Do you think PD is biased towards Japanese cars?
- Thread starter MrSassypantz
- 144 comments
- 14,783 views
I just leave those times there for anyone interested in testing it. Theres much more times in the page, but from my experience the GT-R is too fast, just like in all 4 previous games. Like it or not just watch some real times and do some testing. You can read car magazines for some comparisons too
- 1,008
Goshin2568You are comparing a 605 hp car against a 475 hp car. Of course it's faster.
Ya.... And Forza is biased towards american cars, so your whole point is null.
Haha ya, but American cars do drive like go-karts. And I'm american.
What?? The Enzo is alot of things, but understeery is not one of them. It jumps around like the chipmunk from hoodwinked after they gave him coffee. (Obscure reference anyone?)
Anyway, in response to the OP, I think they are biased in numbers, which is totally acceptable, but not really in performance. I would be pissed if they made japanese cars drive better.
It has alot of power.. but no control... drive an enzo.. then drive a 458 and Scud afterward.. hell even the Murcielago twins are only a second off its tail around monza.. i use it... but its not one of my go to cars..
- 421
- United Kingdom
- Darty08
Thats because GT5 is Designed ,Mostly Developed, Made in Japan by Japaneses people and up until GT5, GT was sold in Japan first.
- 2,083
- FreedomWeasel
I can say "from the limited data that i gathered about lap times and car comparisons the GT-R seems too fast in comparison with other cars, such as ACR, scuderia and others". Of course i can be wrong because i don't have such cars in my garage
- 2,083
- FreedomWeasel
My point is that you haven't posted any comparison numbers. Unless I've missed it, you've said that you think the GTR is too fast in the game, and then posted the real world times.
If you were to post your game times that show the GTR is faster in the game than it is in reality, and compare those to times from a different car that are more similar in game vs reality, then you'd have a case.
I can say "I think the miata is too slow in the game, a real one around laguna seca takes about 1:50 a lap" That doesn't say anything useful at all. If I add "my GT5 lap time is only 2:00" then you can see that there may be something wrong. If I then show that I have the driving skill to match lap times for many other cars on the track, there is more evidence.
- 34
- The_German03
RobGT81
I think this is 1 of the dumbest statements ever...I love how people play "racing" games and become subject matter experts. Drive something in real life. I can tell you first hand that americans do make cars that turn. Ever seen a corvette carbon?
Erm as i have said in previous posts ACR 1.32 GT-R 1.33-1.34 ( dont have my Ps3 at the moment). Real life ACR is 7 sec faster.
- 19,013
- Jersey V.1.0
- axletramp
I remember back in the days of GT3 a similar argument raged about the GT-R (R34) and the Corvette Z06. Which one was the quickest point to point, etc. In the end there was a race league set up and each protagonist chose their weapon (mine was the GT-R). All stock on standard tyres over a number of tracks with varying layouts to test top speeds and grip, etc.
The Z06 won every one (just) which, looking back, I believe would replicate IRL. But I don't believe the GT-Rs are too fast here as they are genuinely quick, faster than many might want to admit, mainly down to very high cornering and exit speeds (Z06 wins the top speed hands down).
It's also worth bearing in mind that at the time we were running these races the GT-R (R34) was almost half the price of the Z06 (IRL), which can't be said now with the current versions.
Just my 2 pennies worth... and that was one fun race series!
The Z06 won every one (just) which, looking back, I believe would replicate IRL. But I don't believe the GT-Rs are too fast here as they are genuinely quick, faster than many might want to admit, mainly down to very high cornering and exit speeds (Z06 wins the top speed hands down).
It's also worth bearing in mind that at the time we were running these races the GT-R (R34) was almost half the price of the Z06 (IRL), which can't be said now with the current versions.
Just my 2 pennies worth... and that was one fun race series!
Last edited:
Extremely bias.
Japanese Cars drive like formula 1
American Cars drive like goKarts
What I've never seen an Amarican car do 2g's in a corner like a gokart does?
- 68
- NearOrion
TheGerman03
I agree-way too many armchair experts. I laugh until they bust on Americans, or anyone really.
These jerks aren't even kids without licenses. They just don't watch motorsport nor do they know racing history. I won't even make a list because it would be too long.
Not to mention in GT5 there are examples of American cars that turn just fine.
Embarrassing levels of ignorance.
- 1,029
- Uruguay
Yes, not only is there a bias towards Japanese cars in terms of quantity, the Japanese cars as a whole seem to handle with mysterious ease. I don't have a huge problem with this as it has the opposite effect on me that one would expect. MY GT garages have nearly zero Japanese cars; I only keep the truly unique ones, like the Dome Zero or the Subaru 360.
PD is a Japanese company obviously, as is Sony, but I do think they should try to do a somewhat better job rounding out the car selection and also removing the "Japanese cars never do anything tricky" handling bias.
(Note, I don't think PD made the Japanese cars artificially fast, that isn't the distinction I'm trying to make. My gripe is that all the Japanese cars seem to be magically easy to recover when you screw up, which makes them very easy to drive. I'm not sure that PD has really made them "artificially good", but rather "artificially easy", if you get the distinction. At least, that's my take on it...)
PD is a Japanese company obviously, as is Sony, but I do think they should try to do a somewhat better job rounding out the car selection and also removing the "Japanese cars never do anything tricky" handling bias.
(Note, I don't think PD made the Japanese cars artificially fast, that isn't the distinction I'm trying to make. My gripe is that all the Japanese cars seem to be magically easy to recover when you screw up, which makes them very easy to drive. I'm not sure that PD has really made them "artificially good", but rather "artificially easy", if you get the distinction. At least, that's my take on it...)
Last edited:
- 133
- WalkerInTN
- 6,057
- Cebu
- SayakaMiki1337
- Kawauchi2568
How on earth would American cars be crap in GT5. Classic Muscle cars can only reach 125 mph because of their crappy transmission. But installing a fully-customizable transmission would help by lengthening the gears for a higher top speed. And for their crappy handling, the FC suspension would help, too. A bit of the same case for the modern ones. The ones that sucks could just be tuned to be better.
Idiots. Have you forgot the essence of tuning?
Idiots. Have you forgot the essence of tuning?
- 2,083
- FreedomWeasel
I apologize, I missed the post where you said that.
Too many people watch top gear and treat it as gospel.
- 19,013
- Jersey V.1.0
- axletramp
- 2,583
- Kelowna, Canada
- Antonisbob
- No...
Actually I'm 15 ATM, when I turn 16 I'll be set, my Grandpa is giving me a 1980 VW Rabbit Pickup - Diesel, Manual. All she need's is a new windsheild, and for me to move it from one province (Alberta) to another (British Columbia).. might do a little rust repair as well. So yeah .. No way I would own a Japanese vehicle, let alone a CAR. I need a 4x4 pick-up also you know. đź‘Ť
- 115
- California
Well they did make the Lister Storm race car 125-300kg heavier in all games it appeared in, they also made the XJ220 race car(LM Edition in the game) heavier than it was in real life by 150kg. The Panoz Esperante spun it's tires more than the R390 GT1 during acceleration in GT3 even with the same power and tires which makes no logical sense. It also understeered and oversteered it was moody while the R390 had nigh perfect handling. In reality the r390 and Panoz GTR-1 were essentially exact equals in Sarthe laps. The Peugeot 905 and Jaguar XJR9 race cars are handicapped with delayed shifts and unstable high speeds and excessive tire spin and understeer respectively. When they were very fast successful cars in reality. While somehow the 88cv has flawless highspeed stability as does the r89 and r92. None of those Japanese cars were as successful as the Jag and Peugeot but were faster in the game... hmm seems fishy. The ONLY cars in GT4 with delayed shifts are non Japanese ie the awesome irl 905 and the Cien etc. The Pagani Zonda road cars have bad breaks in GT3 and 4 when in reality they have great breaking performance. Another silly PD mistake(they are full of em but this is most likely a purposeful favoritism choice in their part) is that only Skyline GT-R's and Mini Coopers could accept Displacement up mods in GT2 and GT3. There were muscle cars in GT2 and they have engine block walls way bigger than needed and are know to be great candidates for increasing displacement in reality. They even made a mistake in ALL GT games is appears in with the 787b they ridiculously made the car be able to accept after market turbos when it was naturally aspirated by nature with a variable trumpet intake system... interesting lack of research there PD and it's from their country hahaha. They also made a mistake when they mentioned in GT4 that Mazda brought the rotary engine to the world and was the first manufacturer to release a rotary powered car LOL. NSU was the first manufacturer to release a rotary powered car and a GERMAN invented the engine. Good job PD their intelligence and research practices AMAZE me. In GT2 the Elise GT1 had glitched stabilizers set a 1 all the time making it unstable so we have the escudo glitched to handle perfect in GT2 but a British car glitched to be nearly undrivable.. suspicious. What I'm getting at is that in no GT ever has a programming error ever handicapped a Japanese car but has to nearly every other nations manufacturers. That's clearly Japanese bias. Lastly, there is a physics error in GT4 where they made rear engine rear wheel drive cars have bad braking performance when in reality that specific drivetrain config has superior braking.
Also, no you are wrong as American cars can handle well. Look into the recent Viper ACR, Chevrolet Corvette, and Camaro nurb laptimes and then say that.
Last edited by a moderator:
The weight for the Storm is the manufacturer-provided figure from GT2. The mistake was that they switched from the roadcar to the racecar in GT3 and didn't change the weight.
The XJ220 LM is a fictional car, and it's not like there's a history of the LM Edition cars being anything like real racers in terms of performance - the Cerbera LM in GT1 was something like 300kg underweight, as was the Viper GTS-R.
This one is just limited local knowledge more than anything else - they represented the Reinik stroker kit for the Skylines as used in the 400R they featured, the B18 bottom end for the B16-powered Hondas as used in the Integra they featured, and something like a 1380 kit for the Mini, presumably because someone at PD owned one or knew someone who did. They missed tons of common Japanese displacement increases, never mind European or American, I would assume because that sort of thing was nigh on impossible to research heavily in 1998 when none of these tuning companies had websites. I doubt many Japanese-language car magazines were featuring stroked Hemis at the time either.
The turbo kit for the 787B comes from GT3, where it was mistakenly featured as a turbo car like most of its earlier Group C competitors, when the later rules actually restricted it to being N/A. The power upgrades for the racecars are complete fantasy either way, plus there are quite a few turbo 4-rotors in the aftermarket, and the level of power when tuned makes more sense for a turbo car.
This is far from a complete list, but just a few off the top of my head...
In GT1:
- The RX-7 A spec is missing all of its downforce.
- The Evo 3, Pulsar GTi-R, Galant VR-4, and Celica GT-Four all have broken AWD that makes them behave like understeery FWD cars.
- The Mitsubishi GTO has broken flywheel settings that heavily limit its top speed.
In GT2:
- The HKS R33 AWD drag car has skinny front tyres like a RWD drag car, so spins its front wheels constantly.
- The Accord SiR '96 is 200kg too heavy.
- The Accord Wagon SiR '96 is missing NA Tune stage 3.
- Most of the Honda models carried over from GT1 have the wrong weight.
- The Impreza typeRA is permanently reduced to 96% of its actual power.
- The Impreza WRX '94 is 40hp down on power.
In GT4:
- The Trueno BZR '98 has a typo in its reverse gear that makes it barely able to move.
There are also many mistakes making non-Japanese cars much faster than they should be, like the ultra-lightweight Cerbera LM and Viper GTS-R in GT1, the '82 Corvette in GT2 having 30hp more than it should, the 327ci Corvette in GT4 making 600hp stock, and so on.
You're replying to a post from over a decade ago, when the Camaro had only just re-entered production after a long absence. Of course they hadn't heard of the laptimes it ran years later.
- 115
- California
Good write up. I had no idea of the mistakes of the cars at the end of your post. Granted most of those are all normal production cars and are not meant to compete in the top level races. The Cerbera LM is a op'd car in Gt1 and 2 for sure one of the best in the games. The fact remains on why the Eperante is clunky in GT3 when it was fast in real life for a GT1 car doing 3:40 laps at Sarthe but can barely keep up with the R390 in GT3 when the R390 was basically equal in laptimes and performance in the 1998 le mans. We still are faces with the issue of delayed gear changes for the 905 and it's unstability when it was a wonderful successful machine in real life. In GT4 the 905 always finishes at the lower end of races when ai uses it bob has a hard time keeping it stable and when players drive it they have to really work hard to make it competitive. It SHOULD have came competitive. Fun fact the Toyota 88cv and the 905 are both lightweight 850 and 750kg respectively both produce similar power and are cars in the same class so what mysterious property makes the 905 less stable? Why does the 905 have shift lag and no other race car does? Well I'm sure pd seen how lightweight the 905 was and figured they need a way to handicap it for it's power to weight ratio so they purposefully implemented shift lag and some level of bottoming out and unstability to nerf it. With it's power to weight ratio it would have been the fastest non F! car but pd wouldn't allow that. There is no reason for it to be unstable compared to the unsuccessful 88cv. The XJ220 did compete in real world racing.. it wasn't the most successful or fast but someone in PD when making the lm version decided that somehow 1400kg is a good weight for a race car which you'd never see in reality. It makes the car nearly useless they could have cross referenced the weight of all their other lm cars and made it the standard 1000-1150kg to make it stand a chance but nope that didn't happen. The Lister was a fairly successful and fast machine yet they made that overweight too. If lm cars are all fantasy cars with fantasy performance why then are the two fictional British lm cars fantastically slow. Why not make the NSX lm 1400kg instead of the Xj220....?
Last edited by a moderator:
I suspect you're over-thinking this a lot - it will be a simple typo somewhere in the physics data. So many of the other quirks and bugs in the data throughout the GT series are as basic as that, a tiny mistake that wasn't spotted before release. They're not even minor things either - in GT2 none of the Acura cars have racing modifications... because someone typed an 'r' where it should have been an 'n'. The Audi TT in GT3 is hopelessly slow... because someone typed 0 where it should have been 1.
PD have always had to rush to finish development of each GT game, and games developers are just as fallible as anyone else. None of these bugs are malicious, they're just mistakes.
- 115
- California
Well I wonder what byte went wrong with the 88cv gripping so well in corners compared to other lmp class c cars. Speaking of typing mistakes during coding I wonder if giving the R89cp, R92cp, and 88cv higher hp when fitted with stage 4 turbos compared to every other race car was a type or on purpose. I see no reason why a XJR9 or a 905 should have 100-150hp less than a Nissan or Toyota of the same class and with the same turbo? And when you consider that the XJR9 and the Nissans and the Toyota all have similar power to weights stock that immediately gives a very slight power to weight edge to the Japanese cars when fitted with turbos.. go figure. I'd be ok with this if the Japanese cars all had more tire wear than the Jag but the average tire wear is equal with the Japanese cars possessing the better power to weight tuned. Well with all things considered miraculously the C9 ends up being the best class c car in the game overall. Honestly though all these legendary cars(sides the 88cv it was legendarily BAD lol) should have been carefully programmed and should have all been essentially equally competitive and stable. The ai and players alike should have been able to see 905's and XJR9's in the top 3 in endurance rankings or GTWC rankings here and there instead of the imbalance in favor of the 787b, C9, Nissans and Toyota. The glory in celebrating these legendary machines should have been shared equally with regards to their implementation in the game and for the experience of the players. When certain cars are handicapped it can really hamper the enjoyment of the game from one that enjoys said car.
Similar threads
