Gran Turismo 7: Latest news and discussion thread

[snc]

The concept of getting a feel for braking distances from different speeds is also fine. Is the best way to do that a stop/go test like those in every GT Licence test so far? It's also taught in any subsequent test that involves slowing the car, and the concept of "fast thing take longer to slow down" is so intuitive for anyone over the age of 2 that teaching it explicitly all by itself like this just seems like talking down to the player.

Let me put it this way - if you removed those two tests do you think it would take players longer to learn the concept through the cornering and hotlap tests that they'd be doing anyway? I rather think that the first time they tried to brake for the corner and flew off the road the automatic assumption would be that they might need to slow down more. If a developer really wanted to be sure that the player got the correct idea, it doesn't seem like it would be hard to put a trigger that if the player runs wide off the track above a certain speed during the test it plays an audio clip telling the player that they might want to try braking earlier.

It's about having respect for the player and their time.

Lol, sick burn bro. Why is it important to specifically teach braking to a stop? And why can this not be taught any other way or incorporated into any other test?


They're bad at braking, but they know how to brake. GT kind of encourages not braking with the lack of damage and how speed gets carried when you bounce off walls, which is why you'll see a lot of players happily playing like that even with substantial game experience. I don't fault new players for driving in a way that the game allows to be quick. If GT made it so that braking for the corner was always faster than bouncing off the walls or your opponents maybe you'd see more people trying it.


It has crossed my mind.

Has it crossed your mind that anyone who plays the game will likely be a human, and therefore familiar with basic physics? Anyone who will play this game has been in a real car - it's basically unavoidable in modern society. They can probably walk and even run, and so have some concept of how speed and turning works. Should you also teach them the difference between up and down? How gravity works? At what level of fundamental concepts do we assume that the player is familiar enough that they can reasonably figure it out for themselves?

My argument is that these tests are so simplistic that they're unnecessary. If I want to teach someone to make toast, I assume that either they're already capable of picking up and holding a slice of bread or that they're at least smart enough to figure it out on their own without my input. A tutorial on how to place your fingers under the slice and clamp it between your thumb and forefinger would be asinine.

==========

Let me show you all an example of what an improved tutorial might look like.



The player is actually having to perform the skills that you're trying to teach, but they've got loads of guidance in the form of the racing line and loads of feedback from Tiff. This idea could absolutely be done better, some of Tiff's advice is pretty ropey, the timings can be waaay off and the overall build of the tutorial leaves a lot to be desired. This is from Ferrari Challenge which is 13 years old, made by Eutechnyx who are far from the greatest racing developers ever.

But you see the concept - instead of having players do arbitrary tasks with little relation to real racing, put them on a race track and give them guidance and feedback so that they can learn. Experienced players will do one lap and be done. New players can take as long as they like and will be getting timely feedback as to where they're going wrong and how to correct it. That's how you would teach someone to drive a track in real life.

This is far from the only way this could be accomplished, but I think it serves to show that there are other ways of imparting the same information that are far more fun for everyone as well as being more useful for the new or inexperienced players who are the real target audience.

If you still disagree then fine, but at least explain why you think that a stop/go test is the best way to teach new players. "People are dumb so they need dumb lessons" is not a strong argument.

this video apparently show good way of teaching ? showing race line and coloring break time is the worst way of teaching driving I can imagine

 

[CinnamonOD]

Why is it important to specifically teach braking to a stop? And why can this not be taught any other way or incorporated into any other test?

It teaches new players to learn that different cars brake differently, even more so considering the car from the second test is faster and heavier than the first one

In past Gran Turismo games this has been explicitly included in the test descriptions

Besides, as I just said, it's something that has been in past Gran Turismo games; I'll give you the point that for the people that have played the game for a long time, these tests are something very insignificant, mundane, you name it, but there's people that will find the basics found in tests very useful

Hell, even some veteran members of this community can learn a thing or two from them

 

[Samus]

Either that or "It's the Gran Turismo way".

Besides, as I just said, it's something that has been in past Gran Turismo games;

As I was saying. That's not a valid reason for including something. We don't include low poly car models just because they were in previous games, we improve them, so why can't they improve anything else?

It teaches new players to learn that different cars brake differently, even more so considering the car from the second test is faster and heavier than the first one

..and why do they need a specific test to learn that? There are hundreds of racing games out there, GT is the only one that has these super basic tests. Other games send you out to the track and you learn by experience. That's how we learn a lot of things as humans.

When was the last time you ever saw someone complaining they didn't like a racing game because they just didn't understand how cars braking worked? You quickly work it out, even in a game like F1 which are nothing like cars anyone drives in the real world. People work it out.

 

[Dippykun]

holy **** some of yall need to touch grass or something

been touching grass lmaooo..... anyways I hope coffee break makes a return

 

[CinnamonOD]

As I was saying. That's not a valid reason for including something. We don't include low poly car models just because they were in previous games, we improve them, so why can't they improve anything else?

It is a valid reason since they stated (though I don't exactly remember when) that for GT7, they were taking inspiration from what they did in past games, these tests were in those games, is it justifiable to implement them as they were in the past? not really, but hey, they're there, either we like it or not

I don't like the extremely basic tests either, but I don't believe there's any real reason to be this upset for 2 challenges that for a player like you or me would take a few minutes at most to gold

..and why do they need a specific test to learn that? There are hundreds of racing games out there, GT is the only one that has these super basic tests. Other games send you out to the track and you learn by experience. That's how we learn a lot of things as humans.

When was the last time you ever saw someone complaining they didn't like a racing game because they just didn't understand how cars braking worked?

You'll never know, it'll be useful for someone, somewhere

 

[ghsnu]

A little late to the party, but thoroughly excited for a new GT with a proper career/GT mode. I loved Sport initially, but the lack of car modifications and meaningless settings sheets really made the game dull after a while since I started playing more campaign races rather than Sport races. The driving aspect is still great in short sprints, but getting sucked in for hours is no longer possible for me.

Loved the showcase trailer, jammed full of content and couldn't wait to get home from work to check how everyone dissected it. The Moon Over the Castle throwback really hit the feels - my favorite childhood game (even though I had no idea WTF I was doing at the time). Looks like a solid return to GT's roots - a mix of GT3-4-5 sprinkled about, that's really all I care about. The cars are there. Sport's handling was good enough for me (if that hasn't changed). Scapes are back with ray tracing and HDR. A proper career/GT mode with earlier GT map. Dynamic time and weather. Tuning parts.

I do prefer the earlier GT map that was shown...a year ago? Looks a bit cleaner, but the new map is nice. A little worried on how the PS4-5 thing is going to go. While I do have a PS5, there may be some limiting factors for things that could've been larger if either company didn't push for a PS4 version. On the brighter side, at least PS4 won't be left alone for a proper GT game.

Still waiting for PD to do an interview, discussion video, or something. A year of silence and then a crazy trailer showing a lot of content is a bit...odd...without some talk from the developer, although it is PD. Hopefully Marth 4th is a solid date, I don't think they could do any worse than GT6 if it's rushed IMO. (side note, large expansions could be possible like No Man's Sky if the game is shipped not fully done)

All in all...the hype is real for me

 

[Samus]

It is a valid reason since they stated (though I don't exactly remember when) that for GT7, they were taking inspiration from what they did in past games, these tests were in those games, is it justifiable to implement them as they were in the past? not really, but hey, they're there, either we like it or not

I don't like the extremely basic tests either, but I don't believe there's any real reason to be this upset for 2 challenges that for a player like you or me would take a few minutes at most to gold


You'll never know, it'll be useful for someone, somewhere

I'm not upset, we're just having a discussion on a forum. If anything i'm just disappointed (but not surprised) that PD once again have refused to change anything about the game. Between this, the menus in the first trailer showing the same old events to pick from a menu and everything else they've show, it's just GT1-6 again. Copy. Paste.

Some people might enjoy playing the exact same game over and over again, and clearly they do whenever I mention this, but I'm not one of those people. I hoped for the old format with some fresh ideas to improve weaknesses and staleness but evidently we're just getting the old format, end of.

I guess I just need to resign myself to knowing that until someone else takes over, every Gran Turismo is going to be the same game.

 

[CinnamonOD]

I'm not upset, we're just having a discussion on a forum. If anything i'm just disappointed (but not surprised) that PD once again have refused to change anything about the game. Between this, the menus in the first trailer showing the same old events to pick from a menu and everything else they've show, it's just GT1-6 again. Copy. Paste.

Some people might enjoy playing the exact same game over and over again, and clearly they do whenever I mention this, but I'm not one of those people. I hoped for the old format with some fresh ideas to improve weaknesses and staleness but evidently we're just getting the old format, end of.

At this point we haven't had an in-depth look into the progression, we know it's going to be structured like GT1-6, doesn't mean that it's not all going to be the exact same thing (though it looks likely)

We're 6 months away from release and we'll be getting more GT7 news in the coming weeks, so I still have expectations for the rest of the game

 

[Samus]

At this point we haven't had an in-depth look into the progression, we know it's going to be structured like GT1-6, doesn't mean that it's not all going to be the exact same thing (though it looks likely)

We're 6 months away from release and we'll be getting more GT7 news in the coming weeks, so I still have expectations for the rest of the game

Well yes, I've not written it off entirely but with PD it's usually the case of what you see, is what you'll get. Countless times we've had people here say "Just wait and see, it might be different, there might be something else" and it almost never is. They've shown license tests are going to be the exact same, they've shown us the exact same events to pick from a list and no sign of anything new or deeper, so that is most likely what we'll get.

I remember when I returned to this forum when they announced they were adding single player stuff to GTS, I posted my disappointment that it seemed to be the same old same old again and was told to wait and see when it launched. Unsurprising, I was right.

As a single player gamer the AI is still the key factor for me more than anything. If that is not improved, I'll be buying GT7 when it's £10 as a novelty a couple of years down the line like I did with GTS. A racing game without proper racing and poor AI is utterly pointless to me (personally), irrespective of anything else.

 

[Imari]

It’s not about having to just click a button in a menu. What people like about it is that they have to actually look after the condition of their cars to an extent, which mimics real car ownership. That does add immersion for some players. The same can be said about the UCD as well, really. There’s nothing practical about having “used” cars in a racing game either, but many fans still love the UCD and are glad that it’s returning. These things what just make Gran Turismo what it is.

And to be totally honest, unless you do an insane amount of driving every day, I dobut you will have to do these things so much that it becomes a nuisance. In GT6, it took thousands of miles/kilometers before wear started affecting a car’s performance in a significant way. If it’s the same in GT7, I see maintenance being a minor inconvenience at worst.

I think the oil changes and stuff would be fine if they were purely "cosmetic". If there was never any change in performance regardless of what you did, but you could take your car in for a wash or an oil change or whatever and you got some snazzy music and a little animation or montage. I reckon people would still do it and enjoy it as much because it still feels like you're looking after your car, I used to wash my cars after every race in GT1. But those that don't care aren't inconvenienced, minor or not.

It is a valid reason since they stated (though I don't exactly remember when) that for GT7, they were taking inspiration from what they did in past games, these tests were in those games, is it justifiable to implement them as they were in the past? not really, but hey, they're there, either we like it or not

I don't like the extremely basic tests either, but I don't believe there's any real reason to be this upset for 2 challenges that for a player like you or me would take a few minutes at most to gold

I mean, why critique or be passionate about anything? Why not just drift through life accepting what you're given, doing the bare minimum and never questioning whether things might be able to be better?

Don't do this. Don't use the "you care too much" fallacy. You have 5000 posts on a GT forum, you can't make the argument that people here are taking GT too seriously.

You'll never know, it'll be useful for someone, somewhere

You can justify literally any piece of poor design like this.

"Why did you leave the electrical wires exposed on this refrigerator?" "Well, you never know, it'll be useful for someone, somewhere." Bad design is not design that is never good for any user ever, it's design that overall presents a worse experience over the entire range of users. And even then, it tends to get weighted towards negativity - a button that half the time gave the person that pushed it a million dollars and half the time killed them would probably be considered a bad button.

 

[Destroy321]

Personally, the most important thing about GT7 is that it has a competitive AI. All races will be attractive with competitive AI, even if the career mode hasn't been redesigned from previous GT titles.

 

[Scaff]

It is a valid reason since they stated (though I don't exactly remember when) that for GT7, they were taking inspiration from what they did in past games, these tests were in those games, is it justifiable to implement them as they were in the past? not really, but hey, they're there, either we like it or not

I don't like the extremely basic tests either, but I don't believe there's any real reason to be this upset for 2 challenges that for a player like you or me would take a few minutes at most to gold


You'll never know, it'll be useful for someone, somewhere

I literally work as a Training professional in the Motor Industry and any piece of training (which is what the licence tests are) should exist to solve a problem by increasing knowledge, skill and/or ability.

The only problem this coukd potential solve is the ability to brake to a standstill in a straight line, the needs to have such a skill isn't a problem that requires solving in a racing title.

It's poor instructional design and exists simply because it always has, defend it on the basis of tradition, but please don't defend it as a good piece of learning, because it's not.

 

[Freeman_Cruz]

I do not know why, it seems that it is forgotten that GT Sport has evolved the way of teaching how to drive compared to other classic GTs and nothing makes me doubt that in GT7 these options will continue to be present
Circuit experiences and cone marking seem like a much more successful way to teach than blindly following a line and hitting the brakes when it turns red.

 

[o000o]

It is a valid reason since they stated (though I don't exactly remember when) that for GT7, they were taking inspiration from what they did in past games, these tests were in those games, is it justifiable to implement them as they were in the past? not really, but hey, they're there, either we like it or not

Taking inspiration from past things have to be done with good reason other than nostalgia. Like personally for me, like tuning shop, implement it for educational factor, not because of how previous GT games did it.

Looks like a solid return to GT's roots - a mix of GT3-4-5 sprinkled about, that's really all I care about. The cars are there. Sport's handling was good enough for me (if that hasn't changed). Scapes are back with ray tracing and HDR. A proper career/GT mode with earlier GT map. Dynamic time and weather. Tuning parts.

It's the past and probably also present (like Livery Editor) part, how about the future part?

Personally, the most important thing about GT7 is that it has a competitive AI. All races will be attractive with competitive AI, even if the career mode hasn't been redesigned from previous GT titles.

They probably deal with AI problem by superficially making it harder like removing Qualifying and making the races roll start, instead of improving it. They must add back Qualifying as a sign that they actually worked on it.

I do not know why, it seems that it is forgotten that GT Sport has evolved the way of teaching how to drive compared to other classic GTs and nothing makes me doubt that in GT7 these options will continue to be present
Circuit experiences and cone marking seem like a much more successful way to teach than blindly following a line and hitting the brakes when it turns red.

GT Sport started the Driving School with even worse 'basic' elements than the first 6 games, which was just driving in straight line to the finish line.

 

[CinnamonOD]

I mean, why critique or be passionate about anything? Why not just drift through life accepting what you're given, doing the bare minimum and never questioning whether things might be able to be better?

Never said you shouldn't be critical or negative about this, I only said I believed there is no reason to be upset or mad

Don't do this. Don't use the "you care too much" fallacy. You have 5000 posts on a GT forum, you can't make the argument that people here are taking GT too seriously.

For that very same reason, I stopped frequenting the site as much, I was here for too long and was too active, now I have things that keep me busy but I see some people here still have enough time to keep themselves really engaged in this forum, seeing that I'm getting replies from 3 people with nearly 60 thousand posts combined

I literally work as a Training professional in the Motor Industry and any piece of training (which is what the licence tests are) should exist to solve a problem by increasing knowledge, skill and/or ability.

You're in a training position, so you should know that as part of the design of training processes, there is a need for guides to nearly everything, of all kinds and have to be effective in all the contexts in which your training is going to take place, you can't leave room for errors or miscommunications, or else it means that your training programs are not optimal and shouldn't be taken into practice, this means that even unnecessary training pieces need to be created, just in case (it'll be useful for someone, somewhere, sometime)

You can justify literally any piece of poor design like this.

"Why did you leave the electrical wires exposed on this refrigerator?" "Well, you never know, it'll be useful for someone, somewhere." Bad design is not design that is never good for any user ever, it's design that overall presents a worse experience over the entire range of users. And even then, it tends to get weighted towards negativity - a button that half the time gave the person that pushed it a million dollars and half the time killed them would probably be considered a bad button.

I believe you're mistaking a quality issue with a necessity issue, are the Acceleration/Braking tests inherently bad? do they pose a threat to the user doing the tests?

Well yes, I've not written it off entirely but with PD it's usually the case of what you see, is what you'll get. Countless times we've had people here say "Just wait and see, it might be different, there might be something else" and it almost never is. They've shown license tests are going to be the exact same, they've shown us the exact same events to pick from a list and no sign of anything new or deeper, so that is most likely what we'll get.

Exactly, I said it looks likely it'll be the same thing, but it's always better to wait and see to be 100% sure

 

[dimassa19]

Personally, the most important thing about GT7 is that it has a competitive AI. All races will be attractive with competitive AI, even if the career mode hasn't been redesigned from previous GT titles.

Hope we have a decent AI this time.

 

[05XR8]

Know what’s funny about the licence tests? They can be ignored because, there’s an Arcade Mode. A place where anyone can pick a car and practice using it on any track. If someone wants to learn how to drive, they wouldn’t need to do those tests.
if someone new to the franchise boots up the game, selects Arcade, chooses the Honda Fit Hybrid(default Automatic gearing), selects High Speed Ring, presses Start and finds they are racing AI over 2 laps, they’ll soon find out about accelerating, turning and braking.

It’s been that way through every Gran Turismo. The licence tests are definitely not needed for any player, new or experienced to the franchise. PD have added it as a lock to open in advancing in the game.

It’d be like booting up Mario Kart and having to do licence tests before actual racing. Don’t some games get you racing and pause to explain what you need to do while driving for the first time That could have been an option in Gran Turismo.

 

[kjeldsen]

I may be in the minority here. But after being spoiled with GTS online races i would prefer to be able to "level" my driver through real online racing and not just AI races.

 

[Bloodytears]

Speaking about tracks, I am really miss Circuito de la Sierra, and really up for 20km plus other tracks.

 

[Samus]

Know what’s funny about the licence tests? They can be ignored because, there’s an Arcade Mode. A place where anyone can pick a car and practice using it on any track. If someone wants to learn how to drive, they wouldn’t need to do those tests.
if someone new to the franchise boots up the game, selects Arcade, chooses the Honda Fit Hybrid(default Automatic gearing), selects High Speed Ring, presses Start and finds they are racing AI over 2 laps, they’ll soon find out about accelerating, turning and braking.

It’s been that way through every Gran Turismo. The licence tests are definitely not needed for any player, new or experienced to the franchise. PD have added it as a lock to open in advancing in the game.

It’d be like booting up Mario Kart and having to do licence tests before actual racing. Don’t some games get you racing and pause to explain what you need to do while driving for the first time That could have been an option in Gran Turismo.

It was a nice touch in Gran Turismo 1, it was a new idea that wasn't in any other games and they WERE quite helpful for people playing a relatively realistic "sim" for the first time coming from the arcade games of Ridge Racer and such.

The problem is that they haven't evolved AT ALL. Time has moved on, video games have moved on, people who play games have moved on, but GT hasn't. They made them longer, they changed the cars and tracks, but the core idea is identical in every game.

OK, they grouped them all by difficulty in GTS instead of split up. Big change /s.

PD ideas meetings must be incredibly short is all I can say.

 

[05XR8]

It was a nice touch in Gran Turismo 1, it was a new idea that wasn't in any other games and they WERE quite helpful for people playing a relatively realistic "sim" for the first time coming from the arcade games of Ridge Racer and such.

The problem is that they haven't evolved AT ALL. Time has moved on, video games have moved on, people who play games have moved on, but GT hasn't. They made them longer, they changed the cars and tracks, but the core idea is identical in every game.

View attachment 1079594

View attachment 1079595
View attachment 1079596
View attachment 1079597
View attachment 1079599

OK, they grouped them all by difficulty in GTS instead of split up. Big change /s.

PD ideas meetings must be incredibly short is all I can say.

Guess it’s one way to get around remastering the old games.

 

[Famine]

It was a nice touch in Gran Turismo 1, it was a new idea that wasn't in any other games and they WERE quite helpful for people playing a relatively realistic "sim" for the first time coming from the arcade games of Ridge Racer and such.

The problem is that they haven't evolved AT ALL.

Except in GT4, which allowed you to skip a bunch of the early tests if you had a GT4P save game with sufficient completion.

Which would be a good idea to recycle for GT7. If you've played GT Sport, there's surely no need to do these basic tests again and a save file with sufficient progress should be enough to allow you to automatically graduate to harder ones.

I do have a hypothesis that Sport Mode stats will simply carry over as it is (the ranking data is online and it's nonsensical to start the 2022 FIA in GT7 with all the S drivers at E along with everyone else), so extending that to licence tests can't be terribly problematic.

 

[o000o]

Except in GT4, which allowed you to skip a bunch of the early tests if you had a GT4P save game with sufficient completion.

Which would be a good idea to recycle for GT7. If you've played GT Sport, there's surely no need to do these basic tests again and a save file with sufficient progress should be enough to allow you to automatically graduate to harder ones.

I do have a hypothesis that Sport Mode stats will simply carry over as it is (the ranking data is online and it's nonsensical to start the 2022 FIA in GT7 with all the S drivers at E along with everyone else), so extending that to licence tests can't be terribly problematic.

Data Transfer. I did point out about Data Transfer before, but no it won't be the complete solution.

 

[Daniel55]

I don't think that license tests should be removed, I actually like to gold them. Some of them are boring, especially the first missions, but some of them are pretty challenging (or at least they used to be in the older games - not GT Sport) and i think about them as mini challenges. Keep in mind that not everyone that gets to play the game is a skilled driver/racer and for a little kid they are pretty useful.

In my opinion, they should leave the tests in the game, but not make them mandatory to progress through the career. Or, identify the users that played the missions in the previous games and ask them when they enter the career for the first time if they want to restart the tests or keep them as "passed" from the older games.

 

[sparkytooth]

I think license tests are probably my favorite part of the early game Gran Turismo experience, since its one of the only challenging parts of the game to master.

 

[Samus]

I don't think that license tests should be removed, I actually like to gold them. Some of them are boring, especially the first missions, but some of them are pretty challenging (or at least they used to be in the older games - not GT Sport) and i think about them as mini challenges. Keep in mind that not everyone that gets to play the game is a skilled driver/racer and for a little kid they are pretty useful.

In my opinion, they should leave the tests in the game, but not make them mandatory to progress through the career. Or, identify the users that played the missions in the previous games and ask them when they enter the career for the first time if they want to restart the tests or keep them as "passed" from the older games.

Or...they could get their heads together and come up with a new way to integrate driving challenges that actually teach you things, or are more fun. The possibilities are almost endless.

It's the fact they don't even seem to try that irks me. They've had 8 main titles now and the most they could manage in trying to change them up was adding coffee breaks in GT4 and changing how they're grouped in GTS.

 

[snc]

It was a nice touch in Gran Turismo 1, it was a new idea that wasn't in any other games and they WERE quite helpful for people playing a relatively realistic "sim" for the first time coming from the arcade games of Ridge Racer and such.

The problem is that they haven't evolved AT ALL. Time has moved on, video games have moved on, people who play games have moved on, but GT hasn't. They made them longer, they changed the cars and tracks, but the core idea is identical in every game.

View attachment 1079594

View attachment 1079595
View attachment 1079596
View attachment 1079597
View attachment 1079599

OK, they grouped them all by difficulty in GTS instead of split up. Big change /s.

PD ideas meetings must be incredibly short is all I can say.

why are you complaining like little kid for a thing you will pass in few minutes ?

 

[Samus]

why are you complaining like little kid for a thing you will pass in few minutes ?

Why are you personally attacking me instead of contributing to discussion about a video game on a discussion forum for a video game?

 

[05XR8]

I don't think that license tests should be removed, I actually like to gold them. Some of them are boring, especially the first missions, but some of them are pretty challenging (or at least they used to be in the older games - not GT Sport) and i think about them as mini challenges. Keep in mind that not everyone that gets to play the game is a skilled driver/racer and for a little kid they are pretty useful.

In my opinion, they should leave the tests in the game, but not make them mandatory to progress through the career. Or, identify the users that played the missions in the previous games and ask them when they enter the career for the first time if they want to restart the tests or keep them as "passed" from the older games.

This I’m fine with. I’ll probably do them anyway. The tests usually come with prize cars. Same way to get the GT-R Safety Car in GTS, these tests should give some special car as rewards. Not have me do these tests and receive the Fit Hybrid that I was already Gifted as my First Car or that I bought to start my first race.

 

[snc]

Why are you personally attacking me instead of contributing to discussion about a video game on a discussion forum for a video game?

not sure what your spaming about breaking test that take few minutes contribute to discussion but ok