Duplicates in following GTs...

[o000o]

If the Japanese cars keep duplicated in any of the next GT.
My wish of duplicates is this (No offense but I wish SOME duplicates like in GT1-GT3 but not TOO MANY like current ones so I can get to know different types of a car). I actually wanted all below either bolded and non-bolded, but if people feels there are still too many, those which I bolded are my must wish list

Spoiler: NSX

Acura (Keep this one) :

• NSX '91 (3000cc)
• NSX '97 (3200cc)
• NSX '04

Honda :

• NSX Type S '99
• NSX Type S '01
• NSX Type S Zero '99
• NSX Type R '92
• NSX Type R '02

So, non-'type'd for Acuras, 'typed' for Hondas

Spoiler: Skyline GT-R

R32 :

• Skyline GT-R '89
• Skyline GT-R V-spec '93
• Skyline GT-R V-spec II '94
• Skyline GT-R V-spec N1 '93

R33 :

• Skyline GT-R '97
• Skyline GT-R V-spec '97
• Skyline GT-R V-spec LM Limited Edition '97
• Skyline GT-R N1 '95

R34 :

• Skyline GT-R '00
• Skyline GT-R V-spec '99
• Skyline GT-R V-spec II '00
• Skyline GT-R V-spec II N1 00
• Skyline GT-R M-spec '01
• Skyline GT-R V-spec II Nur '02
• Skyline GT-R M-spec Nur '02

M.N.P colors in one of color selection

Spoiler: RX-7 (FD)

1st Gen

• efini RX-7 Type R-S '91
• efini RX-7 Type R '93
• efini RX-7 Type RZ '96
• efini RX-7 Type RS '96

2nd Gen

• RX-7 Type RS-R
• RX-7 Type RS
• RX-7 Type RZ '00
• RX-7 Type R Bathrust R '01
• RX-7 Spirit R Type A '02

Removal of (J) models and only different year model

Spoiler: MX-5/Miata/Eunos/Roadster

1st Gen

• J-Limited II '91
• VR-Limited '93
• SR-Limited '97
• S-Special Type I '95
• V-Special Type II '93

2nd Gen

• 1600 NR-A '04
• 1800 RS '00

3rd Gen

• RS (NC) '07

Whatever it is, keep consistent with 1 name choice (MX-5/MX-5 Miata/Eunos/Roadster), MX-5's lots of duplicate is because all of the 4 names are included (So it's each ver times 4 different names), choose just 1

Spoiler: S2000

• S2000 '03
• S2000 Type V '03
• S2000 '06

Removal of country models (EU, JP) and only different year models, S2000's lots of duplicate is because of those two reasons

Spoiler: FTO

• FTO GR '97
• FTO GPX '99
• FTO GP Version R '99

Spoiler: GTO/3000GT

1st Gen

• 3000GT SL '96
• GTO VR-4 Turbo '95
• 3000GT MR '95

2nd Gen

• 3000GT SR '98
• 3000GT VR-4 Turbo '98
• GTO Twin Turbo MR '98

So, with this list....The number of duplicates maybe still high, 52
But it is 52 for All (or Most) of lots-duplicated cars
And total for all bolded, is 37 (For all/most duplicators)
It's still better than 30-40 duplicates for ONE car (MX-5...) plus 10-20 others

Edit :
Don't threat cars like Celicas, Evos, and Imprezas as duplicates....maybe they have same name but each of their version of cars are different generation version

 

[Johnnypenso]

Thanks, but you could have posted that in here: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/gt7-the-iconic-cars-that-need-to-stay.315885/

 

[Tornado]

I dunno. He did a pretty good job paring down the dupes of those models, other than stumbling on the 3000GTs (the GTOs are the ones modeled accurately), so one of the threads specifically about dupes would fit his list better.

 

[o000o]

Actually my wish is for all the bold and non-bold cars
But if the player want the duplicates to be reduced further, I bolded the must-list car

 

[AITB]

Actually my wish is for all the bold and non-bold cars
But if the player want the duplicates to be reduced further, I bolded the must-list car

Nice list either way. But I'm just hoping for all those cars to be at least Semi-Premium in GT7 - PS2 quality cars do not belong in a PS4 game.

 

[05XR8]

Hmm, what of the Base Models? Are those moreso duplicates than the "real" cars? The "duplicates" of the Eunos Roadster aren't technically duplicates. The Base Models are actually duplicates because they are the same car but different skins.

If PD modelled the interiors of the Roadsters, there would be different trims, steering wheels, deleted items or optional items from JDM-Euro-USA versions. Same for all the other cars listed above. Like the Mustang GT '05 and Mustang GT '07. The '07 is a Euro model with reflectors/rear fog lights on the bumper bar. The USA car never had refelctors on the bumper bar.

This may have been argued in a different thread. If we were to shape shift each "duplicate", differences like ride height, mirror trim, wheels would change. So, they are not actually duplicates. Do the same to the Base Models and we know nothing changes but the skin.

 

[Castrol96]

A standard version of a premium car is useless!

 

[AlexN8710]

NO problem with duplicates as long as they are all premium quality and arranged under sub menu's. Some of us know our Type S-Zero's from our Type - R's, but really, do we need a Fairlady Z and 350z LM race car?

On the subject, will premium now mean PS4 quality, built from the ground up? Will be interesting to see how older textures hold up with the PS4's power and better anti aliasing/memory etc.

I for one hate driving standard cars, even if it a car I love.

 

[AITB]

NO problem with duplicates as long as they are all premium quality and arranged under sub menu's. Some of us know our Type S-Zero's from our Type - R's, but really, do we need a Fairlady Z and 350z LM race car?

On the subject, will premium now mean PS4 quality, built from the ground up? Will be interesting to see how older textures hold up with the PS4's power and better anti aliasing/memory etc.

I for one hate driving standard cars, even if it a car I love.

It would be really stupid if Polyphony had to remodel all PS3 Premium models for GT7.
They should have thought of that earlier, by modelling all Premium cars in GT5 and GT6 with millions of polygons, then downscaling them to what the PS3 could handle, and in GT7 they'll downscale them to what the PS4 can handle. Let's hope they did it that way.

 

[pasigiri]

It would be really stupid if Polyphony had to remodel all PS3 Premium models for GT7.
They should have thought of that earlier, by modelling all Premium cars in GT5 and GT6 with millions of polygons, then downscaling them to what the PS3 could handle, and in GT7 they'll downscale them to what the PS4 can handle. Let's hope they did it that way.

Actually, Kaz stated that this is what was done when modeling the premiums for GT5??? and GT6. Now how many of the premiums are next gen "proof" who knows. A good guess would be the ones with full/partial tessellation.

 

[Tornado]

Actually, Kaz stated that this is what was done when modeling the premiums for GT5??? and GT6. Now how many of the premiums are next gen "proof" who knows. A good guess would be the ones with full/partial tessellation.

This is true. Kaz has said that steps were taken to model assets above what the PS3 was capable of. The problem then mostly becomes "how many were actually done that way" (because there is an occasionally obvious quality gulf even for Premiums" and "were the future proof assets actually future proof." Rumblings of the same thing were made for the assets PD made for the PS2, but for a variety of reasons (the biggest of which likely being the difference in how cars were modelled by the time the 360 generation started) that didn't pan out; so with things like Forzavista's fully modelled engine bays or Drive Club's deliberate approach to replicating paint textures I'm personally worried that PD's method of "future proofing" simply meant that they have more polygons than the ones they used.

 

[FerrariF1GT]

What about the Evos and Imprezas?

 

[AlexN8710]

This is true. Kaz has said that steps were taken to model assets above what the PS3 was capable of. The problem then mostly becomes "how many were actually done that way" (because there is an occasionally obvious quality gulf even for Premiums" and "were the future proof assets actually future proof." Rumblings of the same thing were made for the assets PD made for the PS2, but for a variety of reasons (the biggest of which likely being the difference in how cars were modelled by the time the 360 generation started) that didn't pan out; so with things like Forzavista's fully modelled engine bays or Drive Club's deliberate approach to replicating paint textures I'm personally worried that PD's method of "future proofing" simply meant that they have more polygons than the ones they used.

Seems like a lot of work. Planning next generation assets all the time. Why not do the best with what you have, when you have it.

Would it not be efficient to work.on streamlining processes in modelling cars in the first place, so generation times are reduced?

 

[Lord Protector]

Truly great list. However is the S2000 ‘04 still AP1? I’d rather see more variety in years so I’d go with S2000 ‘99

 

[ARTAsean]

Truly great list. However is the S2000 ‘04 still AP1? I’d rather see more variety in years so I’d go with S2000 ‘99

Really? I think this list is bollocks and still full of unnecessary dupes. For example, the ‘LM Limited’ R33 can be recreated in the Livery Editor, and so can the N1 R34.

I can halfway understand facelifted dupes, like a ‘91 FD to contrast the ‘02. But I honestly would rather have something like the Asparadrink GT300 RX-7 instead of yet another road-going version.

We need quality, not quantity.

 

[o000o]

Really? I think this list is bollocks and still full of unnecessary dupes. For example, the ‘LM Limited’ R33 can be recreated in the Livery Editor, and so can the N1 R34.

I can halfway understand facelifted dupes, like a ‘91 FD to contrast the ‘02. But I honestly would rather have something like the Asparadrink GT300 RX-7 instead of yet another road-going version.

We need quality, not quantity.

This is an old post made before GTS, just in case they are keeping duplicates (and by extension, standard cars in PS4). I'm just suggesting this to someone who 'wants duplicates' (didn't expect him to comment here).

For me the duplicates help more with the encyclopedia part of GT as more knowledge about that particular car. Some people suggested 'trim' for the different types in a car, but I'm not certain about some different type in the 'trim' that truly have different performance than other type (Ex: NSX Type R to ordinary NSX), or cars that are fundamentally different (Ex: '91 FD to '02 one like you say, their performance is also different).

In that case, why don't you say the same about like, '03 TT and TTS in GTS?

 

[Lord Protector]

Really? I think this list is bollocks and still full of unnecessary dupes. For example, the ‘LM Limited’ R33 can be recreated in the Livery Editor, and so can the N1 R34.

I can halfway understand facelifted dupes, like a ‘91 FD to contrast the ‘02. But I honestly would rather have something like the Asparadrink GT300 RX-7 instead of yet another road-going version.

We need quality, not quantity.

I agree that we indeed need quality, not quality BUT, the dupes usually have different specs like being FR instead of 4WD in case of Skylines, or have different body parts, like wings etc. It is not just the same car with a diferent name. Furthermore, to create

R32 :
- Skyline GT-R '89
- Skyline GT-R V-spec '93
- Skyline GT-R V-spec II '94
- Skyline GT-R V-spec N1 '93

I would say it takes less time than to create 2 totally different cars as PD already has the base model, they can just update the specs and change some body parts but essentially it must be a quick edit. So having dupes does not mean we get quantity instead of quality. We just get more cars, for some relevant for some not.

I just love the variations in the past games and I loved to guess what variation of car is that.

 

[GTV0819]

I agree that we indeed need quality, not quality BUT, the dupes usually have different specs like being FR instead of 4WD in case of Skylines, or have different body parts, like wings etc. It is not just the same car with a diferent name. Furthermore, to create

R32 :
- Skyline GT-R '89
- Skyline GT-R V-spec '93
- Skyline GT-R V-spec II '94
- Skyline GT-R V-spec N1 '93

I would say it takes less time than to create 2 totally different cars as PD already has the base model, they can just update the specs and change some body parts but essentially it must be a quick edit. So having dupes does not mean we get quantity instead of quality. We just get more cars, for some relevant for some not.

I just love the variations in the past games and I loved to guess what variation of car is that.

Out of all automakers existing in the games, Nissan has the most dupes of them all, resulting into them taking around 15% of the total cars available in the previous titles.

Other than the GT-R, they're also famous for another example. In this case, the 350Z Concept LM Race Car and the Fairlady Z Concept LM Race Car found in GT4-GT6 are essentially the same cars visually. The only difference is that the former comes in LHD while the latter is RHD and did I mention that there's also an unreasonable 100HP gap between them? I find it ridiculous.

The 350Z has only around 515HP whereas the Fairlady Z has a higher 615HP. Therefore, it also has a higher PP there since it is obviously more powerful. Although other dupes are seemingly reasonable, I think this one doesn't count. I wonder what's PD's logic on this.

 

[o000o]

I agree that we indeed need quality, not quality BUT, the dupes usually have different specs like being FR instead of 4WD in case of Skylines, or have different body parts, like wings etc. It is not just the same car with a diferent name. Furthermore, to create

R32 :
- Skyline GT-R '89
- Skyline GT-R V-spec '93
- Skyline GT-R V-spec II '94
- Skyline GT-R V-spec N1 '93

I would say it takes less time than to create 2 totally different cars as PD already has the base model, they can just update the specs and change some body parts but essentially it must be a quick edit. So having dupes does not mean we get quantity instead of quality. We just get more cars, for some relevant for some not.

I just love the variations in the past games and I loved to guess what variation of car is that.

Actually...I wanted 4 of them (so is the other non-bolded one in others), but if it still feels too much for people, bolded one is a must.

 

[ARTAsean]

I agree that we indeed need quality, not quality BUT, the dupes usually have different specs like being FR instead of 4WD in case of Skylines, or have different body parts, like wings etc. It is not just the same car with a diferent name. Furthermore, to create

R32 :
- Skyline GT-R '89
- Skyline GT-R V-spec '93
- Skyline GT-R V-spec II '94
- Skyline GT-R V-spec N1 '93

I would say it takes less time than to create 2 totally different cars as PD already has the base model, they can just update the specs and change some body parts but essentially it must be a quick edit. So having dupes does not mean we get quantity instead of quality. We just get more cars, for some relevant for some not.

I just love the variations in the past games and I loved to guess what variation of car is that.

Instead of adding an entire other R34 Skyline that’s RWD, why not just let us adjust the differential torque on the settings screen like we could do in GT5/GT6? That’s 2 birds with one stone.

 

[talhaONE]

Instead of adding an entire other R34 Skyline that’s RWD, why not just let us adjust the differential torque on the settings screen like we could do in GT5/GT6? That’s 2 birds with one stone.

You cant give 0% torque to front wheels in gt5 and gt6.

 

[ARTAsean]

You cant give 0% torque to front wheels in gt5 and gt6.

I’m aware of that, hence why I said “like GT5/6” as in “similar to.” Not “exactly like” or “just as.”

Between this and the Nismo LM Thread, I’m wondering if you are intentionally trying to be the most annoying person on this forum, or if it comes naturally.

 

[Lord Protector]

Instead of adding an entire other R34 Skyline that’s RWD, why not just let us adjust the differential torque on the settings screen like we could do in GT5/GT6? That’s 2 birds with one stone.

You don’t get it...

 

[ARTAsean]

You don’t get it...

I implore you to explain to me (as if I were a 5 year old) why having 2 Skylines, identical in appearance & generation, is a better solution than adding a 4-wheel Torque Distributor - which would not only be a benefit to all AWD cars in the game, but would allow you to replicate a RWD Skyline, thus eliminating the 2nd Skyline & other ‘Car List Clutter.’

 

[Tornado]

I agree that we indeed need quality, not quality BUT, the dupes usually have different specs like being FR instead of 4WD in case of Skylines, or have different body parts, like wings etc. It is not just the same car with a diferent name.

In GT5 and GT6 it usually actually was, even when ignoring the cars the ones that PD just made up, like most of the Miatas. I can't comment on whether they cleaned up their act in that regard for GTS,

 

[ImaRobot]

I implore you to explain to me (as if I were a 5 year old) why having 2 Skylines, identical in appearance & generation, is a better solution than adding a 4-wheel Torque Distributor - which would not only be a benefit to all AWD cars in the game, but would allow you to replicate a RWD Skyline, thus eliminating the 2nd Skyline & other ‘Car List Clutter.’

A RWD car should drive fundamentally different than the same AWD car with all power sent to the rear. For one, the weight distribution would not be identical, nor would the actual weight of the vehicle. That's ignoring any aesthetic difference they may have. Simply switching the power to the rear on an AWD vehicle is not going to be replicating anything, really. Those are some rather simple examples one could give.

 

[ARTAsean]

For one, the weight distribution would not be identical.

In a hypothetical situation where this negligible difference could actually be felt in a Gran Turismo game, bringing back the ballast / weight distribution slider, again from GT5/6, would solve this. And as before, would make the entire game better.

To reiterate, I personally think it’s senseless to have variations that could realistically be replicated using in-game features. Telling me that we need a RWD Skyline because “the 50 pounds of unused front drivetrain will make the car handle different” is, well, absurd if I’m honest - especially considering there are about 1000 other things that impact handling which this game doesn’t even simulate.

 

[ImaRobot]

In a hypothetical situation where this negligible difference could actually be felt in a Gran Turismo game, bringing back the ballast / weight distribution slider, again from GT5/6, would solve this. And as before, would make the entire game better.

That's true, but that's not what you asked. You asked for reasons, and those are some pretty straightforward, and at least, reasonable ones. Doesn't the ballast add weight? That sounds like it's getting even farther and farther from the not-so-much-a-replica that you mentioned. You're moving the goal posts now.

To reiterate, I personally think it’s senseless to have variations that could realistically be replicated using in-game features.

That's the thing though. It can't be replicated in the game, using in game features.

Telling me that we need a RWD Skyline because “the 50 pounds of unused front drivetrain will make the car handle different” is, well, absurd if I’m honest

So is pretending that there's only a 50lb difference. The 93 GTS-T apparently has a curb weight of 2910lbs compared to the 3150lbs for the GTR.

It will handle different, not just because of the weight, but the weight distrubution. Pretending it wont is what's absurd, if I'm honest.

especially considering there are about 1000 other things that impact handling which this game doesn’t even simulate.

Which has very, very little to do with what's being discussed.

If anything, new features like a drivetrain swap feature would basically solve this issue, as well as a customization option for the multiple trims available.

 

[FPV MIC]

If anything, new features like a drivetrain swap feature would basically solve this issue, as well as a customization option for the multiple trims available.

This would be great, especially if it added RHD and LHD variances as well.

 

[talhaONE]

I’m aware of that, hence why I said “like GT5/6” as in “similar to.” Not “exactly like” or “just as.”

Between this and the Nismo LM Thread, I’m wondering if you are intentionally trying to be the most annoying person on this forum, or if it comes naturally.

Naturally.