Hi everyone, I don't want to open the thread for this questions, so I hope this is good place to ask since it seems there is lots of sincere answers floating around.
I am looking for good reasons to buy GT Sports.
I played GT2,GT3,GT4,GT5 and for long time GT was the only driving simulation I ever played. The best experience was when I finally bought Logitech GT wheel for GT5.
Recently I bought Logitech G29, I subscribed to iRacing, and I also bought Project Cars 2. I was surprised that with the wheel, I kinda got the similar driving experience as I had with GT5, I am kinda having similar amount of fun.
I was thinking to buy GT Sports, but now I have doubts. Is there anything GT Sports can offer compared to PC2 and iRacing combo? Are GT tracks, specific cars, GT music, and driving school enough to justify it? Is there something else?
What worries me even more is the reviews that mention that GT physics are really bad, like soap. I used to think GT have real physics, and the whole idea of "real driving simulator" was really exciting cause I would imagine that to some extent GT skills can be applied in real life.
Now that bubble is burst. Though, I am not even sure can I stay in that bubble while playing PC2 and even iRacing. Yes, there is lots of people saying on the internet that this games are using real driving model, and that even real race drivers use this games to train (it sounds a bit funny, no?), but I am starting to think that this is just gamers trying to convince themselves it is real, and the others are doing it for marketing? My friend that drives city car tried playing iRacing, and he said that things he needs to do in the game and real life are completely different. He was kinda surprised how fast he loses control during low speed even while using weaker cars.
Hi everyone, I don't want to open the thread for this questions, so I hope this is good place to ask since it seems there is lots of sincere answers floating around.
I am looking for good reasons to buy GT Sports.
I played GT2,GT3,GT4,GT5 and for long time GT was the only driving simulation I ever played. The best experience was when I finally bought Logitech GT wheel for GT5.
Recently I bought Logitech G29, I subscribed to iRacing, and I also bought Project Cars 2. I was surprised that with the wheel, I kinda got the similar driving experience as I had with GT5, I am kinda having similar amount of fun.
I was thinking to buy GT Sports, but now I have doubts. Is there anything GT Sports can offer compared to PC2 and iRacing combo? Are GT tracks, specific cars, GT music, and driving school enough to justify it? Is there something else?
What worries me even more is the reviews that mention that GT physics are really bad, like soap. I used to think GT have real physics, and the whole idea of "real driving simulator" was really exciting cause I would imagine that to some extent GT skills can be applied in real life.
Now that bubble is burst. Though, I am not even sure can I stay in that bubble while playing PC2 and even iRacing. Yes, there is lots of people saying on the internet that this games are using real driving model, and that even real race drivers use this games to train (it sounds a bit funny, no?), but I am starting to think that this is just gamers trying to convince themselves it is real, and the others are doing it for marketing? My friend that drives city car tried playing iRacing, and he said that things he needs to do in the game and real life are completely different. He was kinda surprised how fast he loses control during low speed even while using weaker cars.
Not true. I have all the games you mentioned. I had the most fun and exitement with the online races in GTS the last few evenings, because I don't have friends to play with in the other games. Fun equals quality for me. So it's GTS all the way.
Give the game a few more weeks, you will be tired of it. Because this game has little depth besides the "Wow finally, a GT on PS4 with decent multiplayer, beautiful graphics and photo mode to boot!" and that will wear off in time.
We will see. I don't care about the graphics and the photo mode at all but I love the multiplayer. I am really not a good driver but I can feel myself growing and improving by competing with other people. I don't want to race against Ai ever again.
Hi everyone, I don't want to open the thread for this questions, so I hope this is good place to ask since it seems there is lots of sincere answers floating around.
I am looking for good reasons to buy GT Sports.
I played GT2,GT3,GT4,GT5 and for long time GT was the only driving simulation I ever played. The best experience was when I finally bought Logitech GT wheel for GT5.
Recently I bought Logitech G29, I subscribed to iRacing, and I also bought Project Cars 2. I was surprised that with the wheel, I kinda got the similar driving experience as I had with GT5, I am kinda having similar amount of fun.
I was thinking to buy GT Sports, but now I have doubts. Is there anything GT Sports can offer compared to PC2 and iRacing combo? Are GT tracks, specific cars, GT music, and driving school enough to justify it? Is there something else?
What worries me even more is the reviews that mention that GT physics are really bad, like soap. I used to think GT have real physics, and the whole idea of "real driving simulator" was really exciting cause I would imagine that to some extent GT skills can be applied in real life.
Now that bubble is burst. Though, I am not even sure can I stay in that bubble while playing PC2 and even iRacing. Yes, there is lots of people saying on the internet that this games are using real driving model, and that even real race drivers use this games to train (it sounds a bit funny, no?), but I am starting to think that this is just gamers trying to convince themselves it is real, and the others are doing it for marketing? My friend that drives city car tried playing iRacing, and he said that things he needs to do in the game and real life are completely different. He was kinda surprised how fast he loses control during low speed even while using weaker cars.
What the reviewer actually said was that when FWD cars understeer its as if soap has been added to the tyres (gamermuscle was the review in question).
There's no need to abandon eSports and I don't think anyone has called for that. They can do both eSports and an offline focus at the same time like many other games manage to do.
You mean you pulled out the reviews you didn't like and ignored all the others with their spot on criticism of the title? They haven't played the game yet you can clearly see on Amazon that many of the reviews are from verified purchasers? So they bought the game, didn't play it, and submitted a review? Right, pull the other one.
Fun = fun, quality = quality. There are plenty of games out there that might be considered high or low quality and may or may not be fun.
Not sure what the point of this is. We all know that each game has it's strengths and shortcomings. That doesn't mean that, in the overall, some are more accurate than others. You seem to be suggesting that so long as they aren't 100% accurate it doesn't matter how accurate they are. If that's true, why not just slap NFS or DC physics onto GT and call it a day?
No because we are taliking about games and not a watch or a car. A game which is not fun is not high quality because that is what is was made for.
You're flat out wrong. Quality and fun are two different things. You are conflating the two because it suits your narrative that a game is fun therefore it's high quality and that is blatantly incorrect. That isn't to say you can't enjoy a low or high quality game, just that the two aren't, by definition, directly related.
Define 'good'?
I'm not talking about watches and you're missing the point. The post I responded to directly equated fun with quality, meaning that because a game is fun it must therefore be high quality. That's incorrect. I don't think I'm alone in saying I've enjoyed many a game that I did not consider high quality overall. A fun game can be high quality or not, there isn't a direct correlation between the two. It's no different than relating sales to quality. Or sales to physics. Don't go running off on a tangent.
Which could be very, very different from the user expectations.
In terms of physics simulation what are those ways?
Again, I'm not talking about watches. And again, if you followed what has been posted you'll see I've already acknowledged that one can be a factor in the other. The point being discussed is equating the two inextricably. So yes, you're off on a tangent.
Which is the point at which is starts getting tricky.
As an example Seb Loeb Rally Evo is easily the ugliest and worse sounding rally title available today (maybe even the worse looking and sounding racing title today full stop). So in those two you would struggle to get any argument that its far from good.
However when it comes to stage accuracy (as in width, camber, surface, etc) and physics its arguably the rally sim made today, which is subjectively good.
Now if we compare it to Dirt Rally, Dirt 4 or even the rally bits of GTS it's poor in terms of visuals and sound, how ever does that stop it being 'fun'?
Well that depends on what the individual thinks of as fun, for me no matter how 'good' it is in terms of looks and sound, GTS's rally is not even close to fun (as its so inaccurate in terms of physics, stage design, etc).
Just to give you an idea of the difference in terms of these areas in SLRE, Dirt Rally and Reality have a look at the following (but be warned SLRE really is ugly and it really does sound bloody awful):
Its what makes agreeing on what is 'good' and 'fun' so difficult.
As a side, I may go back and get Dirt Rally. I didn't have a wheel when it was released so there was no point. Then Dirt 4 came out I got it. But Rally is only 12 bucks on Steam right now...
Dirt Rally is the better of the two in my opinion.Well it's definitely butt ugly.
