Grid Autosport (General Discussion)

[Samus]

I said easy to learn. Not easy full stop. As in you don't slide into the gravel and walls for the first hour while getting used to the handling model. Plenty of arcade games are easy to get the hang of, doesn't mean they're easy to be the best at them.

 

[Speedster911]

In that case ALL games are difficult, as soon as you crank up the AI difficulty.

Shift 2 is quite frustrating, until you learn to tame the model. I nearly gave up on it. Then tried again, glad I gave it a second go.

Games with long and gradual learning curves are the best, as they give you a great amount of replay value.

 

[Samus]

It depends on the genre. In a driving game I want to have a good feel for the driving model right away. Again not perfected in 10 minutes, but a good feel for it that you can lap consistently and then start improving.

That's all I'm looking for in this next GRID.

 

[Wolfe]

@Speedster911 -- Even the most realistic physics models are predictable and pretty easy if you know how to drive. It should be an "easy to learn, difficult to master" thing. Pushing the limits of traction and finding the best lines for the quickest laptimes is where the challenge lies. Racing sims that reinforce the "real = difficult" mindset are a problem, and arcade racers that make driving more of a chore than it has to be are annoying.

What I meant by "concrete" and "believable" on the last page is pretty much what @Samus said. Predictable, and easy to relate to how an actual car handles. And I, too, would like to see that from Grid Autosport.

 

[Speedster911]

Ah, since you put it that way, could't agree more.

It's the difficult to master part that really makes me want to keep playing the game. The "real = difficult" mindset sure is a nuisance, which is why I ditched SIM steering in FM4.

 

[PepeMickey]

GT is the king of "real=difficult" on consoles and the reason why legions of casuals think GT is the most realistic thing in the universe.

It doesn't matter if FM4/5 is factually more realistic, most people will consider Forza an arcade game because of this mindset.

 

[Speedster911]

Yeah, yeah... I know where youz coming from PepeMickey! 👍

Though I always found GT far too easy and basic. Forza on the other hand, that learning curve man... always room for improvement.

 

[Spektru]

GT is the king of "real=difficult" on consoles and the reason why legions of casuals think GT is the most realistic thing in the universe.

It doesn't matter if FM4/5 is factually more realistic, most people will consider Forza an arcade game because of this mindset.

Only PS fanboys consider Forza an arcade game. Even FM Horizon is a great sim.

 

[Downhill Dino]

Too bad it's neither of them.

 

[Speedster911]

Only PS fanboys consider Forza an arcade game. Even FM Horizon is a great sim.

Ahh.....easy there cowboy! Let's not get ahead of ourselves here!

 

[somebodysb2]

FH is anything BUT a sim.

 

[Speedster911]

Either your hinting at sarcasm or dead serious about what you said

A game borrowing elements from Forza doesn't make it a sim, bit if you're convinced and enjoying it then well and good.

 

[Wolfe]

Among all racing games, Forza Horizon's handling dynamics are truer to life than most of them. Compared to FM4, what it gave up with its modified tire model was made up for with improved suspension and aerodynamic modelling. Compared to any "arcade" game -- or Codemasters title -- it's in an entirely different category.

You can consider Horizon "simcade" if it makes you happy.

 

[Luminis]

You can have challenging gameplay without needing a hardcore physics model.

The demanding and challenging factor can always be toned down with assists and whatnot. Why won't devs accept this??

I'd give the same answer to both points. Yes, a game can be demanding without a hadcore physics model; and yes, one could alleviate the challenge of a realistic physics model with a bunch of assists.

Thing is, I feel that a lot of developers glance over that issue like Codies did with the cockpit cam in GRID 2. "Shall we make the game a challenge?!" "Nah, not worth it, only 20% of our player base cares". Same with realistic physics. Why bother to create them, then scale them down for the bulk of players who don't want that? Just create something simple out of the box, throw it out there and don't bother with the few sim-racers who are complaining.

Quite frankly, why would you do 100% of the work to get 100% of potential buyers cuvered when 20% of the work already covers 80% of your potential market? Simple answer: You don't, unless you want the positive PR or something.

Now, this bit might be important to understand this post: I'm not saying that most players are like that. That's my impression of what the developers are thinking, currently. We'd be seeing more sim-oriented driving games and more challenging games overall, otherwise, in my opinion. However, just an impression, so don't mistake it for claimed fact

 

[VXR]

On the subject of Horizon, any arcade behaviour is purely up to how you choose to drive or the forced nature of the story mode. The nuance to the handling is still there, just as in any decent console sim.

 

[Speedster911]

I'd give the same answer to both points. Yes, a game can be demanding without a hadcore physics model; and yes, one could alleviate the challenge of a realistic physics model with a bunch of assists.

Thing is, I feel that a lot of developers glance over that issue like Codies did with the cockpit cam in GRID 2. "Shall we make the game a challenge?!" "Nah, not worth it, only 20% of our player base cares". Same with realistic physics. Why bother to create them, then scale them down for the bulk of players who don't want that? Just create something simple out of the box, throw it out there and don't bother with the few sim-racers who are complaining.

Quite frankly, why would you do 100% of the work to get 100% of potential buyers cuvered when 20% of the work already covers 80% of your potential market? Simple answer: You don't, unless you want the positive PR or something.

Now, this bit might be important to understand this post: I'm not saying that most players are like that. That's my impression of what the developers are thinking, currently. We'd be seeing more sim-oriented driving games and more challenging games overall, otherwise, in my opinion. However, just an impression, so don't mistake it for claimed fact

This may very well be the sad truth. Fun, fun fun... it's all gamers want today. A quick fix.
Very few are willing to actually sit down, understand and appreciate what happens to a fast moving car, when you push it over the edge.

On the subject of Horizon, any arcade behaviour is purely up to how you choose to drive or the forced nature of the story mode. The nuance to the handling is still there, just as in any decent console sim.

Wouldn't you say the braking is a tad bit cartoonish? The physics are certainly in no way comparable to Dirt, GRID or say TDU/Burnout/NFS, but not quite close to FM either.

Still deserves to be called a console sim? Cos' FM and GT do a far better job of physics on a console.

Among all racing games, Forza Horizon's handling dynamics are truer to life than most of them. Compared to FM4, what it gave up with its modified tire model was made up for with improved suspension and aerodynamic modelling. Compared to any "arcade" game -- or Codemasters title -- it's in an entirely different category.

You can consider Horizon "simcade" if it makes you happy.

Horizon may have been taken more seriously had it not had the ultra-colorful dudebro setting to begin with.

A dark and serious open road game with consequences of bad driving would be SO nice.

 

[Samus]

This may very well be the sad truth. Fun, fun fun... it's all gamers want today.

Um, that's all any gamer has ever wanted from any game. It's kind of the point. Even die hard sim racers want to have fun, don't they?

 

[Speedster911]

Um, that's all any gamer has ever wanted from any game. It's kind of the point. Even die hard sim racers want to have fun, don't they?

Oh yes, they most certainly do! Serious fun... not casual fun with retarded physics and a forgiving driving model. Games ain't what they used to be I tell ya mate.

About a decade ago, especially back in the 90s devs were way more serious about making realistic and believable games. Now it's all about fancy shmancy graphics, MP and gameplay.

Physics and sounds just aren't taken as seriously today. Whatever sells, stays.

 

[wicken]

According to Codemasters...
"It's in no way a simulation game, in terms of numbers it's probably 60:40 in favour of simulation to arcade.

GRID has never been a simulation, it's always been a bit of a mixture but for Autosport it's closer to sim than its ever been. Playing GRID Autosport with a steering wheel is completely different to how it was on GRID 2.

Rest assured, this is at it's heart, an authentic racing experience."

 

[Akira AC]

Oh yes, they most certainly do! Serious fun... not casual fun with retarded physics and a forgiving driving model. Games ain't what they used to be I tell ya mate.

About a decade ago, especially back in the 90s devs were way more serious about making realistic and believable games. Now it's all about fancy shmancy graphics, MP and gameplay.

Physics and sounds just aren't taken as seriously today. Whatever sells, stays.

No game on Consoles have archived the same level of driving realism as in FM4 (IMO), that was released in 2011 and by the time P-cars releases on consoles it would probably be the most realistic game on consoles.

That said, stop talking out of your ignorance, in the last few years there has been literally breakthroughs on the Sim Racing scene, take Assestto Corsa for example which was released last year and is probably the most accurate simulation there is in the public market, is based on actual RD data taken directly from Vallelunga circuit, unlike previous games with relate to data offered by third party contributors (Like Turn-10 with Pirelli).

Flight simulation took a great hit with Flight, however that's the only example I can take from simulation going backwards, and even so there is stuff like X-plane, which keeps getting updated.


Why do people fool themselves into thinking that what they play is simulation, this happens with GT6 and FM5 alike, none of them are accurate to what can be done in a car and they are designed under a game design philosophy, now we have people who only want sims, TOCA 3 was the last entry to the series which was closing to sim-racing territory, and even then the physics lacked, the only redeemed feature on that aspect was the damage model which was surprisingly accurate.

I honestly rather play a fun game on consoles and a simulation game on PC, I have a lot fun with GT6 even though I know is not simulation, same with NFS Hot Pursuit and PGR4. rFactor provides fun when you mod it to include Targa Florio and some other mods like additional cars, but the data required to duplicate such instances is too inaccessible for rFactor developers due to their budget constrains, therefore they work on the engine to make it more simulation like, and leave moders complement the game with the engine provided by the developer, same is happening with AC proving a similar framework with a more advanced simulation engine.

What I want is a fun experience, TOCA 2 offered me that in the PS1 days and I would like to have similar experiences, I had a lot of fun with Grid 2 and I'm looking forward to this one as well, even though I know it will not be simulation, the game will be designed in order to provide such an experience.

 

[Wolfe]

I really don't know what version of the '90s Speedster911 was gaming in, because there are more choices of realistic driving games today than ever before. Sure, there's more focus on super-mega-HD graphics and online connectivity today, but all driving models were more simplistic back then, whether they leaned toward arcade style or simulation style. Only a select few of the "simulation" branded games were even in the ballpark, and due to the timing of the evolution of 3D graphics, they didn't even start appearing until the late '90s.

 

[Samus]

Oh yes, they most certainly do! Serious fun... not casual fun with retarded physics and a forgiving driving model. Games ain't what they used to be I tell ya mate.

About a decade ago, especially back in the 90s devs were way more serious about making realistic and believable games. Now it's all about fancy shmancy graphics, MP and gameplay.

Physics and sounds just aren't taken as seriously today. Whatever sells, stays.

I get what you're saying, it was just weird you saying all people wanted was fun.

Personally I've been gaming since SNES/Megadrive days and I don't really recall there being a time where racing games on consoles were all serious, sim orientated. All you really had in the realistic realm in PS1 days was Gran Turismo and the Toca games but when you go back to those today you realise they weren't that realistic at all. Other than that, pretty much everything was firmly in the simple, arcade physics realm.

In short, I personally don't see how anything has changed, not in racing games anyway. If anything there are more console racing games around with a slant towards realism these days than the other way around.

 

[PepeMickey]

You see I like these arcade games, as long as I can have a manual tranny and cars behave like cars I have no problem with them but If they're going to design the whole thing around real racing, why not ditch the "dudebro" approach and make it more serious.

 

[Brend]

This may very well be the sad truth. Fun, fun fun... it's all gamers want today. A quick fix.
Very few are willing to actually sit down, understand and appreciate what happens to a fast moving car, when you push it over the edge.



Wouldn't you say the braking is a tad bit cartoonish? The physics are certainly in no way comparable to Dirt, GRID or say TDU/Burnout/NFS, but not quite close to FM either.

Still deserves to be called a console sim? Cos' FM and GT do a far better job of physics on a console.



Horizon may have been taken more seriously had it not had the ultra-colorful dudebro setting to begin with.

A dark and serious open road game with consequences of bad driving would be SO nice.

You are just coming across as very single minded, narrow-sighted gamer here. Many people would argue that driving games are pointless as it is simply 'driving around over and over again' and serve no purpose as to showcase the visual capabilities of each respective gaming device. What seperates your opinion from something like that? Aside from backtracking a few steps everytime you say something a bit OTT?

'Anyway, I am weary and annoyed of all this influx of casual racing games each year.'

'Gaming as of late, has gotten pretty non-serious and fun-oriented.'

'In that case ALL games are difficult, as soon as you crank up the AI difficulty.'

Combining the above quote with these 3 examples seem to shot that you really don't see any appeal in games outside your own comfort zone, you say that a steep learning curve is best and yet I'm willing to bet that 95% of re-playable games start with an easy to pick up but difficult to master motif.

 

[Speedster911]

^^ How many sims have you mastered to date? And how long have you stuck with each?

Just curious.

 

[Speedster911]

I get what you're saying, it was just weird you saying all people wanted was fun.

Personally I've been gaming since SNES/Megadrive days and I don't really recall there being a time where racing games on consoles were all serious, sim orientated. All you really had in the realistic realm in PS1 days was Gran Turismo and the Toca games but when you go back to those today you realise they weren't that realistic at all. Other than that, pretty much everything was firmly in the simple, arcade physics realm.

In short, I personally don't see how anything has changed, not in racing games anyway. If anything there are more console racing games around with a slant towards realism these days than the other way around.

I meant sims generally, not just on consoles.

By those standards in the day, TOCA and GT weren't exactly leaning towards the arcade realm were they?

Maybe over a decade from now, FM and GT both might be considered "learning more towards arcade". Project CARS is shaping up well. If these guys pull it off, I'd have very little reason left not to get a PS4.

No game on Consoles have archived the same level of driving realism as in FM4 (IMO), that was released in 2011 and by the time P-cars releases on consoles it would probably be the most realistic game on consoles.

That said, stop talking out of your ignorance, in the last few years there has been literally breakthroughs on the Sim Racing scene, take Assestto Corsa for example which was released last year and is probably the most accurate simulation there is in the public market, is based on actual RD data taken directly from Vallelunga circuit, unlike previous games with relate to data offered by third party contributors (Like Turn-10 with Pirelli).

Flight simulation took a great hit with Flight, however that's the only example I can take from simulation going backwards, and even so there is stuff like X-plane, which keeps getting updated.


Why do people fool themselves into thinking that what they play is simulation, this happens with GT6 and FM5 alike, none of them are accurate to what can be done in a car and they are designed under a game design philosophy, now we have people who only want sims, TOCA 3 was the last entry to the series which was closing to sim-racing territory, and even then the physics lacked, the only redeemed feature on that aspect was the damage model which was surprisingly accurate.

I honestly rather play a fun game on consoles and a simulation game on PC, I have a lot fun with GT6 even though I know is not simulation, same with NFS Hot Pursuit and PGR4. rFactor provides fun when you mod it to include Targa Florio and some other mods like additional cars, but the data required to duplicate such instances is too inaccessible for rFactor developers due to their budget constrains, therefore they work on the engine to make it more simulation like, and leave moders complement the game with the engine provided by the developer, same is happening with AC proving a similar framework with a more advanced simulation engine.

What I want is a fun experience, TOCA 2 offered me that in the PS1 days and I would like to have similar experiences, I had a lot of fun with Grid 2 and I'm looking forward to this one as well, even though I know it will not be simulation, the game will be designed in order to provide such an experience.

Let me put it another way... aside from Forza and all the other PC sims that have innovated in the "gaming sim" industry, it is tiring to see a developer like Codemasters say they'll be releasing an authentic racing game, whereas ANY developer apart from PD or T10 (we're talking consoles only for now) has been delivering arcade-themed racers, promising to be authentic, while blending between sim and arcade. Why can't they go either all sim or all arcade? Why do PC gamers only get to enjoy the most hardcore sims? PCs have casual arcadey and fun/easy to pick up and play games too.

Yet devs shy away from making a full blown sim on consoles. Oh well, I'm waiting for PCARS to turn up.

As for GRID Auto, reviews will tell if it's a worthy purchase for a sim-only gamer.

Unfortunately, as is witnessed by these discussions/debates, coming from a Forza/GT background, you just don't want to digest anything less realistic. That's just how it is for some of us.

I love arcade games, particularly action ones (Max Payne, the Batman games), but when it comes to cars and racing, I'm all business.

PCARS looks to be heading in the right direction it seems.

According to Codemasters...
"It's in no way a simulation game, in terms of numbers it's probably 60:40 in favour of simulation to arcade.

GRID has never been a simulation, it's always been a bit of a mixture but for Autosport it's closer to sim than its ever been. Playing GRID Autosport with a steering wheel is completely different to how it was on GRID 2.

Rest assured, this is at it's heart, an authentic racing experience."

Worth a shot I guess, if you're looking to keep your racing collection fresh and varied.

 

[Wolfe]

By those standards in the day, TOCA and GT weren't exactly leaning towards the arcade realm were they?

Maybe over a decade from now, FM and GT both might be considered "learning more towards arcade".

TOCA and GT certainly didn't square off with the likes of Papyrus sims.

Among hardcore sim racing circles, FM and GT have always been considered "arcade." They're perceived as big fish in a small pond.

Why can't they go either all sim or all arcade? Why do PC gamers only get to enjoy the most hardcore sims? PCs have casual arcadey and fun/easy to pick up and play games too.

Yet devs shy away from making a full blown sim on consoles.

Full blown traditional motorsports sims -- like the SimBin games -- are usually niche titles for enthusiasts, and any game that's going to challenge the average gamer with its driving model has to drill in its authenticity with marketing, because few people can recognize the damn difference. Defining your product with a label like The Real Driving Simulator™ allows you to get away with almost anything. Same if you can establish yourself as a premier platform exclusive, beyond the reach of Gran Turismo's shadow (Forza).

The console sim market chews up newcomers and underdogs like popcorn, regardless of their merits. Codemasters is wise to be satisfied with "authentic" rather than "sim," and it's why some of us are happy enough to see developers put in the effort to land somewhere between "all sim" and "all arcade." As long as the cars behave like cars, like PepeMickey said. I enjoy Grid and Dirt 3, but the handling model could be better.

 

[anim8r_uk]

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/28/grid-autosport-codemasters-racing-genre?

 

[Brend]

^^ How many sims have you mastered to date? And how long have you stuck with each?

Just curious.

Mostly stuck with GT(since the first game), iRacing(2009 to 2012)and Forza over the years, in terms of mastered, unless I can win something like GTAcademy I have no right to claim mastery of anything. Nobody does.

 

[doblocruiser]

New questions answered:

Q) Can replays be saved?
A) Not at this time.

Q) Is the AI as good as it was in TOCA2 and Toca World Touring Cars
A) AI has had a lot of improvements made to it, will leave you to decide if it’s better or not.

Q) Is the classical D-pad layout still available and does it match the thumb stick lap times?
A) By default the d-pad is used to talk to your team engineer. The game hasn't really been made with D-pad controls in mind, just controller sticks and wheels. However, you can customise your controls should you wish.

Q) Do AI opponents also suffer from mechanical damage?
A) Yes

Q) Is there a podium sequence when one has made a podium finish?A) No

Q) Are there bonuses to be unlocked if you reach a certain mileage within a discipline?
A) You do get a ‘discipline level’, more on that soon.

Q) Is there a team manager who keeps you up to date with what's happening on the track?A) You have an engineer but he doesn't really say much on his own. Instead we've allowed you to take control by giving you the ability to request details via the D-pad.

Q) Can cars loose oil which makes a surface slipperyA) No

Q) Why did Codies not add a flag system to GRID ASA) There’s a danger if we go down the route of adding all these traditional sim options that the game will lose a bit of its identity. That’s not to say we won’t look at that kind of system in the future but right now it’s probably a step too far towards sim for Autosport, we’re all about that ‘middle ground’

Q) How does qualifying work? one flying lap or several laps?A) You have x amount of time, set the fastest time. Bit like F1 in that regard.

Q) All cars / all tracks on Custom Online?A) Yes, with a few exceptions (can’t drive a drift car on a non drift route etc)