Nitro...

[Alfaholic]

Great opening post! I had a good laugh reading it. I don't use nitrous much myself because I tend to find that if more power is needed engine mods do a better job. I often use it on max speed runs though, and did use it to win the Shelby series in an otherwise stock Shelby WoteveritscalledthatssilverandnotaCobra.

What I don't see though, is how using nitrous is cheating any more than using other engine or suspension upgrades to improve the performance of your car, or tuning your adjustable suspension to eradicate a handling imbalance, or tuning your almost infinitely adjustable gearbox to exactly match the circuit, or changing tyre type in a pitstop, or adding a functioning wing. Ultimately, all of these things are done to make your car fast enough for you to win the race in it (or more competitive or whatever). Sure, the AI apparently can't or doesn't use it, but they do use other modifications, and sometimes these result in power outputs that are seemingly impossible to replicate on the same car, suggesting that they use tuning bits not available to us. Also, the AI can't decide to add an extra 20bhp to his car as a reaction to the modified car that you have entered in the race, so any modification would seem similarly unfair.

I don't like it because it's a temporary boost. I'd rather be driving a car that can give full performance every lap than one that has a finite performance boost. This is probably because I prefer racing endurances, which negate the value of Nitrous. It can make a big difference in a 3 lap race, but is less significant in a 60 lap race. If my car's not fast enough for me in a race, I'll use some other, more permanent way of adding speed. Sure, there's nothing wrong with coming second, and it's usually more fun than winning by half a lap, but you can come second with nitrous too.

 

[Jim Prower]

I'm on the non-nitrous bandwagon. The only time I've installed a bottle on a car is for max speed attempts, and once when I was vainly trying to make a VW wheelstand off the line. (Which GT doesn't allow. You can wheelstand a Group C car using aero, but...) Anyway, It's kind of a letdown, a little extra power for a short amount of time. Why can't I have all that power all the time?

FUN FACTS: According to popular legend, innovative stock car mechanic Smokey Yunick "Discovered" Nitrous Oxide while in the dentists chair. As well, the Germans used N2O in a variant of the Foke-Wulf FW190 fighter plane during WWII. Unlike what the Fast and the Furious would have you believe, they wouldn't blow up any more easily than airplanes without the systems.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

Sure, for longer races, but there in lies the problem, nearly every long race where you don;t need to qualify, the game allows you to. For nearly all the short races, where qualifying would allow you to not have a better performing car than the front running rabbit you can't qualify. In my opinion PD got it entirely backwards... but frankly the easy solution would have been to allow the qualifying option for all races, as in GT3.

That said, the point still remains that there are exceptions and that Nitro can be used to even the playing field for those short races with rabbits, and allow for a great close competive race, and I for one wouldn't call that cheating in the least.

Well that's just a personal thing I guess. It used to bug me that qualifying got dropped in sprint races, now it doesn't. I personally like starting in last place...the announcer goes

"....and sitting in last place....Parnelli Bones!!

2nd announcer: "I think his name is Pirelli."

1st announcer: "Whatever. Pirelli has proven himself before, but can he do it this time!!!????"

2nd announcer: "Well Steve, the cards are stacked against him this time! I got a 30 to one shot Mr. Parsmelli hasn't got the skills."

1st announcer: "You're on!"

and of course I make my way thru the crowd...kicking some Ai ass in the process; but I'm still forced to deal with traffic 👍 It's the main reason I dig GT4 over GT3...all the drama of "will he win this one????

And not all longer races are ruined by qualifying (although I agree some of them are). I just did the GV300 for instance in a '03 Dodge Viper SRT-10 (I wrote a race report about it). Anyways, in that instance, it wasn't down between me & one other car; matter of fact there were 2 others (abt Audi TT, au Cerumo Supra) that battled it out with me. you'd think since I won that one of those 2 would have come in 2nd place, but it was the Hiroto Skyline that surprised me with a 2nd place, while the cars that I thought woulda stole it wound up in 3rd and 4th.

Also, you seem to have totally missed my point about starting the jackrabbit cars in lower positions for sprint races. To me it doesn't make sense to have them sit any higher than 3rd place, rely on nitrous to catch them, and call that a "race without cheating", cuz it is! One car has nitrous, the other doesn't...plain and simple. Nothing wrong with this--just fess up to it is all I'm saying.

You should try this instead. Take the Clubman Cup for instance. You enter the race and a Opel speedster starts in 2nd place and a Lotus Elise starts in 4th, while you're of course in 6th. I guarantee if you do this race, by the 2nd lap you'll be having a 3-way battle with the Opel and the Lotus, which will get your blood pumping and your thoughts focused, and which is way more thrilling than just using a bottle to catch someone who gets way ahead. Those 2 (the Opel and Lotus) had to fight traffic just like you did, which means ultimately you won't need so much power.

...it's your game of course, I'm just suggesting.

So, kind of like real life? I've seen plenty of small races where this is the case. For example: I went to Mid-Ohio and the first race I caught while there was the GT3 Cup race. It was 45 minutes. No need for fuel/tire stops, so short of damage or other mechanical issues there were no pit stops. The entire race had a small group of cars in the front battling, and eventually became two until one went into the pits with engine problems. Everyone else was jockying for points. What you described above is how smaller race series work.

The difference between real-life and the game is in real-life there are mechanical issues as you said. Also heat (I also saw that mid-Ohio race) and humidity play into it. Track surface conditions. Spills. the game simulates none of this.

Now, if GT4 did simulate all this--sure, I say all races should have qualifying. First place/pole position is a very temporary thing in this case. You car can always break down and you'll need to pit. Your car may hit a puddle of coolant and there goes your first place! One of your pit crew guys trips over an air-hose and you lose 1.4 seconds in the pits due to his blunder!

But since GT is ultimately a game and has most real-life issues absent, then (to me) qualifying is not an absolute necessity all the time.

NOW, the one reason I miss qualifying to this day is this: In GT3 you could run a car a few laps. You'd be a second faster than the 2nd-place car. So you could go back to your settings...remove a computer chip, remove that sports exhaust...now your car was more equally plotted against that 2nd-place car, which makes the game more fair.

The problem I've found with GT4 qualifying is it isn't as accurate as GT3. I'll qualify faster that 2nd-place car, yet during the race, he may still kick my ass bad! that's what I've noticed. It's almost like the drivers literally have off-days and makes qualifying in GT4 seem not as accurate.

....does anyone get what I'm saying or does this not make any sense?

 

[Parnelli Bone]

Great opening post! I had a good laugh reading it. I don't use nitrous much myself because I tend to find that if more power is needed engine mods do a better job. I often use it on max speed runs though, and did use it to win the Shelby series in an otherwise stock Shelby WoteveritscalledthatssilverandnotaCobra.

What I don't see though, is how using nitrous is cheating any more than using other engine or suspension upgrades to improve the performance of your car, or tuning your adjustable suspension to eradicate a handling imbalance, or tuning your almost infinitely adjustable gearbox to exactly match the circuit, or changing tyre type in a pitstop, or adding a functioning wing. Ultimately, all of these things are done to make your car fast enough for you to win the race in it (or more competitive or whatever). Sure, the AI apparently can't or doesn't use it, but they do use other modifications, and sometimes these result in power outputs that are seemingly impossible to replicate on the same car, suggesting that they use tuning bits not available to us. Also, the AI can't decide to add an extra 20bhp to his car as a reaction to the modified car that you have entered in the race, so any modification would seem similarly unfair.

Right, so that's the reason you have to limit yourself. Would I enter a Lupo in the FF Challenge with full-custom everything, a wing, and nitrous? No, because the Ai hasn't got all that. Instead, I'll choose a sports suspension, I'll keep the gearing stock (or use a close unit) but most of all I keep my power low. Sucahyo's research has shown that PD often programs cars with better parts than we might think.. I see nothing wrong with using simple, basic upgrades to modify my cars and gradually introduce more sophisticated parts for more challenging races.

...but nitrous is an obvious "oh god I better make sure I win this one since I'm not so confident" sort of attempt. It overrides any issues we might have as drivers and makes up for our faults.

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

It looks very much like we will have to agree to disagree then.

I'm content to see that there are exceptions, and as these exception often result in some very competitive races, I'm glad at least the option is there for those who have found a use for it, other than "cheating" just to win a race.

Hopefully PD realized their error in dropping the option to qualify for non-championship races, and instead of removing options for players to use, they give them more in the next GT installment. 👍

 

[Parnelli Bone]

It looks very much like we will have to agree to disagree then.

I'm content to see that there are exceptions, and as these exception often result in some very competitive races, I'm glad at least the option is there for those who have found a use for it, other than "cheating" just to win a race.

Hopefully PD realized their error in dropping the option to qualify for non-championship races, and instead of removing options for players to use, they give them more in the next GT installment. 👍

That's fine. You got your game, I got mine. I appreciate the fact that you still get a close race thru nitrous, it's better than using a 1,000 hp car against 500 hp cars for instance.

 

[Duke]

You should be able to qualify for every race. That being said, I never qualify unless I've given it half a dozen good tries and just can't win in the car I'm driving.

 

[mouser]

When I use nitrous (which is very rarely), I mostly use it to make up for speed lost during cornering.

 

[FoolKiller]

The difference between real-life and the game is in real-life is mechanical issues as you said. Also heat (i also saw that mid-Ohio race) and humidity play into it. Track surface conditions. Spills. the game simulates none of this.

Now, if GT4 did simulate all this--sure, i say all races should have qualifying. First place/pole position is a very temporary thing in this case. You car can always break down and you'll need to pit. Your car may hit a puddle of coolant and there goes your first place! One of your pit crew guys trips over an air-hose and you lose 1.4 seconds in the pits due to his blunder!

You haven't played F1:CE yet have you? It has a mechanical issues option and the pit times are determined by how fast, and in what order, you hit the buttons for each job to be performed.

What videos we have seen of GT5 show heat mirages, I can only hope that these are actually a sign that heat/weather will play a role of some sort.

the problem i've found with GT4 qualifying is it isn't as accurate as GT3. I'll qualify faster that 2nd-place car, yet during the race, he may still kick my ass bad! that's what i've noticed. It's almost like the drivers literally have off-days and makes qualifying in GT4 seem not as accurate.

Do you tune your car differently for qualifying? I mean, when it is going to be a close race and I know grabbing the front row is important I throw on some super softs and go to town, tearing up my tires very quickly to grab a good time. Then in a long race I may be on super hard tires, reducing my handling ability and lengthening my times. Now, if you are going in race ready and then this happens in the race it could be different, just another AI issue.

ALso, do you stop as soon as you grab that pole time? Because I have had a situation where I beat teh current pole time by a couple of seconds only to have the AI beat that next time around as it is now suddenly catching my draft. Your presence in front of the lead AI does give it a different opportunity with your draft.

....does anyone get what i'm saying or does this not make any sense?

Yes, and I really think you would be happy playing F1:CE.

 

[sukerkin]

A little off-topic but if you run three laps in qualifying you will get a much better idea of the AI's actual pace (of course, for some tracks not only is that a chore but the AI don't make three laps before pitting ).

 

[Alfaholic]

Right, so that's the reason you have to limit yourself. Would i enter a Lupo in the FF Challenge with full-custom everything, a wing, and nitrous? No, because the Ai hasn't got all that. Instead, i'll choose a sports suspension, i'll keep the gearing stock (or use a close unit) but most of all i keep my power low. Sucahyo's research has shown that PD often programs cars with better parts than we might think..i see nothing wrong with using simple, basic upgrades to modify my cars and gradually introduce more sophisticated parts for more challenging races.

...but nitrous is an obvious "oh god i better make sure i win this one since i'm not so confident" sort of attempt. It overrides any issues we might have as drivers and makes up for our faults.

... so you add the speed you need to the corners instead of the straight bits. Personally I don't see the difference. You're making the car faster to make it competitive with you at the wheel. What's the difference if it's done with a weight reduction, uprated and tuned suspension, a turbo, or a bottle of nitrous? Tuned suspension can also make up for faults by dialing out a handling imbalance introduced either by the car or the driver themself. By adding suspension or a close ratio box, you're admitting that the car has a fault - it's not lapping fast enough - and you need to add bits to get the required performance. Over 5 laps, nitrous won't add more speed than a tyre upgrade or, say, a stage 2 turbo. Or a level 3 weight reduction, or decent suspension. Generally speaking, if you want to make sure you win the race, just about the cheapest way to take whole seconds off your laptimes is a triple plate clutch with racing flywheel and carbon prop. Far more effective than nitrous when you're not fast enough.

Which is why I don't generally use nitrous.

 

[Duke]

You're making the car faster to make it competitive with you at the wheel. What's the difference if it's done with a weight reduction, uprated and tuned suspension, a turbo, or a bottle of nitrous?

The difference is, nitrous is a temporary band-aid that applies short bursts of straight-line speed, for a limited amount of time. It does nothing to correct the fundamental shortcomings of the car.

Tuning away suspension or gearing issues, on the other hand, fixes the underlying problems and makes the car permanently faster and nicer to drive.

Which would you rather have: one-time arthroscopic surgery on your bad knee, so that it gets better forever, or have to get cortizone shots every 6 weeks so you just don't notice that it's still bad?

 

[BobK]

Tuning, to a greater or lesser extent, is legal in pretty much all real life auto racing. Nitrous isn't. That's my main reason for not using it.

 

[Alfaholic]

The difference is, nitrous is a temporary band-aid that applies short bursts of straight-line speed, for a limited amount of time. It does nothing to correct the fundamental shortcomings of the car.

It does if the fundamental problem is lack of straight line pace. I agree in so much as it's hard to recommend nitrous as a solution to a handling problem, either temp or perm, even if the handling problem is with the driver rather than the car.

Which would you rather have: one-time arthroscopic surgery on your bad knee, so that it gets better forever, or have to get cortizone shots every 6 weeks so you just don't notice that it's still bad?

I don't think it's really like that though. Your example of using nitrous to compensate for suspension or gearing problems is more like getting around your bad knee by making your arms stronger. If its used to solve lack of pace, then it's as permanent as any other engine mod, but its effectiveness is diminished with increasing race distance because of its While-Stocks-Last nature. But even if it's used to overcome a suspension shortcoming, or an off track excursion, it does the same thing as any other mod: it shaves a few seconds off your race time with the intention of finishing where you want to finish.

In a nutshell, I think it's a fairly lousy mod. But my original point was this: I can't see the logic behind calling it cheating. I can't see why taking three seconds of your total race time using nitrous is bad, but taking 5 seconds off your total race time with trick suspension is OK.

 

[heavyhalf79]

I only use it on one car wich is the 350z race car. And I don't use it because when you go into the pits it does not refill. I have been doing fine without it

 

[Parnelli Bone]

... so you add the speed you need to the corners instead of the straight bits. Personally I don't see the difference. You're making the car faster to make it competitive with you at the wheel. What's the difference if it's done with a weight reduction, uprated and tuned suspension, a turbo, or a bottle of nitrous? Tuned suspension can also make up for faults by dialing out a handling imbalance introduced either by the car or the driver themself. By adding suspension or a close ratio box, you're admitting that the car has a fault - it's not lapping fast enough - and you need to add bits to get the required performance. Over 5 laps, nitrous won't add more speed than a tyre upgrade or, say, a stage 2 turbo. Or a level 3 weight reduction, or decent suspension. Generally speaking, if you want to make sure you win the race, just about the cheapest way to take whole seconds off your laptimes is a triple plate clutch with racing flywheel and carbon prop. Far more effective than nitrous when you're not fast enough.

Which is why I don't generally use nitrous.

The difference is out-cornering an Ai car takes actual skill! This is where I do most of my passing, my friend....not on the straights.

I applaud your use of drivetrain parts (clutch, flywheel etc) because these make for faster acceleration out of corners, without necessarily introducing extra power. But I take it a step further: I'll be using a single-plate clutch in a slower car, or a twin in an intermediately fast car like an Audi S4. I rarely use triple-clutches. Call me crazy but I like that "downtime" between shifts that occurs..it means you can coast a tad longer thru corners without power understeer and re-position your car if you need to.

And all cars have faults. That is true. Yes, I am admitting that. However, I wouldn't go so far to say that I'm necessarily faster than the Ai or that I become a tune-hound till every little fault in my car has been squelched neatly away. It's true I'll add parts to aid my cornering. But I don't

1. bash into other cars or push them off track

2. use loads of power (or nitrous) to overcome for sloppy cornering.

3. Slap a wing on unless I'm racing a bunch of full-racing cars.

....shall we go on?

Keep in mind that the Ai are a bunch of robots. They have no problem using me as a wall or a punching bag; hence, I have no problem ensuring that I can out-corner and out-brake them with a set of racing brakes or sport suspension...as I said, driving this way takes actual skill..whereas using nitrous or mad power takes very little skill. The only skill nitrous takes is remembering which button you set-up on your dual-shock when you need a bit of speed!

One of these days I'll have my own personal technology so I can finally start posting some replays. This way y'all will know I'm not just whistling out my ass on these issues. You will see:

1. my cars are no faster than the Ai. In fact, in many cases running down a straight, my cars will often be seen losing speed (while I'm sweating up a puddle) even when I'm drafting.

2. I am able to out-corner the Ai not only because of the parts I choose, but also because of the way I choose cornering lines. And if an Ai car is ahead of me, I often know how that car is gonna react to me as a competitor. So I tend to avoid them, rather than pushing into them or choosing lines that allow them to push into me. In this respect, GT racing against the ai is like a high-paced game of chess; not only am I making my moves, but I'm also considering the moves the Ai cars are going to make in response (or dumbness).

3. Winning despite my lack of power. Yet I don't always win. My games run 50 to 60% win ratios, matter of fact. The goal of the game (for me) is to win of course, but (despite the mods I use) it simply doesn't always happen. Sometimes this is due to me starting a race, finding some fault (like I'm too fast) and then re-starting it. Others, it's due because tried as hard as I could yet still lost due to a mistake or something of that nature.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

You haven't played F1:CE yet have you? It has a mechanical issues option and the pit times are determined by how fast, and in what order, you hit the buttons for each job to be performed.

What videos we have seen of GT5 show heat mirages, I can only hope that these are actually a sign that heat/weather will play a role of some sort.


Do you tune your car differently for qualifying? I mean, when it is going to be a close race and I know grabbing the front row is important I throw on some super softs and go to town, tearing up my tires very quickly to grab a good time. Then in a long race I may be on super hard tires, reducing my handling ability and lengthening my times. Now, if you are going in race ready and then this happens in the race it could be different, just another AI issue.

ALso, do you stop as soon as you grab that pole time? Because I have had a situation where I beat teh current pole time by a couple of seconds only to have the AI beat that next time around as it is now suddenly catching my draft. Your presence in front of the lead AI does give it a different opportunity with your draft.


Yes, and I really think you would be happy playing F1:CE.

I'm eventually gonna get a copy of ToCA, which is supposed to represent all the breakdowns and stuff..I never heard of F1:CE but it sounds cool.

No I don't change tires between qualifying and racing, but I sometimes make small changes in power. But we're talking 5 to 10 horses. And I used to stop after I made that pole time, but doing so is unreliable. What often happens is

1. I qualify and make pole. Recently I just did some European event and found myself 4 seconds ahead of the competition or something crazy.

2. I'll do a few more laps. Sometimes I'll even stop, wait for one of the Ai cars to roll up (preferably one of the faster ones) then drive along with them for awhile; just to see if I'm overkilling or not.

3. So naturally, I'll downplay my power if I am.

4. The race. I prefer close ones...yet now some of the Ai is getting light-years ahead! And this is after I changed a semi-racing exhaust for a stock one! Something minor like that.

...so making horsepower changes in GT4 is a bit unreliable...unlike in GT3 where you could reliably drop (or add) a bit of power, and if your qualifying lap times were within a half-second of the Ai, you knew you were about to have a close race. I really believe the Ai drives different from qualifying to racing in some cases. I also believe they have "off-days"; you'll have a race in which a Lotus Elise kills! You'll restart and do the exact race again, and that same Elise for some reason can't get past a 2nd-place car. I've seen it happen again and again.

In a nutshell, GT4 has some variables going on that make it much less predictable than GT3, which in a way is kinda cool. 👍 you don't exactly know what'll happen next all the time.

 

[FoolKiller]

i never heard of F1:CE but it sounds cool.

Formula 1: Championship Edition. It's a PS3 game that involves damage and control over your pit times.

 

[Alfaholic]

The difference is out-cornering an Ai car takes actual skill! .

Good one! For a second there I thought you were being serious! Can I borrow your AI please? The Artificial Idiots on my disk can't corner to save their lives.

This is where i do most of my passing, my friend....not on the straights.

That's truly lovely. In fact, if you read my race reports driving the El Capitan 200 in an Elan, you'll realise that I'm familiar with winning races in cars which handle well but can't keep up on straights. The thing is, though, even with only 129bhp, beating the Motorsport Elise there wasn't as difficult as it might sound, because the Elan was fast enough around corners to put the lap times in, good enough on its tyres to keep the times consistent throughout the tyre life, and it was so well balanced in the corners that keeping it at maximum pace for 66 laps without any significant mistakes was actually not that hard. But now try the same race in a car that does the same lap times but is faster on the straights and rubbish in the corners. Then tell me which takes more skill.

I applaud your use of drivetrain parts (clutch, flywheel etc) because these make for faster acceleration out of corners, without necessarily introducing extra power. .

Actually they also vastly improve braking performance. Not completely sure why. Perhaps it's something to do with engine braking.

I don't

1. bash into other cars or push them off track
.

Good plan. They usually win. The AI may be crap at negotiating a circuit, but they're generally dab hands at recovering a slide or spin.

....shall we go on?

No, as we seem to be creeping off topic.

...as i said, driving this way takes actual skill..whereas using nitrous or mad power takes very little skill. ?

See? This is where I just can't agree. Driving clean, consistent laps in an overpowered car with rubbish handling requires more skill than driving clean, consistent laps in a decent handling, underpowered car. At least, I find it harder. I guarantee that, if both cars can post the same lap times in my hands, I'll do better in a race in the underpowered, good handling one, because I'll make less mistakes, because the car is easier to drive.

The only skill nitrous takes is remembering which button you set-up on your dual-shock when you need a bit of speed! ?

Good point. Now you mention it, I can't remember where nitrous is on a Dual shock. On a G25, though, I think it's the button on the right. I found it the other day while trying to break 300mph on the Mulsanne Straight at De La Sarthe (without the chicanes) in a ZZ11 on a race meeting or whatever its called. I remember it quite well because I had been slipstreaming a W12 and hit the nitrous as I pulled out to overtake. The tyres lost traction and the tail stepped out of line at about 240mph, resulting in the fastest powerslide I think I've ever had without crashing. I guess that's a case of nitrous introducing a handling deficiency, rather than covering for one. Or perhaps I shouldn't have been trying on N2s.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

Okay buddy. So glad you've illuminated me on these subjects! From now on, I won't even bother practicing being a great driver in the corners, I'll just slap on as much power as possible, and a wing, and slide into walls and stuff. Oh, and I'll make sure every car I buy is now equipped with nitrous, so that I can now make up for all the mistakes I plan on making! 👍

 

[Alfaholic]

I knew you'd see the light 👍

 

[BobK]

Okay buddy. so glad you've illuminated me on these subjects! From now on, i won't even bother practicing being a great driver in the corners, i'll just slap on as much power as possible, and a wing, and slide into walls and stuff. Oh, and i'll make sure every car i buy is now equipped with nitrous, so that i can now make up for all the mistakes i plan on making! 👍

Parnelli, I think you missed this part:

Driving clean, consistent laps in an overpowered car with rubbish handling requires more skill than driving clean, consistent laps in a decent handling, underpowered car.

 

[jcb74]

I like to use it (sparingly) with lower powered cars to "get the back out" & help me 'round a corner.
Other times, it helps to "straighten" a low-powered car through a corner.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

Parnelli, I think you missed this part:

Originally Posted by Alfaholic
Driving clean, consistent laps in an overpowered car with rubbish handling requires more skill than driving clean, consistent laps in a decent handling, underpowered car.

That's something I've done plenty of times before (driving a car with loads of power but crap handling) after all, I've raced plenty of muscle cars and older sports cars in GT2 and GT4. But that's not even what we were talking about. That's a whole different topic.

Alfaholic seems to think somebody who knows how to drive (and who includes good cornering) is cheating if they use a sports suspension (or some other basic upgrade) to augment their cornering even if they manage to race around Ai cars in an underpowered machine and avoid hitting them. Meanwhile, the Ai thinks nothing of hitting us. Alfaholic seems to think there is no skill involved in this kind of racing.

He also implies that someone who doesn't know how to drive and uses nitrous to make up for their cornering faults is on the same level as I am so far as cheating goes. That's the bottom line of this discussion.

Now let me ask you this. How did Nigel Mansell get to where he got in racing? Aryton Senna? Alain Prost? Michael Schumacher? Do they consider their racing lines in and out of corners to be a part of their skills? Or did they get to where they are (were) by crap cornering...and then pushing a magic button which delivered more power to their engine?

Let's take this several steps down. We're video-gaming now. Playing GT4. GT4 may have its faults..it aint perfect, but it's supposed to be a driving simulator. I may not be a professional race driver, all I do is game in my armchair. Yet, real-life race car drivers and enthusiasts have marveled at the work Polyphony Digital has done in creating a game that simulates the basics of race-driving.

And what this means is as I race my Honda Civic around Tsukuba, I am making decisions in my cornering and passing other cars that are crucial to my winning strategy.

....do you guys honestly think it takes as much skill to do this as it does to drive like crap and hit a button to make it all better down the straights?

I knew you'd see the light 👍

You have illuminated me. From now on, I'm not even gonna play GT4 anymore, I'll just run straight to GameStop and get myself a couple Need 4 Speed copies, matter of fact. After all, I don't even have to drive well in these games. There is no punishment for hitting walls, and (best of all) I can hit a nos button and blue flames shoot out of my tail pipe!

 

[Tired Tyres]

I took a very carefully set up Black Mazda 787B to the Motegi Oval race in the GTWC and won a 200 A-Spec race against a quality field. I modified, tinkered and changed the setup until I had done enough to win the race. It was satisfying to do that.


I took the same Mazda to the El Capitan race in the same championship and left the car completely stock other than to fit super hard tyres and sat in 6th place, didn’t pass a single car and took the win as each AI car pitted for new tyres. This victory came about because of superior tactics. This is how Alain Prost won most of his GP’s. It was satisfying to do that.


I took a stock Corvette Grand Sport to victory around Infineon Sports car course and had to overcome its handling deficiencies by driving around them to take the car to victory. It was satisfying to do that.


That’s three different ways to win. None of them is THE right way to do it. None of them is THE wrong way to do it. None of these methods are unfair, none of them are cheating. NOS on the other hand is cheating. None of the AI cars use it.

PS I've checked out your website in your Sig - It's a very good read.

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

NOS on the other hand is cheating. None of the AI cars use it.

Using that logic, then its cheating any time you use a car that isn't also among the 5 AI cars in a race. It is cheating any time you use a mod that none of the 5 AI cars in that race has. It is cheating to use a tire type that none of the 5 AI cars in that race has. And so on and so so forth. Seriously, I can't begin to understand this line of thinking, and frankly it's starting to really irritate me.

Most importantly, I guess I'm really surprised there are so many who seem to think this is just some kind of 'black or white' issue, and appear at least unwilling to recognize that there are exceptions, where using NOS in GT4 is not some kind of cheat device, and can result in some great close competitive racing, just as if you used a heavily modified inferior car against AI in stock superior cars.

As in real life, there are almost always exceptions, and many fine examples of using NOS that are certainly not "cheating" have been brought up in this thread. To continue to make blanket statements proclaiming the use of NOS in GT4 is cheating is not only narrow minded, but it insults everyone who has taken the time to experiment and discover ways of using NOS to create close competitive racing.... just like those of us who have done the same thing by using seriously inferior cars, but moded and tuned to compete with superior AI cars.

So not only are these proclamations of cheating almost entirely subjective, but they are almost all very narrow minded in their lack of understanding that there are REAL exceptions, where clearly the use of NOS is not just some kind of pathetic way of "cheating" the game.

The sooner these people realize this, the sooner they'll find that they too can find a use for NOS that isn't cheating the game, but rather can help create great close racing.

Now if they can't, or more likely, don't want to, then fine, but please stop telling those that do that they are cheating. Thanks.

 

[Tired Tyres]

Perhaps cheating was the wrong word. I was trying to point out that there are different ways to win. The details of three race wins points that out.

I don't know of any way to check the tuning state of the AI cars so I don't have ANY problem with ANY form of tuning. I just don't see any reason to use a gas that is not used by the AI at all.

I do agree that its use can create some very good racing though.

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

I don't know of any way to check the tuning state of the AI cars so I don't have ANY problem with ANY form of tuning. I just don't see any reason to use a gas that is not used by the AI at all.

That's one of the things that really bugs me about GT4, and all racing games, and that is the lack of detailed car specs/tuning info for AI cars.

That said, there is no definitive proof they do not use NOS either. I don’t believe they do for any race, but just to make the point of how problematic it is to hold a position of black or white when there are not only many exceptions, but you don't even know for sure what the AI might on occasions use, but let's cotinue to assume they do not.

Once again I'm still failing to understand the logic here. There is also no definitive proof that the AI use anything but the stock tuning settings... so by your logic, making any tuning adjustments would be cheating, becuase as much as we can assume they never use NOS, they also never adjust the default tuning settings.

Also, for each race, the AI can ONLY use one specific type of tire, and that is an actual fact, confirmed by previewing a race where it tells you exactly what tire type it is using. Thus applying the same logic as before, you would also then have to say using any other type of tire in that race is also cheating… because the AI can’t!

It is also an actual fact that the AI has a limited pool of cars it can use in any specific race, so again, because just like how they may not be able to use NOS, because the AI car can not use all the cars that would normally qualify for a race, then it would also be cheating to pick any car outside that pool of AI cars.. or even any car not being used in that specific field of 5 AI cars… because the AI can’t!

See how problematic that line of reasoning gets when you try and apply a very simple rule to a complex situation and say just because the AI may not use NOS, then its cheating for the player to use it... except apparently its OK to use cars they can't use; tire types they can't use; mods they might not be able to use; custom tuning they might not use; and so on and so forth.

You can also flip it around, and say, well... the AI use Group C races in GT4, so it’s not cheating to use one in a race against AI that are only using sub 200 hp stock cars.

The point is, it would be a mistake to try and make such black and white generalizations, especially when many of the facts are only speculative, and that most importantly you have to consider the end result/goal.. which in this case seems to have been lost or ignored.

The one thing most of us seem to agree on is that it is not cheating to have a race that is challenging, close and competitive… and that thanks to the multitude of options in GT4, there are MANY reasonable ways of creating these challenging, close and competitive races, and NOS happens to be one of them in at least a few situations that I personally am aware of… just like situations where the use of different cars, tire types, mods, and tunings that the AI isn’t able or likely doesn’t ever use in specific races, or possibly none of the races, but the end result is a challenging, close and competitive race.

I do agree that its use can create some very good racing though.

👍

 

[Parnelli Bone]

I don't think they use nitrous (the ai that is). You'd be able to hear the engines sipping it up otherwise. You know how it makes that sssssss noise?

And I guess you'll have to call me narrow-minded on this subject D-N, but I'm not trying to insult anyone. I just have yet to find a single race in which I truly need nitrous. But that's just me. Please don't get offended, okay?

 

[Alfaholic]

Alfaholic seems to think somebody who knows how to drive (and who includes good cornering) is cheating if they use a sports suspension (or some other basic upgrade) to augment their cornering even if they manage to race around Ai cars in an underpowered machine and avoid hitting them. Meanwhile, the Ai thinks nothing of hitting us. Alfaholic seems to think there is no skill involved in this kind of racing.

Seems? Why don't you just read what I'm saying and take it at face value like intended? I never said there's no skill involved in racing without hitting the AI. I said it's easier to drive consistent laps in a good handling, underpowered car than in an ill handling, high powered car. You yourself admitted that you use a brake upgrade to give you a performance advantage under braking over the AI cars, to avoid them driving into you. Why is that different from someone using nitrous to avoid the AI cars rear ending them on the straights, and then battling in an ill handling car to keep the AI behind in the corners?

He also implies that someone who doesn't know how to drive and uses nitrous to make up for their cornering faults is on the same level as i am so far as cheating goes. That's the bottom line of this discussion.

I never mentioned the need for a lack of driving skill in my argument. But, if you need to make up for all-my-own-work mistakes in cornering, Nitrous would not be my first choice anyway, since you only get enough of it to make up for one or two mistakes. If using nitrous to improve lap times is cheating, then so is using any other modification that achieves the same end result. I'm also not comparing two different drivers. I'm comparing the same driver using two different options.

Now let me ask you this. How did Nigel Mansell get to where he got in racing? Aryton Senna? Alain Prost? Michael Schumacher? Do they consider their racing lines in and out of corners to be a part of their skills? Or did they get to where they are (were) by crap cornering...and then pushing a magic button which delivered more power to their engine?

Senna and Mansell both insisted on getting the best equipment. They did whatever they could to win, not to race closely. You can guarantee that if they had the exclusive option of nitrous, they would have used it, just like they would any other exclusive performance advantage they could get. Senna, for instance, joined McLaren because they had the best engine in F1. He didn't say "no, can't have that. Rather give me that slow car over there so I can come 15th but feel good about it". Mansell, when presented with the only car on the grid with effective active suspension, didn't say "oh I can't have that, it gives me an unfair advantage". He took advantage of a car which was superior around corners and used it to win the championship. Prost is an even worse example for you to use. He made a name for himself as "The Professor" in the turbocharged, fuel restricted days, because he knew just when to turn the boost up to gain track advantage, and when to turn it down to avoid running out of fuel. In other words, he made better use of a temporary power boost than anyone else who actually had a turbo (not all the cars ran turbos). He couldn't use it all the time because he'd use up all his fuel. Thus, he made good use of performance advantage used on the straights, but also limited in availability. A bit like nitrous, and pretty much exactly the "magic button" you mentioned. I don't know where you're getting this idea that as a prerequisite to using nitrous, you must be a crap driver. Good drivers are allowed to use it too.

Thing is, I can enter a race in a car, find that I need another half a second a lap to be competitive, wander off to the garage and add a bit that gives me that half a second. What difference does it make if it's a suspension bit or a straight line bit, incl. nitrous? Either way, I'm doing something the AI can't. They can't improve their car's performance to react to me. Whether or not you call that cheating is up to you, but even if you do, you can't point the finger specifically at nitrous, or even engine mods in general.

And what this means is as i race my Honda Civic around Tsukuba, i am making decisions in my cornering and passing other cars that are crucial to my winning strategy.

So is a guy who is battling to keep his ill handling car on the circuit around the twisty bits to try keep in striking distance of the AI so he can power past them on the next straight, then trying to keep the AI behind him in the next set of twisties. Just like you probably were in the muscle cars you mentioned. Did you modify the gearbox in those to allow a top speed above the 118mph limit most of them are supplied with? If so, did that help you overtake them in the corners?

....do you guys honestly think it takes as much skill to do this as it does to drive like crap and hit a button to make it all better down the straights? .

Skill's got nothing to do with the mods on your car. An unskilled driver will still crash everywhere in an Elan. A skilled driver will still have difficult races in an 800bhp Tuscan, possibly fitted with nitrous.

.Yup, you have illuminated me. From now on, i'm not even gonna play GT4 anymore, i'll just run straight to GameStop and get myself a couple Need 4
Speed copies, matter of fact. After all, i dont even have to drive well in these games. There is no punishment for hitting walls, and (best of all) i can hit a nos button and blue flames shoot out of my tail pipe!

Whatever turns you off.