VGT like them or not? (Poll)
- Thread starter Igano
- 86 comments
- 5,545 views
- 1,744
- Singapore
- XSquareStickIt
I voted no, and I'll copy and paste a comment I made on Roflwaffle's video on the subject to explain why:
Vision GT cars often look comical, almost like a caricature of what a car should look like, and it very much clashes with the ultra realistic look and feel of the game. The Merc VGT for example, has tyres so low profile, they look painted on. The Volkswagen Supersport has no fuel inlet anywhere. Many don't even come with reverse lights or turn signals. Most are set to scrape on their own shadow even on a textureless, mirror smooth racetrack, and with non adjustable suspension, they just spark like crazy and are a bumbling mess on laser scanned real tracks. Oh, and some of these shadow scraping cars can even fit dirt tyres, which should tell you everything you need to know about how much thought goes into these things.
Which brings me to my second point: most of them drive so god awful that it's completely inconceivable to me that anyone test drove these monstrosities before greenlighting them. Back in GT Sport, the Subaru VIZIV will wheelspin in 3rd despite having AWD, and its torque vectoring just instantly spun the car upon turning the steering wheel. Same with the INFINITI VGT. I mean, hell, the Jag VGT gave us the first (and only, if I'm not mistaken) red flag in Gran Turismo history, to give some context on how awful these things are to drive.
If real cars drove badly, it's somewhat easy to excuse: they set it up to be comfortable. They built this to a cost. The technology hadn't been there back then. Etc.. With a VGT car, it exists only in Gran Turismo for the most part. If it drives awful in Gran Turismo, it's because no one bothered to make it drive well, even without any cost or technical limitations. It just feels like lazy slop that exists only for the manufacturer to peacock.
In a series that has traditionally included many duplicate cars and highlighted the minute differences between them, Gran Turismo has really made me appreciate the small, mechanical improvements that go into a car as it ages. Now imagine Dodge coming along and claiming they can make more than 2,500HP from a 7 Litre V10. Chevy saying they can propel a car with lasers. It just feels like a playground fight between children to see who can exaggerate the best. Now imagine those playground kids being given the power to materialise their fantasies. It instantly invalidates any and all of the hard work that real engineers do to satisfy safety, emissions, and reliability standards to bring a car to market. It feels like a direct slap across the face to race these outlandish and improbable VGT cars with real cars.
Back in the earlier GT games, the fictional cars weren't so egregious. The Dodge Copperhead looks like it could be produced and rub shoulders with an NSX, sure. The del sol LM looked hilarious, but it could run with the other LM racecars no problem. The RX-7 LM is actually based on an obscure 15th anniversary body kit Mazdaspeed offered. Even though they were fictional, they had roots in reality, and didn't feel out of place to look at or to drive. That I feel is the main difference between fictional cars in earlier GT games versus the stupid VGTs we have now.
Even if VGT cars materalise, they often don't share much with the original VGT. The McLaren Ultimate VGT uses a familiar sounding V8 engine, features a novel prone driving position, and has my favourite cockpit view in the entire game. The McLaren Solus has none of that. The only link to the VGT program it can claim is just in styling. That just feels incredibly skin deep to me.
As you said in the video, VGT cars aren't for the players. They feel like cheap, marketing ploys at best and being forced to watch Kaz and car manufacturers circle jerk one another at worst.
Vision GT cars often look comical, almost like a caricature of what a car should look like, and it very much clashes with the ultra realistic look and feel of the game. The Merc VGT for example, has tyres so low profile, they look painted on. The Volkswagen Supersport has no fuel inlet anywhere. Many don't even come with reverse lights or turn signals. Most are set to scrape on their own shadow even on a textureless, mirror smooth racetrack, and with non adjustable suspension, they just spark like crazy and are a bumbling mess on laser scanned real tracks. Oh, and some of these shadow scraping cars can even fit dirt tyres, which should tell you everything you need to know about how much thought goes into these things.
Which brings me to my second point: most of them drive so god awful that it's completely inconceivable to me that anyone test drove these monstrosities before greenlighting them. Back in GT Sport, the Subaru VIZIV will wheelspin in 3rd despite having AWD, and its torque vectoring just instantly spun the car upon turning the steering wheel. Same with the INFINITI VGT. I mean, hell, the Jag VGT gave us the first (and only, if I'm not mistaken) red flag in Gran Turismo history, to give some context on how awful these things are to drive.
If real cars drove badly, it's somewhat easy to excuse: they set it up to be comfortable. They built this to a cost. The technology hadn't been there back then. Etc.. With a VGT car, it exists only in Gran Turismo for the most part. If it drives awful in Gran Turismo, it's because no one bothered to make it drive well, even without any cost or technical limitations. It just feels like lazy slop that exists only for the manufacturer to peacock.
In a series that has traditionally included many duplicate cars and highlighted the minute differences between them, Gran Turismo has really made me appreciate the small, mechanical improvements that go into a car as it ages. Now imagine Dodge coming along and claiming they can make more than 2,500HP from a 7 Litre V10. Chevy saying they can propel a car with lasers. It just feels like a playground fight between children to see who can exaggerate the best. Now imagine those playground kids being given the power to materialise their fantasies. It instantly invalidates any and all of the hard work that real engineers do to satisfy safety, emissions, and reliability standards to bring a car to market. It feels like a direct slap across the face to race these outlandish and improbable VGT cars with real cars.
Back in the earlier GT games, the fictional cars weren't so egregious. The Dodge Copperhead looks like it could be produced and rub shoulders with an NSX, sure. The del sol LM looked hilarious, but it could run with the other LM racecars no problem. The RX-7 LM is actually based on an obscure 15th anniversary body kit Mazdaspeed offered. Even though they were fictional, they had roots in reality, and didn't feel out of place to look at or to drive. That I feel is the main difference between fictional cars in earlier GT games versus the stupid VGTs we have now.
Even if VGT cars materalise, they often don't share much with the original VGT. The McLaren Ultimate VGT uses a familiar sounding V8 engine, features a novel prone driving position, and has my favourite cockpit view in the entire game. The McLaren Solus has none of that. The only link to the VGT program it can claim is just in styling. That just feels incredibly skin deep to me.
As you said in the video, VGT cars aren't for the players. They feel like cheap, marketing ploys at best and being forced to watch Kaz and car manufacturers circle jerk one another at worst.
- 271
- The_Revengel
I'm Gigantor/Astro Boy/Tobor the 8th man old (all B&W) . . . and I love your tastes!Meteoro was my first anime! Of course Mach 5 too!
Also, I still love Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang. And was floored when I learned the connection between the car and James Bond.
Would love to have this in the game . . . or in my driveway to be honest:
- 1,322
- United Kingdom
- rodgers1
VGTs are cool and do deserve a place in the game. The big problem I find though is they is no current need for them in the game.
Offline - I think they made one cafe book for VGTs of 3 races, and that’s the only time they are officially used.
Online - Never get used! Id like for PD to just make a a single group for VGTs and then use them to race. Example Gr1. Good group off race cars there, but they never get used. It’s always the Porsche 919 or Mazda 787b. They should do a Gr1 VGT only race.
Buying VGTs - As they is no real reason to buy these cars, the only VGTs I own are ones I’ve won on the roulette.
Offline - I think they made one cafe book for VGTs of 3 races, and that’s the only time they are officially used.
Online - Never get used! Id like for PD to just make a a single group for VGTs and then use them to race. Example Gr1. Good group off race cars there, but they never get used. It’s always the Porsche 919 or Mazda 787b. They should do a Gr1 VGT only race.
Buying VGTs - As they is no real reason to buy these cars, the only VGTs I own are ones I’ve won on the roulette.
Last edited:
- 17,185
- United Kingdom
So what you're saying is the @Roflwaffle just talks **** on his YouTube channel for the clicks?
- 1,744
- Singapore
- XSquareStickIt
I'm not sure what I wrote gave you that impression. I quite like the guy's videos, and I think he makes a few good points about VGTs not being implemented well in the game (although he also points out this problem is hardly VGT specific).
If you have any counter points to either what he said in the video, or what I wrote in the comments (and the post above), I'd love to hear them.
- 17,185
- United Kingdom
The conclusion you attributed to Rofl's video is pretty clear, if you've paraphrased it correctly... and it's the kind of conclusion that gets used irrespective of the topic. Asserting that an opinion you hold is representative of the community you're appealing is basically just meaningless gatekeeping. This poll alone has indicated that (at most, as far as I've noticed so far), it's 60/40 against and thus the conclusion stated, or at least paraphrased, decides to negate the passion, affection, appreciation and investment of 40% (currently 44%) of the players.
As for the reasons you stated in your response, I can see at least where you're coming from on some issues, and on others it's just a sweeping generalisation, which I notice in a lot of the VGT criticism... I can't really think of any characteristic of VGT's that actually define them as such aside from the name - yet most are judged based on characteristics of a few, which in many cases are issues not exclusive to VGT's.
- 1,744
- Singapore
- XSquareStickIt
I quoted Rofl's conclusion in the video that "VGTs were not made with the player in mind" as a point I agree with, and a reason why I dislike them personally, but that does not mean that he was trying to speak for the community as a whole in saying, "we hate VGTs, therefore, they suck and shouldn't exist", nor was it my intention to paint it that way, and I'm sorry if my hasty copy and paste job gave you that impression. I think you should definitely give the video a listen yourself if you want to know his stance on the topic; I wouldn't want to speak on his behalf.
And, hey, a 1973 Carrera RS was not made for Gran Turismo players in mind, but it's one of my favourite cars in the game.
You also make a good point in my initial assertion being generic. But, as you also point out, there is so, so little common among VGT cars, that one has to make general, sweeping statements to explain why one is for or against VGTs. After all, what meaningful conversation can stem from just "cars having four wheels that cost one million credits"? That's all that can tie VGTs together.
Therefore, I speak from my personal experience, and most of the VGTs I've bothered to drive had some very weird handling quirk and vice that make them ultra difficult to drive quickly, making them inferior to existing cars. For the Car of the Week threads in GTS and GT7, I've had to drive the Subaru VIZIV, the Mitsubishi PHEV, the Toyota FT-1 VGT, the BMW VGT, the VW Supersport, the Zagato, the Infiniti, the Chaparral, the Genesis, the Mini, the Audi e-tron, Daihatsu RJ, and the Fittipaldi, and only the last four weren't irredeemable garbage to me. Yes, it's a bit of an over generalisation to make, having driven only 14 VGTs in the game (not counting Gr. derivatives of VGTs), but I find that VGTs are often nonsensical in how they handled and drove.
If you're trying to say that I should drive EVERY VGT in the game before I can form an opinion on them, isn't that gatekeeping in itself?
- 17,185
- United Kingdom
Fair enough. I stand by what I said in the instances where people do claim, for instance, that 'nobody' wants these things, or 'we' don't want VGTs, but if that's not what was being put across by yourself or @Roflwaffle apologies for any seeming aggression. Take it in the context of social posts from those much closer to PD than me...
It points to two different mindsets for me. The BMW VGT is my most used car, I love it, I've laboured over it for hours... it's not the reason I vote 'yes' for VGTs. Broadly speaking I like concept cars, always have, but again, that doesn't mean I like all concept cars.. but in voting 'yes' I'm voting in respect of including the opportunity to find new cars to love, in any category. If people don't like individual VGT's, or even most of them based on their attributes, then fair enough, but being against even the possibility... that doesn't sit right with me.
No, but you have to understand that comments like VGTs are:
Spaceships
OP
Silly
16 cylinders
2500hp
Wet noodles
... etc etc etc.
... and then you look at, and drive the selection... it's just patently wrong. I'm not saying you have to drive them all to form an opinion, but there's a ~345% laptime difference across the range, you have 3 cylinder to laser, you have cars that corner on rails, to cars that corner like supertankers, to cars that handle like fidget spinners, to cars that corner like mosquitos... you have cars that are little different to a standard model with a bodykit, to clear visions for possible future directions, to cars the are only focused on what they are and forget any aspect of what they were...
I would totally agree it's crap that some don't have interiors (as a bumper cam exclusive driver), I agree it's a shame that more don't have more customisation options.. I hate the way the Viziv drives (though I do really like the Infiniti), I hate the way the wing on the BMW was clearly not designed in the Livery Editor era... but do I still want car companies to make their own cars for my favourite game of the last 25+ years... yes, yes I do.
Last edited:
- 1,342
- Brazil
No.
jrbabbitt
Premium
- 2,880
- Charleston, SC
- TCR_JimyBee
I also have watched his YT videos on this subject, and I believe he speaks truth. Please remember that all truths are dependent on the point of view of the one or many that make that statement. I personally do not see the same point of view as @Roflwaffle but what he posts is not a load of [insert your choice descriptive word here].
- 17,185
- United Kingdom
That would be an opinion. A truth would be a verifiable fact independent of someone's point of view.
FWIW, I just wasted 35 minutes of my life watching the video, and I've decided to go back to my original statement. Rofl may well have made the effort to do some research, but it's clearly only woven in in a specific way to justify a conclusion he's evidently already come to. 90% of the video doesn't even attempt to support the conclusion... gotta get that watch time, I guess.
- 2,982
- Nowhere
- TheSweeney_
I've always liked what the VGT program stands for, with it producing fascinating cars. Including the wacky and OTT stuff like the Tomahawk and Chaparral, even if they're not my most liked to be honest.
Be it concepts or original creations, fictitious cara have always been a part of what PD do, and what GT is about in my opinion. Plus, to think they detract from having real world cars added to the game, is a naïve view, but each to their own 🤷♂️.
Some of my most used and favourite VGT's include the Honda Sports, Suzuki, Mazda LM55 and Hyundai N 2025 to name a few. Ultimately they're just fun, and they don't take themselves too seriously. Which fits within the remit of what GT is and should be. I.e. to cater for the realism and fantasy in one, as a fairly varied type of racing game. After all, sim racing is a vast enough genre these days, that there's something for everyone. Whether its from iracing to Wipeout and everything in-between.
VGT's will never be everyones "cup of tea" as it were, and that's ok 🍻. There's enough of us that see it's value to warrant their existence, so theres something for everyone 👍.
Be it concepts or original creations, fictitious cara have always been a part of what PD do, and what GT is about in my opinion. Plus, to think they detract from having real world cars added to the game, is a naïve view, but each to their own 🤷♂️.
Some of my most used and favourite VGT's include the Honda Sports, Suzuki, Mazda LM55 and Hyundai N 2025 to name a few. Ultimately they're just fun, and they don't take themselves too seriously. Which fits within the remit of what GT is and should be. I.e. to cater for the realism and fantasy in one, as a fairly varied type of racing game. After all, sim racing is a vast enough genre these days, that there's something for everyone. Whether its from iracing to Wipeout and everything in-between.
VGT's will never be everyones "cup of tea" as it were, and that's ok 🍻. There's enough of us that see it's value to warrant their existence, so theres something for everyone 👍.
Last edited:
- 687
- Austria
Can't answer that poll since there is no "I don't care"-option...
jrbabbitt
Premium
- 2,880
- Charleston, SC
- TCR_JimyBee
You just did answer the poll with a "write-in option "
jrbabbitt
Premium
- 2,880
- Charleston, SC
- TCR_JimyBee
By making the comment he did it was is called a "write-in vote"
Definition of similar:
A write-in candidate is a candidate whose name does not appear on the ballot but seeks election by asking voters to cast a vote for the candidate by physically writing in the person's name on the ballot.
his vote of "I don't care" was a write-in vote
Last edited:
MineralBlurb7
(Banned)
- 343
- Norway
Similar threads
