The GT Sport Epic Whining and Crying Thread

[Aleppe]

There is a big difference between a great physics engine and being truly realistic(Not that they are mutually exclusive) to every car. In my opinion, Forza has a great physics engine but it's not true to life to every car and a big part of that is because of the variety of cars that have to run on that physics engine.

Games that purely focus on racing cars have a distinct advantage in being able to focus on making a certain type of car feel realistic.

When you have F1 cars, trucks, vans, muscle cars, fwd hatchbacks, 30s GP cars, 40s sedans and trucks, modern sedans and more. All these types of cars use different drivetrains, suspensions, tires and are even built different structurally. For instance, Forza 6's physics engine actually takes into account how the frames and bodies(wood and metal) on 1930 GP cars perform under stress.

Totally agree

 

[Luminis]

There is a big difference between a great physics engine and being truly realistic(Not that they are mutually exclusive) to every car

While that might be true due to the limitations of current physics engines, that's a realm of realism neither Forza nor GT seem to strife for. Granted, I lack the experience of driving 1930's GP cars to judge just how true to life their representation in Forza (or any other game, for that matter) is... Regardless, if there's anyone in the industry with the resources to pull something like that off (even if it includes manually tweaking the cars in the game), it's PD. They're also allowing themselves the sort of development cycles that ought to give them all the time in the world to deliver in terms of both quantity and quality.

Be that as it may, it's not like I'm saying PD ought to come up with a few hundred brand-spanking new premium cars (including their handling model), I'm saying it's a pretty darn weird call to not use the premium cars they already have - they've got both the driving model and the visual model for those. And they've adapted their car models from GT4 to work in GT5 and 6, hence why I perceive it as all the more mind-boggling they're not doing that again - especially since nobody's going to complain about the quality of levels of these premium cars - thanks to their "future proving".

 

[Earth]

It just dawned on me how much spin PD, Kaz, Sony and others are putting out there to muddy the truth

To understand whats really going on you need to be able to see past all the double speak, sleight of hand, used car salesman pitches, misdirection, as well as bait and switch tactics Kaz and co. have become so good at.

"The game is only 50% complete"
Reality: We spent most of the first 3 years of PS4's life trying to fix GT6 and have only just put our full attention towards GTS. We are hopelessly behind in optimizing the game for PS4 so thats why it looks and performs like a launch title

"Super Premiums built from the ground up for PS4"
Reality: We're so far behind we cant include all the other premium cars because we dont have time to make them compatible with the livery editor. And we'd rather sell them to you as DLC later.

"GT Sport is not a Prologue"
Reality: It is a Prologue, we just named it something else and threw in a few more features because the backlash for releasing another prologue this late AGAIN would be insurmountable.

"Damage is not at a premium for us"
Reality: We are so hopelessly behind we have no time to model and test damage for the cars.

"FIA Officials will monitor our Bumper Car Races with Impervious Cars"
Reality: We dont care about resembling real world racing in anyway besides visuals and handling physics.

"We are not ready to announce GT7 yet"
Reality: GT7?! you wanna talk about GT7?! We just hope they can get this glorified prologue out the door by November.

"GTS will be priced the same as a full game"
Reality: Thanks suckas for funding our studio a further 3 years so we can take our sweet time making GT7, available 2019, 2 months before PS5 launches. But please understand it is our tradition to release 2 GT titles per console. Also understand it is our new tradition to release GT-Lite titles like GT5P and GTS to help fund the incredibly slow studio Polyphony Digital. GT7 will be worth the wait. Like GT5 was. And GT6. Think about the bright side. PS4 Neo uber slim will be out by then. It will the size of a pancake and will cost 249 US dollars. And will have 30% faster compute cycles then the PS4 Neo Mk.1

 

[mooney298]

Terrible sounds is such a turn off. Sony should have combined Evolution Studios with PD for god's sake. With Kaz at the helm, GT will forever be stuck in the past. Makes me sad to see one of my favourite franchise lose out to other racing sims.

 

[Koenigsegg19]

Framerate drops is the result of poor optimization/overestimating hardware's capabilities, Forza 6 runs at 1080p/60fps locked at ALL times with no drops because T10 specifically optimized for that target despite having weaker hardware than what PS4 offers. It's a design decision by the developers to juggle eye candy/framerate ratio as they please. You could give developers a system 100 times more powerful than PS4 and you would still see framerate drops if they wanted.

I'm still in the learning process on much of this stuff, so I know I'm wrong on a lot of these things. I do know without a doubt though that the PS4 was outdated before it came out. But you're right, it's no excuse to have frame rate drop for the prettiest game at fleeing moments while the rest of the game tears, shows it's jagged edges, and lags behind due to poor programming.

It isn't that, it is the fact that with other sims out there offering incredible realism features it is a joke for PD to offer something featureless. iRacing doesn't have 2 of those 4 features he is requesting and it wasn't the first for any of them. The features it has are better than other sims IMO but there are plenty of sims offering some sort of dynamic track, pitlane limiters and rain and much more.

In my opinion in 2016 what PD has shown us is an arcade game and no longer worthy of being called a sim. I know the term simcade is thrown around a bit but you can't call yourself a sim any more if you are not even trying to do some type of realistic damage or collision model. To call what we have seen a sim is like calling any arcade racer a sim as they are all imitating driving or racing. But I think to fall into the category of simulation in 2016 you need to be trying to simulate racing with modern features that modern hardware is capable of. You must at least be trying to simulate weather or changing track conditions and realistic physics including collisions and consequences. I'm not saying a sim must have every feature out there but they should be trying to simulate as close as they are able racing a car and to me it doesn't seem like GT is trying to do this. It seems like these guys don't know how to do these things and they are milking a name for all it is worth.

Very true PD and the GT franchise is so far behind today than it ever was. First games in the GT series used 3D imaging for cars with a simple physics model attached. Now that they have to create actual 3D models, they are making excuses as to why they can't make premium cars. Hence why the Standard models looked like crap; they were ported images from previous iterations of GT. As for features, they do lag behind there as well. I don't think they will have pitlane limiter or much of the other features like iRacer, but the physics part they are falling horrifically behind in. GT6 was a complete flop in the physics and tuning departments, as in many others, but I would say the Physics part took top prize in that battle. The main thing is, I don't think PD is trying to add new features but rather make a realistic handling model per their claim, "The Real Driving Simulator." It's sad, but it seems to be the only thing they are focused on. I know I sound like a lone wolf here, but I was really hoping for the drivetrain and motor conversions and swaps. They added Jay Leno's Toronado which had a Drivetrain conversion AND a crate Caddy motor, but condemned players who made their own. If they added that feature, they would at least be a bit more on par with Forza, but again as you said, they haven't added much features, if any. Just a revamp of a couple and a livery editor.

I think the tracks need a major overhaul too. The Nurburgring videos were very disheartening. The track seemed to have had about as much detail as any other GT title. On the other hand, Need For Speed Shift 2 and other simulation titles had a very detailed Nurb with many individual trees, tents, moving spectators, and so on. All of the GT games have had poor surroundings and this game didn't seem to change much more. I can only hope GT7 will be much further advanced than GT Sport/Gran Turismo 7 Prologue is now.

Like I've said before, I haven't a problem waiting years for a good game, but within those years, I expect the finished product to look excellent and to exceed other titles at the same time. It's been done before, so there is no excuse as to why it cannot be done again.

 

[SimTourist]

I'm still in the learning process on much of this stuff, so I know I'm wrong on a lot of these things. I do know without a doubt though that the PS4 was outdated before it came out. But you're right, it's no excuse to have frame rate drop for the prettiest game at fleeing moments while the rest of the game tears, shows it's jagged edges, and lags behind due to poor programming.

The thing is Sony (and MS) no longer want to lose money on consoles and then recoup them from subscription/game licensing, PS4/X1 were designed to make money from Day 1 or shortly after. Neither company is in a position where they can afford to lose billions of dollars just to make the box a little more powerful like they did with PS3/X360.
From the developers' side it's their choice to either scale their vision appropriately and make the most of the resources available or overshoot hardware's capabilities and have the game struggle to run smoothly, they'll never have enough power and resources to do absolutely everything they want and that's a good thing, because the ever-increasing game budgets due to HD asset fidelity have already killed the majority of devs we used to have.

 

[Koenigsegg19]

The thing is Sony (and MS) no longer want to lose money on consoles and then recoup them from subscription/game licensing, PS4/X1 were designed to make money from Day 1 or shortly after. Neither company is in a position where they can afford to lose billions of dollars just to make the box a little more powerful like they did with PS3/X360.
From the developers' side it's their choice to either scale their vision appropriately and make the most of the resources available or overshoot hardware's capabilities and have the game struggle to run smoothly, they'll never have enough power and resources to do absolutely everything they want and that's a good thing, because the ever-increasing game budgets due to HD asset fidelity have already killed the majority of devs we used to have.

True. Hence we see the Xbox looking at a sooner-than-later demise. I had been a console gamer for the longest time, but have moved to PC since last year. I can see why they have said and continue to say "PC Master Race." it's where these games are developed. It's certainly cheaper to keep them on the PC rather than spend millions on formatting the games to fit a specific console and publishing costs on top of that. A you stated, and as I have read lately about Xbox's likely demise, it has always been a huge spending outlet for Microsoft, but it is rather one of the only things Sony has going for them since their TV's, Laptops, Blu-Ray Players, and so on do not make them the profit they wish to see. The PlayStation and Xbox division of their companies respectively have wanted to break away and create a universal console to bring in larger profits as console exclusives are helping to kill the console market as well. Now that the project is canceled AFAIK, the ball is now left in each company's field as well as the Devs of our favorite games.

On the topic of the Devs never having enough money to pll out all the stops on the next game, that is a good thing indeed. If the Dev adds a ton of feature to the next installment (Like Rockstar did with GTA 5), that Dev will have a very hard time topping its latest creation when they go to create another installment. it's rather frustrating to many, but it's a business tactic to keep people coming back. The trick here is to find the balance as to how much content to add, and how much to save for later. In our case with GTS, it seems that PD is putting forth less than expected, and rightfully so when other Developers have added much more in each installment lately (i.e. Forza).

And even then, as others have said, there's a huge collection of perfectly fine car models that are being left out because...

Are you speaking of the 3D models/Premium cars being left out of GTS, or some of the previous cars in the 1000 + roster being culled from the GT franchise?

 

[bremics]

True. Hence we see the Xbox looking at a sooner-than-later demise. I had been a console gamer for the longest time, but have moved to PC since last year. I can see why they have said and continue to say "PC Master Race." it's where these games are developed. It's certainly cheaper to keep them on the PC rather than spend millions on formatting the games to fit a specific console and publishing costs on top of that. A you stated, and as I have read lately about Xbox's likely demise, it has always been a huge spending outlet for Microsoft, but it is rather one of the only things Sony has going for them since their TV's, Laptops, Blu-Ray Players, and so on do not make them the profit they wish to see. The PlayStation and Xbox division of their companies respectively have wanted to break away and create a universal console to bring in larger profits as console exclusives are helping to kill the console market as well. Now that the project is canceled AFAIK, the ball is now left in each company's field as well as the Devs of our favorite games.

On the topic of the Devs never having enough money to pll out all the stops on the next game, that is a good thing indeed. If the Dev adds a ton of feature to the next installment (Like Rockstar did with GTA 5), that Dev will have a very hard time topping its latest creation when they go to create another installment. it's rather frustrating to many, but it's a business tactic to keep people coming back. The trick here is to find the balance as to how much content to add, and how much to save for later. In our case with GTS, it seems that PD is putting forth less than expected, and rightfully so when other Developers have added much more in each installment lately (i.e. Forza).



Are you speaking of the 3D models/Premium cars being left out of GTS, or some of the previous cars in the 1000 + roster being culled from the GT franchise?

Pretty sure he's talking about the future proof premium models.

Pretty sure GTS has only half the amount of premiums from GT6 plus the new models, so less than half of them made it to GTS.

Day one FM5 had 200 cars at launch, 2 years later GTS will have 132(?).

 

[nickg07]

With PS3 they had an excuse, 256mb ram etc cell processor to develop for. Now they have 8gb ram and an easy to programme platgorm they can't hide behind good graphics but no left over xpu cycles for sounds/physics.

 

[FordGTGuy]

Pretty sure he's talking about the future proof premium models.

Pretty sure GTS has only half the amount of premiums from GT6 plus the new models, so less than half of them made it to GTS.

Day one FM5 had 200 cars at launch, 2 years later GTS will have 132(?).

Three years later.

 

[Luminis]

I think I can boil my personal "epic whining" down to two videos.

This is what we have now:



And this is what we'll get with GTS in half a year, if we so chose:

Oh well. Time to let it go and move on. Again.

 

[VBR]

Terrible sounds is such a turn off. Sony should have combined Evolution Studios with PD for god's sake.

 

[NLxAROSA]

I think I can boil my personal "epic whining" down to two videos.

This is what we have now:



And this is what we'll get with GTS in half a year, if we so chose:

To me, this basically confirms that GTS > GT6 by a large margin. It also confirms that GTS's Nurb is on par with the competition (Youtube/movie compression aside, because there is *a lot* of it in the GT vid, which I suspect is not just YT, but also the editing software in play, but I digress).

For what it's worth, I took to the ring in AC yesterday and I think GTS is all over it in terms of track decoration (trees, etc.). The only thing I miss in the GTS version is the amount of graffiti, but graphically, it's better.

I'd be the first in line to criticize PD if their Nurb would be crap, but it's just not.

 

[FordGTGuy]

To me, this basically confirms that GTS > GT6 by a large margin. It also confirms that GTS's Nurb is on par with the competition (Youtube/movie compression aside, because there is *a lot* of it in the GT vid, which I suspect is not just YT, but also the editing software in play, but I digress).

For what it's worth, I took to the ring in AC yesterday and I think GTS is all over it in terms of track decoration (trees, etc.). The only thing I miss in the GTS version is the amount of graffiti, but graphically, it's better.

I'd be the first in line to criticize PD if their Nurb would be crap, but it's just not.

AC and Forza have a laser scanned Nurburgring; until GTS is confirmed it isn't on the same level of the other versions of Nurburgring.

 

[Toblakai99]

I think that whole game is 50 percent done statement was a cockup when in fact what actually was meant was the graphics quality is only 50 percent of what they are aiming for.

 

[Luminis]

It also confirms that GTS's Nurb is on par with the competition

I'm not saying it isn't.

It's probably what you might call GT's premier track and, frankly, given the history of the franchise and PD's resources and whatnot, I still expected a little more. Assetto Corsa was released in 2014 and developed by a relatively small developer, after all. I'm just wondering what GTS is bringing to the table that isn't offered by the competitors that have been out for a year or two. Granted, I'm a little more critical in that regard as others, seeing that I'd have to get a PS4 specifically for GTS. I was hoping for it to wow me into doing that - which might be a little unfair, I'll give you that. Dunno. My impression is that the footage of GTS wouldn't be spawning a lot of hype if it wasn't for it being, you know, Gran Turismo.

With all their resources, the budget, the time they got - ought the results not be a little more impressive than playing catch-up to the likes of Assetto Corsa?

As I said, might be a little unfair on my end to expect something like that and maybe they got something coming that changes my opinion. Who knows. As I said previously, I do hope to get some hands-on time during the Nürburgring 24 Hours where GTS is supposedly playable. I'm just not holding my breath for it to push the envelop in any way.

 

[SimTourist]

AC, Forza and PCars all have a laser scanned Nurburgring; until GTS is confirmed it isn't on the same level of the other versions of Nurburgring.

PCars' isn't laserscanned.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

To me, this basically confirms that GTS > GT6 by a large margin. It also confirms that GTS's Nurb is on par with the competition (Youtube/movie compression aside, because there is *a lot* of it in the GT vid, which I suspect is not just YT, but also the editing software in play, but I digress).

For what it's worth, I took to the ring in AC yesterday and I think GTS is all over it in terms of track decoration (trees, etc.). The only thing I miss in the GTS version is the amount of graffiti, but graphically, it's better.

I'd be the first in line to criticize PD if their Nurb would be crap, but it's just not.

Order I think on most realistic looking on games I've seen running natively: GTS > Assetto Corsa > GT6 > Forza 6 > Project CARS. R3E and iRacing I think somewhere around Assetto Corsa in ranking.

 

[GranTurismoFive]

AC, Forza and PCars all have a laser scanned Nurburgring; until GTS is confirmed it isn't on the same level of the other versions of Nurburgring.

Slow down there. I don't think PC's version is laser scanned. In fact I'm almost certain it isn't.

The most impressive version of this track I've experienced has been in RACEROOM RACING EXPERIENCE. There is a wealth of activity in the recreation of the track - crowds cheering, music blasting and all sorts



Anyway back to my thoughts on this "new" GT title. Not much has changed.. Seems like most of us old issues. Darn shame.

 

[FordGTGuy]

PCars' isn't laserscanned.

Sorry, you're correct; I was confusing AC getting updated with a laser scanned version with PCars.

Order I think on most realistic looking on games I've seen running natively: GTS > Assetto Corsa > GT6 > Forza 6 > Project CARS. R3E and iRacing I think somewhere around Assetto Corsa in ranking.

Any order with a non-laser scanned version above a laser scanned version when it comes to realism is just wrong.

Even more so to put two non-laser scanned version above one that is laser scanned.

 

[NLxAROSA]

It's probably what you might call GT's premier track and, frankly, given the history of the franchise and PD's resources and whatnot, I still expected a little more.

I think that if we look at what AC and PC manage to deliver already, there's just no headroom to do more on PS4. I don't think it's realistic to expect significantly better graphics AND keep it at a solid 60 FPS, given how hard it was for SMS (and Martin Griffiths is a real wizard, make no mistake there). Not sure if AC will have had to do any concessions on quality or fidelity to get it to work on PS4, we still have to see that.

PCars' isn't laserscanned.

This is indeed correct. Which just shows how capable both SMS and PD are when it comes to track modelling.

Order I think on most realistic looking on games I've seen running natively: GTS > Assetto Corsa > GT6 > Forza 6 > Project CARS. R3E and iRacing I think somewhere around Assetto Corsa in ranking.

With regards to realism my order would be different than yours. My order would also be different when it comes to looks.

Any order with a non-laser scanned version above a laser scanned version when it comes to realism is just wrong.

While the raw data is more accurate, it's still a lot of tweaks/optimizations away from what will end up in the game/sim. And it's outdated the moment there is a repave (which is quite often). So laser-scanning is certainly not the holy grail IMO. Though I probably would agree in this case if realism is the only judging factor.

 

[FordGTGuy]

I think that if we look at what AC and PC manage to deliver already, there's just no headroom to do more on PS4. I don't think it's realistic to expect significantly better graphics AND keep it at a solid 60 FPS, given how hard it was for SMS (and Martin Griffiths is a real wizard, make no mistake there). Not sure if AC will have had to do any concessions on quality or fidelity to get it to work on PS4, we still have to see that.

Forza did it on weaker hardware.

In fact, PCars on Xbox One doesn't even manage a locked framerate at 900p let alone 1080p at 60 fps.

While the raw data is more accurate, it's still a lot of tweaks/optimizations away from what will end up in the game/sim. And it's outdated the moment there is a repave (which is quite often). So laser-scanning is certainly not the holy grail IMO. Though I probably would agree in this case if realism is the only judging factor.

Laser scanning definitely is the "holy grail", of course there are times when a track is modified but that doesn't mean that a modeled by pictures and measurement track is going to be better then laser-scanned.

 

[GranTurismoFive]

I think that if we look at what AC and PC manage to deliver already, there's just no headroom to do more on PS4. I don't think it's realistic to expect significantly better graphics AND keep it at a solid 60 FPS, given how hard it was for SMS (and Martin Griffiths is a real wizard, make no mistake there). Not sure if AC will have had to do any concessions on quality or fidelity to get it to work on PS4, we still have to see that.

This is indeed correct. Which just shows how capable both SMS and PD are when it comes to track modelling.

I'm sorry what are you on about?

PC's version of that track is hella bumpy lol. And GTs version of the track is laser scanned... It's been that way for many years now..

 

[FordGTGuy]

I'm sorry what are you on about?

PC's version of that track is hella bumpy lol. And GTs version of the track is laser scanned... It's been that way for many years now..

Can we get confirmation on this?

 

[Saidur_Ali]

Even more so to put two non-laser scanned version above one that is laser scanned.

Since GT4, it's been laser-scanned AFAIK.

With regards to realism my order would be different than yours. My order would also be different when it comes to looks.

Out of interest, in what order would you rank them?

 

[FordGTGuy]

Since GT4, it's been laser-scanned AFAIK.

Out of interest, in what order would you rank them?

Forza Motorsport 5 is the first game ever made with a laser-scanned version of Nurburgring.

GT4 is the first Gran Turismo title to actually feature Nurburgring.

 

[NLxAROSA]

Forza did it on weaker hardware.

In fact, PCars on Xbox One doesn't even manage a locked framerate at 900p let alone 1080p at 60 fps.

Dynamic weather, 45 cars on track. If anything it proves how hard it is.

Since GT4, it's been laser-scanned AFAIK.

I don't think that claim can be substantiated, as a matter of fact I think there was a whole discussion about it here somewhere.

Out of interest, in what order would you rank them?

For realism, I'd place AC's at #1 (most recent scan I think) and PC's at the last spot (a lot of small differences there), the others are a bit less obvious IMO, very subtle differences, would need to give that a bit more thought.

 

[Samus]

Nobody has proven the ring was laser scanned for GT4.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

Forza Motorsport 5 is the first game ever made with a laser-scanned version of Nurburgring.

GT4 is the first Gran Turismo title to actually feature Nurburgring.

I don't think that claim can be substantiated, as a matter of fact I think there was a whole discussion about it here somewhere.

GT4 road surface accuracy difference of 15mm. How does one do that without laser scanning back then?

 

[FordGTGuy]

Dynamic weather, 45 cars on track. If anything it proves how hard it is.

Under these conditions the game is basically crawling and a absolutely mess.

I don't think that claim can be substantiated, as a matter of fact I think there was a whole discussion about it here somewhere.

It can't be, it's false.

For realism, I'd place AC's at #1 (most recent scan I think) and PC's at the last spot (a lot of small differences there), the others are a bit less obvious IMO, very subtle differences, would need to give that a bit more thought.

This is the correct answer, most recent is most realistic.