GT Sport - Trailers, Videos and Screenshots

[sk8er913]

You should probably play these games yourself, instead of simply listening to the lowest common denominator on the internet.

You should also take notice of the fact that I wrote rF2, not rFactor. Although Game Stock Car is built on isiMotor, as was rFactor, and GSC is fairly excellent. rF1 is a decent enough sim, but it really depends heavily on the quality of the content you get for it, as does rF2. If you want to find a car that behaves horribly, you can.



No. The idea of a simulation is to simulate as accurately as possible. Gran Turismo doesn't do this in any of the areas that it simulates. It's a partial simulation.

Gran Turismo's approach to a racing game may be the best, because it offers a wider range of play. But it's not a better oval racing sim than iRacing, it's not a better road racing sim than AC, and it's not a better rally sim than RBR or Dirt Rally. It's jack of all trades, master of none, as has been said many times. That maybe makes it a better game, but it does not in any form make it a better simulation.

A better simulation is more accurate, and Gran Turismo just isn't.

I don't understand why people have this need to insist that Gran Turismo is the best simulator [clarkson]in the world.[/clarkson] It's a decent game (if we're talking about the older ones, it's an excellent game), and it simulates well enough for it's purposes. Is that not enough? Can it not just be without being a superlative as well?

Are we such blind consumers that we need to justify "The Real Driving Simulator" as if it wasn't just marketing guff?

I didn't say it was the best simulator in the world. I'm just saying that it is a good simulator because it can simulate many different circumstances, that is an integral part of a simulator.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I didn't say it was the best simulator in the world. I'm just saying that it is a good simulator because it can simulate many different circumstances, that is an integral part of a simulator.

That's an integral part of a good game, not a good simulator. The accuracy of a simulator is measured against reality. Because one chooses to model rain and the other doesn't as an example, doesn't make one or the other more or less of a simulation, it's how well it does what it chooses to do that determines it's worthiness.

 

[sk8er913]

That's an integral part of a good game, not a good simulator. The accuracy of a simulator is measured against reality. Because one chooses to model rain and the other doesn't as an example, doesn't make one or the other more or less of a simulation, it's how well it does what it chooses to do that determines it's worthiness.

But is your simulator the best under which conditions:
1: after the rear tires have lost grip it feels fantastic (drifting), but at the limit its just ok.
2: after the rear tire have lost grip the car behaves in a way that doesn't mirror real life, but the sim feels great when you are are at the limit.
3: The game feels good in both conditions, but not as good as the other 2 at their strengths.


You would probably pick option 1 for drifting, and maybe option 2 for racing. But option 3 is able to accurately simulate both conditions and is arguably the best, because it simulates both conditions.

 

[RACECAR]

rF1 is a decent enough sim, but it really depends heavily on the quality of the content you get for it, as does rF2. If you want to find a car that behaves horribly, you can.

Pretty much true (though I'm not sure why you would intentionally set out to find the worst driving thing there is )

Are we such blind consumers that we need to justify "The Real Driving Simulator" as if it wasn't just marketing guff?

Funny thing is, people take that way too seriously.

 

[Johnnypenso]

But is your simulator the best under which conditions:
1: after the rear tires have lost grip it feels fantastic (drifting), but at the limit its just ok.
2: after the rear tire have lost grip the car behaves in a way that doesn't mirror real life, but the sim feels great when you are are at the limit.
3: The game feels good in both conditions, but not as good as the other 2 at their strengths.

You would probably pick option 1 for drifting, and maybe option 2 for racing. But option 3 is able to accurately simulate both conditions and is arguably the best, because it simulates both conditions.

Sounds like you are just trying too hard to ensure the outcome is, "GT is the best simulator". As I said earlier, real life is the test. In your example above you are talking about the tire model and you'll have a tough time trying to convince anyone that understands real car behaviour, that GT's tire model stands up well against any current sim. That's not so say that GT isn't fun to drive or that it doesn't feel good or that it isn't challenging etc..but those things aren't the measure of simulation, reality is.

 

[sk8er913]

Sounds like you are just trying too hard to ensure the outcome is, "GT is the best simulator". As I said earlier, real life is the test. In your example above you are talking about the tire model and you'll have a tough time trying to convince anyone that understands real car behaviour, that GT's tire model stands up well against any current sim. That's not so say that GT isn't fun to drive or that it doesn't feel good or that it isn't challenging etc..but those things aren't the measure of simulation, reality is.

i cant run these "modern games" so option 1 is a special game from 2003 that still holds up, and option 2 is an overrated game from 2005 that was redesigned poorly in 2008. GT is the most realistic sim i can run. sadly.

 

[Imari]

But is your simulator the best under which conditions:
1: after the rear tires have lost grip it feels fantastic (drifting), but at the limit its just ok.
2: after the rear tire have lost grip the car behaves in a way that doesn't mirror real life, but the sim feels great when you are are at the limit.
3: The game feels good in both conditions, but not as good as the other 2 at their strengths.


You would probably pick option 1 for drifting, and maybe option 2 for racing. But option 3 is able to accurately simulate both conditions and is arguably the best, because it simulates both conditions.

Are you actually trying to argue that Gran Turismo is a more accurate simulation because of the summation of all it's parts than the other games that I mentioned?

Seriously. Play them. Gran Turismo is fine, but physics-wise it's not even close to iRacing or AC. Not on road tracks or on ovals. Not drifting or racing.

You should also note that "feels good" is not the measure of an accurate simulation. Whether it behaves the same as real life is the test. We have people on this site that think that Driveclub is an excellent simulation because it behaves the way that they think a car should.

i cant run these "modern games" so option 1 is a special game from 2003 that still holds up, and option 2 is an overrated game from 2005 that was redesigned poorly in 2008. GT is the most realistic sim i can run. sadly.

So stop arguing that it's a better simulation than games you haven't played.

 

[sk8er913]

This is a GT Sport Media thread, I don't think we have enough video/gameplay evidence on GTS to be discussing physics in here.

 

[girabyt3]

You should probably play these games yourself, instead of simply listening to the lowest common denominator on the internet.

You should also take notice of the fact that I wrote rF2, not rFactor. Although Game Stock Car is built on isiMotor, as was rFactor, and GSC is fairly excellent. rF1 is a decent enough sim, but it really depends heavily on the quality of the content you get for it, as does rF2. If you want to find a car that behaves horribly, you can.



No. The idea of a simulation is to simulate as accurately as possible. Gran Turismo doesn't do this in any of the areas that it simulates. It's a partial simulation.

Gran Turismo's approach to a racing game may be the best, because it offers a wider range of play. But it's not a better oval racing sim than iRacing, it's not a better road racing sim than AC, and it's not a better rally sim than RBR or Dirt Rally. It's jack of all trades, master of none, as has been said many times. That maybe makes it a better game, but it does not in any form make it a better simulation.

A better simulation is more accurate, and Gran Turismo just isn't.

I don't understand why people have this need to insist that Gran Turismo is the best simulator [clarkson]in the world.[/clarkson] It's a decent game (if we're talking about the older ones, it's an excellent game), and it simulates well enough for it's purposes. Is that not enough? Can it not just be without being a superlative as well?

Are we such blind consumers that we need to justify "The Real Driving Simulator" as if it wasn't just marketing guff?

I allways say GT it's "The Real Driving Simulator"; but on console. Remember Project cars and Assetto corsa are more hardcore due that they are made mainly for PC, and going to console means a general downgrade due to limitations (reason of why IRacing and others stays on PC), and IMO, Forza is a "daddy's girl with daddy's money" parody. Besides out of all those sims, GT it's still the only one that offers allmost all the pillars of motorsport (road racing/rally racing/ endurance racing/ classic-modern racing), and they balance them great, so basically, not all in the slogan it's a lie (remember we are talking about a console sim, not a PC).

 

[Imari]

remember we are talking about a console sim, not a PC

As long as you appropriately restrict your classification, you'll always be able to be the best. I'm the world champion at the 23m dash for left-handed caucasians wearing only one sock before 10:30 in the morning on mixed surfaces.

A simulation is a simulation, regardless of hardware. That GT chooses to limit the fidelity of their physics model to focus on things like graphics is a design choice, and frankly a pretty good one. As demonstrated adequately in the last couple of pages, most people can't tell good physics apart from great physics, and so it would be largely wasted effort.

Which is exactly the clever thing that GT does. How good do your physics have to be before the vast majority of people can't tell the difference between them and AC/iRacing or whatever the current top consumer grade sim is? GT apparently hits it pretty much dead on, with regularity.

Remember Project cars and Assetto corsa are more hardcore due that they are made mainly for PC, and going to console means a general downgrade due to limitations (reason of why IRacing and others stays on PC)

No, iRacing stays on PC because they'd never make enough money to justify developing a console version. That, and their pricing structure would go down like a ton of bricks with a console audience.

pCARS is on console, with graphical downgrades only. Or upgrades, depending on the strength of your computer. AC is coming to console as well, it just takes longer because Kunos are tiny. No reason to think that it'll be downgraded, it runs perfectly well on a PS4 equivalent spec computer.

The reason the hardcore stuff has historically stayed on PC is that they have a very limited market, and it's generally not worth the cost to them. But that appears to be changing, possibly due to Sony/MS making it easier for small companies to publish on their hardware.

Besides out of all those sims, GT it's still the only one that offers allmost all the pillars of motorsport (road racing/rally racing/ endurance racing/ classic-modern racing)

Nope. There are rally mods for AC. I imagine all the mod-able games have rally tracks, considering that they can do it the exact same way that Gran Turismo does: change the road texture and surface grip.

Can people please stop trying to say "but GT is the only one that X" without actually knowing what they're talking about? It's a good game, it doesn't have to be a special and unique snowflake as well. GT sells really well and has a lot of cars and tracks, and looks very nice. Is that not enough?

 

[JKgo]

As long as you appropriately restrict your classification, you'll always be able to be the best. I'm the world champion at the 23m dash for left-handed caucasians wearing only one sock before 10:30 in the morning on mixed surfaces.

... Where do you come up with such ridiculous examples? You're a danger to my sides - they might explode from laughing!!

Can people please stop trying to say "but GT is the only one that X"

But, but, GT ships with 1200+ cars!! That must be worthy of Guinness world record or something...

Well, this is a Gran Turismo fansite, so it can't be helped. My attitude towards GT series always has been thus: it is the best all rounder in the console racing scene, being able to cater to most types of players with minimum fuss.
The end.

 

[Cocomoto]

Some guys here...just some guys. Always the same faces.

Trying so hard to prove that GT is bad game, and game A or B is better etc.

No matter what kind of atrocity someother say, they like it only because they are attacking/saying something bad about GT.

 

[FoRiZon]

Some guys here...just some guys. Always the same faces.

Trying so hard to prove that GT is bad game, and game A or B is better etc.

No matter what kind of atrocity someother say, they like it only because they are attacking/saying something bad about GT.

Its not that some people are talking bad about GT. Any constructive critisism to PD is very encouraged.

Is the fact that some people talking down without any merit (PD is taking all our money! or Lol buy Project Cars) and with very narrow point of view (OMG only PD is catering to SIMCADE (even though Forza did the same thing with different way) and its design choice stuck in the 90s! (not development style, design choice.) ) .

I just let @Bo talking here since im tired already with these GTS and GT6 threads.
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/thre...er-and-more-badass.315221/page-2#post-9969923

 

[silverman_GT]

Here's hoping the next GTS trailer will dethrone the epicness of this trailer:



I'll have to admit; while the current GTS trailer is indeed awe-inspiring, IMO it doesn't really capture the essence of a "pure" racing game. Almost feels like it was missing something VERY important.

Spoiler

daiki kasho MUST return.

 

[cutmeamango]

There is a couple of videos that tell this story about simulation and physics complexity that are a good listen.

Brian Beckman (worked in Forza) on real-time physics simulation:

Niels Heusinkveld on general though about sims and physics:

You can watch part 6 and other of his videos for a deeper understanding on the real-time physics side.

It makes me appreciate GT/Forza's "universal" approach and hope they make further strides in it.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Some guys here...just some guys. Always the same faces.

Trying so hard to prove that GT is bad game, and game A or B is better etc.

No matter what kind of atrocity someother say, they like it only because they are attacking/saying something bad about GT.

Right on cue, the guy with nothing to add to the conversation so he makes a blanket and incorrect ad hominem attack on those that are contributing. Well done:tup:👍. Feel better now?

/s

 

[Elitekilla29]

Here's hoping the next GTS trailer will dethrone the epicness of this trailer:



I'll have to admit; while the current GTS trailer is indeed awe-inspiring, IMO it doesn't really capture the essence of a "pure" racing game. Almost feels like it was missing something VERY important.

Spoiler

daiki kasho MUST return.

I remember when this trailer was released i was losing my mind.

 

[FoRiZon]

Here's hoping the next GTS trailer will dethrone the epicness of this trailer:



I'll have to admit; while the current GTS trailer is indeed awe-inspiring, IMO it doesn't really capture the essence of a "pure" racing game. Almost feels like it was missing something VERY important.

Spoiler

daiki kasho MUST return.

Thats not the best GT intro.

Thats the best Video Game intro ive ever seen, literally.

 

[super_gt]

link

 

[JTB10000]

View attachment 479752
link

Doesn't really belong in this thread.

 

[Zlork]

Off topic. Please.....

 

[TayeezSA]

I think a new thread needs to be started in regards to this whole 'simulation' topic

 

[daan]

Doesn't really belong in this thread.

To be fair, most of this thread doesn't belong in this thread.

 

[joao pinto]

In decenber whe have a news about gt sport?

 

[Zlork]

In decenber whe have a news about gt sport?

We'll probably have some news in the PSX, on 5th - 6th. december.

 

[Imari]

Some guys here...just some guys. Always the same faces.

Trying so hard to prove that GT is bad game, and game A or B is better etc.

No matter what kind of atrocity someother say, they like it only because they are attacking/saying something bad about GT.

It's amusing how often someone neglects to actually read what I write, just because they assume that they already know.

Also, "atrocity". Lol.

 

[Turnaround]

Seriously. Play them. Gran Turismo is fine, but physics-wise it's not even close to iRacing or AC. Not on road tracks or on ovals. Not drifting or racing.

Even though I haven't played iRacing or AC even I agree that they have better physics. In fact, just looking around it seems that every simulator has better physics than GT. The best evidence being that every other simulator has a more advanced tire model.

 

[RACECAR]

Here's hoping the next GTS trailer will dethrone the epicness of this trailer:



I'll have to admit; while the current GTS trailer is indeed awe-inspiring, IMO it doesn't really capture the essence of a "pure" racing game. Almost feels like it was missing something VERY important.

That's not a trailer, that's a second intro of a completed game featuring new content. Not really comparable to an announcement teaser.

 

[daan]

In decenber whe have a news about gt sport?

We don't know.

How old are you? You're like a small child tugging at his mother's skirt saying, "GT Sport. GT Sport. GT Sport. GT Sport..."

 

[joao pinto]

21