jpg

I would like to know how you can simulate accurately this on LFS changing a few default parameters, specially all the combination of dynamic computerized gizmos that come with new cars. Like this:

S-AWC
The system now adds an ASC (Active Stability Control) feature to the ACD (Active Center Differential), AYC (Active Yaw Control) and Sport ABS (Sport Antilock Brake System) components that have proven themselves in the Lancer Evolution series. Integrated system management of these four components allows regulation of torque and braking force at each wheel. S-AWC also now employs yaw rate feedback control. This allows the system to control each wheel under a wide range of driving conditions, thus realizing vehicle behavior that faithfully reflects driver inputs and allows drivers of all abilities to enjoy sporty motoring with confidence.

 

[Wolfe]

I'm aware that the game "universe" will have the same physics parameters, but the PD team still have to test every car and gather data, and then somehow translate the results they find into every individual car in the game. Whether they do it with number crunching or not it's a much larger task than doing number crunching for a dozen made-up cars.

Even when GT is developed by a team of Japanese programmers and supporting staff on a Sony budget, slaving away in a Tokyo office for days at a time, and Live for Speed is programmed by one British bloke in his spare time? You're right, a lot of time and effort goes into a GT game, but I don't know why we should pity PD for it. It's their fault for wanting such a huge selection of cars -- I'd rather see a great GT with 200 cars than a mediocre one with 700.

I'm not saying GT5P has as impressive physics as LFS, because it doesn't. But putting it down for such a reason is unfair because the other aspects of the game (especially once the full GT5 is released) will more than make up for any discrepancy in physics between it and the sims people consider the most accurate. And it's obvious the game has to be at least slightly accessible to a wider range of people. I think a few too many people on GTP get a bit high and mighty and consider themselves much more important than the casual gamers...

Sorry, I can't stand to play a game with wrong physics, no matter how alluring the rest of the game is. That's why GT4 was so disappointing. If a game isn't realistic, it should at least be enjoyable. GT3 was great about that. GT4 was not.

You're right when you say the game has to be accessible. That's true of any console sim that wishes to be successful. However, "accessible" and "realistic" are not mutually exclusive. All you have to do is provide the appropriate driving aids or an "easy physics" mode, and configure the standard controller's inputs to work well with the game. If I'm not mistaken, GT5 already has all of these elements, so the "realism" knob could be cranked up a bit. Which brings us to your next point...

And let's consider the concept of interpretation. What if the physics in GT5P are how PD interpret real physics to be? What if they spend more time making it "feel" like real car than doing things entirely in numbers like LFS do?

I'm sure PD believes GT is "real." Kazunori himself has said he never plays any other sims (if he did, GT would be a much, much better game, IMO), so of course he thinks his own creation is "real." Based on 6 years of driving experience, including a little track time, and all my knowledge of automotive mechanics and the physics of cornering, I would disagree. I think Live for Speed is the only game to truly recreate the feeling of driving a roadcar at high speed. But that's just me.

However, as you say, GT5 is still impressive. I've only played an old update, and I assume the latest is better, but the one I played was lightyears ahead of GT4 in physics. Given time to adjust to its particular flaws, I bet I would have a blast drifting the 135i up and down the Nurburgring in the final game. My sister might have a PS3 by then.

Kazunori explains, "Each time a car manufacturer announces a new mechanism and a thesis is submitted we then study and add the new mechanism to our simulation model."

I would like to know how you can simulate accurately this on LFS changing a few default parameters, specially all the combination of dynamic computerized gizmos that come with new cars. Like [S-AWC].

Live for Speed already allows you to customize an AWD system, offering open, locked, viscous limited slip, and clutch pack limited slip differentials for the front, center, and rear (but no locked center diff). The LSDs are also customizable.

If Scawen were given access to Mitsubishi's data or programming, electronically controlled AWD systems like S-AWC would be quite easy to include in the game. Simply because of the way the physics engine is implemented, all you'd have to do is tell the car how to route the power to the wheels, and physics would take care of the rest.

 

[myke6699]

Even when GT is developed by a team of Japanese programmers and supporting staff on a Sony budget, slaving away in a Tokyo office for days at a time, and Live for Speed is programmed by one British bloke in his spare time? You're right, a lot of time and effort goes into a GT game, but I don't know why we should pity PD for it. It's their fault for wanting such a huge selection of cars -- I'd rather see a great GT with 200 cars than a mediocre one with 700.


Sorry, I can't stand to play a game with wrong physics, no matter how alluring the rest of the game is. That's why GT4 was so disappointing. If a game isn't realistic, it should at least be enjoyable. GT3 was great about that. GT4 was not.

You're right when you say the game has to be accessible. That's true of any console sim that wishes to be successful. However, "accessible" and "realistic" are not mutually exclusive. All you have to do is provide the appropriate driving aids or an "easy physics" mode, and configure the standard controller's inputs to work well with the game. If I'm not mistaken, GT5 already has all of these elements, so the "realism" knob could be cranked up a bit. Which brings us to your next point...


I'm sure PD believes GT is "real." Kazunori himself has said he never plays any other sims (if he did, GT would be a much, much better game, IMO), so of course he thinks his own creation is "real." Based on 6 years of driving experience, including a little track time, and all my knowledge of automotive mechanics and the physics of cornering, I would disagree. I think Live for Speed is the only game to truly recreate the feeling of driving a roadcar at high speed. But that's just me.

However, as you say, GT5 is still impressive. I've only played an old update, and I assume the latest is better, but the one I played was lightyears ahead of GT4 in physics. Given time to adjust to its particular flaws, I bet I would have a blast drifting the 135i up and down the Nurburgring in the final game. My sister might have a PS3 by then.


Live for Speed already allows you to customize an AWD system, offering open, locked, viscous limited slip, and clutch pack limited slip differentials for the front, center, and rear (but no locked center diff). The LSDs are also customizable.

If Scawen were given access to Mitsubishi's data or programming, electronically controlled AWD systems like S-AWC would be quite easy to include in the game. Simply because of the way the physics engine is implemented, all you'd have to do is tell the car how to route the power to the wheels, and physics would take care of the rest.

I think the reason why Kazunori Y doesn't play any other car racing/sim is because he prefers to drive a real car- you probably know that he has a couple of Ford GTs, Nissan GTR, Porsche etc.
The new Spec III has somewaht improved the physics of the previous update. The most pronounced is that you can actually feel the contact between the tires and the pavement which wasn't as apparent before.

 

[Juice476]

If the final version of GT5 doesnt have:

Weather
Day to night
Pits
Detailed damage
Private Rooms

Then its a failure compared to a PC sim. The things I listed are the very basic things that every PC sim has. Like I said before its not just the physics that make PC sims better its the little extra's.

Speaking of damage I will be interested to see how detailed GT5 is. Break wear? Tire wear\blowouts\Rip offs? Clutch wear? Over heating? Suspension breaks when jumping a curb? Roll overs? ect..... Honestly I think GT5's damage wont be any better then Forza 2's.

I dont think PD is going to bring PC sim racing to the console. MS got SimBin maybe Sony could get Image Space Incorporated or LFS Team, And bring a proper sim to the lost flock. Or maybe I'm wrong and PD will come up with somthing that blows my mind.