Pre-release GT5:Prologue Thread Firmware 2.17 mandatory for GT5:P? (and Pictures)

[Chelsea_is_dead]

Having more options is always going to be better than fewer (except for those that don't like to have options and want someone else and or a game to dictate exactly what they can and can't do at all times).

If you want HP limits, all you have to do is show some self control and select cars that meet the rules you set for yourself at any given time... you shouldn't have to need the game to do that for you.

But, the thing is, (and you have to admit this) it's way too easy to cheat your way though GT3 and 4. All you have to do is take a medium to moderate-fast car, give it a turbo stage 4, upgrade the entire transmission and drivetrain, give it a wing, lighten it up, enter it in a class race, and BLAM! you're home free.

Let me give you an example. Let's take, say, a Honda S2000. In GT2, the races had horsepower limits. That meant that in order to enter a race, your car had to be under the limit for that race. For example, the lone S2000 in GT2 had 246 HP and 160 Lb/ft of torque. let's say that you wanted NA stage 1. Here's the upgrade for that:

256 Horsepower (up from 241 HP)
167 pounds/feet of torque (up from 160 lb/ft)

Now here's the races you can enter with that car:

FR Challenge ~295 HP
~443
~493

Sunday Cup ALL

Clubman Club ALL

Luxury Sedan Cup ~394 HP
~493
~591

Muscle Car Cup ALL

Convertible Car World Cup ~345 HP
~591

Station Wagon Cup ALL

'80s Sports Car Cup All but ~197

Grand Touring Car Trophy ~394 HP
~493
~591

Pure Sports Car Club ~394 HP
~493
~591

Tuned NA Car No. 1 Cup ALL

Gran Turismo All-Stars " "

Super Touring Trophy " "

GT300 Championship " "

GT500 Championship " "

See? And that's just Special Events alone. I Didn't even take into account the GT League or even Endurance races. Now compare that to GT3 & 4. In GT2 competitive balance with the CPU existed because you couldn't blow the computer away with your car's raw speed because of Horsepower limits. IN GT3 & 4, all you had to do was do the things I mentioned above and you will cross the finish line in first faster than you can say "Bugatti 16/4 Veryon".

So, my point is, it's very easy to beat the in GT3 & 4, partly because of B-spec mode (yes, I finally mentioned that) and partly because you can juice up your car to the max, win by 10 minutes, and not be punished for it. Quite Frankly, I hope PD fixes this problem for the "Real" GT5 (at least for the online mode, if there's going to be one.) because if not, than PD will have a big problem on their hands and GT5, in my opion, if so, will not haved evolved from GT4.

SALUD.

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

But, the thing is, (and you have to admit this) it's way too easy to cheat your way though GT3 and 4.

*snip*

Maybe I was too subtle...

Having more options is always going to be better than fewer (except for those that don't like to have options and want someone else and or a game to dictate exactly what they can and can't do at all times).

If you want HP limits, all you have to do is show some self control and select cars that meet the rules you set for yourself at any given time... you shouldn't have to need the game to do that for you.

Perhaps you find it too tempting to "cheat", and thus perhaps need a game that doesn't have a lot of options and has very specific limitations... I personally do not. That may explain why we have a different opinion on the need for more restrictions in GT5.

 

[Biggles]

It's true that some people treat GT4 like a game you have to "beat". ie. make your way through it as quickly & painlessly as possible. This seems entirely pointless to me. I like to create a race in which the cars are pretty evenly balanced & in which I have to drive more or less flawlessly in order to win.

The problem in GT4 is the crappy (non-existant) AI (& collision physics), which takes away a lot of the complexity & satisfaction of running a good race. In this sense, Forza 1 & 2 are far superior. It is my hope that GT5/P will address this fundamental shortcoming of the GT series...

 

[Tenacious D]

I agree with the first bit, but the video's don't really show you anything.

When Kaz was running through his first demo of Prologue at TGS, at one point he went off the road in his Ferrari. Getting back on, he cut off a car and the bot veered left and right trying to find a way around him. This is something you've never seen before in Gran Turismo. As for the physics, I've gleaned little bits here and there that look refined over past GT games, such as the scene someone noted a bot car being spun out with a tap to the rear. I know though that we'll have to wait for Prologue itself to realize just how their hard work has manifested.

 

[RedBaron]

When Kaz was running through his first demo of Prologue at TGS, at one point he went off the road in his Ferrari. Getting back on, he cut off a car and the bot veered left and right trying to find a way around him. This is something you've never seen before in Gran Turismo. As for the physics, I've gleaned little bits here and there that look refined over past GT games, such as the scene someone noted a bot car being spun out with a tap to the rear. I know though that we'll have to wait for Prologue itself to realize just how their hard work has manifested.

Yes and when Kaz slammed the bot, the bot seems to be the same "untouchable" AI car as always. Like a wall. You hit him and you barely change his way. In reality, when you knock into rear of any car from side, even lightly, the car most probably heavily spin out.

 

[DarthTurismo]

Yes and when Kaz slammed the bot, the bot seems to be the same "untouchable" AI car as always. Like a wall. You hit him and you barely change his way. In reality, when you knock into rear of any car from side, even lightly, the car most probably heavily spin out.

guys not sure whether this clip has done the rounds or not but..... i was quite happy to see (finally) an ai driven car that was tapped by the guy playing the game who used it to get around the corner.... finally we see a gt scene where the car gets clipped and spins off the track.... it's about 2:30 into the clip......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCIAcawOw-0&mode=related&search=

i just wonder what the sensitivity of this set up is..... ie: how fast do u need to hit them and what angle etc...?? just another piece of the gt puzzle coming together..... let's hope the sounds are also on the "needs more work calendar"

 

[GT Pro]

Delayed to March? That's a good thing for me I guess, since I can instead get a PS3 on my birthday that month when the prices have dropped after Christmas.

It was inevitable, anyway.

 

[Beerz]

Guys, don't forget that there will be 2 different physics models in the game, and as far as I know, we've only seen the 'rookie physics' one so far.
We can already see some improvements both in AI and in physics, but no doubt they're still working on both, and they'll surely be much better than GT4 on that aspect when the game comes out.

Plus, regarding the AI, my guess is that they've done something similar to what F! drivers agreed a few years ago, which is the racing line belongs to the driver in front, unless the car trying to overtake is already halfway or more on the side of the car in front.
It's (imo) stupid to think that just because you brake later to a turn and have your front bumper on the side of the car preceding you that he automatically has to open up his racing line to let you pass. You YOU do that? No way.
Another thing is that no one is looking at their mirrors all the time, so it's only natural to skip something going on behind the car he's driving, it's just like that.

If you don't see any improvements so far, such as the different physics of how the car behaves when it goes off the track, when it collides and bounces off spinning, the way the brake and steer to avoid (within possible) collisions, etc., you have either not paying attention or you're just too biased and too filled with pessimism to know something good even when it slams you in the face.

I'm getting more optimistic by the time. Let's not forget that GT5 - the full game - won't be out for at least 18 months, there's PLENTY of time to improve everything they want to in the game.

 

[Dave A]

We've seen both, but I doubt they are different models, one will be the same as the other it will probably just have a load of driving aids working in the background to dumb it down.

With regards to seeing improvments in the AI etc, everyone was saying the same thing when GT4 vids were popping up "did you see the Ai do that, theres a definite improvment," etc, but it was crap. If you pick the right clips of GT4 you can make the AI look great. The bottom line is that until we have the game and see it for ourselve, we cannot come to an accurate conclusion over what the improvments are and how big they are. I'm sure they will have improved, I hope they have, but watching thoes videos doesn't prove it has to me.

 

[SavageEvil]

We've seen both, but I doubt they are different models, one will be the same as the other it will probably just have a load of driving aids working in the background to dumb it down.

With regards to seeing improvments in the AI etc, everyone was saying the same thing when GT4 vids were popping up "did you see the Ai do that, theres a definite improvment," etc, but it was crap. If you pick the right clips of GT4 you can make the AI look great. The bottom line is that until we have the game and see it for ourselve, we cannot come to an accurate conclusion over what the improvments are and how big they are. I'm sure they will have improved, I hope they have, but watching thoes videos doesn't prove it has to me.

The AI hasn't improved any has it? Do the AI try to avoid contact? Do they cleanly pass the human driver? Do they lose control from impacts? Just asking questions to find out why you think nothing has changed.
On another note, Kaz did say that GT5 will have two driving engines, one will be the usual fanfare and the professional mode. One is based off tire physics i think and the other is off individual vehicle physics, i have to find the interview with it. But i do know it's not some dumbed down all assist on type of thing. You speak as if you know what they are going to do, develop some sort of clairvoyance perhaps?

 

[Tenacious D]

Dave (TVR) has gone back and forth even on GT4, saying "It's a fun drive" to "It's appalingly bad for me." It'll be very interesting to read the impressions of Prologue from some of these naysayers, and even then keeping in mind this will still be a prologue, with the finished game coming out a year or more later.

I know in my experience with Forza 1, at first I was seriously disappointed with several factors which just weren't right. But I was determined to get a handle on things, since I'd spent almost $300 just to play it. And in a few weeks time my views softened, I adjusted to it, since it wasn't going to adjust to me obviously, and after that it was luuv. Forza 2 turns out to be a tweaked Forza 1, which makes sense, and as I had gotten used to FM1 the transition was relatively painless. Relatively. And it is an incredible game, though you have to drive by it's rules once more.

Will the nitpickers be happy? The way people are these days, demanding that Gran Turismo be some other game, I can see they might not.

 

[Kent]

Personally, I think the idea of two different physics systems (one for tires and one for cars) being seperated to create two different game modes is rediculus.
Wouldn't you need both the vehicle and tire physics going at the same time to ensure an accurate physics model?
I'm inclined to say that if either of the two ideas presented is likely, it will be the driving aids theory that is most likely. Tire and car physics being seperated so the game can play with one and not the other is just silly (almost as silly as suggesting the system while criticising others for suggesting another system may be used).

Truth is, we don't know how GT5 will work the differences between professional mode and 'the other mode' (sorry but I don't know the name for the amatuer mode).

Personally, my biggest concern is the idea of delays.
There's a good chance I will not buy GT5 or a PS3 until I can compare them to the 360 and FM2. With that in mind, delays are a bad thing for Sony and eventually (if there is an '09 GT5 release) there will be a good chance of me buying a 360 and Fm2.

Basically, I believe PD's biggest problem is meeting a schedule. The quality of the product will likely be great. However, I wouldn't be suprised is there are flaws like with every other product.

Btw, I think AI should be one of the last major concerns for all of us considering the online mode (none the less, I do understand the importance of good AI).

 

[Tenacious D]

Kent, if you can afford to blow almost $6-700 on a Forza 2 gaming rig, including the FFB Wheel, I'd heartily recommend it. I mean, assuming you had no life like I don't. It's no Gran Turismo but it's a great game. Just make sure you get warranty extensions for your stuff if you do. Both my 360 and wheel broke down after only a few weeks.

If you can only afford that kind of moolah every year and a half, I'd say wait for Prologue and GT5. Heck, the Playstation will always walk all over the 360 library. My opinion of course, and if you're a rabid PC gamer it might go the other way. But Gran Turismo will always be worth the wait for me.

 

[Kamus]

Will the nitpickers be happy? The way people are these days, demanding that Gran Turismo be some other game, I can see they might not.

Excuse me? demanding it to be some other game?
we've been over this numerous times, and you seem to still not get what people want.

they don't want it to be like other games, they want the game to live up to it's name, a SIMULATOR.
Got it?

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

The problem Kamus is that some people have VERY unrealistic ideas of what a "realistic" game is supposed to be (a bit of irony that I'm sure is not lost on a lot of people that read thess types of threads), and to make matters worse, they use very subjective opinions on what they think a "simulator" game on a console should be... and of course there are also some people who get so hyper focused on realism that they forget it is also a GAME, and no console or even PC game is EVER going to be truly realistic. If you really want something that realistic, I suggest stop playing games, and starting spending all your free time at the track.

*sigh*

This thread can sometimes be rather depressing to read.

I’d suggest that things will get better when the GAME, finally comes out, but considering all the similar types of threads on GT4 nearly three years after its release, I seriously doubt anything will change.

I said it in another thread, but I think it applies to this thread even more:

Let's not forget, most console owners are not nearly as geeky as you find on various online gaming forums where you'll find people arguing endlessly over the most meaningless things that they themselves don't even care about, but enjoy arguing over nonetheless.

 

[Biggles]

Yeah, I don't get why wanting certain elements in GT5 equals wanting it to be like other games.

Given the limitations of the PS2, GT4 delivered huge content, great graphics, decent physics, good sound, poor AI, poor collision physics, no damage, no online, great replays & great wheel support.

In comparison Forza offered smaller content, decent physics, good graphics, good sound, decent AI, good collision physics, decent damage, online, decent replays & decent wheel support. Forza 2 improved somewhat on most of those categories but remains with smaller content, good but not "great" graphics, a good but not "great" wheel & disappointing replays. I suspect that some of the shortcomings of Forza 2 have to do with rushing the game to market - a strategy that may have made sense in stealing from GT5's (& PS3's) base.

With the vastly increased power of the PS3 it is not unreasonable to hope for huge content, great physics, great sound, great AI, great collision physics etc. However, what GT5 actually delivers, remains to be seen.

 

[Kamus]

The problem Kamus is that some people have VERY unrealistic ideas of what a "realistic" game is supposed to be (a bit of irony that I'm sure is not lost on a lot of people that read thess types of threads), and to make matters worse, they use very subjective opinions on what they think a "simulator" game on a console should be... and of course there are also some people who get so hyper focused on realism that they forget it is also a GAME, and no console or even PC game is EVER going to be truly realistic. If you really want something that realistic, I suggest stop playing games, and starting spending all your free time at the track.

*sigh*

This thread can sometimes be rather depressing to read.

I’d suggest that things will get better when the GAME, finally comes out, but considering all the similar types of threads on GT4 nearly three years after its release, I seriously doubt anything will change.

I said it in another thread, but I think it applies to this thread even more:

So, let me see if i get you straight, simulators will never achive comparable levels of realisim regardless of the huge techonological advancements that contradict this proposition?

This is not the first time i've been told to go hit the track, here is the problem with that:

Tracktime is expensive, Tyres are expensive, you can't just decide "hmm, i feel like racing right now" and just start a race just because you feel like it.
wrecking cars is expensive, getting tracktime isn't always easy, specially when you live in a city that doesn't even have a decent track.

Do you want more reasons why some people would rather just do it on simulators most of the time? Cause there is more than plenty.

And go tell the guys that have been developing flight simulators for more than a decade that a simulation can never be close to the real thing. Technology is getting there weather you belive it or not.

The things that people with realistic criticisms have pointed out are glaring problems with GT that aren't related to technological limitations anymore.

While i'm sure there are some people that want results that are not possible in current hardware, i don't think i've seen many of those posted. Specially when it comes with the physics related to car handling.

For realistic car damage i don't know the ammount of CPU time it would take to make this viable, and frankly i don't really care that much untill they get more important aspects right first. I'd rather not have damage in at all untill they can get it done by real collision and not just predetermined damage.
But you know you got a problem when Grand Prix Legends which was developed for dinosaurs compared to the PS3 is still more realistic than many of these so called simulators. (GT5 not included untill we get hands on experience with it.)

The "but it's also a game!" is a nonwarranted apology for this. you could have 100% realistic physics and just add driving aids up the wazoo and problem solved.

GT5 is getting a LOT of things right, and as i've said before. it looks to be like the only company out there with enough resources to come up with really high quality product in all aspects, i don't think there's any other simulator developer that has a big a budget as them.
So really, why not just look at things for what they are and stop apologizing for PD.
There is nothing wrong with pointing out stuff that you think needs improvent, specially if you have been pointing it out for years now and it's still not adressed. (again, we don't really know about GT5 just yet.)

I'm personally not doing this out of spite for PD, quite the contrary.
If i really disliked their product compared to others i'd probably be playing forza instead and be on MS's ass pointing out their horrible graphics and what not.

Turns out, THIS is the game i'm intrested in, they get a lot of things right. and if they really want to live up to their name i don't see any reason why i shouldn't point out why it doesn't yet.

 

[Biggles]

Personally, my biggest concern is the idea of delays.
There's a good chance I will not buy GT5 or a PS3 until I can compare them to the 360 and FM2. With that in mind, delays are a bad thing for Sony and eventually (if there is an '09 GT5 release) there will be a good chance of me buying a 360 and Fm2.

An early release of limited size would work for me. As I've said before, I don't need huge content in GT5 (or GT5) - a smaller number of cars & tracks would be fine, if they're well done. More could be added later. (I probably spend 70% of my time in GT4 on the Ring.) What scares me is the idea of the quality being compromised by the quantity.

Btw, I think AI should be one of the last major concerns for all of us considering the online mode (none the less, I do understand the importance of good AI).

Much of the time I would not be able to play online, so AI remains of paramount importance to me.

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

So, let me see if i get you straight, simulators will never achive comparable levels of realisim regardless of the huge techonological advancements that contradict this proposition?

We are talking about this decade and for consoles right? Then the answer is quite clearly yes. There is no point in trying to forecast the far off future or what is possible if you had hundreds of thousands of dollars to spend on a simulator, as it doesn’t apply to what is possible with today’s consoles… which unless I’m mistaken is what GT5 will be played on.

This is not the first time i've been told to go hit the track, here is the problem with that:
*snip*

It’s interesting that you say this is not the first time someone has said to hit the track, but yes, all those reasons are exactly why you should then have more realistic expectations of what to expect out of a $50-$60 console game that not only must have some kind of limit to production time and cost, but must also appeal to a wide range of players.

While I don’t have any experience in game development, making feature films is something I am very familiar with, and just like games, films have budgets and production time limits, and while many things are technically possible, reality is difficult decisions must be made, and even if things are “possible” it doesn’t mean it’s reasonable to do them all, and for consumers to expect to see them all done.

The "but it's also a game!" is a nonwarranted apology for this. you could have 100% realistic physics and just add driving aids up the wazoo and problem solved.

It is neither unwarranted nor an apology. It’s an actual fact. Perhaps some folks would benefit by realizing that even if the technology is there, game developers do not have unlimited budgets and unlimited production time, nor can games succeed if they are designed to appeal to just a small group of players, at least not games with massive production costs, like GT.


Once again, it's about having realistic expectations, especially from a game, and to understand that game developers do have real limitations (and not just technical ones) that they must work with, and are not going to be making games with just one person in mind, but to each his own. I will say though, I think in some ways you once again verified several points made by myself and others, but I suppose it really doesn't matter.

 

[Tenacious D]

@ Kamus:

It's not my intent to make you the poster boy of this subject, as there are plenty of other culprits who want GT to be EPR, Forza, Live For Speed, Toca, GTR, (insert name of game here). But I think you do exhibit exactly what I'm wanting not to see from Kaz and the lads.

Everything which gets coded into Gran Turismo is something I want them to transmogrify into the game from real life, not some other game. I want the WRX STi in GT5 to behave like a real WRX, not one mimicked from EPR or Forza. Damage is another example, and weather.

Now I do my own version of this, with a caveat. I just made a post about how much I was enjoying the paint and mod shop in Forza 2, and it's really something to crow about. However, the reason it exists is because this sort of thing is how real people create real race cars, from SCCA gearheads and drifters to SuperGT magicians in Japan. Now, if that's not how race cars were born and they were all purpose built, and GT2 hadn't had this kind of thing and Forza created it's own genre, then yes I'd say Kazunori-dono needed to look what those crazy men at Turn 10 did, and don't you dare get shown up in GT5!

But aside from the purpose built and experimental stuff, modding up sports cars is what motorsports is all about these days. So this is an example of how I'm approaching GT5 and my desires for it, and I'd be happier if we well wishers would come in here with that kind of outlook, and not a laundy list of elements of people's favorite game.

 

[Biggles]

lau(r)ndy list of elements of people's favorite game.

Don't understand your point. Surely great graphics, realistic physics, good AI, wide selection of tracks & cars etc. would be the desirable elements in any driving/racing sim??? 💡

 

[Ben Aracin]

Do i need to give poor SavagegraphicshoEvil a soda and a cookie with little blue and red sparklies to shape the logo, so him can go pway his widdle non realistic but really shiny game?
As for the amount of cars in Forza 2? Guess what sonnyjim, I'd call it the same thing i've been saying about the GT series since GT1, a small track day somewhat simucade that doesn't have enough cars in it to race against at the same time.
Guess what else? I'll say the same thing about my fav console car game Enthusia to.
Unlike most 80% of the folk that play/race the GT series, or any other console supposed sim, to me it was ALWAYS supposed to be about the racing, period.
I'd take a sim with a MUCH lower graphical look but had way more CONTENT towards racing than a "look how pretty i am" game like the GT series has become.
As long as i could clearly see where the track was and what the cars looked like i'd be fine.
I "love" how the gaming industry has just shifted from great gameplay to "OMG!!! LOOK HOW AWESOME AND S**T THAT GAME LOOKS!!".
I'm not apologizing to anyone simply because i want a sim that at least tries to make the racing be more like racing.
Unfortunately i'm in the minority, but i'll still gripe about PD going once again to great graphics FIRST then gameplay second, and i always will.
When they were planning this game the first words to come out of their mouths should have been "ok how many cars can we get on the screen at once" not "We so gotta make the cars look showroom new at 1080p".

It's just funny as hell when all i do is mention how wanting more cars on track over improved graphics just makes folk get all comstipated an stuff.

Who knows the horror i could've caused if i had actually tried adding stuff like Working collision detection system, or an A.I. that actually does work and get penalized as well as the human/s opponents etc.
There would've been mass hysteria or something.

 

[SavageEvil]

Do i need to give poor SavagegraphicshoEvil a soda and a cookie with little blue and red sparklies to shape the logo, so him can go pway his widdle non realistic but really shiny game?
As for the amount of cars in Forza 2? Guess what sonnyjim, I'd call it the same thing i've been saying about the GT series since GT1, a small track day somewhat simucade that doesn't have enough cars in it to race against at the same time.
Guess what else? I'll say the same thing about my fav console car game Enthusia to.
Unlike most 80% of the folk that play/race the GT series, or any other console supposed sim, to me it was ALWAYS supposed to be about the racing, period.
I'd take a sim with a MUCH lower graphical look but had way more CONTENT towards racing than a "look how pretty i am" game like the GT series has become.
As long as i could clearly see where the track was and what the cars looked like i'd be fine.
I "love" how the gaming industry has just shifted from great gameplay to "OMG!!! LOOK HOW AWESOME AND S**T THAT GAME LOOKS!!".
I'm not apologizing to anyone simply because i want a sim that at least tries to make the racing be more like racing.
Unfortunately i'm in the minority, but i'll still gripe about PD going once again to great graphics FIRST then gameplay second, and i always will.
When they were planning this game the first words to come out of their mouths should have been "ok how many cars can we get on the screen at once" not "We so gotta make the cars look showroom new at 1080p".

It's just funny as hell when all i do is mention how wanting more cars on track over improved graphics just makes folk get all comstipated an stuff.

Who knows the horror i could've caused if i had actually tried adding stuff like Working collision detection system, or an A.I. that actually does work and get penalized as well as the human/s opponents etc.
There would've been mass hysteria or something.

Would have read all that, but your post was kind of hard to read, it's 3 40am here, im not that bored. Who asked you to apologize for anything, dude get over yourself, your opinion is means as much to me as the space you take up on earth. PD has their own take on driving, so what, if that's not your cup of tea, I'm sure there are other games out there that will suit your tastes. You're persistent rants and put downs are borderline nitpicking, and some are just that. I can care less if like GT or not, but sometimes it's better to keep opinions to yourself, or rather your influx of constant negative opinions, you are like a poorly written hook to a song. The one you hate, but always gets stuck in your head.

 

[Tenacious D]

Ben, you might as well face it, and the PC world is a big clue. People want better graphics. That's why the PC market is loaded to the warehouse rafters with components to make your gaming rig look more photoreal than ever. That's why we want new consoles every 5 or 7 years - NOT 4, Microsoft.

Would I be happy if Kaz decided to have GT5 be 720p native, but upscale it to 1080p in order to get more performance out of his game engine? I'd be fine with that, but they have their own ideas. Besides, we don't know what they can accomplish on the PS3 with those 5 or 6 available processors, all running at 3.2ghz. Heck, I remember when we were afraid that Prologue was only going to have 7 or 8 cars on track at once. Remember the hooplah over that first glimpse of that video with 16 cars? We went nuts. And this is only Prologue. And even then, Kaz and the lads are still tweaking that game engine and evidently managed to get 20 cars running properly on the Daytona oval. Again, just the prelude game, not even the finished Gran Turismo 5.

So, throwing tantrums before the game is even out, or even the Prologue is even out is... well, kind of neener, doncha think?

 

[unv412]

So, let me see if i get you straight, simulators will never achive comparable levels of realisim regardless of the huge techonological advancements that contradict this proposition?

This is not the first time i've been told to go hit the track, here is the problem with that:

Tracktime is expensive, Tyres are expensive, you can't just decide "hmm, i feel like racing right now" and just start a race just because you feel like it.
wrecking cars is expensive, getting tracktime isn't always easy, specially when you live in a city that doesn't even have a decent track.

Do you want more reasons why some people would rather just do it on simulators most of the time? Cause there is more than plenty.

And go tell the guys that have been developing flight simulators for more than a decade that a simulation can never be close to the real thing. Technology is getting there weather you belive it or not.

The things that people with realistic criticisms have pointed out are glaring problems with GT that aren't related to technological limitations anymore.

While i'm sure there are some people that want results that are not possible in current hardware, i don't think i've seen many of those posted. Specially when it comes with the physics related to car handling.


The "but it's also a game!" is a nonwarranted apology for this. you could have 100% realistic physics and just add driving aids up the wazoo and problem solved.

GT5 is getting a LOT of things right, and as i've said before. it looks to be like the only company out there with enough resources to come up with really high quality product in all aspects, i don't think there's any other simulator developer that has a big a budget as them.
So really, why not just look at things for what they are and stop apologizing for PD.
There is nothing wrong with pointing out stuff that you think needs improvent, specially if you have been pointing it out for years now and it's still not adressed. (again, we don't really know about GT5 just yet.)

and if they really want to live up to their name i don't see any reason why i shouldn't point out why it doesn't yet.

once again you hit the nail on the head!!!!! Also to get onto the Trackday discussion.I do not know of anyone this side of being a multi billionair that can afford to hire out every track listed in GT4 and has access to 700+ cars that gt4 simulates in the real world.In closing all those people who say "its only a game so dont get too picky" shouldnt be on this forum in the first place! This forum IS about a hardcore driving simulation (GT just hasnt yet shown its full capabilities yet....so i figuer we need to prompt them a little) I think its ok to demand/dream/suggest for things to be in/out of GT5....or be one of the people who settles for being content with whats coming to you, and play a second rate GT game.

 

[JAGUAR1977]

When you have 14 years olds claiming this or that isn't realistic, when they've never even sat in a drivers seat, arguments will never cease.

On the other hand you have some who seem to believe a race car should be ultra difficult to drive, despite it being very rare for even gentlemen drivers to lose it out on track.

 

[RACECAR]

These arguments are getting old really fast. I don't see alot of contructive or reasonable input, just a bunch of arguing people and comments downing other people just because of they're views and reasonable posts. I would like it best if there was less immature and unnecessary demands and more mature and realistic expectations. Some of the things I hear are anything but reasonable or realistic and have sorry excuses to back them.

 

[godzilla_GTR]

i want aftermarket guages....Seems reasonable to me. I want it like import tuner challenge, but i want to be able to pick the light colour etc and be able to get a monsta tacho with a shift light for the older car's that don't have tacho's etc. Oh and tire mark's are a must now that we have drifting...

 

[CodeRedR51]

I want it like import tuner challenge, but i want to be able to pick the light colour etc and be able to get a monsta tacho with a shift light for the older car's that don't have tacho's etc....

Umm, no.

 

[Fruitcake]

Umm, no.

what he said.