A theory about the AI in GT4

[Zardoz]

Hypothesis: The AI in Gran Turismo 4 is not the system that PD originally intended to have in the game. Instead, we probably have a version of the same AI program used in GT3, inserted into GT4 at the last moment under duress as Sony marketing forced the issue and demanded that PD end development and just release the long-delayed game, no matter how many bugs, weaknesses, and glitches it had.

Consider the following:

Exhibit "A" - Gran Turismo 4 is a vast, complex game. It is enormous in its scope. Many pundits have marvelled at how so much was crammed onto one disk, and how it runs at all on the old PS/2 platform. It is the end result of a grand (or maybe "grandiose") vision that Kazunori Yamauchi had for the game. Does anyone think that his vision could have included the AI that we have to put up with in GT4?

Exhibit "B": Polyphony Digital went public with the fact that the game was released very long after its initial scheduled release date because of technical problems they were having. They were specific about the last delay being caused by their making a last-ditch attempt at making the online component of the game work. They failed in that attempt.

Exhibit "C": It's quite likely that they failed in another attempt, as well. There is no possible way that Kaz and company intended the Artificial Intelligence in GT4 to be as wretchedly bad as it is. There is no logical route to travel to come to the conclusion that it is anything like what they actually wanted it to be. It must be the result of something going terribly wrong during the development of the AI system they really wanted to use. Is it possible that they were working on an advanced AI system that turned out to be technically infeasible? Could it be that they struggled with it to the bitter end, and were forced to abandon it and stick in a warmed-over version of the GT3 AI just so they could finally get GT4 into production?

They couldn't go public with this, could they? How could they come right out and say that the AI in GT4 isn't what they had in mind? They had to go public with the online mode problem simply because it is blatantly obvious that it isn't in GT4.

What do you think? Am I crazy here? Could it be that Kaz and his boys over-reached and tried to give us something that couldn't be realized? Did they set lofty goals, but not reach them?

 

[Guyver 1]

I think that it's perfectly logical to assume that this AI was not what PD wanted to be in this game. Considering how gigantic GT 4 is there were many bugs to iron out and the advanced AI was probably dropped as a result. GT 5 should be a whole different story.

 

[SRV2LOW4ME]

I could see the idea where your coming from, and it sounds like it could be quite logical. But as you stated, PD already has the PS2 platform running at full for GT4, do you think that maybe they substituted the AI for everything GT3 didn't have thats new to GT4.
Almost like a toss up, would you rather have the same number of cars from GT3, with better AI, or what we have in GT4, including photomode n such with the same AI from GT3?

 

[Z Draci]

Many of the crap the AI pulls off in the game would warrant a black flag and disqualification.
Therefore, I'm forced to race dirty just so I can keep up with the pack!

Is it just me or does the AI try to spin you out if you try to pass it on a straight?

 

[Bathurst7]

Is it just me or does the AI try to spin you out if you try to pass it on a straight?

It's not just you, happened to me too. One of them turned my car's rear end so bad that I spun out and ate the gravel. "Those bastards!"-Stan

 

[Lisa_Bonami]

not to turn this thread into a WISH LIST but I think that with the release of FORZA and some of the really great things it does successfully, I think GT 5 is going to have to raise the bar to stay ahead of the pack. The following features/additions are necessary in GT 5 for it's success:

1-Improved and various AI that gives different cpu drivers different characteristics
2-real damage and damage physics effects that graphically and physically affect the performance of your car
3-Unique driving COCKPIT Views that show the interior dashboard of each car...I think this cockpit view is as important to a racing sim as viewing your weapon in a first person shooter rather than simply showing you an on screen crosshair!
4-better, more detailed and accurate engine sound effects ( GTR Racing has set the bar )
5-dynamic tire markings, skids, realistic dirt clouds, debri and dirt kicked up effects.
6-dynamic weather effects and reduced handling in rain and wet terrain
7-better spread of automobiles ( not 150 versions of Skylines and Sylvias )
8-Farrarri, Lambo's and Porsche's are a must
9-more American muscle cars
10-Visual car upgrades would be cool such as skirts, mufflers, aero packages, ect a whole seperate modding section similar to Forza's cool ideas
11- An AVI or MPEG export ability....similar to the way we can save photo's in Photoshoot mode. It would be cool to record small movies to transfer to CF cards that we can upload to the net or trade.

 

[JTSnooks]

not to turn this thread into a WISH LIST but

And yet....
There's already a couple threads for GT5 wishlists, and everything you said has been covered in them. Nice list though.

 

[Bilgewater]

No, the AI doesn't try to spin you out. What's happening is you are taking the same line that they want. Only problem is that they aren't really recognizing the fact that the line is already taken.

As for Zardoz's theory, the problem is that GT is using the same AI that they've used in every version of the game. Why would the fact that this holds true for GT4 mean that PD wanted to do something different?

My theory is that Yamauchi doesn't care about the racing aspect of GT games. That's why the six car lineup, the lack of damage, and the pathetic AI has never ever changed despite seven different GT releases, and so many years later. He probably hired some guy to program the AI for the original GT and figures that as long as the game sells, he's got no reason to change anything, or fire anybody for gross incompetence.

 

[G25RJ]

It's very simple, in the end they choose better visuals over AI and a more complete physics engine becouse of the limits of the PS2.

Forza is a great game but the visual damage is not perfect, the physics engine is more complete, have a very good AI system and the Drivatar (a.k.a b-spec in GT4) is more fun to train because you teach the AI, so the AI is as good as you are.

I think GT4 tracks and cars are more beautiful than Forza's.

 

[kjakan.no]

Totally agree with you. I think the limits of the ps2 is the reason. I think that may be the reason bacause the game uses the memory card so much also. They are saving ram with trying to have as little info about your garage in memory as possible. And because of that the game autosaves every time you change car.

 

[DemonSeed]

from the chat posted here it looks like pd made ai so crap on purpose, because of market differences. for me thats a load of bollocks because which sane racing games fan doesnt want to have a proper race in the game? but anyway, looks like people on some continent actually like their races to be pushovers....

MasterGT: Many players wonder why, after four editions of the game, that the artificial intelligence can't be improved to a more natural and responsive level. Every week, some new aspect of the game has been found to be far away from our real life experiences. What has held developers back from designing AI cars that act naturally to their environment, that don't have a fixed trajectory and that won't pull so many silly stunts?
Taku Imasaki: To MasterGT: The AI in this game is intentionally kept passive to satisfy all markets (Europe, Asia, US)... however I understand more and more US consumers play against human beings nowadays, and they like competition... I'll do my best to give the AIs in future versions more 'attitude'

 

[Bilgewater]

That chat with Imasaki is nothing more than another interview with the guy who claims to have some responsibility for the American market. He is not a developer, nor a producer, or... well, anything. He is less than nothing in PD's Machiavellian existence. He might have managed to bring a few of the muscle cars into the game, but even that is doubtful. More than likely, he is just a glorified PR guy who can speak English and was told to say as little as possible. A corporate version of a politician who is adept at not telling the truth without obviously lying through his teeth.

 

[DemonSeed]

That chat with Imasaki is nothing more than another interview with the guy who claims to have some responsibility for the American market. He is not a developer, nor a producer, or... well, anything. He is less than nothing in PD's Machiavellian existence. He might have managed to bring a few of the muscle cars into the game, but even that is doubtful. More than likely, he is just a glorified PR guy who can speak English and was told to say as little as possible. A corporate version of a politician who is adept at not telling the truth without obviously lying through his teeth.

what?? he is a person authorized by pd to make statements about the game. official ones. pd's machiavelian existence? what are you talkin about? pd is not a company size of microsoft involved in a corporate warfare. they do 1 game thats considered a market leader. they do not have any competition really [until this year anyway]. what he says is everything you could hear from polyphony itself, if you dont believe it thats your problem. you may also believe that humans are manipulated by aliens, and i would tell you that they are not. maybe im just a glorified PR guy for aliens who can speak english, who knows.........

 

[Zardoz]

...My theory is that Yamauchi doesn't care about the racing aspect of GT games. That's why the six car lineup, the lack of damage, and the pathetic AI has never ever changed despite seven different GT releases, and so many years later. He probably hired some guy to program the AI for the original GT and figures that as long as the game sells, he's got no reason to change anything, or fire anybody for gross incompetence.

You may, unfortunately, be 100% correct. If so, we can just kiss off GT5.

However, what makes me theorize that they tried and failed to do something better in GT4 is the fact that the AI is actually much worse than it was in GT3. Your AI competitors in that game did not do the ridiculous things they do in GT4.

Of course, that could also be the result of trying to use the old programming in the newer, more complex game. But when you look at the effort they made in other areas of the game, then look at what they gave us with the AI, it doesn't seem to make sense. Its like the AI doesn't belong with the rest of GT4 at all.

 

[xXSilencerXx]

The AI dosent try to spin u out they just are running the racing line that they are programmed to. The game biulders didnt make it so they would realize they are getting passed so the just push anything that in their racing line.

 

[Epinionator89]

I personally think the AI is improved. For example, the B-Spec driver can "learn" and actually drives a lot better than the in-game "computer" driving the car (after a race, or before starting a race with rolling starts). The GT3 AI was not used to control a car for you during races, so they had to improve it in order to make a realistic B-Spec driver.

I really don't mind the AI because I've just been seeing how fast I can fly around the Nurburgring.

 

[hitman146]

well thanks for this interesting theory well done for this write up i think it is true

 

[ZAGGIN]

the ai in gt4 is different to gt3. to prove this, race at monaco (on both games) and watch how the cpu tackles the hill after the start. on gt3, it struggles to keep the car off the arncos never mind keep to the racing line. on gt4 there is a definite improvement. the cpu now races straight up the hill (just like we do), no meandering or swaying, and rarely leans on the barriers.
whether the ai is 'better' is another matter. it isnt worse, and thats for sure but the improvements are hard to spot. i believe that the failings in the ai are not present because the ai was poorly programmed, but because of the antiquated 6 car system that gt has used from day one. to have a truely competitive ai, it has to be free from all constraints, and that doenst happen with a field of only 6 cars. i bet if there were more cars on the track, then the beauty of the ai would shine, but because it is limited through 'rubber banding', and other aids designed to pander to the casual racer, it doesnt realise its full potential.
think about it. the cpu could race off into the distance and leave us all standing if it wanted to, but to keep things near to a real race environment with a 6 car field, the cpu has to adhere to a 'rubber banding' routine. this ridiculous routine needs to be removed, because it is unrealistic, and detrimental to the ai. how can the cpu win a race if its told not to race to hard, or told to keep a certain distance from us?
on many occasions, i have raced gt4 and spun off wildly, and watched as the field dissappears into the distance, only to be caught again within a couple of laps. that stinks big time! if i spin off, i expect to come in last, if i cant realistically gain any ground that i lost. i dont expect the cpu to hinder its own chances of winning just so i can have a good race.
as for the cpu being dirty, i see nothing wrong with that. how many times have we forced the cpu off the track so we can win a championship? dirty tactics are used all the time in motorsport, its part of a drivers arsenal of skills. does anyone remember when michael schumacher rammed damon hill so he could win the f1 championship? there is nothing wrong with dirty tactics.

 

[JohnBM01]

I normally say GT4's AI "purposely sucks." What I mean is that they race for the win. I think the drivers are more aggressive and want to beat you at every instant. I'm not peeing in my diapers about the AI, but better than none. I think PD will have to look at TOCA Race Driver 2 for great AI. When it comes to game issues involving PD, I normally say that if you want to have the best possible results, you'll have to study your competition. I state this because you may want to work on getting those features in the game to make it better, or try to do one better than the competition. "The competition" even relates to past racing titles. You always want to study to make the game better.

Then too, I don't think the AI races like they are "stock" cars at Talladega. You know, bump drafting and all. The AI wised up, but I'm happy with the AI as long as they don't do anything to punt me off the track or consistently block my progress, which hasn't been done yet.

The AI issue I WOULD address is better knowing what counts as a 5-Second Penalty. Heck, one time I barely tapped the Pace Car in a license test, but didn't get a penalty (failing). I think side-to-side racing (even if there is contact) should just be a no-call. I think if you intentionally tried to knock the other car off, there should be a penalty. Or just do as I would- away with penalties, and more racing! These aren't races. These are fights.

 

[ZeratulSG]

First of all, let me just say that I can't believe the theory that KY doesn't care about the racing aspects of the game, only the bottom line. Sure, he's a business man and has shareholders to report to, but let's not forget that KY pioneered the GT franchise because he loves cars (and racing them) and because at the time there wasn't anything he deemed "realistic" enough.

I'm far more likely to buy Zardos' theory about the advanced AI we were promised being dropped or downgraded due to technical and/or timing constraints. As a programmer myself, I can certainly relate to THIS

I can also say from my experience that, while still very crappy, the AI in GT4 is slightly improved over GT3. For one, they actually execute (or try to execute) intelligent overtaking maneuvers into turns (late-braking etc.) and WILL respond to your blocking of the line into turns if you don't leave it until the last second (the AI seems to need a moment to think about what you're doing before it reacts). If you close the door at the last moment, they'll ram into your backside. Also, if the AI catches you on a straight and you move to block their pass (again, NOT at the last second), they will actually lift off to prevent ramming you, unlike GT3.

Watch the AI racers moving around each other. This IMO backs up what I'm saying about the delayed AI response. Because the AI knows what the other AI racers are gonna do at all times, the delay is not there (they will often take wider lines through a turn to avoid hitting each other etc.). You just need to try and give the AI time to react to you on track, and they improve to a degree.

One thing which REALLY bothers me though is that the AI often seems to run less than WOT on the straights, demonstrated by the fact that I can often catch AI cars in stock races without slipstreaming or (on viewing the replay) faster corner exit speeds. Now that goes to what somebody else said about the AI "cheating" to make things easier for the player. I don't like that

GTR has far better AI than GT4, though even this game, with all the power of the latest PC's at it's disposal, will nudge you from behind on a straight rather than go around, or occasionally make a daring (and illegal) move to the inside of a turn. No AI is perfect

 

[amar212]

AI has drasticly changed in every GT game so far, and it is clearly visible after even minor serious analysis.

Main problem though isn't AI - because I think that AI in GT series serves in only one purpose - to exist. Not to think, so goodbye Descartes.

Main aspect of GT series always was and it will always be - multiplayer. Every single effort that you make in single player - no matter of GT or Arcade mode - is making you a better driver. And then, driving against human competitior is a peak of GT experience.

AI is perfect in one thing - to teach you how to DRIVE. And they do that task flawlessly. So, game is driving simulation nodooubtfuly.

But, when it coms to RACING - the multiplayers jumps in bigtime.

GT series was always a techical materpiece in terms of multiplayer - only shadow is has is a lack of official online in GT4, but since the game is highly playable via Xlink, I tend to forget that one.

New console and new "big" game will finaly offer us a opportunity to forget about the AI "as we know it" and focus more on racing aginst the real intelligence.

Me and my crew held a 5-console GT4 weekend with 16 hours of racing bonanza and it was a time to remeber. Next saturday we're starting a full-championship. So, racing is what it is all about.

 

[Bilgewater]

Honestly judge the game for what it is and you'll have to admit that the racing element is fairly low on the horizon. The graphics, the physics, the engine sounds, the sheer number of cars, the beautifully done tracks are better than most any game you can point to.

But let's look at the less than perfect aspects of GT games. The AI is not perfect, in fact, it is the brunt of many a cruel joke. The modifications are also less than perfect. The lack of damage, the lack of online play, the lack of visual modifications...

Look at where PD shines and you'll see Yamauchi's vision of GT. Look at where the game manages to bog down in places and you'll see aspects of the game that he doesn't really care about.

Or maybe these might ring a bell: "The Real Driving Simulator" "The Drive of Your Life".

Notice the singular absence of the word "racing"?

The game shines in the driving aspect, but falls flat on its face in the racing aspect. I don't believe that this is a coincidence. I think that Yamauchi has a vision for GT that doesn't necessarily involve racing.

As for the AI in GT4 being different from previous versions, I'll admit that there is something to be said for that. The problem is that GT's AI has been the laughing stock of "racing" games for quite some time now, yet the AI in GT4 still shares too many unfortunate similarities with previous versions to think that anything substantial has been done to the basic coding. Yes, they are much too slow when it comes to dealing with erratic human drivers. Changing from speed up or relax mode to overtake mode doesn't happen fast enough. Never has! That's why they will plow into my rear quarter panels when we're all fighting for position to take that perfect line for the next curve. That's also why the physics for the cars have been massacred. If I hit you in your rear quarter panel while you're doing 100 miles an hour, you're going to spin out. In GT4 we have a magic hand keeping your car stable despite the fact that you've got some AI opponent doggedly trying to take the line that you currently occupy.

Simply put, the AI in GT games has always been a weak link, and I don't believe that this is simply because programming better AI is incredibly difficult for a game that produces revenues like GT games do. If Forza can do better, then why can't PD? Gawd knows that PD has an incredible amount of money to hire the best programmers they can find. But they don't bother because the producer of the series doesn't care about racing. He cares about driving.

 

[WorksAccess]

it could be argued that if that various elements of the game could be removed to make memory / processor resource available.

for example. i would think that replay data that is captured during a race must take up huge temporary memory allocation. a short 3 lap race might not, but a 24hour enduro race will. How about the option to disable replay capture?

ive also noticed that even when disabling the soundtrack during racing and in the replay it still shows the name of the track? is it the case that the music is still being loaded into the temporary memory just muted to not be heard?

B-spec mode, instead of running a full screen view of the real race, why not compress it to a window thats smaller?

i think that im really hinting towards greater flexibility over better resource allocation. we might get our longtime wanted AI improvement?

 

[ZeratulSG]

Honestly judge the game for what it is and you'll have to admit that the racing element is fairly low on the horizon. The graphics, the physics, the engine sounds, the sheer number of cars, the beautifully done tracks are better than most any game you can point to.

But let's look at the less than perfect aspects of GT games. The AI is not perfect, in fact, it is the brunt of many a cruel joke. The modifications are also less than perfect. The lack of damage, the lack of online play, the lack of visual modifications...

Look at where PD shines and you'll see Yamauchi's vision of GT. Look at where the game manages to bog down in places and you'll see aspects of the game that he doesn't really care about.

Or maybe these might ring a bell: "The Real Driving Simulator" "The Drive of Your Life".

Notice the singular absence of the word "racing"?

The game shines in the driving aspect, but falls flat on its face in the racing aspect. I don't believe that this is a coincidence. I think that Yamauchi has a vision for GT that doesn't necessarily involve racing.

Up to a point I agree with you. While neither one of us can speak intelligently about what KY does or does not care about, I do believe he originally created the franchise to allow gamers to experience driving cars on a race track, as realistically as plausible given the constraints of the platform (and the average gamer).

But the format of the racing series in GT suggests this goes a step further: to allow gamers to experience track racing in all forms, from stock production cars right up to Formula 1 cars. Would it have been a little less "arcady" to introduce a season-type approach to GT Mode, where you run consecutive races and you don't have to win everything to complete the game? I think so, but I don't really care that much. If I want a dedicated, life-like racing simulation running professional seasons et al I'll play GTR (which I do) or something similar. Then again, you don't HAVE to reach 100% completion in GT either. Personally I think this stems from the console game mentality as opposed to the PC game mentality. Console games are, historically, more arcade-like, and arcade-like gamers like to unlock things and achieve some sense of completion, usually represented by stats or scores (completion %, A-Spec points, etc.). Throw them into a season where they have to go from race to race regardless of their placement and points (i.e. create a situation where they are likely to not be the best, let alone the winner) and your audience shrinks.

If I hit you in your rear quarter panel while you're doing 100 miles an hour, you're going to spin out. In GT4 we have a magic hand keeping your car stable despite the fact that you've got some AI opponent doggedly trying to take the line that you currently occupy.

Yes well I think this "magic hand" as you call it exists to offset the nature of the AI. If the AI is gonna hit you frequently, it would get very annoying to have your race ruined as frequently.

Simply put, the AI in GT games has always been a weak link, and I don't believe that this is simply because programming better AI is incredibly difficult for a game that produces revenues like GT games do. If Forza can do better, then why can't PD?

Look, I wouldn't say that GT4's AI is so far off the current leaders. I've played many racing "sims" and while I agree GT4 leaves a lot to be desired in the AI category, the difference is small. Let's be honest here, the only real problem with the AI in GT4 is it's inability to surrender the racing line under the proper circumstances (or put another way, it's inability to accurately know where you are on track and react accordingly). Now that equates to a huge problem in the game, but it is still a single element. Why haven't they fixed it? I dunno, maybe you're right and they haven't spent enough time on it, but as someone else here said, if it's a choice between 200 cars, 20 tracks, and great AI, or 700 cars, 50 tracks, and dodgy AI, which would you choose? The AI in GT4 can be worked around 95% of the time. It's just annoying.

P.S. Sorry for the lengthy post

 

[rk]

Bilgewater is clearly right on this. Let's try that conversation with Taku Imaski again, adding our own mental subtitles:

MasterGT(how do I tell this guy his game is a glossy splash ad and the racing sucks without pissing him off and clamming him up?): Many players wonder why, after four editions of the game, that the artificial intelligence can't be improved to a more natural and responsive level. Every week, some new aspect of the game has been found to be far away from our real life experiences. What has held developers back from designing AI cars that act naturally to their environment, that don't have a fixed trajectory and that won't pull so many silly stunts?
Taku Imasaki(o crap, another crackhead yankee doodle; what, you didn't get enough steroids for breakfast?): To MasterGT: The AI in this game is intentionally kept passive to satisfy all markets (Europe, Asia, US)... however I understand more and more US consumers play against human beings nowadays, and they like competition... I'll do my best to give the AIs in future versions more 'attitude'(meaning I will crank up the agression and call it good, serves those poor self esteem racing freaks right for breaking my chi).

And how about the "non-race-ables"? Ok, so one is an ad for Nike, one an ad for Toyota (an ad for Caterham?!?!) the Tank was probably a ploy to get on The Tonight Show, but the old Benz and Ford seem more for experience than to demonstrate it. Besides, if they wanted just ads, there is PLENTY of banner space...
Then there is photo mode, not much going on there with racing. And I love what they have re-named the race generator: "Family Cup", as if to say, the kids will be along so there is excitement in THIS category. Considering all the above and the freaking NAME of the game is becomes obvious the only reason racing is included (and the laughably synthetic polyfony F1) because Kazunori hasn't found a $utable replacement for what is undisputably the ultimate driving experience.
Maybe he could team with Rockstar; you could have all ur little homies b-spec spamming San Andreas County while getting dressed for work.

 

[Zardoz]

Cynical as Bilgewater and rk may sound, they're probably right. We may have a tough time comprehending how PD could actually want the AI to be like it is, but it could be that AI quality is near the very bottom on their list of priorities, and they really do think its fine the way it is.

Who are we to question how they market their game, and who they're trying hardest to please? We probably have a big, fat clue that they know exactly what they're doing right here on the main forum page at GT Planet: Take a look at the "Gran Turismo 4 Sub-Forums", and see which ones are getting the most traffic. As I write this, the Photo & Video Galleries forum is showing 26,016 posts, and the Drifting forum has 13,015. Neither has anything to do with racing, while the only one that does, the Car Tuning & Settings forum, has just 6,442 posts.

Any questions? The hard reality may be that Kaz and his Uruk-Hai marketing goons know exactly what they're doing, and they're just giving their primary customers what they want. We hard-core race fans will simply have to deal with it.

 

[Fade to Black]

Just a thought here, but...

Why has PD never thought of having a difficulty setting for it's GT mode, as regards the AI?

It'd solve all it's problems, and make most people happy... the casual "I just want to drive the cars not race them types" could choose easy AI, drive some 10,000BHP beastie against a pile of brain dead Daihatsu midget drivers, and win lots of cars, to drive... they'd be happy.

Most folk could select Medium or Hard AI, giving them as much of a challenge as suits them and...

Your "I want it so hard and realistic that I get whiplash pulling 2G round corners!" type hardcore racer could select EXTREME AI, and go up against a pile of Michael shumacher types, who use every dirty trick in the book too?

And how hard can it be to programme AI to mess up it's driving lines?

I think it'd be a lot better than the current "One difficulty setting regardless of how new you are to the game, or how incredibly good you are" state of affairs at the moment!

 

[SirBerra]

After racing the Formula events in A-Spec, I have to say that the AI is weak beyond imagination. I thought that it would provide some sort of challenge. Those AI drivers drive in bunches with a straggler or two tailing way of speed. At least in GT3 the AI Formula cars had different strengths and weaknesses, but these guys seem to be lame clones of each other. They drive so aggressively around turns that could be taken more slowly that they burn out their tires extremely quickly. On Twin Motegi Speedway I saw wisps of smoke from their tires (probably from braking) when they should have been gliding through curves. I was getting four laps more out of the tires (on all the shorter and medium courses) than they were and I'm turning two seconds a lap faster. Those AI drivers brake very late and very hard which makes them whack you from behind. I just don't get in front of them before a turn since they're too stupid not to back off. I wouldn't consider them intelligent at all. They're downright stupid.

 

[Zardoz]

...I was getting four laps more out of the tires (on all the shorter and medium courses) than they were and I'm turning two seconds a lap faster. Those AI drivers brake very late and very hard which makes them whack you from behind. I just don't get in front of them before a turn since they're too stupid not to back off. I wouldn't consider them intelligent at all. They're downright stupid.

They're worse than they were in GT3. That's why it seems that this could be the result of something going really wrong during the development of the game.

 

[snypa]

First of all, let me just say that I can't believe the theory that KY doesn't care about the racing aspects of the game, only the bottom line. Sure, he's a business man and has shareholders to report to, but let's not forget that KY pioneered the GT franchise because he loves cars (and racing them) and because at the time there wasn't anything he deemed "realistic" enough.

I'm far more likely to buy Zardos' theory about the advanced AI we were promised being dropped or downgraded due to technical and/or timing constraints. As a programmer myself, I can certainly relate to THIS

I can also say from my experience that, while still very crappy, the AI in GT4 is slightly improved over GT3. For one, they actually execute (or try to execute) intelligent overtaking maneuvers into turns (late-braking etc.) and WILL respond to your blocking of the line into turns if you don't leave it until the last second (the AI seems to need a moment to think about what you're doing before it reacts). If you close the door at the last moment, they'll ram into your backside. Also, if the AI catches you on a straight and you move to block their pass (again, NOT at the last second), they will actually lift off to prevent ramming you, unlike GT3.

Watch the AI racers moving around each other. This IMO backs up what I'm saying about the delayed AI response. Because the AI knows what the other AI racers are gonna do at all times, the delay is not there (they will often take wider lines through a turn to avoid hitting each other etc.). You just need to try and give the AI time to react to you on track, and they improve to a degree.

One thing which REALLY bothers me though is that the AI often seems to run less than WOT on the straights, demonstrated by the fact that I can often catch AI cars in stock races without slipstreaming or (on viewing the replay) faster corner exit speeds. Now that goes to what somebody else said about the AI "cheating" to make things easier for the player. I don't like that

I totally agree with you.
If I would say the A.I is far from being smart in GT4, I think it's also unfair to say it's the same as GT3, where there was one and unique racing line for the A.I Racers. In GT4 it's not the case, there are more racing movements beetween the drivers. Brake too early, the AI will pass you instead of hurting you like in GT3.
Try to brake very late at the end of the long straight, and you will see the A.I trying to match you....and sometimes go off the track.

Yes, the A.i is far from perfect, and the majority of us was expecting something better. But GT4 is a step from GT3, on every aspect of the game. Let's hope PD will make another bigger step, thanks to the future PS3.