GT sport vs Assetto Corsa Competizione on PS5, my opinion

[Klik]

Acc is better, i changed my mind lol. Last update made ACC physics and fbb SO much better on console on par with PC

 

[Johnnn]

Physics comparison would be nice. I play on a controller and then GT is very arcadey so I can't say how good it is. But online was always superb on consoles.

 

[Scaff]

Also,i don't think GT sport physics are that much worse than ACC.

While you do get to a point of diminishing returns, the difference between the two is still quite significant. Physics wise GTS is a good generation behind ACC (and others).

I would call it light sim and ACC heavy sim.GT sport is kinda underestimated as a simracing game.

GTS is a great introduction to the world of sim racing and sims in general, as such I don't think people so much underestimate it, as much as some people get snobby about it (or at the other end of the scale get into denial about its limitations).

GTS's biggest limitations exist around the tyre and suspension models (dampers, in particular, are a weak point), not helped by the overly flat track surfaces (bar a couple) and the rather uncommunicative FFB.

And its more fun.

That's entirely subjective, personally, I get more fun out of AC/ACC/AMS2, etc. you get more out of GTS and others will get more out of NfS. It very much depends on what each person enjoys, and in the case of 'fun' no one is right or wrong.

 

[Klik]

That's entirely subjective, personally, I get more fun out of AC/ACC/AMS2, etc. you get more out of GTS and others will get more out of NfS. It very much depends on what each person enjoys, and in the case of 'fun' no one is right or wrong.

I guess that's because GT sport's online. I found ACC online kinda weak on PS4/PS5.

I think on PC its different story, as how many full lobbies are there on PC? On PS4/PS5 there are about 3-4 full with couple of half full(below 10).


For me online is most important for me.GT just dominates over ACC on ps4 in thar regard. Although i stilll haven't tried ACC competitive servers..

 

[Scaff]

I guess that's because GT sport's online. I found ACC online kinda weak on PS4/PS5.

I think on PC its different story, as how many full lobbies are there on PC? On PS4/PS5 there are about 3-4 full with couple of half full(below 10).


For me online is most important for me.GT just dominates over ACC on ps4 in thar regard. Although i stilll haven't tried ACC competitive servers..

It is completely different on-line on PC in that regard, GTS does dominate activity on the console in that regard.

Driving manners do seem to be better on ACC (PC version) online than in GTS, and the penalties I would say are fairer and less contentious.

 

[Groundfish]

ACC on console was just a developer cash grab. It looks awful.
Look in your mirror from cockpit and it looks like Mariokart behind you.
Initially the ffb was quite good then they updated and messed it up.
Online on console is a complete ghost town. There’s no one to play.
Whoever said GTS FFB is uncommunicative is wrong git gud.
Jmo you need PC for ACC to become playable.
Re PHYSICS-yes ACC is better than GTS, obviously. But the graphics on console destroy immersion for me. GTS will never be equaled for online. Controller players wheel players together plus fabulous immersive graphics on a big enough 4K.
GTS physics are quite good, up to the limit, where things are waaay forgiving, but that makes for much more fun. Don’t be fooled it’s not very easy in GTS either. Knowledge of fundamentally sound technique is a necessity.
GTS doesn’t use setups. Everyone is on equal footing. Any game using setup is gonna have hacks and tricks people use to gain advantage, I’d call them exploits.
I’d reccomend buying ACC though to support the developers. I bought it but it really never gets played because there’s no one online.
GTS is the PERFECT balance between sim and Cade for online.

ALL GTS NEEDS IS BETTER PENALTY SYSTEM.

ACC has a good system for that plus great sound plus nice physics and ffb but the graphics ruin it totally, destroying immersion.
I agree GTS is underrated by all the PC nerd over analytical crowd. They HAVE to hate on GTS, for fear of having even LESS players online to play. Many of those people prefer racing ai anyways lol.

 

[Scaff]

Whoever said GTS FFB is uncommunicative is wrong git gud.

I did, and as it was only three posts above yours it's a little odd that you couldn't quote it. Then again had you done that it would have been difficult to quote mine what was actually said and remove context.

"rather uncommunicative" is not the same as just "uncommunicative", the former (which is what I actually said) means that GTS's FFB is not as communicative as if could be, the latter (which you claimed was said) would mean GTS has no communication via FFB at all. Two quite different things.

I agree GTS is underrated by all the PC nerd over analytical crowd. They HAVE to hate on GTS, for fear of having even LESS players online to play. Many of those people prefer racing ai anyways lol.

Address the actually points rather than attacking groups of people, don't forget that without that "PC nerd over analytical crowd" GTS wouldn't have its on-line system, one it borrowed rather heavily from iRacing!

 

[Groundfish]

I did, and as it was only three posts above yours it's a little odd that you couldn't quote it. Then again had you done that it would have been difficult to quote mine what was actually said and remove context.

"rather uncommunicative" is not the same as just "uncommunicative", the former (which is what I actually said) means that GTS's FFB is not as communicative as if could be, the latter (which you claimed was said) would mean GTS has no communication via FFB at all. Two quite different things.


Address the actually points rather than attacking groups of people, don't forget that without that "PC nerd over analytical crowd" GTS wouldn't have its on-line system, one it borrowed rather heavily from iRacing!

It’s not rather uncommunicative or totally uncommunicative. It’s probably one of the best ffb setups for giving max info on tire grip, car weight balance, suspension loading without having a bunch of needless jiggling. ACC and AC are better, in terms of more effect, more immersive from the standpoint of ffb and physics alone.
If those properties existed in a vacuum and there were no graphics I’d be using the title.
But, the graphics are so poor, everything you see with your eyes constantly reminds you this is a video game, not a real car.
There were quite a few of us on the team looking forward to ACC very much pre release, but post release not many seem to play it much.
It’s because OVERALL, all things considered GTS DESTROYS ACC quality wise.
I don’t understand how GTS on console looks so fantastic and ACC sucks so much.
Dirt Rally 2 looks excellent why not ACC.
To me if one is a person who enjoys all those intricacies and adjustments and can just hotlap or race AI and who values ONLY physics and ffb ACC is your game.
If you enjoy more online racing and immersion level comes from that like it does for me there’s no comparison.

Jmo but one reason participation is lacking in some of these titles is BECAUSE of all the nerdy setup stuff.
Adjusting tire pressure for example.
WHY NOT JUST GIVE ME OPTIMAL PRESSURE AND EVERYONE ELSE THE SAME?
That’s the only fair way and tweaking a jillion settings isn’t fun for most people.
For most it’s a chore then it’s even more morally defeating when they are seconds a lap off pace and there’s no one near their pace so there’s almost no racing just hot laps.
A game like ACC would be much better IMO if they just gave you 2 setups to choose from and make tire pressure optimal for all. There’s no need of all these settings it’s why most people don’t find it fun.
If other games ever want more market share they need to go less sim more Cade, just as GTS does.
How cool would it be to have ACC rating system in GTS with ACC ffb?
Eliminate all the needless settings over complicated car nerd geek tweaking and just give the players equal cars.
Again make it more CADE less SIM!
That’s what people find fun imo

 

[Scaff]

It’s not rather uncommunicative or totally uncommunicative. It’s probably one of the best ffb setups for giving max info on tire grip, car weight balance, suspension loading without having a bunch of needless jiggling. ACC and AC are better, in terms of more effect, more immersive from the standpoint of ffb and physics alone.

GTS gets fundamental basics wrong in its FFB, take any compression or rise that you take while steering, GTS does not recreate the changes to lateral steering load you get in these situations well at all (Paddock Hill at Brands illustrates this to great effect, hell GTS doesn't do the build-up and reduction in lateral steering load well at all.

If those properties existed in a vacuum and there were no graphics I’d be using the title.
But, the graphics are so poor, everything you see with your eyes constantly reminds you this is a video game, not a real car.
There were quite a few of us on the team looking forward to ACC very much pre release, but post release not many seem to play it much.
It’s because OVERALL, all things considered GTS DESTROYS ACC quality wise.

Quality of visuals I would agree, quality of physics I would not.

I don’t understand how GTS on console looks so fantastic and ACC sucks so much.

That one's not difficult at all. One team has had access to the system since before it's release and was actively involved in creating its architecture (that would be PD), the other was a dev team that had to take a PC product, from a studio that was developing half the code in a new tool (UE) and the other half in a proprietary engine (Kunos' own physics engine). ACC isn't exactly wonderfully optimised on PC either (it's not however PCars 3 bad in that regard). It was always a question of how much of a compromise would be needed to get ACC running on PS4, etc, that was discussed prior to its launch.

That's putting aside the fact that the two products are developed with very different resource priorities, PD have always prioritised visuals over physics, Kunos have always gone in the opposite direction.

Dirt Rally 2 looks excellent why not ACC.

Again, utterly different engines, with utterly different demains placed upon them. Dirt Rally 2 (along with GTS) don't have dynamic weather or time of day to manage either, DR2.0 doesn't have to model more than six cars at once (ever), and doesn't have the last work in physics either (particularly on tarmac).

To me if one is a person who enjoys all those intricacies and adjustments and can just hotlap or race AI and who values ONLY physics and ffb ACC is your game.
If you enjoy more online racing and immersion level comes from that like it does for me there’s no comparison.

On console, yes, but that's not the case once you expand beyond that platform. However immersion is a different matter, while poor graphics can ruin immersion for some, for others, it's holes in physics or FFB. As an example, no matter how good GTS looks (and it does look good, even if it's a bit sterile) whenever the FFB or physics gets it wrong it breaks the immersion for me, counter that with Richard Burns Rally (as an example), which will never look good because of the age of the engine, it's physics and FFB accuracy keep me immersed all day long.

 

[Haitauer]

I think GTS has a lot better physics than often is suggested, BUT the feedback from the physics is HIGHLY dependent of ones controller. There is massive difference between steerig wheel models let alone playing on dualshock. I myself have had T-GT for maybe 2 years now, so I think I have the optimal gear to feel the physics through the ffb as intented by developers. Bit bumbier tracks and a bit more feel for longitudal weight transfer would be nice, but its actually very good. Also one should note its very natural to change between GTS, ACC and iRacing - like having the same rules of physics just differently tuned. ACC and iRacind DO have that extra bumbiness and feedback/weight under suspension load i would wish GTS had, but with T-GT i can feel the information is there - its just informed in different way. Old AC feels in general way too slippery after these.

My main point is the same as so many times before. Hard does not equal realistic simulation, and games physics feel VERY different with different wheels. One should also note many of us propably prefer the games we do depending on our gear. There are many games I have felt lot better with G29 or T150 compared to T-GT, and I imagine its the same different "sweet spot" of a game with i.e. Fanatec.

Ps. I dont think PS5 makes much of a difference here. ACC has better fps on ps5, but same exact physics/ffb as ps4. GTS even less as PS5 benefits only loading times. I do feel like cockpit view is smoother on ps5, but thats propably just a placebo effect..

Pps. My experience of ACC is from PC, but i have let myself understand the physics and ffb is the same on consoles.

 

[Groundfish]

GTS gets fundamental basics wrong in its FFB, take any compression or rise that you take while steering, GTS does not recreate the changes to lateral steering load you get in these situations well at all (Paddock Hill at Brands illustrates this to great effect, hell GTS doesn't do the build-up and reduction in lateral steering load well at all.

I actually find GTS does all those complete opposite to your viewpoint, what bothers me about GTS is just how Uber easy it is to save it when having a moment.
As far as platforms go...There’s nothing out there attractive enough for me to spend on a pc.
Iracing-I don’t like the business model. ACC is the main one piquing my interest, that Rfactor2 and Automobilista all look good. But after factoring in the cost of pc, lack of online players I just can’t justify it.
The GTS pick up and play when I want online with races every few minutes against players hundredths and tenths from my pace trumps everything else.
The ease of use etc the quality and variety, it’s unbeatable.
If only they sorted the horrid pen system it’d be even better.
GTS only big negative is the pen system, but looking at all available alternatives means you just deal with it.
To each their own. I think if one can afford it then buy all the games and play them all, there’s so much to like, but I don’t have an unlimited budget so pc is OUT.

 

[Scaff]

I think GTS has a lot better physics than often is suggested, BUT the feedback from the physics is HIGHLY dependent of ones controller. There is massive difference between steerig wheel models let alone playing on dualshock. I myself have had T-GT for maybe 2 years now, so I think I have the optimal gear to feel the physics through the ffb as intented by developers. Bit bumbier tracks and a bit more feel for longitudal weight transfer would be nice, but its actually very good. Also one should note its very natural to change between GTS, ACC and iRacing - like having the same rules of physics just differently tuned. ACC and iRacind DO have that extra bumbiness and feedback/weight under suspension load i would wish GTS had, but with T-GT i can feel the information is there - its just informed in different way. Old AC feels in general way too slippery after these.

My main point is the same as so many times before. Hard does not equal realistic simulation, and games physics feel VERY different with different wheels. One should also note many of us propably prefer the games we do depending on our gear. There are many games I have felt lot better with G29 or T150 compared to T-GT, and I imagine its the same different "sweet spot" of a game with i.e. Fanatec.

The T-GT is an interesting case, as it uses a small tactile transducer in the wheel base itself to simulate some of the track surface and drivetrain information the vibrations @Groundfish was talking about). GTS is currently the only title that supports this.

However it’s possible to run either audio or telemetry fed tactile units providing the same or more detailed info separately (I’ve got three on my rig, one 100w for overall effects and two 20w units for left and right separation).

It’s arguably better to have these effects separate to the steering, as in reality you feel them via your butt rather than your wheel.

I actually find GTS does all those complete opposite to your viewpoint, what bothers me about GTS is just how Uber easy it is to save it when having a moment.
As far as platforms go...There’s nothing out there attractive enough for me to spend on a pc.
Iracing-I don’t like the business model. ACC is the main one piquing my interest, that Rfactor2 and Automobilista all look good. But after factoring in the cost of pc, lack of online players I just can’t justify it.
The GTS pick up and play when I want online with races every few minutes against players hundredths and tenths from my pace trumps everything else.
The ease of use etc the quality and variety, it’s unbeatable.
If only they sorted the horrid pen system it’d be even better.
GTS only big negative is the pen system, but looking at all available alternatives means you just deal with it.
To each their own. I think if one can afford it then buy all the games and play them all, there’s so much to like, but I don’t have an unlimited budget so pc is OUT.

It’s not that GTS is difficult, rather that you have to learn to drive in a manner that is at times different to reality.

While your point about cost being a barrier of entry to PC racing is a valid one ( as is the comparative ease of use better on console), difficulty in finding online opponents certainly isn’t one.

Across AC, ACC, RF2, R3E I’ve never had an issue finding a full grid and competitive, clean racing.

iRacing certainly doesn’t have that issue either, I’m not a fan of it because of its tyre model and absurd pricing structure.

 

[Haitauer]

Iracing-I don’t like the business model. ACC is the main one piquing my interest, that Rfactor2 and Automobilista all look good.

IRacings business model IS horrendous. I just spent 3 month sub + bought 911 cup and Nurb just to try the combo. Thats the price of a full game for just 3 months of testing. ACC would be very good in many ways, but the lacking player base on console is a big problem. Automobilista 2 I also have and its very promising, but technical issues take too long to fix and the business model is also a bit demanding for what you get and thus propably kills the player base.

 

[Scaff]

IRacings business model IS horrendous. I just spent 3 month sub + bought 911 cup and Nurb just to try the combo. Thats the price of a full game for just 3 months of testing. ACC would be very good in many ways, but the lacking player base on console is a big problem. Automobilista 2 I also have and its very promising, but technical issues take too long to fix and the business model is also a bit demanding for what you get and thus propably kills the player base.

AMS’s initial pricing did indeed look awful, now that they have extended the season pass to cover three years of content (2020, 21 and 22) it actually looks quite cheap.

I’d also have to disagree with regard to the speed of addressing issues, as while they can’t hit everything, the pace and scale of the monthly builds are solid.

I think the main issue with take-up has been down to a lack of awareness even in the sim community and people dismissing it as the ‘South American focused sim’.

 

[05XR8]

Biggest difference I find between ACC and GTS, ON PS4/DS4, is the braking and turning.
When slowing down in ACC, engine braking, ABS and gearing are synced. It's more gradual. The braking force is simulated very well in ACC.
In GTS, it's more momentum loss, if I'm being understood. Its either brake all the way before shifting or nearly poor man's ABS while downshifting.

Both games are similar when accelerating. Though ACC TCS On, isn't as hindering as it is in GTS. GTS cuts the power. ACC keeps acceleration at a gradual pace.

 

[Haitauer]

Sorry for double post - something messed up in quote -feature in my browser.

The T-GT is an interesting case, as it uses a small tactile transducer in the wheel base itself to simulate some of the track surface and drivetrain information the vibrations @Groundfish was talking about). GTS is currently the only title that supports this.

However it’s possible to run either audio or telemetry fed tactile units providing the same or more detailed info separately (I’ve got three on my rig, one 100w for overall effects and two 20w units for left and right separation).

It’s arguably better to have these effects separate to the steering, as in reality you feel them via your butt rather than your wheel

The vibrations of T-GT tactile transducer aka T-DFB are exactly one big part of the feedback - or even physics engine, that PDI has for some reason decided to "hide" in vibrations instead of actual ffb forces. Im not a fan of this decision, but I do take this tactile feedback in count as I evaluate the physics and feedback of the game.

 

[Haitauer]

AMS’s initial pricing did indeed look awful, now that they have extended the season pass to cover three years of content (2020, 21 and 22) it actually looks quite cheap.

I’d also have to disagree with regard to the speed of addressing issues, as while they can’t hit everything, the pace and scale of the monthly builds are solid.

I think the main issue with take-up has been down to a lack of awareness even in the sim community and people dismissing it as the ‘South American focused sim’.

What you said on AMS pricing is actually true - maybe its just the "bouncing" of suspension that has driven me out from the game. I was part of early access from day 1 i guess, and had maybe too high expectations.

And what comes to focus on AMS - i do also think people would be greatly surpriced by all the classes AMS is beginning to cover after the updates.

 

[FPV MIC]

The T-GT is an interesting case, as it uses a small tactile transducer in the wheel base itself to simulate some of the track surface and drivetrain information the vibrations @Groundfish was talking about). GTS is currently the only title that supports this.

However it’s possible to run either audio or telemetry fed tactile units providing the same or more detailed info separately (I’ve got three on my rig, one 100w for overall effects and two 20w units for left and right separation).

It’s arguably better to have these effects separate to the steering, as in reality you feel them via your butt rather than your wheel.

I've got a T-GT and a Buttkicker and from my personal experience the tactile on the T-GT is a different feel than that of my Buttkicker. It's hard to explain but it feels more refined and has slightly different emphasis than the more raw feeling of my Buttkicker. The addition of the vibration function (edit: it's actually called vibration strength) adjustment in GT Sport has helped a lot by being able to better tune the T-GT to your own personal liking.

It's still not quite as good as ACC but it's definitely up there for T-GT users and I think what @Haitauer mentioned about games feedback being highly depend on what wheel people are using has a lot of merit.

 

[Scaff]

I've got a T-GT and a Buttkicker and from my personal experience the tactile on the T-GT is a different feel than that of my Buttkicker. It's hard to explain but it feels more refined and has slightly different emphasis than the more raw feeling of my Buttkicker. The addition of the vibration function (edit: it's actually called vibration strength) adjustment in GT Sport has helped a lot by being able to better tune the T-GT to your own personal liking.

It's still not quite as good as ACC but it's definitely up there for T-GT users and I think what @Haitauer mentioned about games feedback being highly depend on what wheel people are using has a lot of merit.

Are you running your Burt kicker off audio or telemetry?

I ask because I’ve found the difference massive when I switched from an audio feed on mine when I run it in console to telemetry driven on PC.

It’s exactly as you describe, becoming much more refined, while still capable of delivering a thump. It’s most noticeable in terms of track surface details.

 

[Groundfish]

It’s not that GTS is difficult, rather that you have to learn to drive in a manner that is at times different to reality.

Yes, far more risk taken in GTS than reality. Heck many places you can have outside wheels on grass and get away with it, and the counter steer saving is too easy, and there’s even a kind of weird counter steer Uber speed hack I’ve seen Fraga do, and there’s the engine blowing down shift compression locking the rear to rotate on entry to name them, but those are for the qual time ridiculousness largely imo.
I do think though GTS ease of saving is a plus for exciting online racing.
From video of Automobilista2 yeah the cars bounce strangely. They look strange too on replay.
If you want to be fast enough to be 1.5 sec off the top times though on gts you can do that with fundamentally sound technique no unreal bits at all.

 

[FPV MIC]

Are you running your Burt kicker off audio or telemetry?

I ask because I’ve found the difference massive when I switched from an audio feed on mine when I run it in console to telemetry driven on PC.

It’s exactly as you describe, becoming much more refined, while still capable of delivering a thump. It’s most noticeable in terms of track surface details.

It's only connected to my console setup so it's audio only. One day I'll try PC gaming but I've got much bigger fish to fry atm, namely a new three car garage so my old 2.5 one can be converted into my new, far superior to the one I have now mancave.

Edited because I forgot to mention: There's none of the big thumps conveyed through the T-GT, they're all from the Buttkicker.

 

[Johnnn]

What you said on AMS pricing is actually true - maybe its just the "bouncing" of suspension that has driven me out from the game. I was part of early access from day 1 i guess, and had maybe too high expectations.

And what comes to focus on AMS - i do also think people would be greatly surpriced by all the classes AMS is beginning to cover after the updates.

Bouncing should be solved already. If it's car, it was improved, if it's camera, it was improved too.

AMS deserves much more than it has. I didn't have PC for many years so I couldn't help and currently I have AMSs + DLCs because the games are very good.

 

[Klik]

Some good points here. Let me add:

Im playing ACC on PS5 and although i get 60fps there's a graphic bug(after 3month of them not fixing it) where you have to put 1080p res on TV to get clear picture. If you put 2160p on TV its really blurry. They still haven't fix that after 3+ months.


The biggest problem for me in ACC was low playerbase. Hell, even original AC on PS4 has the same amount of full lobbies.

Because of the low playerbase the gap between players in race is huge. In GT sport most of the players are same rank so races are really interesting. But in ACC there's like a gap of 10+sec between each driver in a race.In the end races are so much more boring compared to GT sport.


I bet on PC is quite different because of 10x bigger playerbase.


ACC/original AC on console is good for hotlapping and occasional playing in lobbies but if you want more than that then PC is a MUST.

Physics are better in Acc BUT gt sport is not bad at all. Like i said previously,i managed to transfer all my knowledge from gt sport to ACC with a few days to accustomize to techinques that ACC does different. This all means that GT sport is quite decent light simracing game.


So to summarize, on console ACC has bit better physics but this means nothing as online is a ghost town. I would rather take light sim and huge playerbase than full sim and painfully low playerbase.

 

[Yard_Sale]

Sim nerds arguing about "which" platform is better.....

This includes Gran Turismo dorks too

 

[Haitauer]

Sim nerds arguing about "which" platform is better.....

This includes Gran Turismo dorks too

Here among old men this is not an arguement - more like exchange of experienses, opinions and theories. You look closer and see how no-one is forcing their opinion as the one and only truth.

 

[Zeitoss]

GTS's biggest limitations exist around the tyre and suspension models (dampers, in particular, are a weak point), not helped by the overly flat track surfaces (bar a couple) and the rather uncommunicative FFB.

Scaff, just out of curiosity, have you ever tried Forza Motorsport 7?
And if so, how do you rate it compared to GTSport (physics-wise)?

 

[Scaff]

Scaff, just out of curiosity, have you ever tried Forza Motorsport 7?
And if so, how do you rate it compared to GTSport (physics-wise)?

I have it (on PC) and for me, it's one of the first to fall behind its GT equivalent. It's not massively behind, and it's more down to inconsistency across the massive car list. GTS has a much better consistency, much of which I put down to the much smaller car list base they started with at launch.

 

[Zeitoss]

I have it (on PC) and for me, it's one of the first to fall behind its GT equivalent. It's not massively behind, and it's more down to inconsistency across the massive car list. GTS has a much better consistency, much of which I put down to the much smaller car list base they started with at launch.

Thanks, we have exactly the same feeling.

 

[meekrab]

GTS's biggest limitations exist around the tyre and suspension models (dampers, in particular, are a weak point), not helped by the overly flat track surfaces (bar a couple) and the rather uncommunicative FFB.

I assume the glass smooth tracks are there to make it easy to drive using a DS4, you have to remember Gran Turismo is always and forever a console game and console players use controllers.

 

[Johnnn]

I assume the glass smooth tracks are there to make it easy to drive using a DS4, you have to remember Gran Turismo is always and forever a console game and console players use controllers.

Not necessary true. Driving with a pad it's like better NFS. But if you connect wheel, it switches to "wheel" mode and it's much more wild as I remember. I can't test Forza with a wheel but it's similar. With a pad you have several stabilizations and everything is much smoother even if track is not. Usual console simcades has good physics and layers above it for controllers. GT is full of assists on a pad.