Does GT5 have an identity crisis?

[IFLATLINEI]

Having an identity is over rated. Grid, Ferrari Challenge, Supercar Challenge, NFS Shift all had an identity and all of them were failures from my perspective. What I need is for developers especially in racing games to stop trying to create an identity and stop trying to steer me in a direction of their choosing.

What I want is all the tools so I can decide how to implement them. GT5 does a pretty good job of this. A nice selection of tracks, tons of cars, good physics, sounds, and graphics. Its a platform for which my friends and I can create our own events and set them up any number of ways.

 

[deftonesmx17]

Those tracks are iRacing quality driving experience, with graphics that i'm still not sure how the PS3 can pull off.

La Sarthe looks better in GRID than it does in GT5 and that game was made years ago and the PS3 pulled it off; also with a day/night transition. Nurburgring looks lifeless and static in GT5 as where it looks alive in NFS Shift with trees which sway in the wind. The only saving grace GT5 has for tracks is it's lighting, which is too perfect and overly bright if you ask me.

What you're saying is stupid, you're blabbering on saying that it creates the illusion that its good? isnt that a genious, graphics are what you see, regardless of how its done, if it looks good then it looks good, there is nothing else to be said about it, you must realise how ridiculous you sound?

Did you miss where I said GT5 looks like it does not use normal mapping on the environments? Meaning it does not give you the illusion of depth...

Next up, the game has a system that allows you to adjust downforce, to do that you need to buy a wing, this is a compromise, in real racing you could do the same thing by adding a different wing to a car, adjusting aerodynamics in racing happens, and in GT5 you race and tune cars, this is how GT5 allows you to do it. Why is that so hard to understand?

Did you miss where it has an actual wing and a factory spoiler for that car? Therefore there is no reason for the spoiler to be adjustable downforce as you can clearly buy the adjustable wing. This is an example of a major mistake, not a compromise. For a game that bills itself as realistic that is very unrealistic. Jesus, even forza got this one right...

 

[Bigbazz]

La Sarthe looks better in GRID than it does in GT5 and that game was made years ago and the PS3 pulled it off; also with a day/night transition. Nurburgring looks lifeless and static in GT5 as where it looks alive in NFS Shift with trees which sway in the wind. The only saving grace GT5 has for tracks is it's lighting, which is too perfect and overly bright if you ask me.

La Sarth in GRID looks NOTHING like La Sarth... They added a bunch of movie effects like blur among other things to make it look cool, but it certaintly doesnt look realistic and the driving experience is pathetic, the track is nothing like the real thing.

When i talk about track quality, i am talking about the quality of the track, moreso than the quality of the graphics, the quality and accuracy of the driving experience in relation to the real life La Sarth.


Which is NOT what GRID gives you, i bought GRID on steam sometime last year and have completed it in full, and since you have to race the LeMans 24h seemingly ever 4 races, i've done plenty of racing around there in La Sarth, and it is nothing like the real track, so even if it looks cool with its crazy blur effects, its nothing like La Sarth.




I'm sorry but i can no longer take you seriously, i will stop posting in this thread from now on.

 

[deftonesmx17]

La Sarth in GRID looks NOTHING like La Sarth... They added a bunch of movie effects like blur among other things to make it look cool, but it certaintly doesnt look realistic and the driving experience is pathetic, the track is nothing like the real thing.

When i talk about track quality, i am talking about the quality of the track, moreso than the quality of the graphics, the quality and accuracy of the driving experience in relation to the real life La Sarth.


Which is NOT what GRID gives you, i bought GRID on steam sometime last year and have completed it in full, and since you have to race the LeMans 24h seemingly ever 4 races, i've done plenty of racing around there in La Sarth, and it is nothing like the real track, so even if it looks cool with its crazy blur effects, its nothing like La Sarth.




I'm sorry but i can no longer take you seriously, i will stop posting in this thread from now on.

Where was I talking about the driving experience in GRID? I'm pretty sure its obvious that we were both talking about how the track looked, until I commented on GT5 not looking that great...


The fact that you say the track looks NOTHING like the real thing is a joke. It has the real tracks layout, thus it can't possibly be "nothing like the real thing". Small inaccuracies like track width or road bumps does not equate to looking "NOTHING like the real thing". Let's be real here, La Sarthe in GT5 looks nothing like the real thing either if small inaccuracies are what you are clinging to because GT5's version is full of those as well.

 

[AndyKosch]

Just so you guys now, in 3D gt5 gives an excellent "illusion" of depth. Guess it is a bit so-so in 2D :-\

 

[deftonesmx17]

^^^^^^^
Different type of illusion than I am speaking of. Flat textures would still look flat, even in 3D. Normal mapping gives the illusion of a surface having "depth" without the use of additional polygons.

Take the standard vs premium cars for example. The textures on many of the standard cars lack depth because they are merely flat as where rendering techniques were used on the premium cars to give the illusion of added depth beyond the extra polygons. Why this was done to only the cars in GT5 and not the environments is beyond me.

 

[Bigbazz]

Where was I talking about the driving experience in GRID? I'm pretty sure its obvious that we were both talking about how the track looked, until I commented on GT5 not looking that great...
As for Blurring, um, err, that is actually something GT is missing.

The fact that you say the track looks NOTHING like the real thing is a joke. It has the real tracks layout, thus it can't possibly be "nothing like the real thing". Small inaccuracies like track width or road bumps does not equate to "nothing like the real thing". Let's be real here, La Sarthe in GT5 looks nothing like the real thing either if small inaccuracies are what you are clinging to because GT5's version is full of those as well.

Can't resist.

1. Blurring is an artificial effect, not sure what your eyes are doing, but when i drive fast in a car it looks nothing like that.

2. The La Sarth is nothing like the real track, it is much much wider, the corner angles are wrong, the elevation is wrong, everything is wrong... when i first drove it i could barely notice it was the same track. If you cannot tell this then i'm not sure you're qualified to be speaking about the circuit.

3. GRID has high quality high res but unrealistic looking graphics, i play it on the PC so i have a fair bit more ooomph than a PS3, and it is a great looking game as are all codemasters games, they all look fantastic, but GRID does not look realistic, and La Sarth is not a realistic representation of the track.

My original post about track quality was a lot more about the actual quality of the track modeling, the bumps in the road, the accuracy of the layout and ground elevation, corner angles, distance. In GT5 these are spot on, the only other game where i have seen this level of detail is iRacing, the guys who laser scan all of their tracks who are well known as being the leaders in creating the highest quality track models. Other tracks in GT5 are not necessarily this good, but those 2 tracks are best versions available in any game, by a long way.

 

[ElSecundo]

They did add more low quality cars than high quality ones, which is quantitiy over quality through and through.

Depends on your point of view, I guess. If you'r focused solely on numbers, I can see why you'd say this.

But if you look at the man-hours spent creating the 200 premium cars compared to the time spent porting over or creating the 800 standard cars, I think you'll see that the time spent on (and therefore, the cost of) the premium cars is overwhelmingly in the majority. To me, that's putting quality over quantity.

Back to the the OP's question:

I don't think it's an identity crisis. It looks like one, because of assumptions we may have had about the game before it came out. But looking at the whole thing, it looks very much like a highly interactive encyclopedia for car and racing fans. If you laid out all the pieces, it could fill a museum for car nuts. It would be a place where I'd like to hang out all day (and end up doing too often).

 

[Big Ron]

First of all I want to make it clear that this is not a whinge, a complaint or a gripe. I've more than got my moneys worth out of this game and have thoroughly enjoyed it.

Having said that, what is GT5 for?

It is billed as the "Real Driving Simulator" but if that is what it is why is it that I can only drive on race tracks? And why is it that the only way to progress in the game is by winning races? That's not simulation. I would have thought a simulation would have a free roam mode where I could go anywhere.

So is it a racing game? Well I guess it is partially but there are better ones out there. I was at a lan party last weekend and was playing GTR Evolution on the PC and it struck me how much more realistic the feeling of driving was than GT5.

Also if it is primarily a racing game why are so many of the cars useless for racing? Unless you're going to do a one make race who in their right mind is going to enter a Subaru 360 for example against anything faster than a bicycle? That car (and many others) belong in a simulator but where is the simulator part of the game to use them in?

I fully agree with your meaning. With GT5 I started to think about, what the game wants me to do with it.

The only thing, it does right is to give you the feeling of driving a car (in some way). But in my opinion, that´s it.

On the other hand it is not enough to present a persistent game. What should I do with a good feeling while driving a car when every other aspect in the game seems to be half-thought out or "just stale".

Besides a good handling system, PD need to develop a great racing experience and bring both together.

But there is still this half-baked A-Spec-thing, where you run through meanless races to earn money to buy a new car to test out how it feels to run it over a track and have fun (if it really happens).

But this shouldn´t be the sense of a racing game. A racing game (and GT is still a racing game) should mediate to be a driver who needs to fight for his success and to get in love with "your car" that went through good and hard times together with you.

GT is more a "I take money to buy a lovely looking car and test it out and then I find out it is ok, but not really satisfying...so I take money to buy the next car to drive it for a race to find out, I need more money to buy a more expensive car".

The most important part of a racing game is still and forever the "race experience" and how you and your car can match with your opponents.

There isn´t any career to get involved or rules to care about or anthing that sucks you in the game.

It is just a museum for cars to rent and go for a ride for one day.

 

[deftonesmx17]

Can't resist.

1. Blurring is an artificial effect, not sure what your eyes are doing, but when i drive fast in a car it looks nothing like that.

G-forces do indeed create a "blurring" effect. I never said the blurring in GRID was realistic, but blurring itself while on a race track is.

2. The La Sarth is nothing like the real track, it is much much wider, the corner angles are wrong, the elevation is wrong, everything is wrong... when i first drove it i could barely notice it was the same track. If you cannot tell this then i'm not sure you're qualified to be speaking about the circuit.

If you don't know there is an e on the end of Circuit de la Sarthe then I'm not sure how you're qualified to be telling me how accurate the elevation and bumps are in a certain video game that puts the name in front of your face every single time you load it.
Again, I never said anything about the driving in GRID.

3. GRID has high quality high res but unrealistic looking graphics, i play it on the PC so i have a fair bit more ooomph than a PS3, and it is a great looking game as are all codemasters games, they all look fantastic, but GRID does not look realistic, and La Sarth is not a realistic representation of the track.

Open the xml config file in the hardware settings folder and set motion blurring and Post Process to false since you own the PC version. You'll see once the yellow tint and blurring is gone that it does indeed look fantastic.

 

[Bigbazz]

G-forces do indeed create a "blurring" effect. I never said the blurring in GRID was realistic, but blurring itself while on a race track is.


If you don't know there is an e on the end of Circuit de la Sarthe then I'm not sure how you're qualified to be telling me how accurate the elevation and bumps are in a certain video game that puts the name in front of your face every single time you load it.


Open the xml config file in the hardware settings folder and set motion blurring and Post Process to false since you own the PC version. You'll see once the yellow tint and blurring is gone that it does indeed look fantastic.

I did not know you needed perfect english to be a racing car driver, or a track analyst, but thank you for that. GRID has fantastic graphics, not arguing that, but it is not a fair comparison for me since the PC is far more powerful than the PS3. I've not played it with blurring effects turned off, but that would improve things a lot.

But the track is not accurate, and i'm afraid that is the most important part of quality. I could draw a picture of of how i think the nurburgring looks, put it in a game with pretty graphics, but it still would be an embaressment to the racing world, no matter how pretty it looked, because it would not be accurate.

 

[HKS racer]

Also if it is primarily a racing game why are so many of the cars useless for racing? Unless you're going to do a one make race who in their right mind is going to enter a Subaru 360 for example against anything faster than a bicycle? That car (and many others) belong in a simulator but where is the simulator part of the game to use them in?

+1
+10
+100
+1000!!!

Epic post, why on Earth we need that stupid-upid little slow car? Racing? With that? Rotfl.. seriusly that is a JOKE. if you want people use it, you need to implement a freeroam thing, or much better, just remove that crap and keep focus on real RACING. Give us more premium Race Cars.

Yamauchi Tamagochi inside.

 

[deftonesmx17]

I did not know you needed perfect english to be a racing car driver, or a track analyst, but thank you for that.

I was not attacking your english, just trying to underastand how someone with such knowledge of a tracks diminsions and layout didn't know it's name.

 

[AarkonD]

GT is its own game and should not be compared to others.

On the blurring thing .. blurring is not natural your eyes do not view things blurred ( unless you have bad eyesight maybe or glaucoma )your brain dedicates less energy to interpreting things out of your field of focus. forced blurring of objects in games or in 3D movies is a widely used bad idea it is not needed your brain will do it for you and thus make it more realistic.

 

[deftonesmx17]

GT is its own game and should not be compared to others.

On the blurring thing .. blurring is not natural your eyes do not view things blurred ( unless you have bad eyesight maybe or glaucoma )your brain dedicates less energy to interpreting things out of your field of focus. forced blurring of objects in games or in 3D movies is a widely used bad idea it is not needed your brain will do it for you and thus make it more realistic.

Except for a TV screen/montior is in your entire field of focus.

You do know what a concussion is right? You also know that there does not have to be any form of outside physical impact for this to occur, right? Rapid acceleration (g-forces experienced during racing) can cause the internals of your head/brain to be subject to trauma. One of the physical signs of a concussion is blurred vision. That is just one of many examples of why blurring when experiencing rapid acceleration while driving a car at high speeds can occur.

Moving on and speaking of G's specifically, one of G-LOC's major effects is Tunnel Vision which can lead to a blackout.

As for you saying only those with bad eyes or things out of your field of view will experience blurring, do me a favor and wave your hand rapidly in front of your face.

 

[ElSecundo]

Epic post, why on Earth we need that stupid-upid little slow car? Racing? With that? Rotfl.. seriusly that is a JOKE. if you want people use it, you need to implement a freeroam thing, or much better, just remove that crap and keep focus on real RACING.

It IS real racing! 👍
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_A2HVx0aLC-I/Sm-pe2aHwJI/AAAAAAAAB4U/cqHmGfUKXh8/s1600-h/DSC03590.JPG

 

[Destinkeys]

GT5 is two half-realized games. A bad racing game, and a bad driving game. Combining the two hasn't made EITHER half any better...

Admit it, guys... GT5 has great physics (for a console), and a great 'Ring. And that's about IT...

 

[Big Ron]

GT5 is two half-realized games. A bad racing game, and a bad driving game. Combining the two hasn't made EITHER half any better...

Admit it, guys... GT5 has great physics (for a console), and a great 'Ring. And that's about IT...

So when it has great physics (for a console), why is it a bad DRIVING game?

It is a real bad racing game, for sure. But driving a car is lovely.

 

[freedomweasel]

GT5 is two half-realized games. A bad racing game, and a bad driving game. Combining the two hasn't made EITHER half any better...

Admit it, guys... GT5 has great physics (for a console), and a great 'Ring. And that's about IT...

I don't think the two half-games are "bad", but I definitely spend most of my time doing solo laps on the ring. I picked up F1 2010 for racing. 👍 It's been a while since I've not gotten first place and been happy about it too.

So when it has great physics (for a console), why is it a bad DRIVING game?

It is a real bad racing game, for sure. Bud driving a car is lovely.

My opinion: there are no mountain roads or anything like that. You've only got race tracks. Forza had the mountain road course and the little Italian(?) cobblestone ocean-side course which were a lot of fun to drive on.

 

[eyeamg0dly]

gran turismo does not have an identity crises. it is exactly what it has been over the years. a driving simulator. i enjoy it now the same as when it originally launched on the ps1.

yes there are some things that can be tweaked. imo it should be harder, alot harder, upgrades should cost more, or you should not get credits as easy.

learn to drive your car stock and learn to tune the car to how you drive. learn to master your car. the car will then have more meaning to you. that is the direction i would like to see gt go.

 

[Destinkeys]

If it was a DRIVING simulator, it wouldn't all be on race tracks...

It would be on regular city streets, open world country drives, there would be oncoming traffic, slower cars, pedestrians, buses, trucks, traffic lights, roundabouts, bikes, traffic signs etc..

But I guess you never see any of that when YOU drive, huh?.

It's a BAD driving game. With good physics.

 

[MuchoJimbo]

@freedomweasel, I wanted there to be a Fujimi-type track in GT5. That track was so much fun.

 

[Big Ron]

If it was a DRIVING simulator, it wouldn't all be on race tracks...

It would be on regular city streets, open world country drives, there would be oncoming traffic, slower cars, pedestrians, buses, trucks, traffic lights, roundabouts, bikes, traffic signs etc..

But I guess you never see any of that when YOU drive, huh?.

It's a BAD driving game. With good physics.

Sorry, but that is so wrong I can´t find any words. Driving a car means driving a car, no matter where it is.

A city road is made out of tarmac like a race track. And field roads are made out of gravel like rally courses.

It is not called a city traffic simulator but a driving simulator. Landscapes and cities are game concepts of Need For Speed or Grand Theft Auto. But the game concept of GT is driving a car on race tracks.

 

[Destinkeys]

As opposed to RACING, on racing tracks...

Right...

 

[freedomweasel]

It would be on regular city streets, open world country drives, there would be oncoming traffic, slower cars, pedestrians, buses, trucks, traffic lights, roundabouts, bikes, traffic signs etc..

Are you arguing that it would be more fun with all of those things? Really?

When I take my car out to drive on a weekend, the worst part about the drive is getting to the backroad. The part with signs, traffic, pedestrians, etc. Then once I get on the back road there's always at least one person driving insanely slow and refuses to pull off.

You want to simulate this? Honestly?

That sounds terrible. Next on the release schedule: "9 to 5 cubicle work" only on Playstation.

 

[Bigbazz]

I dont think the part about driving people want in a game or simulation of any sort, is the part of driving they get to experience and do not enjoy every day in the real world. You don't need a simulator or game to do that.

This is why to sell games, people generally make games where you can go ridiculously fast and drive dangerous without worrying about dying, killing other people or going to jail. Something that you cannot realistically do, in the real world.

Racing cars around a circuit is another thing people generally cannot do in the real world. Its possible but it is also expensive, and unless you're a racing driver or a millionaire, doing it often is not something that is likely to happen. Thats why we have racing simulation games.

So you can pretend you're a millionaire or a racing driver. ^^ GT5 does a good job of both to a certain extent. Enough to make it the best selling racing franchise.




Though i would love a big open city to drive around in, or a place with windy country or mountain roads, and offroad forest tracks. I certaintly wouldnt be abiding by any speeding limitations or any traffic lights or laws or signs. And if they made this an online world (like TDU2), then i definitely wouldnt be one of the guys following the rules of the road, nope i would be thrashing all my favourite supercars as fast as i could, 90% of the time.

And when it comes to the racing in the game, if it has this open world, i would pretty much hope that 90% of the races took place on proper race circuits, and if the country/mountain/city street roads are used that there are NO traffic during racing.

 

[Stradivis]

I see two possibilities.

GT could focus more on roads and the simple joy of driving. It's an idea. But there are some problems in here.

I don't think Kaz would endorse illegal racing, in open roads, cities, etc. If one would drive on the limits, at 70 mph, it would be the stupidest game ever created. People wouldn't follow those rules. And I don't even think about cops. They don't belong in GT.

So, GT is a track game. But the overall track experience could improve, with track days, more racing rules, safety cars, etc. All those elements add to the general racing feel. And, IMO, that's the way GT should go. Grab some more licenses, more Le Mans cars, more NASCAR tracks, pikes peak back, more real life circuits, etc.

This way, GT could improve in its racing heritage, while still offering some interesting bits of automotive history for us to try out.

The free roaming I would leave to TDU, NFS and the like.

Peace.

 

[Destinkeys]

Are you arguing that it would be more fun with all of those things? Really?

When I take my car out to drive on a weekend, the worst part about the drive is getting to the backroad. The part with signs, traffic, pedestrians, etc. Then once I get on the back road there's always at least one person driving insanely slow and refuses to pull off.

You want to simulate this? Honestly?

That sounds terrible. Next on the release schedule: "9 to 5 cubicle work" only on Playstation.

No, you miss my point... I simply believe that many fanboys use the 'driving simulator' line to excuse how BAD a racing simulator GT5 is. But, once you point out what a 'driving simulator' actually is, it is obvious what a boring, stupid idea it is. But it is relentlessly used to excuse all the missing RACING features from GT5.

Hence my original point. GT5 is a half-assed racing AND driving game. The combination of two bad sections doesn't make for one good one, IMO. And that is the OP's question. Does it have an identity crisis? You bet your 🤬

Only trouble is, all the Pokeman 'Gotta dupe them all' car collectors are diverting PD's attention away from this dichotomy. I honestly believe them to be a small but vocal minority that actually WANT a 'driving' game. And I sincerely wish they would all just buy TDU2 and go away, and let PD concentrate on a RACING game. Either that, or PD concentrate on dropping racing and making a 'driving' game.

It is pretty obvious they can't do BOTH.

 

[seanchump]

PD added a larger variety of cars over the years but not the events to go with them. I'd actually enjoy the "Pokeman 'Gotta dupe them all'" car collector aspect if there were more events associated with each car class.

Two problems:
The game tries to do too many things but doesn't do any one thing well.
The game is so vast in it's offerings that your goal becomes obscure.

Add some freaking organization! Why on earth would PD give a Hyundai Concept car in an American Championship? You know you have an identity crisis when your top competitor is a banned fan car from the 70's...

At least let us customize championships and allow us to chose competitors and courses with NO PRIZE CAR OR MONEY. It would be FUN to create something that made some 🤬 sense.

 

[HKS racer]

PD added a larger variety of cars over the years but not the events to go with them. I'd actually enjoy the "Pokeman 'Gotta dupe them all'" car collector aspect if there were more events associated with each car class.

....

At least let us customize championships and allow us to chose competitors and courses with NO PRIZE CAR OR MONEY. It would be FUN to create something that made some 🤬 sense.

Yes, I definitely think PD are a bit retarded, the physic is almost perfect but there are too many stupid mistakes with the GAME structure, everything not related with physic can become a huge problem with them... and this is weird. They are weird.