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

[Tornado]

The only thing that anyone from PD actually seems to run is the Pit Stop blog. Everything else that is used to talk about GT news (most notably the GT website) always seems to be two or three layers removed from anyone who has any direct knowledge of what is going on.

 

[Johnnypenso]

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.

The "distinction" between standard and premium now is known. No interiors, low poly counts, single shell bodies etc. Removing that distinction means a full interior, full poly count on the exterior and individually modeled body panels and parts. In other words, all premiums and no standards.

 

[chzsln485]

The "distinction" between standard and premium now is known. No interiors, low poly counts, single shell bodies etc. Removing that distinction means a full interior, full poly count on the exterior and individually modeled body panels and parts. In other words, all premiums and no standards.

That's exactly what I hoped they meant. But why didn't they just say "there will be no Standards and only Premiums"?

Oh wait. Because Polyphony...

 

[CSLACR]

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.

If your statement is that it's unrealistic to think 900HP is achievable on a 5.0 V8, (SuperGT max size) then you have a lot to learn about engines.
If you think the turbo size cannot be increased, because SuperGT cars just run the biggest turbos in the world already, again, you have a lot to learn about engines.

If you're trying to say that real-world SuperGT wouldn't allow it, then you're correct, but you're not using words well at all.

 

[Johnnypenso]

That's exactly what I hoped they meant. But why didn't they just say "there will be no Standards and only Premiums"?

Oh wait. Because Polyphony...

I'm just giving the definition, as I see it, of "no distinction". What PD thinks "no distinction" means could be a different story altogether.

 

[CSLACR]

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.

That's exactly what I hoped they meant. But why didn't they just say "there will be no Standards and only Premiums"?

Oh wait. Because Polyphony...

I think it's pretty clearly a vague statement, but I also think I speak PD, so here's the translation I have on file:

We are going to do more "semi-premium" work to continue spiffing up our 14 year old models, some of which are still based of die-cast model cars. They will be more visually pleasing this time around, but the insides and physics will remain that of Playstation2 era quality.

 

[Mike_grpA]

If your statement is that it's unrealistic to think 900HP is achievable on a 5.0 V8, (SuperGT max size) then you have a lot to learn about engines.
If you think the turbo size cannot be increased, because SuperGT cars just run the biggest turbos in the world already, again, you have a lot to learn about engines.

If you're trying to say that real-world SuperGT wouldn't allow it, then you're correct, but you're not using words well at all.

Oh of course there are race engines in game that could be boosted, but even the Super GT V8s you're talking about would need to be completely re-built with much of the layout changed in order to be turbocharged, you can't just slap a turbo on anything. Do you think it's realistic to be taking a Group C engine, already running it's maximum real life power in GT, slap a "stage 3" turbo kit on it and suddenly have up to 1300hp?

 

[chzsln485]

I'm just giving the definition, as I see it, of "no distinction". What PD thinks "no distinction" means could be a different story altogether.

They'd probably argue that they were most of the way to removing that "distinction" already (even if it's just not calling them Standard or Premium). If I had a bag containing five red Lego bricks and five blue, and you wanted them to all be blue, I could of course just remove that distinction by saying they were all blue. I could also say that they're all functionally identical, so it doesn't really matter that not all the bricks are the same. It would be a load of rubbish, of course, and it'd be a very disingenuous way of solving the problem.

 

[TeamCZRRacing]

Oh of course there are race engines in game that could be boosted, but even the Super GT V8s you're talking about would need to be completely re-built with much of the layout changed in order to be turbocharged, you can't just slap a turbo on anything. Do you think it's realistic to be taking a Group C engine, already running it's maximum real life power in GT, slap a "stage 3" turbo kit on it and suddenly have up to 1300hp?

Actually, yes, to an extent. From what I can tell, the figures quoted in the game are how much power the cars made in race trim. In quali trim they were sometimes capable of over 1,000hp.

 

[CSLACR]

Oh of course there are race engines in game that could be boosted, but even the Super GT V8s you're talking about would need to be completely re-built with much of the layout changed in order to be turbocharged, you can't just slap a turbo on anything. Do you think it's realistic to be taking a Group C engine, already running it's maximum real life power in GT, slap a "stage 3" turbo kit on it and suddenly have up to 1300hp?

I think real life is realistic. In real life, 1,300HP actually isn't that much.

When you start talking about what "would be allowed in real life", the mods are ridiculous, yes. But so is saying a SuperGT car can't make 900HP or more.
If you're just talking about the semantics of GT's pitiful upgrade system, that's a different story. GT doesn't allow custom crankshafts, adjustable boost, bore increase, I could make a 20-page list.

But the upgrades for "race cars" in GT are no worse than for road cars, imo.

 

[Mike_grpA]

Actually, yes, to an extent. From what I can tell, the figures quoted in the game are how much power the cars made in race trim. In quali trim they were sometimes capable of over 1,000hp.

Source? Also, I'm pretty sure that teams never bolted on different turbo kits for quali did they? Besides, at that power level the motor wouldn't be indestructible like in GT.

I think real life is realistic. In real life, 1,300HP actually isn't that much.

When you start talking about what "would be allowed in real life", the mods are ridiculous, yes. But so is saying a SuperGT car can't make 900HP or more.
If you're just talking about the semantics of GT's pitiful upgrade system, that's a different story. GT doesn't allow custom crankshafts, adjustable boost, bore increase, I could make a 20-page list.

But the upgrades for "race cars" in GT are no worse than for road cars, imo.

I never said anything about a 900hp Super GT car being unrealistic, you've come up with that one. About Super GT, I used that series as an example of it being stupid to be able to upgrade a race car outside of the scope of it's regs and still enter it's championship.

If 1300hp wasn't that much for those engines, they would have been running that power level. They weren't, they weren't even running the power level they have stock in GT for any endurance races, because they wouldn't last.

 

[CSLACR]

Ah screw it...
Disclaimer: Instead of taking a quick jab, I recommend reading the distance this car drove at least.




As I can already see the eyebrows raising with anticipation to tell me how this car isn't relevant, it is. Just like Miata's with LS-1's in them, 800HP Honda S2000's, 2,000+HP cars drive down highways and turn 6-second quarter miles.
I know, I know, durability, etc, etc.

We could argue all day about semantics, whether it's how long a user has determined an engine will last, someone decides this doesn't count because it doesn't take corners, engine size, there's a mile of excuses here. The point is simply this: Where there's a will, there's a way. We have production cars coming out with 900+HP nowadays every couple of weeks.

 

[TeamCZRRacing]

Source? Also, I'm pretty sure that teams never bolted on different turbo kits for quali did they? Besides, at that power level the motor wouldn't be indestructible like in GT.

If you read the Wikipedia article, the Porsche 935 made over 800hp in qualifying trim, and the Nissan R90C over 1,000. This article on Mulsanne's Corner also mentions how cars frequently made higher power figures in their quali setup than they did in the race (paragraph starting with "The 1980s sports prototype racing car...").

So what I'm saying is that the ability to fit a higher power turbo onto a Group C prototype could be considered analogous to increasing turbo pressure for qualifying, though it would be better if they'd just allow us to adjust pressure from within the tuning screen. It would also be better if, like you say, they introduce component damage so that you run the risk of blowing your turbo if you run too high a pressure for too long.

 

[CSLACR]

I never said anything about a 900hp Super GT car being unrealistic, you've come up with that one. About Super GT, I used that series as an example of it being stupid to be able to upgrade a race car outside of the scope of it's regs and still enter it's championship.

If 1300hp wasn't that much for those engines, they would have been running that power level. They weren't, they weren't even running the power level they have stock in GT for any endurance races, because they wouldn't last.

I asked you what you meant, yet it wasn't until it became obvious that what it sounded like you were saying was wrong, now you clarify it's not what you meant.

Source?
I'd love to hear more about how SuperGT regs are based on "what the engines can handle".
Let me guess, you didn't say that either?
You did, because you said "If it wasn't too much, they would have ran that much power".
To your dismay, logic dictates that means you believe SuperGT cars run at the maximum power the engines can handle, which is laughable really, because anyone that knows anything about major racing series, knows "what the engine can handle" is basically never the limiting factor for vehicle specs.

 

[Tornado]

Actually, yes, to an extent. From what I can tell, the figures quoted in the game are how much power the cars made in race trim.

It's not.

So what I'm saying is that the ability to fit a higher power turbo onto a Group C prototype could be considered analogous to increasing turbo pressure for qualifying

But, again, as the various LMP/Group C cars are in GT4/GT5/GT6 already is far and away higher than any spec they actually raced in. If you were adding the high RPM turbo to these cars when they had ~700-~800 horsepower, that would put most of them in line with qualifying trims, but in GT4/GT5/GT6 they almost all start out of the box with over 900 horsepower, and then you add a high RPM turbo to that; and since PD simply cranked a power multiplier on them they aren't really in qualifying trim out of the box either.

 

[Mike_grpA]

I asked you what you meant, yet it wasn't until it became obvious that what it sounded like you were saying was wrong, now you clarify it's not what you meant.

Source?
I'd love to hear more about how SuperGT regs are based on "what the engines can handle".
Let me guess, you didn't say that either?
You did, because you said "If it wasn't too much, they would have ran that much power".
To your dismay, logic dictates that means you believe SuperGT cars run at the maximum power the engines can handle, which is laughable really, because anyone that knows anything about major racing series, knows "what the engine can handle" is basically never the limiting factor for vehicle specs.

I wasn't talking about Super GT engines in the second paragraph, I thought it was obvious, but perhaps I should have clarified that. By talking about the 1300hp figure, I thought you'd know I was talking about the group C engines. If those could run that power reliably, they would have. Quite how you think I was talking about Super GT when saying "they weren't even running the power level they have stock in GT for any endurance races", I have no idea.

Read back through my posts, at no point did I talk about power levels in Super GT being unrealistic, I only ever mentioned them when talking about how it's stupid you can enter those series' in game with cars that have unrealistic mods. A 900hp Super GT car wouldn't be accepted into the series would it?

If you read the Wikipedia article, the Porsche 935 made over 800hp in qualifying trim, and the Nissan R90C over 1,000. This article on Mulsanne's Corner also mentions how cars frequently made higher power figures in their quali setup than they did in the race (paragraph starting with "The 1980s sports prototype racing car...").

So what I'm saying is that the ability to fit a higher power turbo onto a Group C prototype could be considered analogous to increasing turbo pressure for qualifying, though it would be better if they'd just allow us to adjust pressure from within the tuning screen. It would also be better if, like you say, they introduce component damage so that you run the risk of blowing your turbo if you run too high a pressure for too long.

Yes at Le mans, they ran much lower power than you'll find stock in GT, for reliability reasons, so of course in quli they'd turn up the boost.

But yes, like I said, having wastegate control is a better way of controlling that, and the ability to damage an engine would prevent getting those power levels for long enough to use them in a race. How it is currently, you get an unrealistic and permanent power boost. It's also ridiculous to be able to fit a bigger turbo than those engines ran. They had turbo sizes very carefully chosen for the engines. Putting on a bigger turbo just increases the boost threashold, and gives you less rpm to work with. The turbos already on those engines will reach high enough boost levels to blow up the engine in short order, adding a bigger turbo gets you nothing but a higher boost threshold and more lag.

 

[CSLACR]

I wasn't talking about Super GT engines in the second paragraph, I thought it was obvious, but perhaps I should have clarified that. By talking about the 1300hp figure, I thought you'd know I was talking about the group C engines. If those could run that power reliably, they would have. Quite how you think I was talking about Super GT when saying "they weren't even running the power level they have stock in GT for any endurance races", I have no idea.

Read back through my posts, at no point did I talk about power levels in Super GT being unrealistic, I only ever mentioned them when talking about how it's stupid you can enter those series' in game with cars that have unrealistic mods. A 900hp Super GT car wouldn't be accepted into the series would it?

Cuz this?

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.

Oh of course there are race engines in game that could be boosted, but even the Super GT V8s you're talking about would need to be completely re-built with much of the layout changed in order to be turbocharged, you can't just slap a turbo on anything. Do you think it's realistic to be taking a Group C engine, already running it's maximum real life power in GT, slap a "stage 3" turbo kit on it and suddenly have up to 1300hp?

I never said anything about a 900hp Super GT car being unrealistic, you've come up with that one. About Super GT, I used that series as an example of it being stupid to be able to upgrade a race car outside of the scope of it's regs and still enter it's championship.

You're taking multiple sides, and changing standpoints.

You started off stating it's ridiculous that you can put a larger turbo on an already turbocharged car. (I know right?)
Then you said it was ridiculous because the entire engine would need re-designed (And it almost sounds like you think no GT500's have turbos?)
You compared adding a bigger turbo (and subsequently, more boost) to SuperGT as so unrealistic that it's like allowing suspension upgrades on LMP cars or a weight reduction on a Formula car. - Not because of regs, there is no mention of regs, you meant it in performance. You believe putting a bigger turbo on a turbocharged car is as useless as trying to remove weight from an F1 car, or improve suspension on an LMP, meaning it won't help.
Now you're falling back on "regs".

Here's another look:

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.

I don't see anything about regs at all here.

 

[ImaRobot]

don't see anything about regs at all here

The problem with trying to achieve parity in race cars within the same category in GT games is they allow the player to modify the race cars anyway, so you could buy an LMP1, slap on a massive turbo, and dominate the field regardless of how close they were to each other.

I think it's kind of stupid that you can do that. Buying highly strung race cars and slapping on bigger turbos and such. They should allow more in depth set up options like control over wastegates within the range the real car used, but bolting on upgrades to race cars is just silly IMO.

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.

Isn't that basically what hes been talking about since this initial post?

 

[Mike_grpA]

Cuz this?




You're taking multiple sides, and changing standpoints.

You started off stating it's ridiculous that you can put a larger turbo on an already turbocharged car. (I know right?)
Then you said it was ridiculous because the entire engine would need re-designed (And it almost sounds like you think no GT500's have turbos?)
You compared adding a bigger turbo (and subsequently, more boost) to SuperGT as so unrealistic that it's like allowing suspension upgrades on LMP cars or a weight reduction on a Formula car. - Not because of regs, there is no mention of regs, you meant it in performance. You believe putting a bigger turbo on a turbocharged car is as useless as trying to remove weight from an F1 car, or improve suspension on an LMP, meaning it won't help.
Now you're falling back on "regs".

Here's another look:

I don't see anything about regs at all here.

All you're doing is taking a few of my posts out of context. The only time I spoke about Super GT was using it as an example of a series where you can upgrade the car and still go into the series. At no point did I say it's ridiculous to put a larger turbo on a turbocharged car, I said it's ridiculous to take highly strung turbo race cars like LMP1s or Group Cs, and slap on a "turbo kit", as those engines already have large turbos carefully selected for them.

I also never said that no GT500 cars have turbos, all you keep claiming is that everything I'm talking about is about GT500 cars, which is nonsense, as I've repeatedly clarified for you what I was talking about, even though my posts weren't exactly hard to understand to begin with.

Telling me what I meant, and ignoring whole posts where I spoke specifically about regs, saying I never mentioned them, is just odd. I think you need a hobby mate, because at this point you're making up your own things to argue against.

isn't that basically what he's been talking about since this initial post?

Yes, but apparently reading isn't the goal. The idea is to read a little bit of what someone says, formulate what you think they mean, and argue with that. SMH.

 

[Tornado]

And it almost sounds like you think no GT500's have turbos?

It almost sounds like you think that the V8 powered Super GT cars that were used for most of the series' life before they merged regulations with DTM had turbos. Because while there certainly were turbocharged GT500 cars even in the SuperGT era, you were the one who specifically mentioned the V8 cars:

If your statement is that it's unrealistic to think 900HP is achievable on a 5.0 V8, (SuperGT max size) then you have a lot to learn about engines.

In fact, it sounds an awful lot like you are under the impression that the Super GT cars from the V8 era were turbocharged:

You compared adding a bigger turbo (and subsequently, more boost) to SuperGT as so unrealistic

You believe putting a bigger turbo on a turbocharged car

If you think the turbo size cannot be increased, because SuperGT cars just run the biggest turbos in the world already

For the record, I don't think Mike_grpA does believe that SuperGT cars of the V8 era already ran the biggest turbos in the world already, because statements like this:

but even the Super GT V8s you're talking about would need to be completely re-built with much of the layout changed in order to be turbocharged, you can't just slap a turbo on anything.

Pretty heavily imply that Mike_grpA knows that those engines were not turbocharged.




Because, in case you haven't gotten it by now, those engines weren't turbocharged. They weren't turbocharged when Toyota first started running the big Lexus V8 in the Supra starting in 2004. They weren't turbocharged when Toyota switched to the SC430 in 2006. They weren't turbocharged when Nissan was running the even bigger Infiniti V8 in the GT-R starting in 2008. And they sure as hell weren't turbocharged when all three manufacturers agreed to a high revving spec 3.4L V8 engine starting in 2010 which was used all the way up to the DTM merger.






And while a 10.1 liter dragster engine pushing 2100 horsepower reliably is interesting, it's not particularly relevant when we're talking about race engines built off of common blocks from luxury cars being further boosted from the 500 naturally aspirated horsepower that is already ~150 more than stock all the way to 900.
Similarly, while at the very least the Nissan VRH34A used when Nissan switched to the spec design in 2010 could in theory be made to make 900 or whatever horsepower (since its design lineage goes back to the Nissan Group C engines of the early 1990s), I'm somewhat doubtful that when Nissan was constructing the engines used in the R89C and the like for 24 hour duty they started by making the engine wind up to 500+ horsepower with a sky high compression ratio and then turbocharging that; to say nothing of the modified Formula Nippon engines that Toyota and Honda used in GT500 at the time.

 

[Mike_grpA]

Because, in case you haven't gotten it by now, those engines weren't turbocharged. They weren't turbocharged when Toyota first started running the big Lexus V8 in the Supra starting in 2004. They weren't turbocharged when Toyota switched to the SC430 in 2006. They weren't turbocharged when Nissan was running the big Infiniti V8 in the GT-R starting in 2008. And they sure as hell weren't turbocharged when all three manufacturers agreed to a high revving spec 3.4L V8 engine starting in 2010 which was used all the way up to the DTM merger.

The main reason the old JGTC cars are my favourites still, because I'm a sucker for turbos. Aaaaanyway lol. That brings me back to the topic: If PD were to re-do as many standards as possible, and drop the rest, I hope they focus on race cars, like the aforementioned JGTC beasts. It'd suck to lose so many great race cars from the game, but I could deal with losing most of the standard road cars. I'd even happily lose my car from the game if it meant all the race cars got the premium treatment.

Edit: Just to clarify, I only mentioned JGTC cars as an example of standard race cars I'd like re-done as premium, I'm not favouring them over other standard race cars, and I do acknowledge the existence of premium JGTC cars already in the game. Just in case anyone needs that cleared up, would hate to offend lol.

 

[CSLACR]

I apologize, you guys obviously know the exact power figures that PD should implement, and clearly hold the experience to comment on how much power exactly any racing vehicle can maintain.
It was silly of me to think someone could make a 900 horsepower race car, I apologize infinitely to the gods of gtplanet.

 

[Mike_grpA]

I apologize, you guys obviously know the exact power figures that PD should implement, and clearly hold the experience to comment on how much power exactly any racing vehicle can maintain.
It was silly of me to think someone could make a 900 horsepower race car, I apologize infinitely to the gods of gtplanet.

Lol so having had your strawmen refuted, you resort to this attempt at being clever? Nice job man *slow clap*

 

[05XR8]

I know when I first saw the GT6 preview in gtplanet, the SLS and R35 GT3s got my attention. The Audi S1 and the slowmo of the A110 made me believe we were in for a treat. gtplaneteers then noticed some once standard cars became premium. The Countach for one. Then, the 25th Anniv Countach. When PD reveal the trailer for GTS, some will be happy once again.

Others, well... There will be clapping when a Premium Supra makes the cut. Yet, there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth when there is no E30 and GT3 McLaren.

 

[GT6champNK_69]

Some of the enhanced Standards (semi-premiums) in GT6 looked quite decent. With slight enhancements maybe subdividing the polygons, I don't mind seeing a most of them.

And I hope these are the Standards Kaz talks about porting to GT7/GTS

Images courtesy goes to people supporting the GT6 Standards thread.

What most of you guys miss out from, is that as for all Standard cars in GT6, they are not just copy pasted from previous releases, you can't/don't do that, and that's not PD's philosophy or vision to do such things. What they actually do, is for every new release they build everything from scratch, even the Standard cars. The only thing that's different is the standard cars are built the same way as the premium cars, but the have less polygons and no detailed interiors. And if you look closely on the standard cars, you can actually see through the window screens and see low visual rendering interiors, you could not see that in the first GT games.
My personal opinion is that, they should only keep the most prominent standards, make those in to premium, scratch all the duplicates out, and use GT Planet to see what sort of cars and brands that the community and players really wants. There are so many cars that haven't seen the light of day in GT. Ford Escort RS Cosworth, Ford Sierra RS Cosworth, Mitsubishi Starion road version, Opal Manta, BMW 320i, Ford Escort MK1 '72, Ford Capri, Skoda 105, Skoda Rapid 105 Speed, Lancia 037, and lot more cars, so for me there's many cars and brands to look at, and they should do that. I like the standard cars, because I do replica tuning in GT6, but, I don't need 10 or more of the same car

 

[CSLACR]

Lol so having had your strawmen refuted, you resort to this attempt at being clever? Nice job man *slow clap*

Cute that you used Tornado's line.
And I'll return you the same favor, silly "strawman". (Funny how we can call each other stupid as long as it's cleverly put, right?)

I'm sorry, did I interrupt your hijacking of the thread? How many pages of bickering would you like to fill with off-topic banter about the semantics of GT modifications?
You want me to point out the fact that generally speaking, GT does not allow turbochargers to be added to "N/A" cars?
You want me to guess how much power JGTC or LMP engines can handle like you have?
You want me to point out that you - not I - you failed to distinguish in your post when you jumped from one type of car to the next?
You want to cover every semantic?
Nah, you just want to argue, off-topic at that.
Should I count the percentage of posts you've made in this thread that are actually on-topic?
Edit: Done!
Page 11, 7 off topic, 0 on topic.
Page 12, 5 off topic, 0 on topic.
Page 13, 5 off topic, 1 on topic.

5.5%, or one(1), single on-topic post. (slow clap)
Furthermore, your first 16 posts were off-topic, followed by your only on-topic post, in which you actually had the audacity to say:

Aaaaanyway lol. That brings me back to the topic:

Back? To come back you have to have been there bro.

 

[Mike_grpA]

Cute that you used Tornado's line.
And I'll return you the same favor, silly "strawman". (Funny how we can call each other stupid as long as it's cleverly put, right?)

You don't know what strawman means do you? Because it's not some insult that someone here coined...

Considering the rest of your post is full of even more strawmen, I'm guessing you don't have any idea. Stop making things up to argue against.

 

[CSLACR]

1 out of 19 on-topic now. 👍
It's ironic that you question my ability to understand, yet you came to a thread to talk about engine modifications, regulations, forza livery editors, among other things.....Aaannnnd you picked the thread titled "for-those-that-object-to-gts-or-gt7-having-std-cars-what-is-your-reason".


I'll ask really politely this time: Please stop hijacking this thread, and go find the appropriate thread for speculating realistic engine horsepower potential.

 

[Mike_grpA]

1 out of 19 on-topic now. 👍
It's ironic that you question my ability to understand, yet you came to a thread to talk about engine modifications, regulations, forza livery editors, among other things.....Aaannnnd you picked the thread titled "for-those-that-object-to-gts-or-gt7-having-std-cars-what-is-your-reason".


I'll ask really politely this time: Please stop hijacking this thread, and go find the appropriate thread for speculating realistic engine horsepower potential.

Ah I get it, your strawmen all defeated, you tried to be clever and it backfired, so now you'll play moderator and demand I stop posting. Despite the fact you're the one who took issue with what one post of mine said, and started this?

In case you hadn't noticed, much of this thread has consisted of off topic posts. Yours included. So get off your high horse.

 

[CSLACR]

Okay, screw it, let's argue because Mike likes to argue. Yay.

Ah I get it, your strawmen all defeated, you tried to be clever and it backfired, so now you'll play moderator and demand I stop posting. Despite the fact you're the one who took issue with what one post of mine said, and started this?

In case you hadn't noticed, most of this thread has consisted of off topic posts. Yours included. So get off your high horse.

Not before you came around.

Yeah PD really needs to make a Forza rivaling livery editor. I can't justify buying an X1 just for Forza games, which are the only XB exclusives that interest me, and I also don't have an X1 compatible wheel, despite my CSR being an official Forza wheel (ironically only works with PS4 in this gen lol). Despite this, Forza just has so much great stuff that is missing from GT. If T10 started selling Forza games on PS4 too, I'd buy them in a heartbeat. I think Forza is by far the best thing the Xbox has going for it.

Ah yes, Forza livery editor. Yes.

In a perfect world console exclusives wouldn't exist. Only fanboys benefit from one console not getting certain games that another one does.

The big winners would be gamers if PS4 and X1 both got GT and FM games.

Any idiot knows this is done to encourage customers to buy consoles, it's not just for fanboys. (bad word here don't you know?)

The problem with trying to achieve parity in race cars within the same category in GT games is they allow the player to modify the race cars anyway, so you could buy an LMP1, slap on a massive turbo, and dominate the field regardless of how close they were to each other.

I think it's kind of stupid that you can do that. Buying highly strung race cars and slapping on bigger turbos and such. They should allow more in depth set up options like control over wastegates within the range the real car used, but bolting on upgrades to race cars is just silly IMO.

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.

No, the problem with achieving parity is not because you can modify cars.
People don't accidentally jack their cars up to 900 horsepower, which means it isn't mandatory, or standard.
The problem is that the AI run wildly different paces and finish 5 lap races close to a lap apart.
Another problem is that even if a user matches their lap time to the AI, there will still be corners the AI drives to slow in, brakes too early for,and vice versa. Once you really achieve parity in GT5 or 6, you see how the AI really drives, which is well for some corners, and terribly for others.
The AI is the problem.

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.

Seriously, it sounds like you are genuinely concerned how other people play their game, and if they will be able to "breeze over the competition", so to speak.
I won't even ask why you would care, because I know there aren't any good reasons to care.

Oh I'm not talking about forcing stock set ups, that wouldn't be realistic. I just think modifying the car itself is unrealistic and makes the game ridiculously easy. Of course you should be able to set the car up how you like within the real car's parameters.

I know it wouldn't appeal to casuals, but I don't really care about that lol. I know a bunch of people will say "if you want closer races just don't hot up the cars, let us play how we want to blah blah blah", and no doubt that's what I'd do, but I just think it's stupid and unrealistic the way you can modify the race cars in older GT games. On one hand you've got people that want to be able to do unrealistic mods to race engines, and on the other hand they're wanting the career races to be closer.

You're right, nobody cares how you want them to play their game they paid for. Glad I don't need to explain it farther.
The race car mods aren't any less realistic than road car mods, which is where my discrepancy comes in. You state it as though it's only unrealistic for racing engines.
It's equally unrealistic for both road and race cars.

Yeah you could think of it that way, but the stock power level in GT6 is actually their qualifying power, they were turned down for endurance races. The R89C was capable of 950hp on full boost, but in GT it goes up to around 1100hp iirc with the turbo upgrade. Not to mention, at those power levels, the engine wouldn't last long, and in GT they last forever.

Are there sources I missed?

Yeah I agree, hopefully the FIA's love of over regulating things can do some good for once and lead to better, more realistic regulations in GTS lol.

Yeah.

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.

And what does the difficulty slider do?
Slow the Ai down?
How's that more realistic than speeding yourself up?
If upgrading slow road cars into fire-breathing monsters is what this game "has always been about", explain why there have always been highly modified race cars in GT?

Also explain why it's more realistic to make a homemade Nissan make 900HP than a Nissan race car?

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.

A properly set-up car doesn't typically run an over sized turbo, to minimize lag.
Secondly, you said adding a bigger turbo won't make the engine more powerful.

Wait...that doesn't sound intelligent at all...That's exactly what turbos do.

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.

This is where you talked about adding turbos to turbo cars. Later you will refute this by stating non-turbo race engines need re-built to withstand turbos. Oopsy.

P.S. Of course it's arbitrary...Do you think users should pick their own desires or something? Sure, I'll take a 4k Viper please.......

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.

I actually kind of agree, ironically.
It's the part where you tell me it's impossible that I disagree with.

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.

Yes, options for GT7, yay.

Oh of course there are race engines in game that could be boosted, but even the Super GT V8s you're talking about would need to be completely re-built with much of the layout changed in order to be turbocharged, you can't just slap a turbo on anything. Do you think it's realistic to be taking a Group C engine, already running it's maximum real life power in GT, slap a "stage 3" turbo kit on it and suddenly have up to 1300hp?

Yes, yes you can. That sentence alone says you need to read up. You can turbo pretty much anything.
Would you like to see a beater on Youtube with a leaf-blower forced induction system? Yes it's real.

But I believe you've taken the liberty to deduce GT's upgrade system to "literal", which I don't disagree with, but it's a double standard you're pulling at best.
All the parts you need to adjust or replace to properly support a bigger turbo? They aren't listed for the road cars either.
So like I said earlier:
If you're trying to say GT's upgrade system is rubbish, you're right, but wording it poorly.
If you're trying to say someone couldn't increase boost, or fit a larger turbo on a real race car and increase power, it's silly nonsense.

Source? Also, I'm pretty sure that teams never bolted on different turbo kits for quali did they? Besides, at that power level the motor wouldn't be indestructible like in GT.
Do you see how this goes from talking about LMP's
I never said anything about a 900hp Super GT car being unrealistic, you've come up with that one. About Super GT, I used that series as an example of it being stupid to be able to upgrade a race car outside of the scope of it's regs and still enter it's championship.
to SuperGTand then jumps to 1,300HP engines without mentioning that you're suddenly talking about the LMP's again?
If 1300hp wasn't that much for those engines, they would have been running that power level. They weren't, they weren't even running the power level they have stock in GT for any endurance races, because they wouldn't last.

I wasn't talking about Super GT engines in the second paragraph, I thought it was obvious, but perhaps I should have clarified that. By talking about the 1300hp figure, I thought you'd know I was talking about the group C engines. If those could run that power reliably, they would have. Quite how you think I was talking about Super GT when saying "they weren't even running the power level they have stock in GT for any endurance races", I have no idea.
Probably easier to blame your mistake on someone else I suppose.

Read back through my posts, at no point did I talk about power levels in Super GT being unrealistic, I only ever mentioned them when talking about how it's stupid you can enter those series' in game with cars that have unrealistic mods. A 900hp Super GT car wouldn't be accepted into the series would it?



Yes at Le mans, they ran much lower power than you'll find stock in GT, for reliability reasons, so of course in quli they'd turn up the boost.

But yes, like I said, having wastegate control is a better way of controlling that, and the ability to damage an engine would prevent getting those power levels for long enough to use them in a race. How it is currently, you get an unrealistic and permanent power boost. It's also ridiculous to be able to fit a bigger turbo than those engines ran. They had turbo sizes very carefully chosen for the engines. Putting on a bigger turbo just increases the boost threashold, and gives you less rpm to work with. The turbos already on those engines will reach high enough boost levels to blow up the engine in short order, adding a bigger turbo gets you nothing but a higher boost threshold and more lag.

Also, I'm still waiting on the sources for these power figures.
You know, the one you asked someone else for, but haven't provided yourself?

All you're doing is taking a few of my posts out of context. The only time I spoke about Super GT was using it as an example of a series where you can upgrade the car and still go into the series. At no point did I say it's ridiculous to put a larger turbo on a turbocharged car, I said it's ridiculous to take highly strung turbo race cars like LMP1s or Group Cs, and slap on a "turbo kit", as those engines already have large turbos carefully selected for them.

Brakes.
Stop.
Eat.

Most turbo race engines have massive turbos already, so changing the turbo won't make the engine any more powerful.

You didn't say ridiculous, you called it unrealistic (both for breaching regs and because bigger turbos don't add power, you say)

The main reason the old JGTC cars are my favourites still, because I'm a sucker for turbos. Aaaaanyway lol. That brings me back to the topic: If PD were to re-do as many standards as possible, and drop the rest, I hope they focus on race cars, like the aforementioned JGTC beasts. It'd suck to lose so many great race cars from the game, but I could deal with losing most of the standard road cars. I'd even happily lose my car from the game if it meant all the race cars got the premium treatment.

Edit: Just to clarify, I only mentioned JGTC cars as an example of standard race cars I'd like re-done as premium, I'm not favouring them over other standard race cars, and I do acknowledge the existence of premium JGTC cars already in the game. Just in case anyone needs that cleared up, would hate to offend lol.

The one. The only. On-topic.

Lol so having had your strawmen refuted, you resort to this attempt at being clever? Nice job man *slow clap*

Are you

You don't know what strawman means do you? Because it's not some insult that someone here coined...

Considering the rest of your post is full of even more strawmen, I'm guessing you don't have any idea. Stop making things up to argue against.

happy now?