Motorcycles in GT6?

[Cheshyrkat]

I ride and still say bring it. True it isnt the same as real life and there are no practical rigs out there to simulate the experience compared to what you can accomplish for a car game but that still doesn't mean it cant convey the basics via a controller. Im not saying you will be able to play the game and apply it to a M endorsement class but you can still learn that bikes require a different technique for cornering, brake control, weight shift etc....

 

[R5]

You don't feel exactly how a car would react to teams at all... Not to mention the sheer power needed just to run them (high spec computers way beyond a PS3's power, most of which goes to the physics code)

As for the iRacing guy, seen it. But the thing is, he has a racer's mindset- iRacing just nurtured it. That gave him no real feeling of the G-forces (a crucial part of a racing car) so much so, he was sick in the helmet. So... Yeah...

 

[avens]

And yes, you can use the the feel from a G25/G27 to drive in real life.
Just look at the fastest guy in iRacing. He had only driven a Ford Escort (Or somethinglike that.) in real life, and they put him in a Formula Mazda at Road Atlanta, and he was very quick.

On that, I'd say that if someone doesn't have a license and tries car simulators (both racing and city driving), know the rules and everything needed, then it's not that much of a big step to jump into a real car. The same goes for going from simracing to real racing, which can be done and has happened plenty of times by now (iracing and gt:a guys). Of course there's going to be work and practice involved, but it isn't night and day by any means.

Try doing that with a motorcycle: you'll die in your first attempt, both for daily driving and in racing.

What I want to say is some activities are better represented by simulators than others. In some those are very useful, planes for example, but in others they are useless and will remain so.

edit: and btw, my point is solely about simulation. There are tons of more aspects to consider on the decision of including motorcycles in GT6 or not.

 

[Griffith500]

I ride and still say bring it. True it isnt the same as real life and there are no practical rigs out there to simulate the experience compared to what you can accomplish for a car game but that still doesn't mean it cant convey the basics via a controller. Im not saying you will be able to play the game and apply it to a M endorsement class but you can still learn that bikes require a different technique for cornering, brake control, weight shift etc....

Yeah, exactly, it's a game. 👍

EDIT: avens, are you seriously suggesting that going from a sim to a real car, everything feels the same? Even Gregor Huttu had to start slow and build up very gradually when he applied his alien sim skills to the real world. But you're right, every time someone gets on a bike for the first time, they die. We're talking a difference of degree here, not a difference in kind. I wonder what a world without David Kaemmer or Geoff Crammond would have left us in the sim (car) racing stakes; probably lots of people saying it can't be done...

 

[Tornado]

As for bikes "Not belonging in GT", it could be argued that the FTO Super Touring Car doesn't belong, same with X1s, the RMs, the racers in general (seeing as it is Gran Turismo=> Grand Touring), but this logic is severely flawed. Like yours.

Not seeing how the two concepts are connected.

 

[Bopop4]

controls can be developed to deal with that, even on a gamepad.

No, no it can't.
I'm not even going to begin to try and explain it, because it's obvious that you've never ridden a bike.

"There hasn't been a decent bike sim ever, so no one should ever try to make one again!"

Because it simply cannot be done.

) (it's easier to do a car simulator than a sex simulator, isn't it).

That is actually a very good point.

Try doing that with a motorcycle: you'll die in your first attempt, both for daily driving and in racing.

Yep.

Separate point:

It amazes me how people can't even choose the right bike for learning on.

"Imma gonna get a 600 for my first bike!"

Cue a whiskey throttle into a bus. : /


Edit:

I'm all for fun bike games, but GT is supposed to be a sim.
No point wasting time and money to do a sub par job.

I loved TT Superbikes, but I'm not going to point out the awesome physics. (Even if it's the least arcadey bike game I've played.)

 

[Griffith500]

No, no it can't.
I'm not even going to begin to try and explain it, because it's obvious that you've never ridden a bike.

Yes, yes it can. And yes, yes I have. Mostly offroad, though, so maybe that makes a difference...

Because it simply cannot be done.

Yes, yes it can. Maybe you can't. So I'm sorry about that.

That is actually a very good point.

Yep.
It amazes me how people can't even choose the right bike for learning on.

"Imma gonna get a 600 for my first bike!"

Cue a whiskey throttle into a bus. : /

Which has nothing to do with how viable a bike sim is.

 

[avens]

EDIT: avens, are you seriously suggesting that going from a sim to a real car, everything feels the same? Even Gregor Huttu had to start slow and build up very gradually when he applied his alien sim skills to the real world. But you're right, every time someone gets on a bike for the first time, they die. We're talking a difference of degree here, not a difference in kind. I wonder what a world without David Kaemmer or Geoff Crammond would have left us in the sim (car) racing stakes; probably lots of people saying it can't be done...

Never wrote that. What I wrote is that the step isn't by any means as drastic as in bikes. I have read that coverage too and Huttu achieved very good lap times in one day, with absolutely zero experience in sports cars and in real life racing. I know a guy from my country that did the same transition but into full time professionalism, then there's the GT:A guys and so on.

The same cannot be said in motorcycles, in which it's completely different activity going from TT (or GT6 with bikes using a DS3) to riding a real one. Pressing L2 (with 10 assists) at your couch is not how you brake and certainly not how you tackle or safe yourself in corners, and to me that's not a good representation of the real thing.

 

[sinbad]

Gran Turismo is a game. Yes it's a "simulator", although hardly a realistic or refined one, but it's a game. Cars are supposed to be fun and bikes could be too. There's no reason why they couldn't be.

I'm done with hoping they would do it well, though.
They wouldn't. TT wasn't realistic, and it wasn't even much fun really. Throttle Nanny, why?

 

[Griffith500]

Never wrote that. What I wrote is that the step isn't by any means as drastic as in bikes. I have read that coverage too and Huttu achieved very good lap times in one day, with absolutely zero experience in sports cars and in real life racing.

The same cannot be said in motorcycles, in which it's completely different activity going from TT (or GT6 with bikes using a DS3) to riding a real one.

Do you have any proof of that, especially since there isn't actually a real bike sim to talk of...
Does it really matter that it doesn't transfer to real life? It has only recently become the case for car sims!

I think TT got the feel of the dynamics of bike handling down pretty well, even though the physics engine was just GT4's in a new dress (so it had perma abs and a weird tyre model that tolerated tank slappers etc.). It even had a customisable "riding form" to tweak things like rider position in turns etc. That's already much more than a lot of bike games, and I'd like to see what else they could do.

The problem is that developers are too scared to make it truly hardcore, they feel people would be scared away. Well, they won't if you package it right, with the right kind of assists etc. - but someone just needs to do it!

 

[avens]

Is it worth it to spend developing time on something that we know will be subpar, in comparison of what PD can deliver in cars?

 

[R5]

Is it worth it to spend developing time on something that we know will be subpar?

Sub-par to hardcore bikers, you mean. Average Joes will maybe get a good laugh out of it, recreating TopGear Magazine's famous MP4-GT3 v John McGuiness' Honda race bike, or simply cruising on a Harley making gangs called Hell's Angels or Devil's Slaves or something and trying to annoy car-users who get bored of them and wipe them off the road for it

 

[avens]

Creating a fun, arcade racer still takes a lot of time, even more so if bikes have to coexist with cars. It's not like Kaz can say "yeah, in your free time model a bike and there we go", especially with the 2013 standards.

I agree it's not making an entirely new game, but it isn't easy and it will take loads of time and money, which could go into improving the car side of the game. For example, I'd rather hear better sounds and see more cars than having yet another bike game that plays like it was made in the 80s.

 

[Bopop4]

Yes, yes it can. And yes, yes I have. Mostly offroad, though, so maybe that makes a difference...

So on a controller, how are you supposed to do all the commands?

Let's say you wanted to slowly weight the outside peg, while moving your head forward, squeezing the tank with your leg.

Then the front end starts to slide out and you have to catch it. I can't even think up all the different positions, and varying pressures that you would have to put through the controller.

You would run out of room for the sticks and buttons.

What would be cool is a controller, where the entire surface is a touchpad that also senses pressure. You could get a bit more realism that way, but only a bit.





Riding a dirtbike is simpler, but you are still having to move around and constantly adjust pressure.

If you continue to practice to get quicker, you'll have to consciously think about different techniques, and then it'll become subconscious.

So when you rode, you were doing a whole bunch of things that you were not even aware of, but made the bike ride and handle better.

Yes, yes it can. Maybe you can't. So I'm sorry about that.

See reasons above.

Which has nothing to do with how viable a bike sim is.

It's not, I was just saying it because.
And if anyone who was wanting a fast bike to start out on saw the post, then hopefully it might make them think, and do some research on it. Knowledge is power.


If you have a way that all of the riders movements and forces can be put through a controller, I'd like to hear it., because I don't see a way that it can be done. (And that's just one part of it.)

 

[Griffith500]

Is it worth it to spend developing time on something that we know will be subpar, in comparison of what PD can deliver in cars?

Yes. Because what they deliver "in cars" is subpar to comparison with other games...
At least as far as absolutely precise, true simulation is concerned. Which most players probably have no interest in anyway.

I think if a strong stab at a realistic bike game came out, it might spawn some imitators - then we might actually see some progress in the underlying simulations and the abstracted control schemes - maybe even some bespoke controllers (that might be interesting!)

You can't just jump to the final solution, you have to work through the problem piece by piece. I'd be happy to partially fund that by buying into genuine attempts for the "cause".

EDIT: Bopop, on a pad, you'd need some kind of abstracted scheme with a sort of AI to handle the finer inputs, all customisable to suit your "style" / ability if you must. The tricky part is maintaining interactivity of that AI, so that those corrections are initiated manually, but with an automated "execution", if you get me. That's fine as a starting point, since most of it is subconscious to a degree, as you say. What's important is that the bike will actually be behaving realistically according to those raw inputs translated by the AI. The rest can be built on in time. Also, offroad is not necessarily simpler at all - try trials.

 

[R5]

Creating a fun, arcade racer still takes a lot of time. It's not like Kaz can say "yeah, in your free time model a bike and there we go", especially with the 2013 standards.

What I'm saying is it will only be sub-par to the minority; true, hardcore bikers.

 

[Bopop4]

What I'm saying is it will only be sub-par to the minority; true, hardcore bikers.

But isn't GT supposed to be about simulation?
That's what made it so great in the first place.
GT1 was a benchmark, like GT2 and GT3 after it.

PD shouldn't be trying to make arcade games, they have always focused on trying to simulate things.

 

[R5]

But isn't GT supposed to be about simulation?
That's what made it so great in the first place.
GT1 was a benchmark, like GT2 and GT3 after it.

PD shouldn't be trying to make arcade games, they have always focused on trying to simulate things.

They are a level down from sims (play iRacing, Simraceway or RFactor and see what I mean), the term is SimBin. Above arcade racers (NFS) and below sims (iRacing), and I'm not saying they'll be arcade, just not quite sim racers.

 

[Griffith500]

But isn't GT supposed to be about simulation?
That's what made it so great in the first place.
GT1 was a benchmark, like GT2 and GT3 after it.

PD shouldn't be trying to make arcade games, they have always focused on trying to simulate things.

No, GT was never a proper, physical sim, and still isn't (yet). It'll get there in time. Bike games could similarly benefit from a bit of actual development work.

The best part is that TT was already better than GT1 in terms of actual realism, even though both did very well to deliver a believable experience (at least superficially) and one that wasn't truly arcade-like, e.g. in that you actually had to brake...

EDIT: Legacy, I think you mean SimCade, not SimBin (they who made GTR, GTR2 etc.)

 

[R5]

Last I heard it was SimBin.


Why wasn't I told it was changed

 

[Bopop4]

I know that GT is a simcade, but more towards sim than arcade on a sliding scale.

The best part is that TT was already better than GT1 in terms of actual realism, even though both did very well to deliver a believable experience (at least superficially) and one that wasn't truly arcade-like, e.g. in that you actually had to brake...

The problem is that you won't be able to get to a sim level for bikes.
I don't have a problem with that, since it's the way it is.

But if you want the GT series to become as good as it can be, then you have to focus all of your time and money on GT.

Taking people away from GT for bikes is bad because those resources could be used to improve GT.

Take sounds as an example, would you rather have realistic sounds, or bikes?

 

[R5]

Bikes. Because the sounds are a big "Meh" point for me.

Edit: as for GT perfection. We'd still be waiting for 5 right now if it was to be perfect.

 

[Griffith500]

I know that GT is a simcade, but more towards sim than arcade on a sliding scale.




The problem is that you won't be able to get to a sim level for bikes.
I don't have a problem with that, since it's the way it is.

But if you want the GT series to become as good as it can be, then you have to focus all of your time and money on GT.

Taking people away from GT for bikes is bad because those resources could be used to improve GT.

Take sounds as an example, would you rather have realistic sounds, or bikes?

The underlying sim can be as detailed as you want, it's the player input you have to pare down on ordinary controllers. What you'll eventually have is a sim within a sim - a rider sim controlling a bike sim! Sounds pretty interesting to me.

No, if I want GT to be as good as it can be, you need infinite time. There are plenty of car games out there; GT will be what GT will be, I'd really like to see someone have a proper go at a bike game, not a cynical cash-in attempt on a popular real-world racing series... TT showed real promise, I think PD could refine their input model (and rider "sim"), the underlying bike simulation, and that alone would make for a worthwhile sequel.

Realistic sounds are already on their way. I'll take the bikes as well. 👍

 

[sinbad]

The bar controls are by far the most important anyway. Steering has been proven to be massively more influenced by handlebar input than "leaning".
Body movement is simply something which you have to take out of the equation by automating it. It doesn't mean that you can't attempt to simulate the bike and tyres with simplified controls.

I mean when you look at the physical differences between using a control pad and driving a real car with manual gear box it's a wonder people don't campaign for pad control to be done away with entirely.

 

[R5]

If pad was done away with, people would lose interest- there are people not willing to drop £100 on a Logitech or even £20 on a bargain bin piazza dish (Like I stupidly got)

 

[Exorcet]

Apart from the inability for a game to simulate a motorcycle

Which isn't true.

there's the game issue of being able to buy a $2500 Litrebike and wipe the floor with most of the car list.

Which isn't true.

*Cars only
*Your bike has no downforce
*Players aren't forced to use the bikes

Take your pick.

You would run out of room for the sticks and buttons.

The same would happen if you tried simulating a car down to the neurons in a driver's brain. Why does the controller need to let you take every possible position or movement?

 

[sinbad]

If pad was done away with, people would lose interest- there are people not willing to drop £100 on a Logitech or even £20 on a bargain bin piazza dish (Like I stupidly got)

So no to a bike game with a pad because "realistic"controls aren't available, but yes to a car game with pad because they are, but they're expensive?

(I wasn't seriously suggesting that they remove pad control, simply questioning what is something of a double standard.)

 

[R5]

I misread your post.

Anyway, has everyone forgot the PS-move control? Bikes handlebars right there

 

[Bopop4]

Which isn't true.

*Cars only
*Your bike has no downforce
*Players aren't forced to use the bikes

Take your pick.

You put something like an R34 GT-R vs an old Honda Fireblade, and the bike will wipe the floor with it.

Of course a full on racing GT car will beat a bike, but it would take a very fast street car to beat a street bike.

Example, a magazine tested a 458 vs an 1198, the bike was quicker by about 2 seconds on a circuit.

Why does the controller need to let you take every possible position or movement?

Because body position makes a HUGE difference in the handling of the bike.

 

[R5]

Take a look online. How many cars are stock? None. This tuning can't all be done as successfully as a bike, ergo, advantage car. I could easily knock 5-6 seconds off the 458s time with a tune up.