GT Sport vs Other Games: Comparison Video Thread

  • Thread starter GTPNewsWire
  • 2,529 comments
  • 218,499 views
Consumers don't always know what they want. There is no console racing game out at the moment* that has a well-designed online system that is easy to use and fun to take part in. Offline racing games have taught casual gamers to behave like idiots on track, which is acceptable against AI drivers, but when a group of such gamers races, it's frustrating for all of them. If casual gamers were to learn how to behave properly on track, online racing would be a lot more enjoyable to them, since racing humans is a lot more interesting and exciting than racing the AI.

I personally think iRacing already demonstrated that online racing is superior to offline racing, and that an implementation can work effectively if the right measures are in place: skill and safety ratings, a realistic damage model, and strict penalties for bad behavior (not just crashing into others, but stuff like corner-cutting).

* Project Cars 2's servers aren't online yet, so we don't know how well it is designed.
Based on my experience with the GTS beta its not doing anything to change that, deliberate griefers and crash fans were just as present, even in the later stages of the beta and at higher driver ratings.

Using iRacing as a model also has its issues, given that it has I believe around 60k active users, if that's all it can attract then GTS will not succeed on the same model at all.

Your comments above I actually agree a lot with, however they apply to the 5%, and possibly some of the 10%. The rest however I remain to be convinced about, given that GTS is not offering anything unique to the genre to attract them and retain them. Its a conversation that's been had many times here and part of the appeal of offline racing for casual gamers is that they can set it up so they win far more often than not (and as soon as that stops, so do they - drop out rates grow as off-line racing gets tougher, regardless of the title). In on-line racing no matter how well balanced the matchmaking is, only one of those taking part is going to win, and for the casual driver that is simply not appealing.

The only factor that I can see PD and Sony using in this regard is that historically for GT the 5% and 10% are much larger pools of people, but a lot of that this time around is going to be based on how the title is received, and for the first time ever I'm not sure that the gaming press is going to be quite so pro GT.
 
By the turn of the year the first rumblings of Horizon 4 will hit the press, restricting Forza 7's ability to have long sales legs (beyond bundles).

You don't need long sales legs when you're releasing a game every year. Only games like Gran Turismo that put 4+ years between releases actually care about sales out to those distances. The vast majority of sales for any game are made shortly after release, and so FH4 really isn't crippling FM7 at all. I'm pretty sure they'll happily trade the couple hundred thousand extra FM7 sales they might have made that year for another 3+ million FH4 sales.

It's a matter of personal preference, but I do think we understimate casual gamers willingness to learn racing techniques and etiquette, and apply that to an online racing environment.

Yes. It's why iRacing has been such a raging success.
 
Consumers don't always know what they want. There is no console racing game out at the moment* that has a well-designed online system that is easy to use and fun to take part in. Offline racing games have taught casual gamers to behave like idiots on track, which is acceptable against AI drivers, but when a group of such gamers races, it's frustrating for all of them. If casual gamers were to learn how to behave properly on track, online racing would be a lot more enjoyable to them, since racing humans is a lot more interesting and exciting than racing the AI.

I personally think iRacing already demonstrated that online racing is superior to offline racing, and that an implementation can work effectively if the right measures are in place: skill and safety ratings, a realistic damage model, and strict penalties for bad behavior (not just crashing into others, but stuff like corner-cutting).

* Project Cars 2's servers aren't online yet, so we don't know how well it is designed.
I took one month free access to Iracing back when I was waiting for GT5 to launch. I gave it up when it expired and bought GT5. Months later GT5 had sold its 10 millionth copy. iRacing had gained somewhere between 5 and 7 thousand new subscribers in that time period.

That's the kind of mountain GTS has to climb to be successful. Add the requirement for Plus - I just don't see it selling the kind of numbers PD Will be expecting.
 
Hear me out folks, Kaz basically said GT Sport was a reboot. They put out a video talking about how the game went into becoming a collector game and now they are rebooting everything. I mean it's going turn off a lot of staunch individuals who liked the old way, but with the way it is setup GT Sport may have opened itself up to be more than it ever was. Lets look at it from this point, GT Sport the entire offline section is geared toward teaching every player how racing works, rules, regulations and sportsmanship. They also included a Beta that tested and also updated the rating system that will be used to match players of similar skill levels. There is a heavy lean on social interaction with GT Sport and sure it will cost them a lot of players but with the world being connected as it is, they will also open themselves up to potentially more than they potentially could ever have lost. Although if it's not popular with buyers the alternative is far worse that doing par for the course of releasing a by the numbers GT game.

What I am saying is this is the new GT, this is PD's new game. It's a risky move to almost unilaterally aim the game at something PD themselves have only just dabbled in two games ago. While this game still heavily offline, the lean of connecting online is strong since the base of the game points to racing with others online. It's a risk in many ways, running servers to support the game will be expensive and also their base is sort of confused about the game changes PD have implemented to the basic structure. I applaud Kaz and PD for risking it all, I can't even think of the amount of money dumped into this effort at all not to mention that if it fails Kaz will take the brunt of the backlash.

My thoughts are that PD are definitely not making this game for offline players, everything steers you toward racing together with others online even the offline mode basically is there to teach you all the rules and skills for clean fair racing that will be used within the game and in the sanctioned online rooms. I say if you aren't interested in online in the least then this GT isn't for you at all, although you can simply muddle around with the photomode but even that requires online so you can share your creations with others. I've got a lot of games and not a lot of time so this game may just fit my groove better than I anticipate. I mean I played ton of Destiny and now Destiny 2, all my systems are connected online. PD and Sony aren't stupid they of course measured metrics and are looking to the future and online is only going to grow barring mass disruption of internet worldwide. It's a risk but still a business decision and thus calculated risk non the less.
The last part I don't think is true. The metrics for online racing are not good for any franchise other than iRacing in terms of online participation rates and iRacing is the exception for the obvious reason. I don't think Kaz looked at the metrics and said, "Ok this is the way to go", I think he looked at the metrics and said, "Ok we need to change these metrics and be the force that moves people to online". In other words, they aren't responding to the data trends they want to set the data trend.
 
Hear me out folks, Kaz basically said GT Sport was a reboot. They put out a video talking about how the game went into becoming a collector game and now they are rebooting everything. I mean it's going turn off a lot of staunch individuals who liked the old way, but with the way it is setup GT Sport may have opened itself up to be more than it ever was. Lets look at it from this point, GT Sport the entire offline section is geared toward teaching every player how racing works, rules, regulations and sportsmanship. They also included a Beta that tested and also updated the rating system that will be used to match players of similar skill levels. There is a heavy lean on social interaction with GT Sport and sure it will cost them a lot of players but with the world being connected as it is, they will also open themselves up to potentially more than they potentially could ever have lost. Although if it's not popular with buyers the alternative is far worse that doing par for the course of releasing a by the numbers GT game.

What I am saying is this is the new GT, this is PD's new game. It's a risky move to almost unilaterally aim the game at something PD themselves have only just dabbled in two games ago. While this game still heavily offline, the lean of connecting online is strong since the base of the game points to racing with others online. It's a risk in many ways, running servers to support the game will be expensive and also their base is sort of confused about the game changes PD have implemented to the basic structure. I applaud Kaz and PD for risking it all, I can't even think of the amount of money dumped into this effort at all not to mention that if it fails Kaz will take the brunt of the backlash.

My thoughts are that PD are definitely not making this game for offline players, everything steers you toward racing together with others online even the offline mode basically is there to teach you all the rules and skills for clean fair racing that will be used within the game and in the sanctioned online rooms. I say if you aren't interested in online in the least then this GT isn't for you at all, although you can simply muddle around with the photomode but even that requires online so you can share your creations with others. I've got a lot of games and not a lot of time so this game may just fit my groove better than I anticipate. I mean I played ton of Destiny and now Destiny 2, all my systems are connected online. PD and Sony aren't stupid they of course measured metrics and are looking to the future and online is only going to grow barring mass disruption of internet worldwide. It's a risk but still a business decision and thus calculated risk non the less.

Consumers don't always know what they want. There is no console racing game out at the moment* that has a well-designed online system that is easy to use and fun to take part in. Offline racing games have taught casual gamers to behave like idiots on track, which is acceptable against AI drivers, but when a group of such gamers races, it's frustrating for all of them. If casual gamers were to learn how to behave properly on track, online racing would be a lot more enjoyable to them, since racing humans is a lot more interesting and exciting than racing the AI.

I personally think iRacing already demonstrated that online racing is superior to offline racing, and that an implementation can work effectively if the right measures are in place: skill and safety ratings, a realistic damage model, and strict penalties for bad behavior (not just crashing into others, but stuff like corner-cutting).

* Project Cars 2's servers aren't online yet, so we don't know how well it is designed.

:cool::cool::cool:

You both nailed it.
 
The difference between iRacing and GTS is that GTS applies all of the design elements to make it a more entertaining experience (the orignial OST, the slick UI, the innovative Scapes, the unique livery editor, industry leading graphics, museum, campaign mode, PD fantasy tracks, VGT).

I see the similarities to iRacing, but GT has incorporated the same sort of "flavor" that has made it great over the years - and them some.

I don't like to reduce it to the GT badge, but the GT design language is what gives PD more potential to succeed with Sport mode.
 
Last edited:
Consumers don't always know what they want. There is no console racing game out at the moment* that has a well-designed online system that is easy to use and fun to take part in. Offline racing games have taught casual gamers to behave like idiots on track, which is acceptable against AI drivers, but when a group of such gamers races, it's frustrating for all of them. If casual gamers were to learn how to behave properly on track, online racing would be a lot more enjoyable to them, since racing humans is a lot more interesting and exciting than racing the AI.

I personally think iRacing already demonstrated that online racing is superior to offline racing, and that an implementation can work effectively if the right measures are in place: skill and safety ratings, a realistic damage model, and strict penalties for bad behavior (not just crashing into others, but stuff like corner-cutting).

* Project Cars 2's servers aren't online yet, so we don't know how well it is designed.

Whether online racing is superior to racing AI is purely subjective at the end of the day. Online racing is by no means perfect and your experience may vary.

Personally, racing random people I don't know does nothing for me, especially when some of said people out there have no interest in having a fair race.
 
I don't like to reduce it to the GT badge, but the GT design language is what gives PD more potential to succeed with Sport mode.
The GT badge will without a doubt shift units, however even in the past that name hasn't kept those players around for long.

50% of the millions that purchased GT6 never even bought more than ten cars in it, I don't unfortunately see that same name then transitioning them into online eSport racing nuts.
 
part of the appeal of offline racing for casual gamers is that they can set it up so they win far more often than not (and as soon as that stops, so do they - drop out rates grow as off-line racing gets tougher, regardless of the title). In on-line racing no matter how well balanced the matchmaking is, only one of those taking part is going to win, and for the casual driver that is simply not appealing

I'm not a psychologist, but I'd argue that the obsession to win every single race only exists when there's only a reward for winning. In past Gran Turismo games, one of the core objectives is to get credits so that one can more cooler cars. One only gets credits by placing 1st, 2nd, or 3rd, if I remember correctly, with 1st place yielding significantly more credits than 2nd and 3rd place. If one has a really intense battle for 4th place with a couple of other AI drivers, the on-track action may have been spectacular, but because one doesn't collect any credits, it feels like one wasted a lot of time. Forza Motorsports, and a lot of other older racing games, require you to get 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place to complete a race or championship. 4th place or lower is a failure, and therefore one is forced to adjust to the AI difficulty to such an easy level that one always, or nearly always, wins.

The career mode in Codemasters' F1 games is an interesting exception, because it allows one to drive for an underdog team, and getting 1st, 2nd, or 3rd is not always the objective. Instead, the placement objective depends on the team's strength. If you place 10th with an underdog team, your team will congratulate you, and if you keep up that performance you eventually get contract offers by better teams! From what I've read, a lot of players do not pick Mercedes or Ferrari for their F1 2017 career, because they prefer the mid-field battles and want to improve a team from season to season to eventually earn a championship victory.

I think if the classic objective of finishing 1st is eliminated, and instead points are awarded at the end of every race for good racing etiquette, kilometers driven, and maybe some other stuff, then players will feel good regardless of their finishing position. In iRacing I was motivated to get my safety rating and thus license up to a higher level. Completing races without incidents is very tough in iRacing, but doing so feels very rewarding. Comparing scores with ones friends can also be a lot of fun. I know I always checked out how much faster my Steam buddies were in the daily race events in Dirt Rally. I enjoy the friendly competition, and don't mind being slower than a lot of other people.

I don't think hard, punishing games are only for hardcore, try-hard gamers. Ever heard of the game Dark Souls? It's extremely hard, but after the initial shock of the game's difficulty, players do not mind because they feel like they accomplish something great each time they advance. The Dark Souls games are popular and successful commercially. Some online game examples that are very popular, even though one does not always win: Overwatch, Dota, PUGB. The probability of losing in the first 2 is around 50%, and it's a lot higher in PUGB, yet millions of people enjoy playing those games online. (Although, yeah, a lot of Overwatch and Dota players rant about losing and feel bad when they have a losing streak).

TL;DR: if the requirement of placing 1st, 2nd, or 3rd is removed from racing games and instead points are awarded for driving professionally, the thrill of racing online against real, equally skilled and well-mannered players will be a superior experience to driving against AI, assuming technology isn't a hindrance and finding games doesn't take several minutes.
 
I'm not a psychologist, but I'd argue that the obsession to win every single race only exists when there's only a reward for winning. In past Gran Turismo games, one of the core objectives is to get credits so that one can more cooler cars. One only gets credits by placing 1st, 2nd, or 3rd, if I remember correctly, with 1st place yielding significantly more credits than 2nd and 3rd place. If one has a really intense battle for 4th place with a couple of other AI drivers, the on-track action may have been spectacular, but because one doesn't collect any credits, it feels like one wasted a lot of time. Forza Motorsports, and a lot of other older racing games, require you to get 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place to complete a race or championship. 4th place or lower is a failure, and therefore one is forced to adjust to the AI difficulty to such an easy level that one always, or nearly always, wins.

The career mode in Codemasters' F1 games is an interesting exception, because it allows one to drive for an underdog team, and getting 1st, 2nd, or 3rd is not always the objective. Instead, the placement objective depends on the team's strength. If you place 10th with an underdog team, your team will congratulate you, and if you keep up that performance you eventually get contract offers by better teams! From what I've read, a lot of players do not pick Mercedes or Ferrari for their F1 2017 career, because they prefer the mid-field battles and want to improve a team from season to season to eventually earn a championship victory.

I think if the classic objective of finishing 1st is eliminated, and instead points are awarded at the end of every race for good racing etiquette, kilometers driven, and maybe some other stuff, then players will feel good regardless of their finishing position. In iRacing I was motivated to get my safety rating and thus license up to a higher level. Completing races without incidents is very tough in iRacing, but doing so feels very rewarding. Comparing scores with ones friends can also be a lot of fun. I know I always checked out how much faster my Steam buddies were in the daily race events in Dirt Rally. I enjoy the friendly competition, and don't mind being slower than a lot of other people.

I don't think hard, punishing games are only for hardcore, try-hard gamers. Ever heard of the game Dark Souls? It's extremely hard, but after the initial shock of the game's difficulty, players do not mind because they feel like they accomplish something great each time they advance. The Dark Souls games are popular and successful commercially. Some online game examples that are very popular, even though one does not always win: Overwatch, Dota, PUGB. The probability of losing in the first 2 is around 50%, and it's a lot higher in PUGB, yet millions of people enjoy playing those games online. (Although, yeah, a lot of Overwatch and Dota players rant about losing and feel bad when they have a losing streak).

TL;DR: if the requirement of placing 1st, 2nd, or 3rd is removed from racing games and instead points are awarded for driving professionally, the thrill of racing online against real, equally skilled and well-mannered players will be a superior experience to driving against AI, assuming technology isn't a hindrance and finding games doesn't take several minutes.
You mean pretty much as AC and PC do?

Condition drivers via the career that you don't need to win to progress.

Unfortunately they don't have any higher take up online than titles that reward wins with credits or free cars.

The difference with shooters is that the vast majority of the ones that experience long term success is that they offer a miriad of micro wins throughout the online experience. As such it's not close to comparable to that which is offered in racing titles.

The license systems in PC2 and GTS may help change that, but we don't yet know.
 
You mean pretty much as AC and PC do?

Condition drivers via the career that you don't need to win to progress.

Unfortunately they don't have any higher take up online than titles that reward wins with credits or free cars.

The difference with shooters is that the vast majority of the ones that experience long term success is that they offer a miriad of micro wins throughout the online experience. As such it's not close to comparable to that which is offered in racing titles.

The license systems in PC2 and GTS may help change that, but we don't yet know.

I haven't played AC, but PC1 doesn't have a simple online racing interface, and no matchmaking system. Also, joining a game in PC1 takes way too long, because somebody has to manually set up a lobby with a bunch of game rules. Players looking for a game may be picky and may not agree with the rules set by some lobbies, so the search can be tedious.

If online racing wants to become mainstream, it needs to be really simple to join an online race. No navigating through a bunch of menus, no picking and choosing from dozens of rules, no waiting for many minutes for an appropriate lobby. I remember the old Counter-Strike versions in which server administrators could configure a lot of rules, and even add non-standard stuff via mods. Some players enjoyed all the customization and flexibility, but overall it was a pain for casual players to find a match. In Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (the new version), the user interface and mach-making process is much simpler and finding games is very quick. Gran Turismo Sport will need make it as quick and easy to find a game as CS:GO or Overwatch do.

F1 2017's online mode is fairly well done in that regard. All you pick is your preferred race length (4 options are available). All the other game rules for public matchmaking games are standardized; for custom rules, a custom lobby needs to be opened.

As for micro-wins being necessary to keep players hooked: yeah, I agree. I think daily/weekly "quests" and events, such as "drive X kilometers" or "finish in this week's BMW M3 Nordschleife race", and regularly occurring mini leagues for casual gamers should to exist. This is where the game designers need to come up with some clever ideas.
 
The difference between iRacing and GTS is that GTS applies all of the design elements to make it a more entertaining experience (the orignial OST, the slick UI, the innovative Scapes, the unique livery editor, industry leading graphics, museum, campaign mode, PD fantasy tracks, VGT).

I see the similarities to iRacing, but GT has incorporated they same sort of "flavor" that has made it great over the years - and them some.

I don't like to reduce it to the GT badge, but the GT design language is what gives PD more potential to succeed with Sport mode.

GT Sport and iRacing are only similar on the most basic of levels.

The whole weight of Sony is behind this product. This is a franchise of 75m+, launching on a system itself about to pass 70m by the end of the year. Sony are in a position to change the market, not just follow trends, or retread old ground. From ND with The Last of Us, to GG with Horizon Zero Dawn, and SSM with God of War, they encourage their developers to shake things up. These are the studios and franchises PD and Gran Turismo are on par with in the Sony ecosystem.

I read earlier in the thread how Sony should have been pushing GT Sport in the week PCars 2 launches, but I think this both undersitmates what Sony are doing, and over eggs what competition like PCars 2 can achieve. In the last week alone Sony Japan announced a GT Sport themed console for Japan and Asia, there'll be a TGS presentation with a Super GT star, McLaren revealed their Vision GT, Carlos Sainz Jr was revealed as one of numerous high profile ambassadors, alongside numerous public and press events from EGX in the UK, to Franfurt in Germany and Singapore. It's a global marketing campaign to attract a mainstream audience.....and still 4-5 weeks out from launch.

It's easy to get a distorted view of what makes an impact amongst the larger gaming and mainstream audience when you get much of your news and feedback from relatively small, selective community like GTPlanet. You can liken it to CoD or FIFA, they garner relatively little interest on gaming sites, but continue to sell magnitudes better than heavily hyped favourites of sites like Neogaf.
 
I haven't played AC, but PC1 doesn't have a simple online racing interface, and no matchmaking system. Also, joining a game in PC1 takes way too long, because somebody has to manually set up a lobby with a bunch of game rules. Players looking for a game may be picky and may not agree with the rules set by some lobbies, so the search can be tedious.
My copy of PCars has a big button on the home screen that allows you to join a random lobby?

As such you have a choice of if you want to search or not, keep in mind that we have no idea yet how GTS will manage this.

If online racing wants to become mainstream, it needs to be really simple to join an online race. No navigating through a bunch of menus, no picking and choosing from dozens of rules, no waiting for many minutes for an appropriate lobby. I remember the old Counter-Strike versions in which server administrators could configure a lot of rules, and even add non-standard stuff via mods. Some players enjoyed all the customization and flexibility, but overall it was a pain for casual players to find a match. In Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (the new version), the user interface and mach-making process is much simpler and finding games is very quick. Gran Turismo Sport will need make it as quick and easy to find a game as CS:GO or Overwatch do.

F1 2017's online mode is fairly well done in that regard. All you pick is your preferred race length (4 options are available). All the other game rules for public matchmaking games are standardized; for custom rules, a custom lobby needs to be opened.
Again we don't know what GTS will do with regard to this, after all on the beta all we had was three one hour slots a day. How the full release will expand on that we don't know. Hb

As for micro-wins being necessary to keep players hooked: yeah, I agree. I think daily/weekly "quests" and events, such as "drive X kilometers" or "finish in this week's BMW M3 Nordschleife race", and regularly occurring mini leagues for casual gamers should to exist. This is where the game designers need to come up with some clever ideas.
Yep that's been tried by a number of titles already, mainly rally ones, the take up and retention is no different.


GT Sport and iRacing are only similar on the most basic of levels.

The whole weight of Sony is behind this product. This is a franchise of 75m+, launching on a system itself about to pass 70m by the end of the year. Sony are in a position to change the market, not just follow trends, or retread old ground. From ND with The Last of Us, to GG with Horizon Zero Dawn, and SSM with God of War, they encourage their developers to shake things up. These are the studios and franchises PD and Gran Turismo are on par with in the Sony ecosystem.
It's not a 70 million franchise in anything but total sales. It's a 10 million per title franchise, and based on past attach rates and PS4 sales this one is a 7 million title at most.

I read earlier in the thread how Sony should have been pushing GT Sport in the week PCars 2 launches, but I think this both undersitmates what Sony are doing, and over eggs what competition like PCars 2 can achieve. In the last week alone Sony Japan announced a GT Sport themed console for Japan and Asia, there'll be a TGS presentation with a Super GT star, McLaren revealed their Vision GT, Carlos Sainz Jr was revealed as one of numerous high profile ambassadors, alongside numerous public and press events from EGX in the UK, to Franfurt in Germany and Singapore. It's a global marketing campaign to attract a mainstream audience.....and still 4-5 weeks out from launch.
Have you checked Google searches for this month or week? I have, and currently GTS is trailing F7 and PC2 on both time scales. What they are currently doing is not driving people to search for info on it.

It's easy to get a distorted view of what makes an impact amongst the larger gaming and mainstream audience when you get much of your news and feedback from relatively small, selective community like GTPlanet.
I'm basing my info on the habits of every PS4 owner who has bought a racing title and played it. I'm doing the exact opposite of what your inferring.

The mainstream audience do not stick with racing titles, either offline or to a much greater degree online.

You can liken it to CoD or FIFA, they garner relatively little interest on gaming sites, but continue to sell magnitudes better than heavily hyped favourites of sites like Neogaf.
COD and FIFA get little interest in gaming sites?

Why then do IGN, EG, Kotako and the rest cover them do heavily?
 
Without wanting to take this even further off-topic, I feel it's worth pointing out we have multiple threads around the boards for versus comparisons:
...

:cheers: :embarrassed: Just a lugh, not on you guys, just in general...


For topic...
FORZA 7 - I find this video appropriate for:
- being on Xbox S
- with a Trustmaster wheel
- by a person that clearly knows sim-driving
- not getting negative(istic) but realistic

He shares his comments on AI, and by the end goes deeper on wheel issue that Forza series continues to have - no center spring power.



 
GT Sport and iRacing are only similar on the most basic of levels.

The whole weight of Sony is behind this product. This is a franchise of 75m+, launching on a system itself about to pass 70m by the end of the year. Sony are in a position to change the market, not just follow trends, or retread old ground. From ND with The Last of Us, to GG with Horizon Zero Dawn, and SSM with God of War, they encourage their developers to shake things up. These are the studios and franchises PD and Gran Turismo are on par with in the Sony ecosystem.

Uncharted 4 , TLOU and Horizon. I've played them all without the need to buy PS+. GoW you can do that too.
GTS? Not so much, from what we know. So, from the 70+ million consoles you're referring to, only a fraction have PS+ ( around 25-30% if I remember correctly).

I read earlier in the thread how Sony should have been pushing GT Sport in the week PCars 2 launches, but I think this both undersitmates what Sony are doing, and over eggs what competition like PCars 2 can achieve. In the last week alone Sony Japan announced a GT Sport themed console for Japan and Asia, there'll be a TGS presentation with a Super GT star, McLaren revealed their Vision GT, Carlos Sainz Jr was revealed as one of numerous high profile ambassadors, alongside numerous public and press events from EGX in the UK, to Franfurt in Germany and Singapore. It's a global marketing campaign to attract a mainstream audience.....and still 4-5 weeks out from launch.

Yes, all that and zero info about the game's most wanted and important features. How will the online work? Details on the FIA championships? Fog, rain? Custom races? Can we really import out vectors to the game livery feature? How does it work exactly? Some of these topics are probably what will make people stay in GTS rather than not. And it would make sense, imo, during the week pC2 is launching and with so much of it being revealed and with good reviews that PD would say something about the game an not dance around with meaningless marketing campaigns.

It's easy to get a distorted view of what makes an impact amongst the larger gaming and mainstream audience when you get much of your news and feedback from relatively small, selective community like GTPlanet. You can liken it to CoD or FIFA, they garner relatively little interest on gaming sites, but continue to sell magnitudes better than heavily hyped favourites of sites like Neogaf.

You can play FIFA or COD offline and have fun. They have campaigns / career modes and, especially FIFA, a great deal of re-playability. Not to mention that FIFA sells a lot because it's one of those games you can have fun with your mates at home and you don't even need to play online or the career mode - just have it on the shelve for when the party comes.

GTS, again, is very online focused and is radically different from previous iterations. That's why some people are quite sceptical and raising an eyebrow to the whole PD's communication strategy recently.
 
Have you checked Google searches for this month or week? I have, and currently GTS is trailing F7 and PC2 on both time scales. What they are currently doing is not driving people to search for info on it.
I'm on UK PSN right now. We also have to factor in GT Sport being 5 weeks out compared to PCars 2 launch week.

Gran Turismo Sport Digital Deluxe Edition - 693 Ratings

Gran Turismo Sport - 55 Ratings

Project Cars 2 Deluxe Edition - 101 Ratings

Project Cars 2 - 34 Ratings

Pro Evolution Soccer 2018 - 120 Ratings

Pro Evolution Soccer - FC Barcelona Edition - 80 Ratings

I included PES as it sold between 15k-35k, across all formats, week one in the UK.

None of this is scientific, but the ratings above do indicate actual sales/pre-orders. Marketing is all to do with timing. It's PCars 2 release week, Forza 7 also dropped a demo, but we have a 5 week run upto release, including various hardware (console & controller) bundles, important reveals and videos.
 
Uncharted 4 , TLOU and Horizon. I've played them all without the need to buy PS+. GoW you can do that too.
GTS? Not so much, from what we know. So, from the 70+ million consoles you're referring to, only a fraction have PS+ ( around 25-30% if I remember correctly).

You don't need PS+ to play GTS either lol. And just like GTS, by not having PS+ you are missing significant portions of the game (U4 and TLOU MP).

Yes, all that and zero info about the game's most wanted and important features. How will the online work? Details on the FIA championships? Fog, rain? Custom races? Can we really import out vectors to the game livery feature? How does it work exactly? Some of these topics are probably what will make people stay in GTS rather than not.

And they will find out when the game comes out. GTS isn't going to vanish off the shelves after the first day. It will continue to sell and attract for years.

And it would make sense, imo, during the week pC2 is launching and with so much of it being revealed and with good reviews that PD would say something about the game an not dance around with meaningless marketing campaigns.

This is just hilarious. Why would SCE as pub care about the launch of a game that sells a third of what their worst selling flagship product sold? Besides SCE is a global company and GTS has gotten advertising in other countries this week like Asia.

You can play FIFA or COD offline and have fun

As you can also do with GTS lol
 
You don't need PS+ to play GTS either lol. And just like GTS, by not having PS+ you are missing significant portions of the game (U4 and TLOU MP).

You don't miss the main part of Uncarted, TLOU, Horizon or GoW without PS+. Sure, you can play GTS without PS+...is you want to ignore its main feature - online racing.

And they will find out when the game comes out. GTS isn't going to vanish off the shelves after the first day. It will continue to sell and attract for years.

Sure. The point is not that GT will do bad. But then again, we were told there would be a second beta and nothing happened (the info was even deleted from the last post on the playstation blog press release). The point is that it seems strange that with the current context - pC2 coming out and with lots of good reviews and videos coming and out, PD would take a step forward and show something great in order to keep the fans with the eyes on October 17. People will look away if what they see on the one hand is actual gameplay and detailed info on pC2 and on the other, just marketing and PR campaign stuff. It's OK. It just looks weird.

This is just hilarious. Why would SCE as pub care about the launch of a game that sells a third of what their worst selling flagship product sold? Besides SCE is a global company and GTS has gotten advertising in other countries this week like Asia.

Forza was "just" a game that sold a fraction of GT back in 2004. See where they're now. I'd say that part of Forza success is directly related to that idea that PD is above everything, floating on a cloud with Sony SCE and, because of that, they don't need to worry with what others are doing.

That's what's hilarious.

As you can also do with GTS lol

Have you tried it? To play GTS offline and having fun by not playing its main feature?
 
You don't miss the main part of Uncarted, TLOU, Horizon or GoW without PS+. Sure, you can play GTS without PS+...is you want to ignore its main feature - online racing.

Comparing a story drive game to racing games is just a bad analogy. For some arcade or SP could be more main than MP.

People will look away if what they see on the one hand is actual gameplay and detailed info on pC2 and on the other, just marketing and PR campaign stuff. It's OK. It just looks weird.

No it doesn't. Anyone who is interested in GTS can wait and unless their memory is short term they aren't going to suddenly forget its existence.

Forza was "just" a game that sold a fraction of GT back in 2004. See where they're now.

Still selling a fraction of GT lol

Have you tried it? To play GTS offline and having fun by not playing its main feature?

SP and arcade. I can have hours of fun on arcade.
 
Comparing a story drive game to racing games is just a bad analogy. For some arcade or SP could be more main than MP.

You brought them up, not me.

No it doesn't. Anyone who is interested in GTS can wait and unless their memory is short term they aren't going to suddenly forget its existence.

There are people who might be interest in both and have to decide for one. Seeing new (and good) stuff from the game that's coming out on Friday can make at least some people lose their interest when GTS comes around in a month. I didn't say people will simply forget GTS. Whoever doesn't care about pC2 is waiting for GTS. But will you tell me you wouldn't have liked to see something new yesterday morning during the TGS PS presentation?

Still selling a fraction of GT lol

Still? Present? Do you know how many millions Forza sold this generation? over 4.5 millions already (not counting with FH titles). They're launching the 3rd title. That's not insignificant.

In a month, PD will have released a fraction (1/3) of the games T10 has for this generation. And honestly, I don't think GTS will catch up.

SP and arcade. I can have hours of fun on arcade.

SP and part of the arcade. Still, you haven't tried it yet. I guess most people don't like GT for the arcade part. A long career / GT mode was nice, but that was scraped.
 
I'm on UK PSN right now. We also have to factor in GT Sport being 5 weeks out compared to PCars 2 launch week.

Gran Turismo Sport Digital Deluxe Edition - 693 Ratings

Gran Turismo Sport - 55 Ratings

Project Cars 2 Deluxe Edition - 101 Ratings

Project Cars 2 - 34 Ratings

Pro Evolution Soccer 2018 - 120 Ratings

Pro Evolution Soccer - FC Barcelona Edition - 80 Ratings

I included PES as it sold between 15k-35k, across all formats, week one in the UK.

None of this is scientific, but the ratings above do indicate actual sales/pre-orders. Marketing is all to do with timing. It's PCars 2 release week, Forza 7 also dropped a demo, but we have a 5 week run upto release, including various hardware (console & controller) bundles, important reveals and videos.
They indicate the number of people that give ratings for preorders, nothing more and nothing less.

My preorders for example. I could have put a rating up on the store for PC2, as I've ordered the digital version. I've not done so however as I don't rate titles I haven't played.

As such they are a poor indicator of the interest of the general public. Google search hits however are a good metric of public interest, which is why they are a well used tool for digital marketing.
 
They indicate the number of people that give ratings for preorders, nothing more and nothing less.

My preorders for example. I could have put a rating up on the store for PC2, as I've ordered the digital version. I've not done so however as I don't rate titles I haven't played.

As such they are a poor indicator of the interest of the general public. Google search hits however are a good metric of public interest, which is why they are a well used tool for digital marketing.

PCARS 2 would/should be higher since it is launch month. Another metric is Youtube views. PCARS 2's views are nowhere near GTS or F7. How many RTs on Twitter or likes on Facebook by the official channels aren't close either. GT and Forza get lots more attention from sites like Jalopnik as well. Thread lengths on GAF are another metric..... I could go on but I'm sure you get the point.
 


I think I'm more concerned by 3:05 and 4:45 when the player car is able to force its way under other cars.

I would also add facts that:
- AI Temperament is set to 0 - ZERO, most attentive they can get.
- AI skill is set to 100 - scale does go even higher, but point is that it is not low. If it were low then one could argue that player chose to race against "dumb" AI. But he hasn't.
- Later we see how rain helped by slowing things down, giving them more time to "think". AI seems to have really slow reaction time. When things go as expected its fine. In unusual situation they adapt very poorly.
- Again what Daan said...
 
PCARS 2 would/should be higher since it is launch month. Another metric is Youtube views. PCARS 2's views are nowhere near GTS or F7. How many RTs on Twitter or likes on Facebook by the official channels aren't close either. GT and Forza get lots more attention from sites like Jalopnik as well. Thread lengths on GAF are another metric..... I could go on but I'm sure you get the point.
Where do I go on YouTube to find out how many people have watched videos for the individual game franchises?
 
Don't think you can. Next best thing is search (for example PCARS 2 trailer) and sort by views.
So you went through and manually counted the views on the hundreds of PCARS2 videos? What were the totals for each franchise?
 
Back