Gran Turismo Sport: General Discussion

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Dynamic time of day, weather is now no longer bells and whistles. On PS3 it was a big deal especially the weather because no other racing game had it and those which did were running at 30fps. On PS4 I would say these are must have for a sim. Pcars and F1 already have it and I guess dirt rally as well.

F1 had dynamic weather log before GT did, and probably why people consider it a bells and whistle feature that is a must across the board. Not something that you just put in a few places. Despite what they're running if people can't figure it out by now it's an issue. Imari is right, if PD really want to have an ever encompassing game as people claim they must have, then features that are silly (to me) should be lost in favor of things they could actually make better than others.

 

[doblocruiser]

The original Toca 2 on PS One had dynamic weather as one of the first games. Today's system however seems much more advanced and impressive.

 

[jm79]

When I first saw the dynamic weather on DC, I was astonished. And I don't say that lightly. I've been playing racing games since stunt car racer, and that was the first moment when I thought realism was something achievable in a videogame. It was also the point at which 60fps didn't seem like such a big deal.

My expectations of the immersiveness and realism of driving games are so much higher now, purely because of this.

 

[Imari]

Dynamic time of day, weather is now no longer bells and whistles. On PS3 it was a big deal especially the weather because no other racing game had it and those which did were running at 30fps. On PS4 I would say these are must have for a sim. Pcars and F1 already have it and I guess dirt rally as well.

One could also say that a livery editor was a standard feature, as most games have at least something. But some don't. Why? Constraints.

Dynamic time and weather are common features these days, but they're not necessary for a racing game to function in the same way as a physics engine is. A game can be made without them if necessary, and it can be just fine if the rest of the game is good enough.

Assetto Corsa and iRacing are arguably the two top PC simulations, and neither of them have dynamic time or weather (iRacing kinda sorta does, but it's nothing like in Gran Turismo). They have the ability to set the time to a certain hour of daylight (or on some tracks, night), but that's it. On the other hand, they both have dynamic tracks which rubber in, which is arguably a much more important feature for realism, although it's not as graphically flashy.

Both F1 and pCARS fail to maintain 60fps. Dirt Rally as far as I'm aware doesn't have dynamic weather or lighting, although it does (I'm told) maintain 60fps on console. I've only got it on PC, where it maintains whatever framerate I tell it to.

So there you are, two devs who made sacrifices to lighting and weather and maintained 60fps, and two who didn't and didn't. It seems a pretty solid statement based on those games that if you want lighting and weather in a PS4/X1 quality game at a solid 60fps, then something else is going to have to give.

Turn 10 and Codemasters decided that variable lighting and weather was less core to the racing experience than other aspects that they might have cut. If Polyphony chooses to keep the variable lighting and weather, what do they cut to make that possible? Car count? Track detail? AI? Sound? Physics fidelity? All of the above?

Assume for a moment that Polyphony isn't magic and that they can't just make a game where you have everything and the kitchen sink. What sacrifice do they make to allow variable lighting and weather?

 

[queleuleu]

One could also say that a livery editor was a standard feature, as most games have at least something. But some don't. Why? Constraints.

Dynamic time and weather are common features these days, but they're not necessary for a racing game to function in the same way as a physics engine is. A game can be made without them if necessary, and it can be just fine if the rest of the game is good enough.

Assetto Corsa and iRacing are arguably the two top PC simulations, and neither of them have dynamic time or weather (iRacing kinda sorta does, but it's nothing like in Gran Turismo). They have the ability to set the time to a certain hour of daylight (or on some tracks, night), but that's it. On the other hand, they both have dynamic tracks which rubber in, which is arguably a much more important feature for realism, although it's not as graphically flashy.

Both F1 and pCARS fail to maintain 60fps. Dirt Rally as far as I'm aware doesn't have dynamic weather or lighting, although it does (I'm told) maintain 60fps on console. I've only got it on PC, where it maintains whatever framerate I tell it to.

So there you are, two devs who made sacrifices to lighting and weather and maintained 60fps, and two who didn't and didn't. It seems a pretty solid statement based on those games that if you want lighting and weather in a PS4/X1 quality game at a solid 60fps, then something else is going to have to give.

Turn 10 and Codemasters decided that variable lighting and weather was less core to the racing experience than other aspects that they might have cut. If Polyphony chooses to keep the variable lighting and weather, what do they cut to make that possible? Car count? Track detail? AI? Sound? Physics fidelity? All of the above?

Assume for a moment that Polyphony isn't magic and that they can't just make a game where you have everything and the kitchen sink. What sacrifice do they make to allow variable lighting and weather?

Constant framerate like gt5/6.

 

[Soundtrack]

Codemasters game maintains a locked 60fps with minor tearing issues on PS4 according the Digital Foundry people. For the sake of precision, there aren’t that many on screen opponents on a typical rally stage (who by nature are already a different kind of beast) and the added Rally Cross events cope with a limited assortment/grid. Not sure to what extend it can therefore be used as a solid comparison point to GT Sport.

Constant framerate like gt5/6.

They will probably not be able to compromise the fps as there seems to be an industrial requirement for it. I'm not going to tag PSVR as "bells and whistles" as this involves personal taste but could happily live without it if this means better car count, track detail, AI, or even livery editor...

 

[jm79]

Codemasters game maintains a locked 60fps with minor tearing issues on PS4 according the Digital Foundry people. For the sake of precision, there aren’t that many on screen opponents on a typical rally stage (who by nature are already a different kind of beast) and the added Rally Cross events cope with a limited assortment/grid. Not sure to what extend it can therefore be used as a solid comparison point to GT Sport.



They will probably not be able to compromise the fps as there seems to be an industrial requirement for it. I'm not going to tag PSVR as "bells and whistles" as this involves personal taste but could happily live without it if this means better car count, track detail, AI, or even livery editor...

There is a certain disadvantage also in not being 1st party, and being multiplatform.

So, theoretically, PD have a big advantage here. See the amazing performance Forza gets out of the comparatively limited XBOne, for similar reasons.

 

[Soundtrack]

There is a certain disadvantage also in not being 1st party, and being multiplatform.

So, theoretically, PD have a big advantage here.

It's lots of freedom with one hand tied behind back indeed.

 

[SimTourist]

There is a certain disadvantage also in not being 1st party, and being multiplatform.

So, theoretically, PD have a big advantage here. See the amazing performance Forza gets out of the comparatively limited XBOne, for similar reasons.

Nah, if anything this gen showed us that multi platform and first party devs are now on even ground in regards to development, Uncharted 4 for example doesn't look significantly better than multi platform titles, not in the same way that U2/3 were ahead of the pack on PS3. Forza gets amazing performance because it uses static lighting which frees up a ton of resources, tracks with pre-baked lighting were pretty stable 60 fps in GT5 too.

 

[jm79]

Nah, if anything this gen showed us that multi platform and first party devs are now on even ground in regards to development, Uncharted 4 for example doesn't look significantly better than multi platform titles, not in the same way that U2/3 were ahead of the pack on PS3. Forza gets amazing performance because it uses static lighting which frees up a ton of resources, tracks with pre-baked lighting were pretty stable 60 fps in GT5 too.

Yeah, I guess the move to more PC-like components has evened up the field a bit, but it still must count for something - at the very least the advance look at devkits that 1st parties enjoy...

 

[Imari]

...tracks with pre-baked lighting were pretty stable 60 fps in GT5 too.

Not really. London was a big offender, so much so that they patched some of the trackside objects out to try and improve the frame rate.

Weather and variable lighting made things much, much worse, but GT5 still had frame rate issues even on tracks without those things.

 

[SimTourist]

Not really. London was a big offender, so much so that they patched some of the trackside objects out to try and improve the frame rate.

Weather and variable lighting made things much, much worse, but GT5 still had frame rate issues even on tracks without those things.

London is probably the most detailed track in the game though, I think it ran well in GT5 Prologue, but got progressively worse in GT 5 and 6.

 

[queleuleu]

(From neogaf)
http://www.nuerburgring.de/uploads/media/16-04-12_Q24h_Teilnehmerliste_01.pdf
Entry 101 Kaz in a M6 gt3.

 

[nocturnalgrey]

Racing in a "fixed place" generated 75 million units out the door for PD/Sony.

Indeed it did. But I honestly am struggling to see how their success guarantees a bright future. Why? Even casual arcade racers like Driveclub and Forza Horizon don't come near to the sales GT6 did (for example). The ultra realistic sim racers don't either. It's why I believe the PDI needs to cater to both the arcade and sim fans.

Well, there is no way to fully attract players of other genres but there will always be driving aides for example 'Skid Recovery Force' which will do the trick, to please the casual drivers.
Of course, now that P. D. has connected with FIA, there is no way going back to full arcade.

I don't ever see, nor do I ever want PDI to go "full arcade" and while the Skid Recovery Force helps, I still believe PDI needs to do more. I am willing to bet Sony and PDI are more worried about people who are on the outside looking in when it comes to GT type games.

I hate to say it, but PDI (and other sim racers) need a magic bullet to bring in some of the 20 million GTA players out there. While they are at it, PDI must avoid alienating their fan base. Quite the predicament...

Turn 10 and Codemasters decided that variable lighting and weather was less core to the racing experience than other aspects that they might have cut. If Polyphony chooses to keep the variable lighting and weather, what do they cut to make that possible? Car count? Track detail? AI? Sound? Physics fidelity? All of the above?

And there is 10 million dollar question. Over the past month I came to conclusion that no racing game is going to be considering perfect for reasons you stated above. I believe that PDI is wrestling with this very thing and it's why it's all silent on the GT Sport front.

 

[Samus]

I think you're looking at it too deeply. To appeal to the mass market a racing game just has to look exciting, fun, and not complex and complicated as so many PC sims do. Why does NFS sell so well? Because their games are marketed as exciting, pick up and play racing games with lots of cars from popular culture. This greatly appeals to the casual market and the parents buying games for their kids.

This:



Just isn't going to appeal to casuals. They see it as boring, the same as those farming simulators.

 

[super_gt]

Entry 101 Kaz in a M6 gt3.

Powered by Dunlop.

 

[Eh Team]

(From neogaf)
http://www.nuerburgring.de/uploads/media/16-04-12_Q24h_Teilnehmerliste_01.pdf
Entry 101 Kaz in a M6 gt3.

Welll... We did kinda receive the Kazboat GTR because of his participation in that same race, so I don't think it would be too farfetched to end up seeing the M6 GT3 in GT Sport, or at least only one that has the exact livery.

 

[dipsetab]

(From neogaf)
http://www.nuerburgring.de/uploads/media/16-04-12_Q24h_Teilnehmerliste_01.pdf
Entry 101 Kaz in a M6 gt3.

nice

 

[Huks]

I think you're looking at it too deeply. To appeal to the mass market a racing game just has to look exciting, fun, and not complex and complicated as so many PC sims do. Why does NFS sell so well? Because their games are marketed as exciting, pick up and play racing games with lots of cars from popular culture. This greatly appeals to the casual market and the parents buying games for their kids.

This:



Just isn't going to appeal to casuals. They see it as boring, the same as those farming simulators.

But isn't the slow, laid-back attitude of these simulators exactly what appeals to the casual market at the moment? It surely can't be a coincidence that Euro Truck Simulator 2 is the fourth best-selling "racing" game on Steam right after GTA V, Rocket League and some free-to-play title, with the player count keeping up with those games as well. While there's no doubt that excitement and action are appealing (GTA and Rocket League are full of those, which is why they're #1 and #3 respectively), there's demand for the calmer stuff as well. If PD want GTS to sell well, they need to strike a balance between the two to appeal to both styles of play.

 

[queleuleu]

No time to write a post on the pitstop blog in 5 months but enough to drive for 24h a M6 gt3

 

[05XR8]

M6 GT3 cover car for GTS? Hmm, BMW's 100th. Might get a slew of M *cough E30 cough* cars in GTS.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Indeed it did. But I honestly am struggling to see how their success guarantees a bright future. Why? Even casual arcade racers like Driveclub and Forza Horizon don't come near to the sales GT6 did (for example). The ultra realistic sim racers don't either. It's why I believe the PDI needs to cater to both the arcade and sim fans.

PDI does cater to both types of fans already and within the confines of a "fixed place" for going on 2 decades now. Whether that type of success continues and whether that type of game will generate enough appeal in this day and age to turn over 10+ million units remains to be seen of course.

I don't ever see, nor do I ever want PDI to go "full arcade" and while the Skid Recovery Force helps, I still believe PDI needs to do more. I am willing to bet Sony and PDI are more worried about people who are on the outside looking in when it comes to GT type games.

I hate to say it, but PDI (and other sim racers) need a magic bullet to bring in some of the 20 million GTA players out there. While they are at it, PDI must avoid alienating their fan base. Quite the predicament...

And there is 10 million dollar question. Over the past month I came to conclusion that no racing game is going to be considering perfect for reasons you stated above. I believe that PDI is wrestling with this very thing and it's why it's all silent on the GT Sport front.

I agree and it's been my position for several years now that PD should expand into other areas beyond cars and tracks. One suggestion I made a few times including this post a couple of years ago, was something along these lines:

GT Fun Mode - I'd introduce a new game mode designed simply for fun with flat amount prizes awarded for completion regardless of finishing position
- it would include basically anything that isn't organized racing and could literally be anything that involves driving.
- events could include a smash up derby, figure 8 racing, ramp jumping, wheelies, gymkhana, racing in reverse, bizarre cars not in the regular game, car soccer, car hockey, ice racing or any one of dozens of fun things to do in a car you wouldn't normally do in real life.
- some events like car hockey or car soccer I would include in online mode
- I see this is a great way to attract small children to the game and as a party mode for us bigger kids to play with our friends and relatives who aren't as interested in car physics or racing and just want to grab a controller and have some fun once in a while.

The incredible success of Rocket League tells me I was right about opening up GT to this kind of a "fun mode". I myself am hooked on Rocket League and I don't know what the sales are, but when I go online there are as many players online at all times as enter GT Seasonal events over a period of several weeks, aka 100,000+.

 

[nocturnalgrey]

I think you're looking at it too deeply. To appeal to the mass market a racing game just has to look exciting, fun, and not complex and complicated as so many PC sims do. Why does NFS sell so well? Because their games are marketed as exciting, pick up and play racing games with lots of cars from popular culture. This greatly appeals to the casual market and the parents buying games for their kids.

This:



Just isn't going to appeal to casuals. They see it as boring, the same as those farming simulators.

I am genuinely concerned over not only the sport of racing but racing games too. Here in the US, racing (outside of NASCAR) is unheard of unless you are enthusiast. And like you stated, racing comes of as boring.

When I was making my futile attempt to place at a recent GT Academy, both my sons (age 16 and 13) asked me how I could do that over and over. They also couldn't believe I was "forced in the car", LOL.

One suggestion I made a few times including this post a couple of years ago, was something along these lines:

GT Fun Mode - I'd introduce a new game mode designed simply for fun with flat amount prizes awarded for completion regardless of finishing position
- it would include basically anything that isn't organized racing and could literally be anything that involves driving.
- events could include a smash up derby, figure 8 racing, ramp jumping, wheelies, gymkhana, racing in reverse, bizarre cars not in the regular game, car soccer, car hockey, ice racing or any one of dozens of fun things to do in a car you wouldn't normally do in real life.
- some events like car hockey or car soccer I would include in online mode
- I see this is a great way to attract small children to the game and as a party mode for us bigger kids to play with our friends and relatives who aren't as interested in car physics or racing and just want to grab a controller and have some fun once in a while.

I honestly believe you may be on to something, and now that I think about it, perhaps the moon driving in GT6 was the start of that very thing?

The one thing that stands out to me on your suggestion is the demolition derby mode. That could appeal to a ton of people. Great job Johnnypenso.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I honestly believe you may be on to something, and now that I think about it, perhaps the moon driving in GT6 was the start of that very thing?

The one thing that stands out to me on your suggestion is the demolition derby mode. That could appeal to a ton of people. Great job Johnnypenso.

I thought when they announced the Arena course that it was a natural for both car hockey and soccer and that PD had the little surprise up it's sleeve as DLC or an update of some sort. I was quite disappointed when they didn't take advantage of that golden opportunity.

 

[avens]

They will probably not be able to compromise the fps as there seems to be an industrial requirement for it. I'm not going to tag PSVR as "bells and whistles" as this involves personal taste but could happily live without it if this means better car count, track detail, AI, or even livery editor...

The "industrial requirement" is stating 60FPS@1080p in the box.

In practice almost no resource demanding AAA game today achieves this on current and past generation consoles. They run almost always at 50FPS territory rather than at 60 (or in GT5's case with dips to 20 FPS in raining conditions), and with upscaling (GT5 runs at 1280x1080).

What I mean is, the requirement is to advertise the game as such. Nothing more. What sells resource heavy games are the graphics, alike having rain effects, but not how smoothly they actually run.

Some weeks ago I posted here a Digital Foundry video of DriveClub vs Project Cars on the PS4. DriveClub runs at perfectly steady 30FPS, and that is the first time I've seen a racing game run as steadily on consoles since maybe Super Mario Kart.
edit: as posted below, Forza on Xbox One already achieves this too.

But isn't the slow, laid-back attitude of these simulators exactly what appeals to the casual market at the moment? It surely can't be a coincidence that Euro Truck Simulator 2 is the fourth best-selling "racing" game on Steam right after GTA V, Rocket League and some free-to-play title, with the player count keeping up with those games as well. While there's no doubt that excitement and action are appealing (GTA and Rocket League are full of those, which is why they're #1 and #3 respectively), there's demand for the calmer stuff as well. If PD want GTS to sell well, they need to strike a balance between the two to appeal to both styles of play.

ETS 2 is quite different than the GT series. ETS 2 is a driving game, whereas the GT series is about racing. They are different subgenres.

In ETS2's subgenre it's a positive thing that the game is relaxing yet engaging. It's about having a journey in an open world-ish environment, alike OutRun or going for a sunday drive in real life.

On the other hand, a racing game that's laid back has a huge design flaw, because the idea with those is to feel there's a speedy competition going. That very rarely happens in the PS3 GT games, and doesn't happen at all at the beginning of those. If you read the reviews of both GT5 and GT6 it's easy to tell they got bad scores (for an AAA game) mainly for being sterile and for the games' career modes starting out really slowly.

Listening to smooth jazz can work well when driving, but not when racing.

ETS' high praise and GT's quality demise show there's a market for relaxing driving games, but not for relaxing racing games.

 

[SimTourist]

The "industrial requirement" is 60FPS@1080p, yes.

However, in practice practically no AAA game today achieves this on current and past generation consoles. They run almost always at 50FPS territory rather than at 60 (or in GT5's case with dips to 20 FPS in raining conditions), and with upscaling (GT5 runs at 1280x1080).

What I mean is, in practice the requirement is to advertise the game as such. Nothing more.

Some weeks ago I posted here a Digital Foundry video of DriveClub vs Project Cars on the PS4. DriveClub runs at perfectly steady 30FPS, and that is the first time I've seen a racing game run as steadily on consoles since maybe Super Mario Kart.



Euro Truck Simulator 2 is the sole exception to that 'excitement rule'. Doesn't mean sterile racing games are well received in general, besides that specific franchise.

For example if you read the reviews both GT5 and GT6 got bad scores (for a AAA game) mainly for that very reason.

You should check out Forza. 1080p/60fps with no dips.

 

[avens]

@SimTourist Thanks for linking the video. With that it's clear GT's competition already got that aspect nailed. Lets see if PD can achieve the same this time around.

 

[CDPlaysGames]

I think there should be longer endurance races. It would be cool if there was an actual 24 hours of the le mans instead of 24 minutes. Of course you could save your progress and quit whenever you want during the race. Endurance races should also be added to arcade mode. You choose how long the race is.

 

[avens]

I think there should be longer endurance races. It would be cool if there was an actual 24 hours of the le mans instead of 24 minutes. Of course you could save your progress and quit whenever you want during the race. Endurance races should also be added to arcade mode. You choose how long the race is.

I'd be content with 6 hours, alike in real life racing.

Of course for that the game should show the context, of the race being a team effort. Or as Kaz calls it, "Human Drama".

Well or it could have the option of 24 hours offline, with four driver swaps.

I've heard iRacing's 12-hour online races with real driver swaps are fantastic. Have yet to try them myself though.

 

[Samus]

Personally I've always thought there was a huge flaw with endurance races in a game like GT. Everybody wants to win. In the real world, drivers and teams enter endurance races knowing no matter how well they race they're extremely unlikely to win their class, and would be very happy with a top 10 position or even just finishing is an achievement. In a game though, what percentage of players would be happy with that? Not many, I'd wager. Most people see it almost as a chore, and they do not under any circumstances want to do it more than once. That means most people enter the events in a car they are sure is good enough to win, and combined with GTs lack of damage there is no real challenge to an endurance event. It's literally just x hours of driving, several laps ahead of the AI for most people, making them rather pointless.

Ask yourself, how many times in the GT history have you entered a long endurance event looking forward to the challenge of trying to win the race? I can't think of any time I have, except the very first one in GT2 where I thought even finishing last would net me decent money. That was only ~45 minutes though. Otherwise though you always enter them knowing you'll win, and it's just the challenge of having to drive for so many laps.

What doesn't help is the way GT and many games are set up in that they practically force you to win events, it's 1st or nothing for a variety of reasons. If the game was structured in a way where finishing 6th at Le Mans 24 Hours is still valuable, and combined with mechanical damage, they might be more fun to approach.