Can we actually call GT5 a simulator?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Raven_WET01
  • 351 comments
  • 23,411 views
I believe Exorcet is responding to the idea that the available car lineup somehow affects the physics calculations. On-track, yes, the more cars, the more calculations the physics engine will have to compute, obviously. But the number of options we have to take to the track shouldn't affect anything.
 
yeah, good point. Got a bit irritable and wasn't thinking properly :) sorry Exorcet.
For the difference between 20 and 1000 cars i'm thinking that with a smaller number of cars that they can be more specific or at least adjust for those better. I have read about some people complaining about some cars being worse after an update where others are saying some have improved after the same update.
 
Why you decided to throw that in there confuses me. So no racing game is a simulator? ;)

I know that you iRacing fans are quite hardcore and devout about your game, but there are a few problems with it.

The cost of entry is exceptionally high, and buy everything in it with real money, and then you have to pay rent. Quite a bit of money, and frankly for those of us with lives and bills, that's just a bit too steep for what little you get.

The whole point of iRacing is to pretend to be a pro racecar driver in some sort of fantasy league, in which you work - and pay - your butt off in order to see your position move up a spot in a points board every race or so. Hopefully.

And while I would very much like to see more simulation in Gran Turismo - heck, in GT6 I'd love to see an entire sim racing Mode with gobs of leagues to race in for seasons, I think you're wrong in slamming GT5 blanketly. Collisions do indeed have consequences. Not mechanical damage, yet, but when I wreck, I lose position and time like crazy. So I spend quite a bit of attention to my racing line and my competitors so I don't wreck. And having spent a stint in the GTRs, I never really enjoyed pitting. It was an annoying interruption and a hassle to pit properly, and I'm quite content to hand off to GT5 for that.

But to say that there are no good races to be found in GT5, you've completely ignored an entire section to this site devoted to setting up races. Yes, they have to be scheduled, and yes, often you need to be on a friend's list. But how is that any different from any other game? I had quite a blast last saturday in a 30 lap tear around Spa with six other people here hosted by dhandes. It was clean, competitive, gentlemanly... and dominated by a mod with a BMW race car. :lol: But honestly, I didn't care that I ended up in the middle of the winner's list. The racing was a delight, a back pain aside.

Sure, as a sim goes, you can point out a lot of things GT5 leaves off. I'm going to hopefully have some voting points available at some time to chase down some of those simmy posts in the Feedback Board. Why don't you do that too, and make your wishes known, as it seems that PD is keeping close tabs on Jordan's feedback system.

I actually like your comments because they are somewhat intelligent ... a good post deserves a response ...

SIMULATION.... No racing game is a simulator? ....

I think iRacing, NetKar Pro and even Richard Burns Rally are simulation.... I've only been into sim-racing for a few years..but most of the other games I've tried ... some 30+ racing titles games I've played I would say NO they're not... maybe I missed a few GTR titles, R-Factor and Live For Speed I don't have much playtime with ... so I dont know.

you asked about 'throwing that in there' but I think your missing my point - no a simulation by the traditional sense isn't a game or meant to be a game. .... That's what I meant and it had nothing to do with driving vs flying a plane - .... A simulation has to resemble the real world in regards to consequences ... like how a rally car can go off a cliff in Richard Burns Rally or How you can easily break your transmission in iRacing with sloppy footwork.....and the question we're asking here is whether GT5 is a simulation... by my definition its not because there are just way too many things that protect the player from himself. Examples would be lack of damage, almost impossible to destroy your car, invisible walls, auto-drive in and out of pits, cars don't realistically affect each-other when making contact,... And the things that protect other players from you, like no player rank demerits for being a jerk etc. etc.

EXITING OUT OF THE PITS

the question isn't whether you personally enjoy exiting out of the pits..the question is whether this kind of hand holding makes the game more or less of a realistic simulation - my argument is that its no benefit to GT5 as a simulation because it doesn't' do anything to prepare a person for a real track day where track etiquette like good manners, speed limits and track awareness are important ...like when you merge onto a race track where people are already going fast and you are not. This is an issue all the time with beginners in iRacing because they don't check the relative times or even their mirrors to see who's coming round the corner when they are leaving the pits... so they just blindly run out on the track like they own it and SMACK!.... but iRacing (in my humble opinion) does cultivate good driving habits and awareness because the cost of stupidity is pretty high...Especially during actual races where not only do you miss the opportunity to finish the race but also the shame of ruining it for others.... plus being unpopular with the other drivers.

THE COST OF IRACING?

No your not paying rent...and when the racing in GT5 gets this good, and it very well might some day I'll deff stop paying for the iRacing service..... lol but I have a life and bills too bro, and I'm not one of the people will triple monitors and hoping one day to get a motion cockpit, lol .... money's tight on my end too but read on.....

Yes you are correct iRacing is expensive, I know this because in the last ten months its been like my very own crack addiction and I've bought everything in the game I wanted to play up till now so about 65 percent of all of the content in the game and its probably a few hundred dollars I've spent and I'm 99 percent satisfied except for maybe a car or two I don't enjoy as much as the others. But I mean how much did your ps3 cost?.. probly about the same.... and yes I guess PC is more expensive platform but mine is already 2 years old and I never originally bought it to even play racing games

... I won't defend iRacing's pricing on cars because I don't agree with it myself.... and If I could go back and know which cars I would like the most I'd have only bought those.... but I was just too curious to try as much in the thing as I could because of the quality of it all.........its not about how many cars you buy its about which ones you want to compete with on a regular basis ... if I stuck to the basic membership I would have only spent the 10 bucks a month.....


Now from your perspective its too expensive for what you get?.... that's fine and fair.... but for whatever its cost so far I've been able to race competitively every day I've had time to do so all year. And by competitively I mean bumper to bumper day in and day out with other like minded drivers who only want to race. What iRacing does that (nothing else I know of does) is recreate real-world racing in an online environment and I don't know if any other game/simulation/or whatever even comes close to doing that....... its able to do that not only because of the physics model (which is also pretty good in GT5) but because its almost lag-free.... so its a combination of the network servers, the physics and the consequences of contact with other cars.

but what could I have done with that money and my new found passion for race cars instead of race all year on my pc? ....I could have run about 15 laps in a stock car on a weekend at my local oval for $149 bucks

I could have Done a half hour Kart lesson for $150 bucks at a local outdoor karting/motor bike track .... and maybe $2000 for a 2-day weekend thing... or bought my very own Kart for 2 or 3 grand...I could have even did a Formula 2000 weekend trip for close to $3500 .... and yea sure I guess I could go hit up some low powered fun-Karts for 35 bucks or something with friends but that's hardly going to lead to anything competitive. What I really want to do is winter Ice-Racing because its run locally ...but roll cages aren't cheap.

so you say the cost of iRacing is expensive but....compared to even the cheapest form of real-world racing its a joke.... This is for people who would probably do some kind of real world racing if it was less expensive...or for those who already do it as their job or hobby and want to get better.....and all in all iRacing at least more than anything else provides the next best thing. this is for people who actually want to race other people in a fair environment... nothing else

... I like that you said fantasy league that's in a way the idea I guess...but what what are you really paying for? ...if you are already a race car driver you are paying for the best possible simulation that helps you work on different tracks ... if you are someone like me? Well it sure isn't about how many cars you have collected in your garage..... what I'm paying for is a hobby onto itself... I could even call it a sport but it would be misinterpreted.... if there is such a thing as a non-athletic sport this would be it ... i can get all the highs and lows that I would out of a real sport at least in terms of enjoyment except the benefits of exercise, LOL ....and without leaving my house to go to a nightly adult sports club of some kind. If I think of iRacing as my main hobby and compare it too any sport or martial arts club I used to be in regularly by comparison (sports equipment, club dues or drop-in fees, clothing, gas money) to the $75 a year iRacing is pretty substantial.... playing racket sports for instance was running me $2400 a year, that was a long time ago and I was probly living off minimum wage back then....

HOW IS THAT DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER GAME?

well I don't need to be on a friends list to race people in iRacing that's part of it ......but I'm not saying THERE IS NEVER any good racing in GT5, but what one person considers 'Good Racing' might not be the same for everyone.. for instance I have friends who played GT5 all year with duel shock controllers and they consider it 'Good Racing', where I don't because I use a wheel...... for me personally I haven't yet found the racing to be anywhere near the same quality as iRacing even when it was more or less organized racing.... and again I believe this to be the combination of the network code, the collisions and the physics... all of those things... not just one in particular........ but Hey, that's just me and maybe I'm a horrible person for it :guilty:

...Yes I know there is organized racing and I've gone that route and decided it wasn't worth it for me ...... besides iRacing does all the work of finding people to race for me and it does it every hour on the hour and I just click a button and magically *I'm racing people and it's keeping score* even better than that is that its NOT matchmaking ... its scheduled racing... no homework or research or e-mails or social networking involved.

I'm also not saying iRacing is a better game than GT5.... I'm only saying that iRacing is a simulation and GT5 is not and using it as an example to answer the question that this thread is asking... I wouldn't be here if I didn't like GT5 ... my motivation to say this stuff is because what I get in iRacing I personally find to be lacking in GT5 and I wish it wasn't ..... and this thread isn't in anyway meant to be an insult to the GT5 community .... but hey, if you ask me as an iRacing player I'm sure as hell going to tell you what I think, even though GT5 is the only console racing game I actually still play ... and Yes PD IS doing an amazing job with updates I agree... I'll check that out.
 
Last edited:
I think the best answer is that yes, GT5 is a simulation. Perhaps a limited one, but then they all are, in their own (different) ways, and certainly in a home-use context, they always will be to some degree.

So from here on, I shall call it a Gran Turismulation, and move that we all agree on that as the official term.

:)
 
I actually like your comments because they are somewhat intelligent ... a good post deserves a response ...

SIMULATION.... No racing game is a simulator? ....

I think iRacing, NetKar Pro and even Richard Burns Rally are simulation.... I've only been into sim-racing for a few years..but most of the other games I've tried ... some 30+ racing titles games I've played I would say NO they're not... maybe I missed a few GTR titles, R-Factor and Live For Speed I don't have much playtime with ... so I dont know.

you asked about 'throwing that in there' but I think your missing my point - no a simulation by the traditional sense isn't a game or meant to be a game. .... That's what I meant and it had nothing to do with driving vs flying a plane - .... A simulation has to resemble the real world in regards to consequences ... like how a rally car can go off a cliff in Richard Burns Rally or How you can easily break your transmission in iRacing with sloppy footwork.....and the question we're asking here is whether GT5 is a simulation... by my definition its not because there are just way too many things that protect the player from himself. Examples would be lack of damage, almost impossible to destroy your car, invisible walls, auto-drive in and out of pits, cars don't realistically affect each-other when making contact,... And the things that protect other players from you, like no player rank demerits for being a jerk etc. etc.

EXITING OUT OF THE PITS

the question isn't whether you personally enjoy exiting out of the pits..the question is whether this kind of hand holding makes the game more or less of a realistic simulation - my argument is that its no benefit to GT5 as a simulation because it doesn't' do anything to prepare a person for a real track day where track etiquette like good manners, speed limits and track awareness are important ...like when you merge onto a race track where people are already going fast and you are not. This is an issue all the time with beginners in iRacing because they don't check the relative times or even their mirrors to see who's coming round the corner when they are leaving the pits... so they just blindly run out on the track like they own it and SMACK!.... but iRacing (in my humble opinion) does cultivate good driving habits and awareness because the cost of stupidity is pretty high...Especially during actual races where not only do you miss the opportunity to finish the race but also the shame of ruining it for others.... plus being unpopular with the other drivers.

THE COST OF IRACING?

No your not paying rent...and when the racing in GT5 gets this good, and it very well might some day I'll deff stop paying for the iRacing service..... lol but I have a life and bills too bro, and I'm not one of the people will triple monitors and hoping one day to get a motion cockpit, lol .... money's tight on my end too but read on.....

Yes you are correct iRacing is expensive, I know this because in the last ten months its been like my very own crack addiction and I've bought everything in the game I wanted to play up till now so about 65 percent of all of the content in the game and its probably a few hundred dollars I've spent and I'm 99 percent satisfied except for maybe a car or two I don't enjoy as much as the others. But I mean how much did your ps3 cost?.. probly about the same.... and yes I guess PC is more expensive platform but mine is already 2 years old and I never originally bought it to even play racing games

... I won't defend iRacing's pricing on cars because I don't agree with it myself.... and If I could go back and know which cars I would like the most I'd have only bought those.... but I was just too curious to try as much in the thing as I could because of the quality of it all.........its not about how many cars you buy its about which ones you want to compete with on a regular basis ... if I stuck to the basic membership I would have only spent the 10 bucks a month.....


Now from your perspective its too expensive for what you get?.... that's fine and fair.... but for whatever its cost so far I've been able to race competitively every day I've had time to do so all year. And by competitively I mean bumper to bumper day in and day out with other like minded drivers who only want to race. What iRacing does that (nothing else I know of does) is recreate real-world racing in an online environment and I don't know if any other game/simulation/or whatever even comes close to doing that....... its able to do that not only because of the physics model (which is also pretty good in GT5) but because its almost lag-free.... so its a combination of the network servers, the physics and the consequences of contact with other cars.

but what could I have done with that money and my new found passion for race cars instead of race all year on my pc? ....I could have run about 15 laps in a stock car on a weekend at my local oval for $149 bucks

I could have Done a half hour Kart lesson for $150 bucks at a local outdoor karting/motor bike track .... and maybe $2000 for a 2-day weekend thing... or bought my very own Kart for 2 or 3 grand...I could have even did a Formula 2000 weekend trip for close to $3500 .... and yea sure I guess I could go hit up some low powered fun-Karts for 35 bucks or something with friends but that's hardly going to lead to anything competitive. What I really want to do is winter Ice-Racing because its run locally ...but roll cages aren't cheap.

so you say the cost of iRacing is expensive but....compared to even the cheapest form of real-world racing its a joke.... This is for people who would probably do some kind of real world racing if it was less expensive...or for those who already do it as their job or hobby and want to get better.....and all in all iRacing at least more than anything else provides the next best thing. this is for people who actually want to race other people in a fair environment... nothing else

... I like that you said fantasy league that's in a way the idea I guess...but what what are you really paying for? ...if you are already a race car driver you are paying for the best possible simulation that helps you work on different tracks ... if you are someone like me? Well it sure isn't about how many cars you have collected in your garage..... what I'm paying for is a hobby onto itself... I could even call it a sport but it would be misinterpreted.... if there is such a thing as a non-athletic sport this would be it ... i can get all the highs and lows that I would out of a real sport at least in terms of enjoyment except the benefits of exercise, LOL ....and without leaving my house to go to a nightly adult sports club of some kind. If I think of iRacing as my main hobby and compare it too any sport or martial arts club I used to be in regularly by comparison (sports equipment, club dues or drop-in fees, clothing, gas money) to the $75 a year iRacing is pretty substantial.... playing racket sports for instance was running me $2400 a year, that was a long time ago and I was probly living off minimum wage back then....

HOW IS THAT DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER GAME?

well I don't need to be on a friends list to race people in iRacing that's part of it ......but I'm not saying THERE IS NEVER any good racing in GT5, but what one person considers 'Good Racing' might not be the same for everyone.. for instance I have friends who played GT5 all year with duel shock controllers and they consider it 'Good Racing', where I don't because I use a wheel...... for me personally I haven't yet found the racing to be anywhere near the same quality as iRacing even when it was more or less organized racing.... and again I believe this to be the combination of the network code, the collisions and the physics... all of those things... not just one in particular........ but Hey, that's just me and maybe I'm a horrible person for it :guilty:

...Yes I know there is organized racing and I've gone that route and decided it wasn't worth it for me ...... besides iRacing does all the work of finding people to race for me and it does it every hour on the hour and I just click a button and magically *I'm racing people and it's keeping score* even better than that is that its NOT matchmaking ... its scheduled racing... no homework or research or e-mails or social networking involved.

I'm also not saying iRacing is a better game than GT5.... I'm only saying that iRacing is a simulation and GT5 is not and using it as an example to answer the question that this thread is asking... I wouldn't be here if I didn't like GT5 ... my motivation to say this stuff is because what I get in iRacing I personally find to be lacking in GT5 and I wish it wasn't ..... and this thread isn't in anyway meant to be an insult to the GT5 community .... but hey, if you ask me as an iRacing player I'm sure as hell going to tell you what I think, even though GT5 is the only console racing game I actually still play ... and Yes PD IS doing an amazing job with updates I agree... I'll check that out.

Great Post
What you have given an example of though is a Racing Simulation where Gran Turismulation (haha Love it) is a Driving Simulation that is focused on the number of cars and the feel of driving them.

P.S other past accurate Racing Sims I have played are the Papyrus games NASCAR and INDYCARS, and the Geoff Crammond GP series. I have GP4 on my PC running an amazing 1991 Mod.
 
So what if the physics are "right" but it doesn't feel right? Does that make it a better sim? Or should we just trust the mathematicians and ignore countless hours of experience?

A correct mathematical basis is a better starting point than someone changing something because it simply doesn't feel right, or worse yet, simply trying to replicate what they "feel" when they drive on a track.
A tyre is incredibly complex, but it can still be explained with maths, just as each individual component of what makes up a car can be. The better PC simulations have a depth to them which gives ultimately a much richer experience than those that have clearly cut corners to achieve what they consider to be the right "feel". Be it with force feedback, tyre grip, or whatever.

They have an approach at a level of detail which would seem unnecessary if you're only trying to get the right "feel", but which ultimately gives the best results and the most realistic and rewarding feel.

All of the best simulations, and in fact all the best feeling ones, are based on mathematical data and a physics engine that is developed in the knowledge that if they're good at what they do it will feel right anyway.

That's not to say you couldn't make a rubbish sim in this way, of course, but you'll never make a great one if you don't do it this way either.
 
I believe Exorcet is responding to the idea that the available car lineup somehow affects the physics calculations. On-track, yes, the more cars, the more calculations the physics engine will have to compute, obviously. But the number of options we have to take to the track shouldn't affect anything.
Yes, thanks for clearing that up.

yeah, good point. Got a bit irritable and wasn't thinking properly :) sorry Exorcet.
For the difference between 20 and 1000 cars i'm thinking that with a smaller number of cars that they can be more specific or at least adjust for those better. I have read about some people complaining about some cars being worse after an update where others are saying some have improved after the same update.

It happens.

A smaller pool of cars might result in increased accuracy, but only if the cars being simulated are simpler than average. Consider a GT game where the tires simulated are made out of steel (not very practical). They would not deform nearly as much as rubber tires, and so tire deformation would not need to be modeled in order to provide a realistic simulation. Even if you had 1000 cars on steel tires, that sim would probably be more accurate than one with 20 cars on rubber because rubber is so much more difficult to model.
 
yeah, good point. Got a bit irritable and wasn't thinking properly :) sorry Exorcet.
For the difference between 20 and 1000 cars i'm thinking that with a smaller number of cars that they can be more specific or at least adjust for those better. I have read about some people complaining about some cars being worse after an update where others are saying some have improved after the same update.
Consider the physics engine a coin sorter, and the cars in the game have their own parameters, which we'll call coins. When you go on a track, the game throws each cars coins into the bin, and you get - driving. (sorted coins)

An update that affects the physics (coin sorter) will change the total value of each cars coins.(how they end up driving)

If PD gives car "x" the wrong value in change, then when you throw it into the coin sorter, your result (driving) will be the wrong amount of change.

Since PD got some cars right, and some wrong, some cars will improve from a physics update, and some will get worse, it's inevitable in any physics change as long as PD has the parameters for some cars wrong.
 
Consider the physics engine a coin sorter, and the cars in the game have their own parameters, which we'll call coins. When you go on a track, the game throws each cars coins into the bin, and you get - driving. (sorted coins)

An update that affects the physics (coin sorter) will change the total value of each cars coins.(how they end up driving)

If PD gives car "x" the wrong value in change, then when you throw it into the coin sorter, your result (driving) will be the wrong amount of change.

Since PD got some cars right, and some wrong, some cars will improve from a physics update, and some will get worse, it's inevitable in any physics change as long as PD has the parameters for some cars wrong.

ahhh I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say. Can you forget the coins and coin sorter and try to explain in a different way please.
 
Are you guy's driving with ABS off? ABS off has completely change my driving experience with GT5, Its a new game to be honest, It brings the physics to another level in my opinion. If you don't believe me take a stock S2000 premium version to Deep Forest no driving assist. Brake balance set 2 in the front 0 in the back. when you drive in the second tunnel I dare you to brake over that hill, you will pay :lol: This is not the same for ABS 1 It feels like something is still helping you. Just my opinion. 👍
 
ABS off makes it a little different, but all it really changes are the brakes. You get understeer (and lock up) under hard braking, but all the non brake issues still remain.
 
ABS off makes it a little different, but all it really changes are the brakes. You get understeer (and lock up) under hard braking, but all the non brake issues still remain.

Hmm Braking is one of the most important factors when it comes to racing. You say a little different I think you are brushing it off. It makes a huge difference and it also makes the car feel as if it has no assist. I played with ABS1 for a long time, and always felt braking was way to easy in GT5. Majority of people jam on the brakes without even caring about the braking zone. If they played with ABS off with the right brake balance this would not be the case. I am going to read all your post in this thread so I can catch up with your argument. 👍 Again Ex I'm not saying your wrong, I'm just stating my opinion.
 
Hmm Braking is one of the most important factors when it comes to racing. You say a little different I think you are brushing it off.

I usually drive ABS1 in races because it can't be disabled online, but ABS0 isn't a big deal for me, and I typically set up old cars that would not have ABS for ABS 0 only, with appropriate tires such as CH. Also, while you can mash the brakes with ABS on, it's still better to release the brakes slightly coming into a turn

For the heck of it I tried the GT-R with ABS off as you suggested in the GT-R thread in Q&A. It got a bit looser during braking, but it was the same everywhere else. What I was saying with "a little different" was that the physics issues in the game aren't related to ABS only.
 
Great Post
What you have given an example of though is a Racing Simulation where Gran Turismulation (haha Love it) is a Driving Simulation that is focused on the number of cars and the feel of driving them.

P.S other past accurate Racing Sims I have played are the Papyrus games NASCAR and INDYCARS, and the Geoff Crammond GP series. I have GP4 on my PC running an amazing 1991 Mod.

It's great you mention Papyrus, cause that is what iRacing is. iRacing is the phoenix from the Papyrus ashes.

The whole driving simulation idea is moot, why have purpose built races cars for races. Why not just set up nice mountain roads where you drive the speed limit in whatever car you want and push it from time to time. Not race, I know what the box says, but it also talks about GT being the most realistic racer out there, as well as a racing revolution.
 
No, it really does feel as if all the assists are on to an extent with ABS on, even at 1. All of my cars drive very differently without it, and I still use Stability Management and Anti-skid to help keep the cars pointed the right way. They aren't as unstable as the cars in Forza 4, but who the heck wants that? :p

In real life, it's a lot easier because you can feel the cars. All that feeling is gone except for some force feedback in a game, and whatever tire noise they give you, so unfortunately I can't race without some assists in GT5, and forget Forza 4. I have all the assists on with simulation physics, and the cars are still unstable and the wheels lock up!

And WedgeX's post was a good one, though about what I expected. The sim guys in large numbers find a lot of appalling shortcomings in Gran Turismo, some less appalling, some more so. It depends on the driver and what he feels. Yes, the technical details are lacking. Sure, races don't have any real rules. Bots are... well, bots, and online, it's still just for fun, with no league-ish structure or points.

And sure, iRacing is as close to a league career as many of us could ever get to. But... hey, that's not my thing. I have to count pennies too. I already have a mix of racing sims that pretty much give me what iRacing does, without the rental fees. I really can't tear myself away from those 1000 cars in GT5. I don't care if a turbo might be 1 psi of boost off from what someone considers an ideal Stage 1 turbo. If I was spending real money on it, that would be a different matter. And I'm racing people from Europe on weekends, and lag is hardly ever a problem. It hasn't messed up a race yet. And... I have to say, I'm just not that impressed with the physics and technical accuracy of the GTRs, rFactor and Live For Speed, as marvelous as those games are, and obviously better sims, versus GT5 which with ABS off is surprisingly similar. No rules, but that's okay, I roleplay them. :D

If I was one of those guys who lived to see where I stacked up against 10,000 other players on a league board, and I had the cash, I'm sure iRacing would be the only answer, or maybe rFactor 2, which is supposed to plop along sometime soon.
 
Last edited:
GTR (and GTR2) had some rubbish tyre/suspension stuff going on, to the point that powersliding was virtually impossible. PS why turn off ABS on cars that have it in real life? I mean yeah, I can understand for older cars, racing cars and so on (just like using the h-pattern and clutch where the real car has it) but turning off ABS?
 
Hmm Braking is one of the most important factors when it comes to racing. You say a little different I think you are brushing it off. It makes a huge difference and it also makes the car feel as if it has no assist. I played with ABS1 for a long time, and always felt braking was way to easy in GT5. Majority of people jam on the brakes without even caring about the braking zone. If they played with ABS off with the right brake balance this would not be the case. I am going to read all your post in this thread so I can catch up with your argument. 👍 Again Ex I'm not saying your wrong, I'm just stating my opinion.
You should understand, just because you drive with ABS on, does not mean the ABS has to engage.
I try to avoid engaging my ABS, because it slows you down a bit in GT5, and is harder on tires. ;)

and forget Forza 4. I have all the assists on with simulation physics, and the cars are still unstable and the wheels lock up!
You just made me want FM4, soooooo bad, you have no idea.
 
Yeah because unstable cars that spin at the drop of a hat are totally realistic...

Except that they aren't like that, and if someone has to regularly drive with SRF engaged in GT5, everything else is going to feel squirrelly and uncontrollable.

This topic is veering away from the original point, though, it's not entirely about the physics engine alone, it's the modification aspect of GT5 that doesn't add up in some ways. Most cars are held to some arbitrary limits of power, but more frustratingly; not everything can have a turbo or supercharger installed? Like the OP hints at, SS tires are still too grippy (though most of us have known this for a long time), but I can't entirely fault PD for that; this is still a light-sim, after all, and being on a console (and being such a large sales behemoth) needs to straddle a line between challenging and approachable. That is one area GT5 excels; sure, for people who've cut their teeth on PC sims, GT5 will always be simpler. But it is still arguably the most sim-like console driving game (FM4 being the other, but on PS3, there's no real competitor for road and race cars).

But an interesting thing happened when I went to pick up Arkham City, after forgetting about my pre-order for 3 weeks due to FM4. The guys at Game Stop, both the employees and the customers waiting behind me, were utterly confused as to how I was distracted with a game that was "too realistic". They mentioned when they buy racing games, they don't want them to be like reality, they prefer them to be easy, to jump right in and not worry about the millimetric efficiency required to master the turns of a track. And who's to tell them what they prefer is wrong? I just look at SS tires as another SRF, or TCS, or ASM; there for those that need them, for the sake of broadening GT's appeal, from the casual racer to the hardcore sim nut.
 
You just made me want FM4, soooooo bad, you have no idea.
Quick OT here, if you'll pardon. ;)

I have a feeling you'll love it. It's different in ways that are sublime, but in others hard to describe. The cars are livelier on their suspensions. When the tires roar, it sounds like you're abusing a set of four tires. Like I said, it caused me to smell burned rubber! The graphics are terrific, if a bit CG in different ways from GT5, so Photo Mode should be a hoot. And that modification system and Livery Editor are just too hip for words. But the feel is different, T10 is doing something unorthodox. Some can connect with it well, some like me struggle, and some hate the physics completely. You really have to try it.

As for GT5's mods, yeah, they're a mixed bag, kind of arbitrary. A few cars which should accept a turbo or supercharger can't. Some which shouldn't without modifying, can. And Kaz decides how far up the performance ladder every car can go, which is a source of irritation for some people. I don't mind because my "sweet band" is in the range of 300-400hp for the most part. You have grunt but aren't flying around the track at crazy speeds. Less power means closer, more competitive races, and a less spread out field, great for Photo Mode, which I may finally get to play with! I still have my monsters, like a Ford GT at 700 plus, but I really prefer less power. One of my faves is the CR-Z TC in the new DLC - lot of rhyming initials there :D - which only has 200 hp. I know a lot of people loves their supercars, but some of us love cars that are super in their own way.

As for turning off ABS, it's because even at 1, all the other aids seem to be turned on one to three clicks, and you can't disable them. It gives you a car that you still have to drive properly, it's not arcade or anything, but the cars are still too poised, polite and safe to me. After turning off ABS and giving the cars a go, they feel much more alive. Not quite as vivid as the cars in Forza 4, but close enough, and I can still drive aggressively. And in racing, you can tune a car however you want, within regs. And in GT5, there aren't any that I don't make up. :D
 
Except that they aren't like that, and if someone has to regularly drive with SRF engaged in GT5, everything else is going to feel squirrelly and uncontrollable.

I was more referring to this general attitude that somehow less grip = more realistic. If that were true, we'd all be pirouetting across intersections and in front of buses on our way to work.

On the SRF issue - I had to drive with that on in the GTR time trial yesterday, man it felt downright strange. I'm sure I could've gone faster without it too.

This topic is veering away from the original point, though, it's not entirely about the physics engine alone, it's the modification aspect of GT5 that doesn't add up in some ways. Most cars are held to some arbitrary limits of power, but more frustratingly; not everything can have a turbo or supercharger installed? Like the OP hints at, SS tires are still too grippy (though most of us have known this for a long time), but I can't entirely fault PD for that; this is still a light-sim, after all, and being on a console (and being such a large sales behemoth) needs to straddle a line between challenging and approachable. That is one area GT5 excels; sure, for people who've cut their teeth on PC sims, GT5 will always be simpler. But it is still arguably the most sim-like console driving game (FM4 being the other, but on PS3, there's no real competitor for road and race cars).

I don't know how Kaz worked out the modification "rules", they are a bit strange. I daresay some cars which can't have a supercharger, for example, simply wouldn't have the underbonnet space for one. Regarding tyres, they are just placeholders for classes of tyre (touring, sports tyres, semis, r-comps etc).
 
Except that they aren't like that, and if someone has to regularly drive with SRF engaged in GT5, everything else is going to feel squirrelly and uncontrollable.

This topic is veering away from the original point, though, it's not entirely about the physics engine alone, it's the modification aspect of GT5 that doesn't add up in some ways. Most cars are held to some arbitrary limits of power, but more frustratingly; not everything can have a turbo or supercharger installed? Like the OP hints at, SS tires are still too grippy (though most of us have known this for a long time), but I can't entirely fault PD for that; this is still a light-sim, after all, and being on a console (and being such a large sales behemoth) needs to straddle a line between challenging and approachable. That is one area GT5 excels; sure, for people who've cut their teeth on PC sims, GT5 will always be simpler. But it is still arguably the most sim-like console driving game (FM4 being the other, but on PS3, there's no real competitor for road and race cars).

But an interesting thing happened when I went to pick up Arkham City, after forgetting about my pre-order for 3 weeks due to FM4. The guys at Game Stop, both the employees and the customers waiting behind me, were utterly confused as to how I was distracted with a game that was "too realistic". They mentioned when they buy racing games, they don't want them to be like reality, they prefer them to be easy, to jump right in and not worry about the millimetric efficiency required to master the turns of a track. And who's to tell them what they prefer is wrong? I just look at SS tires as another SRF, or TCS, or ASM; there for those that need them, for the sake of broadening GT's appeal, from the casual racer to the hardcore sim nut.
Of course, people scream for realism in most types of games, but then when cars come up, it's to hard, so then of course, "realistic racing sucks" in their mind, because they're no good at it, and can't be bothered to learn.
Rant over.

I don't think either T10 or PD should be bothered with what the general "gaming store community" has to say, tbh. At least unless/until there's some form of substantial evidence that arcade sells better for racing, a point that GT has been destroying for the past 1.5 decades.


Quick OT here, if you'll pardon. ;)

I have a feeling you'll love it. It's different in ways that are sublime, but in others hard to describe. The cars are livelier on their suspensions. When the tires roar, it sounds like you're abusing a set of four tires. Like I said, it caused me to smell burned rubber! The graphics are terrific, if a bit CG in different ways from GT5, so Photo Mode should be a hoot. And that modification system and Livery Editor are just too hip for words. But the feel is different, T10 is doing something unorthodox. Some can connect with it well, some like me struggle, and some hate the physics completely. You really have to try it.
I definitely intend to. :)

As for GT5's mods, yeah, they're a mixed bag, kind of arbitrary. A few cars which should accept a turbo or supercharger can't. Some which shouldn't without modifying, can. And Kaz decides how far up the performance ladder every car can go, which is a source of irritation for some people. I don't mind because my "sweet band" is in the range of 300-400hp for the most part. You have grunt but aren't flying around the track at crazy speeds. Less power means closer, more competitive races, and a less spread out field, great for Photo Mode, which I may finally get to play with! I still have my monsters, like a Ford GT at 700 plus, but I really prefer less power. One of my faves is the CR-Z TC in the new DLC - lot of rhyming initials there :D - which only has 200 hp. I know a lot of people loves their supercars, but some of us love cars that are super in their own way.

As for turning off ABS, it's because even at 1, all the other aids seem to be turned on one to three clicks, and you can't disable them. It gives you a car that you still have to drive properly, it's not arcade or anything, but the cars are still too poised, polite and safe to me. After turning off ABS and giving the cars a go, they feel much more alive. Not quite as vivid as the cars in Forza 4, but close enough, and I can still drive aggressively. And in racing, you can tune a car however you want, within regs. And in GT5, there aren't any that I don't make up. :D
The problems with GT5's tuning/upgrading don't just come in the form of turbo/superchargers though.
First off, any car with enough room under the hood, or under the car can be turbo or supercharged. Any car. There's even rear-mounted "secret" turbo kits out there so nobody can tell you have one. :p

But more then that, the prices are absolutely ridiculous, on EVERYTHING. $500 for a freaking air filter? $20,000 for a turbo that only gains 40HP?
And then there's engine mods, 1K RPM gain from each stage? Where'd that come from? 1-3K for an ECU? Why can't I choose where to put the rev-limiter? On cars like the Subaru's, which PD has intentionally raised the limiter in ridiculous amounts, it'd be nice fot AT users to be allowed to race in the powerband, I would think, rather then over-rev up to 8K+ RPM on a car that loses power starting before 7K RPM.

Furthermore, drivetrain mods, more specifically, not being able to simply swap a rear, which is the most common real-world drivetrain modification people make, at least in the States, and we might just have enough with it here to make that worldwide. That's a staple upgrade for many people, and not just drag racers, and it's not even in GT1,2,3,4, or 5 at all.

Suspension, pretty limited, always bought in incredibly expensive kits, with undetermined settings.
Weight reductions, no idea what they are, specifically, limit weight reductions on cars much like the "max HP" most cars get limited to. Problem with weight reduction though, is weight is the PP's favorite buddy, so typically, heavy cars just can't fit into any PP category well at all. IIRC, a Lamborghini GT car was made IRL and weighed in around 2400LBS. In GT5 the best you can do is around 27-2800LBS. 👎

Aerodynamics, well, you can't really even buy them. This is what you need to make any "stock" car, run with racing cars, but PD won't let you. In fact, you still can't add front aero to any car you can't RM.:ouch:
For cars like the ACR, with this feature on the car off showroom floor, this is a major slap in the face, but in any case, should be achievable on all cars, to what degree is the only question.

RM's, some are good, some are terrible, some "okay". Basically all depend on whether PD gave them downforce or not, and for many of them, it's 15-20 front downforce. While that would work if we had fields of cars limited to 15-20 front downforce, we don't. This renders most RM cars useless, yet again. RM's were one of the coolest things in GT1 and GT2, and have since been dropped by the wayside for unspecified reasons. Now we get some back, and the uses are all limited pretty heavily, the Vettes are just race cars as they should be, but still lack enough downforce to truly rival the other GT cars in it's class, which typically have 50/70 downforce over the RM's max 35/60 downforce. I don't think there's a single RM in the game that can keep up fairly with any of it's "rival racing class" cars. Even the EVO and STI are to light to be equal to rally cars, not enough downforce to be racing cars.

So there's a huge chunk of modification failure on PD's part. And I haven't even touched the "tuning" bits of it.
And to me, 90+% of it is simple, "what the hell, PD?", type of stuff. :banghead:

I was more referring to this general attitude that somehow less grip = more realistic. If that were true, we'd all be pirouetting across intersections and in front of buses on our way to work.

On the SRF issue - I had to drive with that on in the GTR time trial yesterday, man it felt downright strange. I'm sure I could've gone faster without it too.
Highly unlikely, if you know anything about SRF and how it works. ;)


I don't know how Kaz worked out the modification "rules", they are a bit strange. I daresay some cars which can't have a supercharger, for example, simply wouldn't have the underbonnet space for one. Regarding tyres, they are just placeholders for classes of tyre (touring, sports tyres, semis, r-comps etc).
Name the car without space for a turbo or supercharger added, please. I'm sure there's at least one or two in GT5.- But even if there's 10, surely we won't let that detract from the fact that most every car can have one added, right?
 
Last edited:
You should understand, just because you drive with ABS on, does not mean the ABS has to engage.
I try to avoid engaging my ABS, because it slows you down a bit in GT5, and is harder on tires. ;)

I don't think you understand what I'm saying with ABS1 on there is some magical small assist helping you stay stable. With ABS1 on you should not be able to go into a turn hot slam on the brakes and have no consequence. The braking should be like it is with ABS off minus the brake lock. ABS1 makes drivers have no skill when it comes to braking, watch your replay from a online race you will see it for your self. I like the ABS in FM4, however the physics don't connect with me but the braking in FM4 is nice!
 
I don't think you understand what I'm saying with ABS1 on there is some magical small assist helping you stay stable. With ABS1 on you should not be able to go into a turn hot slam on the brakes and have no consequence. The braking should be like it is with ABS off minus the brake lock. ABS1 makes drivers have no skill when it comes to braking, watch your replay from a online race you will see it for your self. I like the ABS in FM4, however the physics don't connect with me but the braking in FM4 is nice!
This is the assumption I'm talking about.

I could show you the fastest GT5 players in the world using ABS on 1, and it has nothing to do with skill, but what you can prove somebody is running throughout a race.
I find it amusing though that you would jump on that limb and tell me to watch my own replay to see my own lack of skill. :lol:

I very much do not enter corners at full on braking, but since you didn't read my last post, or disregarded it, I'll assume you'll do the same with this one.
 
CSLACR, I'm with you, mostly. The stage levels are pretty much whatever Kaz says. The costs are crazy expensive, right out of GT4 which has a much easier economy. But we don't have much choice. Just sunday, I spent myself from over 16 million Cr down to 61, buying and "race modding" a few cars! :lol: It was kind of fun, though that level of poverty just can't last for much longer.

Strictly on the subject of simulation, this kind of thing is laughable. Of course, most of us aren't laughing or mocking, we're smiling with every lap of a car we've fixed up and painted. Sure, it's nowhere near what Forza offers, and the simulation stuff really needs to get patched in - or maybe refined for GT6, but for now, the racing in GT5 is pure chewing satisfaction for us. So we keep racing, smiling, and putting up with it.

As I say though, this is one area I have no problem with people complaining and begging for improvement, so have at it.

Oh, and I'm obviously with JDMKING on the ABS matter.
 
CSLACR, I'm with you, mostly. The stage levels are pretty much whatever Kaz says. The costs are crazy expensive, right out of GT4 which has a much easier economy. But we don't have much choice. Just sunday, I spent myself from over 16 million Cr down to 61, buying and "race modding" a few cars! :lol: It was kind of fun, though that level of poverty just can't last for much longer.

Strictly on the subject of simulation, this kind of thing is laughable. Of course, most of us aren't laughing or mocking, we're smiling with every lap of a car we've fixed up and painted. Sure, it's nowhere near what Forza offers, and the simulation stuff really needs to get patched in - or maybe refined for GT6, but for now, the racing in GT5 is pure chewing satisfaction for us. So we keep racing, smiling, and putting up with it.

As I say though, this is one area I have no problem with people complaining and begging for improvement, so have at it.

Oh, and I'm obviously with JDMKING on the ABS matter.
Actually, online racing is the only thing keeping me playing GT5 atm.
I don't modify cars unless I need to, which is rare. I don't like driving modified cars in GT5, nor did I like it in GT4.

Once you modify cars in GT5, online racing turns into "who can find the fastest car at this PP level" instead of drivers racing in fairly equal cars. :yuck: Implementation.
Racing the AI? Don't need mods. Implementation.
Driving by yourself? I don't even like the way cars drive with mods, because you can't add what you want, or how you want it. Implementation / lack of mod options.

As far as ABS, I see the point, I understand it doesn't work like ABS does in real life at all. But I've also said a thousand times over, that anything less then $150USD doesn't have anything other then a sponge for a brake pedal, and threshold braking is made much more difficult then reality because of the lack of natural forces at play which tell drivers where the limit is.

So while JDM is on his high-horse about driving without ABS, he should understand all the guys that beat his lap times with ABS, would do exactly the same without it, it's just a matter of having the patience to learn where to put the pedal, as feel has nothing to do with it, unfortunately.

If anything, faster laps can be achieved in GT without ABS, so I don't see the issue for all the people I see whining about ABS in GT5.
Not to mention the fact that it can't be enforced properly.💡

So yeah, I agree the ABS isn't perfect in GT5, of course. But to think driving without it somehow makes you a better driver? You'd have to be kidding yourself, and like-minded individuals.
 
Actually, online racing is the only thing keeping me playing GT5 atm.
I don't modify cars unless I need to, which is rare. I don't like driving modified cars in GT5, nor did I like it in GT4.

Once you modify cars in GT5, online racing turns into "who can find the fastest car at this PP level" instead of drivers racing in fairly equal cars. :yuck: Implementation.

To an extent though, this mirrors real-world events. In any production-based racing series, competitors invariably find that one car will have a distinct advantage, then usually they either dominate or the rules are changed to hobble them. It happens all the time. The only time it doesn't is when the parity rules are carefully designed and monitored, in series like DTM, or SuperGT, or indeed our own V8 Supercars.
 
Back