For those that object to GTS or GT7 having Std Cars, what is your reason?

[Samus]

In screenshot and especially closeup it is easier to tell.

But during gameplay and even on replay it is not as bad as people make it out. For example this Toyota is standard and many others as well in this video:


People who play in cockpit view have the problem so that is the main problem IMHO

The polycount and number of cars, these factors should not be considered this time

That screenshot was only for illustration, I clearly said that when you play in that view it's very easy to notice the poor quality cars as you drive alongside or behind them. They can fill the majority of your screen at times.

So what are you saying, we should only ever look at cars from a distance? We should only use chase cam to drive, not bonnet/roof, where we'll see the problems?

We know they CAN look ok, but the same can be said for anything that isn't aesthetically pleasing. It's totally missing the wider picture.

 

[TJC_69]

I voted for 1 to 4. Even though it takes many man hours to model a standard to a premium, it is still Polyphonys ''own'' carry over policy that is the reason we will have standards in future GT games. If they dropped the standards entirely and focused on new models of even older cars, but new cars to the series, then I don't feel the community at large would have any problem with that.

I don't think GT Sport will have any standard models due to it's a tie in game with the FIA, but that might just be a small part of the game?... But i'm confident of standards being included with GT7. Just to pad the car count really.

But it's pretty lame to include subpar quality content in any new release in my opinion. Whether it's Gran Turismo or not.

Can someone pass on to the PD office that it's not 1999 anymore

 

[Johnnypenso]

In screenshot and especially closeup it is easier to tell.

But during gameplay and even on replay it is not as bad as people make it out. For example this Toyota is standard and many others as well in this video:


People who play in cockpit view have the problem so that is the main problem IMHO

The polycount and number of cars, these factors should not be considered this time

Have you played a recent game? Forza 6? DriveClub? AC or PCars on pc? You're looking at standards against last gen backdrops not current games. Drop that same standard into Forza 6 or DriveClub and then tell us how it looks. Now imagine the sheer beauty of Gran Turismo Sport and drop that same standard car in there. It's not just the cockpit, it's the entire car, it just doesn't belong.

 

[ColouredBadger]

Have you played a recent game? Forza 6? DriveClub? AC or PCars on pc? You're looking at standards against last gen backdrops not current games. Drop that same standard into Forza 6 or DriveClub and then tell us how it looks. Now imagine the sheer beauty of Gran Turismo Sport and drop that same standard car in there. It's not just the cockpit, it's the entire car, it just doesn't belong.

Kinda like this...?



It's not very well photoshopped into place but it's by no means edited to make it look worse - But you get the gist of everyone who doesn't want standard cars' perspective... Those edges on the back window in contrast to the rest of the picture. That is pretty much what we'll be faced with if they get carried over.

I love that little car, it's great fun for one-make races, BUT I'm happy to drop it because it'll look awful, as shown.

 

[iName]

At this point, I'm not concerned with graphics in racing games anymore. Just focus on physics first PD, please!

Shift 2: Still look pretty, but completely ruined by the handling.

NFS Most Wanted (PS3): Amazing graphics, cars handle like absolute boats.

The Crew, TDU2: Decent graphics and amazing open world, but got utterly ruined by the abysmal car physics.

NFS 2015: Looks stunning and hearkens back to underground days, but why do they still carry the terrible car handling physics of the previous games that were ruined by it?!

Project CARS: If you only have a controller, you'd know.

I'm so frustrated with racing games nowadays, it's always form over function! You could have the best car list and every track in the world, but if the cars all inherently handle like crap, you'd hate the game regardless.

With that in mind, I have no issue with the standards, because they were at least fun to drive. I just want a racing game that actually has good handling physics... please!

 

[glassjaw]

That was Forza 5 did. Instead of relying on the Forza 4 models, they made the entire car lists from stratch.

Not entirely. New models were made from scratch, but older ones that have been a part of the FM car roster since the early games were still kept, but updated to modern standards. You can tell they're old assets because they retain the same proportional inaccuracies that have been present for the last decade. F40, NSX, and 22B Impreza are examples of this.

Yep. The cars are two different sizes.

And this is why they need to go; they're not simply lacking detail, they're flat out wrong. It's hard to maintain that sense of immersion when you see two Camaros running alongside each other and one of them looks smaller.

 

[1241Penguin]

Fun thing I've noticed: the premium and standard R34 have different proportions.

 

[Tornado]

So do the two C5 Corvettes, but from what I've been able to tell it is the Premium that isn't correct.

 

[NivekRJ]

One last thing. If they're not going to upgrade the physics and engine sounds of any kept standard or even semi-premium, then there's really no point. As much as I hate to see some of these cars go, I don't ever want to hear PS2 era engine sounds again. The lack of interior does bother me, for sure, but outdated engine sounds would bother me a lot more.

 

[Imari]

At this point, I'm not concerned with graphics in racing games anymore. Just focus on physics first PD, please!

Shift 2: Still look pretty, but completely ruined by the handling.

NFS Most Wanted (PS3): Amazing graphics, cars handle like absolute boats.

The Crew, TDU2: Decent graphics and amazing open world, but got utterly ruined by the abysmal car physics.

NFS 2015: Looks stunning and hearkens back to underground days, but why do they still carry the terrible car handling physics of the previous games that were ruined by it?!

Project CARS: If you only have a controller, you'd know.

I think you're conflating physics and all the other associated control issues that are also involved with making a car fun to drive.

For example, pCARS actually has a very good physics system, but is pretty tough to drive with a controller because it doesn't come with the same level of assistance that one might find in something like GT or Forza. That's nothing to do with the physics, and everything to do with how the controller inputs are filtered and modified.

Shift 2 had a similar issue in the fundamentally the physics aren't awful (as can be seen by certain PC mods), but the game was horrendously crippled on console by staggering levels of input lag. It's really hard to drive when every action is delayed by a third of a second, but not because the physics are wonky. Shift 2 also had some astonishingly awful stock setups which really didn't help anyone.

The other games are arcade racers, so physics doesn't really come into it. I thought that NFS MW was actually a pretty good arcade racer, it was certainly fun to drive once I got the hang of it. None of them are supposed to be realistic, if you don't enjoy that style of driving then don't play the games. It's a bit like complaining that Wipeout doesn't drive right.

 

[iName]

I think you're conflating physics and all the other associated control issues that are also involved with making a car fun to drive.

Yep, I definitely did! Every time I see somebody else complaining about the way cars handle, they usually mention the physics. Me being just as knowledgable of programming as they are, I thought it was tied into the physics as well.

Whelp! My original post has been render useless

 

[gtracedriver1]

That screenshot was only for illustration, I clearly said that when you play in that view it's very easy to notice the poor quality cars as you drive alongside or behind them. They can fill the majority of your screen at times.

So what are you saying, we should only ever look at cars from a distance? We should only use chase cam to drive, not bonnet/roof, where we'll see the problems?

We know they CAN look ok, but the same can be said for anything that isn't aesthetically pleasing. It's totally missing the wider picture.

Have you played a recent game? Forza 6? DriveClub? AC or PCars on pc? You're looking at standards against last gen backdrops not current games. Drop that same standard into Forza 6 or DriveClub and then tell us how it looks. Now imagine the sheer beauty of Gran Turismo Sport and drop that same standard car in there. It's not just the cockpit, it's the entire car, it just doesn't belong.

I like good car models as good as anyone. Who doesn't like a curvy body But having played GT5 and GT6 for more than 500hrs I guess. Especially in GT6 it did not bother me as I thought during gameplay. So i voted for 4th option as black out interior kills the immersion and cockpit view is unplayable

 

[syntex123]

Fun thing I've noticed: the premium and standard R34 have different proportions.

And the the two Viper GTS's, and a lot of others.

 

[CSLACR]

So do the two C5 Corvettes, but from what I've been able to tell it is the Premium that isn't correct.

What makes you think that?

 

[syntex123]

Maybe he did a photo-reference? @CSLACR

 

[CSLACR]

Maybe he did a photo-reference? @CSLACR

How would you know which is correct either way?

 

[05XR8]

I see GTS as being GT5P -style with fully renders cars only. They have had time to model the new race cars to meet FiA standards(in that, I'm sure all race cars will need working wipers-bar open cockpit cars, hi/low beams and rear foglights, maybe even working fuel gauges). Players that only use bumper/bonnet/aerial views might not car but, those players(like myself) that use in-car view, will need those features to be operable.

An '09 Playstation R8 LMS will not do. Upgrading it to Premium-standard won't be enough. It would have to be a complete render to deliver full immersion. Besides, it's in PS4. There can be nothing less expected from this game.

As for the road cars in the game(not including VGT cars). The Veneno, AMG GT, ND MX-5. What ever trials or licence tests may await us, mixing those cars with standards would be silly.

All new generations of race games have moved forward. PD could "break new ground" by being the first full Gran Turismo to feature all completely rendered cars! (ain't gonna happen)

 

[syntex123]

How would you know which is correct either way?

Because you reference both the standard and premium to a real photo?

 

[TonyJZX]

I'm not hugely against standard cars. I dont need an interior, I just wish they cleaned up the model so we dont have jagged edges and curves that are made up on straight lines staggered to form a wheel wheel.

That sort of thing didnt fit in 2010 when it looked ugly in 720p. And yet we are in 2016...

 

[wedjim]

I'm more concerned about having 25 different Nissan performance cars with basically only different paint work.
While leaving out some of the best performance and sports cars(and trucks...Cyclone, Raptor, Lightning, etc.) of all time.

...it shouldn't be a PD requirement that none of the Muscle cars can be made to handle as well at the same PP as their Asian/European counterparts. For example the 69 Camaro "Race car," that has no steering on corner entry and no traction out being 6+ seconds a lap slower than an S2000 after maximized tuning of both at 500pp. :/

Oh...And where are the multi surface rally events for the rally cars in the game?

Maybe its just me.

 

[Samus]

...it shouldn't be a PD requirement that none of the Muscle cars can be made to handle as well at the same PP as their Asian/European counterparts. For example the 69 Camaro "Race car," that has no steering on corner entry and no traction out being 6+ seconds a lap slower than an S2000 after maximized tuning of both at 500pp. :/

That is more an issue with the PP system rather than the car handling. I don't imagine a 69 Camaro race modded would touch a modern performance S2000, so indeed the PP should match that.

 

[ImaRobot]

That is more an issue with the PP system rather than the car handling. I don't imagine a 69 Camaro race modded would touch a modern performance S2000, so indeed the PP should match that.

That's a bit harder than people may realize. While that same Camaro may not be too good on the twistys, there are likely some tracks where it would be able to outrun the more handling-oriented S2000. Finding that good middle ground concerning the PP would probably be difficult.

 

[Samus]

That's a bit harder than people may realize. While that same Camaro may not be too good on the twistys, there are likely some tracks where it would be able to outrun the more handling-oriented S2000. Finding that good middle ground concerning the PP would probably be difficult.

True it's never going to be perfect, do we know the method PD use for it? I know T10 said they use a large fictional track made up of pretty much everything, but that still has many issues. Less than the PP system though, IMO.

The same is true in the real world though, some cars in series will be better at certain tracks. Not many pro series run in such vastly different cars as that example, though.

 

[ImaRobot]

True it's never going to be perfect, do we know the method PD use for it? I know T10 said they use a large fictional track made up of pretty much everything, but that still has many issues. Less than the PP system though, IMO.

The same is true in the real world though, some cars in series will be better at certain tracks. Not many pro series run in such vastly different cars as that example, though.

Unfortunately, I don't know. You'll always get that one oddball car. The one that just feels like its performing higher than what it the stats suggest. While it's not a perfect system, I don't feel it's terribly unbalanced. You'll just have to find the strengths of your certain vehicle and use it when it's ideal.

 

[girabyt3]

Fun thing I've noticed: the premium and standard R34 have different proportions.

The 69 Camaros as well

 

[SlipZtrEm]

True it's never going to be perfect, do we know the method PD use for it? I know T10 said they use a large fictional track made up of pretty much everything, but that still has many issues. Less than the PP system though, IMO.

The same is true in the real world though, some cars in series will be better at certain tracks. Not many pro series run in such vastly different cars as that example, though.

Without veering too far off-topic: yeah, T10 use a track. I don't think we've ever nailed down a full explanation of GT's PP system. It seems to take horsepower, torque, and weight into consideration, as well as aero. I still wish PD had left tires as a part of the equation too; it's the big difference between the two systems now, and I like the idea of a sticky-tired David taking on a powerful, but otherwise stock-rubbered Goliath.

I'm over 330 cars into testing them all at Lime Rock in FM6, and being on such a short track has presented some very unexpected upsets in the PI rankings. I've never really expected equality with these sorts of systems, in either game, as the car roster is simply too large. There will always be some cars that are just better suited to some tracks over others.

The odd PP ratings of Standards when compared to their Premium counterparts is another reason I've never believed Standards have had their physics values looked at with the same care. They've just never felt quite right, IMO.

 

[Tornado]

PP takes weight distribution into consideration, but not nearly as much as it should (and with how badly they tend to model it, it's somewhat moot anyway).

 

[wedjim]

That is more an issue with the PP system rather than the car handling. I don't imagine a 69 Camaro race modded would touch a modern performance S2000, so indeed the PP should match that.

Many good posts on this.

My concern isn't that the S2000 Opera car outpaces the 69 Camaro race car, it's the margin. Keeping in mind the 69 Camaro isn't representing a modified street car, but it is a full on purpose built race car. Which means engine set back, wheelbase mods(based on limited rules) major suspension mods like roll axis roll centers and migration all optimized...as well as huge racing slicks.

The 64 Cobra Daytona coupe and Ferrari 330 handle far better using the same "old" or older technology.

Like we've all accepted, it'll never be perfect.
But seeing a car that is so powerful it's hard to get traction, get out pulled in high gear at only 130 mph is hard for me to swallow.

This is just one example. I can't wait for GT7 and a new PS4 either way, lol.

 

[nocturnalgrey]

In GT5, I didn't mind the Standards at all. I accepted them because of all the nostalgia associated with them. I completely sympathized with those who want to hang on to them.

When GT6 came out, I didn't have a problem with the Standard Cars at first, but as I spend more and more time with the game, I began to dislike the inconsistencies of the modeling when compared to the PS3 versions.

Now that a PS4 version of Gran Turismo is coming out, I am opposed to those cars making an appearance in GT Sport. I love some of those automobiles (and have owned a few), but I have moved on and would rather not have a car at all if it means it is in Standard form.

I am sorry PDI, but they aren't needed any longer in a Gran Turismo game.

 

[Imari]

Many good posts on this.

My concern isn't that the S2000 Opera car outpaces the 69 Camaro race car, it's the margin. Keeping in mind the 69 Camaro isn't representing a modified street car, but it is a full on purpose built race car. Which means engine set back, wheelbase mods(based on limited rules) major suspension mods like roll axis roll centers and migration all optimized...as well as huge racing slicks.

The 64 Cobra Daytona coupe and Ferrari 330 handle far better using the same "old" or older technology.

That assumes that it's the Camaro that's wrong. It could be the other way around, or they could all be wrong. Hell, the S2000 could be wrong as well.

True it's never going to be perfect, do we know the method PD use for it? I know T10 said they use a large fictional track made up of pretty much everything, but that still has many issues. Less than the PP system though, IMO.

The same is true in the real world though, some cars in series will be better at certain tracks. Not many pro series run in such vastly different cars as that example, though.

Frankly, while I'm on board with the difficulty of creating a PP system that accurately compares very different styles of cars around a variety of tracks, there's a (relatively) easy option available to PD at this point. They should have comparative data out the wazoo from GT5 and GT6. Assuming that their physics system is basically correct, there shouldn't be any major performance changes between games, so they should be able to use the data from past games to identify and patch the biggest offenders in the PP system. It's not going to be perfect, but it should narrow the gaps at least.

Basically, instead of trying to do it computationally, just use the huge amount of raw racing data they have and do it statistically. Or at least combine the two approaches and use statistical data to modify the computational data. Without statistical analysis they'll never know how well their PP system is doing anyway, so they *should* already be doing half the work needed for this.