I like the rubber banding in this game

[Devedander]

By racing at the Lower class, it will help you build the Skill required to race on S-Class....................... What your obviously lacking...

Actually you are right, I have a lot of trouble on S class but that's becuase I don't play much (I can't really get into GTPSP with no career mode) and the nub and me just don't get along well.

But that's not why I am saying this.

The point isn't whether you can win at S class, the point is that you should win by what your skill level dictates. If rubberbanding means that racing an 8 minute lap wins by 1 second, but a 7:30 second lap against the same cars also only wins by 1 second, then that's just ridiculous.

That said, the exact problem is that someone who DOES have the skill to win at S class should be able to win based on that skill, not have to defeat a rubberband also.

Example: Let's say I race an 8 minute lap and it wins me the race in S class. Then next race I am shaping up for a 7:30 lap, easily a win agianst the same cars right? But the last corner I screw up a bit and I end up with a 7:40 lap. Still plenty fast to win, I obviously have the skill and I should get the win. But no, the rubberbanding put the computer on my butt the whole way so I loose as the computer pulls past me unfairly fast.

That's the problem.

BTW most of your post doesn't make any sense... rubber band doens't kick in until the person has an unfair lead? How exactly does one get an unfair lead? Is it by being better than the competition? If so then it stands that on lower classes, where that same person is even BETTER compared to the CPU the rubber band should be stronger no?

Your logic makes no sense.

As for keeping the game competitive to avoid huge gaps... umm, that's called having a higher class or adjusting S class so it's so good you really do have to be perfect to beat it, but do so in a fair and realistic way.

The solution to S class not being able to keep up with human drivers shouldnt be rubber banding, it should be a better sclass or an even higher (maybe R class) that does give those drivers a legit challenge.

Everyone seems to blame players for not being able to beat S class... ummm no... the problem isn't not being able to beat S class, it's that S class has a bad feature built in that means your skill is not accurately represented. If you shave 30 seconds off your previous first place time, you should have won by at least 30 seconds.

I am sure PD has some excellent racers, all they have to do is make the top class so good even those racers have a hard time winning. Viola, problem solved without annoying and unfair rubberbanding. If the S class drivers can drive so well that only and abosolutley perfect race will beat them and then only by a second or two, then there will never be a gap becuase you can't get faster than perfect.

 

[CirclesCenter]

I got buggered when I was coming down fuji's long straight in a ZR1 in S class and the Bugatti I was alongside didn't just leave me for dead. I really wanted it to just take that extra 350hp and show the (IIRC) 1.5 million dollar difference. I mean yeah, a ZR1 is no joke, but it's a Veyron.

 

[hugo24]

I did a 5 lap run of the Nurburgring on B level using the Veyron hoping to earn the 130,000 that day I needed to buy the AUDI Le Mans 03 quattro.

By the second lap I had built an 8 second lead, then three quarters of the way round after taking a series of corners perfectly out of no where the TVR's came flying by me doing at least 60kmph quicker than I was. The series of corners and the fact they were no where near me proves that they passed me not by slip streaming or taking a better line out of the corner, but by unfair AI. I soon passed them within 5 seconds (as there rocket packs expired) and thought jeeze that was strange.

The next lap at exactly the same point the same thing happened. I soon realised that my 38 minute race wasn't going to come down to skill or concentration but rather taking the last of the 96 or whatever it is corners correctly, irrespective of how bad I drove the other 95.

That to me is stupid, it doesn't reward skill or provide any enjoyment, what is the point if you can spin out, make a massacre of 90% of the corners but as long as after the RBE gets you to first in the last straight of the ring you can drive the insde line as slow as you want making it impossible to be passed, you win?

 

[SiNiST3R]

I never once said it was too hard, so why would I lower my class? If anything it's too forgiving imo.

Umm you said....

it just feels artificially difficult.

It's dificult, but not hard? okay there buddy

As to designing games I let PD do that

Apparently so, and complain about things you don't understand... Why not take a minute to figure out why & maybe you would understand better and feel less reason to complain.

If this was in GT5p or GT5 There would be legitimate reason to complain. Thankfully they have MUCH higher levels of complexity to the AI and games dynamics keeping it competitive without RB, the PSP simply doesn't have the power to do the same while maintaining 60fps & as much detail as this GT PSP has.....

Processing power I compared to the iPhone not the ps3

No, what your doing is asking a system less powerful do as much or more then the PS3. ALLOT of racing games on the PS3 system use RB. Re-read my last post to get the explanation of why (Still not getting it, eh?)

I even mitigated my statement by saying the iPhones processor had more dev time behind it. My point was that the iPhone uses arm arch and the psp uses mips, similar to the sgi graphics workstations of days only recently past, making a mhz to mhz comparison meaningless. The second point I even said was speculative.

Its not meaningless if it speaks to the devises capabilities. Your still not getting it? HELLO 60FPS on very high detailed cars and environment, doesn't leave much processing power to have sophisticated AI, as sophisticated as it would require to do what your asking.

The difference in tech and Dev time between the IPhone and PSP is irrelevant, what is relevant is the END performance and capabilities, as BOTH are on the market now. And that is where the coparo is made. If the PSP had the IPHones processing power it would be capable of expanding the complexity of whats being processed during game play....

Systems MORE powerful use RB still, and you continue to fail to understand why, 💡 I would look into that, before continuing to argue about something you admittedly don't understand.

Remember?

As to designing games I let PD do that

So let them!

Moving on..

Really though, to me it counts as a minor complaint, similar in scale to the gfx glitches that sometimes pop up it seems that other people care more about it than I do, on both sides. I for one wish you could set it as you wish, on for you off for others.

Yeah make the game cheesy if you want it cheesy.

You guys are complaining about loosing leads that you would never had obtained at all if the AI had the Skill your requesting. The only reason your getting a lead at all is because the game is designed to let you win Yet you complain that the game attempts to keep it exiting and punishing for mistakes made at the highest level of play. The whole reason they have different classes is to cater to the unskilled. Every class however is like a Fixed fight, we already know the winner, and it HAS to be like this (This is another thing apparently hard to understand). You just need to develop skill & consistency at the game, that's all, and its easy, fun, and interesting. You guys are complaining about not being rewarded for mediocrity, that's just sad.

 

[FoolKiller]

I am currently in a love/hate situation with this. I hate that the AI couldn't perform well enough to not need this. It is S-class, there is no reason why it shouldn't be the one class where some will have trouble winning. S-class licenses were borderline impossible for some people in GT4, and Yamauchi said that some things some people just wouldn't be able to do. I would prefer the AI's ability be the cause of that.


That said, I have learned to like it because I am finding myself being forced into better accuracy. For example: I was racing Autumn Ring in the MkV GTI against a Subaru Legacy, Integra R, and NSX. On S-class they all easily out powered me on the straights. With just a handful of turns left I take a tight turn a bit too wide and get off enough to get pulled on to the grass completely. The Legacy and Integra pass me before I get myself sorted and it took near perfection from there on to catch and pass the Integra, but the Legacy beat me by less than .175 seconds. I was extremely angry that the RBE caused the loss, as I should have had a good 5 seconds or more on them at that point (I can be 2+ seconds ahead midway through the first lap, but RBE stops any more).

So, I raced again. I did not make the same mistake and found myself more focused on each and every turn, knowing that one off would prevent a win. It forces me to be less careless.

It is annoying, but if I ever go online I think it will make me a better driver.

I think it could serve that purpose without upsetting people if it were implemented differently, like a different kind of challenge mode.

 

[Lucas180]

The racing is pretty easy to win..i dident read all this but jsut keep practice..i have not lost once yet in gt psp lol and yes i spun out multipul times and still got the lead back ..really easy.

 

[FoolKiller]

The racing is pretty easy to win..i dident read all this but jsut keep practice..i have not lost once yet in gt psp lol and yes i spun out multipul times and still got the lead back ..really easy.

It isn't about losing, but losing when you otherwise wouldn't that is annoying.

Try going off into the grass within less than 30 seconds of finishing the race and see if you can catch them back up.

And out of curiosity, what physics setup are you using?

 

[Devedander]

You guys are complaining about loosing leads that you would never had obtained at all if the AI had the Skill your requesting.

I think you nailed it on the head... the AI should have been programed so you couldn't get those leads... that's the good solution. Putting in something like rubberbanding is the bad patch job to fix that. Why the AI wasn't just programed to be better across the board instead of boosted when it fell behind is the issue.

Here's the thing, if you race a winning lap speed (say 7 minutes) and the next compeitor is a 7:10 that means that the best the cpu cars can do is 7:10. That means beating 7:10 should be a win (give or take few seconds maybe).

So here's the problem, you might race your next race, go off a curve early, get a 7:07 but because you went off early and had time to recover, you still win.

But make a similar 7 second mistake late, and suddenly against the same competition who can only race a 7:10 you loose...

This is a problem. Getting better should be against a set bar so you earn what you earn. Did you earn a 20 second lead victory? You should get it. Is there a class so hard you can't physically get a 10 second lead? Great.

But not some weird constnatly changing mixture of the two.

It's not an issue of skill, it's an issue of the fundamentals of racing which are: speed wins. Not speed wins sometimes, or speed wins depending on whether it happens early or late in the race.

Rubberbanding AI is like a clock in hotlap mode that doesn't keep true time depending on how well you are racing the course.

 

[SiNiST3R]

It isn't about losing, but losing when you otherwise wouldn't that is annoying.

Try going off into the grass within less than 30 seconds of finishing the race and see if you can catch them back up.

And out of curiosity, what physics setup are you using?

"losing when you otherwise wouldn't that is annoying"

Whats annoying is people who go off into the grass think they are good...

I've NEVER lost an S-Class race when running clean consistent laps, its only when going off into the grass on the last lap (making a HUGE mistake at the most crucial point in the race) that they ever get a win, & in that case they deserve it...

Try not going off into the grass, at any point, if you can do that your qualified to run S-Class, if not, your just not good enough

I think you nailed it on the head... the AI should have been programed so you couldn't get those leads... that's the good solution. Putting in something like rubberbanding is the bad patch job to fix that. Why the AI wasn't just programed to be better across the board instead of boosted when it fell behind is the issue.

The game even at its highest Rank has to be beatable They also realize people will get progressively better, so they NEED a system that will allow the game to be beatable by the masses, and still be entertaining after spending time on it. Why should the game get boring once you master it??? No keep it interesting with a system that adapts to the situation at had with only USER position being the guiding factor (Simplest way to do it, effectively and catering to all needs) is a system that wont hurt the 60fps or having 3 AI controlled cars.

In order for USERS to drive cars we need ALLOT of assist, even when all assist are turned off, there is still steering/throttle/braking assist at play keeping the USER on the road. So just getting past CPU controlled cars that are not hindered by the digital controls with Skilled AI would be difficult.

Here's the thing, if you race a winning lap speed (say 7 minutes) and the next compeitor is a 7:10 that means that the best the cpu cars can do is 7:10. That means beating 7:10 should be a win (give or take few seconds maybe).

The CPU should be adapting to you, and in doing so keep on your butt no matter how fast you get, they need to be there to punish you when you make a mistake, and at the same time as a bonus they get more air time in replay videos, making the videos more interesting just like the races. BONUS!!!

So here's the problem, you might race your next race, go off a curve early, get a 7:07 but because you went off early and had time to recover, you still win.

There's your issue, Stop Going Off The Track! Nuff Said!

But make a similar 7 second mistake late, and suddenly against the same competition who can only race a 7:10 you loose...

Damit, Still going.... Argh.

Your Still complaining about loosing after making mistakes.......... I'm stunned, are you serious??????? Your just not good enough to race at S-Class. I'm sorry if you don't want to believe it, but its true.

This is a problem. Getting better should be against a set bar so you earn what you earn. Did you earn a 20 second lead victory? You should get it. Is there a class so hard you can't physically get a 10 second lead? Great.

NOOOOOO!!!

The game should be adapting so it remains interesting as you progressively get better. Your argument is pretty sad, 10sec gaps are boring and CHEEEEESY Thank you Polyphony Digital (again, this is all getting so redundant) for engineering the game to be interesting no matter how good I get, & By doing so I will always keep getting better and more consistent. Thank you!

Your just complaining about not being good enough but without the Stones to say it.

But not some weird constantly changing mixture of the two.

It's not an issue of skill, it's an issue of the fundamentals of racing which are: speed wins. Not speed wins sometimes, or speed wins depending on whether it happens early or late in the race.

Yes! Yes it is a issue of skill, or a lack there of to be more correct.

The fundamentals of racing don't build the 10 gaps you want, and to win when making mistakes in the last laps, stop crying for not being consistent enough, if you were the RB wouldn't be an issue, it would be a good thing considering the situation...

Rubberbanding AI is like a clock in hotlap mode that doesn't keep true time depending on how well you are racing the course.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHa

Complaining about NOT winning races after going off the track on the last lap, is simply put, Pathetic!

 

[Devedander]

The game even at its highest Rank has to be beatable

That's not in question. At it's highest class it should be ALMOST impossible to beat, but still possible. This means if you get as good as you possibly can, you will only just win by a second or two.

They also realize people will get progressively better, so they NEED a system that will allow the game to be beatable by the masses,

Here is your problem. They don't need every mode to be able to be beaten by the masses. There are plenty of games out there where the hardest setting is only beatable by the few who really, really put time into it, there is no reason this should not be one.

The whole rest of your statement is pretty much based on this flawed statement.

Yes! Yes it is a issue of skill, or a lack there of to be more correct.

So running a faster lap than your previous first place lap speed shows a lack of skill? Coulda fooled me...

The fundamentals of racing don't build the 10 gaps you want,

No one is saying they WANT 10 second gaps, they are saying that IF you GET a 10 second gap, it should really be a 10 second gap, not magically handicapped down when the CPU sees fit.

Program an AI skilled enough that you can't get 10 seconds up, GREAT! Add in rubberbanding so you never know what your lead REALLY is? WEAK!

and to win when making mistakes in the last laps, stop crying for not being consistent enough, if you were the RB wouldn't be an issue, it would be a good thing considering the situation...

The hilarity of it is that what you are saying is absolutely not true... due to rubberbanding, putting down consistent times does not garauntee you will win... you could race 7 minutes one time and get first by 10 seconds, but the next time, 7 minutes gets you a loss... why? Becuase once you raced equally well the whole race, the other you did REALLy well the first half but went a bit wide near the end.

BOTH should be a win, but they aren't and that's the problem.

Complaining about NOT winning races after going off the track on the last lap, is simply put, Pathetic!

Fine, leave going off the track out of it, lets say it was just going to wide, braking too early, whatever. The point is a winning time should be a winning time and this is completely achieveable with AI that is programmed right.

It's funny how people who have weak arguments always try to turn it to an insult of someone elses ability rather than admit the problem is legitimate.

 

[SiNiST3R]

As long as you run a consistent race, you will always win, unless you make a mistake, like going in the Grass, If you get passed just because you went a bit wide, its because you never had the imaginary lead you though you had, the RB doesn't even work like that, it seams you don't even understand what your complaining about....

BOTH should be a win, but they aren't and that's the problem.

Welcome to the world of racing. Wherel mistake at the very last second can cost you the W.

Mistakes should cost you the race, simple as that, but don't under exaggerate your mistake to over exaggerate the RB. The AI can't pass me when I drive like crap, let alone when I run nice lines...

Its a game. A game that should be fun for a long time not a week, because I'm at the point where I leave the AI in the dust, it would be just more FUN to run Time Trials. I want the AI on my Butt to keep me on my toes so I keep a tight race and DON'T go wide in the end costing the W., Only a loser would want it the other way...

Fine, leave going off the track out of it, lets say it was just going to wide, braking too early, whatever. The point is a winning time should be a winning time and this is completely achievable with AI that is programmed right.

Wow, that's ridiculous, on S Rank I run HORRIBLE lines barely paying attention even dipping in the grass & the AI just can't get past me, they cant get closer then a few car lenths and they just stay there a tad in the distance. just far back enough to stay in the Replay, keeping it entertaining...

It's funny how people who have weak arguments always try to turn it to an insult of someone elses ability rather than admit the problem is legitimate.

Its funny how people who lack talent, blame other things for there inabilities....

Alright, lets look into your complaint, & see if it holds weight

IN the Single Player Menu, where you have the option to choose your car/track/race type.

Go into the Option to select your race type (drift trial, time trial, single race)

if you select "Single Race" it will give you 2 options.

First option is to choose how many laps your going to race. (up to you)

The second option is the important one, it will turn the RB on or off. (pretty much)

Its the "Limit to Manufacturer" option. If the option has "YES" selected then there will be RB keeping the AI cars on your tail.

Side Note:
Whats the biggest gap you have gotten on the AI with this option on "YES"? (please prove it) Id like to dig a bit deeper into the complaints as they all seem to over exaggerate the RB, and under exaggerate they're mistakes...

If the Option has "NO" selected, The RB is pretty much off.

Then things get a bit different. The AI is given at least 1 faster car then you that getting past takes some skill, Id like to see proven gaps in this situation, then prove it was the the RB that caused them to Win in a Super car powers cheating kinda way, because your only mistake was to take one of the last corners a little bit too wide....

When the RB is on, its quite laughable (Limited to Single manufacturer, option on YES") The cars are easy to pass (They have to be, they are driving the same car, if they weren't they would literally be next to impossible to pass, the game would have to be called Slipstream King) Once passed The RB keeps them on your tail at all times, and prevents really huge Gaps from being generated at all (Or then there wouldn't even be any Rb at all would there...) Keeping them close to punish you for mistakes, more then just going a bit wide in a corner (that's an Obvious under-exaggeration of your mistake) You need to look in your mirrors more often you'd probably see they are closer then you think.

Either way, Select the option "NO" and Have fun...

 

[NLxAROSA]

I think you guys can agree to disagree here.

Still, in S-class (or any other for that matter) I have never had the AI pass me unless I was plain slow, made a mistake or let them draft me. They simply will NOT pass you, because RBE is not active when they are close. However, they will draft you, and eachother, don't mistake that for RBE. I've seen the AI play rabbit several times: the following car(s) will draft the leader, take the lead and then get drafted again by the car that's behind. This will result in all of the AI cars going faster than you. But that's not RBE. And of course, you can do the same if they use it to pass you.

 

[SiNiST3R]

In S-class (or any other for that matter) I have never had the AI pass me unless I was plain slow, made a mistake or let them draft me. They simply will NOT pass you, because RBE is not active when they are close. However, they will draft you, and eachother, don't mistake that for RBE. I've seen the AI play rabbit several times: the following car(s) will draft the leader, take the lead and then get drafted again by the car that's behind. This will result in all of the AI cars going faster than you. But that's not RBE. And of course, you can do the same if they use it to pass you.

That is exactly what I experience.

I also agree with the rest of your points

Here is a Video displaying exactly this, they will not pass, you but simply keep on your But. During the second lap I drive horribly to show even when making mistakes, it takes a SERIOUS mistake for them to get by, and they can't get by me when I run bad lines brake too deep and harsh, throttle too hard out of corners sliding my tail around, all of that and they still couldn't get by...

S-Class No assist, on Pro

 

[Duke]

Here is a Video displaying exactly this, they will not pass, you but simply keep on your But. During the second lap I drive horribly to show even when making mistakes, it takes a SERIOUS mistake for them to get by, and they can't get by me when I run bad lines brake too deep and harsh, throttle too hard out of corners sliding my tail around, all of that and they still couldn't get by...

And this is good, how, exactly?

I don't WANT the game thinking for me. I don't WANT the game to dumb down for me. I don't WANT to be forced to second-guess how the game is going to respond.

I'm perfectly capable of adjusting the car I drive to make a challenging race at any level of skill I possess... IF AND ONLY IF the game is not constantly faking the AI so they stay near me but won't pass. I can fine tune my car down to provide a challenging race that requires consistent, no-mistakes driving, assuming I can predict what the AI is going to do in terms of lap times. What I can't do is hit an invisible moving target, which is exactly what the RBE makes out of the game.

You need to take a step back and stop insulting everyone who disagrees with you. It is perfectly possible to be a good racer who likes a challenge, but still hates the RBE. How about listening to what anybody else says for once?

 

[SiNiST3R]

And this is good, how, exactly?

It keeps you getting better as no matter how good you get they are always there to push you further and keep you consistent by punishing you for REAL mistakes. The Video is to show they aren't just blowing by the USER because of RB like some people are complaining about, but is merely over exaggerated.

Change the "Limit to Manufacturer" Option to "No" and find out....

Or PLEASE prove what your complaining about, display it, show it actually happening. Show us your so good you should be spanking the AI cars in S Rank, without cutting the grass or whatever other shortcut. Then show them doing whatever it is that's griping you. If your just upset because they are staying with you, that's just sad... You really must think your better than you are... If that was the only issue what exactly is your problem? You just don't like them being there? You want to feel good, by establishing BS leads? What?

What is Duke griping about? If he is so good, that he is "perfectly capable of adjusting the car he drives to make a challenging race at any level of skill he possess.." Well, we know the AI will stay with you, and when near you there is no RB at play... We know all the factors we need to to make that so if it were true. Whats the Issue? Ohh, its not true, Duke is over exaggerating his Skills to under exaggerate the AI's ability to then over exaggerate the AI RB'ing, & issue at hand.

I don't WANT the game thinking for me.

Its not, don't YOU over exaggerate now...

I don't WANT the game to dumb down for me.

Its not, its done the opposite, its stepped up. Go play GT build the HUGE gaps, hell lap everybody on the track, THAT is dumb down.

I don't WANT to be forced to second-guess how the game is going to respond.

What second guessing? We know exactly how they will respond, are you confused about something...

I'm perfectly capable of adjusting the car I drive to make a challenging race at any level of skill I possess... IF AND ONLY IF the game is not constantly faking the AI so they stay near me, but won't pass.

This doesn't even make seance...

You would be able to make the completion challenging on your own simply by tuning the car? If and Only if the AI is not constantly on your Butt?

So by adjusting the suspension of the car, the challenge of the race will be altered. How? How will the "Challenge" be increased or decreased?

Same question: How will adjusting the suspension of the car increased or decreased the "Challenge" of the race???? If the AI hypothetically was exactly how you wanted them to be??? (Not there at all lol)

WOW, your a funny guy, really living in GT fantasy land.

The beginning of your paragraph its like your trying to show off like you got real talent (I control the challenge with adjusting my suspension), but the second half show the truth, its a lack of real talent. (If and only if the AI isn't close behind) IF it were anything else the Issue at hand would NOT be an issue...

They will pass you if your not good enough to keep in front....

Prove they wont, I'm saying if your good enough they can't because You wont let them...

I can fine tune my car down to provide a challenging race that requires consistent, no-mistakes driving, assuming I can predict what the AI is going to do in terms of lap times. What I can't do is hit an invisible moving target, which is exactly what the RBE makes out of the game.

Your dreaming. "I can fine tune my car down to provide a challenging race that requires consistent, no-mistakes driving" What impact does tuning YOUR car have on any other car in the race (The other cars provide the challenge, NOT YOU) If that were the case, you would WELCOME the AI cars on your Butt, otherwise WHERE is the challenge you speak of????

You need to take a step back and stop insulting everyone who disagrees with you. It is perfectly possible to be a good racer who likes a challenge, but still hates the RBE. How about listening to what anybody else says for once?

You make statements that show the lack of understanding, You want to have a challenge, without a challenge..... You want the AI to be good, just not good enough to keep up with you no matter how good you get.

What you want is for the Challenge to be removed, but don't have the Stones to say it...

I'm still waiting for ANYBODY to SHOW anything other then the AI just staying on your Butt. RB or not it makes NO difference to Skilled Drivers, we still win with them there or not. Having them there keeps it interesting, and it keeps you on your toes to NOT make ANY mistakes (Like riding off into the Grass, on the last lap) SO if your complaining, its because your losing. (Prove it otherwise)

Don't take thing so personally, this is a forum, everything is tong in cheek, if your thin skinned, forums are no place for you to post, just observe...

 

[FoolKiller]

"losing when you otherwise wouldn't that is annoying"

Whats annoying is people who go off into the grass think they are good...

I keep reading my post over and over, but I do not see anywhere that I said I was good (or even thought it) in any way, shape, or form. All I did was give an example of when I made a mistake and lost.

I've NEVER lost an S-Class race when running clean consistent laps, its only when going off into the grass on the last lap (making a HUGE mistake at the most crucial point in the race) that they ever get a win, & in that case they deserve it...

Try not going off into the grass, at any point, if you can do that your qualified to run S-Class, if not, your just not good enough

Did you even read my first post? I said that I like it because it does force me to be better. My complaint is that RBE is not a valid replacement for good AI.

Address this question: Why is RBE an acceptable replacement for proper AI that is actually competitive.

I mean, look at your video. You fly past them all before the first turn. You call that a race? If the AI were decent the RBE wouldn't have been needed and they wouldn't have been easy to pass so early and then they should have roasted your butt after that sloppy driving.

RBE is used in place of competitive AI. That is the issue. No one would complain if the AI was competitive without an unrealistic advantage. If someone is as poor of a driver as you are implying I am can pass them quickly and easily and win 9 out of 10 times, only losing when I make a huge flub, that is poor AI for a maximum difficulty event. RBE is an absolutely horrible design choice to make up for that.

 

[Devedander]

I disagree that rubber banding only occurs at distance. This is very visible on the test track where skill in driving is far less important that car peformance.

I have had races where I pull way out ahead, literally can't see the other guys in my rearview. Then suddenly they come boldering up behind me and pass me like nothing... then suddenly I fly past them... this goes back and forth.

This doesn't just happen because I am better or worse at cornering or straights, sometimes they will fly past me on straights and sometimes on corners and vice versa.

This isn't drafting as they are so far back no amount of bump drafting should bring them up that fast and that furious and when I come flying past them, it's just me from way back with no drafting opportunity to help me.

This is just blatent.

 

[GTRufus]

didn't we all wanted a better AI? now PD gives us a better AI and you want the opposite again?

 

[Tornado]

Rubber band AI is not better AI.

 

[NLxAROSA]

Why is RBE an acceptable replacement for proper AI that is actually competitive.

It's not. But given the fact that racing games (and simulators too) on platforms with many times the processing power of the PSP fail to implement actually competitive AI, I find it unrealistic to expect it from a game that runs on a platform like the PSP, especially given the fact that they managed to squeeze all that content, physics, etc. in it already. You can be 100% certain that the inclusion of proper AI would have resulted in dropping several other features, and the game being another year too late. Is that poor design or is it actually smart, given the circumstances?

I disagree that rubber banding only occurs at distance. This is very visible on the test track where skill in driving is far less important that car peformance.

The mirror is actually quite deceiving (like GT5P), a car that's just a few pixels big in the mirror is actually relatively close (check the race map to verify how close it really is). I've run many laps on the test track with many different cars on S-class, and every time I get passed, it's because of drafting, the AI cars playing rabbit with eachother, or them simply having a faster car. Especially with the faster cars, the draft area is immense. I was able to draft Veyrons that were hardly visible (you can verify quite easily because the wind sounds go away when drafting) and attain speeds that were a lot faster than the top speed of the car. The test track is indeed a good track to test this, since you can factor out most of the human errors (hard to make any errors there ).

Rubber band AI is not better AI.

In general: indeed not. But given the circumstances/platform restrictions, it may very well be the only way to make it competitive.

 

[Tornado]

I've played games on the PC from the late 90s that had AI that reacted to player and other AI in ways that I would react if presented with similar situations. The PSX TOCA games weren't that bad either. That the game is on the PSP (the same system that had a straight port of Race Driver 2) doesn't absolve it from anything, because the PSP is still pretty powerful for a handheld.
Though the development time aspect is a much better reasoning for the problem, I admit; as it is quite clear that the game was obviously intended to keep the PSP Go afloat at launch.

 

[Duke]

Don't take thing so personally, this is a forum, everything is tong in cheek, if your thin skinned, forums are no place for you to post, just observe...

With you, it's not tongue in cheek, it's fingers in ears, because you absolutely refuse to consider what anyone else is saying. You post your same condescending posts over and over, missing (or ignoring) everybody's points because they don't agree with you.

It's tiresome, and so are the insults. You're welcome to have a differing opinion. You're not welcome to belittle other users for not sharing it. Change your tone or expect an infraction.

NOTE: this is NOT a warning for daring to disagree with me. This is a warning for being argumentative and insulting to others.

Seriously, it is possible for intelligent people to disagree with you.

 

[SiNiST3R]

With you, it's not tongue in cheek, it's fingers in ears

Finger in ears, or Hands over eyes?

Ill let it go none the less.

Some people like to keep the game interesting, some people like to keep it easy, not everybody wants the same thing....

didn't we all wanted a better AI? now PD gives us a better AI and you want the opposite again?

Its weird, give them what they ask for, then they want it back the other way when they get it.

It's not. But given the fact that racing games (and simulators too) on platforms with many times the processing power of the PSP fail to implement actually competitive AI, I find it unrealistic to expect it from a game that runs on a platform like the PSP, especially given the fact that they managed to squeeze all that content, physics, etc. in it already. You can be 100% certain that the inclusion of proper AI would have resulted in dropping several other features, and the game being another year too late. Is that poor design or is it actually smart, given the circumstances?

The mirror is actually quite deceiving (like GT5P), a car that's just a few pixels big in the mirror is actually relatively close (check the race map to verify how close it really is). I've run many laps on the test track with many different cars on S-class, and every time I get passed, it's because of drafting, the AI cars playing rabbit with eachother, or them simply having a faster car. Especially with the faster cars, the draft area is immense. I was able to draft Veyrons that were hardly visible (you can verify quite easily because the wind sounds go away when drafting) and attain speeds that were a lot faster than the top speed of the car. The test track is indeed a good track to test this, since you can factor out most of the human errors (hard to make any errors there ).

In general: indeed not. But given the circumstances/platform restrictions, it may very well be the only way to make it competitive.

I believe you have understood best, & I couldn't agree more with your post. ++Rep as they say...

 

[FoolKiller]

Its weird, give them what they ask for, then they want it back the other way when they get it.

I would like to keep it interesting, but not via something that is borderline cheating. Granted, this isn't as bad as some of the stuff I ran into in Ferrari Challenge (leaving the racing line to run me off the track, illegal blocking) or Motorstorm (some opponents quit racing in order to wreck my car by coming at me head on, going the wrong way on the track), but I just have to wonder if we would accept this in GT5. I know we already complained about it in Prologue.

I believe you have understood best, & I couldn't agree more with your post. ++Rep as they say...

So, when he agreed with me that it wasn't an acceptable replacement for an actual good AI you agree?

Do note that I am saying I wish I had A instead of B, but not saying that B is ruining the game as the end result is similar. It's like getting the generic knock off of a brand name product. Yes, they both do the same thing, but the brand name doesn't come off as cheap.

 

[vaioleto]

Well corrected Toronado! To be honest, vaioleto's not worth the effort. He got pulled up for hypocritical posts involving terrible grammar, and then he resorts to trying to twist things to his advantage, failing accordingly. But, I can't resist:


LMAO! Maybe that should be "... aren't as negative ...", eh? Like I said in my previous posts, you really have no clue do you? You seem to have looked up the use of the apostrophe, but now you have no idea which words to actually use. You may want to improve your written skills before slating people next time.

You need to get a life.

This is all very tedious, but:



is wrong.

"My friend's little brother" = "The little brother of my friend".

Just goes to show you shouldn't go round putting people down, especially when you're making corrections that aren't correct.

If English is your second language, then I don't blame you...

Anyways, I've played GTPSP more, and I've learned to live with the rewind, like people said, it does keep you race more accurately since if you mess up, the AI will pass you. I treat it like a really tough training tool, where the AI will cheat to win so that when you eventually race against non-cheating AI in GT5, you'll be much better.

You should all ignore devedander, he hasn't played the game and likes to troll a lot. Why people bother to critique something based on hearsay, I'll never know.

 

[Devedander]

You need to get a life.

Nomino might have done a lot of things wrong, but he nailed it when he explained you

Anyways, I've played GTPSP more, and I've learned to live with the rewind, like people said, it does keep you race more accurately since if you mess up, the AI will pass you. I treat it like a really tough training tool, where the AI will cheat to win so that when you eventually race against non-cheating AI in GT5, you'll be much better.

You should all ignore devedander, he hasn't played the game and likes to troll a lot. Why people bother to critique something based on hearsay, I'll never know.

Yes, I am sure peple will listen to you because you make lots of logical and sound arguments and factual statements right? Like how I haven't played GTPSP... even though I have... and I wrote in the review thread?

Keep trying vaioleto... we all need our entertainment

 

[SiNiST3R]

Goes to grab his Bat, heads out to the Barn, and BEATS THE CRAP OUT OF A HORSE, that died earlier that day.

 

[Seismica]

The rubber banding shows that the AI can actually drive fast, even if it is cheating.

So why didn't they just incorporate a system where the AI improve as the difficulty increases? I mean if you look at your B-spec driver in GT4, he improves with practice. Say 1 is the level of skill/difficulty when your B spec driver has 0 points and 10 is when he is maxed out. Why couldn't the difficulties on PSP be like: C - difficulty 3, B - Difficulty 5, A - difficulty 7, S - Difficulty 9. And then cars are sorted into 'classes' so you always race against cars of similar performence, but the AI 'skill' is always the same at each level.

Why couldn't they have done that? Sure the inexperienced drivers would have struggled with S rank, but it would of posed a proper challenge to good drivers. Instead they made the rubber banding have more of an effect with each level of difficulty...

I'll also say this; in GT4 the races were only easy if you made them so. You could increase the difficulty by entering a particular event with a slower car. With no career mode on GTPSP they improvised by introducing rubber banding. So they took away our career mode and introduced rubber banding to replace it. They couldn't have got it more wrong!

I'm not going to buy this game until they release some sort of patch update to remove rubber banding, as it is probably the most hated feature in any racing game for me, regardless of whether past GTs had it. If a race is hard, its a good challenge and i keep at it. When a race is easy if i drive slow and hard if i drive fast, i don't want to play, its simply unfair.

 

[Devedander]

The rubber banding shows that the AI can actually drive fast, even if it is cheating.

So why didn't they just incorporate a system where the AI improve as the difficulty increases?

Perfectly said.

 

[Duke]

Some people like to keep the game interesting, some people like to keep it easy, not everybody wants the same thing....

When did I say I wanted to keep it easy? Please show me. Of course, disagreeing with you is (in your eyes) nothing but proof we can't drive. That's because you refuse to listen to what anybody else is saying and just keep repeating your same argument ad naseum.

Take a look back at some of my GT3 and GT4 race reports. For some of the enduros I spent much longer picking the perfect car (fun, challenging, and close with no overkill) than it would take to actually run the enduro itself. I hardly think that means I want to "keep it easy" because I can't drive.

Some of us actually have willpower and will always choose a car that is barely capable of beating the competition, even if the AI doesn't get magic pixie dust sprinkled on them so they can keep up no matter how fast I go.

Its weird, give them what they ask for, then they want it back the other way when they get it.

Nobody - and I mean nobody but you and PD's game designer likes the RBE. Nobody I know asked for it. In fact, in every instance I've seen, people have been praying it's not in future games.

Excessive RBE - and pretty much any RBE at all is excessive to me - makes tuning and adjusting pointless, because the AI will just magically get what they need to hang off your ass the entire time. So instead of being able to tailor the car you're driving to the AI pressure, it no longer really matters. If you want any kind of accuracy at all, you're stuck.