GT5 Demo vs SCC

  • Thread starter Thread starter Biggles
  • 91 comments
  • 7,842 views
I don't believe there's a "conspiracy" in order to sell more Logitech products. If this was the case why not favour "gated" wheels to sell the more expensive G25/G27s? SCC appears to "assist" pad users (although it's hard to be 100% sure about this). Is there some financial motivation for this?

Surely, it's got to be difficult to put two such different control methods on an entirely even footing? Frankly, I'd be more surprised if a game were able to make them exactly equivalent than if there were slight inequities. Although a lot of the fastest GT5D times seem to have been set using DFPs or DFGTs, I see others set using a pad.

I find it hard to understand why so many racing game enthusiasts don't bother to buy a wheel. Space is obviously a problem in some cases, but as far as cost is concerned, the cheaper Logitech wheels cost less than the price of two PS3 games, & I know many avid PS3 racers who appear to have dozens of games, but continue to race using a pad.

Personally, I am busy lobbying for developers to make their games easier for the elderly & incompetent (not incontinent). :nervous:
 
Biggles
Personally, I am busy lobbying for developers to make their games easier for the elderly & incompetent (not incontinent). :nervous:
Click to expand...

Would it be in all together poor taste to ask if you could leave me your Fanatec wheel in your will? :sly:
 
jjaisli
Would it be in all together poor taste to ask if you could leave me your Fanatec wheel in your will? :sly:
Click to expand...

If he replies 'Yes', I just have the perfect Xmas gift for you Jeff:



















arsenic1.jpg
 
Bullie!
tsk.gif
I'm surprised at you. That's so...boorish. I was thinking more along the lines of extending the 512S event final to 20 laps. Stress can be a...killer. :sly:

At any rate, Biggles has very little to worry about. Much like "old man" Schumacher, the truth is, Grannie Biggles is in much better shape than I am.
 
compared to me, all you guys are kids ... fast as snails ... :trouble:


.... and what has Ralf got to do with this? Does he have a fanatec wheel? :D
 
Well, I haven't tried the Fanatec with GT5D yet. I definitely prefer the G25 for F1CE, I prefer the G25 with FC/SCC & I'm not sure about GT5P/D yet. The only game where I feel the Fanatec is definitely superior is Shift.

The GT3 S wheel is much thicker & a little larger in diameter than the G25, & it's covered in "Alcantara" (whatever the hell that is) leather, which has kind of a suede finish. Overall, it gives a much "cushier", smoother feel to driving than the thin, "boney" feel of the G25. The H-shifter is very stiff & in its present mounting - on two bars which stick out the side of the wheel unit - shifting is a bit tricky. When I do use the Fanatec wheel, I use the G25 pedals with it, because otherwise I have to take the G25 pedals off the Playseat frame & mount the Clubsport pedals, which is just too much of a hassle (& they don't mount properly at the minute anyway).

It may be that I just prefer the G25 because I've spent so much time with it, & I haven't given the Fanatec enough time yet. But for F1CE, which I still enjoy playing, the Fanatec wheel doesn't feel right at all IMO.

But to get back on topic: I've never tried the DFGT wheel, but I did use the DFP for a short while, & while the G25 is definitely nicer build & finish quality & has the H-shifter & clutch, I think the DFP, which I believe can be picked up pretty cheap now, gives 75% of the experience, & probably 100% of the speed of a G25, at a very reasonable price.
 
I thought the Fanatec wheel was your favourite for FC because you had less center deadzone with it?
 
I thought the Fanatec wheel was your favourite for FC because you had less center deadzone with it?
Click to expand...

It's true that it has less deadzone, but I've not used the Fanatec enough to become really comfortable with it.
 
Agree completely with AlanG's comments. The throttle is not linear like SCC's, so i find it hard to carry any corner speed. I end up squaring the corners (sorry, a motorcycling term there) off to get a good drive down the straights.
It seems the pad debate has reared its ugly head again. I can't afford a wheel so that the end of that, and thats the case with many people. With the standard car you can't even turn the TC off if you're using the pad. Why?
If anybody thinks pad users have unfair advantage with SCC then they must be joking. The pad 'assistance' is annoying and normally ends up with me either understeering straight on, or oversteering across the inside curb.
Ended up with a 1.37.116 with the tuned car and then got bored.
 
I'm not going to get dragged in to the pro's and con's in GT or SCC will just say this anyone who is to have driving lessons in the near future and want to get some idea of what driving a car is like play SCC not GT.
 
:crazy::crazy: What a blasphemous thread we have here?!??... lol... Im surprised no one from the GT threads has wondered in here by accident... they'd have a heart attack... :p

Anyway... playing the new GT demo it reminded me a lot of driving in SCC... I dont know if anyone had that feeling? When I first tried to drive the new demo like I would drive in GT5:P, I found myself spinning off track and going nowhere... Then I adjusted and drove like how I would in SCC and voila! Stayed on track and put in some decent times for my skill level... So I think GT is headed in the right direction, but I still consider SCC more of a sim though with its consistent physics.... A developer should step up one day and give us what we want...:D The best elements from each racing "sim" and make the game based on those aspects... That would be heaven wouldnt it?
 
Last edited:
Well, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say, I actually think the physics and car behavior of GT5TT is more true to life than SCC. Although (1) neither are perfect and (2) they're both very close and (3) in application, they go about it in different ways. (Of course, keep in mind that we're comparing 2 cars on 1 track with 44 cars on 20 tracks).

I think the difference is, SCC tends to give one higher (read exaggerated) levels of feedback through the wheel in regards to grip levels and the limits of adhesion than is realistic. GT5TT has definitely improved in this regard compared to Prolgue which was relatively flat and didn't offer ENOUGH feedback. But when one is missing a lot of additional sensory input that driving a real car provides, it's often hard to tell in TT exactly how hard and how far you can push, how much throttle input you can add, before you start over driving the car. Where as in SCC, it's much clearer when you approach those limits and driving becomes more 'organic' and less 'clinical'. And both need work on improving the 'feel' of what happens when you slam on the brakes or hit bumps and ruts. To be realistic, I don't know how much further developers can go without resorting to full hydraulic rigs. I prefer the FFB from SCC because it offers a better sense of what the car is doing. But in real life this input would be more apparent from the centrifugal forces on your body.

I also think the level traction over grass (assuming it's dry) is too high in SCC but not high enough in TT. But in general, I think both developers have managed to create pretty sophisticated models of how cars interact and perform on the road that is consistent with their real world counter parts. Although I would have to give the (slight) nod to TT.


EDIT:
Blitz187
What a blasphemous thread we have here?!??... lol... Im surprised no one from the GT threads has wondered in here by accident... they'd have a heart attack...
Click to expand...

I've been following some of those threads and I remember how the discussions in Biggles' infamous '10 Reasons Why' thread went. I'm nearly 40 and I have no patience for silly fan boys. It's not worth it post a topic like this in those threads because for every reasoned response there are three other who simply open their mouths and burp.
 
Last edited:
jjaisli
Well, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say, I actually think the physics and car behavior of GT5TT is more true to life than SCC. Although (1) neither are perfect and (2) they're both very close and (3) in application, they go about it in different ways. (Of course, keep in mind that we're comparing 2 cars on 1 track with 44 cars on 20 tracks).

I think the difference is, SCC tends to give one higher (read exaggerated) levels of feedback through the wheel in regards to grip levels and the limits of adhesion than is realistic. GT5TT has definitely improved in this regard compared to Prolgue which was relatively flat and didn't offer ENOUGH feedback. But when one is missing a lot of additional sensory input that driving a real car provides, it's often hard to tell in TT exactly how hard and how far you can push, how much throttle input you can add, before you start over driving the car. Where as in SCC, it's much clearer when you approach those limits and driving becomes more 'organic' and less 'clinical'. And both need work on improving the 'feel' of what happens when you slam on the brakes or hit bumps and ruts. To be realistic, I don't know how much further developers can go without resorting to full hydraulic rigs. I prefer the FFB from SCC because it offers a better sense of what the car is doing. But in real life this input would be more apparent from the centrifugal forces on your body.

I also think the level traction over grass (assuming it's dry) is too high in SCC but not high enough in TT. But in general, I think both developers have managed to create pretty sophisticated models of how cars interact and perform on the road that is consistent with their real world counter parts. Although I would have to give the (slight) nod to TT.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you say here, I dont think I couldve put it better myself... But I still tend to lean more to SCC for realism and consistency in this case ;)

EDIT:


I've been following some of those threads and I remember how the discussions in Biggles' infamous '10 Reasons Why' thread went. I'm nearly 40 and I have no patience for silly fan boys. It's not worth it post a topic like this in those threads because for every reasoned response there are three other who simply open their mouths and burp.
Click to expand...

Yep I agree totally here as well.... thats why I was going on about it, but that was obvious I assume :)👍
 
sarrinen69
I end up squaring the corners (sorry, a motorcycling term there) off to get a good drive down the straights.

With the standard car you can't even turn the TC off if you're using the pad. Why?.
Click to expand...

Not familiar with the term, but I'm pretty sure I know what you mean. For example, with the left-hander at turn-6, I find myself adapting the line to brake very late, slowing to slower than normal mid-corner, turn more sharply than normal, and take a straighter exit. Sounds like "squaring" could refer to that.

And the mandatory TC-7 on the Normal car is just stupid.

Although I wouldn't say pad users have an unfair advantage in SCC, we do have an easier time than wheel users in some ways. For pad users, SCC seems to have a more traditional implementation of the steering, so that the speed of the car (when not sliding) dictates how much lock is accepted. So for almost all of the corners, memory from repetition will suggest what speed to take in, and you can just hit full lock. In contrary to this, the pad users have to put up with the auto-correction, steering zones, and have to avoid going outside of the racing line.

Full-lock steering is with the exception of when the speed is below around 50kph. At these times, we have to steer the right amount, otherwise the car will understeer (and actual tyre noise!!). I just wish all corners were like this for pad users in SCC. The GT series does implement this kind of absolute steering for pad users, in parallel with wheel users, where you have to steer the right amount at all times. This is a large part of the reason why I prefer GT, because it's more of a challenge. And no, negotiating with non-linear throttle is not a challenge; it's just a pain in the :grumpy:
 
I'm in agreement with everything in jjaisi's post. Eutechnyx may have exaggerated the actual feel of RL FFB in order to better recreate the overall feel of driving. GT5P/D may be more accurate in the details of the physics, but they are deficient in providing the basic feel of driving. In comparison to SCC, GT5D feels flat & bland - the information is there, but you have to tease it out.

(I have no idea how this difference expresses itself through a pad in the two games, but I am sincerely hoping Santa brings our friends sarrinen & Alan wheels for Xmas so that they can have their lap times screwed up for a few weeks experience the pleasure of driving with a good FFB wheel. :sly: )

I drive fairly differently in GT5P/D than in SCC. In SCC I brake early, let off the brakes to rebalance the weight-distribution in the car, often let the tires roll for a fraction of a second or more[/I] as the car's weight shifts to the outside tires & then reapply throttle as I come through the apex. The extent to which I do this depends on the characteristics of the car & the nature of the particular corner. At the downhill off-camber left-hand corner (called Savelli I believe) at Mugello, I am off the accelerator & brakes for quite a while in order to balance the car as it plunges down & around the track.

In GT5P/D I find it's necessary in order to get a fast time (well sort-of fast time :indiff:) to wait until the last possible second to slam on the brakes & keep the brakes on, until I get on the throttle & push the car around the corner. There is never any sensation of balancing the weight while doing this & the car always feels like its weight is evenly distributed between the four tires. Although I don't do this (partly because I don't want to get into the habit of doing this IRL), I'm pretty sure left-foot braking (not heel-&-toe) would result in faster lap times in GT5P/D, because I suspect keeping constant throttle applied would result in faster lap times. On the Eiger track, I always find it strange (& unrealistic) that it spite of the very steep, dropping, off-camber corners, the cars never feel like they are leaning - body-rolling - around these corners. In addition, the effects of braking & gear shifting in GT5P/D are barely represented at all.

All in all, driving in SCC is just a much more physical experience, where you actually feel like you're driving a car, whereas GT5D remains a much more cerebral experience.
 
Biggles
...SCC I brake early, let off the brakes to rebalance the weight-distribution in the car, often let the tires roll for a fraction of a second or more[/I] as the car's weight shifts to the outside tires & then reapply throttle as I come through the apex. The extent to which I do this depends on the characteristics of the car & the nature of the particular corner...In GT5P/D there is never any sensation of balancing the weight while doing this & the car always feels like its weight is evenly distributed between the four tires. Although I don't do this (partly because I don't want to get into the habit of doing this IRL), I'm pretty sure left-foot braking (not heel-&-toe) would result in faster lap times in GT5P/D, because I suspect keeping constant throttle applied would result in faster lap times. On the Eiger track, I always find it strange (& unrealistic) that it spite of the very steep, dropping, off-camber corners, the cars never feel like they are leaning - body-rolling - around these corners. In addition, the effects of braking & gear shifting in GT5P/D are barely represented at all.
Click to expand...

This is a good highlight of some of the differences and an interesting discussion of what each does right (or let's say, better than the other).

- SCC clearly has an edge over GT5 in how one can feel and sense the weight and balance of the car moving both forward and back as well as left and right. Eutechnyx did an amazing job of transmitting these forces through the FFB. But again, I have to say, it's not that the 'effect' is missing from GT5 in it's physics model but more a matter that we simply don't feel it the same way through the steering wheel. And that's why I say, in a real car, we would feel these forces in the seat of our pants. But as such, that's what I meant when I say, driving in SCC is much more organic, because you can feel these forces transmitted through the FFB where as in GT5, you have very little sense of weight transfer.

- I do think though, that SCC exaggerates this transfer of weight compared to real life and especially in the older cars such as the 365 or 250 LM. And as a result, those cars, driven at the limit, do tend to exhibit some rather funky suspension characteristics. Although, this is only an assumption on my part.

- SCC is CLEARLY much better than GT5P/TT in regards to weight transfer under braking or changing gears. It's night and day. There are some times when you really have to think about shifting (up or down) at a particular spot in SCC because you know holding the gear out a bit longer (for example) won't upset the balance of the car before braking. In GT5 there is no sense of this. Although again, it depends on the car. Changing gears in the FXX is slick, quick and seemless, exactly as you'd expect in the real car. But a major ordeal in the 250 TR. Again, SCC got this right. In GT5 the transmission seems to have very little affect on the drivetrain.

- One thing GT5 did get very right in my opinion is the reaction of the car when you've clearly lost control. In many cases, if you fail to catch it immediately, you're just a passanger. But in SCC, I feel if you lose the car, it's often a bit too predictable. And in this sense, there's an underlying level of sophistication and interaction in GT5's physics model between the tires, the road and the direction of the car that's just missing in SCC under some situations.

But these are all nits to pick and both offer a sophisticated and impressive physics model--clearly the top two in PS3 land.
 
Alan_G
For pad users, SCC seems to have a more traditional implementation of the steering, so that the speed of the car (when not sliding) dictates how much lock is accepted. So for almost all of the corners, memory from repetition will suggest what speed to take in, and you can just hit full lock. In contrary to this, the pad users have to put up with the auto-correction, steering zones, and have to avoid going outside of the racing line.

Full-lock steering is with the exception of when the speed is below around 50kph. At these times, we have to steer the right amount, otherwise the car will understeer (and actual tyre noise!!). I just wish all corners were like this for pad users in SCC. The GT series does implement this kind of absolute steering for pad users, in parallel with wheel users, where you have to steer the right amount at all times. This is a large part of the reason why I prefer GT, because it's more of a challenge. And no, negotiating with non-linear throttle is not a challenge; it's just a pain in the :grumpy:
Click to expand...

I see many good analyses in this thread.

The steering assist (pad) is my biggest complaint about SCC/FC. It forces you to drive according to the racing line. In reality most times there are different ways to drive a corner fast but SCC doesn't give you this opportunity. Make a small mistake and you loose a lot of time when in reality you could have corrected your mistake without loosing much time.
 
The steering assist (pad) is my biggest complaint about SCC/FC. It forces you to drive according to the racing line. In reality most times there are different ways to drive a corner fast but SCC doesn't give you this opportunity. Make a small mistake and you loose a lot of time when in reality you could have corrected your mistake without loosing much time.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it is kind of annoying how Alan always gets in the way because he's always "losing time"! But the rest of us are a tolerant bunch, so we just put up with it. ;)
 
i feel like a story teller today, any way here is may view. will i work for bmw as a group certified technician we aften have track day were we take cars on track for customers our some press, most recently i when alone to killarney were i had to override ASC & DTC on a E93 M3 and a E88 135I they both have similar power but two way deferent torque curves the M has top end rpm were i producers its power were the 135 pull like a demand low down with all the driving aids turned off you think you will lose the car at the rear no way.. its to balanced you must really be dum to lose one off these 2 cars.. my point a 370z not as powerful but yet it spins the rear on the exist of every corner with tc on 7 i dont mined if tc is off but come on so not real with the pad out even the wheel. in scc you can feel the car move around the weight tranfer like the real car.. plus pad users must follow the line as does any racing driver i loaded someone ghost as we can and the lines he uses dont make any sense but his fast,,
 
summary.. for us pad users our me in GT5D it feels like i am driving on ice,, not real for a normal car which is not faster than a M3,, also there are many very fast wheel users in scc like, henry, lamurtapela in SCC pad some tracks wheel others it to close to call.. gt5d wheel only in gt4 my pad was good and fast, gt5 no way,, they need to do something about it,, even the playing fields thats all... SCC simulation game gt5 arcade game not even a driving simulation as they profess... thank you Ant..
 
So it is confrimed, like more than 1000 cars in the new GT5 CE... WOW.. BUT THE QUESTION STILL REMAINS will they do any thing about pad support...? We will have to wait and see.. i am impressed 1 million european down loads, You go guys...
 
I still would like to see some shake & vibration in the visuals & a little bumpiness in the FFB - IRL you obviously feel the bumps through your seat, but you also feel them through the wheel, as in F1CE. I actually think those things are more important that having amazing looking replays (which is what GT5 obviously has).
 
arvore
Incredebly well done,no?
Click to expand...

Feeling the need for some kind of challenge, I put in GT5P yesterday again. 15 minutes later had enough; definitely this time won't be touching any GT related stuff again, unless GT5 drives properly for pad users.

They are entitled to do whatever they want. If they want to make it great for wheels and rubbish for pads, it's their choice, even if it is in any way to nurture Logitech deal. That's just business.

The problem is sales. In my opinion, they kind of are threading a thin line with sales for GT5. The vast, vast majority of customers will be pad users. Even if a significant percentage of them are barely casual users, they all count. I am slightly surprised just how much people have caught onto the handling problems for pad users, in particular with the throttle. Personally, I won't buy GT5 before trying it out properly, and if I don't like it I simply won't buy it. I've realised that many others will feel the same way. This is only the pad-user perspective.

From wheel users I'm also hearing a lot of discontent, not just from the FC/SCC crowd, but even some of the pure GT fans who don't like the feel of it (many posts on the GT5 GTP forums, where rebels are quickly gunned down).
 
I thought i was in a minority of people who had problems with steering and throttle control in GT IE the lack of it, when using a pad. Glad to see it's not my shortcomings, but an obvious problem with the game.
 
There's no way they're making it deliberately hard with the pad. They would have no reason for wanting to alienate pad users, who are by far their biggest customers. It's just the way GT is (at least this generation of GT). Believe me, it's not that easy with a wheel either.

Hopefully they'll make improvements to the FFB & fix the throttle sensitivity with the pad - both things that have been extensively commented on - before releasing the full game.
 
Last edited:

Latest Posts

Back