IC-5: the landing makes all the difference.

[Parnelli Bone]

Here's part 3 (I think) in my license test revelations! I was doing IC-5 (Supra at Red Rock). I had tried it maybe 30x or so. Again and again, the same results: I was off by .05 seconds...off by .04 seconds. Finally I realized that in the demo, the Supra clearly almost wipes out in the sand trap on the left, and is trying to get back onto the track. It is a robot, after all. And I was trying to imitate it. Then I thought: well what if I didn't try to steer back on track? What if I landed on the rumble strip and just went straight thru the finish line? Voila! Instant gold.

Not only that, but I hit gold in IC-6 on my first try!

 

[Jmac279]

Good job ...

 

[MacRoadster]

Nice one. 👍

There's a small detail that can make a difference sometimes... a car looses speed, or doesn't accelerate as much, when cornering. Sometimes is better to trace a line more in "V" than in "U" when cornering, stopping steering as soon as possible when getting out of the corner, to get more speed sooner.

 

[SportWagon]

I don't think the demos are robots. I think they record some actual run by a human.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

Yeah, you're probly right. I would love to meet the person who can drive all those tests..I wonder if he or she is a real-life race car driver.

 

[TMM]

Yeah, you're probly right. I would love to meet the person who can drive all those tests..i wonder if he or she is a real-life race car driver.

May not be the same person that does all the tests. But as the test's can be beaton, to get gold you have to, then surely they are programmed to allow for people to get better. It's more likely that it is the AI driving the test, maybe stepped up a bit to give more of a challenge.

 

[SportWagon]

There are lots of (well, several) drivers at, e.g. GTF, who can get gold on most of the license tests in about as much time as it takes me to just pass.

The demos often show stylistic differences, e.g. different tempermants of pre-test revving-up.

The AI in GT2 often had serious flaws, e.g. turn 1b at Apricot Hill. I don't think it could be just arbitrarily stepped up to be better. Another e.g.. I don't think there's any way it could pick out the lines used by the GT40 at Seattle.

Note that, as of GT2, the gold standards are not quite as fast as the demo runs. That is, that creates room to ensure getting gold is "possible". In GT1, in contrast, a lot of the demo runs weren't even gold, which meant that after a point you were in "uncharted territory" when trying to improve.

 

[Korndawg]

whoa realy? i havnt played gt1 for years. that would really make it a challenge then because you cant just imitate the demo run.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

Yeah I know, Sportwagon. There are a bunch of drivers at Racing Line.org (or there used to be, anyways) who can just knock out golds as easily as I can clip my toenails. Makes me jealous.

 

[Korndawg]

ooh i havnt heard of that site il have to check it out heh

 

[TMM]

There are lots of (well, several) drivers at, e.g. GTF, who can get gold on most of the license tests in about as much time as it takes me to just pass.

The demos often show stylistic differences, e.g. different tempermants of pre-test revving-up.

The AI in GT2 often had serious flaws, e.g. turn 1b at Apricot Hill. I don't think it could be just arbitrarily stepped up to be better. Another e.g.. I don't think there's any way it could pick out the lines used by the GT40 at Seattle.

Note that, as of GT2, the gold standards are not quite as fast as the demo runs. That is, that creates room to ensure getting gold is "possible". In GT1, in contrast, a lot of the demo runs weren't even gold, which meant that after a point you were in "uncharted territory" when trying to improve.

Apologises SportWagon, I didn't realise you were talking about demo runs rather than the time to get gold, even though your post clearly says demo runs. I think I was speed reading because of lack of time, therefore I believe you could well be right and take back my prevouis post on the subject.

PS this is written in good faith and with tongue firmly pressed into check.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

ooh i havnt heard of that site il have to check it out heh

GTF (Gran Turismo Forum.com) is pretty much dead nowadays for GT2 stuff, but its bulletin board goes all the way back to December 1999 when the game was released. It's fun to read people's first impressions of the game (about 70% disappointment, by the way!) as well as flames and assorted weirdness.

www.Racing-Line.org is another ‘old’ site visited by the very best of Gran Turismo drivers, as well as other sims like Colin McRae rally. It was bought by a guy last fall who turned out to be a total d!ck, and most of the original masters on that site either left or got kicked off. Not only that, but the precious records on that site were sabotaged by some hacker or something. I haven't visited it in awhile..maybe it's doing better than it was.

 

[SportWagon]

If I said GTF I meant GTX i.e. www.granturismox.net

 

[Korndawg]

GTF (Gran Turismo Forum.com) is pretty much dead nowadays for GT2 stuff, but its bulletin board goes all the way back to December 1999 when the game was released. It's fun to read people's first impressions of the game (about 70% disappointment, by the way!) as well as flames and assorted weirdness.

www.Racing-Line.org is another ‘old’ site visited by the very best of Gran Turismo drivers, as well as other sims like Colin McRae rally. It was bought by a guy last fall who turned out to be a total d!ck, and most of the original masters on that site either left or got kicked off. Not only that, but the precious records on that site were sabotaged by some hacker or something. I haven't visited it in awhile..maybe it's doing better than it was.

dang thats unfortunate.. i hate to see good sites go down. thanks for the info on the other sites too. thats weird how people didnt like gt2 at first..realy weird..why do you think that is?

 

[Parnelli Bone]

dang thats unfortunate.. i hate to see good sites go down. thanks for the info on the other sites too. thats weird how people didnt like gt2 at first..realy weird..why do you think that is?

I was there right when all the action at Racing Line was happening...I discovered that site, joined up, and wound up right in the middle of a massive flame war! The owner deleted most of the flames, unfortunately, probly since most of them were directed at the way he was handling the reins.

AT GTF, people were disappointed with GT2 for lots of reasons. Off the top of my head:

1. The game doesn't record lap times during races the way that GT1 did. Instead, you have to go on the Arcade disc and do a time trial. This pissed a LOT of people off believe it or not.

2. Grainier graphics. No hidden hi-res mode, either.

3. No drag racing strip was in the game even tho Polyphony promised it would be there.

4. About 10 days after the game was released on December 18th, people started losing their cars to the Garage Bug. It took awhile till some genius figured out that the machine tests are to blame.

5. Acura Type R in the dealer is really a GS-R. The real Type R can only be gained with a gameshark. No M-series BMWs. No Mercedes race car (except with gameshark). No Ferrari, Lamborghini, Maserati. No Porsche...this could go on and on. Basically, everyone's got a favorite car, and nobody's favorite was in the game.

6. GT2 is simply way too easy. The horsepower limits are bunk-you can enter a car 150 to 200 hp below the limits and still win races. The license tests were softened up to make the game more accessible to the masses, and this didn't bode well with a lot of hard-core gamers.

7. and of course, everyone was pissed about all the Kei cars in the game, robbing memory from cars that really matter. Personally, I like the Keis!

This is only the tip of the surface, go see for yourself...it's worth the read if you've got time to kill.

 

[Korndawg]

Basically, everyone's got a favorite car, and nobody's favorite was in the game.

everyone was pissed about all the Kei cars in the game, robbing memory from cars that really matter. Personally, i like the Keis!

that is true. they could have chosen the lineup a bit more carefully. i would have loved to see an old style alfa like in gt4 and of course the ferraris, lambos etc..

about kei cars, i think theyre great fun to putt around in, i just bought one last night in fact. but i do think they could have held back a little, i dont think we needed 5-10 different types of daihatsu moves or suzuki wagons

 

[Parnelli Bone]

that is true. they could have chosen the lineup a bit more carefully. i would have loved to see an old style alfa like in gt4 and of course the ferraris, lambos etc..

about kei cars, i think theyre great fun to putt around in, i just bought one last night in fact. but i do think they could have held back a little, i dont think we needed 5-10 different types of daihatsu moves or suzuki wagons

Totally agree! The Cappucino, Pajero, Storia, and a handful of others are fun and worth racing, and I occasionally like racing a van just for the laugh factor, but they could have hacked a bunch of kei cars.