GT Sport to not feature single player 'career' events/races?

[Mike_grpA]

...*a bunch more rambling about iRacing and reeling off PR lines*

I'm with @Imari on this one, I don't think you're reading or understanding what you're replying to mate, your replies completely miss the point of the posts you're quoting, so I give up.

I find it kind of amazing that someone who agrees whole heartedly that PD has done incompentent things in the past or says how PD messed up the entire initial showing of the game or concedes PD has frequently said things about past games that didn't come remotely close to happening so quickly runs straight to PR statements and marketing materials as proof of everything.

"It's nothing like a Prologue because Kaz said it isn't." "This is a potential revolution in the industry because the website lists some features that I think will be implemented in a way that would make it so." "These licence tests will teach you everything you need to know to be a good driver because they need to or PD won't accomplish what I believe they were talking about." "It doesn't matter if you think otherwise about *thing X*, because the website says you're wrong."

This^

 

[dissectional1]

If you don't want a question answered, maybe don't start it with "I have a question".



I believe that their goal is to make the best simulation that they can, as I explained.



So why play it instead of GT?



Have you see Polyphony? The company that abandoned a successful game formula to spend three years making a console knock off of iRacing? You know, that game with the very, very, very small subscriber base?

You're ascribing rational and logical thought to Polyphony. It's far more likely that they think they can do whatever they want and have it sell, because Gran Turismo. And based on history, they'd be right.



That's your opinion. I disagree. There are interviews with Akihiko Tan explaining how much work he put into trying to get the physics accurate. He meant it to be as much of a simulation as he could manage. He's just not really that good a physics engineer.



You seem to be under this preconception that anything that sells well can't be a simulation. Why is that?

I don't necessarily think anything that sells well can't be a simulation. Just not really a totally strict one, which is usually the way it goes the closer to reality things get. Maybe the guys who are mostly racing fans, invest in steering wheels and all the proper gear, but the guys who are mainly gamers, not racers or anyone who doesn't have much patience for something with a steep learning curve, that demands investing some time. I can't compare the numbers and despite the fact that having something for a few that squeezes hundreds out of them through a subscription might be failry attractive but still doesn't seem to outweight sales figures on a larger audience.

I know a lot of guys who could easily get into a game like GT, but if you gave me them something more complex they would just not engage.

about AC, the actual driving part feels much better than GT, but as far as a relaxing experience when you're short of time and patience GT fits the bill (feels a lot more like a game, it's less demanding)

Sure they bet on the GT name (more than anything else perhaps) to guarantee stuff sells, but sometimes resting on a namesake and past glory might not cut it.

 

[Samus]

Yeah it's been pretty well documented in another thread, can't remember which one. There are tons of photos showing what each section of the "Campaign mode" are, and it's basically a bunch of licence tests.

Err, that would be this one. This thread has since taken a huge diversion by someone writing essays in every post about other subjects.

 

[Imari]

I don't necessarily think anything that sells well can't be a simulation. Just not really a totally strict one, which is usually the way it goes the closer to reality things get. Maybe the guys who are mostly racing fans, invest in steering wheels and all the proper gear, but the guys who are mainly gamers, not racers or anyone who doesn't have much patience for something with a steep learning curve, that demands investing some time.

The thing is that most of the really good simulations pride themselves on what you might call their "hardcore-ness". iRacing locks you into cockpit view. Many games provide limited assists and even more limited controller accessibility. Very few have anything like a legitimate effort at a career mode that would be compelling regardless of what the physics were like.

I don't think super realistic physics are a turn-off, I think they can be a selling point. It's just all these other aspects that are common to highly realistic simulators are not actually that fun to anyone who just wants to have fun racing cars. It's not that there's anything wrong with the physics, it's all the other things that simulators traditionally lack.

Assists and controller filtering aside, driving a real car is not that hard. I've put older, non-gaming people in my rig and they almost always have an easier time driving in iRacing and AC than in GT and Forza. Because it responds in a way that they have years of practise relating to. Driving a car in any simulation is not nearly as hard as elitists and fanboys would like to make out. It's just a car.

What does make it hard is when you've got a weird halfway solution between realism and fantasy, and the player has to determine by experiment which aspects behave like reality and which don't. That's what takes an investment of time, and it's an investment that can't be cut short by having real world experience.

I think if you built a game with the world's most realistic physics, great wheel and controller support, a well chosen set of assists that can cater to a wide range of players, along with an engaging and enthralling career structure you'd have a winner on the levels of the original Gran Turismo.

The problem with modern sims and GT and Forza is that the actual things that you do are kind of dull unless you're super into cars. I'm pretty into cars and racing games, and I get bored playing them sometimes. Whereas if I'm playing The Last of Us or The Witcher 3, I'll stay up for hours and hours because I just have to play a little bit more and see what happens. Or I just have to beat this damn boss because I know I can do it.

What racing games need more than anything is engaging structure. The physics can be anything. If people can adapt between Wipeout and FM6 and Grid and Dirt Rally, they can adapt to any simulation you throw at them if the gameplay is good enough.

 

[Samus]

Anyway to get more back on topic whilst I would be very disappointed if what is in the OP was really it for single player I also do NOT want a return to the exact same old formula of GT. I've long mocked the fact that GT6 was almost identical in game structure to GT1, starting with a slow car and entering the Sunday Cup at Autumn Ring Mini, then the same old events again and again.

I don't just want a soulless menu, picking events, finishing them, then doing the next. It's boring. Other games have moved on from that and all came up with different ideas. pCARS has an 'open' career structure, allowing you to move around as you please to different events and leagues. GRID Autosport did something similar, with the game split into different categories that you can move around. What they both have though is the concept of seasons and progression up the ranks, like reality. Are they perfect? No, but they're more engaging than picking events from a menu. Each race is an event, a championship, and it affects your progress.

I want to see a revolution. A Complete overhaul and with the direction GT Sport is taking it seems like a natural progression, to follow a more structured and interesting motorsport like career.

If GTS isn't going to provide that then hopefully GT7 does. I would be very disappointed if PD just copy and paste the same old offline game into GT7. "Hey, here is 15,000 credits, there is Autumn Ring Mini, get ready for the same game again!"

 

[C_Raccoon23]

Anyway to get more back on topic whilst I would be very disappointed if what is in the OP was really it for single player I also do NOT want a return to the exact same old formula of GT. I've long mocked the fact that GT6 was almost identical in game structure to GT1, starting with a slow car and entering the Sunday Cup at Autumn Ring Mini, then the same old events again and again.

I don't just want a soulless menu, picking events, finishing them, then doing the next. It's boring. Other games have moved on from that and all came up with different ideas. pCARS has an 'open' career structure, allowing you to move around as you please to different events and leagues. GRID Autosport did something similar, with the game split into different categories that you can move around. What they both have though is the concept of seasons and progression up the ranks, like reality. Are they perfect? No, but they're more engaging than picking events from a menu. Each race is an event, a championship, and it affects your progress.

I want to see a revolution. A Complete overhaul and with the direction GT Sport is taking it seems like a natural progression, to follow a more structured and interesting motorsport like career.

If GTS isn't going to provide that then hopefully GT7 does. I would be very disappointed if PD just copy and paste the same old offline game into GT7. "Hey, here is 15,000 credits, there is Autumn Ring Mini, get ready for the same game again!"

As much as I like the classic GT career mode (in GT 1-4 anyway), I have to agree. GT is on the PS4 now. Now is the time for it to step up and advance on all fronts. And it will never feel like an advancement if the same old stuff keeps getting rehashed.

 

[7HO]

Do you read what you reply to? Springs and dampers. I didn't say anything about 3D programming.

Springs and dampers are high school math and physics. F=kx is barely high school, it's more like my first algebra. So is F=-cv. The relationship between the two gets a little more complex, and it gets harder if the damper is non-linear, but still none of it is actually beyond what a bright high school student would be capable of putting together.

Matrices and the like aren't generally taught in high school, but you don't need that for springs and dampers.

Yes I did but you replied to my post where I was clearly talking about more than springs and dampers. So either you reply is irrelevant or you were actually implying that the math that I said was complex is actually not complex for the purpose of simulation. If it is the later then my reply to you was relevant. If it was the former then perhaps you need to ask the question you just asked my of yourself.

Keep in mind I said model the physics of the world. That goes far beyond springs and dampers. You have the relationship of those things with the chassis flex, component flex and tyres. Then you have the components of the car, then you have airflow over the car and how that effects drag and downforce and how these things then alter the previous calculations, then you have how the airflow changes when cars get close to each other or close to objects. Then you have the tyres and how they flex and move around and change shape and change contact patch and vary grip and then you get weight shift and how this interacts with all those things. Then you get how the airflow changes with wind direction and speed which are constantly changing and the effects of air pressure and air density as well as temperatures on all the systems. The calculations of changing track temperature that are interacting with the tyre temperatures and the rubber that is on the road and being laid on the road. The marbles that are being thrown off and picked up and the debris that is being moved around the surface. Oh and the loose nut behind the wheel who is changing the calculation constanly.

That little spring calculation might be a simple one but when every calculation is interacting with each other the math can get complex. Was the high school math statement relevant to this discussion or are we talking about complex math that is well beyond the average person?

I left the best part out, the math must be correct and must be simplified without dumbing down any of the physics and it must be completed in 16ms before the next calculation is required on a 60hz loop.

This is why games simplify physics. Some can't solve that math. Others think it is overkill and believe that you can simplify the systems of a car so that the math is much more basic and still have a somewhat accurate feeling of driving a car. Those are the ones where the game has a feel to it and cars start to feel similar especially when you modify them. A good sim really stands out against these.

I find it kind of amazing that someone who agrees whole heartedly that PD has done incompentent things in the past or says how PD messed up the entire initial showing of the game or concedes PD has frequently said things about past games that didn't come remotely close to happening so quickly runs straight to PR statements and marketing materials as proof of everything.

"It's nothing like a Prologue because Kaz said it isn't." "This is a potential revolution in the industry because the website lists some features that I think will be implemented in a way that would make it so." "These licence tests will teach you everything you need to know to be a good driver because they need to or PD won't accomplish what I believe they were talking about." "It doesn't matter if you think otherwise about *thing X*, because the website says you're wrong."

Not proof of everything, only what is relevant. If we have been shown the game then we know what we have seen and sure they can take it back out or add to it but we know how it is already in the parts they have shown us. That isn't anything like saying "new car every month".

And we both know you are twisting my words here, you are cutting and pasting phrases together to say something completely different to what I have said. I guess it is lucky I'm not one of these legal people who throw around words like libel. But I will say that if you must resort to such tactics to misrepresent someone your argument must be too weak to stand on its own without such tactics.

 

[Samus]

Dude, none of this has anything to do with an offline career mode.

 

[Seanspeed]

What racing games need more than anything is engaging structure. The physics can be anything. If people can adapt between Wipeout and FM6 and Grid and Dirt Rally, they can adapt to any simulation you throw at them if the gameplay is good enough.

Eh, this sounds all nice on-paper, but the reality is that there's only so much you can do with 'structure' to entice people to play a hardcore sim. At some point, when people sit down with it themselves(and not just demo it at your house or something), they're gonna need to be really interested in racing/motorsport to really stick with it. Despite you saying that something like AC or iRacing is *easier* than GT or Forza, I'd say that it involves a lot more time and energy to learn the skills necessary. You are not just 'driving a car'. You are racing. You cant just throw anybody with a driver's license onto a track and say, "Now go win the race." No, it takes tons of time and practice and really *knowing* what to learn and *how* to practice in order to get better. Track driving involves a pretty large and diverse set of techniques that all need to coalesce into a cohesive skillset.

And the same goes with simulators. Yes, games like iRacing and Gran Turismo have a similarity in that you have to find the limits of what the in-game physics will allow you to do, but one has less forgiving physics and will thus require more practice in order to 'drive properly'. I think the barrier to entry is steeper with hardcore sims than it is with GT and FM. And that is deliberate. GT/FM need to sell millions of copies to justify their budgets and so cant go too hardcore. That lack of accessibility from iRacing *can* be overcome, of course. Goes for just about anything, though. But it's going to put off plenty of people. It's kinda like golf - golf isn't much fun til you're reasonably good at it. And getting good requires lots of time on the driving range and on the putting greens. Things that wont be to everyone's enjoyment. There's no great way to 'structure' a better way to entry. It simply requires people to sit down and dedicate themselves to it.

 

[7HO]

As much as I like the classic GT career mode (in GT 1-4 anyway), I have to agree. GT is on the PS4 now. Now is the time for it to step up and advance on all fronts. And it will never feel like an advancement if the same old stuff keeps getting rehashed.

Try to think about GTS as the race simulator separate to the series for a moment so we can move past it and back to the driving simulator for GT7. Does anyone remember things Kaz said in the past about his visions for the future of GT? He mentioned some pretty revolutionary things at the time he said them but now other games have similar features but still not exactly.

Driving Simulator.

What is driving to you? Is it the same as the next guy? What is driving to Kaz or to the typical driver or hoon in Japan? What is Driving to an American? What about a Finn or a Brit?

I remember when he talked about a free roam aspect and I thought about hooning, driving around with other enthusiasts and parking and talking and then driving somewhere maybe to have a race. Hanging out at Powercruise or drifting on the track. Once upon a time it was all about those things for me. I'm not sure how they do it in other parts of the world.


As I've grown up my behaviour in cars has become responsible, now I do the speed limit on the roads and drive safely, I believe in events and facilities for that fun that I once had irresponsibly in my youth. I watch videos of people driving supercars or hypercars around a track and wish I could do that, I dream of going to the Nurburgring.

There is a game in there somewhere.

Other games have leanings in this kind of direction but none of them have really captured the essence of driving in my opinion.

As far as real life situations go something I love about AC is that it has the Touristenfahrten pits. The first time I found an online session on that track and saw guys driving around the pits, probably talking to each other and then casually doing laps as if it was a real track day, I was blown away. If only the game looked better and sounded a little better to complete the immersion.

But Kaz is also passionate about Racing.

So what do we have Gran Turismo Sport the motor racing title and he talked about how people don't like the grind of old and instant gratification. So when we get that driving simulator what will it be? Was Kaz talking crap and in GT7 will it be the same old or will we get a new type of driving simulator with a broader focus on driving?

Funny, I just finished the post there and before I pressed submit my brain ran wild for a moment, I imagined a challenge in a game where the game had online challenges and in this challenge you were given a Supercar and had to do a video for Drive and then your video would be submitted to a gallery and perhaps one or more might be awarded a prize or even featured. I'm not even sure where that idea came from but GT could be revolutionary and recapture the essence of the driving simulator title. I'd buy a game like that, there is no way I'd buy another game of grind against AI, if I had a McLaren P1 in real life the last thing I could imagine doing with it is going to the track and racing against some Sunday drivers, even if I took it to a track day it would be nothing like lets go flat out and win. I'd want to have fun in it my way, kind of like the top gear way or maybe to a motokhana. Traditional GT isn't fun any more to me.

Dude, none of this has anything to do with an offline career mode.

Better?

 

[Johnnypenso]

Eh, this sounds all nice on-paper, but the reality is that there's only so much you can do with 'structure' to entice people to play a hardcore sim. At some point, when people sit down with it themselves(and not just demo it at your house or something), they're gonna need to be really interested in racing/motorsport to really stick with it. Despite you saying that something like AC or iRacing is *easier* than GT or Forza, I'd say that it involves a lot more time and energy to learn the skills necessary. You are not just 'driving a car'. You are racing. You cant just throw anybody with a driver's license onto a track and say, "Now go win the race." No, it takes tons of time and practice and really *knowing* what to learn and *how* to practice in order to get better. Track driving involves a pretty large and diverse set of techniques that all need to coalesce into a cohesive skillset.

And the same goes with simulators. Yes, games like iRacing and Gran Turismo have a similarity in that you have to find the limits of what the in-game physics will allow you to do, but one has less forgiving physics and will thus require more practice in order to 'drive properly'. I think the barrier to entry is steeper with hardcore sims than it is with GT and FM. And that is deliberate. GT/FM need to sell millions of copies to justify their budgets and so cant go too hardcore. That lack of accessibility from iRacing *can* be overcome, of course. Goes for just about anything, though. But it's going to put off plenty of people. It's kinda like golf - golf isn't much fun til you're reasonably good at it. And getting good requires lots of time on the driving range and on the putting greens. Things that wont be to everyone's enjoyment. There's no great way to 'structure' a better way to entry. It simply requires people to sit down and dedicate themselves to it.

Driving aids and difficulty sliders work for the casuals well enough to make any physics model relatively easy to drive with challenging AI. GTS has brake and steering assist IIRC. Add that + SRF to GT7 and a monkey could put in good laps.

 

[Tornado]

But I will say that if you must resort to such tactics to misrepresent someone your argument must be too weak to stand on its own without such tactics.

No, I'm just not particularly interested in wasting my time with someone who responds to concerns people have or feelings they think might apply to this game by copy pasting PD marketing materials that you think might apply because you desparately want this to be iRacing 2.

 

[thenardo55]

Guys, what if you are sit in PD's position, read this thread and then you want to include Career Mode but being forced to release the game this November, how do you do it in only 3 months?



Well, from me, I would ask the team to create OFFLINE version of Sports Mode. So, this how it work. Daily Races and Championship Races will auto-generate about 5 - 10 races/events (races if Daily & events if Champ.) on each mode (Daily/Champ.) based on what cars player have in Garage.



Perhaps if someone from PD read this, they could take my post as inspiration.

I don't how their development cycle works but I think this form of Career Mode is, maybe, pretty simple to
develop.

 

[7HO]

Guys, what if you are sit in PD's position, read this thread and then you want to include Career Mode but being forced to release the game this November, how do you do it in only 3 months?

View attachment 552021

Well, from me, I would ask the team to create OFFLINE version of Sports Mode. So, this how it work. Daily Races and Championship Races will auto-generate about 5 - 10 races/events (races if Daily & events if Champ.) on each mode (Daily/Champ.) based on what cars player have in Garage.

View attachment 552023

Perhaps if someone from PD read this, they could take my post as inspiration.

I don't how their development cycle works but I think this form of Career Mode is, maybe, pretty simple to
develop.

Do you think it would be a good idea to throw in AI races using the old GT AI into a game where you are trying to teach drivers to drive clean at all times?

How would GT6 AI look in GTS in 2016? Would the reaction be worse than not having it at all?

Would racing against GT6 AI in GTS even be fun?

I mean they are going to struggle to complete this game in time already so in the next 3 months there is no way they will be able to develop something that they haven't been able to do yet in the entire series so the best you could hope for is reusing the old AI, is that what people really want, GT5HD or GT6HD?

 

[glassjaw]

What racing games need more than anything is engaging structure. The physics can be anything. If people can adapt between Wipeout and FM6 and Grid and Dirt Rally, they can adapt to any simulation you throw at them if the gameplay is good enough.

So very glad somebody said this 👍 Gameplay is important — of course physics matter. But when there are at least five different products out there that all reasonably simulate driving, with some marginal differences between them, it becomes less about physics and more about everything else. If I can get the same basic experience from RaceRoom, Assetto Corsa or Project Cars, but I feel Project Cars is giving me more in terms of content and structure, that's the one I'm going with.

 

[dissectional1]

The thing is that most of the really good simulations pride themselves on what you might call their "hardcore-ness". iRacing locks you into cockpit view. Many games provide limited assists and even more limited controller accessibility. Very few have anything like a legitimate effort at a career mode that would be compelling regardless of what the physics were like.

I don't think super realistic physics are a turn-off, I think they can be a selling point. It's just all these other aspects that are common to highly realistic simulators are not actually that fun to anyone who just wants to have fun racing cars. It's not that there's anything wrong with the physics, it's all the other things that simulators traditionally lack.

Assists and controller filtering aside, driving a real car is not that hard. I've put older, non-gaming people in my rig and they almost always have an easier time driving in iRacing and AC than in GT and Forza. Because it responds in a way that they have years of practise relating to. Driving a car in any simulation is not nearly as hard as elitists and fanboys would like to make out. It's just a car.

What does make it hard is when you've got a weird halfway solution between realism and fantasy, and the player has to determine by experiment which aspects behave like reality and which don't. That's what takes an investment of time, and it's an investment that can't be cut short by having real world experience.

I think if you built a game with the world's most realistic physics, great wheel and controller support, a well chosen set of assists that can cater to a wide range of players, along with an engaging and enthralling career structure you'd have a winner on the levels of the original Gran Turismo.

The problem with modern sims and GT and Forza is that the actual things that you do are kind of dull unless you're super into cars. I'm pretty into cars and racing games, and I get bored playing them sometimes. Whereas if I'm playing The Last of Us or The Witcher 3, I'll stay up for hours and hours because I just have to play a little bit more and see what happens. Or I just have to beat this damn boss because I know I can do it.

What racing games need more than anything is engaging structure. The physics can be anything. If people can adapt between Wipeout and FM6 and Grid and Dirt Rally, they can adapt to any simulation you throw at them if the gameplay is good enough.

I aggree with just about every point you mentioned. I wasn't focusing on the physics side as the part that's prone to not be very engaging but the other things you've ponted out. I guess I was thinking more in the lines of the interface and game components. I too have more fun playing other games than racing ones. I think there are some "extras" that don't exactly affect gameplay but do provide a nice touch to the experience like the soundtrack, which for a lot of people simply seeking the most immersive scenario might go pretty well without and which GT had from the start up until GT 4 (5 wasn't bad but imo not as good as the previous titles and 6 has a horrible soundtrack)
This is one of those small things that can make the experience more enjoyable imo. It's one of the things I think AC lacks and although as a sim and in the PC Realm might make sense but as a possible console product seems a tad strange I think. I think a game can benefit greatly from having good music in it, much like a good movie can work even better with a proper soundtrack

 

[Nato_777]

This thread has since taken a huge diversion by someone writing essays in every post about other subjects.

The physics and controller conversations were off topic (sorry, guilty as charged) but the prologue/stand alone debate is actually relative as the point 7HO was trying to make is that GT Sport isn't a traditional GT at all, so the type of offline campaign we have had in the past doesn't fit for this particular project. It's not trying to be a forerunner to GT7 but is trying to cut a new tangent. The danger with that is it could turn many off GT in the process and some may not return for a GT7 as it could be a 'last straw' scenario for them. I would like PD to include more offline campaign than a big tutorial as much as the next guy but I think they will save that for GT7 and keep Sport focused the way it is. But anyway I also think we've flogged this horse enough and we should leave it be.

Do you think it would be a good idea to throw in AI races using the old GT AI into a game where you are trying to teach drivers to drive clean at all times?

How would GT6 AI look in GTS in 2016? Would the reaction be worse than not having it at all?

Would racing against GT6 AI in GTS even be fun?

I mean they are going to struggle to complete this game in time already so in the next 3 months there is no way they will be able to develop something that they haven't been able to do yet in the entire series so the best you could hope for is reusing the old AI, is that what people really want, GT5HD or GT6HD?

It would be an issue if GT's AI haven't progressed from GT6, from what I've gathered from people who raced against the AI at the Copper Box event the AI has seen a degree of improvement.

 

[Seanspeed]

Driving aids and difficulty sliders work for the casuals well enough to make any physics model relatively easy to drive with challenging AI. GTS has brake and steering assist IIRC. Add that + SRF to GT7 and a monkey could put in good laps.

I can definitely attest to the fact that using some driving aids does not make racing in a sim 'easy' in the least. Hell, I use the 'factory' option in Assetto Corsa, meaning that a fair number of cars I use have traction control and ABS. It doesn't even come close to making it 'easy' to drive, though. It allows me some freedom to push a bit harder than I could otherwise and perhaps get away from slow corners smoother, but it does not make the difference between me not knowing how to drive and being competitive. Not even remotely close.

You're vastly overestimating the impact that driver aids make in a *proper* sim. Sure, all these fantasy aids in games like GT and Forza may make getting around a lap without flying off the track every corner a much easier task, but it will never make you fast. Put against actual challenging AI? Nope.

And frankly, relying on fantasy aids in a simulator like iRacing or Assetto Corsa would mean missing the point anyways. A bit like the people who ask for an 'easy mode' for Dark Souls. Getting good is the POINT. It's about learning how to properly race and going out there and simulating it. They really do aim to be a simulation and not just a game wrapped in simulation clothing. You can try and inject more 'game' into them but no amount of driver aids are going to stop the learning curve from being much harsher and the skills needed more challenging. Anybody can do it, but again - it's going to be up to them to dedicate themselves. They're going to have to be the type that can find enjoyment in that learning process.

As I said, if this weren't the case, both Forza Motorsport and Gran Turismo would take the jump and use full on hardcore physics. If there's no difference, then why wouldn't they? They can stop lying about being 'the ultimate driving simulator' and actually be it. But they dont. Because they know it presents a taller barrier to entry that would likely hurt their sales.

Now dont get me wrong, I'm all for adding in more compelling 'structure' to proper sims. Frankly, I think a big reason why we dont see it already is because the budget and manpower just isn't there for the teams who dedicate themselves to this niche. Project Cars is probably the closest we've come. But it's never going to be something that sells several million copies. There just aren't enough people serious enough about the racing aspects to get over the hump.

 

[Noz]

i dont care, actually, cause the AI isnt much smarter than before, so i rather race against real people than struggle with the AI!
The singleplayer mode is also very boring, long loading times, very sterile if you know what i mean, i like the way forza present their career mode, thats way more fun, but over all i would be ok with an "online only" gt!

 

[Mike_grpA]

Err, that would be this one. This thread has since taken a huge diversion by someone writing essays in every post about other subjects.

Lol oops. You can forgive me for getting a little lost in the wildnerness this thread has become

Driving aids and difficulty sliders work for the casuals well enough to make any physics model relatively easy to drive with challenging AI. GTS has brake and steering assist IIRC. Add that + SRF to GT7 and a monkey could put in good laps.

Yeah I totally agree with this. In fact, my four year old sits on my lap and turns laps in Project cars, with the Formula Rookie, Formula Gulf, Caterham Classic, and more, using my wheel, with absolutely no assists turned on. I do the pedals and change gears, and he steers. He's not quick by any stretch of the imagination, he's still learning the basics, but he's learned Stowe circuit, and can do lap after lap without driving off track. If a four year old can be that competent with a wheel in a pretty hardcore simulator with no assists at all, then there's no excuse for the average joe who sits on the couch with the controller and plays with every assist under the sun turned on.

 

[Robbks]

There's a lot of talk about bad GT6 AI.

Lately I've been doing a lot of driving in lightly tuned cars (like only adding a better exhaust for better sound, and FC suspension to fix the toe/ camber)
But I've been doing it on Arcade races with infinite laps.
This seems to have have the effect of turning off all the rubber-banding that we're used to, and when using cars close to stock the racing against the AI is very very good.

So while I don't care at all for an offline career in GTS, I don't think that there is such a big issue with the AI itself if they did drop most of the GT6 AI programming into GTS.
PD just need to leave all the dumbed down parts of the code behind.
Assuming that every race will be a grid-start, there's no need for rubber-banding when you're not chasing the rabbit.

 

[Com Fox]

Anyway to get more back on topic whilst I would be very disappointed if what is in the OP was really it for single player I also do NOT want a return to the exact same old formula of GT. I've long mocked the fact that GT6 was almost identical in game structure to GT1, starting with a slow car and entering the Sunday Cup at Autumn Ring Mini, then the same old events again and again.

I don't just want a soulless menu, picking events, finishing them, then doing the next. It's boring. Other games have moved on from that and all came up with different ideas. pCARS has an 'open' career structure, allowing you to move around as you please to different events and leagues. GRID Autosport did something similar, with the game split into different categories that you can move around. What they both have though is the concept of seasons and progression up the ranks, like reality. Are they perfect? No, but they're more engaging than picking events from a menu. Each race is an event, a championship, and it affects your progress.

I want to see a revolution. A Complete overhaul and with the direction GT Sport is taking it seems like a natural progression, to follow a more structured and interesting motorsport like career.

If GTS isn't going to provide that then hopefully GT7 does. I would be very disappointed if PD just copy and paste the same old offline game into GT7. "Hey, here is 15,000 credits, there is Autumn Ring Mini, get ready for the same game again!"

I 50% Agree, I do think some differences need to made with the Career Mode but I also don't want to see them to do something similar to PCars and GRID.

My issue with PCars and GRID career mode that within each class the racing championships are all the same just with different tracks. In GRID you repeated this 3 times per class, it gets really repetitive IMO. Not to mention I don't really feel like I'm progressing when all I am winning is EXP and entering samey championships in GRID and not actually progressing to brand new championships.

I think GT should merge both ideas together and comprimise as I think its more sandbox career can benefit from this. In events about GT3 Cars, you could have a World Championship, a Ferrari GT3 vs. Lamborghini GT3 Championship, a BMW vs. Audi vs. Mercedes GT3 Championship, an entire European GT3 Car Championship. but also in GT Fashion a Championship where cars from different classes race against each other, and like in PCars and GRID you can the race weekend format (though I would say have it optional for casual players who just want to race like in GT3 and GT4).

Granted I heard Forza 4 did this but I never played or looked into Forza 4.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I can definitely attest to the fact that using some driving aids does not make racing in a sim 'easy' in the least. Hell, I use the 'factory' option in Assetto Corsa, meaning that a fair number of cars I use have traction control and ABS. It doesn't even come close to making it 'easy' to drive, though. It allows me some freedom to push a bit harder than I could otherwise and perhaps get away from slow corners smoother, but it does not make the difference between me not knowing how to drive and being competitive. Not even remotely close.

I'm not just talking about TC and ABS, I'm talking about all the driving aids like SRF, ASM(?), brake assist, steering assist etc.

You're vastly overestimating the impact that driver aids make in a *proper* sim. Sure, all these fantasy aids in games like GT and Forza may make getting around a lap without flying off the track every corner a much easier task, but it will never make you fast. Put against actual challenging AI? Nope.

The AI isn't challenging and if it was, a difficulty slider seems to work wonders in every other game I'm aware of that has AI.

And frankly, relying on fantasy aids in a simulator like iRacing or Assetto Corsa would mean missing the point anyways. A bit like the people who ask for an 'easy mode' for Dark Souls. Getting good is the POINT. It's about learning how to properly race and going out there and simulating it. They really do aim to be a simulation and not just a game wrapped in simulation clothing. You can try and inject more 'game' into them but no amount of driver aids are going to stop the learning curve from being much harsher and the skills needed more challenging. Anybody can do it, but again - it's going to be up to them to dedicate themselves. They're going to have to be the type that can find enjoyment in that learning process.

Everyone has to start somewhere. GTS is giving you brake assist for example.

As I said, if this weren't the case, both Forza Motorsport and Gran Turismo would take the jump and use full on hardcore physics. If there's no difference, then why wouldn't they? They can stop lying about being 'the ultimate driving simulator' and actually be it. But they dont. Because they know it presents a taller barrier to entry that would likely hurt their sales.

Many reasons. It's not easy to do. More lines of code + more complexity = more potential for errors. A year and a half after release Kunos it's just getting a handle on tire heat. SMS has struggled with that issue as well. It eats up CPU power if your AI is running the same physics. I get CPU occupancy warning with maxed out settings in AC with only 24 cars on track and that's with an i7 at 4.0 ghz.

Now dont get me wrong, I'm all for adding in more compelling 'structure' to proper sims. Frankly, I think a big reason why we dont see it already is because the budget and manpower just isn't there for the teams who dedicate themselves to this niche. Project Cars is probably the closest we've come. But it's never going to be something that sells several million copies. There just aren't enough people serious enough about the racing aspects to get over the hump.

Here's the thing though. It's not Project Cars. It can still look and feel like a GT game, can still drive like a GT game to a casual fan.

 

[Tenacious D]

What racing games need more than anything is engaging structure.

Yes, and what is that, exactly? I know that Samus hates he idea of yet another Sunday Cup series. But if you have any kind of game from racing game to war game or whatever, you start with something small to get your feet wet, and things get bigger and more challenging as you go. That's almost universally true. Just because GRID Autosport and PCARS do something unique doesn't mean that formula is going to work in other games. Heck, what will you guys say if Sport begins with a lengthy driving school, dozens of events long? It kind of looks that way.

Now as to the topic, if there isn't a single player mini-career at all, and Arcade Mode is nothing more than single races with basic setups, at least as Kaz has it defined now, this is the time to ask for it to be worked on for an update. I think there has to be a little something, even though as 7HO states eloquently, this is an eSports game. It still has to fill the gap while we wait for GT7. But let's say Kaz drops the ball and there's almost nothing. I would lobby for one or both of these:

• Expand Arcade Mode into something which can handle a chain of racing events, rather like a small Event Maker.
• Give us that Event Maker I proposed before, so full featured it allows us to set up offline events, series, championships, and even whole racing seasons with its own rules, points awarded, prizes, championships, bots and difficulty, etc. Online, the same thing, and with those Club and League builder tools you wanted to develop for the previous GT games.

And now for a typical GT Planet quibble.

This is the funniest thing I've read all day. So your defense of this claim:

Tenacious D
I would also say that PCARS isn't more of a sim than Gran Turismo and Forza.

... is to claim that the many things Pcars simulates, that GT6 doesn't, don't matter, or don't offer much of a difference? Wow... Sure, why bother simulating tyre pressures IN A SIMULATOR? I mean, GT games have never had it, so it mustn't be necessary to simulate, right?

What is the point of a racing simulator if it's not to try and simulate racing? If you had said "I don't need any more realism than I find in GT6", nobody could argue with you. But you didn't, you claimed that Project CARS isn't more of a simulator than Gran Turismo, which is objectively wrong.

When you have a game which passes itself off as a perccable simulator, and you end up with a forum with people asking how they get their setup changes to make any difference in handling or lap times, then yes, I question a lot of things about said game. GTR prided itself on letting you adjust almost everything and anything on a car, down to the pressure valve on the radiator. But as far as I recall, engine temps were never an issue in the game, so what's the point?

If I was "objectively wrong," then you wouldn't find a forum with people scratching their heads and asking what alterations actually make any difference. Your insistence that all these tuning options make a massive difference in performance and handling don't harmonize with an awful lot of people. Now I'm not going to belabor whether or not PCARS is an awesome racing sim to you and many other fans, because that's a personal druther and can't be simplified to a simple "PCARS is a sim: (yes/no)." By definition, any game that simulates some factor of driving and racing is a simulation. But the fans really oversell how much of a sim it is. I'm assuming you haven't read that article because it drives some pretty big nails in the PCARS tabletop that I hadn't even experienced. It hadn't even mentioned those almost absent tire sounds which are crucial in having a grasp of how well a car is taking a turn, unless they have FINALLY fixed that. And I'll have to assume that you haven't driven the street cars in Assetto Corsa, because it shows up PCARS in that entire category of cars pretty soundly. And I would say all up and down the line.

And yes, I wish that Gran Turismo had the accuracy of car kinetics that AC does, and the sense of danger that Forza gives you when you push a sports car too hard around a turn. But it does give you a lot of it. A number of people have noted that if you put Comfort Mediums or Softs on a sports car and turn of all aids including ABS, the feel of driving is sublime and pretty darn authentic. They begin to quibble when it goes up to Sports tires, but that's for another thread.

I wish you guys would quit acting like I touched your wife whenever I say something unflattering about your pet games. I have never said it was a BAD GAME. Some parts, yes, are rather teeth grinding, like that hideous weather implementation. But like every game it lets you tear around a track among other cars. However, if like Gran Turismo, it has a whole laundry list of issues and flaws, this is going to manifest with people not liking it, finding it inauthentic, and even some saying yes, it's a bad game. No one is ever going to agree on a universal list of what games are good sims. That's just the way it is. And the debates help sell liquor at bars and pubs.

I don't really know why I'm bothering to reply anyway, as it's obvious to anyone who's seen some of your posts that you think GT is the greatest ever, and you'll buy literally any tripe that Kaz puts the GT name on, and then go tell everyone it's amazing.

Sure, all I do is slag other games around here all day long. Never have anything good to day about the lot of 'em. All rubbish, I tell ya.

Now rather than dwell on you misrepresenting myself and my statements here, I think I would point out that this is a forum DEDICATED to a certain racing game series. You are going to find fans here, many who prefer this game to others, even some outstanding sims like RaceRoom, Assetto Corsa, etc. Furthermore, there is a whole new entry to the series just announced. People, not just fans, are going to be rather juiced over the news to one extent or another, and may not have much to say favorably or unfavorably towards other games, and games which have staked out claims which, fairly or unfairly, are held in doubt. That's just life on Earth. Just be glad you're not a Gran Turismo fan, and have to put up with endless remarks of how all the sounds are bad, all the physics are crap, the bots won't win, Kaz ran over their tricycle...

 

[Johnnypenso]

Yes, and what is that, exactly? I know that Samus hates he idea of yet another Sunday Cup series. But if you have any kind of game from racing game to war game or whatever, you start with something small to get your feet wet, and things get bigger and more challenging as you go. That's almost universally true. Just because GRID Autosport and PCARS do something unique doesn't mean that formula is going to work in other games. Heck, what will you guys say if Sport begins with a lengthy driving school, dozens of events long? It kind of looks that way.

Now as to the topic, if there isn't a single player mini-career at all, and Arcade Mode is nothing more than single races with basic setups, at least as Kaz has it defined now, this is the time to ask for it to be worked on for an update. I think there has to be a little something, even though as 7HO states eloquently, this is an eSports game. It still has to fill the gap while we wait for GT7. But let's say Kaz drops the ball and there's almost nothing. I would lobby for one or both of these:

• Expand Arcade Mode into something which can handle a chain of racing events, rather like a small Event Maker.
• Give us that Event Maker I proposed before, so full featured it allows us to set up offline events, series, championships, and even whole racing seasons with its own rules, points awarded, prizes, championships, bots and difficulty, etc. Online, the same thing, and with those Club and League builder tools you wanted to develop for the previous GT games.

And now for a typical GT Planet quibble.


When you have a game which passes itself off as a perccable simulator, and you end up with a forum with people asking how they get their setup changes to make any difference in handling or lap times, then yes, I question a lot of things about said game. GTR prided itself on letting you adjust almost everything and anything on a car, down to the pressure valve on the radiator. But as far as I recall, engine temps were never an issue in the game, so what's the point?

If I was "objectively wrong," then you wouldn't find a forum with people scratching their heads and asking what alterations actually make any difference. Your insistence that all these tuning options make a massive difference in performance and handling don't harmonize with an awful lot of people. Now I'm not going to belabor whether or not PCARS is an awesome racing sim to you and many other fans, because that's a personal druther and can't be simplified to a simple "PCARS is a sim: (yes/no)." By definition, any game that simulates some factor of driving and racing is a simulation. But the fans really oversell how much of a sim it is. I'm assuming you haven't read that article because it drives some pretty big nails in the PCARS tabletop that I hadn't even experienced. It hadn't even mentioned those almost absent tire sounds which are crucial in having a grasp of how well a car is taking a turn, unless they have FINALLY fixed that. And I'll have to assume that you haven't driven the street cars in Assetto Corsa, because it shows up PCARS in that entire category of cars pretty soundly. And I would say all up and down the line.

And yes, I wish that Gran Turismo had the accuracy of car kinetics that AC does, and the sense of danger that Forza gives you when you push a sports car too hard around a turn. But it does give you a lot of it. A number of people have noted that if you put Comfort Mediums or Softs on a sports car and turn of all aids including ABS, the feel of driving is sublime and pretty darn authentic. They begin to quibble when it goes up to Sports tires, but that's for another thread.

I wish you guys would quit acting like I touched your wife whenever I say something unflattering about your pet games. I have never said it was a BAD GAME. Some parts, yes, are rather teeth grinding, like that hideous weather implementation. But like every game it lets you tear around a track among other cars. However, if like Gran Turismo, it has a whole laundry list of issues and flaws, this is going to manifest with people not liking it, finding it inauthentic, and even some saying yes, it's a bad game. No one is ever going to agree on a universal list of what games are good sims. That's just the way it is. And the debates help sell liquor at bars and pubs.


Sure, all I do is slag other games around here all day long. Never have anything good to day about the lot of 'em. All rubbish, I tell ya.

Now rather than dwell on you misrepresenting myself and my statements here, I think I would point out that this is a forum DEDICATED to a certain racing game series. You are going to find fans here, many who prefer this game to others, even some outstanding sims like RaceRoom, Assetto Corsa, etc. Furthermore, there is a whole new entry to the series just announced. People, not just fans, are going to be rather juiced over the news to one extent or another, and may not have much to say favorably or unfavorably towards other games, and games which have staked out claims which, fairly or unfairly, are held in doubt. That's just life on Earth. Just be glad you're not a Gran Turismo fan, and have to put up with endless remarks of how all the sounds are bad, all the physics are crap, the bots won't win, Kaz ran over their tricycle...

So @Mike_grpA comes up with a laundry list of items where PCars beats GT hands down in terms of simulation and your grand response is that some people on another forum had some questions about tuning and making their cars faster? You realize that's not an answer right? Just to be clear, no one is slagging your "opinion" because you're not giving an opinion. Physics aren't an "opinion" they are factual, measurable and demonstrable. You can like how one car drives in a game that's an opinion, but saying the physics in one game or another is better/worse/same is up for debate.

So Mike has given an eloquent defense of his side of the discussion, where's yours? In what areas specifically is the simulation in GT6 equal to PCars? Tire model? Aero? Suspension? Brake heat? Brake wear? Damage? Race Events? Something else?

 

[Imari]

Yes, and what is that, exactly?

It's exactly what it says, a career structure that is engaging to the player.

So for example, asking the player to do brake tests over multiple distances probably isn't very engaging to anyone. Having simple "drive through these sequential events" probably isn't that engaging.

This is 2016. Shooters have come a long way from the days of Doom and Quake. Platformers and adventure games have come a long way from Mario and Rogue. We expect structure and engaging content in these, rather than just pure gameplay.

Perhaps it's about time that someone attempted to do something similarly revolutionary and push the racing genre forward? I don't claim to know what the best way to do that is, but that doesn't mean that I can't see that the single player portion of racing games is stagnant and has been for a long time. Maybe there's nothing that can be done, but then again maybe Kaz and his grandiose claims of instilling human drama is the man to do it.

 

[Samus]

Play RaceRoom? I could, but it's not Gran Turismo.

If I want Gran Turismo, there's only one game in town.

At least you're finally being honest about it.

 

[7HO]

So @Mike_grpA comes up with a laundry list of items where PCars beats GT hands down in terms of simulation and your grand response is that some people on another forum had some questions about tuning and making their cars faster? You realize that's not an answer right? Just to be clear, no one is slagging your "opinion" because you're not giving an opinion. Physics aren't an "opinion" they are factual, measurable and demonstrable. You can like how one car drives in a game that's an opinion, but saying the physics in one game or another is better/worse/same is up for debate.

So Mike has given an eloquent defense of his side of the discussion, where's yours? In what areas specifically is the simulation in GT6 equal to PCars? Tire model? Aero? Suspension? Brake heat? Brake wear? Damage? Race Events? Something else?

To be fair the premise was correct. That all those things are pointless if they don't actually do anything. I'm not saying they do or don't do anything as I don't know and it seems he doesn't know either and is just basing it on stuff he has read.

It's exactly what it says, a career structure that is engaging to the player.

So for example, asking the player to do brake tests over multiple distances probably isn't very engaging to anyone. Having simple "drive through these sequential events" probably isn't that engaging.

This is 2016. Shooters have come a long way from the days of Doom and Quake. Platformers and adventure games have come a long way from Mario and Rogue. We expect structure and engaging content in these, rather than just pure gameplay.

Perhaps it's about time that someone attempted to do something similarly revolutionary and push the racing genre forward? I don't claim to know what the best way to do that is, but that doesn't mean that I can't see that the single player portion of racing games is stagnant and has been for a long time. Maybe there's nothing that can be done, but then again maybe Kaz and his grandiose claims of instilling human drama is the man to do it.

I think if this game actually does not disappoint, what we know of it already is enough to be considered revolutionary even if it does contain elements that you think are not engaging.

If this didn't have the Gran Turismo name on it attitudes would be completely different. What if it was Kunos that were working with FIA and what if this was called FIA World Racing Championship Online?

What if when you get it the driving schools use familiar GT elements but combine them with video instructors in a new way that makes it feel like a real driving school?

What if they use VR during this process in a revolutionary way so that if you have VR it feels even more like a real driving school?

Remember this is a full PSVR title and this could very well be the poster child. That in itself is revolutionary but imagine for a second that the experience of the game was actually tailored to VR in a way that VR is pretty much an essential purchase to make the game come alive. Think about interactive videos for a moment while you are in driving school that don't really make sense in 2D but in 3D make it feel like you are actually with a real Instructor.

What if the driving school effectively does teach the things you would learn in a real driving school?

What if the 4 parts of campaign are just like 4 different driving schools? What if they just called it campaign because they were worried how people would react to not having one?

What if the whole game with the schools and Sport mode is meant to feel like one big campaign from beginner through driver development into a real racing career?

What if one of the purposes in this game is to develop new real world race drivers and to give them the skills and the confidence to approach their local racing bodies and do track days or join a club?

I look at this as revolutionary because it is. Others don't because they see this as another Gran Turismo that doesn't have what they expected.

But this is a complete Racing experience brought to console that as far as the developers skill goes pushes the limits of the platform to provide the most complete racing experience they can. It is a program that will suit anyone from a beginner as a child right through to the elderly who still want to race. It caters to the best and it caters to those who have zero experience. It is a full Virtual Reality title and we haven't yet been shown just how that will work, that alone could be revolutionary so lets hope for a surprise announcement when they are ready. It has an online racing championship that not only serves as a racing game but also serves as a driver development program allowing people to practice and hone racing skills against real competitors so those young kids can learn that being fast isn't everything and racecraft is just as essential in a race driver.

While people look at this game as a GT title that is missing stuff I look at this as an online racing service and when I think about what else it might need I can think of nothing that can't be fit into the package we have already seen.

Just think of this as a Virtual Reality Race Driver Development Program with real racing as part of the program that includes a World Championship on 19 tracks. Now think about what that program needs. I can't think of anything that can't be included into the game as we have seen it so far.

I see people complaining "oh no it doesn't have an offline game" and I'm sitting here thinking, this isn't really a game as you know it, it is a service that console has never seen before. I'm sitting here thinking people don't realise how good they have it and how good this is.

Things we have never seen in any GT title

• Virtual Reality
• A real Online Racing Service
• A real FIA World Championship against real people
• Revolutionary Matchmaking system for Console Sim Racing
• A Focus on Sportsmanship
• Livery Editor
• The opportunity to achieve a Real World Racing License

But it doesn't end there. Kaz is bringing us a Direct Drive steering system to Playstation. That's massive because even though direct drive steering did exist over 20 years ago it has never been available to the public until recently and this is bleeding edge PC sim racing hardware that no one expected to come to console at all and even has the PC crowd excited.

And from what I can see it looks like the Campaign part of GTS isn't simply the trials of old brought over but it looks like they are bringing over old elements and combining them with new in a progression that is more like a complete driver education program with real racing experience to complete that development.

Of course we must all wait to see how well everything is implemented and we may be surprised and we may be disappointed but I think what we know so far should have us excited (if you are into this kind of thing).

• It is a complete race driver development program
• It is the only complete online racing service on console
• It is a World Championship with official real world recognition by what is arguably the worlds most prestigious motor racing body
• It is still a game
• It is accessible to anyone

In my opinion for what this is at this point there is nothing missing that is needed in this title. As time goes on and we know more and we see how things are implemented we might become disappointed but right now I can't understand the absence mentioned by this thread as being an issue for this title.

And for those who think this title doesn't appeal to I hope you still give it a try to find out for sure but more importantly I hope GT7 follows this release soon and if it doesn't I hope the career progression in it is also revolutionary. If GT7 is little more than an evolutionary title in the series I will not be interested in it personally but if GT do something revolutionary like I posted earlier and can capture that essence of driving then they will have my attention but I think the wait for such a title might be longer.

As far as this title goes the thing I am hoping for most is good physics and some improvements to the simulation parts. If they must take out things like time of day change I'd like to see these replaced with more realistic car modelling of the systems of a car and much improved physics in the game. Ultimately though the more I think about this title the more I realise this is a must purchase item for me and I'll probably wait until close to the date to be sure but I have a good feeling I will pre order this.

 

[ImaRobot]

So many What Ifs.

 

[Mike_grpA]

When you have a game which passes itself off as a perccable simulator, and you end up with a forum with people asking how they get their setup changes to make any difference in handling or lap times, then yes, I question a lot of things about said game.

You do realise the vast majority of people who buy these racing games don't understand much, if anything, about setting up a race car, right? You will get that in any sim. A lot of people will be making setup changes without knowing fully what those changes will do, and they'll wind up making the car worse, which will frustrate them, and lead them to a forum to ask how to get the results they desire out of setup changes.

The ironic thing about that comment of yours is that in Pcars you can make setup changes to a car, and it responds in the way you would expect, provided you know what you're doing. In GT6, you have to spend hours on the first car, making tweaks, throwing away any real world knowledge you have, until you find all the exploits, and then you can apply the same setup exploits to literally every car in the game, and they will all be unrealistically fast. Setting up a car in GT6 is just applying the exploits to each tuning parameter and calling it a day. None of it reacts realistically.

I wish you guys would quit acting like I touched your wife whenever I say something unflattering about your pet games.

Pet games? You clearly haven't taken a look in the Pcars sub-forum. I've been very critical about what SMS hasn't done well in the game, and especially how they've handled bug-reports. Your claim was that Pcars is no more of a simulator than GT6, and once I demonstrated how ridiculous that claim is, you moved the goal posts.

At what point did I claim Pcars was better than AC? or that there was nothing at all wrong with the game? I didn't. The consensus among sim fans seems pretty split down the middle in the debate of Pcars v AC, which seems pretty fair. Both games do some things beautifully, and other things not so well, but both are very well done simulators, and both are lightyears ahead of GT as sims.

So Mike has given an eloquent defense of his side of the discussion, where's yours? In what areas specifically is the simulation in GT6 equal to PCars? Tire model? Aero? Suspension? Brake heat? Brake wear? Damage? Race Events? Something else?

The defence goes something like this:
"Logitech makes better wheels than Fanatec"
"No, Fanatec wheels are better because X"
"No, Fanatec wheels suck because this dude I've never met raves on his blog about how Thrustmaster wheels are better"

See, GT6 must be as good a sim as Pcars, because some people think AC is a better game. Flawless logic right there