What Racing Games Are Better than GT5?

[TomBrady]

It also doesn't have an interior view, but wait, perhaps the actual game is fun.

No, that can't be it.

You call that fun? HAHAHA

It's really hilarious that the same people who say GT5 is a grind, and is repetitive also enjoy crap arcade games like that. There is, NOTHING, nothing more repetitive and boring than an arcade racer. Every car feels the same, the AI is rubberband to the absolute max, and the racing is a joke. All of those games are incredibly meaningless as it is, but Burnout goes even further than that. The one interesting thing about other arcade games like midnight club, or NFS, is they have a cool group of cars. BURNOUT HAS NO REAL CARS. Seriously, how is that enjoyable? You're playing generic cars that all handle the same, terrible physics, and ridiculous AI rubberbanding.

Arcade racing games are a joke. Your opinions are terrible. Sims will always trump arcade games. Every car feels different, they use REAL cars and REAL tracks. Sims are just so much more meaningful, and because of that they're so much more fun and rewarding. Arcade games are a poor way of killing time, sims are a legitimate hobby.

Sim > Arcade

 

[Patrick]

Your opinions are terrible.

Your opinion is terrible.

 

[1241Penguin]

@TomBrady

So basically what you're saying is that our opinions don't matter because unlike yours, they're crap?

Great way to have a discussion, bro. 👍

 

[locoman88]

your opinion is terrible.

+1

 

[Zuku]

I'd rather have rubberband A.I that is competitive then this crap GT5 even remotely calls and A.I.

@Gamerdog

The fact you have Gt5 ahead of any game you named in that small list is just sad. After playing GT5 this long I can't even bring myself to give it an 8.5 like i did at first. Now its more 8.0.

 

[mikecustom]

IMO I don't see how Shift 1 can be better than GT5 when it has very terrible physics, especially in drifting mode. The physics ruin the fun and the game got very boring very quickly for me. For Shift 2, I can't judge it because I haven't played it but from what I've heard and seen, it has very bad physics just like the first one. Evidence:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCOwpTMn08o">YouTube Link</a>

Well your response might be "Well, don't crash then!". It only takes one wheel going into the grass for the potential of a roll-over crash to happen. And even if a roll-over crash did happen due to one wheel going off-course, it is very unlikely the car will roll as quickly and easily as it does in Shift 2 compared to real life.

you're missing the point, tell me how physics make an entire game, with your logic, GT5 is **** because its physics are worse than PC sims, thats not true, GT5 is very good when you're driving with really low volume, with more volume, the horrendous engine sounds will ruin the whole experience, Shift and other racing games are better because as a whole, they do things right,whereas GT5 does one thing good but the rest is so bad its not worth playing, all games have flaws but no game has more flaws than virtues and thats why i think even Burnout Paradise is a better GAME, not "simulator" who cares if its unrealistic, it wasn't created to be realistic in first place, Shift might not be realistic, but its main problem was PR, they sold it as a GT, Forza killer in terms of physics and it wasn't but it sure did kill GT5 in the rest, and it doesn't have the word "simulator" written anywhere, GT5 does have that word written on it and it failed to be what its supposed to be

 

[LancerEvo7]

BURNOUT HAS NO REAL CARS. Seriously, how is that enjoyable? You're playing generic cars that all handle the same...

Crashing and exploring the world. And the cars do handle differently.

 

[gamerdog6482]

I just want to say, physics DO make a game and a bad (ie NFS) engine breaks a game. GT5 has one of if not the greatest game engine in any racing GAME, let alone racing sims. As an avid NFS player I can say NFS isn't a GT5/Forza killer and NEVER will be, period.

 

[THEPUNISHER]

I played forza 4, the game is great but i can't stand the arcade driving style.
GRAN TURISMO is the best when it comes to driving but other than that lets say good.

 

[C_Raccoon23]

I played forza 4, the game is great but i can't stand the arcade driving style.
GRAN TURISMO is the best when it comes to driving but other than that lets say good.

What about Forza is arcade? And what do you use to play both games?

 

[THEPUNISHER]

What about Forza is arcade?

Driving. its soo arcade.

 

[gamerdog6482]

I feel like I'm in the middle of a 14-way argument where everyone is on two sides...

 

[mikecustom]

I just want to say, physics DO make a game and a bad (ie NFS) engine breaks a game. GT5 has one of if not the greatest game engine in any racing GAME, let alone racing sims. As an avid NFS player I can say NFS isn't a GT5/Forza killer and NEVER will be, period.

so if there was a game that looked worse than anything you could imagine, sounded extremely artificial, had only 1 car and 1 track, had no damage, just 1 camera, but it felt real, would it be better than GT5?, other games would be **** compared to it? i don't think so, Physics might be more important to you than they're to me, but you can't say a game is crap because of its crappy physics, especially when it does better in other areas than the suposed "best racing game on consoles ever"

 

[C_Raccoon23]

Driving. its soo arcade.

So it's only arcade because you say so? Gotcha.

 

[Zuku]

Got to agree with Mike custom.

I'd even go beyond to say this game has 1920x1080p native 60Fps and the best physics plus one car and track. And you'd still say it's the best racing game ever?

 

[SlipZtrEm]

You call that fun? HAHAHA

It's really hilarious that the same people who say GT5 is a grind, and is repetitive also enjoy crap arcade games like that. There is, NOTHING, nothing more repetitive and boring than an arcade racer. Every car feels the same, the AI is rubberband to the absolute max, and the racing is a joke. All of those games are incredibly meaningless as it is, but Burnout goes even further than that. The one interesting thing about other arcade games like midnight club, or NFS, is they have a cool group of cars. BURNOUT HAS NO REAL CARS. Seriously, how is that enjoyable? You're playing generic cars that all handle the same, terrible physics, and ridiculous AI rubberbanding.

Arcade racing games are a joke. Your opinions are terrible. Sims will always trump arcade games. Every car feels different, they use REAL cars and REAL tracks. Sims are just so much more meaningful, and because of that they're so much more fun and rewarding. Arcade games are a poor way of killing time, sims are a legitimate hobby.

Sim > Arcade

I'll keep this short(ish): get off the high horse, and don't address other members in that way again, especially a member of staff. GT5 is a video game, just like many others. It's as "meaningful" as a video game can be.

Great idea to bring up rubberbanding though (since the GT series is infamous for it). You're absolutely right about sims using real tracks too - I don't suppose you happen to have any footage from any of the recent races at Trial Mountain circuit?

I can say with honesty that I've had more fun with a group of friends over playing Mario Kart on my old Gamecube than I've ever had trying to convince them to play GT5. If you place more importance on realism in a video game to justify its value and help pretend its more than it is, that's absolutely fine, but don't tell people they're wrong for having different priorities for the discs they put in their game-box.

Driving. its soo arcade.

Want to quantify that? "It is because I say so" is hardly convincing. Do us all a favour and avoid dragging this thread off-topic (yet again), and post your thoughts in this thread.

 

[THEPUNISHER]

This thread talking about games that better than GT5, and i mentioned Forza 4, how can i drag it off topic?

 

[SlipZtrEm]

That thread I linked to is a thread dedicated to discussing the physics of FM and GT. It's a multi-page thread going into the details of that particular aspect of the two games, as it is a hotly-debated topic. Instead of side-tracking this thread with a discussion that's better suited for another thread, moving said talk to said thread makes a bit more sense.

 

[ch3ng]

I played forza 4, the game is great but i can't stand the arcade driving style.
GRAN TURISMO is the best when it comes to driving but other than that lets say good.

If Forza is a arcade racer than GT is a arcade racer too.

I don't want to discuss this here. Just read the FM vs GT Physics thread. Small hint. Forza has equel or better physics.

In my opinion both have advantage and disadvantage.

 

[locoman88]

This thread was meant to be an argument. Did you see title? Ugh........ gt5= better gameplay and realism. Nfs= better cars and damage details. Forza=can't say much as I've never played it...... don't bother arguing with me... I'm not gonna even start.....

 

[Raitziger]

So it's only arcade because you say so? Gotcha.

I think he means the FFB system.

 

[poe64]

GTR2 with or without full mods and Rfactor with mods are way better than GT5 as a game.
GT5 has something unique but I don't know what it is.
It's like a library of all the great cars made and It has it's own little niche.

 

[MSTER232]

you're missing the point, tell me how physics make an entire game, with your logic, GT5 is **** because its physics are worse than PC sims, thats not true, GT5 is very good when you're driving with really low volume, with more volume, the horrendous engine sounds will ruin the whole experience, Shift and other racing games are better because as a whole, they do things right,whereas GT5 does one thing good but the rest is so bad its not worth playing, all games have flaws but no game has more flaws than virtues and thats why i think even Burnout Paradise is a better GAME, not "simulator" who cares if its unrealistic, it wasn't created to be realistic in first place, Shift might not be realistic, but its main problem was PR, they sold it as a GT, Forza killer in terms of physics and it wasn't but it sure did kill GT5 in the rest, and it doesn't have the word "simulator" written anywhere, GT5 does have that word written on it and it failed to be what its supposed to be

Well, physics might not make an entire game, but they do definitely take up a wide majority of it. Shift 1 was nearly unplayable when in the chase view due to the steering lag connected to the physics of the game. Also, I couldn't give a 🤬 about engine sounds since most cars slapped with a titanium racing exhaust would sound bad in real life anyway.

 

[gamerdog6482]

you can't say a game is crap because of its crappy physics

Yes I can, and I do, very often. If the physics are bad, the game isn't realistic, and that's not debatable.

 

[Scaff]

Also, I couldn't give a 🤬 about engine sounds since most cars slapped with a titanium racing exhaust would sound bad in real life anyway.

Having just spent the entire weekend at the Silverstone Classic I can assure you that cars fitted with full racing exhausts (Titanium or otherwise) most certainly do not sound bad at all.

Yes I can, and I do, very often. If the physics are bad, the game isn't realistic, and that's not debatable.

However to then make the leap that Not Realistic = Crap Game is highly debatable as its pure opinion.

 

[Samus]

Exactly, I've played plenty of games with unrealistic physics but still really enjoyed the game. I feel sorry for people that only get enjoyment out of racing games that are sims or close to it. I love GT5 and PC sims as much as the next guy but I also get lots of enjoyment from games like PGR, Burnout, heck even something like Split/Second. Because I just enjoy driving games full stop.

 

[gamerdog6482]

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit, but they're not really in the same genre. GT5 is a sim, meant for realism. Need for Speed is a game meant for enjoyment. And while GT5 brings the enjoyment with the realism, NFS doesn't bring the realism with the enjoyment.
I read something about it once...I'll have to dig it up.

 

[Samus]

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit, but they're not really in the same genre. GT5 is a sim, meant for realism. Need for Speed is a game meant for enjoyment. And while GT5 brings the enjoyment with the realism, NFS doesn't bring the realism with the enjoyment.
I read something about it once...I'll have to dig it up.

GT5 is not a sim, not in the sense you're meaning. It's a game with realistic overtones, it's still a game and meant for fun. It's not like a Flight or Train simulator that aren't for fun, they are sims.

So yes, they're in the same genre. They're very different games no doubt about it, but they're both still racing games intended to be played for fun and enjoyment, not for someone to seriously sit and learn how to drive a car.

 

[gamerdog6482]

Al right, found it. It was an article in PlayStation magazine:

The photorealism seen in Forza and Gran Turismo's photo modes will come a lot closer to running in real time. Not completly, perhaps, but they'll at least clean up the rough edges. Other games, such as Need for Speed, choose believablity over realism.

 

[Zuku]

Yeah I really do wish people would try to stop labeling GT(although they did it to themselves) as an actual simulator.

SimonK I like what you said it's a game that has Sim overtones, but doesn't do it correctly.

You know I'd rather have the believablity over realism. Because with realism you get GT5 it looks very real, but it looks very poorly done. When you believe you feel like you're immersed into the world. Simple as that.