VGT Poll: Realism vs Futurism vs Modernism

[FoRiZon]

Good day everyone! Now, many of you complain on the update thread about the VGT being too "unrealistic" aside from the fact that the VGT outnumbered the real cars for its "dlc".

Now, its you to decide which VGT types would you rather like.

Futurism

• Too complicated to replicate as a working car in real life.

Modernism

Either:

• Nonexistent model but believable enough to be replicated IRL as a working concept, or
• An existing (ussually concept) cars that has been modified to more outrageous shapes.

Realism

• Models that can easily modified from existing production/stock working concept cars.

 

[chzsln485]

As you've shown in your first post, we are currently getting all three types, so why not all three? I like every VGT in their own way, from what is basically a 2-Series racing car all the way to the insane jet-powered Chaparral.

 

[GT_Alex74]

The original aim of VGT was to have manufacturers show how they see the automobile in 20 years or so. So I voted futuristic, though it is not incompatible with realism (the only currently impossible thing is the laser propelled engine as nobody uses this kind of technology, but I'm sure the idea relies on accurate sciences)

My favorites so far : the 2X, the DP100 and maybe the Mercedes. Those are beautiful, completely original and well thought cars with innovative designs. You instantly notice the effort and reflexion put into them, they're not just a stylistic exercice.
My least prefered ones : the Mitsubishi (rice on an existing concept which is already ugly), and the BMW (I love it, but not as a VGT. It is just a sports / race version of an existing production car)

 

[wicken]

I don't mind getting them all. Why? We are getting a diverse spread of cars for all people's tastes plus they are actually developing new physics for those futuristic cars which will definately help on future GT games.

 

[FoRiZon]

Sorry. But this thread is supposedly to express your favorite design route for the VGT. Of course I appreciate them all. But im aligned to modernism

 

[notStig]

I like all of them and for different reasons. The futuristic cars give us a look at what designs we could see in the future. The modernistic cars have more focus on the driving experience, compensating for a less outlandish design. The realistic cars are a bit similar to modernistic ones, but with the focus being circuit racing. But if I really had to choose I'd go for modernism.

As a side note, I'd put the Infinity as a futuristic car. I think it suits better.

 

[jontikis]

My favourites are: Chaparral 2X, Toyota FT-1, VW GTI Roadster and the Nissan.
So I'm in for all three types. Maybe I like futurism a bit more. When I saw that Chaparral 2X I was like --->

 

[Tornado]

AMG GT excepting, the only ones that actually have anything tangible to do with the brand they claim to be representing are the so called "realism" ones; so that's the only one I see any point in for a Gran Turismo game.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Personally I don't mind a mix of the three, it keeps it interesting.

I'd class the 2X as fantasy though, not futurism. I'm well aware the principle is sound, but the practical application is both not possible and highly impractical.

 

[GT_Alex74]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightcraft

 

[MatskiMonk]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightcraft

Thanks, but I said I'm aware the principle is sound.. just not feasible in this application, even if there was a power source small enough and light enough for the application, it could probably be applied in a more appropriate manner than using a laser to propel the driver into the armco at 250mph, hands and face first. Even if you could build a laser propulsion system into a race car, I doubt they'd do it as is portrayed with the 2X.

 

[GT_Alex74]

The car is marked as a 2025 model. I think by that time, or may 10 years more, we may be able to have something small and light enough to power the laser - which, by the way, relies on air to make the magic happen. There's already something which can fly up to 72m high while being the size of a hand - and that's in 2000. Every single technology as we know today that is featured in cars had to start and improve as well, so don't underestimate that, we may be surprised in a few years already.

 

[Tornado]

So what you're saying is... It's fantasy. Or, science fiction if you want to put a finer point on it; though vague allusions to technology that the designers would have known nothing about makes it extremely soft on the hardness scale.

 

[Thematic]

The Chaparral does work differently from other machines in the game, so that gameplay is altered. This makes the game more diverse and as such is welcome. Personally I'm glad that not all of the Visions are that zany.

 

[twitcher]

In the poll, I really don't understand how you separated the "futurism" cars from the "modernism" cars??

The Chaparral aside, how are the Infinity and Benz VGT any more or less plausible than the Nissan, Subaru, Mitsubishi, and Aston?

How is the Nissan "modern", and the Infinity is "future"....they both look like Batmobiles!!



I have to agree with those who have taken the "I like them all" stance. Who cares if some are more futuristic than others, or more outrageous than others?? It would be boring if they were all very similar, or took a similar approach to the design.

If you want all the VGTs to fit in the same little box, why not just get one company, or one person, to design all of them?

 

[sparkytooth]

The Nissan I don't see as outright Futurist, given that it might become a tangible production machine as the R36 GT-R.

 

[RobertM525]

I view basically all these cars as nothing more than concept cars. The outlandish designs would never make it to market, not even in the future. In many cases, there are good reasons why real cars don't look like concept cars—steeply raked windshields, for instance, look cool to concept car artists but actually have terrible visibility.

So, given that they’re basically concept cars, I generally don’t care too much about them. I’d prefer they were actually possible to build, but, again, even concept cars are often technically unworkable, so it’s not insane to think that these might not be, either.

Still, there’s impractical and there’s impossible—a hybrid or electric car that technically doesn’t have a battery, or enough of a battery to really go far, isn’t my cup of tea (e.g., the 2X).

 

[kolio]

Realism. The poll is so close!

 

[HuskyGT]

I voted realism, but I would've want VGT to take a more car-enthusiast aproach. More cylinders, higher displacements, no electric, automatic transmission or AWD mumbo-jumbo.

These cars are fake, so why follow current trends? Let's remember the good days of the auto industry

 

[sparkytooth]

I voted realism, but I would've want VGT to take a more car-enthusiast aproach. More cylinders, higher displacements, no electric, automatic transmission or AWD mumbo-jumbo.

These cars are fake, so why follow current trends? Let's remember the good days of the auto industry

You know, I would like a VGT car designed in a manner that harkens back to the sportscars of olden days. A manual transmission, Naturally aspirated speedster with classical lines that aren't too fussy.

Closest they've been is the Infniti.

 

[Niku Driver HC]

I voted realism, but I would've want VGT to take a more car-enthusiast aproach. More cylinders, higher displacements, no electric, automatic transmission or AWD mumbo-jumbo.

To be fair with you, Aston Martin did that with their car. High displacement? The DP-100 has a twin turbocharged V12. No electric? Yup. AWD? Haha, Aston used a MR layout for that 120% scare factor. So the brands are capable of avoiding most of the points you've mentioned, but very few did do that. That's the problem.

You know, I would like a VGT car designed in a manner that harkens back to the sportscars of olden days. A manual transmission, Naturally aspirated speedster with classical lines that aren't too fussy.

Closest they've been is the Infniti.

I dunno if this would be true, but Alfa Romeo was probably very close to that, with their 6C Biposto. Their car looked like some sort of speedster, and it would harken back to the 6C car that was built in the '60's. But sadly, as we all know, Alfa dropped the project, and will never know whether that would be true or not...

As for me, I voted Modernism. "Realist" cars are either rehashed concept cars (Toyota) or far too close to real cars (BMW) to work properly from a design standpoint. My idea is that a Modernism car can blend the best of all three worlds; look realistic enough to be produced with a few changes, but also unique in some regards. However, I still believe that having all three types provide this project with variety, and as I learned, variety is the spice of life...

 

[JMoney]

The only two FGT models I like are the BMW and Aston- the rest are either ugly, or in the Chevy's case, stupid.

 

[MatskiMonk]

I voted realism, but I would've want VGT to take a more car-enthusiast aproach. More cylinders, higher displacements, no electric, automatic transmission or AWD mumbo-jumbo.

These cars are fake, so why follow current trends? Let's remember the good days of the auto industry

You know, I would like a VGT car designed in a manner that harkens back to the sportscars of olden days. A manual transmission, Naturally aspirated speedster with classical lines that aren't too fussy.

You seem to be confusing "Vision" for "Nostalgia" .... also when did car-enthusiasts have to be stuck in the past?

 

[Johnnypenso]

You seem to be confusing "Vision" for "Nostalgia" .... also when did car-enthusiasts have to be stuck in the past?

And you seem to be confusing their personal preferences with telling everyone else what to do. Are they not entitled to like what they like without it being questioned?

 

[Allek]

I refuse to believe some people think concept cars have nothing to do with real cars. A concept is a bold version that introduces ideas that may look bizarre by now, but might be used in the future. Real cars roaming our streets today DO look like concept cars - concept cars from 25 years ago.

 

[MatskiMonk]

And you seem to be confusing their personal preferences with telling everyone else what to do. Are they not entitled to like what they like without it being questioned?

Husky didn't state it as an opinion, he implied that car enthusiasts like big displacement and lots of cylinders.. which is not necessarily the case.. he also implied that electric, auto and AWD are "Mumbo-jumbo", he did not say "in my opinion these things are Mumbo-jumbo", he implied this should be the thinking of a car enthusiast.

I've got no issue with them liking what they like, did I say they shouldn't like it? I'm highlighting that something that takes a step back to the "olden days" isn't really a vision of what lays ahead...


... but well done, you managed to make a post without indirectly slagging off GT in comparison to <insert any other sim name here>, it was almost worth clicking the little grey link for.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Husky didn't state it as an opinion, he implied that car enthusiasts like big displacement and lots of cylinders.. which is not necessarily the case.. he also implied that electric, auto and AWD are "Mumbo-jumbo", he did not say "in my opinion these things are Mumbo-jumbo", he implied this should be the thinking of a car enthusiast.

I've got no issue with them liking what they like, did I say they shouldn't like it? I'm highlighting that something that takes a step back to the "olden days" isn't really a vision of what lays ahead...


... but well done, you managed to make a post without indirectly slagging off GT in comparison to <insert any other sim name here>, it was almost worth clicking the little grey link for.

They didn't say, "in my opinion"...really?

I would've want VGT to take....

I would like a VGT car designed in a manner....

Exactly how does one express an opinion differently than by starting with "I want" or "I like" where you come from?

Of course you didn't say they shouldn't like it...because this is such a positive and encouraging statement about their opinions:

when did car-enthusiasts have to be stuck in the past?

 

[Tornado]

I'm highlighting that something that takes a step back to the "olden days" isn't really a vision of what lays ahead...

Unless it is looking towards the future of 50's inspired simplicity and minimalism that was so popular just a decade ago; or the future where everything was designed to look like a jet age jellybean from the decade before. Otherwise you're just arguing that the Vision GT cars are "what lies ahead" as dictated by today's design trends of making everything look like a military bunker with humongous wheels and flared fenders.

 

[Exorcet]

I'd like to see GT go the realism route, being a simulator. Though I don't see realism the same way as described in this thread. For me realism only means it's designed based on physics and technology.

The 2X might have the physics down, but I'm not convinced when it comes to technology. I have a feeling that engineers at GM didn't really play much of a role in the designing of this car.

As for the rest of the cars, I don't see a lot of difference between them except for the probability of those cars being released as road cars. Road legality doesn't really mean much to me though. Besides the shape, is there anything about the Mercedes, Nissan, or anything else in that class that sets them apart from the others?

 

[Johnnypenso]

I refuse to believe some people think concept cars have nothing to do with real cars. A concept is a bold version that introduces ideas that may look bizarre by now, but might be used in the future. Real cars roaming our streets today DO look like concept cars - concept cars from 25 years ago.

Some concept cars from the not so long ago:

Pontiac Pursuit

Bertone Stratos Zero

Citroen Karin Concept

Nissan NX-21

Lamborghini Athon

It's pretty hard to predict 20-30 years into the future no?