GT5p vs GRID (First, and only, take)

  • Thread starter sxboyd
  • 298 comments
  • 20,403 views
Although, nothing will change the fact that Codemasters used to make simulators and now do not, which some people may be bitter about.
Not only that, but now that CM has acquired the exclusive rights to future F1 games, those of us who have been big fans of F1 games, like F1CE, that offer an excellent sim style F1 experience, are really VERY concerned about the very real possibility that CM will simply repackage GRiD with F1 graphics.

Especially after reading some of the comments from CM that basically say just that. :eek:

Don't get me wrong though. I actually really enjoy DiRT and GRiD, for what they do well, and I'm not opposed to a really well done arcade style racing game. It's just that I much prefer a sim style racing game, especially when it comes to F1 racing... and with CM having the exclusive rights, it's not as iff we will even get a choice. 👎



Because they were designed with different audiences in mind. Just because a game was designed with x majority in mind doesn't mean people who are fans of y genre aren't going to like the game.

They are still entirely different sorts of games and therefore shouldn't be looked at in the same way.
Very well said, and I fall solidly in the group that thoroughly enjoys both GT5P and GRiD for what each one does brilliantly, and for the different gameplay style each offers. 👍
 
You are missing my point, I'm looking at the thread in general. These games shouldn't be compared because they aren't in the same sub-genre of racing games. It would be like comparing Need for Speed or PGR to a installment of GT. Different types of games designed with a different type of gamer in mind. Just because you are a fan of both doesn't mean everyone is, many members on the boards hate the NFS series, but obviously love GT.

Comparing these games are like comparing apples to oranges, both are fruit but very different kinds.

I know not everyone is a fan of both, but not everyone is biased one way or the other, which is how you seem to think it is. If people are biased towards one, they can avoid the thread. Telling us the comparison is pointless, is hardly constructive for those interested in both games, and makes no difference to those who aren't. This thread is here, people are posting in it how they see fit, so comparisons are being made whether you like it or not. Telling people you don't like it, won't change much because most people here know GRiD is completely different to GT in terms of the racing genre. Those who don't find out here. No harm done in that, is there?
 
I know not everyone is a fan of both, but not everyone is biased one way or the other, which is how you seem to think it is. If people are biased towards one, they can avoid the thread. Telling us the comparison is pointless, is hardly constructive for those interested in both games, and makes no difference to those who aren't. This thread is here, people are posting in it how they see fit, so comparisons are being made whether you like it or not. Telling people you don't like it, won't change much because most people here know GRiD is completely different to GT in terms of the racing genre. Those who don't find out here. No harm done in that, is there?

I'm not talking about what game you prefer or what one you think is better or what you are a fan of. What I am saying is that Grid was designed with arcade fans in mind and GT5P was designed with simulation fans in mind. Yes there will be crossover in terms of players but if you brought Grid expecting a sim game like GT5P then it's your fault for not researching.

They shouldn't be compared, they aren't the same and were not designed with the same criteria in mind. Only compare like things. Comparing GT to Forza, GTR, or other sim game is what you should be doing. Compare Grid to NFS: Pro Street since they seem to offer a similar gaming experience.
 
I'm not talking about what game you prefer or what one you think is better or what you are a fan of. What I am saying is that Grid was designed with arcade fans in mind and GT5P was designed with simulation fans in mind. Yes there will be crossover in terms of players but if you brought Grid expecting a sim game like GT5P then it's your fault for not researching.

They shouldn't be compared, they aren't the same and were not designed with the same criteria in mind. Only compare like things. Comparing GT to Forza, GTR, or other sim game is what you should be doing. Compare Grid to NFS: Pro Street since they seem to offer a similar gaming experience.

I still fail to see why it is so wrong, people seeing these peoples comparisons, may be doing their research through this thread. I agree totally, directly comparing one to the other, e.g. comparing physics, is a bit pointless, but someone who isn't educated about both can find out GRiD isn't like old games of the Race Driver series, and find out the lack of online features GT5 has if they don't already etc. all in one swoop. Please tell me why that is such a crime?
 
I still fail to see why it is so wrong, people seeing these peoples comparisons, may be doing their research through this thread. I agree totally, directly comparing one to the other, e.g. comparing physics, is a bit pointless, but someone who isn't educated about both can find out GRiD isn't like old games of the Race Driver series, and find out the lack of online features GT5 has if they don't already etc. all in one swoop. Please tell me why that is such a crime?

The thread title is GTP5 v. Grid which suggests that they are being compared, even the OP compares the two games to one another. If you want to do research you shouldn't be looking in a thread like this for your information since it makes Grid seem like a terrible game when it's not all that bad if you are an arcade racer fan. I found it to be much better then Need for Speed: Pro Street which is quasi-similar.

If you want to find out more about Grid you should be looking in the dedicated Grid thread. Or by reading reviews from various game information mediums.
 
What if they want info on GT5P AND GRiD, and the first post yes is biased towards one, others aren't that way. Someone who cares about both, will research most places including this thread and dedicated ones to get more opinions.
 
What if they want info on GT5P AND GRiD, and the first post yes is biased towards one, others aren't that way. Someone who cares about both, will research most places including this thread and dedicated ones to get more opinions.

The entire website is dedicated to the GT series, you can find info about anything you ever need or cared to know about it...even some stuff that you wonder why someone even knew in the first place. It shouldn't be that hard to gather data about GT5P.
 
So a GTP member who trusts this forum looks for the GRiD info, they'd look in every thread about it. Here's one, it's not hurting anyone by being compared to GT5 even if its a 'long shot' comparison, is it?
 
At this point GRiD and GT5p are in different categories but, both of them have their problems and I'm still waiting for that complete game. Neither of these games do that.

GRiD 2 ought to be interesting if they improve on the original GRiD though.
 
So a GTP member who trusts this forum looks for the GRiD info, they'd look in every thread about it. Here's one, it's not hurting anyone by being compared to GT5 even if its a 'long shot' comparison, is it?

It's giving people a skewed view of Grid and making it look far worse then it actually is. That is my issue with comparing things that aren't in the same category.
 
Ok, so i can't compare a family 4 foor to a sports coupe because theyre different types of car? You can, but a different approach has to be taken. The advantage of GRiDs arcade features can be presented here, as can its disadvantages of its arcade play when compared to sims. Yes this is a GT forum, but that doesn't mean everyone knows everything, how many times a week does someone have to say 'use the search function' or 'look here' with a hyperlink.

A direct comparison is not possible, but an indirect overall view for those who like both genres evenly can be. People who like one particular, can not read it because theyre conclusions are already made or just blank the thread completely instead of providing useless information. You raise a valid point perhaps, but a point most people will know if they'd read up to your first post.

Although the comparisons being done here may not be gone about in the right way, comparisons can be made by taking the fact they are different types of games into account, which is why overall someone could vote both games are even rather then one is better then another.

Besides, the guys don't need to read our arguments anymore, so this is my final input on this argument.
 
First of all, if you bought Grid expecting a simulator comparable to GT5, then you really shouldn't be complaining. A 20 minute download of the demo, or just watching and reading a few reviews would have been sufficient research to realize that this is not the game for you.

On the matter of a wheel being useless, I couldn't disagree more. Although I admit the default settings are absolutely unplayable, it only took me 10-20 minutes of testing to get my settings dialed in exactly how I wanted them. Now the wheel feels responsive and i feel in complete control of the vehicle.

With those two things out of the way I'll just give my quick opinion. Grid is what it is. Codemaster's approach since day one was to make it 'about the race' and i think thats exactly what they did. While the cars don't handle like their real life counterparts, and the AI drivers can be a little aggressive (though usually when you're in the wrong- very rarely will you just get rammed from behind under braking), the races maintain a competitive quality that I think GT5P really missed out on. I actually end up having good position battles in most races, be it online or offline, whereas in GT5P it feels more like a time trial with moving obstacles. Although there is some bumping and crashing that would be frowned upon in real life, the position battles themselves are very dynamic and competitive. GT5P might be able to recreate this with the addition of private rooms, but at the moment good races are few and far between. With so many punters as the norm, its almost more enjoyable to just play a game where getting punted doesn't carry such harsh consequences, and where you are allowed to bump back. GT4 and GT5 will always be the games I turn to for tuning and trying to shave a couple tenths off a lap time, but when it comes to actual races at the moment I'm having a bit more fun with Grid.

I don't think that Grid is for everyone, and I fully understand and respect how a lot of GT5P fans would dislike the style of play, but in my opinion you have to give it a fair chance. Rather than taking it back the day after you buy it, or just ignoring it all together, give it some time and effort. Spend some time trying to make the game what you want, and find ways to make it fun for you. I normally wouldn't post anything in a comparison thread like this, but I felt that many of the anti-Grid reviews were completely unfair and to be honest, under researched and poorly thought out. If you were thinking about buying this game, but were turned away after reading this thread, I urge you to put a bit more thought into it, you could be missing out on a great time.

- as a final sidenote it definitely worries me that codemasters is adopting the F1 series. That is one genre of racing that i don't want to see ruined by the Arcade-loving demographic .
 
@ Joey D

People are comparing GRID and GT because they're the two biggest racing games on the market, as the Codemasters and Polyphony titles have been for a long time. They're two top franchises that the majority of people into racing games are likely to buy. This is why it's fair to compare them.

Fair enough, there are lots of comments being made that GRID doesn't have the physics of GT or the realism, but at least previous Race Driver and TOCA titles have been closer - I think people, including myself, are annoyed because the handling is now so arcadey that it takes something away from the game.

Another point, I'm sure people on this forum will generally lean towards the GT series, being as it's a GT forum, but I'm sure there are plenty of arcade racer fans too. I'm one of them - even though I was a big GT fan, three of my favourite other racing games on the PS2 were NFS Underground, Outrun 2006, and Ridge Racer V. None of which you could accuse of having realistic handling, but all were great fun.

Now, this in mind, and given that in general I'm a big fan of the TOCA/RD series, you'd expect that I'd like GRID? Well no, I don't. The physics *are* shoddy whichever way you look at it, because the handling is so bad, so floaty and unrealistic it takes away from the racing. I can't see any reason why they changed it so much from RD2 on the PS2. Why bother giving the game real series (such as the WTCC) if you're not going to give the game realistic handling?

The graphics are too OTT, the glare, the tinge to the colour, the lighting effects in general. It's way too Americanised now, which is okay in NFS but to anywhere outside America the commentary, menus and series are just cheesy. The damage modelling that everyone raves about is good, but to be honest in my short time with the game it didn't even seem as good as the damage modelling in GTA4.

As I've already mentioned, there are this many comments from people who don't like GRID, and I really think you simply wouldn't have got comments of this nature in reference to any previous Codemasters racer. This alone says to me that something is very wrong with GRID. These comments are echoed on other forums I'm on too, so it isn't just a bunch of diehard GT fans who aren't impressed.

@ powersaurus

First impressions count for a lot. That there are this many people deleting the demo or returning the game suggests it's making a very bad first impression. Every previous time I've played a demo of a RD/TOCA game I've gone out and bought the full game. I certainly won't be this time.
 
I highly doubt Grid is the number two racing series out on the market. There are several other games that I'm going to guess are bigger, namely PGR and Forza.
 
I highly doubt Grid is the number two racing series out on the market. There are several other games that I'm going to guess are bigger, namely PGR and Forza.

But seeing as people are comparing it with GT5P, which is a PS3 game, I'm referring to the PS3. Sorry I didn't make that clear in my post.

Probably only the NFS games are higher sellers on Playstation, but they really don't warrant comparison because the concept is different.

By the way, I am pulling these assumptions out of my ass, but in the UK at least, there always seems to be a bigger deal made about a new GT or new Race Driver than there is about any other PS racing game, so I'm assuming they're the most popular.
 
So it's ok to compare an arcade racer like Grid to GT5P but not an arcade racer like Need for Speed: Pro Street? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
 
Hi sxboyd,

Sorry you had such a bad experience with the game, but let me give my 2c in a response to your post:

I downloaded the demo before buying this game, and to be honest I didnt really care for it. I did a good number of races, as well as time trials (I fancied my chances of winning that Mustang by setting the best time on the SF track), and think in total I managed to finish less than 10% of the races I started since my car would simply fall apart from the damage after a couple of laps. While I've played a lot of the previous Toca/Race driver games, I've recently seen myself more of a Simulation fan, after religiously playing Forza 2 (please try to keep hate mail to a minimum) for the last year or so, even though I enjoyed PGR3/4 and especially DiRT too. Even though I had my doubts, I had faith in Codemasters and decided to buy it anyway.

So by the time I got my retail copy of GRiD I had basic wheel handling of the game down, but for the "introduction" race I could only manage top 5 or so. Coming from a simulation background, I can totally see your issues with the wheel defaults, it does take a while to "learn". And as a simulation driver comparing things to real life, having to learn a new control system clearly didnt go off well. If it helps, simply think of GRiD as a non racing game where you have to learn the controls from scratch, dont make any assumptions based on real life or previous gaming experience and it will go much smoother. I'd describe the wheel handling/response as a mix between DiRT and PGR. I generally found that the default feedback was a bit too intense, and toning it down made the experience slightly more enjoyable, although I am playing GRiD on default settings at the moment.

As for AI, I agree with powersaurus, that there is a lot of really awesome battles for individual positions. While the AI can be frustrating due to the non standard paths they take around the track, I found them to be quite a fun challenge (and definitely not a negative as you describe). It feels like most racing games have AI that follow this perfect line path around the track, and that you need to force your way through at times. This doesnt happen so much in GRiD, since if you wait 2 corners or so, the AI is bound to go ever so slightly wide giving you the chance to pass without contact, and it is very refreshing to not have to worry about the AI slamming you from behind (although they do try to close the door in corners which can lead to some contact, but usually not enough to spin you out or cause considerable damage).

20 cars seems to be a good number in most races, as it is just enough to work your way through over 3 laps, for you to take the win. I also appreciate the fact that the AI doesn't build up huge leads... nothing as frustrating as getting into 2nd position only to realize the no1 guy is like 30 seconds in front... this doesnt happen in GRiD.

As for cars being flat, I also had the same initial feeling. I couldn't seem to get them to corner the way I wanted, I definitely had the "boat" impression, however after a couple of races you learn how to use this to your advantage by taking corners at insane speeds. While not realistic in any way, it is incredibly fun to "throw" your car around corners. With the AI taking corners at similar speeds, it heightens the tension on individual position battles, which for me makes this game. I agree with powersaurus that this game has a competitive quality which is sadly lacking in simulation racing games.

You mentioned the stats while loading didnt impress you much, and that you just want the game to load. I think this is a wonderful idea, that rather than having a boring loading screen there are fun stats to look at to follow your progress through the game. Showing those stats take pretty much no resources, so it isnt extending the loading times, so why not keep the player entertained while loading? This is one of the breakthrough features of this game, and I hope all games implement this. I will however say that I wish they had the same stats in the menus, since I'd love to look at my stats at other times.

As for learning the tracks, yeah, it is a bit tough against the more difficult AI if you dont know the tracks yet. I'd recommend starting this game on easy until you know the tracks (or at least feel comfortable with the handling of some of the cars). The game does have a brake warning light (bottom left corner), which tells you when you need to slow down, and while useful isnt quite has nice as a braking line on track, but once you learn to use it effectively it helps quite a bit if you dont know the track. I do agree that they probably should've made the first couple of races be the same track or same car... to allow people to get to grips with handling/controls. Most reviews mentioned this as a "slightly higher than normal learning curve". This can be rather brutal on the Le Mans races (end of each season), since driving at night without knowing the track is quite challenging.

The challenge of dealing with new tracks and challenging AI is offset nicely by the flashback feature. For those who dont know, each race gives you 3 to 5 (depending on difficulty) flashbacks, where you can pause the race at any time and rewind the last 5 seconds or so... flashing back to any specific point in that replay. This is a lifesaver when you take a corner badly and take serious damage. Especially on longer races... when you've managed to fight your way thru the entire field, only to screw up on the final corner and spin out.. this feature makes this game. You simply rewind 5 seconds and redo it, without having to replay the entire 20 min race. Initially this feels like cheating, especially coming from simulation games, but looking back I wish I had this feature on Sim Endurance races (Forza / GT) and I would hate my self so much for throwing away hours of racing by losing concentration for a sec. I see this as a feature that will be common in racing games in the future.

I truly enjoy simulation games, but this game is so refreshingly different. It is an arcade game, so please don't play this game and compare it to GT or Forza... you will be heavily disappointed. However I do not feel that the physics/handling is a mistake, it is clear that Codemasters designed it this way to be fun.. to focus on the race. I feel they succeeded wonderfully and look forward to playing through the rest of the game.

The Toca/Race driver series was intended to be more realistic, but with Grid codemaster is changing their target audience (more mass appeal to all markets, not just EU), so a direct comparison isnt possible either.

As for the F1 game that codemasters is working on, I have faith in codemasters that they will give it simulation physics and not make it as arcady as Dirt/Grid. That being said, the Grid engine gives me a lot of hope for the F1 game, as the graphics is gorgeous and perfectly smooth. I havent played online much, but it seems rock solid (even when playing with people on the other side of the world), and a huge improvement over Dirt.

Let me know what you guys think.
 
Seeing as how GRiD IS what EA promised NFS:PS would be I don't really think it's necessary to compare them. As for GRiD to other arcade racers what others are there that would even come close...?
 
@ powersaurus

First impressions count for a lot. That there are this many people deleting the demo or returning the game suggests it's making a very bad first impression. Every previous time I've played a demo of a RD/TOCA game I've gone out and bought the full game. I certainly won't be this time.


no doubt, I agree completely. I played the demo for about 5 minutes before putting it down for a couple weeks. It felt so sloppy and loose that I was shocked. Shortly before Grid was launched I decided to give it a second chance to see if there was anything redeemable about the game, and as it turned out I found it to be very fun and bought the full game. I wouldn't tell anyone they're wrong for disliking the game, but I think it's worth spending a half hour to try it out if you haven't played it yet.
 
Never liked the demo too. I'm with you on your opinion.

The only thing I didn't like was the "25 years old thing". I started playing GT series when I was ~12 years old, until today. Don't know if you said that due to the age/mature thing, but doesn't have that linear relationship with the tastes, necessary.

No offense intended, Aero-R. My comment referred to "under 25 AND liked arcade racing", which was a generalization that I shouldn't have made. I raced and played Battlefield against people as young as 5, learning to respect their skills as they knifed me while I tired to snipe them.

But as any game marketeer will tell you, the general market for these style of games is for the "under 25 that like arcade racing". It is where they want to aim their marketing to sell these types of products. However, there are those of us much older (60) who enjoy them also, if they offer us the right things. MotorStorm is a crackup, but NO-ONE ever touted it as a SIMULATOR or compared it to GT5.
 
Interesting read, although yet again bias towards GT5... you got Grid thinking you had a GT5 equivalent or "killer" in your hands, instead of a simple race game.

I've put my thoughts together about Grid in other threads so i will not do the same thing here... but since you mention the fact that you start the game in a car... and that you say its a step back from Toca racing is kind of wierd, since they do the exact same thing in Toca...?!?! Furthermore, i loved the fact that you were stuck in races and you only needed to "finish" the race... which serves as a good wakeup call to the world of racing... in most games, you always have to finish first, else you just "restart"... in GRID you can't just restart... in real life, your sponsors sure want you to finish first, but first of all, they want you to FINISH the race you started... GRID does that brilliantly... its GT5 that does it wrong.

Also, if you would've bothered to finish the rookie stuff and start your own team, you'd see how much more fun you get from playing that game... yes 20 AIs to put you in walls... if you overbreak, pass in corners or make unsafe passes in general... all that stuff they teach you in liveforspeed ... but i guess you hardcore racers out there didn't play that one eh?

I bought GRID (360) and i have about 300% more fun with this game then with Prologue, for the simple fact that i feel in a race car, on a race track, part of a race team. While in prologue, i feel like taking a ride on a sunday afternoon.

To each his own, but they were the first to compare GRID to GT5 - not me. And believe me, ther is NOTHING more realistic about the cars OR the racing in GRID over GT5. If you believe this, go do 4 hours in GT5 then go jump in your car and drive down your street as you just did in GT%. Now do 4 hours of GRID and try the same performance - if you make it down the street and back doing the speed limit without having to slow down and recalibrate to contiue your drive safely, then I bow to your remarkable prowess.

And as far as dropping you into a race to start the game,
TOCA 2 and 3 both did that, but didn't pretend that you had to "finish" to get some kind of license - I mean "What is the point?" So you finish a race that ANYONE can finish to get the rookie license in 3 categories, but you don't get anything more if you finish 1st, 3rd, or last. Big whoopie. When you finish the licenses in GT, they mean you can drive in the class for which you are licensed. Until then you drive in an unlicensed calss. In GT5p, no licensing (or pretense of it) is required for the first 3 levels. However, if you want to drive in the Pro class, you must finish the first 3 levels.

When I bought GRID, I did not expect anything like GT5, but I DID expect more than TOCA 2 and 3 for the PS2 - that was the biggest disappoiuntment. I rally enjoyed driving in TOCA 2, even though I did not care much for the physics. Like someone else in this thread said - Codemaster took a BIG step back when they did this game. At least give me a product that is as good as the one that I had on the old platform.

So for all that it was touted for, my opinion stays the same. The game falls WAY short of the mark. I'll wait for the next products thank you and, until then, enjoy the superior driving games and simulators available for my PS2 and PS3.
 
Well evidently when one of the 'favored' members calls you a liar and you call them to task on it, they boot you from the forum. :lol:

That's okay, kinda goes along with how people play the game in general anyway. Funny thing is I like DiRT.

I have DiRT and like it. I play it, I have the T-Shirt. Dirt never touted itself to be a racing/driving sim and didn't compare itself to GT5 or equivalent dirt/.rally racing games. It has a weak physics engine, and is not always well implemented, but it is close enough to be fun. Still it is better that the dynamics of GRID. I expect the steering wheel to be less responsive in the dirt, and I expect it to be a little herkyjerky.

I will keep DiRT, but I will not get another copy of GRID.
 
I'm not talking about what game you prefer or what one you think is better or what you are a fan of. What I am saying is that Grid was designed with arcade fans in mind and GT5P was designed with simulation fans in mind. Yes there will be crossover in terms of players but if you brought Grid expecting a sim game like GT5P then it's your fault for not researching.

They shouldn't be compared, they aren't the same and were not designed with the same criteria in mind. Only compare like things. Comparing GT to Forza, GTR, or other sim game is what you should be doing. Compare Grid to NFS: Pro Street since they seem to offer a similar gaming experience.

JOey, Joey, Joey, et al. We were not the ones that started this comparison. It was made in the Gaming rags and the minds of the marketing people at Codemaster - they were the ones that hinted at this being an equivalent to GT - that it was "more" than an arcade game. Look at the ads and other articles.

Not only that, I do enjoy some of the arcade style games for what they are, not for what they were being touted to be - which is arcade style racing.
 
Well, I got my copy today and after about 4 hours of (non-continous) gameplay, here's my take on the game:

First of all, it has to be noted that I consider PD's Gran Turismo to be the pinnacle of all driving/racing game. And my history at video game racing spans from the latter days of Pole Position to Geoff Crammond's GP4 (using a mouse as the controller), the various iteration of Need For Speed (except their latest lamer attempt), Sega Rally and except for the first two, the Gran Turismo series. With Codemaster, I've only played DIRT briefly. The GRID demo was for most part a big dissapointment: with only two races, I found neither races to be interesting (okay, the SF was quite thrilling to an extent) and the cars, I'm with the masses: the handling sucks big time. However, the full game, perhaps because there are more races to be had, the gameplay so far has been quite encompassing. Right now, I'm more at ease with pro-muscle cars in the US races. I did one race in Japan in a 350z on twisty track on a dock. The European Touring car has so far eluded me: I can't seem to keep the car on the track. The AI is challenging although I can't see why anyone would consider it better than what's on GT5:P. Regardless of how hard you try to keep your cars from getting nudge or rammed into, you would have to accept the fate that by the end of the race you'll be lucky if your front end is still intact. The Flashback system works well, but it only occurs if you happen to completely total your car. For a simple spin-out that happen 10 feet from the finish line (as you watch helplessly as each passing cars finishing ahead of you), you need to re-start the whole god-damn race. But the races themselves are thrilling and although the handling can suck, there is a learning curve that once you've master it, do become more than bearable. And yes, the cars handle more like the ones in GT4 rather than Burnout. You need to feather the gas and brakes and take each corners with caution. Some cars are easier to handle than others and there is a distinct dfference in how each of them drive (not in the same realm as GT). The graphics is well done but the guys from PD has nothing to worry about. Instead of the smooth motion you get in GT, the animation in GRID is of the fast/twitchy kind. It is as if you've handed your camera to an 11 year old in need of a dose of ritalin. Basically, it's DIRT without the foliage. Overall, this game is more accessible to most people than GT5:P. Where Prologue requires a certain amount of involvement and knowledge, GRID on the other hand is a video game and it plays like one. Don't get me wrong, I'm slowly starting to appreciate the game but if at the end of the year, GRID gets voted as the driving game of the year, I won't be surprised but I'd still be pulling my hair.
 
Myke I'm about to make you the happiest person to read this thread thus far.


You can initiate the flashback by pressing select (or going through the start menu) to access instant replay. From that you can rewind the same as after a big wreck and pick your position to restart.


edit* - for my advanced wheel settings on my DFP i have Steering Deadzone at 0%, Steering Saturation at 90%, and Steering Linearity at -7. That should feel a lot more reasonable to anyone still using default and hating every minute of it.
 
Hi sxboyd,

Sorry you had such a bad experience with the game, but let me give my 2c in a response to your post:

I downloaded the demo before buying this game, and to be honest I didnt really care for it. I did a good number of races, as well as time trials (I fancied my chances of winning that Mustang by setting the best time on the SF track), and think in total I managed to finish less than 10% of the races I started since my car would simply fall apart from the damage after a couple of laps. While I've played a lot of the previous Toca/Race driver games, I've recently seen myself more of a Simulation fan, after religiously playing Forza 2 (please try to keep hate mail to a minimum) for the last year or so, even though I enjoyed PGR3/4 and especially DiRT too. Even though I had my doubts, I had faith in Codemasters and decided to buy it anyway.

So by the time I got my retail copy of GRiD I had basic wheel handling of the game down, but for the "introduction" race I could only manage top 5 or so. Coming from a simulation background, I can totally see your issues with the wheel defaults, it does take a while to "learn". And as a simulation driver comparing things to real life, having to learn a new control system clearly didnt go off well. If it helps, simply think of GRiD as a non racing game where you have to learn the controls from scratch, dont make any assumptions based on real life or previous gaming experience and it will go much smoother. I'd describe the wheel handling/response as a mix between DiRT and PGR. I generally found that the default feedback was a bit too intense, and toning it down made the experience slightly more enjoyable, although I am playing GRiD on default settings at the moment.

As for AI, I agree with powersaurus, that there is a lot of really awesome battles for individual positions. While the AI can be frustrating due to the non standard paths they take around the track, I found them to be quite a fun challenge (and definitely not a negative as you describe). It feels like most racing games have AI that follow this perfect line path around the track, and that you need to force your way through at times. This doesnt happen so much in GRiD, since if you wait 2 corners or so, the AI is bound to go ever so slightly wide giving you the chance to pass without contact, and it is very refreshing to not have to worry about the AI slamming you from behind (although they do try to close the door in corners which can lead to some contact, but usually not enough to spin you out or cause considerable damage).

20 cars seems to be a good number in most races, as it is just enough to work your way through over 3 laps, for you to take the win. I also appreciate the fact that the AI doesn't build up huge leads... nothing as frustrating as getting into 2nd position only to realize the no1 guy is like 30 seconds in front... this doesnt happen in GRiD.

As for cars being flat, I also had the same initial feeling. I couldn't seem to get them to corner the way I wanted, I definitely had the "boat" impression, however after a couple of races you learn how to use this to your advantage by taking corners at insane speeds. While not realistic in any way, it is incredibly fun to "throw" your car around corners. With the AI taking corners at similar speeds, it heightens the tension on individual position battles, which for me makes this game. I agree with powersaurus that this game has a competitive quality which is sadly lacking in simulation racing games.

You mentioned the stats while loading didnt impress you much, and that you just want the game to load. I think this is a wonderful idea, that rather than having a boring loading screen there are fun stats to look at to follow your progress through the game. Showing those stats take pretty much no resources, so it isnt extending the loading times, so why not keep the player entertained while loading? This is one of the breakthrough features of this game, and I hope all games implement this. I will however say that I wish they had the same stats in the menus, since I'd love to look at my stats at other times.

As for learning the tracks, yeah, it is a bit tough against the more difficult AI if you dont know the tracks yet. I'd recommend starting this game on easy until you know the tracks (or at least feel comfortable with the handling of some of the cars). The game does have a brake warning light (bottom left corner), which tells you when you need to slow down, and while useful isnt quite has nice as a braking line on track, but once you learn to use it effectively it helps quite a bit if you dont know the track. I do agree that they probably should've made the first couple of races be the same track or same car... to allow people to get to grips with handling/controls. Most reviews mentioned this as a "slightly higher than normal learning curve". This can be rather brutal on the Le Mans races (end of each season), since driving at night without knowing the track is quite challenging.

The challenge of dealing with new tracks and challenging AI is offset nicely by the flashback feature. For those who dont know, each race gives you 3 to 5 (depending on difficulty) flashbacks, where you can pause the race at any time and rewind the last 5 seconds or so... flashing back to any specific point in that replay. This is a lifesaver when you take a corner badly and take serious damage. Especially on longer races... when you've managed to fight your way thru the entire field, only to screw up on the final corner and spin out.. this feature makes this game. You simply rewind 5 seconds and redo it, without having to replay the entire 20 min race. Initially this feels like cheating, especially coming from simulation games, but looking back I wish I had this feature on Sim Endurance races (Forza / GT) and I would hate my self so much for throwing away hours of racing by losing concentration for a sec. I see this as a feature that will be common in racing games in the future.

I truly enjoy simulation games, but this game is so refreshingly different. It is an arcade game, so please don't play this game and compare it to GT or Forza... you will be heavily disappointed. However I do not feel that the physics/handling is a mistake, it is clear that Codemasters designed it this way to be fun.. to focus on the race. I feel they succeeded wonderfully and look forward to playing through the rest of the game.

The Toca/Race driver series was intended to be more realistic, but with Grid codemaster is changing their target audience (more mass appeal to all markets, not just EU), so a direct comparison isnt possible either.

As for the F1 game that codemasters is working on, I have faith in codemasters that they will give it simulation physics and not make it as arcady as Dirt/Grid. That being said, the Grid engine gives me a lot of hope for the F1 game, as the graphics is gorgeous and perfectly smooth. I havent played online much, but it seems rock solid (even when playing with people on the other side of the world), and a huge improvement over Dirt.

Let me know what you guys think.
Pretty much 90% of what you say here is what I think of the game. Good write up. 👍
 
So it's ok to compare an arcade racer like Grid to GT5P but not an arcade racer like Need for Speed: Pro Street? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

Then you're thinking about it too simplisticly. Your attitude towards it is "arcade racer different from simulation". What you aren't considering is that both GRID and GT are both circuit racing games, around a mix of real and original circuits, and historically both have been aimed towards genuine racing game fans (same with the Colin McRae series), the sort of people who watch motorsport on TV, follow it on the web, etc.

The NFS series is a street racing game. There may well be circuit races in it but generally in proper motorsport you don't race while there's other traffic around, or police, or lamp posts and trees. There is a heavy emphasis on graphics, bodykits and wild tuning. Since the first Fast and the Furious film came out, it's been heavily aimed at people who enjoy this lifestyle and enjoy modifying their cars.

There's more valid comparison between GRID and GT than there is between GRID and NFS, if anything.

OK. Anyone else: would you get Dirt or GRID as an addition to GT5P?

No, because DIRT is an offense to McRae's name for straying so far away from the World Rally Championship genre and becoming cheesy and Americanised (the last straw for me was being told to "go get 'em, tiger" before a race), and GRID is a shadow of every single former RD and TOCA game. I like arcade games, but I don't like GRID.

What irks me is that Codemasters have had a generally great formula for the RD and CMR series for so long, I've enjoyed every game I've played in both the circuit games and the rally games, and then they go and change them and ruin them both for me.
 
The NFS series is a street racing game. There may well be circuit races in it but generally in proper motorsport you don't race while there's other traffic around, or police, or lamp posts and trees. There is a heavy emphasis on graphics, bodykits and wild tuning. Since the first Fast and the Furious film came out, it's been heavily aimed at people who enjoy this lifestyle and enjoy modifying their cars.

Yea, they tried to change with Pro Street and make it 'professional' racing but as most GTP members will tell you, it was a fail because they tried to make it arcadey AND sim at the same time and just got this horrible mess of physics that didn't work. I believe one EA employee said it was like a simulation you can just pick up and play. :dunce: Not much of a simulation then is it!
 
Back