Gran Turismo Sport: General Discussion

[Aussie_HSV]

Why is it that every time I make a statement which challenges the nay-sayers, it's classified as off-topic or some sort of accusation towards someone who replied of breaking AUP'S?

I in no way, categorically, accused anyone of doing such a thing.
And accusing me of such is beyond ridiculous.

And how is any comment, in a general discussion thread, apparently classed as off topic?

 

[Samus]

Why is it that every time I make a statement which challenges the nay-sayers, it's classified as off-topic

Because it is? You're supposed to be discussing the game, not accusing those commenting of bias.

 

[Aussie_HSV]

Because it is? You're supposed to be discussing the game, not accusing those commenting of bias.

Why not?
Accusations of bias is a regular argument on this thread

Or are we only allowed to argue against positive bias, and arguing against negative bias is somehow off topic and accusing others of breaking AUP rules?

 

[AKps3]

Because it is? You're supposed to be discussing the game, not accusing those commenting of bias.

It's hard to disscous about a game thats not finished/released but It's easy to bash it because of some off screen youtube videos.

 

[jm79]

Top speed is off by 10% on some cars, camber doesn't work, ride height is backwards, cars are faster under the pp system with "dirty oil" etc. What exactly would have to be wrong to consider it glaring?

Fair, but do you know any games that do all of that stuff right?

 

[Samus]

It's hard to disscous about a game thats not finished/released but It's easy to bash it because of some off screen youtube videos.

It's easy to be positive about it as well. Plenty of people have.

If that is all we have to comment on (and it's not), why can't we comment on it? Everybody with functioning braincells knows that it's not fully representative of the final product and nobody has claimed otherwise. So again, what is the issue? PD have shown their game off in various ways, people comment on it good or bad. If you disagree with what is posted, add a retort. If you have no retort, let it go.

 

[Scaff]

Why not?
Accusations of bias is a regular argument on this thread

Or are we only allowed to argue against positive bias, and arguing against negative bias is somehow off topic and accusing others of breaking AUP rules?

You want to discuss apparent bias between titles then take it to the GT vs. 'whatever it is' thread and provide some actual evidence of it.

Do not continue to throw accusations of bias around every time you dislike what someone says and if you continue to do so it will be treated as an AUP violation.

• You will, if asked by a representative of the forums, cease posting any content.

Its not open for discussion, debate or your personal view on how the site should be run.

 

[Scaff]

I repeat (as it seems to be missed on some):

Off topic (and baseless) complaints about bias and unfair treatment have been deleted.
Its quite simple, if you think the AUP has been broken then use the report button, if you feel that a moderator has been unfair then contact an Admin or the site owner.

Members who have ignored these rather clear and long standing requirements have not lasted long, that will not be a pattern that changes in the future.

The next person to ignore it gets the weekend off.

 

[Scaff]

Wow

OK I'm going to make this both very simple for you and give you some time to think about its (as you seem to be insistent in having the last word).

You have across numerous threads, and repeatedly within the same threads attempted to claim that members have a bias against GT and for 'anything else', you have also claimed that members hold GT to a higher standard that 'anything else' and will not address issues in 'anything else' that they will in GT. On top of this you have accused the staff of facilitating such a bias and of actively censoring in line with that bias.

You have not, that I have seen, provided a bit of evidence to support such a claim. However plenty of evidence exists that this claim is nonsense, the volume of issues raised about other titles is very clear in the sub-forums for those titles, be it DiRT, SLRE, Forza, Project Cars or AC.

As such not only is your claim baseless, but it also misses a rather fundamental point of the site, people are allowed to have a bias and other people are allowed to be critical of that bias. As long as the posts in that regard fall in line with the AUP they are not a problem for GT Planet. If you feel that is not for you, then you may need to face the reality that GT Planet is not a place you want to spend time, as the site is not going to change in that regard.

You have been asked to stop peddling the 'GTP and its staff are biased again anyone who like GT' line repeatedly, yet you have repeatedly ignored that, and in doing so shown a level of contempt for the AUP, the staff and the vast majority of members who do follow the AUP.

This will not continue and you now have the weekend away from GT Planet to consider it, but be under no illusion, should you expect to continue posting in the same way when you return the action that follows will be a permanent ban.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Fair, but do you know any games that do all of that stuff right?

Whether they do or don't doesn't is irrelevant isn't it? It doesn't change the fact that there are big holes in the GT physics model in the most recent game.

 

[jm79]

Whether they do or don't doesn't is irrelevant isn't it? It doesn't change the fact that there are big holes in the GT physics model in the most recent game.

I was just wondering is all...

 

[sems4arsenal]

It's not about it being fun, it's about allowing players who can't help but crash to still win (though ideally not online against serious opponents).

Your option for disabling this crash assist? Just flick the switch to "don't crash" and you're all set!

You do that by having suitable difficulty adjustments. Bumper car physics is bad and an outdated concept for any racing game let alone a sim.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

You do that by having suitable difficulty adjustments. Bumper car physics is bad and an outdated concept for any racing game let alone a sim.

You mean you don't want to play Wall Riders of Tokyo 2017?

It's not about it being fun, it's about allowing players who can't help but crash to still win (though ideally not online against serious opponents).

Your option for disabling this crash assist? Just flick the switch to "don't crash" and you're all set!

Why though? I feel that kind of attitude would best be set to difficulty modes and still not have crashing be part of the tool kit to win, online or offline. Yes people will crash but he's asking for a system that is real world, so after the first five or so times you do crash you start to figure out how to not do it so you can win. Plus like any competitive game people who do the best are the ones that set the benchmark. If the pro sim racers at the demos are doing it and showing that'st the way to get the best result, others will follow in kind, that's part of the issue too.

 

[Lain]

You do that by having suitable difficulty adjustments. Bumper car physics is bad and an outdated concept for any racing game let alone a sim.

I used to be one of the people who wanted full realistic damage in GT, even including random mechanical failures beyond the player's control.

But after getting accustomed to damage in the likes of, say, Forza... I've come to a different conclusion. From a game design perspective, realistic crash physics and damage just isn't all that fun or helpful. I still play with full damage enabled in Forza because I can handle it and it's worth the bonus credits, but it doesn't enhance the experience. It just makes it unforgiving for everybody, whether it's casual players who might sometimes rely on their opponent's brakes, or serious players who naturally make occasional mistakes.

Could there be an option for realistic crash physics or damage? Certainly. I just disagree with the notion that bumper car crash physics is an inherently wrong game design choice. It's not wrong for a game to just offer forgiving gameplay, just as it isn't wrong for a game to only offer unforgiving gameplay (i.e. Dark Souls).

Why though? I feel that kind of attitude would best be set to difficulty modes and still not have crashing be part of the tool kit to win, online or offline. Yes people will crash but he's asking for a system that is real world, so after the first five or so times you do crash you start to figure out how to not do it so you can win. Plus like any competitive game people who do the best are the ones that set the benchmark. If the pro sim racers at the demos are doing it and showing that'st the way to get the best result, others will follow in kind, that's part of the issue too.

Crashing is not part of the toolkit to win in GT Sport, though. Yes you can do it and be relatively unscathed, but you get penalized for it in other ways.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Crashing is not part of the toolkit to win in GT Sport, though. Yes you can do it and be relatively unscathed, but you get penalized for it in other ways.

We have no clue as to exactly what those ways are though, and with the delay we even have less an idea, even if we had a partial one prior. Because they could easily change this. The point being demos showed that driving to the degree where one was no longer in control, but was demonstrated by even the pro players. This doesn't show a good design characteristic of a game that is suppose to be a virtual FIA racer.

 

[sems4arsenal]

@Lain I've played PCARS and feel damage adds to the immersion and tension of racing which is what gt games are. Part of what makes Dirt Rally so great is you get it wrong and it's over (or you get a massive time penalty).

It also ruins online racing,

 

[Lain]

Yes, some may enjoy the tension of it. But not everyone does. Therefore it's not an inherently better or more correct way to design your racing game. GT doing their crash physics this way is a legitimate game design choice, and is totally fine. It may not be to your taste, certainly... but it isn't wrong or flawed.

And as I said... I completely agree, it could be an option to have realistic crashes. I'm always for more options, and think anyone who whines about optional gameplay components is slightly daft.

I disagree with the notion that it ruins online racing, however. Regardless of how crash physics are implemented, there's going to be jerks who plow into everyone at the first corner and/or exhibit generally dickish behavior... and in any scenario, their general lack of skill will put them in their place in the long run (especially if the game keeps track of this stuff, which GTS will). The difference is that, with realistic crash physics and damage, they might take some serious players out with them with their crash happy behavior.

 

[Toblakai99]

@Lain I've played PCARS and feel damage adds to the immersion and tension of racing which is what gt games are. Part of what makes Dirt Rally so great is you get it wrong and it's over (or you get a massive time penalty).

It also ruins online racing,

I feel we have a hell of a long way to go before damage visually and mechanical is at a acceptable level also how cars react when a collision occurs.I would say codemasters do damage the best from a visual perspective.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Yes, some may enjoy the tension of it. But not everyone does. Therefore it's not an inherently better or more correct way to design your racing game. GT doing their crash physics this way is a legitimate game design choice, and is totally fine. It may not be to your taste, certainly... but it isn't wrong or flawed.

And as I said... I completely agree, it could be an option to have realistic crashes. I'm always for more options, and think anyone who whines about optional gameplay components is slightly daft.

I disagree with the notion that it ruins online racing, however. Regardless of how crash physics are implemented, there's going to be jerks who plow into everyone at the first corner and/or exhibit generally dickish behavior... and in any scenario, their general lack of skill will put them in their place in the long run (especially if the game keeps track of this stuff, which GTS will). The difference is that, with realistic crash physics and damage, they might take some serious players out with them with their crash happy behavior.

It is wrong and flawed in the sense that if you are making a esport game in line with FIA sanctioning, that such physics would be acceptable. Especially in a competitive venue, where they may be used and done so in such a way that they're more beneficial than actually driving cleanly, like a realistic simulator would have you do.

What you are confusing here is the preference on crash emulation and that of actual failure of emulation. I'm not asking for GT/PD to come with a massive damage package, heck I'd be fine with them going back to the days of no damage. So long as doing it comes with realistic physics that I can't wall ride a street or dirt circuit to win when others drive in a much cleaner and realistic manor. It diminishes the point of racing really, when you can go through a corner ride a wall or even use a person as a spring board to keep you running fast with no real consequence (as far as we can tell for now).

What is your extended experience with actual competitive online racing games...like those of iRacing, Pcars, GTR and such?
Because this is the target console wise that PD are aiming at. If you're specifically going off GT5 and 6 experiences where you are matched up with everyone and anyone, then there is your flaw.

 

[Lain]

It is wrong and flawed in the sense that if you are making a esport game in line with FIA sactioning, that such physics would be acceptable. Especially in a competitive venue, where they may be used and done so in such a way that they're more beneficial than actually driving cleanly, like a realistic simulator would have you do.

What you are confusing here is the preference on crash emulation and that of actual failure of emulation. I'm not asking for GT/PD to come with a massive damage package, heck I'd be fine with them going back to the days of no damage. So long as doing it comes with realistic physics that I can't wall ride a street or dirt circuit to win when others drive in a much cleaner and realistic manor. It diminishes the point of racing really, when you can go through a corner ride a wall or even use a person as a spring board to keep you running fast with no real consequence (as far as we can tell for now).

I disagree with your idea that a FIA sanctioned esport game NEEDS realistic crash physics. If the driving physics were a complete joke, now that'd be a problem.

And no, I'm not confusing anything. It's not a failure of emulation, it's a conscious design choice to not emulate real life physics when it comes to crash behavior. And such a choice has both pros (which I covered) and cons (which you & @sems4arsenal covered), therefore it's not an inherently right or wrong choice.

 

[sems4arsenal]

I feel we have a hell of a long way to go before damage visually and mechanical is at a acceptable level also how cars react when a collision occurs.I would say codemasters do damage the best from a visual perspective.

For GT yes but games like wreckfest are very impressive.

 

[Lain]

What is your extended experience with actual competitive online racing games...like those of iRacing, Pcars, GTR and such?
Because this is the target console wise that PD are aiming at. If you're specifically going off GT5 and 6 experiences where you are matched up with everyone and anyone, then there is your flaw.

Would you care to elaborate on how, in your experience, "competitive" online racing games and the likes of GT5/6 differ?

I'm attacking this from a purely theoretical design perspective, and have virtually no experience with online racing in any capacity.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I disagree with your idea that a FIA sanctioned esport game NEEDS realistic crash physics. If the driving physics were a complete joke, now that'd be a problem.

And no, I'm not confusing anything. It's not a failure of emulation, it's a conscious design choice to not emulate real life physics when it comes to crash behavior. And such a choice has both pros (which I covered) and cons (which you & @sems4arsenal covered), therefore it's not an inherently right or wrong choice.

Don't see how one could not call it inherently wrong to be able ride a wall in a simulation and not have it affect your speed at all. Now if we aren't calling it a simulation then all bets are off of course.

 

[jm79]

I'm looking forward to this race on Sunday at TGS actually, those live races at the Copper Box were awesome. And will be interesting to see if they've made any improvements to the way these things are 'broadcast'... Really liked that immediate replay function for the incidents.

Shame @Tom isn't in Japan

 

[AKps3]

I'm looking forward to this race on Sunday at TGS actually, those live races at the Copper Box were awesome. And will be interesting to see if they've made any improvements to the way these things are 'broadcast'... Really liked that immediate replay function for the incidents.

Shame @Tom isn't in Japan

Can't wait to hear the Japanese Commentators

Does anyone know if Kaz will be there?

 

[jm79]

Can't wait to hear the Japanese Commentators

Does anyone know if Kaz will be there?

You'd think so, right, but I'm sure I heard he wasn't there...

 

[Lain]

Don't see how one could not call it inherently wrong to be able ride a wall in a simulation and not have it affect your speed at all. Now if we aren't calling it a simulation then all bets are off of course.

Correct, I'm calling it a game.

 

[AKps3]

You'd think so, right, but I'm sure I heard he wasn't there...

Thank You
I'm ok with that.
At least they have something on stage and It's better than nothing

 

[daan]

I think next time, that instead of deleting posts, I'm just going to start deleting members.

 

[mister dog]

I think next time, that instead of deleting posts, I'm just going to start deleting members.

👍

Anyhow i stated that there's a good chance that GTS will release exactly how it was presented so far, and that GT players shouldn't get their hopes up that the game will be revamped with this delay. Kaz does his own thing, always has always will.

I hope that's not as provocative now?