Gran Turismo 7: Latest news and discussion thread

[MIE1992]

A couple things I'm hoping for, off the top of my head, is that the Ford GT LM Test Car that we can see in one of the PSN avatars will be based on the Ford GT concept, just as it was in GT4. The other thing is that I'm hoping that the Formula Gran Turismo '04 will return - and the Formula GT event as well.

As one last note, I'm hoping that between any Formula-styled cars (e.g. the Formula GT, the F1500T-A, the Red Bull cars, and the Mercedes-AMG W08) is that the events featuring those respective models won't have too much overlap. I know it can be tempting to just use a bunch of GP courses like Brands Hatch, Monaco, Monza, and Suzuka while mixing in some of the original courses, but I sincerely hope some of the events stand apart from each other a bit. One idea I had was that if the F1500T-A Championship returns, I'd use GP courses that would be more appropriate for the era that car is modeled on, such as the 1980s versions of both Brands Hatch and Monza, as well as including courses that might not have been in the F1 calendar for some time, like Fuji Speedway. (As I believe Suzuka has been the venue for the Japanese GP for some time now.) Then, I'd mostly include the Red Bull Ring as a round only for the events involving each of the Red Bull cars, maybe even as the last race for each of those events.

This whole thing could get further complicated if there are multiple events for various Gr.1 cars, as F1 and the WEC (and/or its predecessors, like the World Sportscar Championship) are known to share some circuits in their histories, like Spa-Francorchamps or Brands Hatch. In GTS alone, there were two Gr.1 event, with one being an Endurance League event. Personally, I'd have multiple events, such as one that'd only permit the Group C cars within Gr.1, and another for the three LMPs from the 2016 WEC season. But alternatively, these could be single-race events, all in the Endurance League, rather than something in the next-highest league, with the former idea being at a course like the Nurburgring GP/F course, and the latter at the Circuit de la Sarthe. Heck, there could even be a return of the "GT All-Stars" event, where any Gr.1 car is eligible, and would feature various GT-original courses like Trial Mountain - though this would likely be a Professional or Extreme League event, rather than an Endurance League event.

But I digress - there's so much we can speculate on, and we're almost only five months out. I'm simply hoping that the game incentivizes us to not only collect every car in the game, but also to actually drive as many cars as possible, as well - both online and in the campaign, even if that means adding new events when new cars/tracks are added.

I also could see some courses or special events being paid DLC, where there may be a special mode that isn't essential to something like the Daily Races or the FIAGTCs, such as the return of the Goodwood Hillclimb or Circuito de la Sierra Time Rally. If the rumors are true, then perhaps even the Isle of Man and/or Pikes Peak could do something similar, where they're part of paid DLC that offer a special event as well. Something that's a little more than a very hard time trial with a Lewis Hamilton voiceover. Not that I didn't like the LH Challenge, it's just that I hope that it'll be a little easier if it returns, especially if it's the only way to get the LH Edition of the Mercedes-Benz VGT.

Didn’t Kaz say in one of those recent interviews that they were still discussing whether to include those endurance races? I really, really hope they include them. Can someone think of a reason why one would possibly omit them? Because I can’t. Pretty sure that if we get them, pit-stop saving will also be included.

I think at the longest, they should be 4hrs. Anything longer would potentially be unrealistic, even for 24hr endurance races like the LM24. I'm also hoping that GT7's Endurance League will have a combination of races that are based on lap-count and by time.

EDIT: I'm also seriously hoping every last car - especially the VGTs and the Toyota S-FR Racing Concept - will have a cockpit this time around, and that the Toyota GR Supra Gr.4 will either get a cockpit that better-reflects its status as a racecar, or get replaced entirely with a more formal GT4-spec racer based on the GR Supra.

 

[Samus]

Indeed. Besides, getting gold on each license test should take up less than 0,1% of total playing time for people who are both experienced enough to be bothered about 25 years of repetitiveness and committed enough to post about it on a forum.

Of course this shouldn’t distract from the possibility that the license tests could be improved. However, the sheer amount of criticism around it has been disproportionate to the tiny fraction of playing time required to clear them. GT has design choice issues across the board affecting players on a daily basis, and in this regard the licenses tests are almost entirely negligible.

If the best defence of them you've got is that they don't take very long then its not a very good defence is it? You're basically admitting they're boring and just a timely chore to get through. So yes, that is why we're tired of them.

Also this is a discussion forum for the game, if we're not supposed to talk about them for too long here where should we talk about them?

 

[NAXEHT]

I think at the longest, they should be 4hrs. Anything longer would potentially be unrealistic, even for 24hr endurance races like the LM24. I'm also hoping that GT7's Endurance League will have a combination of races that are based on lap-count and by time.

Why only four hours? How is it unrealistic with 24 when such races exist in real life? The driver switches can be simulated through either pit stop saving or B-spec (if that were to return).

 

[Neddo]

A couple things I'm hoping for, off the top of my head, is that the Ford GT LM Test Car that we can see in one of the PSN avatars will be based on the Ford GT concept, just as it was in GT4.

No its not because concept has red tow hook very close to headlights.

 

[Nielsen]

If the best defence of them you've got is that they don't take very long then its not a very good defence is it? You're basically admitting they're boring and just a timely chore to get through. So yes, that is why we're tired of them.

I covered my “best defence” in the reply to you on page 214:

I think most of us agree that the license tests in GT are tedious in the early stages, but the tediousness actually has purpose in the fact that every little element gets its own round in the spotlight. It ensures a gradual learning curve that doesn’t overwhelm total beginners. Don’t underestimate the value in such an approach, as basic as it may seem 25 years on.

Then you might pull out the “but games need to be fun” card. Well, GT has issues with not being very fun-soaked in general, and thus there are other areas aside from license tests which could benefit more from some fresh perspectives on increasing the entertainment value. I’d say, save the rants for when the campaign gets properly revealed, because there’ll likely be plenty of weird design choices to pick apart.

-

Also this is a discussion forum for the game, if we're not supposed to talk about them for too long here where should we talk about them?

I’m sure you can talk about it here all you want. I’m merely pointing out that your criticism has exceeded the severity of the issue at hand. In the big picture the perceived tediousness of the license tests is arguably a non-issue as there’s a good reason to teach new players across some very basic and gradual steps. For experienced and regular players it’s just a small portion of the game that does absolutely no harm to your existing skillset. They can even be fun if you go for beating friend times on the leaderboards.

 

[Samus]

I covered my “best defence” in the reply to you on page 214:


-

I’m sure you can talk about it here all you want. I’m merely pointing out that your criticism has exceeded the severity of the issue at hand. In the big picture the perceived tediousness of the license tests is arguably a non-issue as there’s a good reason to teach new players across some very basic and gradual steps. For experienced and regular players it’s just a small portion of the game that does absolutely no harm to your existing skillset. They can even be fun if you go for beating friend times on the leaderboards.

"tediousness has a purpose"

Well, what more can I say to that? Games should not be tedious by design. Oh and yes, surprisingly I do actually want them to improve the whole game, not just license tests. That's the whole issue, they've seemingly just copy pasted the entire old game again instead of evolving and improving it. Saying "well other parts of the game are stale as well" also doesn't seem like a strong defence.

It's not about the severity of the issue, it's that so far they've shown us very little of the game so we can only critique what is on show. I can't critique and comment on something we've not seen.

 

[ImaRobot]

I’m sure you can talk about it here all you want. I’m merely pointing out that your criticism has exceeded the severity of the issue at hand. In the big picture the perceived tediousness of the license tests is arguably a non-issue as there’s a good reason to teach new players across some very basic and gradual steps. For experienced and regular players it’s just a small portion of the game that does absolutely no harm to your existing skillset.

The thing about that, is that you don't get to decide when enough is enough or what warrants discussions between people being bothered by. I've seen ridiculous amounts of incessant whining about 3d/2d trees - Now that is something particularly unnecessary, yet if that's what bother them than oh well, there's nothing I can do about that. If for experienced players and regular players(which is likely to be the vast majority of the playerbase by a massive longshot), it's nothing more than to be time consuming and in no way helpful or detrimental to them, than yeah that does sound pretty unnecessary if you ask me.

What would be interesting if there was some sort of algorithm that studies how you drive and in the event that you aren't above the average in specific actions, than the game introduces ways to help you improve on area's you aren't doing too hot on.

They can even be fun if you go for beating friend times on the leaderboards.

They can, probably, or they can just be unnecessarily tedious and boring, likely for the majority of people too. I don't find joy in seeing who can brake best in a 10 second segment out of all my friends. I'm more interested in applying something like that to actual tracks, though.

 

[05XR8]

That’s why I’ve been saying if people want to get better at using their wheel or get better driving, a licence test isn’t required. Just drive around a circuit. It’s that simple. Take your first car in GT7. Pick a circuit and learn the characteristics of your car and learn the circuit. Can’t tell me braking at Kyoto from straight is going to improve or teach you any more than going to Arcade Mode and experience going around a circuit. The player will learn more with no limit around a circuit than accelerating and stopping at a certain distance.

I still understand people that just want to do the licence. We’ll see how much of the game the licence tests lock.

Some people have mentioned about starting off with nothing. That it’s the GT way of doing things. We’ll, completing licence tests gifts cars. Tha5 almost a form of cheating for doing nothing if it’s so easy to do- Even if PD decide make it difficult this time. Anyway, if people want to “earn” their way to building their car collection and earning Cr. to build their car up, skip the licence test and do the hard road of racing Arcade Mode. See how much they’d advance that way.

 

[RACECAR]

A couple things I'm hoping for, off the top of my head, is that the Ford GT LM Test Car that we can see in one of the PSN avatars will be based on the Ford GT concept, just as it was in GT4. The other thing is that I'm hoping that the Formula Gran Turismo '04 will return - and the Formula GT event as well.

The Headlights themselves seem to indicate to me that won't the case. I think it makes more sense this way because where the Spec 1 race car that was originally in Ford GT Concept made sense relative to that time being when the car was a concept, the Spec II shows up in a game released at the same time frame as the production car so it actually makes sense for both the race car AND test car to be based on the Production car that debuted (Which means having the rear undertray as opposed to the exposed axel on the concept).

 

[ImaRobot]

That’s why I’ve been saying if people want to get better at using their wheel or get better driving, a licence test isn’t required. Just drive around a circuit. It’s that simple. Take your first car in GT7. Pick a circuit and learn the characteristics of your car and learn the circuit. Can’t tell me braking at Kyoto from straight is going to improve or teach you any more than going to Arcade Mode and experience going around a circuit. The player will learn more with no limit around a circuit than accelerating and stopping at a certain distance.

I still understand people that just want to do the licence. We’ll see how much of the game the licence tests lock.

Some people have mentioned about starting off with nothing. That it’s the GT way of doing things. We’ll, completing licence tests gifts cars. Tha5 almost a form of cheating for doing nothing if it’s so easy to do- Even if PD decide make it difficult this time. Anyway, if people want to “earn” their way to building their car collection and earning Cr. to build their car up, skip the licence test and do the hard road of racing Arcade Mode. See how much they’d advance that way.

The only time I willingly have done license tests was to get the rewards tied behind them. It was in no way fun or exciting, and like noted by those arguing against it, it served no reason other than to take up time.

To add to what I mentioned about an algorithm, you bringing up jumping into a circuit had me thinking of something similar to the two ideas. You get a 3 lap stint upon booting up the game and at the end you're judged on the actions performed and recommended things to do to improve those area's - I feel that's when the actual license test set-up comes in, after it recommends area's it gives you live videos of ways to improve, and subsequently, maybe, it will take you to go practice that exact area. Hell, they can offer credit rewards for incentives for those that are willing to partake.

 

[Samus]

Yes, GT6 did that didn't it. Even paused the game to tell you to brake and turn coming up, IIRC. That is a far more intuitive way to teach people to brake for corners, and as I said, pretty much what a real performance driving/racing instructor would do. Although I think they should have used a more beginner friendly track than Brands Hatch. Paddock Hill is not the best corner to throw people into.

In fact for a lot of the stale license tests they suffer this same flaw, they give you a text instruction what to do on the menu but that's it, once you're on the track if you forgot what it said, or didn't even see it, you've no instruction. You have to go back to the menu, take it in, then back to the track. If you're a beginner you might not even understand some of the terms.

So yes, teaching people certain techniques is far better done live on track, with a virtual instructor IMO. That same virtual instructor should be telling you where you went wrong, that's how you learn quickly. Sure, you might eventually work it out yourself but it's much faster if someone is telling you "OK, so you lifted off mid corner there which unsettled the car". A text instruction at the start is never going to give you that feedback.

See what we mean about improvement? There are multiple things they can do, at least try, but no, they don't bother. It's actually pretty crazy reading so many topics here with fans coming up with ideas for different aspects of the game left right and centre, whilst PD just don't do anything but copy/paste.

Again caveat that we haven't seen everything yet regarding licenses, just going by that one screenshot, so maybe there are some differences.

 

[05XR8]

The only time I willingly have done license tests was to get the rewards tied behind them. It was in no way fun or exciting, and like noted by those arguing against it, it served no reason other than to take up time.

To add to what I mentioned about an algorithm, you bringing up jumping into a circuit had me thinking of something similar to the two ideas. You get a 3 lap stint upon booting up the game and at the end you're judged on the actions performed and recommended things to do to improve those area's - I feel that's when the actual license test set-up comes in, after it recommends area's it gives you live videos of ways to improve, and subsequently, maybe, it will take you to go practice that exact area. Hell, they can offer credit rewards for incentives for those that are willing to partake.

Asset to Corsa Competitione does a similar thing. When driving around a circuit, there is a bar that fills up as each objective is met. Whether solo or in a race versus AI, the objectives are: Drive a clean lap, drive with control of your car(try not to go off track or lose control in braking and accelerating). You also get green and red sector deltas to check your progress over each lap.
Once the game registers your performance per lap, your instructed to do another lap and another lap and another lap. You can do well in three laps and the game will instruct you to do a fourth to meet your last objective. However, you can keep driving for as long as you want. Such a good system.

 

[o000o]

A couple things I'm hoping for, off the top of my head, is that the Ford GT LM Test Car that we can see in one of the PSN avatars will be based on the Ford GT concept, just as it was in GT4. The other thing is that I'm hoping that the Formula Gran Turismo '04 will return - and the Formula GT event as well.

As one last note, I'm hoping that between any Formula-styled cars (e.g. the Formula GT, the F1500T-A, the Red Bull cars, and the Mercedes-AMG W08) is that the events featuring those respective models won't have too much overlap. I know it can be tempting to just use a bunch of GP courses like Brands Hatch, Monaco, Monza, and Suzuka while mixing in some of the original courses, but I sincerely hope some of the events stand apart from each other a bit. One idea I had was that if the F1500T-A Championship returns, I'd use GP courses that would be more appropriate for the era that car is modeled on, such as the 1980s versions of both Brands Hatch and Monza, as well as including courses that might not have been in the F1 calendar for some time, like Fuji Speedway. (As I believe Suzuka has been the venue for the Japanese GP for some time now.) Then, I'd mostly include the Red Bull Ring as a round only for the events involving each of the Red Bull cars, maybe even as the last race for each of those events.

This whole thing could get further complicated if there are multiple events for various Gr.1 cars, as F1 and the WEC (and/or its predecessors, like the World Sportscar Championship) are known to share some circuits in their histories, like Spa-Francorchamps or Brands Hatch. In GTS alone, there were two Gr.1 event, with one being an Endurance League event. Personally, I'd have multiple events, such as one that'd only permit the Group C cars within Gr.1, and another for the three LMPs from the 2016 WEC season. But alternatively, these could be single-race events, all in the Endurance League, rather than something in the next-highest league, with the former idea being at a course like the Nurburgring GP/F course, and the latter at the Circuit de la Sarthe. Heck, there could even be a return of the "GT All-Stars" event, where any Gr.1 car is eligible, and would feature various GT-original courses like Trial Mountain - though this would likely be a Professional or Extreme League event, rather than an Endurance League event.

But I digress - there's so much we can speculate on, and we're almost only five months out. I'm simply hoping that the game incentivizes us to not only collect every car in the game, but also to actually drive as many cars as possible, as well - both online and in the campaign, even if that means adding new events when new cars/tracks are added.

Why don't just turn F1500T-A Championship into Formula GT, allowing you to use at least both F1500T-A and Formula Gran Turismo? I don't know if you'd like this from your endurance talk below, but I kinda hope that events like Formula GT will have at least similar scale to the one that GT4 did, the event was massive (in general GT5 and GT6 had smaller scale in its events) like what I think the climatic event based on prestigious sport should be. And speaking of motorsport event around here, I'd like if they incorporated actual motorsport elements into those events, using B-Spec as a whole team managing aspect (as it did contain a bit of it before, the coaching driver in race and hiring/training drivers in GT5, but big no to separating):

Spoiler: B-SPEC

• Crew:
  • When hiring drivers, allow to adjust their stats (ex: Physical strength) with certain limit, but it'll add more cost to hire them and their paycheck.
  • Allow players to decide the name of the drivers by themselves, or set their gender.
  • Implement more members that you hire like pit crew, engineers (works in Tuning Part Shop), mechanics (works in GT Auto), etc.
    • Other members also can be leveled up and has stats like B-spec drivers.
    • Leveled up members give bonuses in their respective field like all pit services being worked at once (changing tyres, refuel, etc. starts at the same time), or in Tuning Part Shop and GT Auto; shorter day usage for certain parts/maintenance.
  • Paycheck routine can be decided (ex: months will take 30 in game day).
  • If no one is hired, there's stock driver, mechanic, etc. A.I. so that B-Spec, Tuning Part Shop, and GT Auto can still be used.
• Gameplay:
  • Fast forward feature like in GT4.
  • GT4 pace system where you don't need to repeatedly selecting which pace.
  • Switch drivers on pit like GT4, including switching between other B-Spec drivers.
  • Driver condition in race like strength, mental strength, etc. can change mid-race.
  • Real-Time Controls from GT6.
  • In-race and out-race feedback/radio responses from the B-Spec driver (like GT5's "OK!", but obviously far more than that, depending on the driver's condition in the race).
• Driver condition stays in and out of race, where if a driver is too tired they can't be used until they've recovered.
• Allow to have the drivers join in the events and drive as teammates (prize moneys are accumulated from both yours and your team).
• Give a choice to coach the driver or not(if yes, then it goes like previous GT's B-Spec, if not, then you go back to the menu, while that event is played out with the B-Spec driver).
  • Set up the race strategies like pit changes before leaving.
  • Allow to re-enter the live event with that B-Spec driver (and play out like regular B-Spec) or go back to the menu at any point, and save replay after the event ends.
• If Practice mode from GT1/GT3/GT4 returns, the mode and stats are more important that you can train the Drivers in that mode.
• Allow to train drivers outside the race.
• There are sponsors that can be picked, or struggled to gain (for the latter, example is winning a Manufacturer Event to gain sponsorship from that brand), with them giving some objectives to achieve, but also with payouts/rewards for acheiving said objectives.

Spoiler: MOTORSPORT

• Implement real-life stuff like opponent number, rules, laps (in Endurance Championships), also point system, in motorsport racing events such as NASCAR or Super GT, while other events such as road car races aren't given the same restrictions.
• Safety Cars (especially as the games include them!) are utilized in motorsports involving them, also mimicking the motorsport's rule of what to do with it being present on track depending on which motorsport.
• You can join a team (buying or enter with owned cars which is related to the team), or bringing your B-Spec team.
  • Team offers have stats for its members similar to B-Spec.
  • If using own team, the racecar uses your team's livery.
• If any, replace existing events that has nearly-identical real life motorsport version with the real one, such as Mini Sports Meeting with UK Mini Challenge.
• Implement the motorsport's requirement to enter that players have to fulfill (played within the event itself) to allow to enter that event.
  • For example, something like GT5's Special Events, like implementing improved NASCAR School-like event for NASCAR before entering the event for the first time.

I also could see some courses or special events being paid DLC, where there may be a special mode that isn't essential to something like the Daily Races or the FIAGTCs, such as the return of the Goodwood Hillclimb or Circuito de la Sierra Time Rally. If the rumors are true, then perhaps even the Isle of Man and/or Pikes Peak could do something similar, where they're part of paid DLC that offer a special event as well. Something that's a little more than a very hard time trial with a Lewis Hamilton voiceover. Not that I didn't like the LH Challenge, it's just that I hope that it'll be a little easier if it returns, especially if it's the only way to get the LH Edition of the Mercedes-Benz VGT.

I think at the longest, they should be 4hrs. Anything longer would potentially be unrealistic, even for 24hr endurance races like the LM24. I'm also hoping that GT7's Endurance League will have a combination of races that are based on lap-count and by time.

I'd like for Pikes Peak to be used as a part of the main events, instead of just playing second fiddle. Past GT do have combination of races based on lap count and time though, like in GT2 there are 2 hours in Rome and Trial Mountain 30 laps. I don't know if this'd be against your wants, but I want to see Endurance Championship, like for motorsports other than open-wheel (Formula GT).

The only time I willingly have done license tests was to get the rewards tied behind them. It was in no way fun or exciting, and like noted by those arguing against it, it served no reason other than to take up time.

To add to what I mentioned about an algorithm, you bringing up jumping into a circuit had me thinking of something similar to the two ideas. You get a 3 lap stint upon booting up the game and at the end you're judged on the actions performed and recommended things to do to improve those area's - I feel that's when the actual license test set-up comes in, after it recommends area's it gives you live videos of ways to improve, and subsequently, maybe, it will take you to go practice that exact area. Hell, they can offer credit rewards for incentives for those that are willing to partake.

Would you think that for GT, the non-License part of the games are fun or exciting either though? I'd think that, if they'd still implement License, the 3 lap stint upon completion should also give the players a chance to skip Licenses, the portion of the License skipped depends on the actions performed too.

Yes, GT6 did that didn't it. Even paused the game to tell you to brake and turn coming up, IIRC. That is a far more intuitive way to teach people to brake for corners, and as I said, pretty much what a real performance driving/racing instructor would do. Although I think they should have used a more beginner friendly track than Brands Hatch. Paddock Hill is not the best corner to throw people into.

In fact for a lot of the stale license tests they suffer this same flaw, they give you a text instruction what to do on the menu but that's it, once you're on the track if you forgot what it said, or didn't even see it, you've no instruction. You have to go back to the menu, take it in, then back to the track. If you're a beginner you might not even understand some of the terms.

So yes, teaching people certain techniques is far better done live on track, with a virtual instructor IMO. That same virtual instructor should be telling you where you went wrong, that's how you learn quickly. Sure, you might eventually work it out yourself but it's much faster if someone is telling you "OK, so you lifted off mid corner there which unsettled the car". A text instruction at the start is never going to give you that feedback.

Oh, ironic that you'd insist for GT to give a more beginner-friendly track than Brands Hatch for the tutorial. I mean every GT6 player, beginner or veteran would go through the tutorial the first time playing right? And that GT shouldn't treat everyone like beginners. Though of course there are still room of improvements in the tutorial mode, I thought this part will garner even more criticism to GT due to the treating people like beginners part, of it explaining very basic stuff like braking on red driving line, getting the feel of the car, etc.

 

[ImaRobot]

Would you think that for GT, the non-License part of the games are fun or exciting either though? I'd think that, if they'd still implement License, the 3 lap stint upon completion should also give the players a chance to skip Licenses, the portion of the License skipped depends on the actions performed too.

Yes I do, because pretty much every aspect outside of the license-test are no way similar outside of the fact that in both instances you're in a car on a track. That's what I was alluding to with the 3 lap stint, if it's necessary you'll get recommendations, how ever if you get by with no issues, you'd never have to look back. In the end even if you don't do too well, you can still skip them if you prefer.

Oh, ironic that you'd insist for GT to give a more beginner-friendly track than Brands Hatch for the tutorial.

Do you mind pointing out exactly what is ironic? There really isn't a connection there like you're thinking. You're not going to want to throw people out on the Nordschliefe, there's obviously going to have to be a better common ground to run a mock up on. What are you even arguing against, and for, on that point? Throwing everyone on the same track is treating everyone as equals, then afterwards it can determine how accurate that is. If you're a great driver you can just treat this as a regular race, as you'll very likely not get dinged for many mistakes, if any. If not, you can jump into tutorials if you'd prefer. Using an easier track in general, for everyone, is not the same as assuming that everyone is going to need the absolute basics described to them. Throw the Nordcshliefe in that test and you'd get dinged left and right even for some of the more well versed people - and that's exactly why a simpler track is fine.

 

[regnar]

I think at the longest, they should be 4hrs. Anything longer would potentially be unrealistic, even for 24hr endurance races like the LM24. I'm also hoping that GT7's Endurance League will have a combination of races that are based on lap-count and by time.

4 hours would give about 240 minutes of endurance racing, with the time multiplier 6X to have the 24 hours compressed, better than the 24 minutes of Le Mans from GT6

 

[Nielsen]

"tediousness has a purpose"

Well, what more can I say to that?

You could say tutorials are a chore in general? At least that’s what I think, and I wouldn’t say GT does an exceptionally bad job at it.

For example, you might be amazed by the amount of beginners who don’t grasp the concept of braking before taking a turn. GT teaches each concept individually and that’s a good thing, as boring as it may be to the dinosaurs among us.

Games should not be tedious by design. Oh and yes, surprisingly I do actually want them to improve the whole game, not just license tests. That's the whole issue, they've seemingly just copy pasted the entire old game again instead of evolving and improving it.

For tutorials it’s really hard to overcome a tedious design without making the whole thing too compressed for beginners. The rest I agree with.

Saying "well other parts of the game are stale as well" also doesn't seem like a strong defence.

I only said this to inject some perspective into the discussion, after having already stressed my main point.

It's not about the severity of the issue, it's that so far they've shown us very little of the game so we can only critique what is on show. I can't critique and comment on something we've not seen.

So no matter how many fair points people raise against yours after weeks, you’ll just keep insisting that the license tests are bad until there’s something else to talk about? Is that a correct assessment?

The thing about that, is that you don't get to decide when enough is enough or what warrants discussions between people being bothered by.

You say that like I told people to stop, which I actually didn’t. I said the criticism is unwarranted by now, and why I think so.

I've seen ridiculous amounts of incessant whining about 3d/2d trees - Now that is something particularly unnecessary, yet if that's what bother them than oh well, there's nothing I can do about that.

The difference between this discussion and your example there - I’m not simply saying the discussion is unnecessary. I’m saying it’s unwarranted criticism for the reasons stated. The outright denial of justifiable points in the counterarguments is just getting ridiculous after more than two weeks of ping pong. Especially because GT has flawed design choices in general and nothing indicates GT7 will improve dramatically in this regard.

If for experienced players and regular players(which is likely to be the vast majority of the playerbase by a massive longshot), it's nothing more than to be time consuming and in no way helpful or detrimental to them, than yeah that does sound pretty unnecessary if you ask me.

This discussion actually inspired me to retry some Driving School tests in GT Sport today. It wasn’t that bad to be honest, and it felt nice improving a few personal best scores from 2017 and 2018.

What would be interesting if there was some sort of algorithm that studies how you drive and in the event that you aren't above the average in specific actions, than the game introduces ways to help you improve on area's you aren't doing too hot on.

That reminds me of how Forza Horizon 4 repeatedly asked me to increase the difficulty level to something higher than expert because I kept winning too often. Fair enough if you prefer that sort of thing, but personally I don’t like it when games interrupt my flow with “hey, try this”.

They can, probably, or they can just be unnecessarily tedious and boring, likely for the majority of people too. I don't find joy in seeing who can brake best in a 10 second segment out of all my friends. I'm more interested in applying something like that to actual tracks, though.

Ok, then remind yourself that some ignorant kid out there probably learned something by dwelling solely on the process of stopping a heavy object. For you it was just 1-2 minutes of second nature. Big deal?

 

[rex1825]

...I'm just looking for more cars on track at the same time, so true mutliclass races can be played both singleplayer and multiplayer with more options to set up car list, with allowed max fuel, tires, mods, PP/Grouping, per car and many more...

But as seen from PSN pre-order screen, 20 is what we get probably in FIA races, for standard online it'll be 16 as it was, as if we are living in 19th century under some rock...

 

[adam thompson]

Hi I wasn’t sure where to post this can anyone help a gran Turismo fan out please!!! I just spoke to eb games and I was going to pre order anniversary edition, but apparently anniversary edition does not work on PS4 version? It’s only for PS5 disc, (I was looking at physical edition for steel book. ) so there’s no anniversary edition for PS4? I’m so confused and should I get anniversary digital since I can via PlayStation store, thank you. So there is no anniversary edition for PS4 version. I dunno 🤷‍♂️

 

[05XR8]

Good thing I live down the street, because I'll be playing my game.

Dates confirmed for 2022 season opener in Newcastle | Supercars

The 2022 season will officially begin on the weekend of March 4-6

www.supercars.com

 

[FPV MIC]

Hi I wasn’t sure where to post this can anyone help a gran Turismo fan out please!!! I just spoke to eb games and I was going to pre order anniversary edition, but apparently anniversary edition does not work on PS4 version? It’s only for PS5 disc, (I was looking at physical edition for steel book. ) so there’s no anniversary edition for PS4? I’m so confused and should I get anniversary digital since I can via PlayStation store, thank you. So there is no anniversary edition for PS4 version. I dunno 🤷‍♂️

The disc only works on PS 5 but you get a voucher for the PS 4 edition for a digital download so it's for both platforms 👍

https://www.ebgames.com.au/product/ps4/275112-gran-turismo-7-25th-anniversary-edition

 

[adam thompson]

that’s what I thought but when I rang up there saying it’s confusing and does not work that way. 🤷‍♂️

 

[Nielsen]

That’s why I’ve been saying if people want to get better at using their wheel or get better driving, a licence test isn’t required. Just drive around a circuit. It’s that simple. Take your first car in GT7. Pick a circuit and learn the characteristics of your car and learn the circuit. Can’t tell me braking at Kyoto from straight is going to improve or teach you any more than going to Arcade Mode and experience going around a circuit. The player will learn more with no limit around a circuit than accelerating and stopping at a certain distance.

Flawed logic. It’s like saying new drivers should skip driving school because the roads, signs and traffic will teach them over time. Ok, video games have no fatal consequences for mistakes like real life does, but the same logic still applies.

About two years ago I witnessed my cousin’s son playing GT for the first time in his life. He headed right into Mission Challenge and was absolutely hopeless at it. Corner after corner he went wide into the barrier head first, and didn’t seem to fathom what the root of the problem was. He just got increasingly frustrated with the game for not mirroring his intentions. Eventually I told him to brake before corners and slowly he seemed to improve. His terrible first impression with GT could have been avoided if he had played through Driving School and watched the instruction videos. This exemplifies why your point doesn’t work for a driving simulator, and GT isn’t even hardcore. The genre is just too overwhelming for beginners who have never reflected on what basic car operation and handling entails. Typically those beginners would be kids, just like many of us were when we first started playing GT. Perhaps easy to forget the initial struggles after 25 years of repetitiveness, but it’s the reality for most beginners.

To add to what I mentioned about an algorithm, you bringing up jumping into a circuit had me thinking of something similar to the two ideas. You get a 3 lap stint upon booting up the game and at the end you're judged on the actions performed and recommended things to do to improve those area's - I feel that's when the actual license test set-up comes in, after it recommends area's it gives you live videos of ways to improve, and subsequently, maybe, it will take you to go practice that exact area. Hell, they can offer credit rewards for incentives for those that are willing to partake.

This would require a seriously good behavioural detection system in order to work as intended. It doesn’t sound like something PD could pull off considering how much trouble they’ve had with their penalty detection system alone. GT games have never utilized very advanced programming, so let’s be realistic here. I’d rather have basic and tedious license tests that work than some advance system that is bound to be full of shortcomings.

In fact for a lot of the stale license tests they suffer this same flaw, they give you a text instruction what to do on the menu but that's it, once you're on the track if you forgot what it said, or didn't even see it, you've no instruction. You have to go back to the menu, take it in, then back to the track. If you're a beginner you might not even understand some of the terms.

For all license tests there are videos demonstrating exactly how to drive for successful completion.

Asset to Corsa Competitione does a similar thing. When driving around a circuit, there is a bar that fills up as each objective is met. Whether solo or in a race versus AI, the objectives are: Drive a clean lap, drive with control of your car(try not to go off track or lose control in braking and accelerating). You also get green and red sector deltas to check your progress over each lap.
Once the game registers your performance per lap, your instructed to do another lap and another lap and another lap. You can do well in three laps and the game will instruct you to do a fourth to meet your last objective. However, you can keep driving for as long as you want. Such a good system.

That system only tells you when you’re improving, not how to improve. The latter can be decisive for inexperienced beginners in terms of giving up on the game. Well, Assetto Corsa doesn’t really attract casual beginners, so it’s an ok system for that title, but GT is for the masses. The license tests in GT serve the masses quite fine.

 

[Samus]

Oh, ironic that you'd insist for GT to give a more beginner-friendly track than Brands Hatch for the tutorial. I mean every GT6 player, beginner or veteran would go through the tutorial the first time playing right? And that GT shouldn't treat everyone like beginners. Though of course there are still room of improvements in the tutorial mode,

Don't see how it's ironic, I'm talking about something to replace the ultra basic straight line pedal tests, so it makes sense to start off with a basic track. The point is that for veterans it makes no difference, you're still just completing a couple of laps to warm up, show your competence easily while you get used to the new feel of the game, and move on. The beginners can be shifted off to more basic tests if they're still struggling, or move on to the trickier braking zones as natural progression.

I thought this part will garner even more criticism to GT due to the treating people like beginners part, of it explaining very basic stuff like braking on red driving line, getting the feel of the car, etc.

The system could and should be advanced so that warnings/info only comes up if the player fails to nagivate the track. It shouldn't be too hard for the game to detect if you hit the brakes enough, or if you went off the track. So then it would give you a hint. If you do it properly, no messages. The game detects you do know how to brake, and lets you carry on with your lap.

So no matter how many fair points people raise against yours after weeks, you’ll just keep insisting that the license tests are bad until there’s something else to talk about? Is that a correct assessment?

No, I'm not the one who keeps bringing them up but if other people do, I'm gonna comment as long as I'm not hugely repeating myself. If people broach into other subjects, I'm not gonna just keep saying "YEAH BUT WHAT ABOUT DEM LICENSE TESTS HUH?" all the time.

The only points people seem to bring up is

• They're tradition
• They don't take that long anyway
• They're good for beginners

But forgive me if I've missed some other compelling arguments why they're the best tutorial method, as if nothing else could be good for beginners.

You could say tutorials are a chore in general? At least that’s what I think, and I wouldn’t say GT does an exceptionally bad job at it.

For example, you might be amazed by the amount of beginners who don’t grasp the concept of braking before taking a turn. GT teaches each concept individually and that’s a good thing, as boring as it may be to the dinosaurs among us.

Why is it a good thing? They're going to have to string it all together eventually, why not just throw then into a track? The straight line tests teach nothing but knowing which button is the brake and when to press it. No other game does these tests and you don't see a widespread issue of people complaining they can't play the game. Choosing not to brake is not the same thing as not knowing how they work at all.

I'm not saying you just throw everyone into an LMP1 on the ring straight away, but are that many people really going to struggle if you stick them in say a Polo at Silverstone and let them have at it? Then when they get the hang of that, send them for a few laps in a GR86 with an instructor, and keep moving up? That's how it happens in real life. Then you get thrown straight into a race, you don't get asked to overtake 3 cars in 5 corners in a preset challenge. You go racing, and you're judged on how well you drive, whether you earn a license. You don't earn a RACING license by showing you can go around X corner in 15.442 seconds or beat a lap time. You've got to race, and show you can be clean and safe, being fast is actually pretty low down the order at that stage. You get fast as you go on.

Tutorials in general used to be usually a chore but modern games now do a much better job of integrating them into the initial gameplay naturally. GT, other than that brief dalliance with GT6, hasn't made that progression. It's stuck with the same structured, off-to-the-side format since GT1.

Flawed logic. It’s like saying new drivers should skip driving school because the roads, signs and traffic will teach them over time. Ok, video games have no fatal consequences for mistakes like real life does, but the same logic still applies.

But.....that is exactly how you do learn to drive, you get an instructor and you head out onto the real roads. Yes you will read the highway code first, but what @05XR8 describes for learning to race is exactly the same thing you do learning to drive. You don't go to some closed driving centre and perform a series of tests first. You get out on the road and drive, with an instructor giving you live feedback.

 

[ScottPuss20]

The only points people seem to bring up is

• They're tradition
• They don't take that long anyway
• They're good for beginners

So what, we're supposed to ignore those beginners so we veterans can get straight in? Most people that play GT aren't "professionals" like we are with heaps of experience in many other racing games.

 

[Samus]

So what, we're supposed to ignore those beginners so we veterans can get straight in? Most people that play GT aren't "professionals" like we are with heaps of experience in many other racing games.

Are you not reading all of my posts, like the next line of text below what you quoted? I never disagreed that they're good for beginners, I've said there are better ways. I've given examples of better ways to teach beginners whilst not annoying veterans. Again, it's like you're suggesting license tests as they are now are literally the only thing suitable for beginners, and they're the best thing for beginners, which is frankly absurd.

 

[ScottPuss20]

Are you not reading all of my posts, like the next line of text below what you quoted? I never disagreed that they're good for beginners, I've said there are better ways. I've given examples of better ways to teach beginners whilst not annoying veterans. Again, it's like you're suggesting license tests as they are now are literally the only thing suitable for beginners, and they're the best thing for beginners, which is frankly absurd.

You say that licences are helpful yet you also say there are better ways to teach beginners. Are you against them or not?

 

[Samus]

You say that licences are helpful yet you also say there are better ways to teach beginners. Are you against them or not?

What? Please read my entire posts.

 

[ScottPuss20]

What? Please read my entire posts.

It's a pretty simple question.

 

[05XR8]

Flawed logic. It’s like saying new drivers should skip driving school because the roads, signs and traffic will teach them over time. Ok, video games have no fatal consequences for mistakes like real life does, but the same logic still applies.

About two years ago I witnessed my cousin’s son playing GT for the first time in his life. He headed right into Mission Challenge and was absolutely hopeless at it. Corner after corner he went wide into the barrier head first, and didn’t seem to fathom what the root of the problem was. He just got increasingly frustrated with the game for not mirroring his intentions. Eventually I told him to brake before corners and slowly he seemed to improve. His terrible first impression with GT could have been avoided if he had played through Driving School and watched the instruction videos. This exemplifies why your point doesn’t work for a driving simulator, and GT isn’t even hardcore. The genre is just too overwhelming for beginners who have never reflected on what basic car operation and handling entails. Typically those beginners would be kids, just like many of us were when we first started playing GT. Perhaps easy to forget the initial struggles after 25 years of repetitiveness, but it’s the reality for most beginners.

This would require a seriously good behavioural detection system in order to work as intended. It doesn’t sound like something PD could pull off considering how much trouble they’ve had with their penalty detection system alone. GT games have never utilized very advanced programming, so let’s be realistic here. I’d rather have basic and tedious license tests that work than some advance system that is bound to be full of shortcomings.


For all license tests there are videos demonstrating exactly how to drive for successful completion.

That system only tells you when you’re improving, not how to improve. The latter can be decisive for inexperienced beginners in terms of giving up on the game. Well, Assetto Corsa doesn’t really attract casual beginners, so it’s an ok system for that title, but GT is for the masses. The license tests in GT serve the masses quite fine.

You can skip driving school and be taught by an experienced driver. The basics of driving, don't need a test. Only the law requires it.

I'm not talking about beginners buying a full Sim. We're talking about different ways to implement changes or improve the tests.

 

[Samus]

It's a pretty simple question.

I don't like licence tests as they are now, I think they could be made a lot better/evolved. How that isn't already perfectly clear I don't know.