GT5 Latest News & Discussion

[Delphic Reason]

Regarding head tracking:

Guys, i am really lost!!
i dont know how that feature would be useful....


The more i think about it, the more it seems awkward...
Please let me explain...


Whether you have two screen or three screens or simple a TV hooked up.
When driving in a straight line, all is fine...
Whenever you need to turn your head for the head tracking feature to work...

how do you look at the screen??? it will no longer feel natural...
because your head is turn (left or right) but your tv screen(s) would still be straight in front of you...... do you have to turn your head and keep your eyes focus straight ahead...


Pardon me if i misunderstand something, but that does not feel natural to me at all...

Could someone please explain?

Yes, that is what you have to do.

However, the larger the TV, and the closer it sits to you, the less this is an issue.

With my 46" Sony Bravia (sitting about a foot from my wheel) It's natural to turn my head slightly to see the edges of the screen anyway. Using TrackIR, I have noticed that it's easy to get used to, if you have a large enough HDTV/Monitor, and your viewing distance is just so.

If you are sitting far from the screen, or using a very small monitor, the effect does seem very strange and unnatural.

 

[analog]

Regarding head tracking:

how do you look at the screen??? it will no longer feel natural...
because your head is turn (left or right) but your tv screen(s) would still be straight in front of you...... do you have to turn your head and keep your eyes focus straight ahead...

Pardon me if i misunderstand something, but that does not feel natural to me at all...

I'm just as puzzled I guess on how it will be implemented ( and more importantly how it feels to experience ).
But it's done before and it seems to be working, think it's just getting used to it I guess.
As for feeling natural, sitting on a couch going 200 mph isn't exactly natural either.

Edit, explained much better in the post above, just a question Delphic Reason.
What is considered large enough by this logic? Would a 37" screen be sufficient? Or even smaller?

 

[CTznOfTime]

the smaller the tv, the closer to the screen you have to get in order to make it feel more "natural"


lol at going 200km/h on a couch... at least, it's coming straight at you...

 

[Delphic Reason]

I'm just as puzzled I guess on how it will be implemented ( and more importantly how it feels to experience ).
But it's done before and it seems to be working, think it's just getting used to it I guess.
As for feeling natural, sitting on a couch going 200 mph isn't exactly natural either.

Edit, explained much better in the post above, just a question Delphic Reason.
What is considered large enough by this logic? Would a 37" screen be sufficient? Or even smaller?

Again, it depends on how close you are willing (or able) to place your TV in relation to your viewing position.

37" can definitely be enough, if it's close enough where it's somewhat natural to move your head (slightly) to see the edges of the screen.

Let me note, that I don't have to move my head to see the edges of the screen. However, it is more natural for me to move my head slightly in concert with my eye movement to view these areas. You're mileage may vary.

 

[Timppaq]

Fixed. Was typing so fast, and since both are proper words (although, not proper usage), the spell check missed it.

I guess if one used the term "peak" loosely, one could be "peaking" they're available view to see over the bonnet.

haha, without checking I honestly believed that I wrote it wrong. Greetings to the EN teacher, I guess..

 

[analog]

Again, it depends on how close you are willing (or able) to place your TV in relation to your viewing position.

37" can definitely be enough, if it's close enough where it's somewhat natural to move your head (slightly) to see the edges of the screen.

Let me note, that I don't have to move my head to see the edges of the screen. However, it is more natural for me to move my head slightly in concert with my eye movement to view these areas. You're mileage may vary.

Thanks for clarification, distance towards the screen isn't a problem but I guess I have to experience it myself when I set it up.

 

[Skidmark]

They really seem to be pushing the headtracking with the 3D saying it comes into it own.

From the videos I have seen with the headtracking it does look like the movements are very sudden and not all that smooth.

I am probably wrong, to be honest its one of the features I am least pumped about.

I'm really keen to see how powerfull the track editor is going to be.

 

[JDMKING13]

I was playing GT5P watching the FT-86 concept video, If you watch the part with the FT-86 on Fuji drifting against the MT Akina 86 you can see that the 86 has blacked out windows like a standard car would, but the car does not look out of place it still looks good against the premium FT-86 has anybody seen this and what do you think.

 

[SuperShouden]

This is what I've been trying to say to those who think that Standard cars look like GT4 cars. When you race a Premium car against a Standard car, it would REALLY look funny if there was a MASSIVE graphical difference between them. From what Kaz set, the difference between standard and Premium were more minute than that. Yeah, they won't be as detailed, but they might has the same polygon count and look just as good as the Premium cars. That way, when you race both types of cars on the same track, there isn't a massive difference between them and you don't laugh your ass off at how crappy the standard cars look against the premiums. I mean, you have Premium Lambos and Standard Lambos. Suppose there's a Lamborghini Single Make Race, you don't want to see a crappy Countach next to a beautiful Gallardo.

 

[alucard0712]

This is what I've been trying to say to those who think that Standard cars look like GT4 cars. When you race a Premium car against a Standard car, it would REALLY look funny if there was a MASSIVE graphical difference between them. From what Kaz set, the difference between standard and Premium were more minute than that. Yeah, they won't be as detailed, but they might has the same polygon count and look just as good as the Premium cars. That way, when you race both types of cars on the same track, there isn't a massive difference between them and you don't laugh your ass off at how crappy the standard cars look against the premiums. I mean, you have Premium Lambos and Standard Lambos. Suppose there's a Lamborghini Single Make Race, you don't want to see a crappy Countach next to a beautiful Gallardo.

We only can judge from "gt5_standardcars.wmv" video.And yes, there is a huge difference, more of that - there is TWO GENERATIONS difference!
GT4 has last gen models while GT5 premiums are WAY ABOVE level of detail of current gen.Kaz himself says that: "They are more like from next-gen".
It's very interesting how they mix them...

 

[eSZee]

We only can judge from "gt5_standardcars.wmv" video.And yes, there is a huge difference, more of that - there is TWO GENERATIONS difference!
GT4 has last gen models while GT5 premiums are WAY ABOVE level of detail of current gen.Kaz himself says that: "They are more like from next-gen".
It's very interesting how they mix them...

If they were way above current gen, they shouldn't be available on the current gen consoles. Anything that current gen consoles can make playable, is current gen. Simple as that isn't it?. Just by being in GT5 on a current gen console just shows that Kaz is a bit full of himself. It's not like GT4 were the models were actually too good for the ps2 and therefore scaled back. Then again, it could've been Kaz being full of it again.
If you look at it that way, there is no 2 generation gap, more like a .5 or .25 gen gap.

 

[Sasuki]

Guys look here, it seem GT5 demo had some tires to choose

Racing R1
Racing R2
Racing R3

 

[GTPorsche]

That's the same tire choice in Prologue.

 

[Sasuki]

This what SimHQ had to say about GT5 demo


"The car felt and drove as expected, demonstrating understeer, oversteer and power-on oversteer in an intuitive way. Although the physics engine of GT 5 has been extensively reworked since GT5-Prologue was released, the game still had a too-faint feel to the force feedback repsonse and wheel resistance. Entering the short back stretch of the GP circuit, the game abruptly shut off and defaulted back to the user interface. The assistant explained that the game demo was designed to run only for 2 minutes — too short a time to complete a lap at any road course on display, and certainly too short of a time to develop much of an opinion about the game.


Joe, guod, and Chipwich also got some seat time with GT5, but ConManly got to try out the game's Rally Cars on a gravel road. Having RBR and DiRT2 to compare it to, he felt that GT5's physics seemed to do a good job replicating this form of racing, although once again the feedback and resistance seemed to be a bit weak. Those of us with higher-end racing controllers such as the G27 and Fanatec PWTS or GT3RS were a bit underwhelmed by the DFGT, but that's not an issue for the game itself. We just hoped that the force feedback response on those products would be a bit more robust.

What little we did see of GT5 was impressive — particularly the graphics and car variety, and certainly seems to have physics and eye candy on a par with GT 5's main rival, Forza Motorsport 3. But GT5 has many game elements that set it above the bar raised last year by FM3, mostly due to limitations of the Xbox360 platform. In GT5, multiplayer races can host upwards of 30 participants, far more than the eight in FM3. And GT5 also boasts day/night transitions, something not available in FM3. It also has a wider variety of track surfaces, including gravel rally roads. While we wish GT5 had more robust force feedback effects strength, it does seem like a worthy simulation product, as far as we could tell. We expect that this game will sell many new PS3 boxes for Sony."

Link, scroll down

http://www.simhq.com/_commentary/all_101a.html



it seems that IRS guy was talking from his A:censored: "when he said GT5 is similar to prologue in physics"

 

[Dan_]

I wonder if these are the definitive in-game menus, they look vey clean and a step ahead from Prologue and GT4. It was a pain to travel around many screens just to get the correct car, do the mods and start racing.

Also, anyone who extensively played GT4 knows that it was hard to find some proper lineups in some endurances, and I saw in some videos that the demos have A, B and C difficulty levels.

Does that have any relation to the opponent lineups? Or maybe is just referring to the AI level of agressiveness and technique? Anyone who played the demos can give some info on this? Resetting the console many times was a pain in GT4, and GT5P AI level option wasn't very useful since you didn't have a vast library of models to race against.

 

[DaveS1138]

Regarding head tracking:

Guys, i am really lost!!
i dont know how that feature would be useful....


The more i think about it, the more it seems awkward...
Please let me explain...


Whether you have two screen or three screens or simple a TV hooked up.
When driving in a straight line, all is fine...
Whenever you need to turn your head for the head tracking feature to work...

how do you look at the screen??? it will no longer feel natural...
because your head is turn (left or right) but your tv screen(s) would still be straight in front of you...... do you have to turn your head and keep your eyes focus straight ahead...


Pardon me if i misunderstand something, but that does not feel natural to me at all...

Could someone please explain?

Remember that you dont need to turn your head as much in the real world as it will turn in game. It will be scaled.

So turning your head 20 degrees in the real world could correspond to turning your head 90 degrees in game and you would still be looking pretty much at the TV in the real world whilst looking out the side of the car in game.

 

[eSZee]

This what SimHQ had to say about GT5 demo


"The car felt and drove as expected, demonstrating understeer, oversteer and power-on oversteer in an intuitive way. Although the physics engine of GT 5 has been extensively reworked since GT5-Prologue was released, the game still had a too-faint feel to the force feedback repsonse and wheel resistance. Entering the short back stretch of the GP circuit, the game abruptly shut off and defaulted back to the user interface. The assistant explained that the game demo was designed to run only for 2 minutes — too short a time to complete a lap at any road course on display, and certainly too short of a time to develop much of an opinion about the game.


Joe, guod, and Chipwich also got some seat time with GT5, but ConManly got to try out the game's Rally Cars on a gravel road. Having RBR and DiRT2 to compare it to, he felt that GT5's physics seemed to do a good job replicating this form of racing, although once again the feedback and resistance seemed to be a bit weak. Those of us with higher-end racing controllers such as the G27 and Fanatec PWTS or GT3RS were a bit underwhelmed by the DFGT, but that's not an issue for the game itself. We just hoped that the force feedback response on those products would be a bit more robust.

What little we did see of GT5 was impressive — particularly the graphics and car variety, and certainly seems to have physics and eye candy on a par with GT 5's main rival, Forza Motorsport 3. But GT5 has many game elements that set it above the bar raised last year by FM3, mostly due to limitations of the Xbox360 platform. In GT5, multiplayer races can host upwards of 30 participants, far more than the eight in FM3. And GT5 also boasts day/night transitions, something not available in FM3. It also has a wider variety of track surfaces, including gravel rally roads. While we wish GT5 had more robust force feedback effects strength, it does seem like a worthy simulation product, as far as we could tell. We expect that this game will sell many new PS3 boxes for Sony."

Link, scroll down

http://www.simhq.com/_commentary/all_101a.html



it seems that IRS guy was talking from his A:censored: "when he said GT5 is similar to prologue in physics"

Because their opinions were different from SIMHQ opinions?
Is that what you're basing that statement on?
I think darin said that the tire model in gt5 wasn't much changed from gt5p, that's what he meant when talking about physics.
Using an opinion of one site to squash the opinion of another, isn't very reliable.
I think many people here disagree with darin and the ISR guy as well as take their opinions with a grain of salt, myself included, but taking the side of one reviewer over the other because their side sounds like you want it to, isn't smart. Especially when they also say GT5 and fm3 had similar physics, just like ISR. GT5P had better physics than FM3 IMO, and them saying GT5 does as well, sound slike maybe they haven't changed much.
Oh wait, I just remembered, you're the guy who hates ISR with a passion, aren't you? Nevermind, ignore my post, it was a waste of my time.

 

[RACECAR]

Funny enough, all because of only ONE game.

 

[SUfan21]

This what SimHQ had to say about GT5 demo


"The car felt and drove as expected, demonstrating understeer, oversteer and power-on oversteer in an intuitive way. Although the physics engine of GT 5 has been extensively reworked since GT5-Prologue was released, the game still had a too-faint feel to the force feedback repsonse and wheel resistance. Entering the short back stretch of the GP circuit, the game abruptly shut off and defaulted back to the user interface. The assistant explained that the game demo was designed to run only for 2 minutes ? too short a time to complete a lap at any road course on display, and certainly too short of a time to develop much of an opinion about the game.


Joe, guod, and Chipwich also got some seat time with GT5, but ConManly got to try out the game's Rally Cars on a gravel road. Having RBR and DiRT2 to compare it to, he felt that GT5's physics seemed to do a good job replicating this form of racing, although once again the feedback and resistance seemed to be a bit weak. Those of us with higher-end racing controllers such as the G27 and Fanatec PWTS or GT3RS were a bit underwhelmed by the DFGT, but that's not an issue for the game itself. We just hoped that the force feedback response on those products would be a bit more robust.

What little we did see of GT5 was impressive ? particularly the graphics and car variety, and certainly seems to have physics and eye candy on a par with GT 5's main rival, Forza Motorsport 3. But GT5 has many game elements that set it above the bar raised last year by FM3, mostly due to limitations of the Xbox360 platform. In GT5, multiplayer races can host upwards of 30 participants, far more than the eight in FM3. And GT5 also boasts day/night transitions, something not available in FM3. It also has a wider variety of track surfaces, including gravel rally roads. While we wish GT5 had more robust force feedback effects strength, it does seem like a worthy simulation product, as far as we could tell. We expect that this game will sell many new PS3 boxes for Sony."

Link, scroll down

http://www.simhq.com/_commentary/all_101a.html



it seems that IRS guy was talking from his A:censored: "when he said GT5 is similar to prologue in physics"

"Host upwards of 30 participants"!!!!!! Was I the only one who caught that? That would be HUGE if its true. I hope thats not some misunderstanding.

 

[chepe371]

Also, anyone who extensively played GT4 knows that it was hard to find some proper lineups in some endurances, and I saw in some videos that the demos have A, B and C difficulty levels.

The ABC(and S) classes were previously used from GT1-3 in Arcade mode.

GT4 has the -10 +10 Difficulty(which is ridiculous because it doesnt match you with the right class only the HP ie: a 300hp GTR will get blasted by the same power in a ASL ARTA Garaiya)

So i guess the other system(ABC-S) got better reviews.


So i think what were seeing is the Arcade mode. In GT mode the difficulty is according to the License class and car class.

 

[HN7]

"Host upwards of 30 participants"!!!!!! Was I the only one who caught that? That would be HUGE if its true. I hope thats not some misunderstanding.

Yes, it's confirmed that you can host a 32 player "lobby", but only 16 on track at one time.

 

[Vincent]

"Host upwards of 30 participants"!!!!!! Was I the only one who caught that? That would be HUGE if its true. I hope thats not some misunderstanding.

It is confirmed that there will be 32 player lobbies, but this does not mean there will be 32 people on the track at once. The maximum number of cars on a track is still 16, but the extra 16 people will be able to spectate those actually racing. The nuts and bolts of how this will work are still somewhat of a mystery, however. Personally, I'm crossing my fingers for the ability to swap drivers, but it's not something I'm expecting to see in the final game at this point in time.

[Edit]Not fast enough.

 

[Raitziger]

This what SimHQ had to say about GT5 demo


"The car felt and drove as expected, demonstrating understeer, oversteer and power-on oversteer in an intuitive way. Although the physics engine of GT 5 has been extensively reworked since GT5-Prologue was released, the game still had a too-faint feel to the force feedback repsonse and wheel resistance

Luckily that all can be adjusted on fanatec wheel. Hopefully ingame settings are much more detailed than they have been in previous games do that logitech users can also get settings they like.

 

[Tenacious D]

Because their opinions were different from SIMHQ opinions?
Is that what you're basing that statement on?
I think darin said that the tire model in gt5 wasn't much changed from gt5p, that's what he meant when talking about physics.
Using an opinion of one site to squash the opinion of another, isn't very reliable.

Actually, it's the opinion of two people versus a few more people from another site. As you can see, the views from SimHq are a bit varied, but tend to be in harmony, and tend to follow better what we grasp of the game from what we've been able to make out. And I am puzzled how Darin and Sean weren't quite as gushy over GT5 as they were over FM3. And I mean overall.

They were wowed, and Sean in particular, by the insane level of detail in the tracks and cars, and he was the one who began all the "Standard Cars are at Prologue level" remarks by saying so himself. He was also dumbfounded by the sheer number of cars in the game. Darin was awed by the quality of environments, such as the time of day changes and the 3D effect, as well as the photo-real appearance of the tracks.

And yet, they still put both games across as pretty similar, which is just odd to me. However, they will get a sit down with both games, and probably explore the unique features of both games a lot. If PD pulls several rabbits from their hat, such as a superb Career Mode, Online system, and other goodies like Track Builder and Race Mod with livery editing, they may push GT5 ahead by several points. Of course with everything GT, we'll see.

 

[alucard0712]

If you look at it that way, there is no 2 generation gap, more like a .5 or .25 gen gap.

100+ times polygon count is 0.5 or 0.25 generations?Are you kidding?

Regarding to your logic Shadow of the Colossus has same-gen GRAPHICS as all other games on PS2?
Shaders(emulated),HDR,motion blur,self-shadows,progressive-scan...all this stuff already exist in SOC and no other games on PS2 had this.But on current gen - it's a "must have" effects.That's why we can *call it* NEXT-gen GRAPHICS game.

GT is ONLY game that represents such level of quality, it's not NEXT-GEN game obliviously, but has DETAILS of NEXT-GEN - I mean cars.And remember - we talked only about CARS right now.Premiums are WAY MORE DETAILED than CURRENT GEN other games.Forza 2,3,Dirt,NFS - that's what cars looks like now, next-gen above GT4...but below GT5.For all other racing games its 2 GENERATIONS gap.Cars in NFS on next-gen would look similar (if not worse) to GT5...

(sorry for English)

 

[gtone339]

Back on PSOne, GT1 and 2 didn't have the quality that Ridge racer type 4 had.

RR: type 4 was the first PS1 racing games to have 'Gouraud shading'.

Today we all know that GT5 is the most realistic looking simulator ever.

 

[patriotzero]

PD is a GOD! 200+ premium models cant wait to see

 

[hardvibes]

PD is a GOD!

Same thing I tought when I saw the first replay screenshot of GT2 in a magazine.

 

[nasanu]

This what SimHQ had to say about GT5 demo

They also said this:

"Sony PS3 Update: Sony announced games will be on Blu-ray discs. WIth several times more data capacity than DVD discs, the move seems like a great idea and has potential to up the graphics on PS3 games and possibly set Playstation games on a higher level than Xbox."

Rubbish site to say the least.

 

[dodi280]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9NQXKv3rIo

GT5 Head Tracking vídeo