How will you identify GT6 game or sim?
- Thread starter smskeeter23
- 59 comments
- 2,594 views
- 2,151
- Germany
- x_XNyordiaX_x
It's simple. The realism of the game itself can only do so much. If you have idiots in your lobby that can't find their brakes, it doesn't matter how realistic it is. Or people that go: "Why does it matter if I ram you with 200kp/h, it's just a game..."
Basically, the people you play with, decide the realism of the game. Up to the point where you are playing with extremely good people, only then will realism of the game come forward.
Basically, the people you play with, decide the realism of the game. Up to the point where you are playing with extremely good people, only then will realism of the game come forward.
- 6,318
- West Virginia
- HBR-Roadhog
- HBR Roadhog
Both of course
- 1,721
- Sydney
- snakebacon97
Neither, it's Gran Turismo!
THE REAL DRIVING SIMULATOR... GAME... BOTH?
DELICIOUSLY FUN AND RATHER REALISTIC RACING, DRIVING AND CAR PR0N TIMESINK
DELICIOUSLY FUN AND RATHER REALISTIC RACING, DRIVING AND CAR PR0N TIMESINK
TACTICAL ESPIONAGE ACTION
- 11,298
- Sweden
- eran0004
That particular aspect of Gran Turismo does not prove anything really, in terms of what skills you get from playing. Take a random sample of 100 000 people who are interested in cars and racing, and you're bound to find someone who is fast in a real car. Do the same with players of any decent racing game and you'll probably get a pretty similar result.
GT Academy is not so much about teaching gamers how to race cars, but rather a method of finding talent that's already out there.
As for simulator vs game? There's not really any conflict there, it's like saying "is the car fast, or is it red", of course it can be one or the other or both at the same time. A game is essentially about winning or playing, while a simulator aims to imitate some real world phenomenon. Of course you can do both at the same time.
And then you have the realism factor, that's sort of separate from both the simulation aspect and the game aspect. A simulator can of course be realistic but it can also be highly abstract (could chess be an abstract simulation of war, for instance?)
I would say that Gran Turismo is a game that aims to simulate driving in a realistic way.
And to find out how good of a job it does we have to ask three separate questions:
1. What game qualities does Gran Turismo have? What is missing?
2. What simulator qualities does Gran Turismo have? What is missing?
3. What realism qualities does Gran Turismo have? What is missing?
In the definition of "machine built to simulate something" that's correct. You can simulate things without having advanced machines, though. A paper and a pen could be enough, depending on what you want to simulate and what aspects you're aiming for.
In the definition of "software made to simulate something", I think GT is definitely included there.
Last edited:
- 2,006
- Port Washington
- GTP_skeeter23
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
You could say the same thing about any entry level motorsport, all it does is separate the talent and doesn't teach you how to race cars. Karts are a good example. No suspension, no tire changes in a race, no pit stops, tiny etc. etc. etc. Racing a kart isn't like racing a car it's a completely different experience in many ways and yet it translates well into success at all levels of racing including F1.
GT teaches and reinforces many motorsport basics, but primarily finding the limit and understanding the interactions between throttle, brake and steering. The physics may not translate exactly and obviously it's much different being in the real car, but the principles are there for sure. 100,000 random people would not have that experience and especially would not have been pre-sorted down to the fastest 16/32 or whatever.
- 11,298
- Sweden
- eran0004
That doesn't mean that GT is unique compared to other racing games. Sure, GT has a unique collaboration with Nissan to make it possible to go from a video game to a race car, but it doesn't say anything about the quality of the game, or the simulation. Apply GT Academy to any other racing game (Mario Kart and that type of games excluded) and you'd probably get the same result per capita as you get with Gran Turismo.
- 1,089
It is more of a video game than sim. But bit off both really 
- 2,012
GT6 doesn't aim at simulating the real experience of driving a racing car in real life, without any aspects that don't exist or are practically impossible in it, both in-game and hardware wise. Therefore, not a simulator.
What F1 teams use is a simulator. A PS3 game is not.
Since the point is quite clear, I think the answer cannot be "yes" or "both" as it is pretty clear the GT series is not a sim. Furthermore, the "both" option is illogical per se considering both concepts are polar opposites; a whole different design approach. To the very most a third concept has to be used, which is the already massively accepted category of "simcade" (not 100% arcade).
On a separate note, GT Academy is rather weird in its roots, since people are chosen based on who knows how to abuse the physics the most (watch any replay of GT:A 2013 [GT6] on youtube to see what I mean) and practicing. While the amount of practice and endurance is a great way of selecting people for anything, the former has practically no relation with how they will do in real life racing, having to train everyone from scratch unless they have a real life racing background.
Also while the same can be said about all videogames and sims, GT6 cannot be a better training tool than proper simulators that their physics and tracks are closer to reality, among other in-game elements.
edit: To prove the physics abusing point, in which to qualify to GT:Academy no one drives realistically since GT6's physics are far off from reality, just found the exact video that was posted here some time ago. No one can say that's a simulator.
First off, did you read the article? That's not a really competitive professional series, like banning a trained adult from participating in a kids karting class.
The reason is the GT Academy guys are trained by real life racers, and now after years of training and practice they are professional racers. In other words, their console gaming background has absolutely nothing to do with how they perform after years of training. Put them in a sports or a racing car for the first time and they will do quite badly, maybe even worse than non-gamers as they could over shoot corners based on an excess of confidence, a common problem in the Nordschleife since it was included in games.
If they ever win at Le Mans it'll be because of their 5 years or more of participating in the real race, not because of sitting in a couch with a gamepad playing a videogame for 5 minutes, on a non laser scanned track, with a racing line, third person, magical grip assists and tires, physics that are considerably off reality and whatnot.
Now that it's clear the GT:A guys aren't a way to prove you point, and also aren't the careers of other gamers that went pro outside GT Academy, the only good example that I know of is the iRacing champion, who is considered to be the very best "simracer" ever. Thanks to top gear magazine he faced a real racing car for the first time -not years of real life racing- and the whole thing was documented. He managed to be somewhat close to amateur racer lap times after several laps of practice, which is awesome for somebody that hadn't even drove a sports car in his life, but still that's far off achieving pro lap times or even being deemed "too fast".
What F1 teams use is a simulator. A PS3 game is not.
Since the point is quite clear, I think the answer cannot be "yes" or "both" as it is pretty clear the GT series is not a sim. Furthermore, the "both" option is illogical per se considering both concepts are polar opposites; a whole different design approach. To the very most a third concept has to be used, which is the already massively accepted category of "simcade" (not 100% arcade).
On a separate note, GT Academy is rather weird in its roots, since people are chosen based on who knows how to abuse the physics the most (watch any replay of GT:A 2013 [GT6] on youtube to see what I mean) and practicing. While the amount of practice and endurance is a great way of selecting people for anything, the former has practically no relation with how they will do in real life racing, having to train everyone from scratch unless they have a real life racing background.
Also while the same can be said about all videogames and sims, GT6 cannot be a better training tool than proper simulators that their physics and tracks are closer to reality, among other in-game elements.
edit: To prove the physics abusing point, in which to qualify to GT:Academy no one drives realistically since GT6's physics are far off from reality, just found the exact video that was posted here some time ago. No one can say that's a simulator.
First off, did you read the article? That's not a really competitive professional series, like banning a trained adult from participating in a kids karting class.
The reason is the GT Academy guys are trained by real life racers, and now after years of training and practice they are professional racers. In other words, their console gaming background has absolutely nothing to do with how they perform after years of training. Put them in a sports or a racing car for the first time and they will do quite badly, maybe even worse than non-gamers as they could over shoot corners based on an excess of confidence, a common problem in the Nordschleife since it was included in games.
If they ever win at Le Mans it'll be because of their 5 years or more of participating in the real race, not because of sitting in a couch with a gamepad playing a videogame for 5 minutes, on a non laser scanned track, with a racing line, third person, magical grip assists and tires, physics that are considerably off reality and whatnot.
Now that it's clear the GT:A guys aren't a way to prove you point, and also aren't the careers of other gamers that went pro outside GT Academy, the only good example that I know of is the iRacing champion, who is considered to be the very best "simracer" ever. Thanks to top gear magazine he faced a real racing car for the first time -not years of real life racing- and the whole thing was documented. He managed to be somewhat close to amateur racer lap times after several laps of practice, which is awesome for somebody that hadn't even drove a sports car in his life, but still that's far off achieving pro lap times or even being deemed "too fast".
Last edited:
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
I disagree and GTAcademy is the proof. Your Mario Kart analogy is speculation because it's not done so you don't know. GT is the filtering process to generate the GTAcademy talent pool and it works. The proof is in the results. Not to say that Forza can't do the same thing, maybe they can. Or PCars or iRacing or any other sim/game. I'd bet they could. This isn't so much about the accuracy of GT specifically, but the accuracy of racing sims in general.
Can gt6 improve your real racing skills, with the proper rig? absolutely yes. Can you learn a track in gt6? Yes you can.
Is gt6 a proper simulator about a single car? no it isn't. Is gt6 a simulator consistent with reality in lap times (like f1 teams simulators)? no it isn't
What is the main difference between reality and gt6? As someone said the tyre model is quite bad, and as you can imagine tyre model is one of the most important things. That means not proper traction, and mainly very bad braking simulation.
So gt6 is a modest but fun simulator.
Is gt6 a proper simulator about a single car? no it isn't. Is gt6 a simulator consistent with reality in lap times (like f1 teams simulators)? no it isn't
What is the main difference between reality and gt6? As someone said the tyre model is quite bad, and as you can imagine tyre model is one of the most important things. That means not proper traction, and mainly very bad braking simulation.
So gt6 is a modest but fun simulator.
- 8,945
- F1 chimp land
- AnotherStory
The game isn`t out yet. 
- 534
- Jakarta
- Chiyo_Cute
GT6 is a lot more towards simulator, but the fact is it still is a game.
Now this is a GAME that I used to play a lot.. Hmm but I guess it's because the hardware wasn't powerful enough to simulate anything..
playing the game above does not improve your driving skill at all, in fact, worsen it.
Now this is a GAME that I used to play a lot.. Hmm but I guess it's because the hardware wasn't powerful enough to simulate anything..
playing the game above does not improve your driving skill at all, in fact, worsen it.
- 11,298
- Sweden
- eran0004
Mario Kart was specifically excluded, just so that's clear for the record 👍
What GT Academy shows, is that within the Gran Turismo player base there are potentially fast racers, that the GT Academy programme is able to find and get into real race cars with successful results. That's as far as it goes in terms of evidence. It doesn't say that Gran Turismo is a better training tool than other games.
What we can do is to conduct an experiment:
1. We select a target group that we want to do research on. Say, 20 year old males in Britain for example.
2. We make a list of all the 20 year old males in Britain and from that list we pick a random sample, let's say 500 individuals.
3. We let everyone go ten laps around Silverstone in a car (in real life) and calculate an average lap time for each person.
4. We select the games we want to test. We pick five different games. It could be Gran Turismo 6, Forza 5, iRacing, Mario Kart and Sim City (for control purposes). We randomly assign these 500 individuals to one game each and let them play ten hours per week for a year.
5. We then go back to Silverstone and let everyone do another ten laps.
6. We compare the average of their first attempt with the average of their second attempt and see if there's any difference.
If anyone is up to that, let's file an application for research funding and give it a go
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
Sorry about the Mario Kart thing..I was running out the door...Mario Kart was specifically excluded, just so that's clear for the record 👍
What GT Academy shows, is that within the Gran Turismo player base there are potentially fast racers, that the GT Academy programme is able to find and get into real race cars with successful results. That's as far as it goes in terms of evidence. It doesn't say that Gran Turismo is a better training tool than other games.
What we can do is to conduct an experiment:
1. We select a target group that we want to do research on. Say, 20 year old males in Britain for example.
2. We make a list of all the 20 year old males in Britain and from that list we pick a random sample, let's say 500 individuals.
3. We let everyone go ten laps around Silverstone in a car (in real life) and calculate an average lap time for each person.
4. We select the games we want to test. We pick five different games. It could be Gran Turismo 6, Forza 5, iRacing, Mario Kart and Sim City (for control purposes). We randomly assign these 500 individuals to one game each and let them play ten hours per week for a year.
5. We then go back to Silverstone and let everyone do another ten laps.
6. We compare the average of their first attempt with the average of their second attempt and see if there's any difference.
If anyone is up to that, let's file an application for research funding and give it a go
Anyway, you're right. It's not about GT being better than other sim, but more along the lines that racing/driving simulators are accurate enough to be able to spot real racing talent. GTAcademy is proof of that. Other series may eventually do the same, Forza being the most likely first candidate. Big shoes to fill though...
- 4,035
- Gothenburg
- Agremont
A bit of both.
- 369
- Spain
- wejhvabewjty
You can even play rFactor with a keyboard (With TC obviously
)
- 3,826
Funny story, Last night i needed some bread so i popped in my X1 redbull and off to the shop i go and silly me broke to late when i got there and hit the shop wall at 350kph, When i got out i said "oops" and we all had a laugh about it, Dont get me wrong it wasnt all roses as i got a slight mark on the shop wall which i had to paint over
Last edited:
- 11,298
- Sweden
- eran0004
Do you think a simulator has to be just like reality? Most proper driving (or flight) simulators doesn't even have any crash physics or graphics, because if you crash it's a fail and the simulation resets. If you're lucky, you get a pop-up window notifying you about the fact that you're "dead". Crash physics and graphics is more of a game feature than a simulation feature.
Ferrari458Italia
Premium
- 1,219
- Tennessee
- FerrariThugs
- xbox is a joke
It's honestly more of a simulator than a game. It offers aspects of a simulator than a game would (like NFS). I voted for simulator because, again, it's more of a sim than a game. I think it's 80% simulator and 20% game
- 822
- grashopper
- 3,826
How can something be a simulator if it does not simulate? gt may simulate some things like a car going 50mph down the road or running out of pertrol etc but gt is a game not a simulator, Those simulators you speak of probaly dont show crash damage or what ever because it isnt needed so no need to waste manhours making it but you still fail if you crash and thats the important part not how pretty it all looks.
If you are a pilot and you take a test in a simulator you cant fly around and crash into other planes or in a car ram people off the road like in video games (well you can try but will not end well), Simulators simulate the enviroment you will/may come up in and are used to prepare you or test you, In a pilot test in a simulator you have to do as if you were in a real plane, You have to do all the correct procedures, GT does not simulate driving conditions or racing conditions, It is no more a simulation than Need for Speed or GTAV although i could say GTAV is more of a simaltion as there are consequences to your actions (not saying GTAV is a sim)
- 11,298
- Sweden
- eran0004
There is no conflict between being a game and being a simulator. It can be both perfectly fine, just like a car can be red and fast at the same time. Not having crash physics and crash graphics would arguably make GT a worse game, but in terms of simulation it's definitely no requirement that it would have to imitate everything from reality. A lot of simulators are niched into only imitating a few certain aspects, and it doesn't even have to do it in a very realistic way.
- 3,826
Agree on it pos being a worse game if it did not apear in gt, There is no need for it to apear in a simulation because it serves no purpose, If the person crashes then the test or whatever is a fail, A simulator is meant to put you in the enviroment and your attention that you would face in the real world, You would avoid crashing in a sim but not be so bothered about it in a video game i.e GT
Similar threads
- Locked
