New Gran Turismo 7 "Collector" Video Reveals More Cars and Tracks

[PorscheHD]

Its hard not getting exited with no Motorsport news.....

 

[o000o]

Group N's seem to be back after being absent from previous previews. And many of the numbers (dimensions, torque) are still wrong, guessing it's some kind of unit conversion issue? Obviously that'll be fixed.

I really like how the #findyourline tagline implies the teases we're getting.

Probably the mistake is about how the Group N exists in the car collection trailer, where it's removed in release date trailer and the PP there is displayed in a more "polished" way.

The body size wasn't "united" unlike in the release date trailer too.

Yes Kaz, you have cars modelled to PS5 quality. You're releasing a game on the PS5, if you hadn't then that would be a massive red flag. That you think that this is worth bragging about is mildly odd.
Yes Kaz, 400 cars is a lot but it's not exactly groundbreaking in 2021 either. You're up against FM7 with 800+ and FH5 with 500+. You're not winning on sheer quantity.

Feeling lacking too (didn't expect the talk about the car number criticism, where having more cars also can have some complaining about either duplicates or 'useless' cars) but I guess speaking about Forza, it's similar jump in number as it; before the 7th one, Forza Motorsport 6, after coming off on 5 (which also reduced the car list for quality like GTS, to around 200. later reaching 325, where GTS reached 336), was stated as having "over 450 cars" (later reaching 594). FH5 was also a reduction, coming from FH4's 753.

 

[Rangeraus]

I think it's just a matter of perspective, where the object seems to change shape depending on the point of view.

View attachment 1090025

But I'm in favor of adjustments, if necessary.

The hairpin and T2-3 still appear re-profiled to me, they're tighter than they were in previous games.

I could of course be wrong but we'll probably (hopefully?) find out before too long.

Why many of you want these old fantasy tracks?

Same reason people buy remasters of 10-25+ year old games that have no new content...

They were what Gran Turismo was built on, and players had a lot of fun playing them. I'm sure they'll still be great to race today (assuming they get included).

I prefer many new tracks but PD prefers to make new 1000 Scapes than to create new fantasy tracks or laser-scan real tracks.

They're not for everyone but a lot of people do use scapes. They are also used as a marketing tool by Sony to help sell their consoles and TVs, as well as selling the game itself (not including peripherals sold by GT/Sony partnered companies).

As for laser scanning real tracks - the scanning is not really the issue I don't think; it's more the licensing fees that circuit owners would request in exchange for allowing their product (i.e. the track) to be used in the game. Which is not an issue if the track is fictional.

That being said we are about 5 months away from launch date so I'm sure there will be more revealed in the coming updates.

 

[Imari]

Feeling lacking too (didn't expect the talk about the car number criticism, where having more cars also can have some complaining about either duplicates or 'useless' cars) but I guess speaking about Forza, it's similar jump in number as it; before the 7th one, Forza Motorsport 6, after coming off on 5 (which also reduced the car list for quality like GTS, to around 200. later reaching 325, where GTS reached 336), was stated as having "over 450 cars" (later reaching 594). FH5 was also a reduction, coming from FH4's 753.

Honestly, my opinion is that car number is far less important than a lot of people seem to make out. I'd rather have 200 well selected cars than 400 randoms that doesn't race well together or play in an interesting manner. I'm one of the people who thinks GT3 was the best GT game ever. As much as having lots of cars in FM7 and FH4/5 is nice, I don't really think it's that big a part of what makes those games good. I feel that a good driving game is good pretty much regardless of how many cars it has, more cars just makes good driving games better. F1 2021 is a great game despite having barely a handful of unique cars.

400 cars is more than enough for a game like Gran Turismo 7 if they're chosen well, especially if the tuning and upgrade system is as extensive and robust as we all hope it will be. For me, I don't find 400 cars to be a problem and I play and enjoy games with far, far less.

But, as long as Polyphony chooses to make emphasis of car counts they absolutely deserve to be hoisted by their own petard. I don't think that they should be using car count as a marketing gimmick at all, because at the moment they don't compare favourably to the obvious competition. I don't think they should say "what makes GT7 special isn't just the high quality, it's also the sheer number of car models it contains" when anyone can see that's clearly not true. High quality, absolutely, Polyphony is great at that. Sheer number of models, I'm sorry but no. 400 cars is not special.

They need to have the car count information available somewhere because otherwise people will ask, but I don't think mentioning it in the trailer does them many favours. Tuck it away on their website somewhere and spend that time in trailer talking about how many more polygons your models have, or how your new PBR system makes the little details of the cars more real. Tell us more about the "many of the most fascinating cars from motoring history" that are included, because that sounds pretty rad.

I don't think they should waste trailer time talking about something that the game isn't particularly noteworthy at as opposed to talking about anything where the game is exceptional. Spend those 12 seconds talking about something for collectors to geek out about, because 400 cars in 2021 is not it.

To be very clear to those who will misinterpret this, this is criticism of their choice of marketing. This is not criticism of the fact that the game has ~400 cars. Those are two separate things. I think having ~400 cars is fine for a game of this type. Having that as a focal point of what makes GT7 special in your car collecting trailer is misguided.

 

[snowgt]

I don't really understand what the big controversy is about Car Groups.

The thing about Gr.4 and PP - what's the problem? Every Gr.4 car also in GTS has base power and weight, and then there's the BoP, which is enabled when entering a Gr.4 race. Nothing will change there. You can still race the Gr.4 cars unrestricted (i.e. not with the PP that the BoP results in). It's not a Gr.4 race then, but still - it's the same as it is now.

The Alfa being in Gr.4 is really quite similar to the Renault Megane Trophy. If it can be BoP'd to Gr.4, they will do it. It can't go into Gr.3, because they have RWD as a rule there. So, the alternative would have been Gr.X, and that's not better, is it?

I can somewhat understand the purists who say "well thaaat car can't go into the same category with thaaaat car" and want to put almost each car into its own category, but that's not what they're there for. PD needs to create some classes that they will BoP in order to organize online races. You can still make your own races restricted to whatever cars you want. (And here's a bit of criticism: Yes, they should provide better tools to restrict online races to certain cars with certain PPs (or a self-made BoP)) The bottom line is however - if they make a class out of it, they need to do a BoP for it - and a BoP means work. That's why they only make a handful of classes, which they absolutely need.

 

[05XR8]

I don't really understand what the big controversy is about Car Groups.

The thing about Gr.4 and PP - what's the problem? Every Gr.4 car also in GTS has base power and weight, and then there's the BoP, which is enabled when entering a Gr.4 race. Nothing will change there. You can still race the Gr.4 cars unrestricted (i.e. not with the PP that the BoP results in). It's not a Gr.4 race then, but still - it's the same as it is now.

The Alfa being in Gr.4 is really quite similar to the Renault Megane Trophy. If it can be BoP'd to Gr.4, they will do it. It can't go into Gr.3, because they have RWD as a rule there. So, the alternative would have been Gr.X, and that's not better, is it?

I can somewhat understand the purists who say "well thaaat car can't go into the same category with thaaaat car" and want to put almost each car into its own category, but that's not what they're there for. PD needs to create some classes that they will BoP in order to organize online races. You can still make your own races restricted to whatever cars you want. (And here's a bit of criticism: Yes, they should provide better tools to restrict online races to certain cars with certain PPs (or a self-made BoP)) The bottom line is however - if they make a class out of it, they need to do a BoP for it - and a BoP means work. That's why they only make a handful of classes, which they absolutely need.

That’s fine for a Lobby, but those of us as solo players, have never been given the proper tools to select AI cars for creating the races we want. That’s one of the biggest problems. Even if PD choose not to correct the classes, assigning AI cars would solve this.

 

[Shakengandulf]

My 2-star artist's impression (probably wrong) of an updated Apricot Hill track layout

I dont think it will look like this at all.
I think some are failing to see the track because they arent looking at it correctly. (Perspective)
What happens when you rotate a circle?
It becomes an oval shape..
The track doesnt look altered at all.
The lines to me are a perfect match.

Newbie poster here, long time reader.

 

[tankuroded]

DTM cars from 1993 are actually slower than modern day GT4 cars...

Go have a look at the pole time at the DTM round at Donington Park and compare it to the GT4 quali times from British GT.

Equal-ish, in fact:

• 155: 1:35.11x (DTM '93 NC Round)
• GT4: 1:35.020 (British GT '20 Round 3, set in a 570S GT4)

 

[Rangeraus]

I dont think it will look like this at all.

You are correct

That being said, to me some of the corner radii look sharper than in the GT6 track map. Track layout will be nowhere near as different as in my initial post though... which is more incorrect the more I look at it

 

[AlexWilmot]

You are correct

That being said, to me some of the corner radii look sharper than in the GT6 track map. Track layout will be nowhere near as different as in my initial post though... which is more incorrect the more I look at it

have a look here

 

[dimassa19]

Newbie poster here, long time reader.

Even so, welcome to

 

[Shakengandulf]

Even so, welcome to

Thanks

 

[Auditore]

Hmm,i'm wondering if some car's engine will wear out faster than others in the same class

 

[o000o]

Honestly, my opinion is that car number is far less important than a lot of people seem to make out. I'd rather have 200 well selected cars than 400 randoms that doesn't race well together or play in an interesting manner. I'm one of the people who thinks GT3 was the best GT game ever. As much as having lots of cars in FM7 and FH4/5 is nice, I don't really think it's that big a part of what makes those games good. I feel that a good driving game is good pretty much regardless of how many cars it has, more cars just makes good driving games better. F1 2021 is a great game despite having barely a handful of unique cars.

400 cars is more than enough for a game like Gran Turismo 7 if they're chosen well, especially if the tuning and upgrade system is as extensive and robust as we all hope it will be. For me, I don't find 400 cars to be a problem and I play and enjoy games with far, far less.

Play in an interesting manner? You did mention about Kei cars in the GT Cafe conversation before... and some can think they're too slow to drive or such. Of course ppl can have different, for yours its about the cars having accurate/pleasing physics (which wouldn't correlate to slowness, thus Kei cars are ok) or such? Of course FM7 and FH4/5 being good isn't only about the car numbers, it's only looking at one part of a game which is unfair, but still I personally wouldn't want thoughts like "the game has too many cars" to happen, especially about petitions to cut down the car list (..until their favorites got removed, that is..). I personally want huge car numbers as it'll further increase something to learn about car culture, or more (potential) event variety too (if they use the career and car variety well that is), like 1 Lap Magic requires huge amount of cars which GT4 can achieve due to the numbers.

But, as long as Polyphony chooses to make emphasis of car counts they absolutely deserve to be hoisted by their own petard. I don't think that they should be using car count as a marketing gimmick at all, because at the moment they don't compare favourably to the obvious competition. I don't think they should say "what makes GT7 special isn't just the high quality, it's also the sheer number of car models it contains" when anyone can see that's clearly not true. High quality, absolutely, Polyphony is great at that. Sheer number of models, I'm sorry but no. 400 cars is not special.

They need to have the car count information available somewhere because otherwise people will ask, but I don't think mentioning it in the trailer does them many favours. Tuck it away on their website somewhere and spend that time in trailer talking about how many more polygons your models have, or how your new PBR system makes the little details of the cars more real. Tell us more about the "many of the most fascinating cars from motoring history" that are included, because that sounds pretty rad.

I don't think they should waste trailer time talking about something that the game isn't particularly noteworthy at as opposed to talking about anything where the game is exceptional. Spend those 12 seconds talking about something for collectors to geek out about, because 400 cars in 2021 is not it.

To be very clear to those who will misinterpret this, this is criticism of their choice of marketing. This is not criticism of the fact that the game has ~400 cars. Those are two separate things. I think having ~400 cars is fine for a game of this type. Having that as a focal point of what makes GT7 special in your car collecting trailer is misguided.

Fair enough, now I got what you're saying better. Though I'm baffled that some just recently knew the car number when there's already on website since the release date trailer. And the fascinating cars part would be subjective and GT features 'ordinary' cars too like the Demio.

 

[gthelmi2398]

In the end you won't drive any car because you will have your favourites like in Gr. 3. I tried the Mclarens some weeks ago for a fun race and asked myself why not before.

Whether we have 300, 400 or 600 cars at release is not important, because I know that GT7 is high quaöity product and everybody in this forum, especially the Gran Turismo part, knows how much details we have in game.

So now I see some confirmed cars and think wow, and other just: Another new car.

For me, the amount of cars is not important. Important is which cars and I can say that I have enough to do in next march.

And there are some cars we don't know yet. Hopefully some interesting myself, but I will be happy aboit every new car.

 

[mastretta_mx]

In the end you won't drive any car because you will have your favourites like in Gr. 3. I tried the Mclarens some weeks ago for a fun race and asked myself why not before.

Whether we have 300, 400 or 600 cars at release is not important, because I know that GT7 is high quaöity product and everybody in this forum, especially the Gran Turismo part, knows how much details we have in game.

So now I see some confirmed cars and think wow, and other just: Another new car.

For me, the amount of cars is not important. Important is which cars and I can say that I have enough to do in next march.

And there are some cars we don't know yet. Hopefully some interesting myself, but I will be happy aboit every new car.

Kind of true, on GT Sport I always use the same Gr3 and Gr4 cars, even though road cars is a different story and is where the car boost needs to happen for GT7

 

[Warte]

I don't really understand what the big controversy is about Car Groups.

The thing about Gr.4 and PP - what's the problem? Every Gr.4 car also in GTS has base power and weight, and then there's the BoP, which is enabled when entering a Gr.4 race. Nothing will change there. You can still race the Gr.4 cars unrestricted (i.e. not with the PP that the BoP results in). It's not a Gr.4 race then, but still - it's the same as it is now.

The Alfa being in Gr.4 is really quite similar to the Renault Megane Trophy. If it can be BoP'd to Gr.4, they will do it. It can't go into Gr.3, because they have RWD as a rule there. So, the alternative would have been Gr.X, and that's not better, is it?

I can somewhat understand the purists who say "well thaaat car can't go into the same category with thaaaat car" and want to put almost each car into its own category, but that's not what they're there for. PD needs to create some classes that they will BoP in order to organize online races. You can still make your own races restricted to whatever cars you want. (And here's a bit of criticism: Yes, they should provide better tools to restrict online races to certain cars with certain PPs (or a self-made BoP)) The bottom line is however - if they make a class out of it, they need to do a BoP for it - and a BoP means work. That's why they only make a handful of classes, which they absolutely need.

The problem lies exactly in the example car you mentioned.
A BOP can be done in any car, sure. We can balance a F1 car to race against a TCR (and I agree with you about the possibility to do personal BOPs for custom races and championships, and the ability to save those settings for online lobbies too, don't get me wrong). But considering the vanilla races, why would you botch the experience of simulating the racing of those cars closely in what they would perform, to accommodate them in a discipline where they don't belong? And other externalities, like the tire and fuel consumption, would be considered?

The Renault Mégane Trophy is best example why this doesn't work. Since it was added in Gr.4 we play a pendulum game of nerf it because is dominating/buff it because is useless. This happens with this car because 1. It has much more downforce and corner capability than the rest of the other road car derivatives. 2. Its completely race build. 3. It's much more lighter (955kg), which eats much less the tires (the 4C and the FWDs are lighter too, but the Alfa doesn't have the downforce, and the FWD chew the tires). Instead of keeping the class balanced for all the other cars, it always attracts the work for it. It would be much better if it was in Gr.X, since it is an one make spec series anyway, and we already had the Mégane "TCR". It will happen too with the 155, because it ticks the same 3 characteristics of the Mégane. It kills the class and its a poor game design.

And about the work, IMHO It demands much more rework to keep balancing cars with completely different builds and characteristics, instead of keeping relevantly close ones together. With the addition of classic racing cars in GT7, it would be much better to create new classic car classes, and by the looks we will have a lot of them to fill!!

Equal-ish, in fact:

• 155: 1:35.11x (DTM '93 NC Round)
• GT4: 1:35.020 (British GT '20 Round 3, set in a 570S GT4)

Interesting! In 1993 the Alfa 155 was the first car solely run in the Class 1 DTM rule book (before the Opel, Mercedes and the Audi test car later in the year). However, just one year later in 1994 Kurt Thiim made the pole in the Mercedes with 1:31:72, and Nannini was second with the Alfa at 1:31:81, 3 seconds faster than 1993, so definitely the car had much more potential (and I don't know about the track conditions for those races too). Maybe this is what happens in a touring championship with Formula 1 budget levels . While the GT4, as a "controlled" pace/budget series, still would be into 1:35 in 2021 (with the Supra GT4), and in other tracks, like I mentioned before, the gap is even bigger.

 

[HyperSpeeder]

Honestly, my opinion is that car number is far less important than a lot of people seem to make out. I'd rather have 200 well selected cars than 400 randoms that doesn't race well together or play in an interesting manner. I'm one of the people who thinks GT3 was the best GT game ever. As much as having lots of cars in FM7 and FH4/5 is nice, I don't really think it's that big a part of what makes those games good. I feel that a good driving game is good pretty much regardless of how many cars it has, more cars just makes good driving games better. F1 2021 is a great game despite having barely a handful of unique cars.

400 cars is more than enough for a game like Gran Turismo 7 if they're chosen well, especially if the tuning and upgrade system is as extensive and robust as we all hope it will be. For me, I don't find 400 cars to be a problem and I play and enjoy games with far, far less.

But, as long as Polyphony chooses to make emphasis of car counts they absolutely deserve to be hoisted by their own petard. I don't think that they should be using car count as a marketing gimmick at all, because at the moment they don't compare favourably to the obvious competition. I don't think they should say "what makes GT7 special isn't just the high quality, it's also the sheer number of car models it contains" when anyone can see that's clearly not true. High quality, absolutely, Polyphony is great at that. Sheer number of models, I'm sorry but no. 400 cars is not special.

They need to have the car count information available somewhere because otherwise people will ask, but I don't think mentioning it in the trailer does them many favours. Tuck it away on their website somewhere and spend that time in trailer talking about how many more polygons your models have, or how your new PBR system makes the little details of the cars more real. Tell us more about the "many of the most fascinating cars from motoring history" that are included, because that sounds pretty rad.

I don't think they should waste trailer time talking about something that the game isn't particularly noteworthy at as opposed to talking about anything where the game is exceptional. Spend those 12 seconds talking about something for collectors to geek out about, because 400 cars in 2021 is not it.

To be very clear to those who will misinterpret this, this is criticism of their choice of marketing. This is not criticism of the fact that the game has ~400 cars. Those are two separate things. I think having ~400 cars is fine for a game of this type. Having that as a focal point of what makes GT7 special in your car collecting trailer is misguided.

I agree.

PD is indeed far behind Forza when it comes to numbers. Forza outsources like crazy and does 4-year licensing deals probably to cut costs. Besides, Forza has two studios working on the franchise. It's impossible for Kaz to compete.

Thus, they need to play it in an intelligent way. Pick widely recognized historic cars. Pick a few which Forza doesn't have. And recreate them in high quality. GT's strategy as of late has been to play with the fact Forza gets the cars first, but people wait for GT's rendition, because they know GT will have more quality.

I'll add that, in Forza, the collecting is meaningless. Horizon is even more guilty since there's cars made "exclusives" for no reason other than to push engagement. The vast majority of "exclusives" aren't worth that moniker. Cars you unlock need to be special in some way, not picked at random.

The problem lies exactly in the example car you mentioned.
A BOP can be done in any car, sure. We can balance a F1 car to race against a TCR (and I agree with you about the possibility to do personal BOPs for custom races and championships, and the ability to save those settings for online lobbies too, don't get me wrong). But considering the vanilla races, why would you botch the experience of simulating the racing of those cars closely in what they would perform, to accommodate them in a discipline where they don't belong? And other externalities, like the tire and fuel consumption, would be considered?

The Renault Mégane Trophy is best example why this doesn't work. Since it was added in Gr.4 we play a pendulum game of nerf it because is dominating/buff it because is useless. This happens with this car because 1. It has much more downforce and corner capability than the rest of the other road car derivatives. 2. Its completely race build. 3. It's much more lighter (955kg), which eats much less the tires (the 4C and the FWDs are lighter too, but the Alfa doesn't have the downforce, and the FWD chew the tires). Instead of keeping the class balanced for all the other cars, it always attracts the work for it. It would be much better if it was in Gr.X, since it is an one make spec series anyway, and we already had the Mégane "TCR". It will happen too with the 155, because it ticks the same 3 characteristics of the Mégane. It kills the class and its a poor game design.

The 155 will need severe engine restriction to fit into Gr.4. Wouldn't be fun to drive IMO. I want 520+ bhp monster, not a 350 bhp neutered version.

Forza 7 had a similar problem with the DBR9, which was strangled to fit GT class. The car dominated tight tracks, but had no performance on fast ones. Then there was the decision to add the Maserati Trofeo to the class as well, which has way less downforce than the rest, which allows the car to dominate Le Mans and similar tracks.

BoP only works when the cars are similar. Old DTM are a far cry from Gr.4, which are GT4, that is, production-based. Almost nothing about the 155 was production-based (which is part of the reason the car is so cool after all).

 

[Phaceless_Ph]

Well, if PD wants to simulate correctly those cars, no.

Considering the tracks where the DTM raced in 1993-1996, just a few could be used for comparison, since most of them had layout changes or don't exist anymore. I ended up using Mugello and Interlagos (without any layout changes) and also Suzuka (that changed the Casio Chicane and Dunlop turn, so small variations in lap time could be disregarded). And remember, those cars were running with 1996 tires.

Mugello Pole laps

DTM 1996

1	5​	Nicola Larini	Alfa Romeo 155 V6 TI	Martini Alfa Corse	1:47.732

12 Hours of Mugello 2021 [Poles for GT3 (Gr.3), GT4 and TCR (Gr.4)]

1 - GT3-AM - Equipe Verschuur - Renault RS01 - 1:45.551
1 - TCR - Red Camel-Jordans.nl - SEAT Cupra TCR DSG - 1:58.901
1 - GT4 - ST Racing - BMW M4 GT4 - 1:59.361



Suzuka Pole laps

DTM 1996

1	15​	Christian Danner	Alfa Romeo 155 V6 TI	TV Spielfilm Alfa Corse	2:02.737

Suzuka 10 Hours 2019 (last one run before COVID, only GT3)

1	42​	Augusto Farfus	BMW Team Schnitzer	BMW M6 GT3	2:00.455​

Interlagos Pole laps

DTM 1996

1	15​	Christian Danner	Alfa Romeo 155 V6 TI	TV Spielfilm Alfa Corse	1:32.631

4 Horas de Interlagos 2021 [Poles for GT3 (Gr.3) and GT4(Gr.4)]

GT3 - Ricardo Baptista/Cacá Bueno - Mercedes AMG GT3 Evo - 1:33:087
GT4 - Cássio Homem de Mello/ André Morais Jr - Mercedes AMG GT4 - 1:41:132


Placing the Alfa 155 V6 in Gr.4 is completely wrong, considering the discipline, pace, build and history where they belong, but also could break the class and its a poor game design IMHO.

I, like many others, defend that PD create Historic racing classes for those cars, instead of the mess that they are creating. I didn't even talk about Gr.X!!!!
You know what could kill two birds with one stone? A class with DTM 90's (Alfa 155, Mercedes C-Klass* and Opel Calibra*, instead of imploding Gr.4) and GT500 90's (Castrol Supra, Pennzoil Skyline and Honda NSX*, that will suffer and be useless if they ends in Modern Gr.2).
Let's call it Gr.2H, and recall Suzuka times:

DTM 1996

1	15​	Christian Danner	Alfa Romeo 155 V6 TI	TV Spielfilm Alfa Corse	2:02.737

JGTC 1997, Suzuka 300km

1.

37

Masanori Sekiya (J) Toshio Suzuki (J)

Toyota Supra (JZA80)

Toyota Castrol Team

GT500

2:05,246

Much closer to adjust BOP and maintain the feeling of the class right? 2 seconds, instead of 10 plus...
Edit: In 1998, the Kunimitsu NSX clocked 2:02:939. Even closer!!

PS. Apricot Hill, Deep Forest, High Speed Ring and Trial Mountain? Goooooood. Keep them coming!!

How about reading things properly before you post argumentative content-cop nonsense?


The DTM cars from 1996 were VASTLY superior to 1993, the Alfa 155 featured in Gran Turismo 7 is from the 1993 season, not 1996:

1993 Pole time at Hockenhiem: 2:12.21 (Alessandro Nannini, Alfa-Romeo)

1996 Pole time at Hockenheim: 2:04.87 (Klaus Ludwig, Opel)


And before you play the "oh but Klaus Ludwig was in an Opel" nonsense, here's what second place did:

2:05.09 (Nicola Larini, Alfa-Romeo)


90's DTM had an insane rate of development, so it's a ridiculous sweeping generalisation to suggest that the cars from 1996 were identical to the cars from 1993 as you have done here, Dunning-Kruger Effect on full display.

 

[Dave A]

The 155 will need severe engine restriction to fit into Gr.4. Wouldn't be fun to drive IMO. I want 520+ bhp monster, not a 350 bhp neutered version.

Given the car dosen't have 520+ BHP in real life, you may be dissapointed no matter what.

 

[mastergracie]

Pleased to se the Alfa Romeo 8C 2300 in the game. I always wanted to see more cars from the 30s, 40s and 50s, specially some very rare cars like the Duesenbergs:

Or the classic Mercedes:

 

[Warte]

How about reading things properly before you post argumentative content-cop nonsense?


The DTM cars from 1996 were VASTLY superior to 1993, the Alfa 155 featured in Gran Turismo 7 is from the 1993 season, not 1996:

1993 Pole time at Hockenhiem: 2:12.21 (Alessandro Nannini, Alfa-Romeo)

1996 Pole time at Hockenheim: 2:04.87 (Klaus Ludwig, Opel)


And before you play the "oh but Klaus Ludwig was in an Opel" nonsense, here's what second place did:

2:05.09 (Nicola Larini, Alfa-Romeo)


90's DTM had an insane rate of development, so it's a ridiculous sweeping generalisation to suggest that the cars from 1996 were identical to the cars from 1993 as you have done here, Dunning-Kruger Effect on full display.

1 - The DTM cars from 1996 were VASTLY superior to 1993

Yes, and I quoted that...
"Interesting! In 1993 the Alfa 155 was the first car solely run in the Class 1 DTM rule book (before the Opel, Mercedes and the Audi test car later in the year). However, just one year later in 1994 Kurt Thiim made the pole in the Mercedes with 1:31:72, and Nannini was second with the Alfa at 1:31:81, 3 seconds faster than 1993, so definitely the car had much more potential (and I don't know about the track conditions for those races too). Maybe this is what happens in a touring championship with Formula 1 budget levels . While the GT4, as a "controlled" pace/budget series, still would be into 1:35 in 2021 (with the Supra GT4), and in other tracks, like I mentioned before, the gap is even bigger."

2 - And before you play the "oh but Klaus Ludwig was in an Opel" nonsense, here's what second place did:

The only nonsense here is you predispose with a straw man. Doesn't matter if the times were done with the Mercedes, Opel or Alfa Romeo, for me they were in the same rulebook to achieve these performances, considering the development of the era. And I considered the pole from a Mercedes before, so I don't understand why would it matter...

3 - Dunning-Kruger Effect on full display.

Learn to talk without offending anyone who disagrees with you, like adults, and respect the AUP. And there is nothing relative to Dunning-Kruger effect...

 

[Phaceless_Ph]

Learn to talk without offending anyone who disagrees with you, like adults, and respect the AUP. And there is nothing relative to Dunning-Kruger effect...

I'm simply calling it as it is, you generalised 4 years of car development while falsely assuming that DTM cars from 1993 are identical in pace to DTM cars from 1996 and posted what is essentially an exercise in confirmation bias for the sake of being a keyboard warrior = Dunning-Kruger Effect on full display.

 

[Warte]

I'm simply calling it as it is, you generalized 4 years of car development while falsely assuming that DTM cars from 1993 are identical in pace to DTM cars from 1996 and posted what is essentially an exercise in confirmation bias for the sake of being a keyboard warrior = Dunning-Kruger Effect on full display.

It's ironic how you ignored my first two paragraphs only to keep painting me like your straw man, just for the will of offending me again, because I disagree with you that this car will be equivalent to the Mégane Trophy and a fish out of water in Gr.4. And I'm the Dunning-Kruger effect keyboard warrior.

 

[Phaceless_Ph]

It's ironic how you ignored my first two paragraphs only to keep painting me like your straw man, just for the will of offending me again, because I disagree with you that this car will be equivalent to the Mégane Trophy and a fish out of water in Gr.4. And I'm the Dunning-Kruger effect keyboard warrior.

You're pretty much just proving my point, you're putting so much emphasis on content-cop style efforts just because you want to "win" so badly...

 

[ScottPuss20]

I was excited to see some details of what gameplay features would be present for collectors, because that seems like something new and that isn't really present in any other similar games. Instead all we get is more talk about how they have lots of special cars and they're modelled to a high quality. Like, that's worth saying once but at the same time it's also entirely expected.

Yes Kaz, you have cars modelled to PS5 quality. You're releasing a game on the PS5, if you hadn't then that would be a massive red flag. That you think that this is worth bragging about is mildly odd.
Yes Kaz, 400 cars is a lot but it's not exactly groundbreaking in 2021 either. You're up against FM7 with 800+ and FH5 with 500+. You're not winning on sheer quantity.

Tell us more about what makes Gran Turismo 7 special and unique. So far I'm getting that it has cars and tracks, is on PS5 and the design is based around car culture. Car culture in 2021 is so broad that it could mean basically anything. The Fast and the Furious is car culture. Formula 1 is car culture. Goodwood and Pebble Beach are car culture. The Nurburgring is car culture.

Show me the amazing stuff that I should be excited to play in your game. So far the only "gameplay" that sticks in my mind is menus, which is very Gran Turismo but probably not the best thing to lead with. If you're going to make a trailer about collecting, show me gameplay that I as a collector will be excited about. Just saying "many cars, much pretty" is not good enough. You have a game. Show it to us. Show me why it's worth eighty of my dollars.

I don't know whether these videos are trying to entice new players or please the faithful who were always going to buy GT7 anyway. I'd say it's to please the faithful because it obviously does a pathetic job trying to convince those who are on the fence. Buying GT7 is merely a formality for me but I can totally understand why some people may be hesitant.

 

[Warte]

You're pretty much just proving my point, you're putting so much emphasis on content-cop style efforts just because you want to "win" so badly...

The only "win that I want so badly" is that the Alfa 155 V6, a car that definitely was in my wish list, ends up being relevant, competitive, well simulated and don't end breaking another class where I want to have fun in the game, if I end buying it. And maybe PD adds the Opel Calibra V6, the Mercedes C-Class W202 and many others.

If you want to petulantly keep offending me online because of this, be my guest.

 

[Stoop Solo]

Anyone see the Apricot Hill Raceway on lights ? in this seconds : 1.04 and 0.26

Apricot Hill making a comeback? Pleasing news indeed.

 

[05XR8]

Hope the next videos are TUNERS

 

[GBalao888]

Pleased to se the Alfa Romeo 8C 2300 in the game. I always wanted to see more cars from the 30s, 40s and 50s, specially some very rare cars like the Duesenbergs:

Or the classic Mercedes:

Duesenberg, even if they're defunct, is still part of Chrysler, so Polyphony can potentially gain their licenses from Stellantis. Shame no video game ever has had a Duesy, not even one.