Gran Turismo Unpopular Opinions Thread

[MIE1992]

I mean, look at this game specifically. It's supposed to be a new dawn for the GT franchise - a bigger, intense, maybe even narrow focus on online competition, to the point of causing some GT fans, who wanted a more traditional GT game, to throw their hands up in the air and quit for the time being. Yet now that the game has reached the first year of it's life, now Polyphony is basically trying to turn back the clock and get those fans to play the game by putting in road cars, GT League single player, all that, but those players know that ultimately, the game is still railroading you into playing online, whether that be in weekly races (which, more often then not, revolve around Group 1, 3 and 4, with 2 making appearances once in a while)

That's the hesitance I see. I see Polyphony wants to make a game that is forward thinking and brings the GT franchise into a new direction, but because of how they've gone about it (It should be noted, it could have been avoided if Polyphony didn't throw the baby out with the bathwater and tried to make the single player worthwhile, and also had it in the game from the start) it seems incredibly hollow, and probably doesn't do as much to get the GT fan who wanted a more traditional GT experience to jump in as Polyphony thought it would.

How do you know that this stuff wasn’t planned far in advance? I doubt they can make stuff like GT League so quickly that its addition could be considered to be some sort of response.

i'm not suggesting that. The PP system would definitely work for the road cars - but that brings up the problem of it maybe not being as effective as before because of the GT Sport's incredibly binary upgrade system.

IMO the road cars should mostly stay stock for ranked races, and if the N-series stays, modifying a car’s power to be in a different N-class should be included as tuning when that is disabled.

The reason I suggested cribbing PCARS 2's class structure is that it offers the best possible experience by putting cars in by general categories, then dividing them up in eras so that LMP900 cars only race with other LMP900 cars, GTO cars only race with other GTO vehicles, and etc. Not simply throwing them into a catch all soup and hoping with gum and chickenwire that it works out.

Like you said, it is obvious that Polyphony themselves have the ability to restrict races even more then just by class, but that's not enough. There needs to be more lines in the sand, so we don't have what amounts to pipe dream cars put into an LMP1 guise going up against outdated, nearly decade old LMP1 cars and Group C vehicles, or cup class cars (cough Megane Trophy cough) in the equivalent GT4 class making mincemeat out of everything else even after being BOP'd to oblivion.

But wouldn’t you also say that creating some unrealistic matches of cars also adds to GT’s appeal? I think for one thing, the VGTs that closely resemble LMP1 cars (e.g. Mazda & Hyundai) could be grouped with the actual LMP1s. But meanwhile, yeah, the Group C cars could be another group, and I could see some VGTs being a better fit for the future hypercar group, like the Bugatti, Alpine, & Audi VGTs.

We could also borrow from real-world class regulations, such as how the Nurburgring 24h class listing has both GT4 cars from the GT4 series, and one-make racecars that’d still be eligible for GT4.

But I think there can be compromise. For example, GT300 cars could be placed with Gr.3 cars, as both GT3 and GT300 race together. Similarly, even though I haven’t seen in realized yet, Gr.2 could also have DTMasters cars. (Meanwhile, idk where DTMeisterschaft cars would go. Maybe Gr.4?) But the McLaren F1 GTR from ‘95 could be put into a Gr.3 meant for similar racers from the 90s. (Maybe even including the aforementioned DTMeisterschaft cars.) It can help when some cars may technically be eligible to race alongside, but never did in reality because they were from different series, following the same regulations.

 

[Pedinhuh]

None of the Gran Turismo games in the series deserves to be called a "simulation".

But if they must be called a "sim", then so does Forza Motorsport games and Project Cars.

 

[FoRiZon]

None of the Gran Turismo games in the series deserves to be called a "simulation".

But if they must be called a "sim", then so does Forza Motorsport games and Project Cars.

Not really an unpopular opinion. But curious on what game is actually a simulation to you. Asseto Corsa? iRacing?

 

[Pedinhuh]

Not really an unpopular opinion. But curious on what game is actually a simulation to you.

For me, for a game to be called a proper simulator it needs to convey not only how a car handles and behave in the track, but also needs to show the unpredictability of racing in general.

Like say, having a transmission or engine blow up in the middle of the race if the driver abuses them, have a tire blow up if the driver keeps driving too fast on poor tires, have the driver be disqualified if they run out of fuel, and properly convey mechanical damages to the vehicles, if I crash head first in a wall at over 180km/h then the damages should enough to destroy the engine and take the driver out of the race.

Also cars shouldn't behave on the way they do on crashes, in real life when cars crash they bounce and wobble because of the suspensions not being able to absorb the inertia resulted in the crash, some cars may even gi over other cars due to different ride heights while others may even flip on their roofs, in all Gran Turismo games the cars are like moving walls, which in turn makes crashes not have any consequences if damages are turned off(not that they being on helps much in that), this eventually rewards bad drivers who crash into their opponent cars as a way to brake on corners and flinging their cars on the wall.

Even the goddamn Grand Theft Auto 5 conveys a better behaviour on car crashes than this game and the driving physics on that game are purely arcade based with very, very few hints of simulation.

You don't really need to have an accurate damage model to have any of what I said above, just gotta rework in the physics of cars and their inertia.

And then there is tire model, PD just can't get the longitudinal grip right in their model, I hope that the partnership with Michellin helps with that.

Plus having proper vehicles classes for cars of specific eras(having group C cars race against modern LMP-1 cars is just asinine), between other minor things that I can't remember now.

No game in the Gran Turismo series has ever bothered with any of that I mentioned above, ever. Even though we do have mechanical damage in GT Sport, it's laughable at best and you can fix it up in the pit stops.

 

[FoRiZon]

For me, for a game to be called a proper simulator it needs to convey not only how a car handles and behave in the track, but also needs to show the unpredictability of racing in general.

Like say, having a transmission or engine blow up in the middle of the race if the driver abuses them, have a tire blow up if the driver keeps driving too fast on poor tires, have the driver be disqualified if they run out of fuel, and properly convey mechanical damages to the vehicles, if I crash head first in a wall at over 180km/h then the damages should enough to destroy the engine and take the driver out of the race.

Also cars shouldn't behave on the way they do on crashes, in real life when cars crash they bounce and wobble because of the suspensions not being able to absorb the inertia resulted in the crash, some cars may even gi over other cars due to different ride heights while others may even flip on their roofs, in all Gran Turismo games the cars are like moving walls, which in turn makes crashes not have any consequences if damages are turned off(not that they being on helps much in that), this eventually rewards bad drivers who crash into their opponent cars as a way to brake on corners and flinging their cars on the wall.

Even the goddamn Grand Theft Auto 5 conveys a better behaviour on car crashes than this game and the driving physics on that game are purely arcade based with very, very few hints of simulation.

You don't really need to have an accurate damage model to have any of what I said above, just gotta rework in the physics of cars and their inertia.

Plus having proper vehicles classes for cars of specific eras(having group C cars race against modern LMP-1 cars is just asinine), between other minor things that I can't remember now.

No game in the Gran Turismo series has ever bothered with any of that I mentioned above, ever. Even though we do have mechanical damage in GT Sport, it's laughable at best and you can fix it up in the pit stops.

You didn't answer my question on what game exactly.

 

[Pedinhuh]

You didn't answer my question on what game exactly.

I know, it's because you want to strike back at what games I think are a proper racing simulators by pointing out that they aren't sims at all and I don't feel like debating with you.

After all, this IS the unpopular opinions thread.

I won't tell you which games are those, but I will tell you that neither Project Cars nor Forza Motorsport are those.

 

[Knukel]

You don't really need to have an accurate damage model to have any of what I said above, just gotta rework in the physics of cars and their inertia.

in all Gran Turismo games the cars are like moving walls, which in turn makes crashes not have any consequences if damages are turned off(not that they being on helps much in that)

Agree with these.
I doubt using heavy damage, or having the best possible penalty system would ever make racing more cautious & clean than proper collision physics. I don't mean visual damage, or engine failures - but cars to behave like they weren't solid bars of soap.
It's also immersion breaking; FIA Blue Moon Oval with open wheelers was just ridiculous.
Brake checking at Raidillion Spa? Only in GT -series.

 

[FoRiZon]

I know, it's because you want to strike back at what games I think are a proper racing simulators by pointing out that they aren't sims at all and I don't feel like debating with you.

After all, this IS the unpopular opinions thread.

I won't tell you which games are those, but I will tell you that neither Project Cars nor Forza Motorsport are those.

Okay. My point is that your opinion isnt exactly unpopular atleast here. Most people know already that GTSport isn't exactly a most realistic of racing games especially when compared with games like Asseto Corsa. PD know this because uber realistic sim will aleniates quite lots of audiences. So some threshold has to be made.

The only true unpopular opinion is that you categorize PCars the same as GT and Forza, which is, okay I guess?

 

[GTV0819]

For me, for a game to be called a proper simulator it needs to convey not only how a car handles and behave in the track, but also needs to show the unpredictability of racing in general.

Like say, having a transmission or engine blow up in the middle of the race if the driver abuses them, have a tire blow up if the driver keeps driving too fast on poor tires, have the driver be disqualified if they run out of fuel, and properly convey mechanical damages to the vehicles, if I crash head first in a wall at over 180km/h then the damages should enough to destroy the engine and take the driver out of the race.

Also cars shouldn't behave on the way they do on crashes, in real life when cars crash they bounce and wobble because of the suspensions not being able to absorb the inertia resulted in the crash, some cars may even gi over other cars due to different ride heights while others may even flip on their roofs, in all Gran Turismo games the cars are like moving walls, which in turn makes crashes not have any consequences if damages are turned off(not that they being on helps much in that), this eventually rewards bad drivers who crash into their opponent cars as a way to brake on corners and flinging their cars on the wall.

Even the goddamn Grand Theft Auto 5 conveys a better behaviour on car crashes than this game and the driving physics on that game are purely arcade based with very, very few hints of simulation.

You don't really need to have an accurate damage model to have any of what I said above, just gotta rework in the physics of cars and their inertia.

And then there is tire model, PD just can't get the longitudinal grip right in their model, I hope that the partnership with Michellin helps with that.

Plus having proper vehicles classes for cars of specific eras(having group C cars race against modern LMP-1 cars is just asinine), between other minor things that I can't remember now.

No game in the Gran Turismo series has ever bothered with any of that I mentioned above, ever. Even though we do have mechanical damage in GT Sport, it's laughable at best and you can fix it up in the pit stops.

I would add that GT games also don't have proper implementation of turbo lag for those cars with turbochargers. However, it wouldn't make me question about their existence just because of the list of negative things or what since it doesn't stop me from enjoying when I play the game. There's no perfect video game at all and I can say that all these imperfections are part of them.

 

[Crazy Taylor]

I don't actually care for the rain, seems pointless having it.

 

[NevilleNobody]

I know slow is unpopular but I kind of want a Gr. lower than Gr. 4.

In essence i agree, loved racing 300Hp touring cars (so grippy things) in Project Cars, but they had the tracks for it too. Plus Project Cars, i dunno, the cars feel alive and shrill, in GTS they are all a bit ...... flat. So 300HP may fall flat on GTS.

 

[GranTurNismo]

Spa is overrated. There are a handful of tracks, both real-world and PD originals, that I'd rather see in a future update than Spa.

 

[BaareCZ]

I don't actually care for the rain, seems pointless having it.

I agree. In GTS it's just visual. It does not affect handling like it does in real life, it only affects grip. So it is pointless and I don't care for it either. Looks good though.

 

[FoRiZon]

I agree. In GTS it's just visual. It does not affect handling like it does in real life, it only affects grip. So it is pointless and I don't care for it either. Looks good though.

You sure play the same game? Because last time I play it definitely affects the handling by quite alot.

 

[BaareCZ]

You sure play the same game? Because last time I play it definitely affects the handling by quite alot.

You're confusing handling with grip. Yes, it's true. The car slides around a lot and it's way harder to put the power down. But that's just grip being affected. Going through deep puddles has no effect on the car like it has in real life. In real life if you hit a deep puddle at high speed, you will 🤬 your pants, man. Happened to me more than once. Also the grip is the same on as well as off the racing line, which is just not realistic. The racing line is way more slippery while wet in real life.

 

[bil coz]

RSS tyres should cost 10k mileage points per car (out of sport mode)
worse tyres than the ones coming with the car should remain free.

 

[bil coz]

You're confusing handling with grip. Yes, it's true. The car slides around a lot and it's way harder to put the power down. But that's just grip being affected. Going through deep puddles has no effect on the car like it has in real life. In real life if you hit a deep puddle at high speed, you will 🤬 your pants, man. Happened to me more than once. Also the grip is the same on as well as off the racing line, which is just not realistic. The racing line is way more slippery while wet in real life.

I think he didn't confuse handling for grip. Did you try the rain with grip reduction set to realistic? it affects the handling, I know cause I spend most of my time sliding cars on CH tyres. The cars behave very differently on the wet track.

 

[FoRiZon]

Going through deep puddles has no effect on the car like it has in real life. In real life if you hit a deep puddle at high speed, you will 🤬 your pants, man. Happened to me more than once.

Take a look at these:




The reason is that:
1. Many racetracks are designed so any deep puddles is not formed.
2. If it did in fact formed, there will be many accidents happen and the race will inevitably red flagged.
3. It will significantly changed the racing line but not what you expect, now instead of having it optimising the apex it will now prioritised to avoid deep puddles instead, which is just not acceptable.

Only forza does deep puddles as I remembered and its the game which competitive multiplayer and serious racecraft isn't exactly the focus, unlike PCars 2 and GTSport.

 

[mastretta_mx]

I love and prefer to get more JDM and 90's euro sport cars over any overrated new hypercar (only the Chiron and Agera R are actual hypercars I would like to see on GTS)

 

[Lebowski]

The addition of any more road cars should be completely abandoned. Gr3 is well behind reality, still racing a 6 year old Ferrari 458 for example. Gr3 and 4 need a complete update as does Gr2, again using cars quite a few years old now. If they don't want to update it then abandon this whole FIA charade and teaming up with brands and instead just admit they are bowing down to the rose tinted glasses wearers who only want old Silvias and S2000s.

 

[Nielsen]

The addition of any more road cars should be completely abandoned. Gr3 is well behind reality, still racing a 6 year old Ferrari 458 for example.

Road cars aren't represented by the Ferrari 488 either. Invalid point.

 

[SuperFTS]

The Peugeot RCZ Gr.4 isn't as bad as people make it out to be. It's just very ah... "quirky".

 

[Ddkklop]

- Tokyo Express ways are very good tracks, mainly if you learn them properly

Can't think of anything else...

 

[Lebowski]

Road cars aren't represented by the Ferrari 488 either. Invalid point.

Totally valid point, the point being get the Gr3 categories up to date instead of using machines that aren't on the grid any more.

 

[Nielsen]

Totally valid point, the point being get the Gr3 categories up to date instead of using machines that aren't on the grid any more.

Your point was that road car additions should be stopped so Gr. 3 could be brought up to date. Well, many modern road cars are missing too.

Fair enough that you want newer GT3 cars, but leave the road cars out of it. It has nothing to do with that.

 

[Lebowski]

Your point was that road car additions should be stopped so Gr. 3 could be brought up to date. Well, many modern road cars are missing too.

Fair enough that you want newer GT3 cars, but leave the road cars out of it. It has nothing to do with that.

Neh, lets just leave the road cars out totally. Had far too many, all crappy too.

 

[Nielsen]

Neh, lets just leave the road cars out totally. Had far too many, all crappy too.

Unpopular opinion indeed.

 

[bil coz]

The addition of any more road cars should be completely abandoned. Gr3 is well behind reality, still racing a 6 year old Ferrari 458 for example. Gr3 and 4 need a complete update as does Gr2, again using cars quite a few years old now. If they don't want to update it then abandon this whole FIA charade and teaming up with brands and instead just admit they are bowing down to the rose tinted glasses wearers who only want old Silvias and S2000s.

rose tinted glasses wearers?? 🤬

 

[Lebowski]

Unpopular opinion indeed.

Hence why i posted it.

 

[ZGBox]

Unpopular opinion, but I think the NSX Gr.3 isn't that bad to drive, and the Hyundais are way underrated and underused.