More Gran Turismo 7 Details: Classic Original Circuits, AI Improvements, and GT Sport Content Confirmed
- Thread starter Famine
- 153 comments
- 20,757 views
- 1,762
- Germany
- xXGalmOneXx
- xXGalm OneXx
I hope you can finally rotate the camera around the car in chase view. Standart feature in every racing game since years meanwhile not possible in GT...
About the content.. well they use the GT Sport content and graphics engine to build another game around it.
About the content.. well they use the GT Sport content and graphics engine to build another game around it.
- 2
- Indonesia
i really hope they adding more fictional tracks in the future
and more cars too, i will be surprised if they put quirky cars like Kubelwagen & Tank Car in GT7
they already have a ton of nice location reference in Scapes, why they dont use it?
and more cars too, i will be surprised if they put quirky cars like Kubelwagen & Tank Car in GT7
this. Grand Canyon, El Capitan in GT4 is few best example of showing PS2 graphics
they already have a ton of nice location reference in Scapes, why they dont use it?
Last edited:
I'm pleasently surprised about dynamic tod and weather and was one of the people expecting it won't be there with the crossgen release. However, only 16 cars on track in online racing is a huge downside that is probably linked to the game being on PS4 also. It even kind of makes dynamic tod irrelevant as you need bigger grids for endurance races.Ahhhhhhh! It's only gt sport 1 1/2!!! only one track with a new menu ! Zero difference or anything new like dynamic time and weather and customization!!
Muh tracing!
They only showed a few real tracks in the trailer so we have to assume something like spa won't be there.
This place is hilarious. And people were so convinced time and weather would be absent because cross gen.
Somebody said ac had a hard time on pc with ray tracing during game play.
The all powerful pc had a hard time
So even if it was full blown ps5 it probably wouldn't be there
I have everything saved up and i'm geeked for thisps5 and gt7 here i come.
Couldn't care less about ray tracing though. I will probably shut it off completely when there is a performance mode without it.
- 302
If they did mention that it is a mix of gameplay and in-game cinematics, then I didn’t see it.
But still, as I said, the fact that you have to be literal, careful and suspicious about the small details is what bothers me most. I mean, in the end, what’s the point of having something half-baked if you can’t implement it properly? I disagree with other users saying that RT makes no actual when driving, difference because it’s not just reflections, but also lighting.
Last but not least, this doesn’t put me off from getting the game anyway, nor does it make me less of a fan because I am used to minor disappointments that come in batches, secretively - this last part I would like to end though!
- 3,804
Anything Kaz says about AI can be taken with a grain of salt until you experience it.
- 1,748
- vspectra06
- vspectra06
Yeah it was at the beginning of the trailer.
So regarding RT, currently devs are using separate algorithms to calculate RT lighting, RT shadows/ao, and RT reflections, so a game saying it has RT doesn't mean it includes all of the above. GT7's press material only talks about RT reflections, Spiderman and Ratchet and Clank also only have RT reflections while relying on traditional pre-baked lighting and shadows. Metro Exodus only has RT GI lighting but no RT reflections. It will be a while before we get path tracing running in-game, which is a single algorithm that calculates all RT lighting, reflections, shadows. Also the current RT technology on console GPUs are very limited. The ray-tracing uses the same compute units that also does the processing for all other graphics. PS5 GPU has no dedicated ray-tracing core accelerators.
In the end it's just another Gran Turismo title… Better graphics (which it was expected except the rain that's the same as in GTS), a back to its roots (nice to see it happen), better AI (let's wait to check it ourselves) but, really, nothing more… It's still a game developed for the "Dual Shock", I can understand that, it's a console game but even though, when we have a steering wheel and try Assetto Corsa or Assetto Corsa Competizione we can see a lot to be improved in our beloved GT…
- 774
- Brazil
- wagnerFAM98
Despite being known as the "real driving simulator", Polyphony simply doesn't want to make the most realistic thing on the market. They know they'll lose a significant amount of players if they try something leading to a full-sim like ACC.
I like to say GT is the most realistic simcade right now, and frankly, this is the perfect spot for me and many players.
Last edited:
- 1,455
- GDL, Mexico
- Insomniac_driver
I fully agree, not all of us are the new Senna or Schumacher, but we are enthusiast, something that is realistic enough while not asking me to be a race engineer is OK for me lol
Well, I don't think like that, I want more. I want more because I have the taste of better is some aspects, and on the console, so it's possible and if it's possible I want the same experience on all the games that stand for sim racing. If you try a steering wheel, or if you already have one, go try it, go try others and compare.
I don't think the game would lose audience and users by being better. The road could have bumps and you could still drive it with the pad.
On another topic, not much has been talked about VR… I really hope to get a full GT7 in VR.
I don't think the game would lose audience and users by being better. The road could have bumps and you could still drive it with the pad.
On another topic, not much has been talked about VR… I really hope to get a full GT7 in VR.
Last edited:
- 16,258
- Melbourne
- ScottPuss20
- CheetahsMeow
Well it was better before June 2019 so no, it's not perfect. If GT7 can revert back to those physics then I'll be happy.
- 128
- Netherlands
- CoopR_26
I agree with you here. I only got into racing games a couple years ago and I bought Project Cars 2 when I first got my wheel. That game is just way too complicated to get into and I never did. When I got GT Sport for free with a new controller, I fell in love with it immediatly. It's just the perfect game to casually race in, whilest still feeling like you're actually driving a car. It is so easy to get into and the Force Feedback, while being mostly just steering weight and slight bumps here and there, is good enough for me. I just love the fact that I can yeet cars into corners at speed way too high and still maintain control. I recently got ACC and that game fits right in between PC2 and GTS for me. The FFB is amazing in ACC, whilest controlling the car isn't overly difficult as in PC2 (for me).
- 214
- Japan
In the first place, kaz said in a previous interview that the more realistic the physics, the easier it is to drive. If this is really correct, you shouldn't lose a lot of players just because it's a realistic physics.
Last edited:
- 9,925
- Denmark
Which is correct. The more arcady game physics are, the harder it is to learn.
- 475
- Germany
Funny thing is, ACCs FFB is often a point of criticism among actual simracers. But that just shows how far away GT Sports FFB from "okay" FFB is, let alone good FFB. IMO there should be a lot of improvements in that area, as, unlike more complicated physics for example, that can't negatively affect casual players either.
- 128
- Netherlands
- CoopR_26
Oh wow, that's certainly interesting. How does Project Cars 2 FFB fit in there? For me that game has the most vague and icy feeling of all racing games I've played.
This basically just shows that FFB is mostly personal preference. I really like the fact that GT Sports is the way it is, albeit pretty bad. It's easy to get into and really master car control.
Last edited:
- 29,991
- Cuddington, Cheshire
- JDA1982
Kind of, it really depends what you expect. An out and out arcade racer can be very easy to learn. But arguably the hardest racing games to learn are those that try to be realisitc but are dumbed down, or omit certain things entirely, because you're expecting the car to feel or do one thing, but it does something else. Where a game is outright arcade, like say Ridge Racer, I don't find those at all challenging to learn how the cars respond etc. But when I expect a FWD racing car to bite into the apex and power out of the corner because of it's differential but instead it understeers out wide and you lose your exit speed, that throws me off and you can lose your rythm beyond that point as well.
The issue with the more realistic titles is usually control pad usability, so one of the reasons games like Gran Turismo and Forza make concessions in the physics is to not put the experience of pad users at risk. But I'm sure they could achieve that and more realistic physics with some decent peripheral recognition algorithms that impact responsiveness etc. and some adjustable user settings.
Last edited:
I see what you mean and the details will be intersting. Of course we've gotten the high level differences across all the interviews. PS5 will look better, sound better and load much faster. It sounds like the biggest difference will be loading times. Sound could end up being significant too (the hardware is there for it) but I tend to doubt it will be a huge difference based on tge sound history with GT titles. Visuals will be better, easier to notice if you are coming from a base PS4. How much different will the PS5 be to PS4 Pro? That will be interesting too. Replays will likely be 60fps and resolution will be just a tiny bit sharper. But will car models have more detail/polygons for PS5?
We know there will be ray tracing in the garage for PS5 only. I think that feature is small but cool. The car models at full detail are so good in GT that adding ray tracing will really make them shine, pun intended. That red NSX screenshot looks fantastic. Hopefully we can control the camera in that mode and the models will look something akin to the dealership models in GT Sport.
I also appreciate the upgrade of the interiors seen in the latest trailer gameplay. Interiors looked great in GT Sport but that new trailer is clearly better. How much of that improvement will also be seen on PS4 is another unknown.
Forgot to mention the controller upgrade. Apparently it is significant for GT7.
Last edited:
- 9,925
- Denmark
In my experience realistic physics are the most intuitive to pick up and play.
Purely from a physics perspective, Assetto Corsa is the easiest driving game I have played when it comes to adaption. The factors that made it inaccessible to many was poor gamepad optimization and hardcore elements that most casual players cannot be bothered to worry about (tire temperatures, surface rubber amounts and such).
GT Sport comes close, but in some areas it is dumbed down, and as you said, dumbed down aspects of physics can catch players subtly off guard if they expect more realistic behavior. It’s the nature of sim-cade, but I don’t consider this to be an overly decisive issue for the learning curve or enjoyment.
Absolute arcade physics, however, is something I have never felt comfortable with out of the box. The only way to improve your skillset, is to adapt drastically to their flawed physics, and even then it’s like the brain still cannot grasp how unnatural it feels. If an arcade game plays intuitively out of the box, then it’s probably because it can be labelled as sim-cade, which I’d say is a very scalable category in between simulation and arcade, and where the majority of today’s mainstream racing games reside. I’d argue arcade has gradually more become a relic synonymous with the the old days of Commodore, Sega and MS-DOS. Pre-historic racing games like Outrun, Lotus, Test Drive, F1 Grand Prix, etc. were really difficult to master, and much of the trouble came down to nonexistent simulation. The Crew 2 is modern example of pure arcade that is constantly at odds with intuition, and effectively why I find it harder to drive than Assetto Corsa.
- 29,991
- Cuddington, Cheshire
- JDA1982
You're probably not alone, but what's easier between outright simulation and a basic arcade racer is probably down to the individual playing the game as much as the game itself. The more used to realisitc simuations and/or how a car should drive in real life, the more natural it should be (in theory) to hop into a new racing game that has realistic physics. but that doesn't mean every arcade game is good, every sim is good and every simcade is bad. ACC for example isn't that good an experience according to many game pad users as you pointed out.
Personally, I find both quite easy to pick up when they're done right. You mention The Crew 2, that's not one that I'd call intuitive either, but I can pick up Burnout 3 or Burnout Paradise and hammer along like a pro without much (if any) warmining up. So it's definitely not a one size fits all i.e. arcade games = easy, sim games = easy, simcade games = difficult.
There are games with good arcade physics and games with bad ones and some of the games in the middle simcade areas do manage to do enough right that they aren't overly difficult to pick up even with thier flaws. But regardless of personal experience or preference, the games that tend throw me the most where the car reacts pretty realistically in one situation, but not quite right in another. I guess that can still relate to an arcade focused title. You can get used to those quirks in games of course, but you have to learn them first.
Last edited:
- 9,925
- Denmark
I haven’t played Burnout, but you say you find in intuitive. Wouldn’t this suggest it’s actually more sim-cade than arcade physics-wise? I understand that Burnout and the ethos surrounding it are identified as arcade, but this shouldn’t distract from our focus on physics, which are where sim-cade definitions derive from.
In my experience it’s:
Simulation = Intuitive
Sim-cade = Intuitive with odd quirks
Arcade = Counter-intuitive
On the subject of physics I think it’s best to talk about intuition rather than difficulty, because the latter can be perceived in multiple ways.
Fair enough, but again I’d like to stress the point that arcade games with good physics are in fact sim-cade. After all, aren’t good physics all about mirroring our sense of realism? If there’s tangible realism, then there also a degree of simulation, hence sim-cade. I’m fully aware there’s no one size that fits all, but this is also why sim-cade covers such a wide spectrum on the scale of realism. I consider The Crew 2 to be pure arcade, because nothing about its physics feels realistic, much like the vintage racing games I mentioned previously.
And just to stay on topic, I believe GT7 physics (much like GTS) will sit somewhere on the higher end of the sim-cade spectrum. Probably slightly higher than GTS, because PD always finds ways to slightly enhance realism without going all in on being a deep simulator.
Similar threads
