Genesis X Gran Berlinetta Vision Gran Turismo Concept

  • Thread starter Jordan
  • 183 comments
  • 25,944 views
This is the discussion thread for an article on GTPlanet:

Gran Turismo 7’s New Genesis Vision GT Car to be Revealed on December 2

When the special events for the Gran Turismo World Finals were unveiled for GT7 last week, they revealed a mysterious new Vision GT project car was coming to the game. Today, we have official confirmation that new car will be coming from Genesis, the luxury spin-off marque from Hyundai...
WOW I Dreamed of this car !!!! The CAR we absolutly need in the game!!! :bowdown: :lol::embarrassed:
 
- Physics - the manufacturer's raw data need to be inputted into the game, sometimes VGTs have extreme performance or lots of extra features that takes time to implement because no other car has them (Chaparral's laser propulsion, Tomahawk's active aero, holographic interiors, etc). Then they need to be test driven. Also check if AI can drive them properly around a wide variety of circuits.
With a working and generally applied physics engine, there is not a lot of work to do.
The Chaparral engine can basically be translated into any other fictional engine by giving it the ingame power curve it would have if it actually existed.
Only the Dodge with the vast array of flaps that need to be implemented correctly to be working while cornering to provide the correct amount of downforce.
 
I'm not sure if the design process videos for the VGTs are still available in GT 7, but they were usually really interesting
I also find the basic idea behind the VGTs an cool thing.

Another question for the Datamind pros here... is that a new track in the teaser?
 
No better example of how the developers refuse to listen to the community.
Whilst I used to agree, ultimately it will be part of licencing agreements to keep vehicle marques in the game and engaged with players. There will likely be some kind of kick back of data from PD to the manufacturer in return as well - i.e. the number of players that acquire the car, the number of miles driven in them etc. etc.

The cynic in me would also hazard a guess as to that being the reason they're giving it away to everyone who watches the stream. Artificially inflates figures for the stream watchers AND the number of players who have acquired the new vehicle. But that is quite cynical of me.
 
I'm glad that they're finally releasing this car. Hopefully we'll get a Gr.1 version, too. I'm always down for more Gr.1 cars, especially for brands that don't really have anything IRL that's like a modern LMH/LMDh. It's all the more reason I was disappointed that the Jaguar VGT SV was all-electric and not say, a hybrid like the Peugeot L750R VGT. Whereas I'm very much fine with the Lamborghini VGT not being in Gr.1, because now we know the SC63 will be a thing, and something very similar applies to the Ferrari VGT since they now have the 499P.
 
Last edited:
mef
I never got the point of these vision cars. It just seems fake.
Are there any aspects of these cars that are making it Into a production line, or is this just marketing? Serious question.
I think it's just part of the fun side to cars. You must have drawn 'fake' cars when you were a kid - this is sort of similar. Just a bit of fantasy that the game has always enjoyed.

GT has always encouraged us to look at cars and admire them. The more I play this game with that in mind, the more I get from it.

Do I like the VGT stuff? Nah.
Do I collect all the cars? Nah.
But I love looking through the dealerships and admiring the designs, shapes and trying to imagine how a VGT could become reality.
 
Still gonna need proof on how these "take away resources" while being cars that DON'T need to be scanned nor have anywhere near the amount of refinement and work as the Real cars (Or even the fictional cars purposefully modelled for GR.3 and GR.4). I'll wait to see who actually provides that evidence and isn't just hiding behind the resource nonsense because yet again it isn't what they want (the exact same complaint thrown around when a REAL HiAce Ambulance gets added).

But sure, lets keep conveniently ignoring the fact that literally every single major update has given this game real cars and also pretend THAT'S gonna address a still less then ideal single player experience (and questionable economy) that many still aren't thrilled about.
Kaz said it himself, just after GTS release, They take twice as many dev hours as a real car, 3 months of dev time for a real car, 6 for a VGT, which is where the 6 month's to make a car comes from,

So given that, and the fact their's nothing substantial for VGTs in single or multiplayer, whether you believe the resource argument, they don't really bring much either way.

As for single player it just got some love, I agree it poor, its why I don't play it, and online is much better, online has had no improvement since GTS.But cars dont take away from it, Car modelling is a different skill, to game development
 
Them adding VGTs will not take a slot from any other requested car being added.
Because they're basically building something out of nothing. Something completely new. But isn't it like the manufacturers design the car and the model first beforehand, then give it to Polyphony for implementation, polish and quality control?
 
Last edited:
So given that,
Given that the VGT cars are designed by the car manufacturers designer teams, the cost and time investment on PD is literally zero until the developers have to import the data. And hopefully they have (with GTS already being a thing) created an easy and fast pipeline where their cost and time stays zero.
As simple as if they were going to hand out creator software, or existing software was compatible with the way VGTs are imported from scratch into the game.
 
So given that, and the fact their's nothing substantial for VGTs in single or multiplayer, whether you believe the resource argument, they don't really bring much either way.
How are they different in this respect to most of the cars in the game?
 
To argue that adding a VGT is a waste of resources is arguing that adding any car you're not personally interested in is a waste of resources.

Nobody is going to want every single car that's added. The game isn't catered to your individual tastes. If you don't like the VGT (or any car), just don't drive it.
 
Last edited:
To argue that adding a VGT is a waste of resources is arguing that adding any car you're not personally interested in is a waste if resources.

Nobody is going to want every single car that's added. The game isn't catered to your individual tastes. If you don't like the VGT (or any car), just don't drive it.
^this 100%
 
I hate the anti-VGT arguments.

"They could have been working on REAL cars!" - look up the "false dichotomy" logical fallacy.

"They're not real!" - No one complains about any of the imaginary race tracks (at least not nearly as many).

"They shouldn't be in the game!" -Do you go to a BBQ restaurant and ask them to take salads off of the menu because you didn't go there for a salad? Is it THAT hard to just not use something you don't like?

"The GT tagline is 'The real driving simulator'". - Do you hold all marketing departments that accountable? Did you call up and complain to McDonald's corporate because the cashier didn't literally Love to See You Smile?
 
How are they different in this respect to most of the cars in the game?
In some respects you are correct, apart from you could have two garage fillers instead of one.
The must have data on how often cars are used, as it's all online, Rockstar collects data for car usage,

Given that the VGT cars are designed by the car manufacturers designer teams, the cost and time investment on PD is literally zero until the developers have to import the data. And hopefully they have (with GTS already being a thing) created an easy and fast pipeline where their cost and time stays zero.
As simple as if they were going to hand out creator software, or existing software was compatible with the way VGTs are imported from scratch into the game.
Given PDs nature, The Manufacturer could give them a full complete model and they would not use it, CAD data and concept drawings is far harder to model from than a 3D scan, let alone lend proprietary software, and all the training that's needed to another company for one car,
 
In some respects you are correct, apart from you could have two garage fillers instead of one.
The must have data on how often cars are used, as it's all online, Rockstar collects data for car usage,
And then these data will tell them that all cars average out on the same amount of usage, very likely.
Some players do like X, others dont.
We dont have these data, so all is assumption with a bias on personal preference.
 
So you see, still quite A LOT of work even if PD receives the 3D data and specs from manufacturer directly. One person making the VGT is one person less able to make other highly requested cars. If PD gives us 10 cars per month then 1 VGT isn't an issue. But with only 3 cars per month, if one of them is VGT then it is an issue.
I'm curious to see if you meant the above.

Since the ItalDesign VGT was released, how many other cars have been added? Assuming the number is 9 or more, the ratio of VGT/Other cars added is fine as is. Correct?

(this is based on the Ital Design VGT being the last VGT released - I can't confirm that at the moment, however. The principle still applies.)
 
Why everyone is hyped for flat out physically impossible (in most cases) cars is absolutely and hilariously absurd to me. Thats like being hyped for an iPhone with a terabyte of storage. Never gonna happen, or it'll happen so far down the line it won't be that cool anymore. It's not like we need more real cars.. Or tracks.. Or races... Nah, keep shoveling this pile of impossible dog droppings

Not sure if I simply don’t get the joke, but iPhones with a terabyte of storage have been around for over two years.
 
And then these data will tell them that all cars average out on the same amount of usage, very likely.
Some players do like X, others dont.
We dont have these data, so all is assumption with a bias on personal preference.
Yes it's all assumption, would like be to see the data, the online data is available.
They could average out, or PD could be just ignoring the data, they generally ignore any feedback, and they plough on regardless. They have form on this, and I'm not referring to cars and tracks as everyone has there list, but features and gameplay in both single and online play
 
Looks cool. Let's hope there's a Gr. 1 (or 2/3/4) version so that it's not a total waste. And no battery unless it's a KERS-like system that self-charges so it can actually be used in "endurance" races.
 
Why everyone is hyped for flat out physically impossible (in most cases) cars is absolutely and hilariously absurd to me. Thats like being hyped for an iPhone with a terabyte of storage. Never gonna happen, or it'll happen so far down the line it won't be that cool anymore. It's not like we need more real cars.. Or tracks.. Or races... Nah, keep shoveling this pile of impossible dog droppings
If you don't like it no need to comment your displeasure.....just don't buy it ....never understood the need to whine about new additions that you're not forced to buy at all....

I’ll never understand Polyphony’s insistence on creating Vision cars.
Why don't you try reading, the history of the Vision project isn't hard to find....
 
Last edited:
With a working and generally applied physics engine, there is not a lot of work to do.
The Chaparral engine can basically be translated into any other fictional engine by giving it the ingame power curve it would have if it actually existed.
Only the Dodge with the vast array of flaps that need to be implemented correctly to be working while cornering to provide the correct amount of downforce.
You still need to input the raw numbers into the game though. It's still takes some effort. Things like gearing, suspension geometry, aero maps, center of gravity/weight distribution etc. A lot of the VGTs are quite wonky to drive, probably because the manufacturers don't give PD a fully complete specs sheet and more along the likes of "it's roughly this and this". Unlike real cars there are no basis for driving comparison as well.

So most of them ends up being half baked in terms of driving experience. Or the ones that are good, need a bit more testing than real cars to make them handle the way they're supposed to based on fictional parameters. Believe me, I've been dabbling in mods since rFactor days and now in AC. Making a car handle well in the virtual game world isn't as easy as copying the numbers from real life 1:1 because no physics engine is exactly the same as real world.
I'm curious to see if you meant the above.

Since the ItalDesign VGT was released, how many other cars have been added? Assuming the number is 9 or more, the ratio of VGT/Other cars added is fine as is. Correct?

(this is based on the Ital Design VGT being the last VGT released - I can't confirm that at the moment, however. The principle still applies.)
Yes, correct, if you see the number of VGTs added throughout the game's lifetime, it's a small percentage.

But I'm looking at it from a monthly update perspective. If we only get 3 cars next month and one of them is the Genesis, I bet a lot of people will be unhappy.

Looking at the game as a whole, according to kudosprime 52 models out of 491 are tagged as VGTs. That's more than 10.5%. Can you imagine what other real road cars or race cars we could have had instead of those 52 cars?

Once again I'm not hating the Genesis. I will treat it the same as any other car in my garage. Also I can pretty much drive any car I want as mods in Assetto. BUT I fully understand why people are disappointed when a new VGT is annouced in an update instead of x/y/z real cars.

----------------

Speaking about the series in general...

The problem with Gran Turismo now is it's as much a marketing tool as much as a game.

GT1-4 was a game. PD's main focus is player enjoyment.
GT5 introduced GT Academy and we have some manufacturer collaborations like the Citroen GT and GT-R reveal in game.
GT6 introduced VGT and it starts becoming a platform for marketing.
GTS introduced esports. Suddenly online becomes the main focus and PD has to make Gr.3/4 variants of several cars instead of adding unique models.
GT7 tries to combine everything. PD's workforce hasn't really grown. Development cost and time have ballooned. But now they have to satisfy offline players + esports + manufacturers + whatever other project Kaz wants to use the game for.

You see the problem. It isn't that any 1 thing is particularly bad. But Kaz/PD tries to do too much with too little. Quality suffers. The only way to fix is to prioritise. But me and many others feel they have been prioritising on the wrong things in GT7 (e.g. music rally, GT cafe, VGT, fixing credit exploits instead of fixing economy and single players, etc).

Overall GT is still a great game but you can tell the focus is not as singular as the earlier games.

Hope that makes sense :)
 
Last edited:
CAD data and concept drawings is far harder to model from than a 3D scan, let alone lend proprietary software, and all the training that's needed to another company for one car,

Having been a first, second and third tier supplier to the automotive industry for over 20 years with hundreds if not thousands of tools sat in my factory for making bits for cars ranging from Sultan specials to Hyundais, there's absolutely no reason why cad files supplied by OEMs can't be used in Maya (as PD use), and a 3D scan will require finessing in much the same way and for much the same reasons as supplied cad files.
 
If GT is basically a digital interactive car magazine then VGTs are just the concept cars pages.
And i never got the surprise in every VGT thread "wow another VGT".PD or at least Kaz loves concept cars since the early GT days,there were three concept off shoot GT games in the early 2000s.It's like hoping they don't add another Nissan or Toyota 😂
 
Last edited:

Latest Posts

Back