"Some technologies that aren't even invented yet", as per the debut video, is quite literally make-believe.
Vision GT. It's supposed to be about the future, which hasn't arrived yet, last I checked.
All engineering starts with an idea. Ideas are but imaginings, and as such are "make-believe" - just dissect that phrase for a second, separate any connotation you might personally want to attach to it and think about what it actually means.
Let's
pretend it's the future now, and these promising technologies currently in the ideation phase have been sussed out and are usable in a low-volume racing product, what could we make with them?
The specific purpose in this case was "take part in a joint marketing exercise for a video game", the unique solution was "just make stuff up that looks/sounds cool"; and no, I don't consider that engineering. Just like I don't consider the "original" VGT car, the Nike 2022, to be engineered when they had an independent designer make that to include in GT4, then Nike just supplied some cool sounding nonsense to go along with it.
Your opinion is your opinion, but it's evidently predicated on a false concept of what engineering actually is. Engineering and ingenuity, as well as
genius, are effectively conceptually equivalent - and that equivalence stems from their shared etymological root of "generate; produce; birth; beget".
That need not only apply to physical things (cf. software engineering), and it certainly has never only applied to things that
already exist. All engineering starts with an idea. It might be argued that that is all engineering really is: ideas; but skill and effort has to come into it somewhere.
The Nike One 2022 wasn't a VGT car, and its "unrealism" stems more from the fact a human doesn't have the power output to make that car move like it did in the game, rather than the fact that it doesn't exist yet. But the major difference is that there is no known feasible way to achieve that power output, ever (aside from storing up excess energy in a battery and deploying it later on, but the "charge" times would be excessive).
These VGT cars are, on the whole (excluding some minor details, like the power source for the 2X
likely needing to be external), rooted in a reality that is simply yet to arrive, should the effort be expended in the necessary directions. Some of the numbers might have been inflated or deflated slightly, but in the real world that would simply equate to a more fragile and / or short-lived machine. Numbers are always revised as ideas mature into machines, anyway.
That rooting in reality actually needn't be a constraint in the context of "engineering", and I think that there is some merit in forgoing any "physical restriction" (insofar as we think we understand them) and allowing pure ideas to be tested out in a virtual reality. A new kind of engineering (or is it an old one; the same one that brought us video games in the first place?). But that doesn't apply here because these concepts were evidently created with an eye on future technology, which I would call a physical restriction.
To suggest, though, that the (e.g. mechanical) "engineers" involved saw the "specific purpose" as anything other than to design a car as befits their vision of a potential future is disingenuous, if not disrespectful. And that's even if and despite whether the overall aim was to engineer money into bank accounts.