GT7 is a weird racing game (compared to others)

[Voodoovaj]

all they need to do is fix the AI

shakes head.....dude....

Again, the AI is not broken, it is intentionally set up this way. If the AI were "broken" as in there is a bug where the slow down too much in corners, that's an elementary fix for even the most junior programmer.

The entire game experience is implemented to allow you to win. It's by design. "Fixing this" requires redoing the entire single player experience.

Broken AI does what is not intended. This AI is doing exactly as intended. It's just that hard core players hate what it's doing.

The issue is, it's both. They work in conjunction with one another, and the AI has been a problem for as long as it has, but I definitely do agree that it ultimately comes down to game design.

No, it's completely different (trust me). The game design instructs the AI. The AI just does what it's told to do.

It's told to let the player win, and there's a few different levels of difficulty for more/less challenge, but ultimate, the over riding design is to let the player win.

But we're ultimately dealing with a company who does not believe issues are issues until the general gaming press criticizes it, which they have for years. And even then, it's unlikely that they do anything to work on it - except in this case, where they use a sledgehammer to crack open a chestnut, and likely do nothing to change the actual design of the races, so it leads to what we have in many of the chili difficulty races: AI that clocks in laps 30 seconds ahead of you, at a wicked pace, then slow down by the time of the first pit stop, and then once you pass them, begin to ramp back up in difficulty to make the race seem closer then it actually is.

Again, it's not the system. It's an intentional experience.


The only good answer is a focus on multiplayer. Better matchmaking. Multiplayer version of the single player events. I keep saying that it's the only good answer.

 

[HyperSpeeder]

With the amount of sensitive people who fear the day when PD will patch the Tomahawk and remove their easy win exploit, if they added full race weekends and competitive AI to every event in GT7, most would quit and flock to easier games. Ironically, those easier games also have plenty of "catch the rabbit".

Personally, I don't mind the way it is now. There's no "catch the rabbit" in the full endurance events. The rabbits are the guys who start first and second, but you can still lose if you make a wrong call or build your car incorrectly.

On the other hand, complaining about "catch the rabbit" in the Sunday Cup or even the regular Clubman Cup is a bit funny, because those events are supposed to be easy. Maybe try catching the rabbits in the Clubman Cup Plus then? But those are more like cheetahs than rabbits. You've been warned!

One of the guys Voodoovaj replied to is the biggest Forza fanboy I've ever seen on the internet and I wonder if he realizes how much "catch the rabbit" exists in Forza Horizon. Street Scene events in particular are a pain to do. The Trial is extremely frustrating in this regard, even more so when your own teammates tend to help rather than hinder the AI, and the Trial has standing starts! Turn 10 is supposed to bring better AI to Forza Motorsport, but then GT7 has Sophy in the pipeline.

 

[Silver Arrows]

With the amount of sensitive people who fear the day when PD will patch the Tomahawk and remove their easy win exploit, if they added full race weekends and competitive AI to every event in GT7, most would quit and flock to easier games. Ironically, those easier games also have plenty of "catch the rabbit".

No, they wouldn't. They'd dump GT7 for other reasons - which is what's been happening already considering how the best way to get any sort of money to complete the collection the game expects you to get is by grinding, but that's nowhere near close to the discussion being had in this very moment.

On the other hand, complaining about "catch the rabbit" in the Sunday Cup or even the regular Clubman Cup is a bit funny, because those events are supposed to be easy.

And I'm not expected to have at least a decent race within Clubman or Sunday Cup races? Then why the hell would Polyphony give people the opportunity to set their own difficulty if both these events are supposed to be 'easy'?

One of the guys Voodoovaj replied to is the biggest Forza fanboy I've ever seen on the internet

At least I know now that you haven't blocked me. But good job mischaracterizing me and not even being man enough to quote me - but then again, I guess in your mind, 'Forza fanboy' is 'anybody who directly goes against your straight out lies about the franchise, even when moderators and others who play the game directly point out how dishonest you're being, which you promptly ignore in order to bring it up in another thread' as well as completely ignores the fact that I've stopped playing FH5 considering the amount of polish problems the game had, and how much it bothered me.

I wonder if he realizes how much "catch the rabbit" exists in Forza Horizon.

I wouldn't, because the AI is actually worth a damn in comparison, once you get the settings dialed down. Compared to GT7, which even though it gives you the option to choose the difficulty, it's a false thing considering how much of the game's main campaign mode has difficulty not play a factor at all (except how far ahead the rabbit is) and how the rest of the game's single player acts and operates independently of the difficulty setting you chose.

Street Scene events in particular are a pain to do.

Strange, considering I never had an issue with Street Scene, and generally went with unmodified cars.

The Trial is extremely frustrating in this regard, even more so when your own teammates tend to help rather than hinder the AI, and the Trial has standing starts!

No one even brought up the Trial, so why bring it up?

Turn 10 is supposed to bring better AI to Forza Motorsport, but then GT7 has Sophy in the pipeline.

No one knows whether or not Sophy will even come in it's current form, and are simply conflating one line (which, knowing the figurehead, could mean anything) to it coming to GT7 as a replacement for the AI. And considering the problems that are present in GT7's AI, structurally and in terms of AI (full disclosure, I agree with AJ's general point about design and AI being the problems, but think it's a shared blame all around) Sophy is simply a sledgehammer solution to a problem that could very easily be solved by human hands, if Polyphony actually bothered to care about one of the major aspects of their game, instead of consistently kicking the can down the road.

 

[Samus]

if they added full race weekends and competitive AI to every event in GT7, most would quit and flock to easier games. Ironically, those easier games also have plenty of "catch the rabbit".

Or, get this.

They go to options > AI > difficulty and turn it down to a level that suits their skill level.

Why you think people are asking for one fixed high skill level AI I don't know.

Also, no other serious racing games have catch the rabbit AI in their main gameplay. That's a trait of arcadey/non-sim games and GT only.

 

[Imari]

Developed by 'Sony AI" (which is Sony) in association with "PDI" (which is also Sony).

Technically correct, but the assumption that you're making is oh so wrong. Like I said, read the paper. It explains what Sony AI did, what Polyphony contributed, how Sophy was made and how it differs from more traditional models.

GT has been like this since GT1.

You should play GT1. And 2. And 3 and 4.

Chase the rabbit started in earnest in GT5. Before that it was very limited, most notably in the overtake missions.

 

[ScottPuss20]

Chase the rabbit started in earnest in GT5. Before that it was very limited, most notably in the overtake missions.

One of the most frustrating examples of "chase the rabbit" in GT4 was the slipstream mission in the GT-R R34.

I still don't understand why nothing has been done with the AI in all these years. PD would rather have you start 25 seconds behind the leader and force you to chase it down than give you a proper race with decent AI. What year are they living in? Why would you intentionally design such a flawed and ridiculous system? They might as well call them overtake missions with a bit of strategy mixed in because that's essentially what they are. If the AI was any good PD wouldn't need to create such scenarios to artificially increase the difficulty.

 

[Voodoovaj]

Technically correct, but the assumption that you're making is oh so wrong. Like I said, read the paper. It explains what Sony AI did, what Polyphony contributed, how Sophy was made and how it differs from more traditional models.

The assumption I am making is not whether PD developed Sophy or whether Sony developed it, or whatever team developed it.

What I am saying is that the AI that is currently in the game is Sophy, simply turned down. Again, I believe this because of the wisdom in doing this. It is far better to get the system in place, hobbled to the level it is now, than to hack out one system, and hack in a new one while the game is live.

The biggest challenge with a learning AI is the sheer amount of data that needs to be stored for it to draw from. With the game constantly online, there is no need for all that data to be stored locally (it likely couldn't be stored locally). An argument could be made that they are currently harvesting data from all the drivers in order to have a higher difficulty version of Sophy in later versions.

They might even completely fake a multiplayer experience in the Single Player by having bot versions of all of us racing around the tracks. That would sure eliminate the issue of not having enough people participating.

 

[Samus]

What I am saying is that the AI that is currently in the game is Sophy, simply turned down.

..and you've still not provided any substantial evidence to support that claim.

 

[Johnnn]

..and you've still not provided any substantial evidence to support that claim.

I thought Sophy can race a car, right? In GT7 we have some idiots and I don't even know what line to overtake. It's the only game I use outer line so often. I think about it as a traffic.

 

[Dave A]

The assumption I am making is not whether PD developed Sophy or whether Sony developed it, or whatever team developed it.

What I am saying is that the AI that is currently in the game is Sophy, simply turned down. Again, I believe this because of the wisdom in doing this. It is far better to get the system in place, hobbled to the level it is now, than to hack out one system, and hack in a new one while the game is live.

The biggest challenge with a learning AI is the sheer amount of data that needs to be stored for it to draw from. With the game constantly online, there is no need for all that data to be stored locally (it likely couldn't be stored locally). An argument could be made that they are currently harvesting data from all the drivers in order to have a higher difficulty version of Sophy in later versions.

They might even completely fake a multiplayer experience in the Single Player by having bot versions of all of us racing around the tracks. That would sure eliminate the issue of not having enough people participating.

And yet, Sophy isn't credited anywhere in the game, nor is Sony AI, nor are any of the people involved in it's development at Sony AI. So I'm going to suggest Sophy isn't in GT7 in any form at present. I'm sure if it was, 1 it would be credited (it would have to be), and 2, PD would have made a song and dance about it.

 

[Nebuc72]

The assumption I am making is not whether PD developed Sophy or whether Sony developed it, or whatever team developed it.

What I am saying is that the AI that is currently in the game is Sophy, simply turned down. Again, I believe this because of the wisdom in doing this. It is far better to get the system in place, hobbled to the level it is now, than to hack out one system, and hack in a new one while the game is live.

Why the hell would Sony make all this fanfare about introducing Sophy and showing it off and then just get PD to stealth put a gimped version of it in the game without saying anything hahahaha.

If you think about it for more than 2 seconds, it doesn't make sense. If they're using us as guinea pigs for it, as you suggest, that doesn't look good on them either - because they're just openly admitting that the AI in the game is unfinished. Not such a good look for a flagship title!

 

[Voodoovaj]

Why the hell would Sony make all this fanfare about introducing Sophy and showing it off and then just get PD to stealth put a gimped version of it in the game without saying anything hahahaha.

If you think about it for more than 2 seconds, it doesn't make sense. If they're using us as guinea pigs for it, as you suggest, that doesn't look good on them either - because they're just openly admitting that the AI in the game is unfinished.

Corporations never hide the truth, right?



If it's a learning AI, it needs data to learn from. If it is truly introduced without a mountain of data to draw from, it won't work at all.

Officially stating that it's coming later lets them save face.

But whatever.

Not such a good look for a flagship title!

And if I'm wrong, what they have in the game now is a good look?

 

[Voodoovaj]

And yet, Sophy isn't credited anywhere in the game, nor is Sony AI, nor are any of the people involved in it's development at Sony AI. So I'm going to suggest Sophy isn't in GT7 in any form at present. I'm sure if it was, 1 it would be credited (it would have to be), and 2, PD would have made a song and dance about it.

Sophy isn't a person. The dev team would get credit. Also, credit is not a given. You can work on a game and go uncredited... Happens all the time.

I got credited once for a game I barely touched because I told the director that the game was terrible. He credited me as a dis 😂

Funny thing. The 4 pepper GR3 race at Daytona exhibits none of the bad behaviours mentioned about the "broken" AI... I wonder why? They seem to race pretty friggin good there.

Just an observation

 

[Imari]

Sophy isn't a person. The dev team would get credit. Also, credit is not a given. You can work on a game and go uncredited... Happens all the time.

For a major feature like AI? I doubt it. You'd need more than "stuff goes uncredited all the time, trust me" when the GT7 AI behaves in very similar ways to Atsushi Hayashi's previous work and he's the sole AI dev credited.

 

[Voodoovaj]

For a major feature like AI? I doubt it. You'd need more than "stuff goes uncredited all the time, trust me" when the GT7 AI behaves in very similar ways to Atsushi Hayashi's previous work and he's the sole AI dev credited.

For any feature. Credit is given at the discretion of the publisher/developer. It is not a right. I've fought for the credit of others who worked on a game throughout it's creation, and then left for a better opportunity just before the test cycle, and the powers that be wanted to leave them off the credits... but we are heading down a super off topic tangent.

My gut (and that's all this is, it's my gut reaction) says that the bones of the system, at minimum, are in place. Why? Because, as I said, it makes sense from a dev standpoint and, because machine learning requires data to learn from. Testers are limited in the amount of info they can produce. That's why the community can find a bug that slipped past the test team. If Sophy is going to behave like a human, it needs a lot of human generated data before it gets officially "implemented". Where better to get that than from than the community?

Remember, just because the system is in place doesn't mean it will behave differently. Just because it CAN be smart and good, that doesn't mean they will allow it to be smart and good. Afterall, it would still need to be slow for new players, for future Sunday Cup events, etc.

They might hold off until GT8 to make it official. Get everyone onto the PS5 platform. It would make for better press. After all, if all this advanced tech can work on a nearly 10 year old system, why would there be a need to buy the new one?

This isn't a hill I am going to die on. I could totally be wrong, but it seems like the rational approach to me.

 

[nxgti35]

Atsushi Hayashi himself in his interview on the PD website says something about "certain things having to be done in a certain way", so AI behaviour, speed and such is pretty much made by game design.

 

[Dave A]

Sophy isn't a person. The dev team would get credit. Also, credit is not a given. You can work on a game and go uncredited... Happens all the time.

I got credited once for a game I barely touched because I told the director that the game was terrible. He credited me as a dis 😂

Funny thing. The 4 pepper GR3 race at Daytona exhibits none of the bad behaviours mentioned about the "broken" AI... I wonder why? They seem to race pretty friggin good there.

Just an observation

Indeed it isn't a person, it's a software product that as far as I'm aware is owned and developed by Sony AI which isn't referenced to in the credits of GT7, nor are Sony AI, nor are any of the development team at Sony AI.

As for people not being credited, sure, first party workers may often not be credited, but licensed software (even if within the same umbrella) does usually need to be credited. It would certainly be unreasonable and unexpected for neither the software itself or any of the Sophy Developers at Sony AI to not be mentioned at all in the games credits.

As for the 4 pepper races, whilst the races themselves are far better comptetiion and format than the chase the rabbit single file races, but yes the AI still has the same flaws, it's just faster. They will still drive into you in the same circumstances as they will in any of the other races, they're just faster, which is a good start, but it still appears to be the same "dumb" AI as in the other races.

There is zero evidence Sophy is already in GT7 in any form whatsoever. In fact, Kazunori even suggested that if/when it finally does appear it may not be as the main AI which you race against. Whilst there's no way to categorically state you are wrong without cracking open the games files and taking a look, there's no way you can prove I'm not a genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist either. But the evidence suggests you're wrong and it probably suggests I'm neither a genius, billionaire or philanthropist too.

 

[Imari]

For any feature. Credit is given at the discretion of the publisher/developer. It is not a right. I've fought for the credit of others who worked on a game throughout it's creation, and then left for a better opportunity just before the test cycle, and the powers that be wanted to leave them off the credits... but we are heading down a super off topic tangent.

My gut (and that's all this is, it's my gut reaction) says that the bones of the system, at minimum, are in place. Why? Because, as I said, it makes sense from a dev standpoint and, because machine learning requires data to learn from. Testers are limited in the amount of info they can produce. That's why the community can find a bug that slipped past the test team. If Sophy is going to behave like a human, it needs a lot of human generated data before it gets officially "implemented". Where better to get that than from than the community?

Remember, just because the system is in place doesn't mean it will behave differently. Just because it CAN be smart and good, that doesn't mean they will allow it to be smart and good. Afterall, it would still need to be slow for new players, for future Sunday Cup events, etc.

They might hold off until GT8 to make it official. Get everyone onto the PS5 platform. It would make for better press. After all, if all this advanced tech can work on a nearly 10 year old system, why would there be a need to buy the new one?

This isn't a hill I am going to die on. I could totally be wrong, but it seems like the rational approach to me.

It makes the massive assumption that Sophy was/is in a state that even the bones of the system, whatever those might be, are capable of being implemented on a PS4. Polyphony can be gathering player driving data without Sophy implemented at all if that's what they need, that's just gathering data. There's no Sophy implementation needed, just whatever data output they enabled for SonyAI in GTS.

As for the AI not behaving differently, you're suggesting that Polyphony implemented a different system and then fine tuned it to behave just like the old system. Occam's Razor cuts that to shreds. It could be correct, but the obvious conclusion when something appears to be the same is that it is in fact the same unless there's evidence to the contrary.

There's no evidence that you're not making stuff up other than "this would be efficient if they can do it". There's no evidence that Sophy is even in a state that a single instance of it can be implemented on a single console that is running the rest of the game at the same time, so the "if they can do it" is a massive hurdle to overcome before that statement even becomes reasonable.

 

[Voodoovaj]

It makes the massive assumption that Sophy was/is in a state that even the bones of the system, whatever those might be, are capable of being implemented on a PS4. Polyphony can be gathering player driving data without Sophy implemented at all if that's what they need, that's just gathering data. There's no Sophy implementation needed, just whatever data output they enabled for SonyAI in GTS.

Well, there's video evidence on the Sophy page that shows the state it's in, so there's that.

As for the AI not behaving differently, you're suggesting that Polyphony implemented a different system and then fine tuned it to behave just like the old system. Occam's Razor cuts that to shreds. It could be correct, but the obvious conclusion when something appears to be the same is that it is in fact the same unless there's evidence to the contrary.

But it's not behaving "just like the old system". There are instance in the game where it's actually acting quite brilliantly. Unfortunately, those places are few and far between.

There's no evidence that you're not making stuff up other than "this would be efficient if they can do it". There's no evidence that Sophy is even in a state that a single instance of it can be implemented on a single console that is running the rest of the game at the same time, so the "if they can do it" is a massive hurdle to overcome before that statement even becomes reasonable.

That's what an opinion is

time will tell.

 

[Voodoovaj]

Is for the 4 pepper races, whilst the races themselves are far better comptetiion and format than the chase the rabbit single file races, but yes the AI still has the same flaws, it's just faster. They will still drive into you in the same circumstances as they will in any of the other races, they're just faster, which is a good start, but it still appears to be the same "dumb" AI as in the other races.

Driver's online are pretty awful, and making an AI seem like a terrible human is a daunting task.

IIRC There's a story about garbage bins are Yellowstone and how the bears get into them. They asked a park ranger about implementing ones that would allow people to use them, while keeping the bears out. He said "there's considerable overlap between the smarter bears and the dumber people". I think that applies to driving game AI as well

There is zero evidence Sophy is already in GT7 in any form whatsoever. In fact, Kazunori even suggested that if/when it finally does appear it may not be as the main AI which you race against. Whilst there's no way to categorically state you are wrong without cracking open the games files and taking a look, there's no way you can prove I'm not a genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist either. But the evidence suggests you're wrong and it probably suggests I'm neither a genius, billionaire or philanthropist too.

As I said, I'm not committed to dying on this hill. I'm perfectly comfortable to be wrong about it, but you might be a genius too....that's all I am saying

Frankly, I'm already way deeper into this topic than I expected. At best, I am hoping for Sophy to be the backbone of a robust co-op mode and an increase in car balance. Beyond that, it doesn't excite me.

 

[Imari]

Well, there's video evidence on the Sophy page that shows the state it's in, so there's that.

All the video of Sophy so far is showing it running off separate server grade hardware. Have you actually read the paper to see what the "current" hardware requirements are? I posted them here.

Even omitting the trainer node, that's 2 vCPUs and 3.3GB RAM per Sophy instance. That's a lot for a console to suddenly pick up in addition to running the game itself. So actually, there's evidence that the current state of Sophy is that it doesn't run on a console without additional work and optimisations at a bare minimum.

But it's not behaving "just like the old system". There are instance in the game where it's actually acting quite brilliantly. Unfortunately, those places are few and far between.

"Few and far between" sounds like confirmation bias to me. You can find evidence for just about anything if all you need is a handful of rare and random occurrences.

At best, I am hoping for Sophy to be the backbone of a robust co-op mode and an increase in car balance.

That's a big step back from:

What I am saying is that the AI that is currently in the game is Sophy, simply turned down.

So which is it? Is the current in-game AI Sophy or not?

 

[tonybarnaby]

GT7 is a very fun game. If you expect a simulation, you're going to be let down. If you want a simulation racing game on console, ACC is your best bet by a landslide. I have had races in ACC where I literally reel in the AI driver ahead of me and gain 1/10th of a second per lap, and it'll go on for half a dozen laps in a row! You will never find this in GT7. Then again, you can play gt7 on your couch and talk to your wife while you play. When you're deep into ACC, it requires a lot of concentration. I love both games for different reasons.

 

[TheGhostOf94]

What? Gt1, gt2, Gt3, GT4 and GT5 have grid starts and GT1 and gt2 have qualify before the race to set the position.
The actual gameplay comes with gt6

Gran Turismo 3 had qualifying too.

 

[CBH]

GT7 is a very fun game.

So how is it a very fun game for you ?. I find GT7 or it should I called GT Sport 2 ridiculous and annoying, and I don't see any fun in the game at all like you..

 

[B80]

So how is it a very fun game for you ?. I find GT7 or it should I called GT Sport 2 ridiculous and annoying, and I don't see any fun in the game at all like you..

Sounds like due to it not being a full sim, more margin for error and perhaps not as taxing/draining mentally as a result.

Sometimes after long day at work or lack of sleep you may not be in the frame of mind for something that requires total focus.

I need to try acc, as bought it last month, buy currently enjoying gt7 and still loads to learn/room for improvement.
Must admit all the tyre pressure, intricate details puts me off a bit. Maybe I'll try f1 2021 first if/when I get bored of gt7.

I'm no hardcore sim racer though and had 10 hiatus from gaming until last year. I've played gt1 to 5, albeit as a casual player. I bought fanatec setup last month to increase enjoyment.

Perhaps more serious racers notice gt7 faults more than I do as a result.

 

[NikNakTobasco]

need to try acc, as bought it last month, buy currently enjoying gt7 and still loads to learn/room for improvement.
Must admit all the tyre pressure, intricate details puts me off a bit

Same for me. I bought ACC and took one look at the settings and went back to GT7. I’m sure if I put the time in it’ll be fine

 

[ScottPuss20]

Perhaps more serious racers notice gt7 faults more than I do as a result.

Yes they do. Those who have had experience with proper simulators like myself have a better understanding of car behaviour.

 

[Biggles]

It seems to me that the GT series is based on appealing to the obsessive/compulsive in people. Some "missions" are very difficult, but simply require multiple repetitions to perfect the sequence of moves required to "beat the level" - ie. timing every maneuver precisely through trial & error in order to win. It resembles a platformer-type game rater than a proper racing game. Games with better AI - like AC, ACC or PCars2 - provide a more organic racing experience, where you actually have to drive quickly & consistently & respond to what the AI does in order to win.

 

[B80]

Same for me. I bought ACC and took one look at the settings and went back to GT7. I’m sure if I put the time in it’ll be fine

Exactly, did a couple of laps on the ring and seemed decent and looking forward to it, but from I've heard/seen, seems like that kind of game you need to focus on, put time in. Not bounce back and forth with other racers. Really have to put time in to get anywhere (and not be frustrated), more do than more casual racers.

Gt7 has plenty of 'mileage' left for me yet.

 

[CBH]

Perhaps more serious racers notice gt7 faults more than I do as a result.

That's right most serious racers I know have gone, and they have played Gran Turismo games for years. I am still thinking about buying an Xbox X console soon, and I thought I never go down that path because l was loyal fan to GT games. I also thought that GT7 will be the best numbered game ever, boy I was totally wrong saying that. PD should hold their head in shame on what they have done to this game.