Pro physics, ridiculous...

[Famine]

Drive a real car at speed.

Done that.

Prologue is ever so slightly oversteer-biased but otherwise pretty much there. Of course the low speed physics still need some attention but then that's not "at speed".

The game is invented to play with a controller and then a wheel as an alternative.

Now I'm one of the most stubborn pad users there is - I even have two wheels (DFP, G25) that I rarely, if ever, use. Every time we have a UKGTP LAN event I say, just as it ends, that I'll be using a wheel by the time of the next one. Our 12th event is coming up at the end of the month and yet still I'm not using a wheel...

But on Professional physics on GT5P, I can't use a pad at all. I have to use a wheel, particularly with the more powerful cars (the F40 notably). It's not a case of lack of ability with the pad as I have sufficient quantities of that to have won some UKGTPs overall.

So I would disagree vehemently that GT5P is invented to play with a controller primarily.

 

[TrievelA7X]

Drive a real car at speed. Wait, in fact, drive Ferrari Challenge, LFS, Race Pro, GTR2, RFactor...........

These games are far closer to simulation then Gran Turismo can claim to be. The game is invented to play with a controller and then a wheel as an alternative.

Really? You find FC realistic?

 

[marchi]

Really? You find FC realistic?

Wheel physics yes. The game punishes you much more then GT does for not having the car in the right position to corner.

@ Famine the basic designs of GT are for controller base. The step up on physics to professional mode is simply an evolution of that. A good one, but not the best.
As you said the oversteer bias is also an issue. If anything the cars should be prone a little more to understeer followed by snap oversteer rather then constant oversteer.

As I said earlier. The cars feel more more floaty on GT then they do in real life. Racing with a wheel, you tend to have to turn into the corner slightly earlier then what would be necessary in real life which again leads to that oversteer issue.

 

[G.T.Ace]

Wheel physics yes.

What the heck are wheel physics?
If you mean Force Feedback, that wont make the handling more realistic, just the experience more immersive, thats a difference.

 

[Famine]

@ Famine the basic designs of GT are for controller base. The step up on physics to professional mode is simply an evolution of that. A good one, but not the best.

I see it the other way about. Professional physics are the base of the game and it's dumbed down for standard physics in order to provide accessibility.

As you said the oversteer bias is also an issue. If anything the cars should be prone a little more to understeer followed by snap oversteer rather then constant oversteer.

Indeed, but it's not a FM1/2 or GT1/2 level of oversteer. It's only just noticeable.

GT4 had it basically right, but the understeer was excessive. They've toned it down markedly to the point where the understeer is now just about spot on, but there's a slight oversteer bias which they've decreased in every iteration of the physics updates for GT5P.

 

[marchi]

What the heck are wheel physics?

Sorry meant to say handling physics and i'm not talking about force feedback.

Noticeably in FC, the positioning/balance of your car on turn in is key to extracting the maximum speed.

 

[marchi]

I see it the other way about. Professional physics are the base of the game and it's dumbed down for standard physics in order to provide accessibility.

Agree to disagree. Your probably closer to the mark then I am.

 

[yeti]

The game is invented to play with a controller and then a wheel as an alternative.

I disagree with this - and go so far as to say that GT4 is the same too... i.e. invented for wheels primarily...

My first bit of evidence is the Minolta on the test track... Driving A-spec with a controller this car isn't possible to drive over a certain speed (I can't remember the speed) as once you hit that speed the car slews off to the side and into the wall... B-Spec bob could drive this car faster than I could without similar events happening... With a wheel however these events (I've been told) never happen...

My second bit of evidence is the fact that 90% of the fastest times are all set with a wheel.

C.

 

[Blitz187]

EDIT: Or let me put it this way, i can adopt my driving style from GT5P to GTL, GTR Evo, rFactor and even LFS and vice versa, i cant do it with Ferrari Challenge or SuperCar Challenge for example, which shows that these games are pretty off.

I've played the beta for Supercar Challenge for a while now and I dont think the physics are necessarily off... The focus of their physics engine just focuses more on other aspects than GT5 does... Now dont get me wrong, I prefer the physics in GT5 and am the most comfortable with them... But what I do like about SCC physics is the focus on weight transfer entering, in and exiting the corner.... The sensation of weight transfer is not as noticeable in GT5 as it is in SCC.... Next to this I also feel that SCC also lets you feel more nuances in the road through the FFB then GT5 does... With this I mean bumps and stuff which sometimes even gives you the sensation of losing traction, etc.

 

[Leonidae]

Could you give us an example?

Easy. Oversteering FWD. Especially when you're applying power.

 

[Biggles]

What I feel is lacking in GT5P's physics is weight-transfer: the cars just sit too securely on their centre of gravity as you understeer them through the corner.

The best example of this to me is the first turn at DR: it's possible to approach this corner at full speed, slam the brakes on & skid sideways to the point where traction takes over again & you can turn into the corner. Through out this whole process it's pretty easy to keep the car balanced. I just can't believe this would be possible IRL (especially with a road car). When I switched back to GT5P after playing a lot of FC, I went online & found the other cars screaming past me at this first corner, because I was braking early, as in FC, to allow for the weight to shift forward & to allow for time to re-balance the weight of the car before turning through the apex. It took a few laps before I adjusted to screaming into the corner myself.

I have noticed that when driving in FC I have to drive a lot more "actively": using the throttle, brake, steering, gear shifts, & (especially) "coasting" the car at times, in order to keep the car balanced & maximize my speed. I don't know if this is actually closer to RL, as I have no track experience myself, but it sure feels right, & in conjunction with the much heavier & more descriptive FFB it's definitely more physical & immersive than the driving in GT5P, which feels a bit "flat" & clinical in comparison.

(PLEASE, don't flame this: it's a point of discussion, NOT an "attack" on GT. Incidentally, I think those who have only tried the SCC beta have to bear in mind that the cars in the beta are high performance monsters, very far from "normal" cars.)

In relation to all this, I am fascinated to see how SHIFT turns out: is it possible it will combine the great graphics of GT with more of the raucous racing feel of FC AND good physics?

 

[Lion-Face]

The best example of this to me is the first turn at DR: it's possible to approach this corner at full speed, slam the brakes on & skid sideways to the point where traction takes over again & you can turn into the corner. Through out this whole process it's pretty easy to keep the car balanced.

Do you drive with ABS on or off in FC/SCC? Have you tried that same tactic with ABS off in GT5Prologue? I can assure you, you need the utmost care when entering that corner with ABS=0, without the perfect balance and approach, you get into trouble very quickly at that corner.

 

[balang_479]

What I feel is lacking in GT5P's physics is weight-transfer: the cars just sit too securely on their centre of gravity as you understeer them through the corner.

The best example of this to me is the first turn at DR: it's possible to approach this corner at full speed, slam the brakes on & skid sideways to the point where traction takes over again & you can turn into the corner. Through out this whole process it's pretty easy to keep the car balanced. I just can't believe this would be possible IRL (especially with a road car). When I switched back to GT5P after playing a lot of FC, I went online & found the other cars screaming past me at this first corner, because I was braking early, as in FC, to allow for the weight to shift forward & to allow for time to re-balance the weight of the car before turning through the apex. It took a few laps before I adjusted to screaming into the corner myself.

I have noticed that when driving in FC I have to drive a lot more "actively": using the throttle, brake, steering, gear shifts, & (especially) "coasting" the car at times, in order to keep the car balanced & maximize my speed. I don't know if this is actually closer to RL, as I have no track experience myself, but it sure feels right, & in conjunction with the much heavier & more descriptive FFB it's definitely more physical & immersive than the driving in GT5P, which feels a bit "flat" & clinical in comparison.

(PLEASE, don't flame this: it's a point of discussion, NOT an "attack" on GT. Incidentally, I think those who have only tried the SCC beta have to bear in mind that the cars in the beta are high performance monsters, very far from "normal" cars.)

In relation to all this, I am fascinated to see how SHIFT turns out: is it possible it will combine the great graphics of GT with more of the raucous racing feel of FC AND good physics?

I agree, in real life if you quickly turn from one way to another and shift the weight rapidly any car would unsettle, while in GT5P its seems to always be fairly stable... you cant even liftoff oversteer that easily as it is in real life.

 

[Biggles]

Do you drive with ABS on or off in FC/SCC? Have you tried that same tactic with ABS off in GT5Prologue? I can assure you, you need the utmost care when entering that corner with ABS=0, without the perfect balance and approach, you get into trouble very quickly at that corner.

I think we've had this discussion before!

I did try the F40 with ABS=0, & it did make some difference. In both FC & GT5P, I drive with all assists off, but I'm not someone who spends a lot of time monkeying around with tuning. In any case, surely it's not reasonable that changing the default ABS to 0 should make a complete difference to the physics? I really don't feel that "utmost care" describes the way people approach that corner, compared to the way they would approach it IRL!

At the risk of repeating myself (yet again!), in FC through the FFB, I can actually "feel" what the car is doing & make little adjustments on the fly. In GT5P I have to "know" what the car is going to do. Yes, obviously there is "knowledge" & "feel" involved in both games, but the balance between the two is different. I prefer the more physical feel of the driving in FC. I'm hoping that GT5 adds a little more punch to the FFB for this reason.

 

[paskowitz]

I have always been of the mine that the sense of weight transfer and transition between traction and over/understeer has always been present in GT5p, its just that it has been muted by the relatively uncommunicative and weak force feedback. GTR2/Evo and LFS have some of the best FFB coding in the genre. In fact without that coding both games would be rather lack luster in my opinion.

 

[Lion-Face]

I think we've had this discussion before!

I did try the F40 with ABS=0, & it did make some difference. In both FC & GT5P, I drive with all assists off, but I'm not someone who spends a lot of time monkeying around with tuning. In any case, surely it's not reasonable that changing the default ABS to 0 should make a complete difference to the physics? I really don't feel that "utmost care" describes the way people approach that corner, compared to the way they would approach it IRL!

Yeah I think so too...

I don't think it matters what car you take this corner with at ABS=0, The F40 just exaggerates the problem.

I've said this before, but running with ABS=1 not only prevents your wheels from locking up, it also stabilizes your car. Makes turn1 at Daytona Road a piece of cake. Its almost as if when ABS=1, while braking, ASM is in effect too. Turning it to ABS=0, there is no way in the world to take Turn1 as aggressively as you can with ABS=1. Without proper positioning and car balance with ABS=0, the Corner quickly becomes a Wall.

'Utmost care' isn't how many people take this corner, or many other corners, due to the safety net and speed advantage ABS=1 offers.

I'm not arguing whether or not FC does this or that, thats for another thread (which has been beaten to death ), I just didn't think your comment about DR turn 1 was even sided when your comparing GT5Prologue with FC and you have ABS=1 in GT5P and ABS Off in FC.

 

[Zer0]

I've said this before, but running with ABS=1 not only prevents your wheels from locking up, it also stabilizes your car. Makes turn1 at Daytona Road a piece of cake. Its almost as if when ABS=1, while braking, ASM is in effect too. Turning it to ABS=0, there is no way in the world to take Turn1 as aggressively as you can with ABS=1. Without proper positioning and car balance with ABS=0, the Corner quickly becomes a Wall.

Yep, having active steering=on in the wheel setting helps too.

All off is the way.

 

[Biggles]

Yeah I think so too...

I don't think it matters what car you take this corner with at ABS=0, The F40 just exaggerates the problem.

I've said this before, but running with ABS=1 not only prevents your wheels from locking up, it also stabilizes your car. Makes turn1 at Daytona Road a piece of cake. Its almost as if when ABS=1, while braking, ASM is in effect too. Turning it to ABS=0, there is no way in the world to take Turn1 as aggressively as you can with ABS=1. Without proper positioning and car balance with ABS=0, the Corner quickly becomes a Wall.

'Utmost care' isn't how many people take this corner, or many other corners, due to the safety net and speed advantage ABS=1 offers.

I'm not arguing whether or not FC does this or that, thats for another thread (which has been beaten to death ), I just didn't think your comment about DR turn 1 was even sided when your comparing GT5Prologue with FC and you have ABS=1 in GT5P and ABS Off in FC.

But even assuming that switching the ABS from 1 to 0 does make that big a difference, is it reasonable that stability & weight-transfer should be that dependent on the ABS setting?

While I don't agree that GT5P's Pro physics are "ridiculous" - they are, in fact pretty good - I'm certainly hoping that the full GT5 offers an improved sense of weight-transfer, and stronger, more descriptive FFB.

 

[Lion-Face]

But even assuming that switching the ABS from 1 to 0 does make that big a difference, is it reasonable that stability & weight-transfer should be that dependent on the ABS setting?

Weight transfer doesn't change based on ABS setting. Stability does, as the computer is holding your hand through the braking process, it will try to correct your weight transfer as you press on the brake helping stabilize the car. I agree that the ABS modelling is incorrect and one of the things that bugs me most about GT5Prologue. ABS should just control brake lock ups, not stabilize your car at the same time.
In saying that, you still need to control your cars weight transfer and corner entry stability with ABS=1 to pull a neat line and a fast corner, its just a little more forgiving than it should be when your not on the mark.

Still doesn't change the fact that when your running ABS=0, the weight transfer and corner stability is fully in your control, correct corner entry, positioning and weight transfer is all required to negotiate the turn without meeting the wall. Which, going back to your original point, was your comparison.

If your going to compare physics between games, I believe it should be done with No Aids whatsoever. Comparing FC to GT5P with FC ABS Off and GT5P ABS=1 isn't a fair comparison. Its like comparing the two games, but we'll turn TCS on for FC and have TCS off for GT5P and then stating that in FC you can't power oversteer because you can't break traction and hopefully the next game will allow you to power oversteer....

 

[zed300]

Try driving the cars around on N3's, they are a lot closer to road tyres.

The sports (s) tyres are almost too grippy to give a sense of feel, but do make for great racing as you can still over drive them easily.

As for the physics, the response to throttle position wheel position and road position seems pretty dam good to me. If you drive on the edge of adhesion, the slightest movement in timing of these 3 elements will result in or

 

[Blitz187]

(PLEASE, don't flame this: it's a point of discussion, NOT an "attack" on GT. Incidentally, I think those who have only tried the SCC beta have to bear in mind that the cars in the beta are high performance monsters, very far from "normal" cars.)

The beta of SCC only has one race car and then the Enzo and McLaren F1 road cars... and I imagine that FC is all Ferraris which are also far from "normal" cars. The DB9R in SCC is rather easy to drive, I cannot say the same about the McLaren and Enzo... They are a MAJOR challenege to keep on the road.... even with ABS on or off it doesnt matter... You think you entered the turn right, but you just end up understeering and sliding off the track... still need practice However this is still beta code.. but the overall "feel" of the physics is nice... Like I said before the presence of weight tranfer is a BIG plus! The FFB is also more descriptive as you say than GT5... In the end however I have to wait for the final version of both games including Shift and see how the physics of each stack up

 

[Biggles]

The beta of SCC only has one race car and then the Enzo and McLaren F1 road cars... and I imagine that FC is all Ferraris which are also far from "normal" cars. The DB9R in SCC is rather easy to drive, I cannot say the same about the McLaren and Enzo... They are a MAJOR challenege to keep on the road.... even with ABS on or off it doesnt matter... You think you entered the turn right, but you just end up understeering and sliding off the track... still need practice However this is still beta code.. but the overall "feel" of the physics is nice... Like I said before the presence of weight tranfer is a BIG plus! The FFB is also more descriptive as you say than GT5... In the end however I have to wait for the final version of both games including Shift and see how the physics of each stack up

As we are not supposed to discuss the SCC beta, I won't go into any detail, other than to say that while not technically "race" cars, the Enzo & McLaren hardly qualify as "normal" cars . FC has a number of out-&-out race cars, a few "super" cars, some "vintage" cars, & a few "normal" cars (if you can call any Ferrai "normal"! ) The best cars to drive to get a sense for non-race tire physics in FC (IMO), are the 360 Modena & the 355 Berlinetta. They understeer much more like the cars in GT5P.

If your going to compare physics between games, I believe it should be done with No Aids whatsoever. Comparing FC to GT5P with FC ABS Off and GT5P ABS=1 isn't a fair comparison. Its like comparing the two games, but we'll turn TCS on for FC and have TCS off for GT5P and then stating that in FC you can't power oversteer because you can't break traction and hopefully the next game will allow you to power oversteer....

My point is, that setting the ABS to 0 makes a difference, but not enough difference. Weight-transfer is still really underplayed.

Here's the way I would put it:

GT5P models a lot of the details of driving physics - the subtle differences in tuning, HP, tires etc. are carefully represented (as are the graphics details of each car) - but the basic physics engine (& particularly the FFB) is lacking "grunt" - the physical feel of actually driving. FC is lacking the detailed modelling of each car's particular physics - I never really believe I'm driving a "realistic" version of that actual car - it's more a "generalized" version of the car's basic performance characteristics. But, accepting the fact that the cars don't give the impression of being accurate representations of the real cars (& this is partly due to the unrealistic graphics), the overall sensation of driving is more convincing.

I don't think there's any chance (due to lack of money/resources) that Eutechnyx/System 3 will be able to put out a game that rivals the detail & realism of GT, but I do think PD could rejig their physics & FFB to provide more of the physical feel of driving that is in FC.

Or maybe (maybe) SHIFT will provide that combination???

 

[Blitz187]

As we are not supposed to discuss the SCC beta, I won't go into any detail, other than to say that while not technically "race" cars, the Enzo & McLaren hardly qualify as "normal" cars . FC has a number of out-&-out race cars, a few "super" cars, some "vintage" cars, & a few "normal" cars (if you can call any Ferrai "normal"! ) The best cars to drive to get a sense for non-race tire physics in FC (IMO), are the 360 Modena & the 355 Berlinetta. They understeer much more like the cars in GT5P.

To my knowledge it is an open beta now so we can discuss it...

 

[The Jenius]

As we are not supposed to discuss the SCC beta, I won't go into any detail, other than to say that while not technically "race" cars, the Enzo & McLaren hardly qualify as "normal" cars . FC has a number of out-&-out race cars, a few "super" cars, some "vintage" cars, & a few "normal" cars (if you can call any Ferrai "normal"! ) The best cars to drive to get a sense for non-race tire physics in FC (IMO), are the 360 Modena & the 355 Berlinetta. They understeer much more like the cars in GT5P.



My point is, that setting the ABS to 0 makes a difference, but not enough difference. Weight-transfer is still really underplayed.

Here's the way I would put it:

GT5P models a lot of the details of driving physics - the subtle differences in tuning, HP, tires etc. are carefully represented (as are the graphics details of each car) - but the basic physics engine (& particularly the FFB) is lacking "grunt" - the physical feel of actually driving. FC is lacking the detailed modelling of each car's particular physics - I never really believe I'm driving a "realistic" version of that actual car - it's more a "generalized" version of the car's basic performance characteristics. But, accepting the fact that the cars don't give the impression of being accurate representations of the real cars (& this is partly due to the unrealistic graphics), the overall sensation of driving is more convincing.

I don't think there's any chance (due to lack of money/resources) that Eutechnyx/System 3 will be able to put out a game that rivals the detail & realism of GT, but I do think PD could rejig their physics & FFB to provide more of the physical feel of driving that is in FC.

Or maybe (maybe) SHIFT will provide that combination???

After viewing the FC is better that GT thread and giving my 2 cents there, I am going to try Ferrari Challenge and just bought it today. I have my issues with GT and they are the same as yours. I never feel like I am driving a real car, where as FC and even Forza do this better. Now while the little nuances might be lost, I will take the trade off for having the overall feel better. I will say it again for the 3rd time in 2 threads, take a car in GT on a bank (Daytona) park it so its balanced and not rolling. The car slides down the track sideways. This proves a fundamental flaw in the physics engine to me and compromises the whole experience. If tire contacting pavement cant be simulated to not move that means there is some pre-programmed amount of slide in the tires that does not recognize the proper weight and friction of the car.

I also believe that it is not nearly as hard to drive a car IRL as it is in GT. I am saying this from actual experience. I have n 111r Lotus that I have driven spiritedly as well as at a few tracks and GT is not correct at all, especially at lower speeds. e.g.: the very first time my Lotus slid on me was on a concrete, smooth stone, type road in the wet, going about 80 on a curve very similar to the last corner onto the straight in Suzuka. The car gave a slight 4 wheel slide and it didn’t take but a slight 1 inch correction to get it back, I did not even go across the line or anything. Now this was on the stock Yokahama's which all Lotus owners know are only good for a few cycles and are very hard and also very bad in water. This was in addition to it being my 1st slide in a MR engine and on an unknown surface.

That being said why is it that I can calmly correct my car with all of these variables working against me IRL but in GT on that same corner on R1s I cant tell you how many times the car just starts to randomly oversteer then over corrects off the track, its silly how hard you have to concentrate to perform basic maneuvers and its absolutely broken. I have stopped fooling myself to eat whatever the hypemachine serves and have admitted that there might be other options that prove to be better. I will undoubtedly get GT5 but not unconditionally anymore.

 

[Famine]

Comparing the two on different rubber isn't representative. Change grip levels and all sorts of crap happens.

The stock Yokos on the Elise should be about S1 level. Give it another whirl and report back - the low-speed stuff will still be out of whack in all likelihood but you might find it a bit closer to reality.

 

[The Jenius]

Comparing the two on different rubber isn't representative. Change grip levels and all sorts of crap happens.

The stock Yokos on the Elise should be about S1 level. Give it another whirl and report back - the low-speed stuff will still be out of whack in all likelihood but you might find it a bit closer to reality.

That's fair, will do. You don't think that the S1s will be too slippery or is the balance just better?

And when you talk about the low speed are you talking about how the car seems to cover too much ground on steering corrections, jutting across the entire road. Or how it is generally too slick when going roughly 30, not hitting the accelerator and it can still slide when you turn the wheel?

 

[Famine]

Generally speaking, road tyres are the N-grade ones to varying degrees. The eco-warrior, runflat crap on the Prius would be N1. Most normal cars would be N2. Slightly sportier things would be N3-S1 - I'd say that'd cover the spread from Pirelli P6000s to Toyo Proxes T1-Rs. S2/S3s would be more your cheater slicks - from Toyo 888s and Yoko AOs to Michelin Pilot Cup and the ilk.

GT's always had a problem with low speed physics. Donuts have been a long-standing bone of contention - easy in reality, all but impossible since GT3 - and whatever you do don't park on the banking at Daytona. So I wouldn't take anything under 2nd gear as representative

 

[The Jenius]

Generally speaking, road tyres are the N-grade ones to varying degrees. The eco-warrior, runflat crap on the Prius would be N1. Most normal cars would be N2. Slightly sportier things would be N3-S1 - I'd say that'd cover the spread from Pirelli P6000s to Toyo Proxes T1-Rs. S2/S3s would be more your cheater slicks - from Toyo 888s and Yoko AOs to Michelin Pilot Cup and the ilk.

GT's always had a problem with low speed physics. Donuts have been a long-standing bone of contention - easy in reality, all but impossible since GT3 - and whatever you do don't park on the banking at Daytona. So I wouldn't take anything under 2nd gear as representative

Ok, sounds good. Now, that low speed stuff has got to carry over, even if small, to the higher speeds, which is why I continually state that I think the fundamentals are not quite there and really undermines the game to an extent, doesnt ruin it but it picks at you every once in a while. Do you agree or do you think it all dissapears above X speed or so?

 

[Famine]

Oh no, I agree though I'm of the opinion that the slower you go the more significant the effect (and, naturally, the less slow you go, the less significant).

GT hasn't got the physics perfect yet, but I'd like an MX-5 to test to be able to give a more objective analysis (simply because I've driven a few of them in reality - and GT5P is the first GT game not to feature one )

 

[The Jenius]

So i tried FC, and needless to say I am very impressed, the physics are awesome to the point that it feels like I am driving a machine with weight without a predetermined path or predetermined physics. I can manipulate the car when i need to slightly, the FF is awesome I know exactly what to do depending on the feel of the wheel and I can drive much better because I dont have to rely on the screen for over or understeer feedback.

Braking and turn in are almost exactly like I have come to expect especially in a mid-rear car. You have to get about 90-95% of your braking out of the way under threshold straight line breaking in order to drive a true sports or race car effectively anyone who has watched BTCC or WTCC knows this and can hear it.

This is very refreshing, the car feels planted unlike GT and not as squirlly like Forza, the car feel like a machine with weight and on a planet with gravity.

The settings could be more robust and the sound needs some work and little nuances for physics need tweaking but overall closer than I expected and closer than GT. Thanks for the suggestion!!

GT is starting to remind me of why i stopped buying Madden, they think they are the top dog on the hill, and they have earned that right. But they don't recognize that others have planted their flag on the hill as well and have added things that are actually better. It doesnt matter if they have only been around 1 or 10 years the fact is all a decent developer has to do is get close to GT5 Prologue and improve from there, it would undoubtedly be better because GT5P is already out and can only be improved so much.

So this attitude of we dont need to release info and we are going to go with our gimmick of 1000's of cars and, we are going to postpone years, not months is lost on me when unlike Madden your license is not exclusive and others have made improvements that are making you show your age if you don't adapt.