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

[MarchingSaint]

Haha, it's true though. We all want more competitive AI for closer races in career, but the AI could be perfect 1:1 with real race drivers and they'd still get dominated because of the ability to enter races with modified race cars.

That's not even a real problem to me because if we'd got cars that could compete in a state of parity, only the occasional/firsttimer would care about a power up. To me the tuning-power up aspect has to stay, it differentiates the game from the others.

 

[Devil240Z]

Some of you people claim to be GT fans but ask for it to be a hardcore sim. I want a fun video game. Go play iRacing if you want that. I want to have fun driving cars. I like Kaz' vision of a bridge between gaming and real racing but the game needs to come first.

 

[Conza]

Look I love variety, but I think there's really three avenues here, and I'm kind of prepared to give up the standards, sort of for the principal of it all.

Make all* standards premium - probably what everyone wants, but basically what no one thinks will happen ( *then we get into the minutiae of doubles, lets not go there again)
Keep standards just the way they are
Sacrifice the standards for other content.

In my mind, and others may disagree, there's no reason not to have standards, without a trade/reward, if they're in for basically nothing, then we might as well right?

That's what PD says to itself I think. We can spend all this time and effort, making a perfect scale Peugeot 307 XSi that all 15 of it's fans will just love, or make the Ferrari F12, with just a tad more effort, which 150,000 people will love to death.

And on that basis, even as 1 of the 15 fans, I'll take the F12, it just makes sense.

 

[Imari]

Some of you people claim to be GT fans but ask for it to be a hardcore sim. I want a fun video game. Go play iRacing if you want that. I want to have fun driving cars. I like Kaz' vision of a bridge between gaming and real racing but the game needs to come first.

But driving a car in real life is fun, right? So having realistic physics isn't what makes it fun or not fun, the gameplay is. It's totally possible to have a really engaging gameplay experience that also offers very authentic physics, it's not an either/or.

If it was, then others might as well just tell you to go and play Need for Speed, but that's probably not the sort of fun that you enjoy.

 

[Mike_grpA]

That's not even a real problem to me because if we'd got cars that could compete in a state of parity, only the occasional/firsttimer would care about a power up. To me the tuning-power up aspect has to stay, it differentiates the game from the others.

My point is that chucking massive turbos on already highly strung race engines is unrealistic, and the real racing cars in GT should abide by the regs they were built for. If someone wants a series to be easier, a difficulty slider would be a better idea than allowing ridiculous power upgrades to race cars, as then experienced racers would also have something to change to make the game more difficult.

As it is in GT6, you can go into Super GT in career, slap a massive turbo on one and enter, despite it being in violation of the Super GT regs, and you'll demolish the opposition, who all abide by the regs. Yes, you can keep the car stock, but what if you're a good driver? You'll still have to give the AI a lap head start to make it harder anyway. So, instead of allowing stupid unrealistic mods to race cars, a simple difficulty slider would make everyone happy.

Buying upgraded parts for road cars wouldn't be affected by that, and that is what GT has always been about, taking slow road cars, and turning them into fire breathing monsters, not taking already highly developed race cars, and doing unrealistic mods to them that you couldn't do in the real world. Hell, in GT5 you could put a roll cage in the F1 car lol.

Some of you people claim to be GT fans but ask for it to be a hardcore sim. I want a fun video game. Go play iRacing if you want that. I want to have fun driving cars. I like Kaz' vision of a bridge between gaming and real racing but the game needs to come first.

Forgive us for wanting a game who's tag line is "The Real Driving Simulator" to be realistic, or y'know, a simulator. If you don't care about realism, and just want a fun racing game, try Driveclub, it's tons of fun.

And also...

But driving a car in real life is fun, right? So having realistic physics isn't what makes it fun or not fun, the gameplay is. It's totally possible to have a really engaging gameplay experience that also offers very authentic physics, it's not an either/or.

If it was, then others might as well just tell you to go and play Need for Speed, but that's probably not the sort of fun that you enjoy.

...So much this ^

 

[Samus]

Some of you people claim to be GT fans but ask for it to be a hardcore sim. I want a fun video game. Go play iRacing if you want that. I want to have fun driving cars. I like Kaz' vision of a bridge between gaming and real racing but the game needs to come first.

But GT6 the game, was boring. The physics and realistic driving model are the only things that make it fun offline. The career structure and race format certainly don't.

 

[Tired Tyres]

Some of you people claim to be GT fans but ask for it to be a hardcore sim. I want a fun video game. Go play iRacing if you want that. I want to have fun driving cars. I like Kaz' vision of a bridge between gaming and real racing but the game needs to come first.

Oh dear.

http://eu.gran-turismo.com/gb/products/gtsport/

The graphics, sound and physics engine will be the most realistic ever experienced in a driving simulator thanks to the new
platform and the new technologies, but that alone would be a too obvious improvement: the way driving
games are played will also undergo a huge revolution with “Gran Turismo SPORT”.
This is a vision that invokes the rebirth of motorsports.

Anyway, when was the last time game play was a priority for GT? Maybe you should try Driveclub. That's fun and not too realistic.

 

[FS7]

Some of you people claim to be GT fans but ask for it to be a hardcore sim. I want a fun video game. Go play iRacing if you want that. I want to have fun driving cars.

It's possible to have both if PD gives us enough options.

Have realistic physics & have driving aids & totally customizable controller setups to make the game more approachable for casual players.
Have mechanical damage & fuel/tyre wear in all game modes & the option to either scale or turn them off.
Have good challenging AI & have the option to adjust AI difficulty so that the game can be fun & challenging for players of varied skill levels.
Have a realistic race format (practice, qualifying, standing starts or normal rolling starts depending on car class) & have a game mode where we can create custom races with whatever format we want.
Have balanced realistic AI car grids, more strict regulations when choosing cars to enter a career event, & have a game mode where we can create custom races, pick whatever car we want and choose cars for the AI opponents.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Some of you people claim to be GT fans but ask for it to be a hardcore sim. I want a fun video game. Go play iRacing if you want that. I want to have fun driving cars. I like Kaz' vision of a bridge between gaming and real racing but the game needs to come first.

Driving aids, RS tires, dramatically overpowering cars etc. are the tools used by casual players to overcome handicaps and they will still be available no matter how simlike GTS is. When it comes to racing, one only need to add a couple of options to add realism for the hardcore players. Qualifying for one, race length for another, and scalable AI. The GTS career mode could resemble the current career mode and most casuals would be happy. Add in those three options and it becomes hardcore mode for anyone that wants it. Options FTW.

 

[Nurburgthing.]

Some of you people claim to be GT fans but ask for it to be a hardcore sim. I want a fun video game. Go play iRacing if you want that. I want to have fun driving cars. I like Kaz' vision of a bridge between gaming and real racing but the game needs to come first.

We don't want to play iRacing. Why don't you go and play Ridge Racer or Burnout?

 

[syntex123]

Hey, don't mock Burnout. Burnout 2 was a perfectly fine game.

Anyway a realistic game is a great game. Hope GTS is more realistic than GT6 in every aspect.

 

[Tornado]

I'm still kind of at a loss for why the two are mutually exclusive. PD would never turn GT into the completely unapproachable mess some PC sims are, but that doesn't preclude making the game more realistic even in terms of game structure. Even the ability to offer the amount of tweaking that those games do doesn't mean that it would detract from anything if they put the effort into making it user-friendly; which is something GT games have always been good at anyway.

 

[chengman]

I don't see why the most famous cars, like the Supra, AE86, and 180SX are standards. Toyota and Nissan have museums in Japan, PD definitely has the access to those cars, and they have had since 2010(Launch of GT5) to model those cars. Also, the 20 or so standard models of S2000's can easily be turned into a premium model. The only thing that is different between them are the wheels(and handling for AP1,AP2). Same with the NSX, Miata, GT-R', and RX-7 FD's.

 

[Tornado]

Most of those would hopefully just be excised instead.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Some of you people claim to be GT fans but ask for it to be a hardcore sim. I want a fun video game. Go play iRacing if you want that. I want to have fun driving cars. I like Kaz' vision of a bridge between gaming and real racing but the game needs to come first.

We don't want to play iRacing. Why don't you go and play Ridge Racer or Burnout?

Where has this idea sprouted from, that realism and fun are mutually exclusive?

 

[Devil240Z]

My intent may have been misinterpreted. I'm not saying that fun and realism are mutually exclusive. and as someone said about GT6 the game not being much fun I agree. Because more work was put into realism and not into the game. Its like PD are so behind schedule that all they have time to work on is graphics and physics and have not touched the game since GT4.
But yeah I don't want a game thats less realistic than GT such as drive club that game is kinda fun but meh. I like GT how it is I just want more of a video game.

 

[Johnnypenso]

My intent may have been misinterpreted. I'm not saying that fun and realism are mutually exclusive. and as someone said about GT6 the game not being much fun I agree. Because more work was put into realism and not into the game. Its like PD are so behind schedule that all they have time to work on is graphics and physics and have not touched the game since GT4.
But yeah I don't want a game thats less realistic than GT such as drive club that game is kinda fun but meh. I like GT how it is I just want more of a video game.

PD is a big company that has many different departments all working on different aspects of the game. Those working on graphics are not the same as those modeling cars and are not the same as those engaging in game design. They could put 100 guys on graphics and cars and it has no effect on game design whatsoever. GT games have been roughly the same, with small differences here and there, from the beginning. It's obviously a style that they feel will appeal to the highest number of fans. It's not because they are spending time on making things look good or adding features, it's a deliberate design choice. What you want them to do is make a different design choice and I think many of us are in agreement with that. They can do that and make the game look pretty and have good physics all at the same time, it's a matter of making different choices, not giving up one to get the other.

 

[CSLACR]

Haha, it's true though. We all want more competitive AI for closer races in career, but the AI could be perfect 1:1 with real race drivers and they'd still get dominated because of the ability to enter races with modified race cars.

The PP system doesn't help things much either. I'm all for having more in depth modification of the road cars. But the series that use real race cars should require them be unmodified.

If your goal is just to make competitive AI, being "allowed" to use an overpowered car doesn't effect it.
If your goal is to enforce close races, and make the game more "difficult", it's very easy to sit down and determine what the AI cars need to do to run competitive - with you.
When you make the AI run 1:1 with real race drivers, you then require people posses real racing skill to play a video game.
When you realize the time gap between 5-10 million customers, suddenly making the AI race at the perfect pace is clearly impossible.

 

[Mike_grpA]

If your goal is just to make competitive AI, being "allowed" to use an overpowered car doesn't effect it.
If your goal is to enforce close races, and make the game more "difficult", it's very easy to sit down and determine what the AI cars need to do to run competitive - with you.
When you make the AI run 1:1 with real race drivers, you then require people posses real racing skill to play a video game.
When you realize the time gap between 5-10 million customers, suddenly making the AI race at the perfect pace is clearly impossible.

Hasn't anyone heard of difficulty sliders? lol. I'll say it one more time: Slapping a "stage 3" turbo on a race car engine which is already highly developed is unrealistic, and stupid when you can't even control the wastegate of any turbos anyway. Most turbo race engines have massive turbos already, so changing the turbo won't make the engine any more powerful. It just makes it even more of a joke that in GT6 you can enter real racing series like DTM or Super GT with cars that have had unrealistic performance mods.

GTS needs to have an adjustable AI difficulty to cater to a wider range of people. As it is in GT6, the only way to make it harder is to purposely handicap yourself by giving the AI a head start, adding a ton of ballast, or turning your engine down. There's no immersion in a sim that allows ridiculous modifications that wouldn't work in the real world, and require such handicapping to have any kind of challenge.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Hasn't anyone heard of difficulty sliders? lol. I'll say it one more time: Slapping a "stage 3" turbo on a race car engine which is already highly developed is unrealistic, and stupid when you can't even control the wastegate of any turbos anyway. Most turbo race engines have massive turbos already, so changing the turbo won't make the engine any more powerful. It just makes it even more of a joke that in GT6 you can enter real racing series like DTM or Super GT with cars that have had unrealistic performance mods.

GTS needs to have an adjustable AI difficulty to cater to a wider range of people. As it is in GT6, the only way to make it harder is to purposely handicap yourself by giving the AI a head start, adding a ton of ballast, or turning your engine down. There's no immersion in a sim that allows ridiculous modifications that wouldn't work in the real world, and require such handicapping to have any kind of challenge.

While I understand what you're trying to say, the answer for game design is still the same. Same car + same tires + stock tune level + 100% AI, should be difficult for even the best of drivers. After that it's up to the players and their individual skill levels and approach to the game if the want to maximize their challenge level, an easy victory, or something in between. They can do it through tuning and/or upgrades to the car and/or changing the difficulty slider. I don't really care how anyone else plays the game so long as I can use a same car/same tune approach (aka a simualation:idea and create a challenging race or series with competitive AI.

 

[Mike_grpA]

I just think it's stupid to have these upgrades in the race cars. What's the point of allowing users to do such upgrades? It makes the game less realistic, and yet they seem to arbitrarily decide which cars get which upgrades.

So many road cars that can't have turbos, when in the real world turbocharging is common, and yet race engines already with massive turbos, and you can add a magical stage 3 street kit that gives you 300 more horses lol. It's a joke.

It would be like allowing weight reduction on a formula car, or suspension upgrades to an lmp1. If they want to go for realism, they need to cut that nonsense out.

 

[JKgo]

So many road cars that can't have turbos, when in the real world turbocharging is common

...Amen. So true it hurts, this quote. Personally, I can't understand the reasoning behind this strange insistence by PDI at all. But they have stuck to it until now, so it's hard to see them change for the next game.

As for strapping a big turbo on race cars, I'd say as long as grinding remains a part of the single player experience, I want it to stay as is - back in GT5 (and in GT6 whenever I don't wanna drag RB fan cars around) I'd take a race mod ZR1 Corvette with a supercharger bolted on, and grinded credits like a dazed teen high on something watching a hundredth repeat of an Attenborough special.
Without the said boost in power, the monotony would've lasted a bit longer, you know.

 

[Mike_grpA]

...Amen. So true it hurts, this quote. Personally, I can't understand the reasoning behind this strange insistence by PDI at all. But they have stuck to it until now, so it's hard to see them change for the next game.

As for strapping a big turbo on race cars, I'd say as long as grinding remains a part of the single player experience, I want it to stay as is - back in GT5 (and in GT6 whenever I don't wanna drag RB fan cars around) I'd take a race mod ZR1 Corvette with a supercharger bolted on, and grinded credits like a dazed teen high on something watching a hundredth repeat of an Attenborough special.
Without the said boost in power, the monotony would've lasted a bit longer, you know.

Well 1) hopefully there's enough variation and seasonals and such to prevent the one event grinding from previous games, and 2) "race modified" cars were just road cars made into racing cars really. What I was talking about was real life race cars built to a set of real regulations.

 

[NivekRJ]

Sorry for shifting off the current topic, but I want to touch on the subject of interiors. I do believe every car in GT Sport and GT7 should have an interior, but there's something else that needs to come along with it. Adjustable FOV. Currently, GT6 DOES have 3 set positions, for FOV, but a slider is what we need.

I'll go ahead and tell you why this came to mind. I've been playing Forza 6 again. While it sucks not having an XB1 compatible wheel, there's something that sucks a whole lot more. The cockpit FOV. I will give credit to Turn 10, for all their cars having an interior, but it doesn't do me any good. The cockpit's seating position is way too far back and there's no adjustment for it. I have to drive from hood/bonnet cam, which annoys me. It's just one of those small things that makes a big difference. I mean, seriously? A PS3 game has slightly adjustable FOV, but an XB1 game has nothing? Get outta here!

That paint editor, though...

So, yeah... interiors are nice to have, but not if there's no way to adjust FOV.

 

[Mike_grpA]

Not just a FoV slider, but it'd also be nice to have the ability to move the cockpit seating position around too. Forward/back, left/right, up/down. FoV and seating position saved per car too.

 

[super_gt]

GT6 DOES have 3 set positions, for FOV, but a slider is what we need.

Try this 👍

 

[chzsln485]

I messaged the GT Facebook page about the inclusion of Standard cars in GT Sport. They responded saying "we aim to get rid of the difference between Premium and Standard cars in GT Sport". This is, as is perhaps par for the course regarding Polyphony's communication with the fans, somewhat unclear. I feel the words used there are very carefully chosen, no doubt about it, but carefully chosen to be as vague as possible.

Does this mean they're getting rid of the visual differences? As in, the polygon count, texture resolution, and interior views?

Does it mean the same thing Yamauchi said in the run-up to GT6's release, where the "distinction" between the two was to be done away with, which only came to pass in the most basic of ways? (i.e. the labelling of Standard and Premium in the menus being removed, the ability to use them in Photo Travel, etc.)

Does it mean they'll be "Premiumised"? (a la NA MX-5s, R390, Skyline R33, DB9)

It's a vague statement, alright, and a perhaps worryingly vague one. Saying "we aim to get rid of the difference between them" is distinct from "there will be no Standards in GTS" - in fact, it implies they will be there in some fashion, as it doesn't actually deny the presence of Standard cars if you compare the two.

 

[nocturnalgrey]

At the very least, the real race series in the game (LMP1,Super GT, etc. etc.) should require the cars be unmodified to enter. In GT6 you could slap a massive turbo on a GT500 car, bumping it up to something like 800hp, and enter the Super GT championship and lap the field in a 3 lap race lol.

In a world of mega sellers like Grand Theft Auto and Call of Duty, how many people do you really think are bothered by this? Outside of a small hardcore group, I doubt there is many.

 

[TRGTspecialist]

I messaged the GT Facebook page about the inclusion of Standard cars in GT Sport. They responded saying "we aim to get rid of the difference between Premium and Standard cars in GT Sport". This is, as is perhaps par for the course regarding Polyphony's communication with the fans, somewhat unclear. I feel the words used there are very carefully chosen, no doubt about it, but carefully chosen to be as vague as possible.

Who exactly is the person/people running that Facebook page? (never looked at it properly until now, I'm surprised at how comprehensive it is!) If it's anything other than a PD employee - and I presume it's most likely a Sony rep - then I wouldn't even bother attempting to message. You say those words may be carefully chosen, but they probably just don't know what's happening - we've seen before that even Sony don't know what PD are delivering sometimes!

 

[chzsln485]

Who exactly is the person/people running that Facebook page? (never looked at it properly until now, I'm surprised at how comprehensive it is!) If it's anything other than a PD employee - and I presume it's most likely a Sony rep - then I wouldn't even bother attempting to message. You say those words may be carefully chosen, but they probably just don't know what's happening - we've seen before that even Sony don't know what PD are delivering sometimes!

I'm thinking that might be the case as well, potentially. Whoever's running the thing might have literally no clue what's going on with Standard cars in GTS, and said the most diplomatic thing possible - it neither confirms nor denies the inclusion of Standards (meaning it's not a statement that can be held accountable in any way regardless of whether they turn up), and correlates nicely with the plan that Polyphony had for GT6, and is therefore the most logical comment to make if you have no other information to go on.

The fact it tells us nothing new (or that we couldn't infer ourselves) supports your views too. It's not as if they've made a bold statement of "yes" or "no".