GT5 Latest News & Discussion

[analog]

Again, it all boils down to definitions and perception, do you want a fantasy track to be like a real track or can you also enjoy an unlikely layout which could only in theory be a real possibility given that it defies convention.

It's just a jump, it's not like they created the tunnel on RouteX in a way you could drive the X2010/Formula cars upside down, that also would be technically realistic (and probably very fun too) yet an unlikely scenario in real life.

 

[Spagetti69]

Can we have wipeout tracks too please. Lol.

News is slow.

 

[gamerdog6482]

I want Mario Kart tracks, too!

 

[Griffith500]

Can we have wipeout tracks too please. Lol.

News is slow.

I think it'd make a cool "Easter Egg". Might be a bit boring, though, given the difference in physics.

What do people think of that coastal road in ProjectCars? There are some massive jumps in that which caused the physics on the Caterham to spazz out for me. That was unrealistic, because the chassis somehow became embedded in the ground, yet I could still move a bit - it was just a bug, of course.

What's really annoying is that I actually agree with Simon. There's no way you'd see Cape Ring in a Simbin game.

 

[KiroKai]

It's just a jump, it's not like they created the tunnel on RouteX in a way you could drive the X2010/Formula cars upside down, that also would be technically realistic (and probably very fun too) yet an unlikely scenario in real life.

Unlikely? With F1 cars maybe... but this is a totally daily scene!




... isn't it?

 

[Samus]

What's wrong with Ridge Racer? Look, if GT had Ridge Racer tracks with GT physics it would be a totally different game. If GT had its own tracks with RR physics, it would be a fourth kind of game. The point is tracks on their own cannot be realistic or not, it's how the interactions with that track play out that matters. In the case of the Rollcage games, the reasons why the cars can do what they do is "explained" so that the physics make sense, and it is therefore "realistic" in the framework of that "narrative".

GT5 aims to be a vehicle dynamics simulator, who cares if they add stunt tracks as long as cars behave properly on those circuits? (Who wouldn't want to test out that F1 car upside down theory? Or, was it a BMW Mercedes advert where they drove on the ceiling of a tunnel?) Just a bit of light relief, you know, because it's a game.

EDIT: Simon, for the last time saying Cape Ring is unrealistic is either stating the obvious (it doesn't exist) or is actually making an assertion. You are entitled to state an opinion, yes, but that is not what you are doing here.
EDIT: Anyway, we've since established that what you mean is that Cape Ring is implausible as circuit to be used in top-flight racing, i.e. a Simbin game. Which is by no means the same thing as "unrealistic" - not opinion, no subjectivity, distinctly different by definition.

No, what I've been saying is that Cape Ring, as a race track is unrealistic. Of course it's not real, but that's not the same thing as saying it's either realistic or unrealistic.

You are aware of what the word means, right? "not believable or practical". "Not compatible with reality".

Something like High Speed Ring is what I would call a realistic race circuit, despite not being real. There is nothing about that track that is not compatible with reality except maybe the bridge.

I think it'd make a cool "Easter Egg". Might be a bit boring, though, given the difference in physics.

What do people think of that coastal road in ProjectCars? There are some massive jumps in that which caused the physics on the Caterham to spazz out for me. That was unrealistic, because the chassis somehow became embedded in the ground, yet I could still move a bit - it was just a bug, of course.

What's really annoying is that I actually agree with Simon. There's no way you'd see Cape Ring in a Simbin game.

The difference with that is it's supposed to be modeled on a real road, just like Le Mans is so those jumps can be considered natural. Cape Ring is different, there is no reason for that jump to exist and wouldn't if someone built the rest of the track in real life.

By the way I'm not sure why you're getting so worked up, I thought we were just having some friendly banter.

 

[mcfizzle]

Trial Mountain should be removed from GT5 because of the hill in the chicane before the start finish line and the tree hanging over the track. No real track would do that. Deep Forest should be removed from the game because of the steepness and length of the hill. No FIA approved track would have a gradient that high. High Speed Ring should be removed because no road course should be allowed to have banking that high in 3 parts of it's tracks. The fantasy tracks should be 100% realistic and true to life because that's what Gran Turismo is and has been since GT1.

 

[analog]

The fantasy tracks should be 100% realistic and true to life because that's what Gran Turismo is and has been since GT1.

Yet you provide examples which show it isn't according to you?

Trial Mountain is unrealistic because the monkey can cause a dangerous situation when he leaves that branch.

 

[Griffith500]

No, what I've been saying is that Cape Ring, as a race track is unrealistic. Of course it's not real, but that's not the same thing as saying it's either realistic or unrealistic.

You are aware of what the word means, right? "not believable or practical". "Not compatible with reality".

Something like High Speed Ring is what I would call a realistic race circuit, despite not being real. There is nothing about that track that is not compatible with reality except maybe the bridge.

These two are not the same thing at all. If it was the former you meant, you could have saved yourself a lot of bother by actually learning to communicate from the outset. Again, Simon, I agree - it is implausible, but that's why some of us like it - you're fine not to like it, I don't care (although it is a stretch to say PD wasted their time on it - again, that's not an opinion but an assertion, unless you really think you can speak for everyone). Cape Ring is totally compatible with reality, but once again you're using a special definition of reality (Simbin) and failing to make that clear.

So try actually using words next time instead of brickwalling yourself in like some kind of angry hermit.

EDIT:

The difference with that is it's supposed to be modeled on a real road, just like Le Mans is so those jumps can be considered natural. Cape Ring is different, there is no reason for that jump to exist and wouldn't if someone built the rest of the track in real life.

By the way I'm not sure why you're getting so worked up, I thought we were just having some friendly banter.

What real road?

I'm annoyed that you've been so thick headed about your use of language. Instead of properly elaborating your position, you've just repeated the same phrases over and over and then wondered why it dragged on for so long. I'm annoyed because I actually I agree with your point, had you actually bothered to stop being a grump about it!

 

[mcfizzle]

Trial Mountain is unrealistic because the monkey can cause a dangerous situation when he leaves that branch.

And there's Loch Ness Monster in the lake. Gran Tursimo is serious business, not about quirky things like fantasy tracks not completely rooted in reality. Somebody needs to remind KY about what type of game he is making. He's gotten off track with his new original courses.

 

[analog]

And there's Loch Ness Monster in the lake. Gran Tursimo is serious business, not about quirky things like fantasy tracks not completely rooted in reality.

Apparantly my sarcasm detector is off, making me a bit unsure whether to see things as a joke or being entirely serious.

By the way, why are you sure the Loch Ness monster is to be perceived as real? Maybe it's a glassfibre mock up or replica?

 

[Samus]

These two are not the same thing at all. If it was the former you meant, you could have saved yourself a lot of bother by actually learning to communicate from the outset. Again, Simon, I agree - it is implausible, but that's why some of us like it - you're fine not to like it, I don't care (although it is a stretch to say PD wasted their time on it - again, that's not an opinion but an assertion, unless you really think you can speak for everyone). Cape Ring is totally compatible with reality, but once again you're using a special definition of reality (Simbin) and failing to make that clear.

So try actually using words next time instead of brickwalling yourself in like some kind of angry hermit.

Of course those things mean the same thing, unless you're saying dictionaries lie?

What have the Simbin games got to do with anything? My definition of reality is reality. What is out there in the real world and as we've seen over the last however many pages, there is nothing like the Cape Ring jump out there in the real world of tarmac racing circuits.

 

[MonSpaNur]

I think some guys need to go back to school to learn the difference between "realistic" and "reality"
Unless that´s a question of very low QI and they are unable to recognise the difference.

 

[gamerdog6482]

There is nothing like the Cape Ring jump out there in the real world of tarmac racing circuits.

And? There is nothing out there like the S2000 LM Race Car but does that make it unrealistic?

 

[analog]

I think some guys need to go back to school to learn the difference between "realistic" and "reality"
Unless that´s a question of very low QI and they are unable to recognise the difference.

What does Stephen Fry have to do with this discussion?

 

[Samus]

And? There is nothing out there like the S2000 LM Race Car but does that make it unrealistic?

No, because there is no reason someone wouldn't build something like that car, there are thousands just like it that do already exist. However I've yet to see any evidence someone has or would build a jump like Cape Ring in a racing circuit.

 

[MonSpaNur]

Are you serious?

Yes, i´m.
The corkscrew exists in real life, but is unrealistic by the standards of some guys, it seems...to tricky for they talent, i would said...just like the Cape Ring jump....

 

[gamerdog6482]

No, because there is no reason someone wouldn't build something like that car, there are thousands just like it that do already exist. However I've yet to see any evidence someone has or would build a jump like Cape Ring in a racing circuit.

Now you're changing you story. Is Cape Ring unrealistic because it wouldn't be built or couldn't be built? I actually want to know your answer.

 

[Samus]

Now you're changing you story. Is Cape Ring unrealistic because it wouldn't be built or couldn't be built? I actually want to know your answer.

It's always been that it wouldn't be built, and I've only ever been talking about the jump, not the rest of the track.

 

[gamerdog6482]

In that case you are saying that it could be built, which is the definition of realistic.

 

[peter_vod69]

 

[Samus]

In that case you are saying that it could be built, which is the definition of realistic.

No it's not. I never said it was unrealistic to build physically/geographically, I said it was unrealistic to be used as part of a racing circuit and as such would never be built.

 

[gamerdog6482]

There is a BIG difference between "unrealistic" and "unreasonable", and I think it would do you good to learn it.

 

[Griffith500]

It's always been that it wouldn't be built, and I've only ever been talking about the jump, not the rest of the track.

The problem with that is that a fully-interactive, virtual reality set-up for the home, made to be sold for less than, say, £300 wouldn't ever be made. That's not to say it couldn't. It's "unrealistic" in your former sense, in that it is "impractical" if you're looking to actually make a profit from it, but it is realistic in the sense that it is entirely possible to make - the technology exists or could eventually be made with enough R&D (and cash) i.e. just like the X-Wings.


So in other words your concept of realism is actually dependent on your end goals (e.g. profit with the VR kit, not killing spectators at Cape Ring).
Given that these considerations do not exist in a videogame, it is unrealistic to expect it to account for them - unless it is meant to be the Real Health and Safety Simulator.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

If I have 100 billion dollars to spare, I would build all GT original circuits, make racing venues on them, screw FIA or GT safety regulations, every car types free to race.
I would go to Cape Ring have a day full of racing, jumping all day if I want to with my car until it wrecked. Don't want to wreck the car, slow down before the jump, simple logic.

In GT5, I slowed down most of the time before the jump at Cape Ring, why ? Because I drive "realistic" way

 

[Samus]

There is a BIG difference between "unrealistic" and "unreasonable", and I think it would do you good to learn it.

Please do enlighten me.

So in other words your concept of realism is actually dependent on your end goals (e.g. profit with the VR kit, not killing spectators at Cape Ring).
Given that these considerations do not exist in a videogame, it is unrealistic to expect it to account for them - unless it is meant to be the Real Health and Safety Simulator.

No, my concept of realism is based on reality. Cape Ring has clearly been created to be like a real world racing circuit. It's got a pit complex, it's got corners with rumble strips on, it's 95% realistic as a real world racing circuit, is it not? Then it's ruined with a big jump that kills any feeling of realism.

No it's not about virtual spectators being killed, it's about driving in a realistic racing game (ie trying to conform to reality as best it can) and then having to take a silly jump each lap. Flatten that section out and I have no problem with Cape Ring, it's a mostly believable racing circuit in terms of the track itself.

 

[gamerdog6482]

Please do enlighten me.

Unrealistic, adj: Not resembling real life.
Unreasonable, adj: not in accordance with practical realities.

Cape Ring is unreasonable, not unrealistic.

 

[Samus]

Unrealistic, adj: Not resembling real life.
Unreasonable, adj: not in accordance with practical realities.

Cape Ring is unreasonable, not unrealistic.

What? How does the Cape Ring jump resemble real life? Because jumps in general exist in real life? By that theory you could put bollards in the middle of a race track and call it realistic because they exist in real life.

 

[gamerdog6482]

Actually, yes.

 

[Samus]

Well with that stupidity stick a fork in me, I'm done.