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

[7HO]

If this was "successful" I doubt a GTS 2 would even happen. E-Sports would just be incorporated in GT7 making GTS look even more like a Prologue.

Because you say so?

You've been writing so much you forgot how this Prologue debate even started, I have no issues with Prologues, I just think GTS is a Prologue that has been marketed differently. You disagreed with me and here we are.

It is irrelevant how the prologue conversation started. We may have started debating it when I replied to the post where you accused Kaz of lying about it not being a Prologue but the way you have carried on about what isn't in this title can only be taken as complaining.

 

[Johnnypenso]

The thing is with a controller is that it's a completely unnatural device for driving a car. If you replaced the steering wheel of a real car with a game controller it would certainly be near undriveable and have disastrous results. So a good simulator should contain an interface between the controller and the physics to level out the over-zealous inputs inevitable from a controller and make it actually playable. Assetto Corsa does this well and is easily driveable with a controller as does GT. Project CARS however does not and is very difficult with a controller - does that alone mean it has better physics than Assetto Corsa - I think not. All the sims I have tried with a wheel are easy to drive.
Having played GT6 with both a wheel and a controller you can really feel difference in the physics between the two control methods - feels much more natural with the wheel.
I certainly don't think you can judge how good a simulator a sim is by it's playability with a controller.

Just curious because I don't know anyone that's played AC much with a controller, have you compared your lap times wheel vs. controller and how do they stack up?

 

[Com Fox]

Because you say so?

Key word is "I doubt" this means it is speculation and not fact.

It is irrelevant how the prologue conversation started.

It does because you think I don't like Prologue's and should instead complain about having pay for the "successor" to GT Academy.

We may have started debating it when I replied to the post where you accused Kaz of lying about it not being a Prologue but the way you have carried on about what isn't in this title can only be taken as complaining.

As does me saying that Kaz is lying for marketing purpose mean I'm complaining about it being a Prologue?

"can only be taken" my sides. So after you disagreed with me, my counter argument is seen as me complaining? Do you expect people not to let out their disagreements to what you say?

 

[7HO]

Key word is "I doubt" this means it is speculation and not fact.

Maybe but you went on to say "E-Sports would".

It does because you think I don't like Prologue's and should instead complain about having pay for the "successor" to GT Academy.

As does me saying that Kaz is lying for marketing purpose mean I'm complaining about it being a Prologue?

"can only be taken" my sides. So after you disagreed with me, my counter argument is seen as me complaining? Do you expect people not to let out their disagreements to what you say?

I didn't say that comment was complaining, on the contrary I mentioned that comment was where we began and was irrelevant. From that point it seemed to me that you were complaining and if you are not fine.

So then I don't see what we are debating.

I'll lay it out for you.

• According to Kaz this isn't a Prologue which means it isn't a Prologue even if you think it is similar to one.
• This game is presented as a esports title with a focus on online racing.
• This game is most similar to iRacing.
• Despite this game having less features than previous numbered GT games and despite it having less features than Forza this game doesn't have substantially less than similar modern games.
• This game has no directly comparable title on console.
• Only iRacing is directly comparable to GT Sport.
• iRacing has a much larger track roster but less cars however it has more series and the series are based directly on real life series.
• iRacing has a greater focus on accuracy.
• iRacing has more features.
• But iRacing is a subscription service that has been in development for 10 years.
• The subscription price of PSN is more than the subscription of iRacing but gives you more.
• In iRacing the purchase Price of GT Sport would provide you more tracks but less cars however this amount of content would be far more limiting in iRacing and if you wanted to progress outside of Rookies iRacing would cost more.

 

[Com Fox]

Maybe but you went on to say "E-Sports would".

It was a mistake

I didn't say that comment was complaining

Yeah you did

I actually think it is kind of funny to complain this is like a Prologue

So then I don't see what we are debating

Because you disagreed with me and I disagreed with you, that's how debates start, no?

According to Kaz this isn't a Prologue which means it isn't a Prologue even if you think it is similar to one

Said it in Marketing I reckon (said it multiple times including the name GT Sport being nothing but pure Marketing like names normally are), @Imari has told you that Marketing is not a Source

This game is presented as a esports title with a focus on online racing.

While it is a feature I disagree with the GT4P like Campaign, I think it is just a heavy focus feature like Pokemon's online feature's.

This game is most similar to iRacing.

Except for Online Racing being big, I think the Prologue's have more similarities.

Despite this game having less features than previous numbered GT games and despite it having less features than Forza this game doesn't have substantially less than similar modern games.

Lets see; AC has more, GRID Autosport has more, PCars has more, GT6 has more, GT5 has more.

This game has no directly comparable title on console.

Take away the E-Sport bit (which isn't even very different) and it is just another GT Game with the same old similarities except that one feature is removed.

• iRacing has a much larger track roster but less cars however it has more series and the series are based directly on real life series.

• iRacing has a greater focus on accuracy.

• iRacing has more features.

This discussion is about GTS, no need to praise iRacing like a god here.

The subscription price of PSN is more than the subscription of iRacing but gives you more.

Haven't played iRacing so I don't know what they had but GTS gives you less than other titles.

 

[Mike_grpA]

I'll lay it out for you.

• According to Kaz this isn't a Prologue which means it isn't a Prologue

I don't really have a horse in this race, but have you actually read some of Kaz's previous claims about various GT games? What he says doesn't often correlate with reality

 

[Nato_777]

It isn't an interface, it is dumbed down physics. The car is swerving side to side but doesn't lose control as if it has Koenigsegg stability control fitted except they worked out how to make it so it doesn't wash off as much speed. I'd buy what you are saying if the cars movements were not reflecting the inputs but I can't see the inputs in the video, what I can see is a car swerving side to side erratically but not behaving the way it should.

But I get it, they want to make a game that is accessible to people who have controllers. I just don't like that they say their physics are more realistic than the competition because they are easier and the competition is too hard.

Also Assetto Corsa is no easier than iRacing with a controller. I had my PC out in the lounge room the other week and curiosity got the better of me so I did some driving with my Logitech F710 on iRacing and Assetto Corsa, I didn't enjoy either. I do agree though, all sims are easy enough to drive with a wheel but for someone going directly from GT or Forza to iRacing it isn't as easy.

...

So going from GT or Forza to a sim like iRacing can be hard and while iRacing is easy enough to drive and I think anyone can learn it quickly, it isn't easy.

It isn't an interface per see of course but the software has to make compensations to either the physics or the control inputs or both with a controller. With Gran Turismo it is definitely both in my opinion. You are correct in that the physics are dumbed down somewhat. To be honest I think they are too in Assetto Corsa but to a lesser degree than GT. It's a necessary evil I think but better than having the game an unenjoyably difficult experience with a controller. Technically you could argue that a sim is not a sim when driving with a controller.
If you are accustomed to racing pretty much exclusively with a wheel then going to a controller in any racing sim won't be easy or enjoyable. I am most accustomed to racing with a controller and AC stands out to me as being the best so far with a controller while still retaining a mostly natural feel to the driving (if that makes sense) - GT is easier but the car behaviour is less natural.
Racing Sims are really built to be used with a wheel and it's here you can properly judge the physics. In GT the cars behave quite differently with a wheel and do behave much more as you would expect them to - not as good as AC or pCARS with a wheel admittedly. It remains to be seen how much better their latest physics are but I'll be happy with any improvement.

Just curious because I don't know anyone that's played AC much with a controller, have you compared your lap times wheel vs. controller and how do they stack up?

I haven't actually done any specific comparisons but I am always faster overall with a wheel. Mostly I'm using a controller due to lack of space - small house and the computer is tucked away in a little corner with no room to set up my rig. But I have set it up briefly a couple of times when I've wanted a decent driving session.

 

[Mike_grpA]

If you are accustomed to racing pretty much exclusively with a wheel then going to a controller in any racing sim won't be easy or enjoyable.

I 100% agree with this statement. I've raced in sims almost exclusively with a wheel for a couple of years now, and I suck badly at racing games with a controller. Before I got my Fanatec wheel for my PS4, I bought Pcars, and hardly played it at all, just because I was terrible, and felt like I barely had control of the cars lol. It was so good to get back behind a wheel and feel like I had full control again. I don't think I could go back to using a controller to play any serious racing game ever again. It just doesn't feel right.

 

[7HO]

Before I enter the text wall I'll mention this. There is another very good reason not to include the traditional GT career in the first esports game that is emphasising sportmanship. GT has typical trained drivers to race dirty, the bump and run against AI is a very common technique. Perhaps this is also an attempt to start fresh and leave all we know about GT behind because now they want to create a real racing service.

It was a mistake

Not your first

Yeah you did

Actually I didn't, read it again

It is irrelevant how the prologue conversation started. We may have started debating it when I replied to the post where you accused Kaz of lying about it not being a Prologue but the way you have carried on about what isn't in this title can only be taken as complaining.

Said it in Marketing I reckon (said it multiple times including the name GT Sport being nothing but pure Marketing like names normally are), @Imari has told you that Marketing is not a Source

Actually it is a source, saying it isn't doesn't make it so. You have no source to back up it is a Prologue. The creator gets to decide what it is or isn't.

While it is a feature I disagree with the GT4P like Campaign, I think it is just a heavy focus feature like Pokemon's online feature's.

That is probably the most hilarious thing you have said. They held an event where they brought in racers to compete against each other specifically to demonstrate what? Online racing is exactly what this title is about, it is the main focus of everything they talk about. You may not like it but that is the way it is. But you do claim there isn't enough of anything besides yet you will not accept what they continually talk about as the main focus of the game.

Except for Online Racing being big, I think the Prologue's have more similarities.

Oh look you admit the Online Racing being big. If they get it right it is bigger than big. If they get it wrong this game is a dud. That right there should tell you this is different than a prologue, the campaign is there to lead you to online racing, if the online racing turns out to be a dud the campaign is pointless and therefore the whole game is a dud.

Lets see; AC has more, GRID Autosport has more, PCars has more, GT6 has more, GT5 has more.

Oh dear wrong again.

GT5 and GT6 are not modern games. GRID is not a similar game, that leaves PCARS and AC.

GTS had 137 Cars and 19 locations
PCARS has 74 Cars and 30 locations
AC has 52 Cars and 17 locations

PCARS and AC are different games with more of a focus on offline play while GTS has an online focus. Do you have AC? The campaign is fairly limited and pretty boring really, I honestly prefer GT legends for this but GT legend is no where near as enjoyable to drive.

As I said GTS is comparable to similar current games even if PCARS and AC really are not similar at all and GTS is more similar to iRacing.

Pure speculation but I can imagine Kaz has looked at what others are bringing out for full price and wondered why PD needs to release 10 times the content at release, then they can make more money with DLC like everyone else does.

And Kaz is right, people like me hate the grind of previous GT games and the career progression is insane and not fun at all. In this regard PCARS is better. But then a real racing career is much better than a pretend one and racing against real people is much more fun than AI so I prefer an online racer and that's why I love iRacing. But GT has taken this to the next step, they are creating a career progression for online racing and I think it is brilliant if it works. First you learn how to be a race driver, then you choose a path, Manufacturer or Nations (or both I imagine). Now I can only speculate how manufacturer works but with Nations apparently you start by competing regionally and then progress to competing nationally until you are able to represent you Nation against the World if you are good enough. I love the idea.

Also it really does seem that you underestimate what is involved in creating a good online racer. There is a reason iRacing is the only game in town, this is a big deal and GTS is trying to take it to the next level.

Take away the E-Sport bit (which isn't even very different) and it is just another GT Game with the same old similarities except that one feature is removed.

Um yeah because online racing is this games thing, der.

This discussion is about GTS, no need to praise iRacing like a god here.

Apart from the fact that as far as a racing simulation goes it is a god that stuff was relevant and to make a point, GTS is directly comparable to iRacing, there are a few areas where iRacing is ahead, some where GTS will be ahead and some where if GTS pulls it off they could also be ahead but realistically iRacing can cost more and will not ba as big and iRacing has a good reason to be better, it has been worked on for 10 years.

Haven't played iRacing so I don't know what they had but GTS gives you less than other titles.

I have already shown that to be not true but as you haven't played iRacing which it is directly comparable to then it is worth comparing.

iRacing is subscription only plus you pay for extra content. If your subscription expires you can not use iRacing or any content you have purchased.

Currently you can get a one year sub for $59 and if you are smart you can renew it every year for less than $50.

That will give you 13 cars and 14 tracks.

But in reality that only gives you access to just a few of the Rookie series, you do get some cars that race outside of the rookie series but if you want to run a full series you will need to buy more tracks.

Additional tracks cost $15 additional cars cost $12. If you buy 3 pieces of content at a time you get 10% off. If you buy 6 pieces of content at a time you get 20% off. Once you have purchased 40 pieces of content you get a discount of 25% of any content you buy and no longer need to buy in bulk for a discount.

A couple of times a year you can buy 1 lot of $100 of iRacing credit for $75 which can be spent on cars, tracks, membership renewal or hosted sessions.

There is no offline play at all, even solo testing sessions require a membership and internet connection. Every session is launched from an online browser, there is no other way to launch the sim outside of the iRacing website. However it is a sim that runs on your PC not a browser game. Even if you buy a membership from Steam this is the same.

iRacing has official racing series, official time trials, private testing and official practice sessions and a forum that are included in your membership price. Hosted sessions are charged at 50c an hour and the host pays for them but they are hosted on iRacing's premium servers. These are used for the many Leagues that run on iRacing and this is another place you can get the most out of the included content in your membership. iRacing has the best Leagues and League services available.

But iRacing is nothing more than an online racing service. It just does that so well nothing else is required. And the members fill in the gaps with teams, help, training, setups, forum mayhem and trolling galore.

As for the official racing. That is divided into Oval and Road with a separate license for each. The license is based on a no fault system of safety rating which is calculated from a corner per incident count over a mostly unknown number of recent laps depending on your license. The license is fairly pointless and a bit of a grind at first but very easy to obtain whatever licence you need except for Pro which are only given out through a qualifying process each year for the Pro series. Both Oval and Road are divided into a number of series at various license levels and each of these series are mostly based on either current of former real life race series. Most series have an official race every 2 hours some have a race every hour. There are also some special events and special event series. Team endurance series race 4 times per week. Normal races typically range in length from 20 minutes to an hour but rarely longer. Team series normally race for 3 hours. Some special events race longer. iRacing can and does have 24 hour events. Team series have driver changes and team members can be anywhere in the world.

The racing on iRacing is real racing, it is as close as you will get to racing in real life. The damage is very realistic although the collision model doesn't always work as expected it has improved a lot. It has realistic dynamic tracks, they heat up and cool down like they would in real life, the rubber moves around like it would in real life, weather is dynamic but there is no rain and the skybox is currently static although both of those are currently being worked on. But iRacing is the most realistic dynamic simulation available and this really transforms racing. And it is a big part of why iRacing really needs nothing else other than online racing BUT...

It does need more and GTS is really filling in those missing gaps that iRacing doesn't have.

Firstly iRacing boasts about 60k members and the fact there are 1600 people online right now and often more online is pretty amazing however not all of them are racing, technically I'm online right now. There is plenty of racing to be had though however not all series race around the clock. This is because there really isn't enough members so most members stick to the popular series. That's okay because GT3 is one of the most popular series and you really don't need anything else But iRacing really needs more members. GTS will have more members by being more accessible. Most iRacers will think that is a bad thing since most do not want to race against someone who is racing with a controller, iRacers are paying for serious racing. But if GTS works as advertised serious guys will get matched with serious guys so again more members is great.

Secondly GTS will train new drivers. Currently on iRacing new members often jump straight into a race and after one or a few if they haven't left they often come into the forum complaining about cheating or all that is wrong with iRacing. Few have read the sporting code which is a requirement of membership, few have taken any time to learn anything about how iRacing works. Because they thought they were fast on GT there must be something wrong with iRacing or those other guys who just lapped them must be cheating. Their FOV is wrong, their setup is wrong, they haven't practiced, they have no idea what they are doing. They probably thought if they entered a real life race series that they would also come first. The forums are very unforgiving to these guys and often scare them away. The guys who simply come in and ask for help get a very different reception.

Although iRacing talks about career and progression by making the license system so easy there really is no career on iRacing unless you are chasing Pros. To get to Pro you need to get your iRating very high first so you can make it into the strongest races to get the highest points. Then in 3 series NASCAR, F1 and Blancpain Endurance (teams) there is a qualifying period. If you finish in a qualifying position at the end of the season and have an A license you will receive a Pro license which will make you eligible to compete in that Pro series the next year. Pro driver are competing for a significant prize pool with a first prize of $10,000 for each series. The NASCAR champions also are officially recognised and awarded by NASCAR at the annual presentations alongside drivers from the real life NASCAR series and they also receive the same championship ring that the real life NASCAR champions receive as it is an officially sanctioned NASCAR championship. While these are prestigious championships they do not apply to the regular member. There are many series on iRacing, many of them are officially sanctioned and recognised by the real life series such as V8SC, the Blancpain GT series and Mazda Cup to name a few. Mazda cup has also produced a few race drivers like the GT Academy has through the Mazda cup season with the winners of season 1 and 2 being offered and opportunity to compete for a real life drive. There are also a number of real life race drivers on iRacing like Shane Van Gisbergen and recently Rubens Barrichello made a bit of a stir when he pushed his son over the line. You never know when you will bump into one of these guys, I've crashed into a V8SC driver a couple of times in practice. But as impressive as this seems there really isn't a progression to speak of other than your own development as a driver. GTS seems to be tackling this as well and again if they pull it off this could be an improvement over iRacing. I look forward to see how the series are implemented on GTS.

iRacing is too spread out for its own good. There are too many series for the number of members so many series are more like leagues and only race a few times a week. If you live in the wrong part of the world and can't make that time slot then you can't race that series, bad luck. And matchmaking is pretty much pointless on iRacing and mostly doesn't work anyway because most of the time races do not split. In certain series in the time slots I can race in I can often just race around the front with no competition. I've come close to lapping the entire field in a sprint race a couple of times and I'm not an alien. GTS will have a massive membership but from the looks of it much fewer series also which will test matchmaking out but if matchmaking works that will test sportmanship rating out and if sportmanship works that will produce some incredible racing. Those are some pretty big ifs because they claimed those guys racing on GTS the other day were the best in the world and that was some of the worst racing I have seen, most racing in iRacing Rookies is better than that and it is a good thing the race didn't have damage because in iRacing I'm not sure many of those guys would have finished the race. It really was pathetic and I hope that id not the future of esports because if so I'm not interested. That isn't racing. But I'm hoping the systems will work and I am hoping that the reason the race was so bad was because the guys were not allowed enough time to prepare. Also they were simply selected and although they were called the best in the world lets see if they are there next year and then lets see if the racing has improved. But that event was pretty embarrassing.

I could go on but if you haven't tried iRacing then that explains why you are debating this. I'll say it again GTS is iRacing for console and if they were shooters it looks like iRacing is the Insurgency or Battlefield and GTS may be the COD.

I don't really have a horse in this race, but have you actually read some of Kaz's previous claims about various GT games? What he says doesn't often correlate with reality

Of course I have and it is why I repeat my lack of faith continually but this one is beyond question. They get to decide what it is and call it what they want so if they say it isn't a prologue it isn't. But regardless of what they say there is more than enough evidence to support their claim. This title is more than worthy of being called a stand alone full release in 2016. I take it further if they can actually achieve what they are claiming then the asking price is a bargain.

It isn't an interface per see of course but the software has to make compensations to either the physics or the control inputs or both with a controller. With Gran Turismo it is definitely both in my opinion. You are correct in that the physics are dumbed down somewhat. To be honest I think they are too in Assetto Corsa but to a lesser degree than GT. It's a necessary evil I think but better than having the game an unenjoyably difficult experience with a controller. Technically you could argue that a sim is not a sim when driving with a controller.
If you are accustomed to racing pretty much exclusively with a wheel then going to a controller in any racing sim won't be easy or enjoyable. I am most accustomed to racing with a controller and AC stands out to me as being the best so far with a controller while still retaining a mostly natural feel to the driving (if that makes sense) - GT is easier but the car behaviour is less natural.
Racing Sims are really built to be used with a wheel and it's here you can properly judge the physics. In GT the cars behave quite differently with a wheel and do behave much more as you would expect them to - not as good as AC or pCARS with a wheel admittedly. It remains to be seen how much better their latest physics are but I'll be happy with any improvement.


I haven't actually done any specific comparisons but I am always faster overall with a wheel. Mostly I'm using a controller due to lack of space - small house and the computer is tucked away in a little corner with no room to set up my rig. But I have set it up briefly a couple of times when I've wanted a decent driving session.

That is a debate that no one will win. I've found out certain people on iRacing were racing with a controller when they announced they got their first wheel and I can tell you I had no idea before that. They were clean, smooth and still reasonably quick. I have been properly surprised twice. If it means more people racing that is also great especially if they are enjoying themselves and especially if it means some of them go out and buy wheels and get more serious. And of course if GTS can actually match people against those of similar skill and sportmanship then I really don't care what they are using as a controller if I can have a clean hard fought race with no bumping, crashing or cheating. However I'm into sim racing and the simulation part is very important to me. I really can't imagine enjoying anything worse than Assetto Corsa. AC might be easy but it is familiar and very realistic. Because I want to simulate racing this includes the physics of racing so I don't want it dumbed down or easier than real life and I want it to feel real. And I don't want controllers to have an advantage and I don't want my wheel gimped to help controllers. What GT did to manual shifting really is unforgivable and completely unnecessary. If I make a mistake and should spin I want to spin and I want the same for everyone. Teach people how to drive, if guys can learn to race with a controller on iRacing there is no excuse. And yes I want those controller guys to be able to race but if racing with a controller is harder than a wheel and also slower and that means a controller can't compete against a wheel then that is how it is and special concessions shouldn't be made. PD said there will be fun racing for those of all levels in GT Sport so there is no need to make it unrealistically easy, I think. If you need a wheel to compete at the highest level you should get one if you want to compete at that level. It is the highest level, it seems ridiculous to make the level easier for those finding it hard to drive with a controller.

If driver aids are made optional they should come with a performance cost. The aim should be to learn to drive without aids. By that I only mean aids that are not used in real life but that is something GTS will not get right because it isn't a real simulator. Still series like GT3 have driver aids so I have nothing against using the actual aids in the real cars but GT doesn't work like this because it isn't a real simulator. In iRacing the cars are accurately modelled and the TC or stability control in that car is modelled on the real life car so each setting does the same thing as the real life race car and the systems will be completely different going from a Merc to a BMW to a McLaren. In GT you have a one size fits all TC or ASM.

As you can see I'm a little on the fence because numbers are important but simulation needs to meet a minimum standard for me to be able to enjoy it and if it doesn't then the numbers really don't mean much.

 

[Com Fox]

PCARS has 74 Cars and 30 locations
AC has 52 Cars and 17 locations

There is more than just numbers, while PCars and AC are lower in Numbers it makes up for it by having things to do with it far more than what we are getting with GTS.

Oh look you admit the Online Racing being big

Yeah... so is in most GT games nowadays.

Um yeah because online racing is this games thing, der.

Doesn't make it innovative or new in anyway though. Online racing isn't really innovative compared to a new feature.

Actually it is a source, saying it isn't doesn't make it so. You have no source to back up it is a Prologue. The creator gets to decide what it is or isn't.

I would comment a lot on this but it would be too rude.

My sources are its similarities to the Prologue games more than anything, the patterns, something you just ignore unless it involves iRacing, I think it is more closer to them than your precious god, iRacing.

So if I made 2 "Strawberry" Cakes and said 1 of them is Vanilla but with differently colouring, does that mean it is no longer a Strawberry Cake?

Also think about it, say something that is similar to the Prologues isn't a Prologue and fool people into buying the game or disappoint them and say it is and lose money.

And Kaz is right, people like me hate the grind of previous GT games and the career progression is insane and not fun at all.

How on Earth does this make it fact or EVEN popular opinion?

Apart from the fact that as far as a racing simulation goes it is a god

Getting ridiculous boastful are we?

 

[Rjo]

To be honest i had it on pre-order gt sport, but the more i look at the footage especially from alan boiston on teamvvv,the more it disgusts me of how it looks. I just looked at the pc version of forza 6 on the spa track in the rain and i'll go for that instead along with assetto corsa and project cars. Gt as it now stands has just died for me

 

[Tornado]

Maybe but you went on to say "E-Sports would".

Probably because the second sentence was (quite obviously) continuing from the first one.

Actually it is a source, saying it isn't doesn't make it so. You have no source to back up it is a Prologue. The creator gets to decide what it is or isn't.

Does the creator also buy all of the copies for everyone who wants the game?

 

[7HO]

There is more than just numbers, while PCars and AC are lower in Numbers it makes up for it by having things to do with it far more than what we are getting with GTS.

No I already addressed that in the same post. AC is light on single player mode so "far more" is incorrect and your statement only addresses single player mode when in reality online mode give you far more playability or infinite playability with no repetition ever as long as the servers are on and people still play. And GTS is creating a career out of online play with its campaign > progressive championships. So in actual fact GTS will have far more to do than either AC or PCARS.

Yeah... so is in most GT games nowadays.

You think that because you have never experienced online race simulation. Be sure that nothing you have experienced in GT online comes close to the real racing experience of iRacing and if GTS can replicate this they are onto a winner and it will be a first on console. You have no idea how ground breaking what PD are attempting or how big a task they have set them selves and that is why it is very likely they will fail because no one but iRacing has pulled this off yet.

Doesn't make it innovative or new in anyway though. Online racing isn't really innovative compared to a new feature.

Rinse and repeat. Not compared to iRacing but completely new for console. However for them to actually accomplish the promise they are making will require something innovative and new. Know this, what PD have promised, no one has achieved yet, not even iRacing. Good matchmaking does not exist in online racing yet. iRacing has matchmaking but it is not good and breaks down quickly. The only reason it appears to be fine is because iRacing is so unpopular it is relatively untested. And still members of iRacing have pointed out specific examples of how ineffective it is and Tony Gardner the President of iRacing has said that if he could he would like to go with the suggestions of the community.

If GTS can actually sort players by both skill and sportsmanship effectively this is not only new and innovative, it is incredible. That said they could really disappoint and just copy iRacing model and if they do that GTS will be a joke. But that isn't what they said we are getting so I'll keep my fingers crossed.

My sources are its similarities to the Prologue games more than anything, the patterns, something you just ignore unless it involves iRacing, I think it is more closer to them than your precious god, iRacing.

Out of ignorance because as you said you know nothing about iRacing. If you knew about iracing clearly the similarities are obvious. Even the media picked up on it because they know more than you do on the subject. So when Kaz mentioned the no fault Sportmanship System they immediately but subtly called it out as a rip off from iRacing. On iRacing people have asked if GT Sport can legally use this system, of course they can but people asked that because iRacing invented it and the funny part is the system is controversial and a source of ongoing complaints in the iRacing forums because if you don't know what it means, it means that if a car hits you, you get penalised equally. A no fault incident rating system means whenever 2 or more cars are involved in an incident no blame is assigned and everyone receives the same penalty. It is likened to each car having to pay for repairs on iRacing but in GTS because it is a sportmanship rating for the purpose of matchmaking it is more likely to be likened to a penalty especially if the consequence is that you end up being matched with wreckers and can never escape because they keep wrecking you. Who knows maybe they will allow you to restart your account on GTS.

So if I made 2 "Strawberry" Cakes and said 1 of them is Vanilla but with differently colouring, does that mean it is no longer a Strawberry Cake?

No and it is a bad analogy. Here is a better one. Apple added the ability to make a phone call from an iPod and called it an iPhone. The single change was significant enough to create an entirely new product line. It isn't really working out as they had planned now but that's another conversation.

Also think about it, say something that is similar to the Prologues isn't a Prologue and fool people into buying the game or disappoint them and say it is and lose money.

There is nothing to think about as you have demonstrated your inability to recognise this for what it is because as you stated you know nothing about the product this is copying. In fact in this post you have demonstrated you don't really have an understanding of the type of online racing this service is trying to provide. From that I can only suspect that your experience with online racing starts and ends with pub racing and you have no idea how incredible online racing can actually be.

How on Earth does this make it fact or EVEN popular opinion?

Clearly Kaz thinks so to mention it and he probably got the impression from GTP since over the years there have been more than a few posts and threads discussing the grind and giving up before 100%. What percentage of owners do you think 100% GT2? What percentage of GT players that own every title would you estimate have completed every title? That's and interesting topic for a thread I think, I bet it would be a short list of people. Now I haven't done a study on it but I've been on enough forums and seen enough talk about gaming to know that the modern popular desire of instant gratification also often extends to gaming. And sure there will always be people who love to grind but they have games like minecraft now

Actually again this conversation is made more difficult because you are not a member of iRacing but even on iRacing very few people want to put in lots of practice, many just want to race and when they race they are not prepared. Well even I don't want to put in lots of practice and testing and it can be likened to grinding but it is still more fun and you can't be fast without it.

Getting ridiculous boastful are we?

Boastful? Perhaps you should look up that word. I am not iRacing nor am I responsible for the service.

 

[Imari]

GTS had 137 Cars and 19 locations
PCARS has 74 Cars and 30 locations
AC has 52 Cars and 17 locations

I wouldn't get too carried away there.

GTS is unlikely to have 137 unique cars, a significant proportion of those are likely to be tuned versions of each other. The final true number of models could be less than 100.

pCARS: GOTY Edition has 125 cars and 35 locations.

AC hasn't announced final numbers for console, but they're advertising over 100 vehicles and over 20 locations.

At the very least all the games are much in the same ballpark. Realistically pCARS has the most content, and it will depend between AC and GTS just how much duplicate content GTS has. Historically, it's been a lot.

 

[Com Fox]

No and it is a bad analogy. Here is a better one. Apple added the ability to make a phone call from an iPod and called it an iPhone. The single change was significant enough to create an entirely new product line. It isn't really working out as they had planned now but that's another conversation.

It isn't really though, to me iPhones are really just iPods with a Phone feature. The name change I reckon is likely done to squeeze more cash in the name of marketing.

Actually again this conversation is made more difficult because you are not a member of iRacing

Same to you because it seems that you only know about iRacing and not other games. I don't think you even played the Prologues ESPECIALLY GT4 Prologue.

 

[Nato_777]

I 100% agree with this statement. I've raced in sims almost exclusively with a wheel for a couple of years now, and I suck badly at racing games with a controller. Before I got my Fanatec wheel for my PS4, I bought Pcars, and hardly played it at all, just because I was terrible, and felt like I barely had control of the cars lol. It was so good to get back behind a wheel and feel like I had full control again. I don't think I could go back to using a controller to play any serious racing game ever again. It just doesn't feel right.

pCARS is the worst game with a controller I've ever experienced! There seems to be little compensation for a controllers shortcomings as an input device for driving a car (despite all the fancy controller options). It's OK if you drive like your Nanna but try to push the limits and it's game over really fast. I don't have a PS4 wheel so like yourself I hardly play it on the PS4 - different story with pCARS 2 on my PC with a wheel.

That is a debate that no one will win.

No worries, I'm not trying to win - just posting my thoughts on the matter.

I've found out certain people on iRacing were racing with a controller when they announced they got their first wheel and I can tell you I had no idea before that. They were clean, smooth and still reasonably quick. I have been properly surprised twice. If it means more people racing that is also great especially if they are enjoying themselves and especially if it means some of them go out and buy wheels and get more serious...
...And I don't want controllers to have an advantage and I don't want my wheel gimped to help controllers. What GT did to manual shifting really is unforgivable and completely unnecessary. If I make a mistake and should spin I want to spin and I want the same for everyone. Teach people how to drive, if guys can learn to race with a controller on iRacing there is no excuse. And yes I want those controller guys to be able to race but if racing with a controller is harder than a wheel and also slower and that means a controller can't compete against a wheel then that is how it is and special concessions shouldn't be made. PD said there will be fun racing for those of all levels in GT Sport so there is no need to make it unrealistically easy, I think. If you need a wheel to compete at the highest level you should get one if you want to compete at that level. It is the highest level, it seems ridiculous to make the level easier for those finding it hard to drive with a controller.

Definitely there are some that are super fast with a controller. I'm not saying that a wheel is always faster than a controller. I can really only speak for GT6 as that's where I've had the most experience with both devices - you can be fast and clean with both but you must employ different driving techniques for either to get the best out of them. For me I can get the quicker times (only slightly quicker mind you) with the wheel as I can drive much as I would in real life - I have over 30 years real world driving experience with some amateur racing experience in there too so I know what it's like to push a car at (and beyond) the limits. Anyway a wheel won't always be fastest for everyone.
Racing with a controller is harder to compete at the very top level but if the systems a sim uses to make it workable can keep the performance balance right they still can get right up there without too much advantage/disadvantage either way.
Where GT falls down as you point out is that it's system means controller users end up learning a technically incorrect driving method/style and usually need to relearn how to drive if they progress to a wheel or sim with more accurate physics.
Anyway I'll leave this conversation here as we are getting off topic a little too much now - it's been good chatting though. 👍

 

[Tenacious D]

pCARS: GOTY Edition has 125 cars and 35 locations.

And some of those are race tuned variations, multiple race tuned variations, according to the... pCARS website. pCARS? project CARS? I'm baffled as to why some of you do that.

I would also say that PCARS isn't more of a sim than Gran Turismo and Forza. I know some of you guys are absolutely mad in love with the game, but I have to wonder how some of you are playing it. Maybe that's with a controller, which would explain a few things. As Nato_777 points out, a racing game is a completely different world with a wheel. I can't race anything but little arcade toy games like Mario Kart with a controller anymore. PCARS feels like a nice sim, like GT6 and Forza 6 but different. Not a great sim like AC and RR, not in my estimation, and I swapped directly between them on PC with a Thrustmaster wheel with similar cars on the same/similar tracks one day after owning all three. And yes, GT6, which didn't feel like those sims either, but felt rather like PCARS in many ways.

Now, Scaff who seems quite keen on PCARS himself, says that GT Sport even at this stage feels nicely improved, so he's giving a thumbs up on Sport as it stands, and there is time to go. I'm not expecting an AC experience in Sport either, but if it's better than GT6, which seems to be the case, I'll be one happy racer in Sportsland.

 

[Samus]

Playing the "you like something I don't, you must be playing it wrong" card again I see.

Also let's be honest you'll be happy with anything if GT is on the box. You've spent years arguing that you'll be very upset to lose standard cars and now not only are they gone but so are the premiums and you're apparently also happy with that.

 

[dissectional1]

Goal: yes.
Will they achieve it: probably not.

GT6 would have been an incredible sim by the standards of not that long ago. By the standards of today it's mediocre to average. I think Polyphony do try and it's their goal to make the best sim that they can, they're just not really that good at it*.

It turns out that they're actually quite good at making a game that feels better than a real sim to your average fella, because it still behaves in a way that convinces them that it's real but flatters their driving by not being super punishing.

*Or rather, Akihiko Tan and whoever else is doing the physics are fine but they're just not in the same league as the big boys at iRacing, Assetto Corsa and rFactor.

My question was rethorical. Do you honestly believe their goal is to make a full blown SIM? Compare the target market between arcade, simcade games and the one for actual simulators and think carefully before you answer.

After playing AC I haven't touched GT 6. But do I think AC is more fun than GT? I can't honestly say that it is.

If creating a complete simulation that wouldn't appeal for the majority of the market (AKA non hardcore or sim gamers) or the option to create something more in between that would eventually cater (albiet not fully) to both the niche and the mainstream were given which one do you think a Tycon would choose? The one where they make a tonload more of cash by reaching a bigger audience or the one where they piss on a pile of bills and set them on fire by creating a product that only the more elitist gamers will enjoy?

GT6 woudln't been a great sim even by older standards, because it was never meant to be an actual sim. If it were, PD would probably have closed doors a long time ago. If it were a full blown sim, the sales would have forced PD to release a new entry probably every year/year and half, because they wouldn't be able to take that much time between titles as the cash probably wouldn't last as long

 

[sems4arsenal]

PCARS's main fault are that most default setups for their cars seem to be made up by someone who was probably drunk and blind.

 

[Nato_777]

Playing the "you like something I don't, you must be playing it wrong" card again I see.

Also let's be honest you'll be happy with anything if GT is on the box. You've spent years arguing that you'll be very upset to lose standard cars and now not only are they gone but so are the premiums and you're apparently also happy with that.

Can't speak for anyone else but personally for GT Sport as I clearly see it as a spin off title with the esport focus I'm not so bothered by the seeming omissions (from a full numbered GT title) in this particular offering.
If many of those things were absent from GT7 that would be another matter altogether.

 

[7HO]

It isn't really though, to me iPhones are really just iPods with a Phone feature. The name change I reckon is likely done to squeeze more cash in the name of marketing.


Same to you because it seems that you only know about iRacing and not other games. I don't think you even played the Prologues ESPECIALLY GT4 Prologue.

Wrong again, crazy wrong actually. Not only did I buy GT4P but I bought the version that was bundled with the Logitech GT Pro and I still have both, the GTP is sitting on a box right behind me and GT4P I think is buried in box somewhere in this room. I still own every Prologue and I have never not had a PS2 in the house because it was never worth selling and still surprisingly fun. Up until GT5 I was a zero day customer of every GT including the Prologues. Actually the only reason I would buy a Playstation was for GT.

And some of those are race tuned variations, multiple race tuned variations, according to the... pCARS website. pCARS? project CARS? I'm baffled as to why some of you do that.

I would also say that PCARS isn't more of a sim than Gran Turismo and Forza. I know some of you guys are absolutely mad in love with the game, but I have to wonder how some of you are playing it. Maybe that's with a controller, which would explain a few things. As Nato_777 points out, a racing game is a completely different world with a wheel. I can't race anything but little arcade toy games like Mario Kart with a controller anymore. PCARS feels like a nice sim, like GT6 and Forza 6 but different. Not a great sim like AC and RR, not in my estimation, and I swapped directly between them on PC with a Thrustmaster wheel with similar cars on the same/similar tracks one day after owning all three. And yes, GT6, which didn't feel like those sims either, but felt rather like PCARS in many ways.

Now, Scaff who seems quite keen on PCARS himself, says that GT Sport even at this stage feels nicely improved, so he's giving a thumbs up on Sport as it stands, and there is time to go. I'm not expecting an AC experience in Sport either, but if it's better than GT6, which seems to be the case, I'll be one happy racer in Sportsland.

I don't own PCARS so I have just gone from reviews and everything I have read led me to believe it was a sim, just not as good as AC. But then you included RR with AC and I'm not sure what to think anymore because RR would have been a good sim 10 years ago but not in 2016. I think people just like it because of the canned FFB effects like slip effects. The physics are average and the FFB is about the same IMO, I rank it as only a marginal step from Simbin games and that is why I still prefer to race on Race07. Surprisingly you can actually find good pick up racing on Race07 now because it's mainly real sim racers left playing it. Unfortunately they mostly like racing cars I don't like. I actually love rain racing in Race07 but that FFB in RR and all previous Simbin games just feels so bad to me. And if it is the effects that people like then the answer is clearly RF2 because it has much better FFB and still has those effects.

Anyway I'm curious. Can you help me understand what it is about PCARS that makes it like GT and Forza? Are the physics too dumbed down? Do you not like the FFB? Or are there too many gamer options? Or is it something else.

EDIT: I'm just adding that I'm still shaking my head and wondering what the because if you think RR is better than PCARS it must be really bad because IMO RR is an oddball, it isn't sim worthy in 2016, it doesn't compare to the racing games, it's just free to play with competitions and I think if it wasn't those 2 things no one would play it.

PCARS's main fault are that most default setups for their cars seem to be made up by someone who was probably drunk and blind.

Sounds like AC to me, the default sets are ridiculously easy, numb and slow but I think with AC that is the way it should be to make it easy for beginners. The problem with AC is the way cars respond to sets, when it is a simple as less downforce equals faster lap times it's a little disappointing.

 

[sems4arsenal]

@7HO it's where GT games have an edge for me, you get in and race no fuss about it, also in PCARS you almost have to calibrate your wheel for each car on its own.

 

[Mike_grpA]

The creator gets to decide what it is or isn't.

So then you believe everything he says the game is? So then GTS will have the best physics of any racing sim ever made, and will revolutionise motorsport for the next 100 years? Seriously, it doesn't matter what Kaz says the game is, it's up to the community to make their mind up about the game. Kaz can say the game is the best thing since sliced bread, and it's meaningless compared to unbiased reviews of the game.
Not sure why your post contained a 10 page long, borderline fanboy, review of iRacing, but each to their own lol.

I wouldn't get too carried away there.

GTS is unlikely to have 137 unique cars, a significant proportion of those are likely to be tuned versions of each other. The final true number of models could be less than 100.

pCARS: GOTY Edition has 125 cars and 35 locations.

AC hasn't announced final numbers for console, but they're advertising over 100 vehicles and over 20 locations.

At the very least all the games are much in the same ballpark. Realistically pCARS has the most content, and it will depend between AC and GTS just how much duplicate content GTS has. Historically, it's been a lot.

Yeah we've already seen, in the limited list of GTS car we know of so far, there is an alarming number of duplicates. Look at Mitsubishi, currently the offering from them is 4 copies of the same Lancer. I wouldn't be surprised if the car count dropped below 100 once duplicates were removed from the equation.

pCARS is the worst game with a controller I've ever experienced! There seems to be little compensation for a controllers shortcomings as an input device for driving a car (despite all the fancy controller options). It's OK if you drive like your Nanna but try to push the limits and it's game over really fast. I don't have a PS4 wheel so like yourself I hardly play it on the PS4 - different story with pCARS 2 on my PC with a wheel.

Yeah, it really feels like you're hardly in control of the car with the controller, very poorly optimised. With a wheel it's really good when you're not being attacked by bugs though

And some of those are race tuned variations, multiple race tuned variations, according to the... pCARS website.

Have you actually counted how many duplicates Pcars has? Because it's 2.

I would also say that PCARS isn't more of a sim than Gran Turismo and Forza. I know some of you guys are absolutely mad in love with the game, but I have to wonder how some of you are playing it. Maybe that's with a controller, which would explain a few things.

Honestly, GT's physics are closer in complexity to Driveclub than Pcars. It's tyre model only models heat, poorly, and only one temp per tyre. It's aero model is the opposite of realistic. It's suspension model responds in no way like reality when set up adjustments are applied. Brake wear and temp isn't modeled at all, and the damage is behind 90's racing games.
Pcars tyre model models temp across the tyre, it models temp of tread, carcass, and inside tyre temp, it models carcass flex, and it models different types of tyres like cross-ply and radial, flat spots, and even models temp transfer from the brakes into the tyres. It's aero model is very good, and even models things like flow separation and stalling. It's suspension model is also very good, and reacts as expected to setup changes, although camber has a weak effect on setup, which is it's only downfall. Brake temp and wear are both simulated, including adjustable brake ducts and brake fade when the temp is pushed too high. And lastly, the damage model includes everything from brakes, to aero, to engine and gearbox, to electrical faults, and more.

So before claiming Pcars isn't more of a simulator than GT, just remember that GT games don't simulate a lot of things. They are simulators, sure, but they are a long way behind most other sims in how many things they simulate, and how accurately they simulate them. PD has a long way to go if they want to even approach the level of detail found in Pcars simulation. I'll also add that I played the last two GT games with a wheel, and I play Pcars with a wheel. GT's physics fall flat when using a wheel, because it exposes how basic it is. Pcars comes alive when using a wheel, because the FFB is all physics derived, it properly communicates what the car is doing.

 

[Com Fox]

Wrong again, crazy wrong actually

Sorry I don't know everything about your personal life like a Stalker, just your posts sound like you don't see the similarities enough IMO.

 

[7HO]

So then you believe everything he says the game is? So then GTS will have the best physics of any racing sim ever made, and will revolutionise motorsport for the next 100 years?

That's crazy. Giving your creation a title and promising what will be in it are different things. Are you telling me that if you grow a hybrid fruit that has a seed on the inside but tastes like vegetable that people are correct in calling it a vegetable because they think it tastes like one? Now if you promise that it will give people enough nutrition for a day but you have a track record for being unreliable then sure people can doubt your claims but those are different things.

I really can't see how this is a debate. It is not called a Prologue and although elements of it are comparable to a Prologue they are also directly comparable to modern games so the argument fails and as pointed out this has a significant feature that not only has no Prologue ever had but no Sim Racing game on console has ever had. In addition to that in certain areas it is actually more featured than the only other game that is actually like it.

Not sure why your post contained a 10 page long, borderline fanboy, review of iRacing, but each to their own lol.

The guy who I was talking to said he doesn't know about it. But I also want to be clear because like I said GTS is a really exciting release because some of its core promises are actually better than iRacing but it would be completely unfair to point that out and not point out where iRacing will still be better than it. Hence the Battlefield vs COD comparisons. There might be fanbois of each of those but they both have their place and as dumbed down as COD is compared to Battlefield it is just as popular. And yes I might be a fan of what iRacing does and that's why I pay the fee but as I have pointed out iRacing has flaws and it only has about 70,000 members and less than 300,000 people have tried it since 2008. GTS will probably outperform iRacing during presale.

And like I am saying to him it would be hard to appreciate if you have no experience with iRacing and yes PD could fail to deliver but seriously people don't seem to appreciate how big a deal this is. Again yes PD could fail to deliver but if they do deliver this is the most significant release of GT ever. I wouldn't even be here talking about it otherwise. If I was your typical iRacing fanboi like you are accusing me of I would be on iRacing laughing at it. But this could be huge.

So interpret what I have written if you will as absolute devotion for iRacing but what it really is is the hope for GTS to be as awesome as they say it will be because if it is this may be the biggest thing to happen to sim racing ever. And yes those elite iRacers on the iRacing forums will continue to refer to GT as a joke and those that proudly claim PC mater race will point out those areas where iRacing is better and how much better their $10k rigs are with their Oculus Rift or triples, 20Nm Direct Drive steering, hydraulic pedals and Simvibe but PD will be having the last laugh and you guys can sit back and know even without all that you have a better racing service due to some very small things that are a significant improvement, oh and the fact that the whole world will actually be racing here instead of a bunch of guys who think they are the best.

Of course that completely depends on GTS delivering this time.

Simply dismissing this as a prologue because it doesn't have what people wanted from the next GT is ignorant of what this game is. This promises to give console players what PC has, a real online racing service. If PD pull this off sign me up for my PD fanboi card.

Honestly, GT's physics are closer in complexity to Driveclub than Pcars.

Previous or GTS?

It's tyre model only models heat, poorly, and only one temp per tyre. It's aero model is the opposite of realistic. It's suspension model responds in no way like reality when set up adjustments are applied. Brake wear and temp isn't modeled at all, and the damage is behind 90's racing games.
Pcars tyre model models temp across the tyre, it models temp of tread, carcass, and inside tyre temp, it models carcass flex, and it models different types of tyres like cross-ply and radial, flat spots, and even models temp transfer from the brakes into the tyres. It's aero model is very good, and even models things like flow separation and stalling. It's suspension model is also very good, and reacts as expected to setup changes, although camber has a weak effect on setup, which is it's only downfall. Brake temp and wear are both simulated, including adjustable brake ducts and brake fade when the temp is pushed too high. And lastly, the damage model includes everything from brakes, to aero, to engine and gearbox, to electrical faults, and more.

So before claiming Pcars isn't more of a simulator than GT, just remember that GT games don't simulate a lot of things. They are simulators, sure, but they are a long way behind most other sims in how many things they simulate, and how accurately they simulate them. PD has a long way to go if they want to even approach the level of detail found in Pcars simulation. I'll also add that I played the last two GT games with a wheel, and I play Pcars with a wheel. GT's physics fall flat when using a wheel, because it exposes how basic it is. Pcars comes alive when using a wheel, because the FFB is all physics derived, it properly communicates what the car is doing.

That stuff is all good and some of it is important to providing a realistic racing experience but none of that matters if the driving experience is inferior.

Of course I have no idea what either PCARS or GTS drives like. PCARS has got to be the hardest game to know anything about without trying it because everything you read contradicts things you have read. One guy says it is like GT or Forza another says it is closer to AC, I've even read on iRacing one guy claiming he thinks PCARS is the most realistic of the lot. The reports are all over the place. I've been tempted so many times to buy it just to finally put my curiosity to bed but I really don't want to buy another racing game I almost never use. AC drives me nuts like that, it feels so good and yet is so boring so combined with all that is wrong with it I almost never play it.

Then of course I wonder why I ever bother reading opinions on physics and handling because if there is something I have learned from iRacing it is many people have no idea what they are talking about, you see guys comparing sims using completely different FOV settings as well as other settings and you just shake your head. Like the AC vs iRacing comparisons, set the FOV correctly in both and the FFB similar with canned effects off and both games feel remarkably similar. And then you get those people who think they have the FOV set the same because the used the same number

 

[Johnnypenso]

Of course I have no idea what either PCARS or GTS drives like. PCARS has got to be the hardest game to know anything about without trying it because everything you read contradicts things you have read. One guy says it is like GT or Forza another says it is closer to AC, I've even read on iRacing one guy claiming he thinks PCARS is the most realistic of the lot. The reports are all over the place. I've been tempted so many times to buy it just to finally put my curiosity to bed but I really don't want to buy another racing game I almost never use. AC drives me nuts like that, it feels so good and yet is so boring so combined with all that is wrong with it I almost never play it.

Only someone who has no idea what they're talking about in terms of physics simulation would mention GT in the same sentence as Project Cars. I've never played Forza. It may not be to everyone's taste, it might have some bugs on console, but the physics simulation is very good, far beyond GT, and its hits most of the high points of racing simulation.

 

[glassjaw]

Clearly Kaz thinks so to mention it and he probably got the impression from GTP since over the years there have been more than a few posts and threads discussing the grind and giving up before 100%. What percentage of owners do you think 100% GT2? What percentage of GT players that own every title would you estimate have completed every title? That's and interesting topic for a thread I think, I bet it would be a short list of people. Now I haven't done a study on it but I've been on enough forums and seen enough talk about gaming to know that the modern popular desire of instant gratification also often extends to gaming. And sure there will always be people who love to grind but they have games like minecraft now

I have never 100 percented a Gran Turismo. Probably never will. Still love career modes, and grinding, and ultimately want my games to be games. Probably because I was a gamer first and a racing fan second. But whatever the reason, playing a game to objective completion has nothing to do with wanting that structure. I typically play till I feel I've experienced everything, or my interest fades, or both. What I find really interesting about all of this is GT1 was revolutionary, in part, precisely due to its game structure. Ten, twenty years ago, a game with no "campaign" so to speak, progression, or locked content was considered to be lacking depth and criticized for it (needn't look past GT PSP for a more recent example in this franchise). Yet, it seems those very attributes and lack of structure have become desirable in gaming. And I'd venture a guess and say it's because of the consumer base widening and diversifying, getting older, and bringing in more people who didn't necessarily grow up with games, or arrived at them purely via a desire to simulate an activity they enjoy in real life (*ahem* driving cars fast).

 

[Imari]

My question was rethorical.

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

Do you honestly believe their goal is to make a full blown SIM? Compare the target market between arcade, simcade games and the one for actual simulators and think carefully before you answer.

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

After playing AC I haven't touched GT 6. But do I think AC is more fun than GT? I can't honestly say that it is.

So why play it instead of GT?

If creating a complete simulation that wouldn't appeal for the majority of the market (AKA non hardcore or sim gamers) or the option to create something more in between that would eventually cater (albiet not fully) to both the niche and the mainstream were given which one do you think a Tycon would choose? The one where they make a tonload more of cash by reaching a bigger audience or the one where they piss on a pile of bills and set them on fire by creating a product that only the more elitist gamers will enjoy?

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.

GT6 woudln't been a great sim even by older standards, because it was never meant to be an actual sim.

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.

If it were, PD would probably have closed doors a long time ago. If it were a full blown sim, the sales would have forced PD to release a new entry probably every year/year and half, because they wouldn't be able to take that much time between titles as the cash probably wouldn't last as long

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

 

[7HO]

I have never 100 percented a Gran Turismo. Probably never will. Still love career modes, and grinding, and ultimately want my games to be games. Probably because I was a gamer first and a racing fan second. But whatever the reason, playing a game to objective completion has nothing to do with wanting that structure. I typically play till I feel I've experienced everything, or my interest fades, or both. What I find really interesting about all of this is GT1 was revolutionary, in part, precisely due to its game structure. Ten, twenty years ago, a game with no "campaign" so to speak, progression, or locked content was considered to be lacking depth and criticized for it (needn't look past GT PSP for a more recent example in this franchise). Yet, it seems those very attributes and lack of structure have become desirable in gaming. And I'd venture a guess and say it's because of the consumer base widening and diversifying, getting older, and bringing in more people who didn't necessarily grow up with games, or arrived at them purely via a desire to simulate an activity they enjoy in real life (*ahem* driving cars fast).

People want lots of different things in gaming. On one hand I played Uncharted 4 all the way through in a day and I really enjoyed it, I enjoy those type of games that play out like a movie and have an interesting story like Tomb Raider. However I feel like there isn't enough freedom and it is too much like a movie where you must complete a task to unlock the next chapter. I really enjoy open games and Skyrim was awesome, I enjoyed the mechanics and I liked that you have the freedom of a free roam game but with a story even if limited with lots of choose your own adventure paths along the way. I find games like GTA incredible. But getting back to Skyrim, I have no interest in crafting or grinding at all, I play for fun not to work, and I do not enjoy it when games make me work. Practising and testing in a racing game on the other hand doesn't seem so much like work to me even though it is because I'm still driving and improving and it is completely skill based. I know if I put in the time I may perform better but it isn't a case of grind to pass.

Just look at iRacing, I got my license that I needed in the first few days and beyond that I am free to do whatever I want in the game, if I want right now I could go race in Skippys and after that jump in a GT3 race. If I want to compete in a championship I can but I haven't done that for years and yet I have spent more time playing that game than every other game I have ever played combined. Because the thrill of racing is what I crave and every race is different. Sometime it is frustrating and my car is wrecked on the first lap, once I even stuffed up on the first lap and took out half the field coming out of the second corner when I put a wheel on the grass and lost control into the car beside me and caused a pile up as the cars behind us had no where to go. You say sorry and try harder in the next one and when it is great it is great. When you fight with the same guys for position for an entire race and you have a better pit strategy and come out of the pits ahead, it doesn't matter if you win or lose those, you finish where you finish with sweat dripping off you and say "that was incredible".

It isn't exactly instant gratification. You practice, you work on a setup, you qualify, then you race. I've practised all week for a race. But it is real and it provides me with what I can't do in real life. Compared to that grinding so I can drive a pretend car in a game so I can race it against moving chicanes that I know I can easily beat but I have to race those same moving chicanes over and over to get the next pretend car or unlock the next moving chicane challenge. It is on par with those games that have no story and go on forever where all you do is mash your buttons to beat the next bad guy.

Once upon a time I played Final Fantasy games, they were incredible in their time and I played them because I had come from enjoying dice role playing games and imagined playing those as computer games would be cool. And I was always into the fantasy adventure games right back to games like King Quest and text based games before that. But when I played those Final Fantasy games I imagined a better game. I wondered why the mechanics had tobe like that and why the game had to play like that. I started to imagine a game that was more real time but still RPG after all I am playing on a computer so why can't I make an instant decision and the calculation is made instantly and why do I need to wait for my turn or my enemy wait for their turn, that isn't very realistic. I started to think of games that might give you more options and mix skill based games with RPG and then Kingdom Hearts came along and I thought this is much more like what I imagined. Still no one has made that perfect game but there are many good ones now.

It is evolution. As we experience something we enjoy we realise what we would enjoy even more. And the games of old may have been fun for me back then but I tried to replay my old FF games the other day and man was I disappointed, even the ones I thought were the best. Bringing it back to racing from the first day I played a racing game in an arcade I knew what I wanted as a child. I wanted a simulator with graphics that looked like real life and multiple monitors so it would feel like I am really in a car. Then I learned about virtual reality and though one day. All my life I have wanted to be a race driver but never had the opportunity so all my life I have wanted to simulate race driving. I don't want to have to jump through hoops to do that, the practice and the setups and qualifying are all the hoops you should jump through and they are realistic.

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?

That isn't completely accurate though. Lets follow through that Kaz means well and when he says something he means it but for whatever reason he can't often deliver. He said the other day that he isn't trying to compete with GTS he is trying to expand the market. On the surface if we look at GTS vs iRacing that doesn't seem like an accurate statement until we start to dig a bit deeper. GTS is trying to to expand on what iRacing has done with a driver education system and they make a big deal about being easy to drive and they also make a big deal about rating systems that form part of matchmaking that would not only place you with drivers of your own skill but also of a similar Sportmanship level. If they pull this off they are creating the online racer for the masses, one that anyone can enjoy including the child and the elderly. And it is on console. That's pretty big and not exactly aimed at the same niche market iRacing is aimed at. It seems to me that he is genuinely trying to expand the market and if he succeeds instead of competing with iRacing he might be helping create new sim racers who will go onto becoming iRacing members.

And they haven't exactly abandoned the formula, as long as this game doesn't get a white Datsun 240z we know there is another game coming.

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.

This stems from people having no idea what goes into making games like this. I'm sure from reading comments that people think these guys scan a car and then just press some keys on a computer and next thing you know you have a simulation. Perhaps they think there is some game making engine where you put in a scan and select simulation and the engine makes it. I'm sure most don't realise that guys who recreate complex physics in a simulation are literal geniuses and they are working for far less money that they are capable of earning by working on a game. But not every person who works on every game is the same level of genius. We are talking about mathematical calculations on a level that the average person can't wrap their mind around, these guys are trying to recreate the physics of the world using math, seriously advanced math and while some of it can be found in a book, many of the critical parts can't and these guys are inventing the math. Sims/games range from the guys trying to accurately model these things exactly to the guys who simplify the systems so much that you can feel it isn't right. And that isn't always a decision for a specific purpose, sometimes it is just a case of too hard. And on genius might crack the code in a few months while another takes years or can never really crack it.

Of course over time if the math is good you can carry it forward but sometimes the math may have been limited by the hardware and can't be reused and needs to be developed from scratch, sometimes you realise later the math wasn't as good as you thought.