- 862
- Northamptonshire
- Ryanswannell
When it comes to instilling fear in GT, why don't we just hook ourselves to an electric chair? Whenever you crash, you get an electric shock. The harder the impact, the larger the shock 
GT "Simcade"?
- Thread starter Beart8o
- 157 comments
- 11,137 views
- 18
- United States
- Beart8o
Not sure why everyone is jumping down Tenacious D's throat. I've not been following this board long, but I've found most of his posts pretty good. He was defending himself against corvette saying every post of his for the last three years were factually inaccutate, (ironically) without any evidence to back up that claim. Also he's totally right about the 10 million fans, because I think it's fair to assume he's talking about the series, not just GT 6 which only came out a couple months ago. GT5 sold over 9 million. Maybe they are not all "fans" but that is clearly being nit picky about his meaning. Here is my facts to back that up. http://www.polyphony.co.jp/english/list.html
Most importantly all of this is crazy off topic, and from a moderator no less, please conduct personal bickering elsewhere.
- 4,455
- Teesdale
- GTP_Vagabond
- 23,800
- Philippines
This is also true of real life. Part of being a good driver in any particular series is knowing the subtle nuances and quirks of the car.
Also: Arcade =/= Easy. Realistic =/= Hard. Eliminate the fear factor, and it is much easier to drive a car on the limit in real life than in many computer games, simply because of the wealth of sensory feedback you get.
Some of the Arcade games in the 8-bit and 16-bit era were insanely difficult, and required immense skill and reflexes to master. Call of Duty, I'd argue, requires a whole lot of skill, and, in team multiplayer, a whole lot of strategy.
This is one thing that comes up with GT Academy. That the fastest guys simply learned the game, the limits of what's allowed and not, and the limits of the physics engine.
In real life, racing drivers do the same thing. They learn what the car can and can't do at the limit compared to other cars, and if they want the fastest time on track, they know, to within the nearest millimeter, how far over the curbing they can drive and still remain legal.
That GT Academy is relatively successful at finding good drivers is a testament to this.
Last edited:
- 926
- machschnel
Well, then I guess about ten million fans like crap then and are delusional. Oh well.
I was reading through you post and found it very interesting indeed. Ten million fans! That's quite astronomical, though I'm still unsure how you can quantify being a "fan"? Maybe by using sales numbers? Bit hard to be a fan without buying the game right? But I just couldn't find any source in your post (which is very unlike the TenD I know) so I thought I'd help you out -
Global Total as of 22nd Feb 2014 (units): 2.05m (http://www.vgchartz.com/game/72181/gran-turismo-6/)
Hmmmmm.... Sales numbers a notoriously unreliable so I'll multiply it by a factor of 3, which might seem extravagant, but I feel it's justified - Gran Turismo is Japanese and you know the Japanese, they put so much effort in, they demand perfection and they are very much a family, it's only right that we extrapolate thus -
Global Total as of 22nd Feb 2014 (units): 6.15m
Hmmmmm....... What am I missing TenD? My number seems to differ to yours by quite a few million. Please get back to me, I just know you wouldn't throw around baseless numbers.
- 11,343
- Chicago, iLL
- GTP_Nismo
Judging by replays of GT academy finalists and all the top times of all the time trials and seasonal events, GT is no different.
- 4,455
- Teesdale
- GTP_Vagabond
Skill at anything is about learning the little tricks and nuances to become adept at it. Real racing is about learning the nuances of friction, gravity, momentum.... In GT it doesn't negate the level of skill required to master it just because its virtual physics rather than real, there are just more parameters and sensory inputs to deal with in the real world version. Judging by the success of Lucas Ordonez and the others, I'd say the skill sets are comparable.
I came the other way and had raced for real before GT ever arrived on the gaming scene. When I bought my first wheel, I did not immediately excel and in fact found that without the extra sensory input from g-forces and braking resistance, I was actually quite awful at it and had to learn to adapt my skill to the virtual.
I came the other way and had raced for real before GT ever arrived on the gaming scene. When I bought my first wheel, I did not immediately excel and in fact found that without the extra sensory input from g-forces and braking resistance, I was actually quite awful at it and had to learn to adapt my skill to the virtual.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Prove me wrong.
Notoriously silent...um no I'm actually not, and I'll even prove it since you're talking out your rear, I make it a priority to know which person is automatically going to jump in front of the proverbial bullet for GT no matter what and those who are more rational. I could even list people but I'm not here to start a flame war between groups you do that well enough by posting about your feelings on the game in a topic that takes the issue more serious than some day time soap opera.
Here's a link that proves you wrong and shows me defending GT :https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/should-pd-expand-studios-to-eu-us.303691/page-2#post-9406503
I've spent the better amount of my limited time arguing the politics of actual motor racing on the subforums than GT BS because it's a reciprocating exercise when you stop and think about it. However, ever so often something interesting in the GT subforums comes up that I have to argue and it could go either way for PD/GT.
What's your Ten D problem today? Or yesterday? Rhetorical question, because I don't care. I'm not here to be your leash boy. I'm here, like everyone else - who's a fan anyhow, to express things about GT6 and related racers and future GTs in this particular board. If what I post really gripes you out, there is this little feature called "ignore" and it will bring you all kinds of peace of mind.
Vagabond addressed this part so...
But to highlight it works both ways, I really don't care what you think when I respond I'm challenging you to provide proof (which you don't/didn't) and not sure what the leash boy crap is other than utter shoot from the hip nonsense. Also the ignore feature works both ways if you don't like me arguing against you then by all means ignore me, I offer the same to others but if I see something from you that I disagree with at anytime and that's anyone on here, I'm going to to say something. Nature of the forum.
Unless you've been following in the shadows for three years and decided to join the forum, which is something I did so the 3 years I used is me being on the board officially. And as for evidence to back it up, all one has to do is look at the post that I argued against him on, that is being given evidence by you. If you want to search the archive of the past 3 years of my post history and his to see when we've argued you'll find he uses a more emotional rather than rational way of arguing GT's validity. Things like how it makes him feel playing it that no other can provide and so on and so forth, so really considering the proof is in this thread alone doesn't require me to go head hunting elsewhere.
Also it's not being nit picky to ask him how he some how has this exclusive knowledge on these 10 million others outside of him. I mean I'm one of those supposed 10 million and I'm not too impressed or happy nor have I been since GT4, but even with the best of times I had playing GT it still results in being a simcade.
Also using GT6 as a standard is quite fair play and to talk about irony as you wanted with me, since I doubt you follow my style of posting but I'll explain. If there are a supposed 10 million fans and game sales were a parallel to prove that, then why haven't even half those fans bought GT6. See here is the irony while it's fine for you to say that GT6 doesn't prove anything, it's okay to use another game because those numbers support your argument...
Many people bought the game and played it, that is very true but doesn't mean anything really other than making a number seem to work for your argument. I buy a ticket to go watch a movie doesn't mean I like it after seeing it or make me some kind of fan. So why is GT different because you're a die hard fan?
Last edited:
- 7,830
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
That's often a challenge. Like... a really hard challenge.
It often takes the form of things like me saying, "You can make the game more challenging by handicapping your car and making the races more of a competition. It's much more fun - you can even lose."
And then responses come like, "That's NOT difficulty, it's basically all wrong, I shouldn't have to."
Or "You can't say the bots are even remotely competitive when all they do is give up and let you win. You have no point."
Or LMSVettes assertion that I haven't said anything of substance in my bazillion year presence here.
And up above, when I do provide some sort of link of substantiation, it gets dissed.But you'r right. If a response looks like it won't end well and the poster looks to have no goal of having a discussion, it's best to just ignore it. I'm usually tired when I post so it's hard to keep that in mind these days.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
That's often a challenge. Like... a really hard challenge.
It often takes the form of things like me saying, "You can make the game more challenging by handicapping your car and making the races more of a competition. It's much more fun - you can even lose."
And then responses come like, "That's NOT difficulty, it's basically all wrong, I shouldn't have to."
Or "You can't say the bots are even remotely competitive when all they do is give up and let you win. You have no point."
Or LMSVettes assertion that I haven't said anything of substance in my bazillion year presence here.
But you'r right. If a response looks like it won't end well and the poster looks to have no goal of having a discussion, it's best to just ignore it. I'm usually tired when I post so it's hard to keep that in mind these days.
What link did you provide? From me and others saying you have no proof to this point in time where now you've claimed you did give proof, I don't see anything still. Perhaps provide the post number, cause the only "proof" to help your claim was given by another user (e.g. not you). Also the bazillion years hyperbole is asinine.
Since you bring up other points of discussion that play to the simcade topic in general, those people are right. One shouldn't have to handicap themselves just to not outright beat AI that should already generate likewise cars to what we bring to a race. They shouldn't have you give them advice that tells them they're doing it wrong when they clearly aren't, yes some do build their cars over the top and easily win and those people shouldn't complain. However, there are many that use stock cars and still outright beat opponents and why shouldn't they if the AI craps out on the last lap due to a built in system that makes it easier for new players without considering the incumbent player.
And those are very real arguments that you are now (from the above sampling) complaining about being made in retort to you, and yet don't give a secondary follow up. I'm not understanding starting an argument and then deciding to not keep up with it because valid points are made, also if you're going to address me you could at least do so with the post I've already given, not this indirect proceeding.
Zer0
(Banned)
- 1,624
GT5 has sold at this rate:
12/2010 - 5.5 million
2/2011 - 6.37 million
12/2011 - 7.3 million
9/2012 - 9 million
3/2013 - 10.66 million
All real numbers, not vgchartz smoke and mirrors. It's amazing how many people fail to realize this simple fact before defending their theories. GT6 is three months old and no one except PD knows how many units have been sold, obviously not as much as GT5 until now...
- 2,739
- Italy
- Yellohead
- Clydeyellow
It is what people call (improperly) a simcade - a simulator that foregoes some of the elements of real life track driving for the sake of being fun for everyone. So are, in my opinion, all games that don't fully simulate things like the car's start-up procedure, or the effect of g-forces on your fov.
Is there anything wrong with that? Not in my mind. It would make sense, for me, to play a flight or train simulator; but with some savings I can get myself an MX5 and do what I do in Gran Turismo in real life, to the limits of my physical and technical capabilities. So, I'm glad GT's not a full sim.
- 269
- England
- Blue--08--
And your real numbers come from where ? Not that It makes any odds they are not relevant to GT6 , the GT series are losing fans/buyers hand over fist and for good reason . You can defend and cover up all you like its never going to bring lost sales back only PD can do that , and to be honest they don't even communicate with there fan base on any level like most developers do
I use to love the GT series but now I think they deserve all the negative press they get from buyers .
- 1,211
- Earth
- TheLordSnowden
- LordSnowden
GT is "simcade" as is every console game... But the real point isn't whether "simcade" is the measure of a competent interactive product or not in contrast to the real world. It's more about how you interact with it and apply it than attaching a label.
Personally I've applied more of my playing of Forza 4 (So did Grid 1 for that matter) to my real world racing than iRacing... iRacing is clearly a simulator more than game but its all in how you merge the experiences, if at all. A more realistic sim isn't the key to being a better driver, it's your applied interpretation of that interaction.
Being a real race car driver really isn't that hard, but like most things, being really good at it requires dedication and skill development. A game can support that development but only if you have both contexts to draw/compare from... In reality it's GT academy that makes racers, accelerates them beyond what most "gentleman" racers can acquire no matter how much money they have. Skip Barber is the closest to a GT Academy accessible to the general public...
Interactive "games" help in a very marginal way, handling a digital car on a track has some relevance by way of learning lines, getting an idea of navigating traffic, and developing reflexes... Sim or not, it's all relative in a track based racer.
[Extreme example] But it certainly doesn't teach you what to do when you get shunted from behind, you're helmet smacks the roll bar, your bell gets rung, car is outside of it's envelope of control, you have blurry vision for the next half a lap while still trying to be competitive... Adrenaline compensates for most of this plus much more... But people are very different when under pressure and adrenaline and few can actually handle and control it... And to master it, like a real pro, will cost you in excess of 5 Million dollars assuming you already started at a very young age.
Many might want to debate this, and thats fair as experiences are variable, but as a 20 year game veteran and 28 years in racing... This is the simplest I can sum it up... Sorry to dash the spirits of those elitists thinking "Sim" is relative to some badge of honor... I like complex sims too... But it's replicating a degree of authenticity more than real world math, feeling authenticity is more important than actual authenticity in the world of interactive mediums...
Personally I've applied more of my playing of Forza 4 (So did Grid 1 for that matter) to my real world racing than iRacing... iRacing is clearly a simulator more than game but its all in how you merge the experiences, if at all. A more realistic sim isn't the key to being a better driver, it's your applied interpretation of that interaction.
Being a real race car driver really isn't that hard, but like most things, being really good at it requires dedication and skill development. A game can support that development but only if you have both contexts to draw/compare from... In reality it's GT academy that makes racers, accelerates them beyond what most "gentleman" racers can acquire no matter how much money they have. Skip Barber is the closest to a GT Academy accessible to the general public...
Interactive "games" help in a very marginal way, handling a digital car on a track has some relevance by way of learning lines, getting an idea of navigating traffic, and developing reflexes... Sim or not, it's all relative in a track based racer.
[Extreme example] But it certainly doesn't teach you what to do when you get shunted from behind, you're helmet smacks the roll bar, your bell gets rung, car is outside of it's envelope of control, you have blurry vision for the next half a lap while still trying to be competitive... Adrenaline compensates for most of this plus much more... But people are very different when under pressure and adrenaline and few can actually handle and control it... And to master it, like a real pro, will cost you in excess of 5 Million dollars assuming you already started at a very young age.
Many might want to debate this, and thats fair as experiences are variable, but as a 20 year game veteran and 28 years in racing... This is the simplest I can sum it up... Sorry to dash the spirits of those elitists thinking "Sim" is relative to some badge of honor... I like complex sims too... But it's replicating a degree of authenticity more than real world math, feeling authenticity is more important than actual authenticity in the world of interactive mediums...
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
Lets compare those "real" numbers to the VGChartz early "smoke and mirrors" numbers shall we?
12/10
Real - 5.5 Million
VG - 5.384 Million
2/11
Real - 6.37 Million
VG - 6.17 Million
12/11
Real - 7.3 Million
VG - 7.334 Million
Hmmmm 98+% accuracy, even allowing for rounding. You were saying?
Last edited:
- 13,848
- Adelaide
- Neomone
And I have a nasty suspicion that if the numbers are really that bad, Sony/PD may just never release official numbers. It's hardly in their interest, it would only hurt the brand more.
It's a bit odd when they don't make a song and dance about the first month of sales of one of their biggest franchises. I think that right there is a clue in and of itself.
It's a bit odd when they don't make a song and dance about the first month of sales of one of their biggest franchises. I think that right there is a clue in and of itself.
- 269
- England
- Blue--08--
Now that's a smack.
Zer0
(Banned)
- 1,624
http://www.polyphony.co.jp/english/list.html
https://www.gtplanet.net/tag/gt5-sales/
You know Jhonny how Vgchartz works? these are corrected sale numbers over the official sales and only become "something" accurate after the real sales are realeased by PD. The same real distributed sales that are presented by the company to the Sony directives.
At some point Vgchartz need a real basis to acomplish that accuracy, they can't track how many games are downloaded and sold in every retailer around the world. In the past those totals were corrected in the order of Millions from one day to another when the PD sales were released in their site. Today still are very inacurate and shows how bad they are computed, you only need to compare their sales by region. Not even their totals match. Was the same in the console sales, when some official numbers are released their totals can vary in order of many Millions in a day.
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/thre...at-does-this-mean.292590/page-29#post-9212388
GT6 numbers are still virgin of official sales so makes Vgchartz initial estimations still more and more inacurate with every month and it will show it when the PD numbers will finally released. Be fast that day and see if you can screen-capture the Vgchartz GT6 sales before they update them, it would make some laughs and maybe some people realize a thing or two about what they are defending.
Knowing the past is one thing, knowing the future another very different...
Last edited:
- 883
- Bridgeton, NJ
- JerseyDriverSS
- jerseyboyss
It's because your playing the wrong sims. People get the misconception hard = realistic ( See Rfactor 2 ). In my limited track experience its not hard to drive on a track, but ultra hard to be in that super upper echelon.
And as far as the original question is GT a sim? Well its not even close. All the tactics used to be fast in this game is no where near what you would do in a real car. GT does not reward for finess and being smooth, but rather drive as deep into a corner as you can induce oversteer and power out. Hell when i made GT Academy national finals 2 years ago i had to retrain my way of thinking to be fast. As someone else said earlier its all about knowing the quirks of the game.
I'm not trying to discredit the winners of GTA either because obviously there all talented and some stuff does transfer over from virtual to real world. I think any of the top 32 could have been sat in a real car, and been semi sucessful and been up to a respectable pace in little to no time.
Ok i'm babbling now.
I think you know what I mean but Ill say anyway. I think if you're good at GT you can be a good real driver but if you're a good driver you wont automatically be good at GT or any racing game or sim. My car aint got no driver aids what so ever and I can be quick in it. but in GT I don't want to get blue but its like sex with a condom, you just cant feel the little sensations and that makes a huge difference. Sims(and ALL racing games) are just missing that feeling of realism no matter how realistic the physics of it are. For me the more realistic the physics are in the game the more disconnected I feel.
- 883
- Bridgeton, NJ
- JerseyDriverSS
- jerseyboyss
- 269
- England
- Blue--08--
Although I do agree with what you're saying, I have a friend who is very good at most all racing/driving games but he can't drive a car for toffee in real life , yet he has a P&W set up for GT but put him in a real car and he has no clutch control cannot judge distance and has failed his driving test 3 times now.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Why wouldn't people expect PD to know how the sales of their product are doing? Do they just set the shipment out to sail and hope for the best. Better yet how do they know when it has stopped selling or close to stopping??? Word of mouth?
I agree about the Vgchartz and argued it on the thread about GT sales, when people were trying to make an early argument against PD on obscure pre-sales numbers for GT6 against GT5. However, the point still stands that one can't claim that sales numbers is an automatic quantified justification for number of fans and then further "rationalize it" as meaning that it proves GT isn't a simcade but a certified simulator. If you want to befuddle this into a "oh my gosh look how many games GT sold these are facts thus it's great" there is a thread for that. However, as you can see this is about it's ability to simulate which I addressed in this post and think the mods would like to see us steer it back to.
- 1,211
- Earth
- TheLordSnowden
- LordSnowden
Sales are determined by 2 key factors; Sell in and sell through. Sell in is where the retailer buys copies to sell on the shelf and sell through is actual point of purchase sales.
Sony (and all publishers) has near real-time awareness of these numbers daily if need be. The real trick when a company talks about sales is when they say whether its sell through or sell in... For instance more than a 3rd of NFS total sales numbers are based on sell in as EA has VERY strong distribution arms... it's the only way a company as lousy as EA is so cash rich (they have 2+ billion in cash in the bank)... You can still find Madden 07 in shrink wrapped on shelves for instance. It gets more complicated from here but EA pushes a lot of product and "owns" a lot of the retail shelf space and trucks that deliver games to market (not just their own).
NPD is the most accurate accounting to the industry as a whole and you need to have a personal subscription sponsored by a publisher/developer, and its not cheep, but NPD don't account for digital sales very well as all publishers are holding those secretly. VGChartz is some silly thing that isn't even remotely accurate and based on something not at all reliable... I don't think I've even been to that site in 10 years...
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
That's great not relevant to the point I made, but good on you for knowing about sales in general...
...and it continues.
...still don't see the point or why you quoted me. Please read my post again and then properly quote me if you're going to retort. No where in my post does it say that VG has correct numbers, actually the opposite is said and I even give a thread where I argued vehemently against the BS VG numbers and I stood in favor for PD/GT. Sales knowledge and how to quickly look up and regurgitate it is great, reading comprehension however is a more useful daily tool.
