GT5 vs Live For Speed

[Zevious Z]

Way back in the day I spent a lot of time fiddling with the FFB parameters in F1 Challenge (the game that Simbin first modded to create the original GT Mod which evolved into GTR and GTR2) and posting my settings to the old Racesimcentral forums. In fact I even got a thankyou in the GTR2 credits. I also was lucky enough to get into the alpha and beta test programs for iRacing. I subscribed to iRacing for a couple years after the beta ended as well. It really is a fantastic sim. Now though, GT5 is my game - but thats really more a matter of circumstance and convenience than anything to do with which is more realistic.

There are different ways to approach these things and they can all end up with a decent result. I'd suggest GT5 is more of a "look-up table" sort of a physics engine - data is entered and then things are tweaked and adjusted until there is the impression of a convincing driving experience. Iracing otoh really operates on an engine that has far more actual physics going on under the hood. The tire modelling (which is really a crucial part of a car sim since the tires are the only thing in contact with the road) is just hugely more complex in iRacing than it is in GT5 and its constantly being improved. And the tracks in iRacing are just unbelievably good. As good as GT5's version of the Ring is, if iRacing ever did a scanned version I'd have to subscribe again just to drive it becuase it would be amazing. With a properly set up FFB wheel, iRacing is just incredibly convincing. You really can feel the "rubber on the road" so to speak. GT5's FFB feels really leaden and ham-fisted by comparison.

But GT5 is a beautiful game and it succeeds marvelously at what it wants to do - give you the feeling of driving an incredible array of different cars as well as the fun of acquiring and collecting them. While I wouldn't say its super realistic, its definitely fun and the driving model has enough subtlety that you can run hundreds of laps and never feel like you can't still improve your times.

 

[shirakawaa]

I agree with this. Physicswise GT5 is on the same level as PC-Sims are. At least the games that I played 2 years ago on the PC. Since GT5P I did not touched any PC-Sim. Maybe the tuning is not as good as on PC but the physics are brillant. Just compared to GT Legends, GTR2, rFactor and LFS. Just the FFB is a bit soft and weak in GT5. I like it when you nearly cant hold the wheel and miss that.

And the suspension model, overly simplified in GT5? The tire model (consumption, general behavior and grip, temperatures, etc) ? The aerodynamics model (drag, downforce, slipstream, etc)? The very poor collisions (and collision detection) with other cars and the track/trackside object? Or that in GT5 cars are "glued" to the ground (even if the game gives you the illusion that they're not by allowing rollovers - with really a lot of effort)? And what about the dubious limited slip differential simulation? And the list could go on quite more.

You guys really have guts saying that physics in GT5 are brilliant and comparable to PC sims (or are not able to tell what's wrong/don't have enough experience and expertise to tell the differences besides how hard it is to drive a car in each game). They might be good for a console title, but that's pretty much it. The margin for improvement is huge.

 

[Samus]

Better physics don't necessarily imply that cars are harder to control.

Exactly. When I first played LFS even with a controller I instantly got into the flow and got around the tracks very easily. Because the physics were realistic so they were what I was expecting and predictable. Compare that to Shift 2, I played that for an hour and still couldn't control the cars and make one decent lap because of the laughable physics.

 

[xDriftzzinc]

Lol, what about the clutch? Big difference there also. I prefer LFS' clutch over GT5's and if you have played both then you would agree too.

 

[wajdi1977]

Lol, what about the clutch? Big difference there also. I prefer LFS' clutch over GT5's and if you have played both then you would agree too.

Agree,the clutch in gt5 is a joke and doesn't give any advantage!

 

[Sele1981]

And the suspension model, overly simplified in GT5? The tire model (consumption, general behavior and grip, temperatures, etc) ? The aerodynamics model (drag, downforce, slipstream, etc)? The very poor collisions (and collision detection) with other cars and the track/trackside object? Or that in GT5 cars are "glued" to the ground (even if the game gives you the illusion that they're not by allowing rollovers - with really a lot of effort)? And what about the dubious limited slip differential simulation? And the list could go on quite more.

You guys really have guts saying that physics in GT5 are brilliant and comparable to PC sims (or are not able to tell what's wrong/don't have enough experience and expertise to tell the differences besides how hard it is to drive a car in each game). They might be good for a console title, but that's pretty much it. The margin for improvement is huge.

I said driving physics, the feeling of the car. Not the temperature of the brakes or the tire deformation. Also not the aerodynamics or something else. I only mean how the cars/handling feels when you drive.

You cant compare a game with 1000 cars to an game with 20 cars. The developer can work on each detail for those 20 cars where GT5 just simulates the driving experience.

 

[jjaisli]

Physicswise GT5 is on the same level as PC-Sims are.

I said driving physics, the feeling of the car. Not the temperature of the brakes or the tire deformation. Also not the aerodynamics or something else. I only mean how the cars/handling feels when you drive.

Sele, the temperature of the brakes, tire deformation, aerodynamics, etc is EXACTLY what the physics are all about. How the game 'feels' is simply a matter of organic and seat of the pants comparison. You have it backwards.

 

[DA6righthand]

Jjaisli said it well.

 

[Vaxxtx]

Jjaisli said it well.

Correct. Some people dont understand that a Sim is short for simulation...

Althought GT5 did some things right, it does not compare to a PC sim. If you really think GT5 can compete in physics with the likes of Simbin titles, you are in denial.

GT5 is easly accessable to a wide audience, and does good there. It makes people feel they can race with the best of them, wether or not they can drive in real life. It makes people that may or may not know about cars feel like they are accomplishing something. And that is what it is for.

Then you have PC snobs that want everything as close to real life as possible. They want a simulator. That simulates the car...inlcuding tire models, and real clutch. For instance, in iRacing there is no "hood" or "chase" cam...only cockpit. For the sim lovers its a smaller market that does not appeal to the masses, and it does well for what it is.

 

[Daverytimes]

This whole thread is a laugh a minute. Comparing a PC sim that was designed almost 10 years ago by a small developer on a limited budget to the flagship racing game on the PS3 platform? Granted it's been tweaked and improved along the way, but it would perhaps be more accurate, along an evolutionary time line, to compare it to GT3.

When I bought my PS3 in 2008, it was a financial decision. Buying the PS3 was much cheaper than buying a new (dedicated gaming) PC. And with the money I saved by going the console route, I bought a Playseat and G25. And I harbor no regrets over that decision because I've garnered so much enjoyment out of my PS3 racing forays.

But over the years, the events I put together changed from 5~6 lap sprint races, to fully blown championships lasting several months, with individual races almost 2 hours long. I wanted more. More realism. More true-to-life physics. More 'virtual reality'. I wanted events and races that closely mirrored their real life counter parts. And I found over the years that the majority of PS3 racing games, and indeed, the vast majority of console gamers, didn't share my enthusiasm for virtual racing with quite the same intensity. Just look at my sig. There's a wide chasm in philosophy between what I wanted and what most people "out there" seem to desire. At least, in the console world.

And more and more, I began to wonder if what I really wanted was the kind of racing one allegedly finds on PC sims. And so, I decided to try. About 9 months ago, I bought a moderately powerful gaming PC. I spent countless hours pouring over online forums, weighing in on different PC racing sims: LFS, Race 07 & GTR Evolution, Netkar Pro, RFactor, iRacing and even Ferrari Virtual Academy. The things you can read in these forums makes your head spin. It would be like trying to decide between GT5 and Forza IV and venturing here to GTP and over to Forzacentral and trying to weigh each other's pros and cons by reading forum posts. PC sim racers can be just as biased and blind as PS3 and Xbox sim racing fans. It's unbelievable how closed minded people can be when defending their weapon of choice, without ever really knowing the other side.

After spending weeks, taking notes, and trying to make decisions, I gave up. I simply threw away my notes and went and bought or downloaded nearly all of these games. I tried to stamp out any preconceived notions and start from a fresh sheet of paper. I spent a lot of time with most of them. I only played one at a time and tried to immerse myself in that particular game and really give myself a chance to know it without constant distractions and comparisons. I joined communities for those individual games and tried to concentrate on tweaks and tips and suggestions, while ignoring the unhelpful comparisons. I downloaded updates and community driven content.

The problem is that the 10 year old PC sim is just now getting usurped by current PC Sims. So it is the most appropriate benchmark for any Racing sim, the fact that LFS a 10 year old game (as you suggest, discounting the improvements over the years) is on the same level as Iracing a 2008 game means that LFS is a proper sim.

 

[eight6er]

Yeah it's easy enough to go from GT5 to LFS, and to an extent they are similar to drive. When it comes down purely to the driving experience LFS will win hands down, LFS is the only sim I have played where you get realistic results in pretty much any driving situation, most other sims are only good at driving fast. GT5 did a good job for a console I think, you can drive fast and drift a bit too, but it doesn't come close to LFS for drifting, for me drifting really shows GT5's flaws and not only in physics but in controls too. The best thing about GT5 for me is I don't need a wheel to enjoy it.

 

[Zer0]

GT5 is easly accessable to a wide audience, and does good there. It makes people feel they can race with the best of them, wether or not they can drive in real life. It makes people that may or may not know about cars feel like they are accomplishing something. And that is what it is for.

GT Academy disagree with you.

 

[Daverytimes]

Correct. Some people dont understand that a Sim is short for simulation...

Althought GT5 did some things right, it does not compare to a PC sim. If you really think GT5 can compete in physics with the likes of Simbin titles, you are in denial.

GT5 is easly accessable to a wide audience, and does good there. It makes people feel they can race with the best of them, wether or not they can drive in real life. It makes people that may or may not know about cars feel like they are accomplishing something. And that is what it is for.

Then you have PC snobs that want everything as close to real life as possible. They want a simulator. That simulates the car...inlcuding tire models, and real clutch. For instance, in iRacing there is no "hood" or "chase" cam...only cockpit. For the sim lovers its a smaller market that does not appeal to the masses, and it does well for what it is.

They are actually accomplishing something, people like Jann and Brian who never raced in their life took 3rd in a 24hr race today. That alone shows you that GT5 (while not the most accurate sim) does help people cultivate better racing etiquette (is that the right word, lol).

 

[Crumpet]

Live for Speed - best tyre model on any game ever..

All I have to say..

 

[Zevious Z]

They are actually accomplishing something, people like Jann and Brian who never raced in their life took 3rd in a 24hr race today. That alone shows you that GT5 (while not the most accurate sim) does help people cultivate better racing etiquette (is that the right word, lol).

this would be true if GT5 were the only game those fellows had played. I've raced with bryan for many years. I was in a GPL league with him back in the early 2000s. He's also been a member of iRacing (where he regularly competes for championships) for years. He's one of the dudes who generally gets called an "alien" by those of us who move around the track at a comparitive snails pace. He's also got a fair bit of r/w autocross experience. I assure you GT5 didn't really teach him a whole lot...

Don't get me wrong, he's a GT fan. I first met him on a Granturismo forum in the 90's when GT1 and 2 were the games.

 

[Daverytimes]

this would be true if GT5 were the only game those fellows had played. I've raced with bryan for many years. I was in a GPL league with him back in the early 2000s. He's also been a member of iRacing (where he regularly competes for championships) for years. He's one of the dudes who generally gets called an "alien" by those of us who move around the track at a comparitive snails pace. He's also got a fair bit of r/w autocross experience. I assure you GT5 didn't really teach him a whole lot...

I guess so, lol. I wonder if Bryan had similar experiences.

 

[another_jakhole]

I already knew that about Bryan.

GT Academy disagree with you.

You can't disregard this, because in the U.S. GT Academy, there was a 19 year old, Chris, with very little (not even days worth) experience in a real car. He was a finalist.

 

[Vaxxtx]

GT Academy disagree with you.

They are actually accomplishing something, people like Jann and Brian who never raced in their life took 3rd in a 24hr race today. That alone shows you that GT5 (while not the most accurate sim) does help people cultivate better racing etiquette (is that the right word, lol).

So you are pointing out 2 people out of how many million that purchased GT5?

If you didnt know yet, GT Acadmey is a marketing strategy. Obviously working. If EA and NFS did the same thing, would you also call it a sim?

I never said it couldnt help you in real life racing, but PC sims do it better still. Want to bring up real drivers, and real sim practice? Want to talk about Greger Huttu? How about a huge list of modern race drivers that use a PC sim?

http://www.iracing.com/multimedia/videos/

Point is no matter how much you think GT5 simulates how a car reacts to the road, its still far off as far as physics, when you compare it to a PC sim.

 

[Tenacious D]

Wow. You must be smoking some good stuff to not see a difference in graphics, and physics. I wont even mention a ported track with a bunch of standards on it for GT5.

Now LFS was made in '03. Its hard to make it look pretty. Then you have S2 for the PC which with the mods looks much better than anything on console. rFactor looking great as well, and even iRacing 2.0 is pretty to look at.

Althought GT5 did some things right, it does not compare to a PC sim. If you really think GT5 can compete in physics with the likes of Simbin titles, you are in denial.

Point is no matter how much you think GT5 simulates how a car reacts to the road, its still far off as far as physics, when you compare it to a PC sim.

Erm... yeah, no bias here.

I have a lot of respect for the sims, because they all strive to be as close to reality as they can. I'm going to lump Forza 4, LFS and the GTRs in the discussion because those are the most highly regarded games, other than iRacing. I'm leaving it out because its "perfectness" is widely disputed, but the excessive cost isn't, which is why some of us refer to it as "iRenting." I think the debate should be kept to the games mere mortals can afford, even with DLC.

In the sims and Forza, a number of physical aspects are represented very well. Collision ballistics in LFS and F4 are superb, they look very realistic. F4 has marvelous body roll, and racing a sports car on stock suspensions is almost wobbly, which sometimes seems overdone, but then I've never taken a 240SX around turns as fast either. While the LFS tire model is a work in progress, all those games have very good tire physics. Torque is well done, and you have to apply power carefully. I can't comment on F4's feedback because I can't afford that expensive Fanatec yet, and won't for a good long while, so with the cheapy MS Wheel it's just okay. And I know this will likely ruffle the feathers of the Forza fans, but Forza has always felt strange, and F4 is the strangest yet. It feels very little like any racer I've ever played, very difficult and hard to read, and as such it seems that a smaller segment of sim fans get along with it well. It doesn't help a bit that the tire sounds are almost completely drowned out by the engine racket unless you race in bumper cam, until the tires really start to complain. In contrast, while the sims are touchier in some ways, racing a car is still fairly intuitive. I quibble over those who love rFactor, as it feels to me like the car uses center of gravity physics like arcade racers do, and the car pivots around the GoG in just about every way, but it's looking like rFactor 2 has worked on this. I haven't tried any of the rF1 patches because the game just doesn't appeal to me since the release of Prologue.

In some ways GT5 is lacking, let's be honest. The feedback from the game is very good but could still be better. The cars are slightly better planted to the track, the collision physics is decent but lack some of the ballistic qualities of some of the others. The clutch implementation is okay. Torque dynamics are okay, but it's very hard to spin a car with average horsepower, while it's more realistic in the others. Tire modeling is still being worked on, though it does feel very good to me.

Having said that though, GT5 is SO close that I do agree that differences are really pretty small. It feels so close to LFS and GTR Evo that I haven't touched my sims in years. In fact, since Prologue came out, as even its physics are remarkably similar to my sims. I can see that the sims will have a clear advantage in physics if that fraction better realism is your thing, or online league racing, which is iRenting's forte. But when you consider how close GT5's dynamics are - and be honest here too, they're quite close, along with all the cars and tracks and features offered, this is why it has global appeal to millions of fans which the other games don't.

In fact, Forza and Gran Turismo both are experiences which other racers just can't come close to. But... well, weather. Time of day changes. Racing on the Nordschleife as the sun sets and weather creeps in. Even fireworks at night. Throw in marvelous car feel and handling, with a TON of cars, and as a racing experience, this is why I find GT5 to have no equal.

 

[Mac K]

So you are pointing out 2 people out of how many million that purchased GT5?

If you didnt know yet, GT Acadmey is a marketing strategy. Obviously working. If EA and NFS did the same thing, would you also call it a sim?

I never said it couldnt help you in real life racing, but PC sims do it better still. Want to bring up real drivers, and real sim practice? Want to talk about Greger Huttu? How about a huge list of modern race drivers that use a PC sim?

http://www.iracing.com/multimedia/videos/

Point is no matter how much you think GT5 simulates how a car reacts to the road, its still far off as far as physics, when you compare it to a PC sim.

Again to be fair, those other sims use the "real racing drivers play our game" line as a marketing strategy as well. I know that Dale Jr is hugely involved with Iracing, and people even claimed they've raced with him, but I can't see him sitting around on his off days going "hey I'd better go play some Iracing so I can sharpen my skills"it just doesn't make sense to me if I'm honest, and that's why I believe they just "use" him as a marketing tool to draw people in. I'm not saying he doesn't play Iracing, but I'm sure if he wasn't getting paid, he wouldn't be playing it. See my point?

 

[Zer0]

I guess so, lol. I wonder if Bryan had similar experiences.

I guess you mean Jann. There is a GTP interview:

GTP: How well did Gran Turismo 5 prepare you for the challenges of driving a real car fast?

JM: A great deal. At the national finals we had some gaming on Gran Turismo 5 and then went straight into a 330 BHP Nissan 370Z, and I was amazed by the end of it how natural it felt and when the car got into an oversteer situation (which I’d never experienced leading up to that), and I was able to control it with throttle and steering input. So, Gran Turismo has shown it’s one of the best simulators out there and it can help your driving in real life situations.

BH: For me, beyond the basic things like line and how to drive the car, it develops muscle memory for understeer and oversteer situations. With the force feedback wheel you can actually feel what’s going on with the front of the car. The other thing is focus, if you do a longer online race with other people, you really have to maintain your focus at a very high level for a long time. A lapse in concentration can send you off the track or into a wall. At the national finals in Florida, I wasn’t always the quickest driver but I tended to make the fewest mistakes and I think that’s why I came out on the top to go to Silverstone. Link


GT5 is a better tool than some people want to admit, there are still a lot of prejudices with console games and specially with the GT brand. Is not a perfect simulator but does very well what is supposed to do. In some cases there are no more authentic options available.

GT Acadmey is a marketing strategy. Obviously working. If EA and NFS did the same thing, would you also call it a sim?

I would call it "suicide".

 

[another_jakhole]

Oh wow ^^^^. I just read your post. 👍

Muscle memory, that's what I tried to say \/ \/ \/

So you are pointing out 2 people out of how many million that purchased GT5?

If you didnt know yet, GT Acadmey is a marketing strategy. Obviously working. If EA and NFS did the same thing, would you also call it a sim?

I never said it couldnt help you in real life racing, but PC sims do it better still. Want to bring up real drivers, and real sim practice? Want to talk about Greger Huttu? How about a huge list of modern race drivers that use a PC sim?

http://www.iracing.com/multimedia/videos/

Point is no matter how much you think GT5 simulates how a car reacts to the road, its still far off as far as physics, when you compare it to a PC sim.

So people know, I agree with this, 100% and it would be 👎 to think, otherwise. GT5 is still a great tool.

The mechanics of racing (in other words, car control?) when you use GT5, or any other sim/"cade", sort of transition to the real-world.

I wish it were simple enough for me to explain like it is for TenaciousD.

 

[Vaxxtx]

Again to be fair, those other sims use the "real racing drivers play our game" line as a marketing strategy as well. I know that Dale Jr is hugely involved with Iracing, and people even claimed they've raced with him, but I can't see him sitting around on his off days going "hey I'd better go play some Iracing so I can sharpen my skills"it just doesn't make sense to me if I'm honest, and that's why I believe they just "use" him as a marketing tool to draw people in. I'm not saying he doesn't play Iracing, but I'm sure if he wasn't getting paid, he wouldn't be playing it. See my point?

I agree it helps marketing. Dale I assume is paid, and every game even NFS uses real drivers to help sell it.

But go through some of the videos, there are plenty that do not get paid, and use it for learning tracks. Some of the Jetti TDI Cup drivers use it, and dont get paid, just for an example.

Greg Huttu is a prime example as well.

We are getting off topic I guess. But IMO its silly to compare consoles with PC sims...for real car physics.

 

[Zevious Z]

Again to be fair, those other sims use the "real racing drivers play our game" line as a marketing strategy as well. I know that Dale Jr is hugely involved with Iracing, and people even claimed they've raced with him, but I can't see him sitting around on his off days going "hey I'd better go play some Iracing so I can sharpen my skills"it just doesn't make sense to me if I'm honest, and that's why I believe they just "use" him as a marketing tool to draw people in. I'm not saying he doesn't play Iracing, but I'm sure if he wasn't getting paid, he wouldn't be playing it. See my point?

gotta disagree with you there. DJ is a huge sim racing fan. He's been part of iracing since the alpha and at least as of 18 months or so ago when I last subscribed he was a regular in the online races. He also regularly discusses the sim on the iRacing forums. He's a real fan - its not just becuase he may or may not be getting paid by iRacing...

 

[Short Bus]

I'm going to lump Forza 4, LFS and the GTRs in the discussion because those are the most highly regarded games, other than iRacing. I'm leaving it out because its "perfectness" is widely disputed, but the excessive cost isn't, which is why some of us refer to it as "iRenting." I think the debate should be kept to the games mere mortals can afford, even with DLC.

I don't think anybody would really claim that iRacing is perfect, but it does offer something that no other sim can.... structured, and very easy to access competition.

As much as I like GT, at the end of the day it's usefulness to me is limited by the fact that it's offline play runs out pretty quick and the online play feels like a poorly implemented afterthought.

So yes, it is expensive, but consider that the cost of the greater level of detail they go into when developing the tracks and cars, *and* running the server architecture required to ensure smooth, lag free racing.

.....and I think you're being a tad on the dramatic side in terms of it's cost. It's not *that* expensive, just more expensive than the alternatives.

 

[Zevious Z]

BH: For me, beyond the basic things like line and how to drive the car, it develops muscle memory for understeer and oversteer situations. With the force feedback wheel you can actually feel what’s going on with the front of the car. The other thing is focus, if you do a longer online race with other people, you really have to maintain your focus at a very high level for a long time. A lapse in concentration can send you off the track or into a wall. At the national finals in Florida, I wasn’t always the quickest driver but I tended to make the fewest mistakes and I think that’s why I came out on the top to go to Silverstone. Link

All true of course, but I assure you if you talked to Bryan in private he would tell you that iRacing is the better sim...

 

[another_jakhole]

Well, yaaaah ^^^

 

[Iso Octane]

:

You guys really have guts saying that physics in GT5 are brilliant and comparable to PC sims (or are not able to tell what's wrong/don't have enough experience and expertise to tell the differences besides how hard it is to drive a car in each game). They might be good for a console title, but that's pretty much it. The margin for improvement is huge.

Hold on there, it goes both ways.

Some folks are so taken in by the big budget production of Iracing that they don't realize its faults. And they are many discussiona detailing their tire model problems.

 

[lowwatt]

And what does that tell you?

it tells me the game is horrible and needs a tcs option

 

[m8h3r]

LFS is live for speed? ive been wondering that for a while now and it keep popping up recentally.