Can we actually call GT5 a simulator?

[Exorcet]

in your previous posts you said the opposite.

Also I just read your first post and you used RS tyres.

I think you're confused. I've always had the stance that controller/wheel/whatever, the physics are the same, and you're going to notice the flaws. The exceptions being SFR (obviously) and maybe ASM because it changes car performance so much.

Also, I did not start this thread.

A wheel does make a difference because of DS3's hidden assists, just like ABS does.

Controller or wheel:
-Aero is still wrong
-Ride height still works backwards
-Final lateral g is still almost entirely tire dependent
-Spring stiffness still makes no sense
-etc

What I mean with this is that if you want to test a car in GT5, you should use the stock tyres, or even better if you downgrade a bit (sports:hard to comfort:soft) like in GT5's offline competitions, or just comfort:mediums.

Once more, the point of the test was not to test a stock car. It was to test Racing tires.

Everyone on Earth knows that CM tires make more sense than RS tires as far as modeling the stock car.

ofc those 2 things won't change the game's flaws, which are more like not taking into account several real life factors, but still. Since you haven't done both you haven't tried the game yet.

If the bold is true, how can driving with RS tires make it so you "haven't played the game"?

The racing tires are a bit crazy yes, but even they can't make the other parts of the physics code vanish. Only SRF can do that. Unless the RS tires have a built in SRF or something, they're just as valid to use in physics testing as anything else. If I lower the front of the car and raise the back, and soften the springs, the car should go spinning sideways into a wall when I try to corner, even on RS. It doesn't.

and finally, gt5 is a game after all. Console games don't focus on realism nor in competition so they sell better, as it was already explained in this thread.
GT5's formula is to have hidden assists and grippier tyres, which isn't the best of ideas and should be improved in GT6. Forza3 and 4 turn into whole different games when using a wheel and removing every assist besides abs.
Some PC racing games aren't videogames but simulators really. Ofc they won't reach the level of detail of a racing team's simulator, which cost dozens of millions of dollars, but they do focus on the "hardcore guys" instead of having fun, providing a decent experience if you spend some cash in accessories (wheel, stand, buttkicker, etc). This is why they are used by professional race drivers, and also the reason they don't sell well which makes them expensive.

I see contradiction

"console =/= not full sim"

but

"GT6 should fix GT5 issues"

Which is it?

Being on a console doesn't matter, and trying to sell more shouldn't hurt the physics. Trying to sell more is why we have/had SRF/Arcade Physics.

instead of having fun

The whole point of a hardcore sim is to have fun.

 

[greg666]

GT5 should be "The Real Semi-Driving Simulator"

 

[axl54]

GT5 should be "The Real Semi-Driving Simulator"

I think you mean "The Semi-Real Driving Simulator"

 

[CodeRedR51]

GT5 should be "The Real Semi-Driving Simulator"

 

[peter_vod69]

If I lower the front of the car and raise the back, and soften the springs, the car should go spinning sideways into a wall when I try to corner, even on RS. It doesn't.

Just on this point - last night I had a crack at the Nascar Cape Point TT event, and as I had been reading about car setups a little earlier, I wanted to try something. I set the Nascar up with maximum rake, that is, lowest front ride height and highest rear, the theory being that it would increase the downforce of the car. But in slower corners it actually made the car a lot more oversteery, which kinda tallies with what you are saying SHOULD happen.

 

[kimi123]

I think you're confused. I've always had the stance that controller/wheel/whatever, the physics are the same, and you're going to notice the flaws. The exceptions being SFR (obviously) and maybe ASM because it changes car performance so much.

Also, I did not start this thread.

Controller or wheel:
-Aero is still wrong
-Ride height still works backwards
-Final lateral g is still almost entirely tire dependent
-Spring stiffness still makes no sense
-etc


Once more, the point of the test was not to test a stock car. It was to test Racing tires.

Everyone on Earth knows that CM tires make more sense than RS tires as far as modeling the stock car.


If the bold is true, how can driving with RS tires make it so you "haven't played the game"?

The racing tires are a bit crazy yes, but even they can't make the other parts of the physics code vanish. Only SRF can do that. Unless the RS tires have a built in SRF or something, they're just as valid to use in physics testing as anything else. If I lower the front of the car and raise the back, and soften the springs, the car should go spinning sideways into a wall when I try to corner, even on RS. It doesn't.


I see contradiction

"console =/= not full sim"

but

"GT6 should fix GT5 issues"

Which is it?

Being on a console doesn't matter, and trying to sell more shouldn't hurt the physics. Trying to sell more is why we have/had SRF/Arcade Physics.


The whole point of a hardcore sim is to have fun.

A good forcefeedback wheel make a big difference. The developer has to make the game playable across the board and wheel implemenation is necessary. Just like how FPS on consoles are implemented. If you do a survey you will find most or many PC sims players use a wheel, for a good reason. I think on console GT5 will be ahead by a big margin although majority of them use a controller.

Normal road cars, supercar, historic car are fine. I think most people want to drive those cars as they were built. What they have to do is for next game is good open wheel implementation with little more advance set up option and for race car as well. Since F1 car and other race car have more versitile setup option it should be implemented accordingly. The problem is this alone might take them years to do so it properly

 

[sinbad]

The weird thing about tyres in gt5 is that when you use comfort soft on a softly sprung road car, you get a certain, rather limited, amount of visible body movement under extreme cornering. If you then switch to a racing soft tyre, which offers an incredible amount of grip and very high cornering g forces, you do not actually see much more (if any) body movement.

When cornering a road car on stock suspension at nearly 2g, it would body roll, a lot. Violent changes of direction should really upset the softly sprung body.

I don't want to draw any conclusions, but since it does not it really makes me question the physics of the suspension and dynamic weight distribution.

 

[avens]

that's forza4 dlc material


we aren't disagreeing exorcet. I'm just saying you should test the game with those settings first, instead of using a ps3 controller, assists, racing tyres (way too grippy) and so on.
It isn't perfect, but the game improves a lot with all the said things. The same flaws persist, but without hidden assists and unrealistic grip. You'll end appreciating the game more.
Besides, the game is more enjoyable with better equipment.

the only thing I don't agree about is "The whole point of a hardcore sim is to have fun. ".
That's the objective of a videogame, not of a simulator. The whole point of a simulator is to practice and then to apply the things you learned using it.
Car simulation is not there yet, at least the commercially available software, but look at flight simulators. Those are so good that are a crucial aspect in the transition between textbooks to flying an actual plane, in which pilots are responsible for airplanes that costs millions of dollars and have the lives of hundreds in their hands every single flight.

 

[occasionalracer]

the only thing I don't agree about is "The whole point of a hardcore sim is to have fun. ".
That's the objective of a videogame, not of a simulator. The whole point of a simulator is to practice and then to apply the things you learned using it.
Car simulation is not there yet, at least the commercially available software, but look at flight simulators. Those are so good that are a crucial aspect in the transition between textbooks to flying an actual plane, in which pilots are responsible for airplanes that costs millions of dollars and have the lives of hundreds in their hands every single flight.

That's crazy talk! Are you serious that you believe real life racing is a chore? People race cars/ buy sports cars because of the fun and joy of driving/racing. What makes a simulator any different, or GT5 for that matter?

 

[Exorcet]

Just on this point - last night I had a crack at the Nascar Cape Point TT event, and as I had been reading about car setups a little earlier, I wanted to try something. I set the Nascar up with maximum rake, that is, lowest front ride height and highest rear, the theory being that it would increase the downforce of the car. But in slower corners it actually made the car a lot more oversteery, which kinda tallies with what you are saying SHOULD happen.

I've tested it on more than one car.

that's forza4 dlc material


we aren't disagreeing exorcet. I'm just saying you should test the game with those settings first, instead of using a ps3 controller, assists, racing tyres (way too grippy) and so on

Since before this thread was started, I've played wheel, no ABS, Comfort tires, road car. All at once.

the only thing I don't agree about is "The whole point of a hardcore sim is to have fun. ".
That's the objective of a videogame, not of a simulator.

Well I can tell you that while I do want to eventually set aside some time to get a pilot's license, I didn't just buy my flight sims for that. I bought them because they're fun.

 

[peter_vod69]

I've tested it on more than one car.

Same. I was just giving you an example. I also tried it on the Nomad Diablo and it had a similar effect.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I've tested it on more than one car.


Since before this thread was started, I've played wheel, no ABS, Comfort tires, road car. All at once.


Well I can tell you that while I do want to eventually set aside some time to get a pilot's license, I didn't just buy my flight sims for that. I bought them because they're fun.

This is too funny and why I tell people to pay attention ^ Exorcet has said he's used a wheel in this thread and threads like it. I don't think he should have to explain or repeat himself, I've also tested the cars as well with both controller and wheel and though the wheel makes a difference the car performance and setups don't go with what the physics of tunning say. GT5 seems to be opposite at times of what would really work in a real world scenario.

 

[CSLACR]

I'll have to go test that (though you happened to pick two cars I drive often, and I don't feel much difference between them in terms of grip). The one area where grip does seem to differ is under acceleration. Cornering not so much, minus the idea of grip multipliers.

Keep in mind that's the C5.

Another, easier test would be say, a Calsonic GTR vs a Takata NSX.
You can't make the NSX take corners as fast as a stock GTR, period.

Some cars have better grip accelerating, braking, or cornering. Some have all three, some have none of the three.
All dependant on what PD gave them from the start.

 

[JDMKING13]

Keep in mind that's the C5.

Another, easier test would be say, a Calsonic GTR vs a Takata NSX.
You can't make the NSX take corners as fast as a stock GTR, period.

Some cars have better grip accelerating, braking, or cornering. Some have all three, some have none of the three.
All dependant on what PD gave them from the start.

Exactly! If anybody has free time watch this video, and try to mimic the battle between the two stock and tuned S2000(first part). I know we don't have the exact track but Suzuka east would work fine. Drive the 1st gen S2000 and the 04 version. The first gen with CS and the 04 version with CS, as with the tuned version CS. I think GT5 is a simulator, is it the most accurate nope, but from a console standpoint it does a very good job! After I did this test in GT5 for myself, I was very pleased with the results as they mimicked the same feedback that the pro drivers were giving in real life. please watch and try I would love to read your feedback.



I'm sorry but I had to post this also because the second taller driver has PD and GT on his racing suit does anybody know who this is Start at 50:00

 

[CSLACR]

Exactly! If anybody has free time watch this video, and try to mimic the battle between the two stock and tuned S2000(first part). I know we don't have the exact track but Suzuka east would work fine. Drive the 1st gen S2000 and the 04 version. The first gen with CS and the 04 version with CS, as with the tuned version CS. I think GT5 is a simulator, is it the most accurate nope, but from a console standpoint it does a very good job! After I did this test in GT5 for myself, I was very pleased with the results as they mimicked the same feedback that the pro drivers were giving in real life. please watch and try I would love to read your feedback.

What I'm referring to isn't exactly a good thing.
PD's "pre-programmed grip levels" are what dictate which cars are the best, sometimes they get it right, sometimes they don't.

Try matching a real-life acceleration test in a Saleen S7, or hitting a McLaren F1's real world top speed. There's at least a hundred examples of errors in programming for different cars in the game, unfortunately.

And to get this clear, what I'm saying is, many cars are very wrong stock, and no amount of "upgrading" with GT5's tuning system can make them perform to real world specs.

But while it had many car programming errors, and effectively ruined cars because of it, GT5 is most certainly a simulator. It just has questionable parts that make everyone on the planet ask, "what the hell were you guys thinking?"

 

[JDMKING13]

What I'm referring to isn't exactly a good thing.
PD's "pre-programmed grip levels" are what dictate which cars are the best, sometimes they get it right, sometimes they don't.

Try matching a real-life acceleration test in a Saleen S7, or hitting a McLaren F1's real world top speed. There's at least a hundred examples of errors in programming for different cars in the game, unfortunately.

And to get this clear, what I'm saying is, many cars are very wrong stock, and no amount of "upgrading" with GT5's tuning system can make them perform to real world specs.

But while it had many car programming errors, and effectively ruined cars because of it, GT5 is most certainly a simulator. It just has questionable parts that make everyone on the planet ask, "what the hell were you guys thinking?"

O ok my bad can you give a list of the cars? I would like to test them out for myself also. What NSX can't hit turns harder than the GT-R, you mean the R35? I still think the NSX-R corner entry is faster and better than the GT-R35 and 34.

 

[greg666]

I think you mean "The Semi-Real Driving Simulator"

Ha , thanks.

 

[peter_vod69]

Keep in mind that's the C5.

Another, easier test would be say, a Calsonic GTR vs a Takata NSX.
You can't make the NSX take corners as fast as a stock GTR, period.

What NSX can't hit turns harder than the GT-R, you mean the R35? I still think the NSX-R corner entry is faster and better than the GT-R35 and 34.

These comparisons aren't really relevant anyway. Despite how close in performance these two RACING cars might be over a lap, they are naturally going to have different characteristics and strengths...

 

[JDMKING13]

These comparisons aren't really relevant anyway. Despite how close in performance these two RACING cars might be over a lap, they are naturally going to have different characteristics and strengths...

Thank you.

 

[iridegravity]

Of Course it's a sim. Just how good of one is open for debate of course. I think it does a pretty good job of being a lot of things to a lot of people which is what a console video game has to be about. It gets my heart and adrenaline pumping which is pretty much Holy grail territory for realism...and so far no other driving game on a console comes close. If theres a better sim out there, i would consider it though.

I do agree with the OP's sig that calls the game incomplete. That is definitely true and pretty week for a game with so much development time and plenty of revenue streams from the entire franchise as a whole. Were talking about a $112 title if you bought the prologue and DLC and it's totally unfinished and lacking polish. No way you should have to endure that with a top notch title.

 

[CSLACR]

O ok my bad can you give a list of the cars? I would like to test them out for myself also. What NSX can't hit turns harder than the GT-R, you mean the R35? I still think the NSX-R corner entry is faster and better than the GT-R35 and 34.

Read below for some answers on "which" GTR and NSX I listed right above your post.
As for a list, it'd be huge, I'd never even consider trying to compile one, firstly, the almost 1100 cars aspect. So here's some easy ones for reference:
Aston Martin V8 Vantage - Sucks, plain and simple, no grip at all, just a ruined car.
Advan Woodone Clarion GTR - No grip comparative to other GTR GT500 cars, absolutely terrible.

There's plenty more, you just have to look.

These comparisons aren't really relevant anyway. Despite how close in performance these two RACING cars might be over a lap, they are naturally going to have different characteristics and strengths...

Ironic, that you would show the obvious answer of what cars I'd mentioned, but still not seem to know the context of which I mentioned them.

The Calsonic and Takata cars I mention are used for illustrative purposes, to show that some cars have more "x" type of grip, in this case, the GTR corners faster, period.
Even if you add ballast to both and make both weight distributions 50/50, and the cars the same weight, the GTR has better cornering programming by PD, it's the better cornering car in the game.
PD's in-game ratings for cars in these matters is the "be-all-end-all" of how they will stack up against each other, period.

It really has nothing to do in this case, with which one "should" corner faster, just that this is how the cars are implemented into the game.
We could go back and forth for 2 weeks about two cars in particular, and there's plenty of cars to show this.
It's been this way since day 1, GT1. It could be this way with every game on the market, as they all program in similar style, meaning each car has "parameters" that are fed into the physics system, which dictates how the car behaves on the track. It's necessary for the game to function properly.
The only issue is when (often) PD screws them up. I presume it's so common in GT games because of the overkill of cars PD floods most games with.

It's why the McLaren F1 can't reach it's real world top speed, why the Saleen S7 does 2 mile burnouts, and why the Aston V8 Vantage can't crawl off the line without burning it's tires down to the rim.

 

[peter_vod69]

The Calsonic and Takata cars I mention are used for illustrative purposes, to show that some cars have more "x" type of grip, in this case, the GTR corners faster, period.
Even if you add ballast to both and make both weight distributions 50/50, and the cars the same weight, the GTR has better cornering programming by PD, it's the better cornering car in the game.
PD's in-game ratings for cars in these matters is the "be-all-end-all" of how they will stack up against each other, period.

Actually it's you who seem to have missed the point. You are talking about 2 different chassis designs, two different sets of suspension setup, two different centres-of-gravity, and so on and so on. It's an Apples v Oranges comparison.

 

[CSLACR]

Actually it's you who seem to have missed the point. You are talking about 2 different chassis designs, two different sets of suspension setup, two different centres-of-gravity, and so on and so on. It's an Apples v Oranges comparison.

Go read my posts again, I was replying to Exorcet, figure it out.

I'm not going to take your attitude just because you've lost track of my discussion with someone else. If you'd like to join, you'll have to read all the posts involved.💡

They do have different levels of grip for different cars. Absolutely.
They just don't have all the right cars with the "grip benefits" and they don't have the proper variance between some cars.

A Ferrari 458 very clearly has more grip then an '02 Z06, on the same tires, for example. Whether or not each car has the right amount is where PD screws the entire lineup of cars up.
This is a very significant factor in what cars are the fastest at equal specs in the game.

I think you've just shown us PD's tire model, honestly.


I think you've just shown us PD's tire model, honestly.

I'll have to go test that (though you happened to pick two cars I drive often, and I don't feel much difference between them in terms of grip). The one area where grip does seem to differ is under acceleration. Cornering not so much, minus the idea of grip multipliers.

Keep in mind that's the C5.

Another, easier test would be say, a Calsonic GTR vs a Takata NSX.
You can't make the NSX take corners as fast as a stock GTR, period.

Some cars have better grip accelerating, braking, or cornering. Some have all three, some have none of the three.
All dependant on what PD gave them from the start.

It's about how the game is designed, and has nothing to do with your "this car vs that car" argument.

 

[peter_vod69]

Hey buddy, you kick me out of the thread then. I'm not the one with the flawed argument. Different chassis = different cornering speed! Yes GT5's tyre model is simplistic, but so is your argument. A car of a given weight with a given tyre will not necessarily go through the same corner as A DIFFERENT CAR with the same weight and tyre.

 

[CSLACR]

They do have different levels of grip for different cars. Absolutely.
They just don't have all the right cars with the "grip benefits" and they don't have the proper variance between some cars.

A Ferrari 458 very clearly has more grip then an '02 Z06, on the same tires, for example. Whether or not each car has the right amount is where PD screws the entire lineup of cars up.
This is a very significant factor in what cars are the fastest at equal specs in the game.

I think you've just shown us PD's tire model, honestly.


I think you've just shown us PD's tire model, honestly.

Hey buddy, you kick me out of the thread then. I'm not the one with the flawed argument. Different chassis = different cornering speed! Yes GT5's tyre model is simplistic, but so is your argument. A car of a given weight with a given tyre will not necessarily go through the same corner as A DIFFERENT CAR with the same weight and tyre.

The CAR has nothing to do with it.

But since you can't wrap your head around that...
Calsonic GTR vs Advan Woodone Clarion GTR.

Car choice still has nothing to do with the point.

 

[peter_vod69]

Why wouldn't a 458 have more grip than a C5 Z06 then? Explain.

 

[JDMKING13]

Im really confused what CSLACR is trying to say.

 

[peter_vod69]

Im really confused what CSLACR is trying to say.

Me too, it's as if he is inferring that two different cars should have the same grip levels on the same tyres. If he isn't I don't know what the hell he is on about.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I think CSLACR's point is that there is an unidentifiable "grip" variable for every car, irrespective of the tires equipped. This was the case in GT3: The Z Concept had a higher "grip" number associated with its chassis than any other road car. This was easy to find since we had a program back then to build hybrids - hybriding in that sense isn't possible in GT5, so it's much harder to find concrete proof of such a variable, if it still exists.

On the topic at hand in the OP, the problem with the upgrade system; it does need to be overhauled. A good example: in real life, if I had a clean '70 Galant GTO MR and wanted to put some modern track day rubber on, I could. I could also do the same for a '95 Cappuccino, with the same tire size, and should expect those tires to be capable of generating equal amounts of grip on either car. Obviously, in practice, the different suspension designs would make the handling itself very different; that's recognizable, I'm only talking about the outright limits of the tires themselves.

But, in GT5, I can equip Sport Softs on both cars and if they are roughly similarly powered/weighted, the newer car will handle far better. The older one will struggle to find purchase; I have a '65 Alfa GTA in the game that is a monster to control, despite a dialed-in suspension and RS tires. The vague tire upgrade system is the main problem here; it just seems to add a percentage to the car's original grip limits, much like equipping items in an RPG. You can rarely make an older car grip more than a newer car.

The different compounds should come with their own respective base values; then, additionally, tire size would have to affect that. That way, dropping my stock tires on either the Cappy or the Galant for a set of SS tires would bring both up to the same amount of available tire grip, instead of, say, 140% of the original amount (just tossing a number out as an example). I hope that makes sense.

The Supra being so under-powered in full-tune compared to real-life is unfortunate, but in real-life you can do just about anything to anything, so the line will be drawn somewhere. I like to think PD typically has rough ideas of "classes" in mind, pegging a group of cars upgrades to roughly similar levels, but who knows why they choose the ceilings they do for each car.

 

[H20HYBRID_GT]

I probably could say now how it's definitely not a simulator because it doesn't simulate consequences of driving errors very good or that the effects of tuning are weird to say the least... but that all don't matter much to me tbh. Going to say it's not a simulator tho because it's quite questionable and unclear what's simulated, if you go and take your car online and everything feel and acts very different suddenly.
Serious question for the people who say it's a sim... What exactly simulates this simulation and which is correct, online or offline?
Don't tell me both.