We do not have realistic expectations for GT6 on the PS3

[phil_2001]

As long as they make it hard GT6 will be remembered. It's a challenging game and that's what's making it epic, well everything actually, gameplay and physics and superb graphics.

I still don't get it how people think PC sims like LFS and so on are more realistic, maybe the AI, but not the physics. Maybe some aspects of the physics are not done fully realistic in GT5, but "overall" Gran Turismo 5 has the best physics of them ALL imo, that's what my experience tells me.

 

[Samus]

As long as they make it hard GT6 will be remembered. It's a challenging game and that's what's making it epic, well everything actually, gameplay and physics and superb graphics.

I still don't get it how people think PC sims like LFS and so on are more realistic, maybe the AI, but not the physics. Maybe some aspects of the physics are not done fully realistic in GT5, but "overall" Gran Turismo 5 has the best physics of them ALL imo, that's what my experience tells me.

Many, many people will disagree with you on that one.

 

[avens]

As long as they make it hard GT6 will be remembered. It's a challenging game and that's what's making it epic, well everything actually, gameplay and physics and superb graphics.

I still don't get it how people think PC sims like LFS and so on are more realistic, maybe the AI, but not the physics. Maybe some aspects of the physics are not done fully realistic in GT5, but "overall" Gran Turismo 5 has the best physics of them ALL imo, that's what my experience tells me.

Does your experience go beyond lfs? The current pc sims are leaps and bounds above gt5, not only in physics but mainly in all the other aspects that make for 'realistic' races. All things considered there's really no comparison, which is why 'the hardcore guys' call GT5 a part of the simcade genre, an intermediate between arcade games and simulators that isn't good enough to be a part of the same genre as in lets say assetto corsa, just like gt5 people mock purely arcade games.

 

[Imari]

I still don't get it how people think PC sims like LFS and so on are more realistic, maybe the AI, but not the physics. Maybe some aspects of the physics are not done fully realistic in GT5, but "overall" Gran Turismo 5 has the best physics of them ALL imo, that's what my experience tells me.

Not sure if serious.

GT5 had/has possibly the least ambitious tyre model of anything even approaching a sim in the last ten years. No tyre width, no pressures. Basic temperatures only, and that was buggy as hell. It's a grip multiplier with very few additional and redeeming features. Tyres just do not behave like that, and the lack of tyre width made many good cars largely undriveable.

GT5 had/has a long, long way to go in terms of physics.

 

[dr_slump]

But luckily GT6 is apparently going to improve by a lot in this area.

 

[Exorcet]

I still don't get it how people think PC sims like LFS and so on are more realistic

-Tires: GT5 has an appalling tire model that basically consists of a fixed grip multiplier that has two modes, grip and slip. This is not how tires work. Then there is tire wear. A tire is treated like a single object. In reality different areas of the tire can experience different wear rates and temperatures.

-Suspension: Super dumbed down weight transfer. Some car just act in a ridiculous manner when you lift off or floor the gas. Coming to a stop you'll see the extremely overdamped body response when the car dips its nose and then slowly comes back to being level. Then there is tuning, it makes no sense and the extremely poorly defined values barely let you effect the car in any realistic or significant way.

-Brakes: No fade. Brake bias makes no sense at all.

-Aerodynamics: Unrealisticly high stability vs yaw angle, drag vs lift for downforce can be all overall the place (and it took them forever to add it). No apparent pitch stability issues with ground effect cars, no loss of downforce when drafting. Downforce potentially increasing grip even at 0 speed. Absolutely no lift generation on cars that should generate lift. All aero part performance is handled through a vague generic slider that uses specific values. The performance is not related to the actual aero parts at all. GT Auto aero parts also don't do anything, except the rear wing.

Other: No wheel inertia, no changes in wheel mass or inertia from GT Auto wheels, no engine/transmission/etc temperature, no damage from bottoming out, damage in general, collision physics, track temperature and weather effects.

These are all things that GT is lacking or that other games simply do better. You don't even need a PC sim to beat GT5, just take Forza 4 if you want good physics.

maybe the AI, but not the physics. Maybe some aspects of the physics are not done fully realistic in GT5, but "overall" Gran Turismo 5 has the best physics of them ALL imo, that's what my experience tells me.

It's not really a contender.

 

[Nissan Cima]

Having 500-600 premium cars with no standards or duplicates and improved engine sounds is in no shape, form or fashion an unrealistic expectation.

 

[Zuku]

You know what every time I hear someone said something about limitations on a console. I just think we get this every time and sometimes it was valid, but we'll hear this again in about 7 years or so when Playstaiton 5 is around the corner.

Because we hear the same story every time. Even the blank canvas crap.

Here is my thing you use 2006 technology yet Xbox is 2005 tech and I remember at least demoing Forza 4 and being blown away, and I'm not going to turn this into that kind of thread. I only say that to say until they get to that level then I'll listen to their well we've pushed the limitations of PS3 and all that crap.


Edit: To add a lot of people don't have unreal expectations wanting 500-600 premiums when we already had 200-300 at the end of GT5 is nothing bad, and even upgrading the tracks even more so again not that bad. I got to admit playing certain tracks in GT5 they looked DEAD Rome was one that in certain parts it was just terrible to look at.

 

[ZoidFile]

I, for my part expect GT6 to be more or less a GT5.5 or GT5 Redux or Directors Cut or whatever you want to call it.

Which is is not a bad thing to me. If its just a GT5 with a better UI and less little annoyances and some new content I am fine with it. In the end, small things, like the torture you had to go trough just to buy a car and get it into you garage, are what broke the game for me.

I do not expect a livery editor or a more sophisticated sound system, because more sound samples and textures, will take more RAM. And I do not think there's much left of it on the PS3.

 

[CJSpencer77]

I have very realistic expectations of GT6, i expect it to be GT 5.5 and as long as the online mode is better then that will be fine for me.

GT5's 12 cars + mics = lag needs to change.

 

[Eks]

edit - wrong thread

 

[Tenacious D]

Rather than read through all this, because I want to get back to my snowblowers, I think the reason we have such high expectations is because team Polyphony are such magicians in certain areas that we expect to be dazzled in all. Like damage. They have a handicap in that while other racing devs have been working on damage modeling their whole careers, Kaz has decided it wasn't what he wanted in Gran Turismo. There was one basic mechanical damage build in GT2, but then they dropped it entirely. They tried to give us something in GT5 because of a massive outcry from fans, but it looked weird with car bodies deforming like putty, much like in Live For Speed, so it was cut way back. They don't have years of experience in this, refining damage builds over the course of a series like other devs, so they have a lot of catching up to do. This is one area I think they could stand to outsource work, especially with a company gaining experience in materials modeling such as with Digital Molecular Modeling.

On the car modeling thing, space isn't an issue, it's time. When they started work on GT5, it took about six man-months to make a basic car. While it's likely they have more advanced tools to help them with this, such as tesselation tools to quickly smooth over tricky surfaces with extra polygons, these models can't build themselves and it probably still takes a darn long time. Tracks take up to four times as long or more.

And the other areas people grouse over, such as bot A.I., sound, the Movie Maker they want, all these things take resources and PS3 only has so much to go around. The Movie Maker couldn't work in GT5 because there wasn't enough system ram, and that's not changing.

GT6 is looking like a miracle game to me, because I was sure the team would have to cut back resources all over the place, beginning with image resolution, in order for GT6 to be better on PS3. Instead, the engineers went back and reworked all the code they wrote for the GT5 engine and made it tighter, more streamlined and adapted to refactoring, or adjusting itself as the game plays over time. There are even PS4 tricks like shorter loading times and on the fly tesselation, or smoothing algorithms. It seems that they improved everything without sacrificing anything, except damage, which I know is a sore point for many people.

But overall, it sounds like GT6 is going to be a dream Gran Turismo, and I can hardly wait to watch as Kaz lays down feature after feature in the upcoming game conventions. E3 is just a few weeks off...