Maybe really good AI isn't a realistic expectation in the GT series?

[Tenacious D]

Don't pay any attention to him. He's physically incapable of loving anything that doesn't start with the words "Gran" and "Turismo".

Maybe I should just put you, mr dog and JohnnyP on ignore, because all you seem to do is deride anyone who doesn't dislike Gran Turismo as much as you do, and create fallacious statements about what people feel and think.

As I said roughly in another thread, you can almost guarantee that to some people, every racing game other than a Gran Turismo is automatically better, which seems to be a fairly common opinion around here. Now, maybe it's just me, but I have this silly idea that if the bots wage war throughout the race, even on their teammates, that's not exactly what I consider awesome bot A.I. Another is that if the driver views in a certain game don't suit me, make racing more of an ordeal than they need to be, maybe that game isn't as well designed as it could be. Maybe even more nerve wracking than it is fun. Maybe if the cars in a certain game took to be modeled to a level rather like some cars in another game that are considered bad and last gen, maybe the people who like those cars are slightly hypocritical. Another is that if the sounds in one game doesn't blow me away, and the sounds in another game don't thrill me any more, maybe the sounds in both games aren't worth trumpeting about over the other.

Now, maybe I'm crazy, and it's just the thing to do to criticize one game for everything and consider it automatically a lesser game, and other racers are all better or even darn near perfect just because they aren't that other game. If that's true to you, and having an opinion of my very own that differs from yours makes me biased, so be it. I'll be biased and continue not caring about it.

 

[Tornado]

Maybe I should just put you, mr dog and JohnnyP on ignore,

 

[Johnnypenso]

As I said roughly in another thread, you can almost guarantee that to some people, every racing game other than a Gran Turismo is automatically better, which seems to be a fairly common opinion around here.

Again, have some links to these fairly common opinions that every game other than GT is automatically better? "Automatically" meaning of course, these games are better without mentioning any specific characteristics they may possess that make them better in certain areas.

 

[mr_serious]

...
Now, maybe it's just me, but I have this silly idea that if the bots wage war throughout the race, even on their teammates, that's not exactly what I consider awesome bot A.I.

Have you watched any motor racing? There's plenty of real life examples of that sort of behaviour. For most team racers, their team mate is their biggest rival!

Now, maybe I'm crazy, and it's just the thing to do to criticize one game for everything and consider it automatically a lesser game, and other racers are all better or even darn near perfect just because they aren't that other game. If that's true to you, and having an opinion of my very own that differs from yours makes me biased, so be it. I'll be biased and continue not caring about it.

Maybe you haven't been reading other people's posts properly? No-one has ever said any other game is perfect, but the reality is that GT (5 & 6) fall far short of many people's expectations for a 21st Century AAA racing game.

Being able to lose a race in equal machinery as a player (in offline mode) would be a good start. Are there any other racing games out now (or ever) that tries so hard to make sure the player wins?

 

[Zer0]

We can expect a similar AI jump as happened between PS2 and PS3 regarding a realistic racing etiquette and rivals' life care, just more advanced and with more human-like reactions. What I'm not sure is if the AI will be competitive enought to adjust to a fast player by its own and without the need of some intervention to find the perfect setup to match everyone skills (https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/how-to-have-some-fun-with-offline-racing.305086/).

Specially during the offline part of the game that seems that is the only part that many players care to explore. GT needs to appeal to a wide audience and probably some option will keep locked and the races customized to achieve a controlled environment to progress in the game, AI included. Basically the career mode is the arcade part of the GT mode and I don't think that will change too much.

What is not realistic to expect are AI drones with hollywood-like reckless behaviours, as in arcade games. That would not fit in a game that is aiming to real events.

 

[Johnnypenso]

We can expect a similar AI jump as happened between PS2 and PS3 regarding a realistic racing etiquette and rivals' life care, just more advanced and with more human-like reactions. What I'm not sure is if the AI will be competitive enought to adjust to a fast player by its own and without the need of some intervention to find the perfect setup to match everyone skills (https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/how-to-have-some-fun-with-offline-racing.305086/).

Specially during the offline part of the game that seems that is the only part that many players care to explore. GT needs to appeal to a wide audience and probably some option will keep locked and the races customized to achieve a controlled environment to progress in the game, AI included. Basically the career mode is the arcade part of the GT mode and I don't think that will change too much.

What is not realistic to expect are AI drones with hollywood-like reckless behaviours, as in arcade games. That would not fit in a game that is aiming to real events.

What I've seen in Grid Autosport tells me it's more than possible to create fast, competitive, realistically behaving AI even on the PS3, so certainly on the PS4. They aren't perfect but the things that make them less than perfect are simply tweaks to the programming. Some teams are more aggressive like Ravenwest, but that's deliberate programming on Codies part. GT would of course take that kind of aggressiveness out of the equation. They don't appreciate you sticking your nose in when cornering, but again, PD would just program them to leave room for you when you get any overlap.

The vast majority of AI behaviour in GAS would be appropriate for any game series interested in real racing. And of course, they are scalable. You can make them alien speed or casual speed depending on your skill level, race length, assists etc.

It can be done, the only real question in my mind is if they can do it for 1200 cars or do we perhaps need a separate, tighter AI model for career mode where the opponents are more limited and closer in performance, as opposed to a more generic AI that would work for any car in any situation?

 

[marcus_war]

The better question should be "do we really need 1400 cars?" or "do we really want 1400+ cars?"

I say no to both.


While I've not yet played GT6, in any capacity, I'll say that the A.I. isn't as bad as it could be, but nowhere near reaching its true potential to match the quality of driving that seems to be improving. It is bad, but not quite as bad as it used to be.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

The better question should be "do we really need 1400 cars?" or "do we really want 1400+ cars?"

I say no to both.

If the game only has a sparse amount of events among those 1400 cars, then I agree with you.
Whats the point?

If PD is going to tout 1400 cars, then they need to provide 3 to 5 events for each competitive grouping of those cars, in the game.
Not one of these days seasonals.
Otherwise, there is no useful purpose for most of them.
They are actually just fluff and hype.

And of course good AI needs to be part of that equation.

 

[Tenacious D]

Have you watched any motor racing? There's plenty of real life examples of that sort of behaviour. For most team racers, their team mate is their biggest rival!

mr serious, you can't be serious. Just take the "human" test. If you wouldn't tolerate such behavior in an online race from real humans, then the bots aren't that good.

Listen, I'm up on how motorsports has a distinct divide between the gentleman but competitive racers and the young(ish) hot heads who want to win at all cost. Dale Earnhart made a career out of the pit maneuver. But honestly, do you want a game with bots that go, "Hmm... ahead of me? Not much longer!" That is seriously not for me, and that's how the bots in GA feel to me. They go a bit further than the BTCC highlight reels on YouTube.

Obviously, GA has its devoted fanbase here who can't get enough of that rough n tumble demolition racing, but I'm fairly confident that GT7 is going the way of something slightly more aggressive than the GTRs and Tocas, with their polite cruise missiles which don't do much but follow the racing line. If they would just keep a good pace, take turns properly and not slam on the brakes, not spread out a mile by race end, they would be just about what most would want. Not too aggressive, not too boring. For those who want really aggressive racing, there's always the minefield of online, or Forza.

 

[IceMan PJN]

Have you watched any motor racing? There's plenty of real life examples of that sort of behaviour. For most team racers, their team mate is their biggest rival!

This is absolutely true. Look to F1 for a bunch of examples of this. The one driver you're post compared against is your teammate, as he's in essentially an identical car, so if you fall short of him, you appear to be an inferior driver. Besting your teammate also usually means favored status at the team. Inter-team rivalry as lead to lots of close calls on the track, and sometimes worse.

 

[mr_serious]

mr serious, you can't be serious. Just take the "human" test. If you wouldn't tolerate such behavior in an online race from real humans, then the bots aren't that good.

Listen, I'm up on how motorsports has a distinct divide between the gentleman but competitive racers and the young(ish) hot heads who want to win at all cost. Dale Earnhart made a career out of the pit maneuver. But honestly, do you want a game with bots that go, "Hmm... ahead of me? Not much longer!" That is seriously not for me, and that's how the bots in GA feel to me. They go a bit further than the BTCC highlight reels on YouTube.

Obviously, GA has its devoted fanbase here who can't get enough of that rough n tumble demolition racing, but I'm fairly confident that GT7 is going the way of something slightly more aggressive than the GTRs and Tocas, with their polite cruise missiles which don't do much but follow the racing line. If they would just keep a good pace, take turns properly and not slam on the brakes, not spread out a mile by race end, they would be just about what most would want. Not too aggressive, not too boring. For those who want really aggressive racing, there's always the minefield of online, or Forza.

well here's a novel idea, something I recall in every racing game I have played since 486's which is some equivalent of easy, average, hard, awesome AI. maybe an aggression adjustment? It is meant to be a simulator after all.

oh it is also meant to be fun?

 

[Johnnypenso]

well here's a novel idea, something I recall in every racing game I have played since 486's which is some equivalent of easy, average, hard, awesome AI. maybe an aggression adjustment? It is meant to be a simulator after all.

oh it is also meant to be fun?

Add in a slider for the AI for overtaking, defending, overall speed, consistency etc. and we'd actually have something worthy of the label "simulator".

 

[Tenacious D]

I'm all for fun, but if some of you aren't happy unless you feel like you're in Death Race 2000, I definitely want that to be an option, not the status quo of bot behavior. Something like Johnny says. I have to reiterate that if people wouldn't tolerate the same behavior from people in their room, it's probably a bit too much badazzness for many gamers.

Anyway, I do crave me some boring old GT6 racing.

 

[mr_serious]

I'm all for fun, but if some of you aren't happy unless you feel like you're in Death Race 2000, I definitely want that to be an option, not the status quo of bot behavior. Something like Johnny says. I have to reiterate that if people wouldn't tolerate the same behavior from people in their room, it's probably a bit too much badazzness for many gamers.

Anyway, I do crave me some boring old GT6 racing.

I can't reiterate enough, you know it is OK to lose a race? It is normal. It is racing, as for accidents & damage; sometimes 🤬 happens when you are racing on the edge.

I want my AI to be at least configurable to race on the edge of traction and even possibly gentlemanly conduct.

It is a game after all.

[edit] errant comma ;/

 

[Tenacious D]

Just to be clear, I don't want to insist on nothing more than boring racing. Lord knows we have that in Gran Turismo already. I'm just saying that violent bots should be an option, not the standard. We have enough of that in Forza and GRID already.

 

[Gerarghini]

Just to be clear, I don't want to insist on nothing more than boring racing. Lord knows we have that in Gran Turismo already. I'm just saying that violent bots should be an option, not the standard. We have enough of that in Forza and GRID already.

Well, Forza 5 gives you that option. You can adjust the Ai/Drivatar difficulty level from Gran Turismo 6 (New Racer, -10% credits) to Grid Autosport (Unbeatable, +65% credits). The Ai/Drivatars in Forza 5 aren't perfect but they're miles better than anything Gran Turismo can put out. There is no reason why Gran Turismo can't include something like this but alas the word "option" is something they apparently never head before.

 

[Flash3001]

So the question is: Can't they or they just don't want to ?!

I often see people saying it has improved here and there, but at the end of the day it's just little enhancements. We never saw a breaking change to it.

I'm actually curious about how did they implemented it? I mean, it's not about just how much the driver put his feet in the gas or how late the bob breaks. There's a conceptual problem to be thought to each programing User Case (situation) and what approach you are going to take to solve the problem.

Each approach they take leads to different kinds of problems.

So, how they did it? Is it just a keep-the-course-to-the-Driving-line-as-fast-as-you-can or a 'Advanced GPS Navigation' or what?!

ps: It would be fine to have a predefined number of opponents, each one with it's own kind of style, separated by racing category. Learning process as in most real AI or just coping our Online inputs and mixing them in a well thought way.

 

[TokoTurismo]

It's really amusing to see those who say GT's AI are somehow good or better in whatever way they describe it. Those people really need a reality check.

I have GAS and let me tell you, as many others has said, the AI isn't perfect, but there hell a lot better than GT's slow and boring AI that PD are too lazy to improve on. GAS AI's actually races you, whereas in GT6 ZZZZZzzzz. Oh sorry, contiuning on. So instead it's all about "chase the rabbit" racing with GT pretty much.

 

[Tenacious D]

Well, Forza 5 gives you that option. You can adjust the Ai/Drivatar difficulty level from Gran Turismo 6 (New Racer, -10% credits) to Grid Autosport (Unbeatable, +65% credits). The Ai/Drivatars in Forza 5 aren't perfect but they're miles better than anything Gran Turismo can put out. There is no reason why Gran Turismo can't include something like this but alas the word "option" is something they apparently never head before.

Well, maybe, but I've read even a gaming journo in one article say that the bots are just too aggressive and stupid, and drag too many bad habits from the online drivers they mimic. As with GA, it seems that some people will put up with a lot of bad racing in order to have to fight their way through a pack.

Considering the complaining about GT bot's pit maneuvers I've read here, I can't imagine GT7 with GA's bots being very popular. Frankly, I quit racing in Forza and GA both because I'd had it with the bots acting like that. And get serious, no real sim is going to be tolerated with bots so reckless that practically the entire field wipes itself out on the first turn of the start of a race, as I suffered in GA in one really frustrating event.

So the question is then, how much competition would be good in general? I really can't see Kaz giving us the option to have bots willing to kill us both rather than lose a race, and I think this is a good thing to exclude. I highly suspect that most gamers would agree. For me, a race in which bots were bumping my fenders and rubbing some metal to get past me if I'm slower than them, that would be good. If GT6's bots wouldn't give up and race to win, wouldn't take turns like student drivers or spread out the pack, I think this is what we'd have. And with my swimming with the guppies in my lesser cars, I've had a lot of enjoyable racing with GT6's bots. I've lost at the finish line a number of times to these guys.

I just can't see Gran Turismo ever ending up like Forza, GRID or the BTCC where half the field can be wrecked out. And I'm just not a fan of that. If GT ever does end up like that, Easy mode all the way for me, but I just can't see it. It's not the Japanese way, and it's probably not what most gamers want.

 

[Johnnypenso]

It's really amusing to see those who say GT's AI are somehow good or better in whatever way they describe it. Those people really need a reality check.

I have GAS and let me tell you, as many others has said, the AI isn't perfect, but there hell a lot better than GT's slow and boring AI that PD are too lazy to improve on. GAS AI's actually races you, whereas in GT6 ZZZZZzzzz. Oh sorry, contiuning on. So instead it's all about "chase the rabbit" racing with GT pretty much.

Par for the course buddy. Some people are just so blinded by GT, every aspect of every other game is automatically inferior, in spite of rave reviews by fellow GTP members, like the Grid AS AI for example. They'll take small details which could easily be tweaked through simple programming and blow them way out of proportion, while ignoring all the positive aspects. As you said, the Grid AS AI aren't perfect, but they do behave much closer to real race drivers than any AI I've ever raced and darn it they are on pace!!

Their behaviour would only need two small tweaks to fit perfectly into the GT series. Take away the added rival aggression factor (or a slider for it even better!) and have the bots leave you room with minimal overlap because in Grid they tend to not leave you room on the inside unless you have nearly full overlap.

The behaviour is a simple thing to fix I think, it's the pace that's the problem. Grid AS is putting up a grid of similar cars with similar specs to achieve their competitive AI racing, whereas GT is often putting up a grid of different drivetrains and power/performance/weight differentials. I'm not sure it's possible in a console environment to accomodate so many different cars and have them come out equal on the track through a generic, one-size-fits-all type of AI program. We can't even get them to come out equal on the track with a single driver because under the PP system you can have cars at the same PP, several seconds apart on the track. So if the cars are seconds apart in my hands for example, even with perfect AI they'd be seconds apart in an offline race as well.

Maybe the answer lies with more series racing in offline career, more racing of cars with equal performance, and formulating the AI code so that at least in those races we can achieve tighter, more competitive, more realistic racing.

 

[SZRT Ice]

In my opinion, the best setup would go like this:

You have a Beginner, Intermediate, and a Professional mode.

Within those modes are artificial intelligence (A.I.) drivers with a skill set that varies from very easy, easy, medium, hard, and very hard.

Coupled with those skill sets are attributes like aggression, passiveness, risk, rail, or deviant.

• Aggressive a.i. are more willing to battle you for a corner and occasionally trade some paint.
• Passive are more willing to allow other vehicles the pass and wait for a later opportunity.
• Risk is a medium. High risk takers are more willing to leave the designated racing line, brake late, and attempt "just made it" passes. Low risk are more willing to settle for a position than risk a catastrophe.
  
• Rail drivers stick to the desired racing line like glue and are less likely to leave it, even for a pass.
• Deviants leave the racing line constantly and are more likely to go wide on turns and occupy areas off the racing line.

Each of the ai drivers would have a name as they already do in GT, and have a stat sheet assessing their individual abilities. Accordingly, there would be different drivers in the "Beginner" mode than there would be in "Intermediate", and "Professional" accordingly.

Beginner mode would have drivers with a mixed skill set ranging from very easy to medium (predominantly easy with like 1 - 3 mediums).

Intermediate would range from easy to hard. (1 or 2 hard)

And Pro' would be a healthy mix of the medium to very hard range.

The drivers to look out for will become familiar as you become acquainted with their driving habits. Depending upon the list of included drivers, there may be occasional wrecks, spin outs, and such on track as well. A.I. drivers could even get penalized or disqualified from an event depending on their behavior during a race series, or due to an accident that totaled a vehicle or left it with severe damage* (but Gran Turismo).

This would help add a healthy mix, as not all crs will behave the same, and some good competition is left to be had if you and one or 2 other a.i. drivers break away from the pack for some heated competition.

Oh, and an aggressive, high risk, deviant is more likely to get into an accident than say a passive, high risk, rail driver. Coupled with the different skill/experience levels, you can imagine how things could play out.

 

[The Stig Farmer]

Now this is completely conjectural, but here is my hypothesis.

I remember an entry on the Codies Blog concerning the AI in Grid (imagine something like that on PitStop ). Anyway, it went into detail about how the AI opponents are programmed; in order to teach the computer how to complete a lap of a track, it needs to be shown how to actually drive a lap of said track - where the track boundaries are, etc. Now I have no idea if PD are using the same technique, but let's say that they are for this scenario.

Now, this has to be done for every layout of every track. So, the programmer has to instruct the computer on how to drive a suitable lap of 70-80 unique courses.

And that's only one car - and GT6 has over 1,200 cars. It's then you realise the vast amounts of time that are necessary to just teach every single car to drive around every single track, before you even consider making them react in a satisfactorily competitive way to traffic.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Now this is completely conjectural, but here is my hypothesis.

I remember an entry on the Codies Blog concerning the AI in Grid (imagine something like that on PitStop ). Anyway, it went into detail about how the AI opponents are programmed; in order to teach the computer how to complete a lap of a track, it needs to be shown how to actually drive a lap of said track - where the track boundaries are, etc. Now I have no idea if PD are using the same technique, but let's say that they are for this scenario.

Now, this has to be done for every layout of every track. So, the programmer has to instruct the computer on how to drive a suitable lap of 70-80 unique courses.

And that's only one car - and GT6 has over 1,200 cars. It's then you realise the vast amounts of time that are necessary to just teach every single car to drive around every single track, before you even consider making them react in a satisfactorily competitive way to traffic.

@anim8r_uk has also suggested in the Grid Forum that the laptimes of the fastest AI were determined by the real laptimes of the Codies staff. This would ensure they have some basis in the real world and are achievable by game players. Can you do this for 1200 cars? Not with the resources that PD has in house, but perhaps with the help of the community, similar to what I suggested here in the PP thread many cars could be tested and the rest extrapolated.

 

[FS7]

... and GT6 has over 1,200 cars. It's then you realise the vast amounts of time that are necessary to just teach every single car to drive around every single track, before you even consider making them react in a satisfactorily competitive way to traffic.

1200+ cars, but you have to take into account all the clones.
PD doesn't need to program each Nascar separately, each GT-R Super GT separately, each Miata separately, etc, they only need to program one of each model.
FM4 had nearly 700 premium cars with proper cockpits & the option to adjust AI difficulty 2 years ago, pretty much every other racing game has the option to adjust AI difficulty so it's somewhat close to the player level, I don't see why it's so difficult for PD to implement decent AI in GT6.

 

[The Stig Farmer]

1200+ cars, but you have to take into account all the clones.
PD doesn't need to program each Nascar separately, each GT-R Super GT separately, each Miata separately, etc, they only need to program one of each model.
FM4 had nearly 700 premium cars with proper cockpits & the option to adjust AI difficulty 2 years ago, pretty much every other racing game has the option to adjust AI difficulty so it's somewhat close to the player level, I don't see why it's so difficult for PD to implement decent AI in GT6.

They make look the same, but they are not the same. More conjecture once again, but I imagine that every single car is its own entity in the game files. Even the apparently outright clones may have minute performance differences (the Ford NASCARs in GT5 were slightly faster than the other NASCARs for example).

If this is the case than GT is terminally damaging itself by having such a bloated car list. And AI has never been a strong point in the series, so starting to do anything about it now would be fruitless, unless they literally wipe the slate clean and start again.

 

[Johnnypenso]

1200+ cars, but you have to take into account all the clones.
PD doesn't need to program each Nascar separately, each GT-R Super GT separately, each Miata separately, etc, they only need to program one of each model.
FM4 had nearly 700 premium cars with proper cockpits & the option to adjust AI difficulty 2 years ago, pretty much every other racing game has the option to adjust AI difficulty so it's somewhat close to the player level, I don't see why it's so difficult for PD to implement decent AI in GT6.

I've never played Forza. How was the AI in Forza 4? Was the pack fairly close together? Did they behave like real drivers by attacking, defending, leaving room in the corners etc? Were you able to get a field of diverse cars on the track and have a close race?

 

[FS7]

They make look the same, but they are not the same.

Same model, same specs (hp, weight, torque, etc), therefore same car.

I've never played Forza. How was the AI in Forza 4? Was the pack fairly close together? Did they behave like real drivers by attacking, defending, leaving room in the corners etc? Were you able to get a field of diverse cars on the track and have a close race?

In FM4 there are 4 difficulty levels: easy, medium, hard, & pro. I generally play on hard, AI cars drive at a reasonable pace, get off the line when needed, try to pass me, and give me a challenge during the entire race. There's standing starts, option to enable mechanical damage in all game modes, and grids are more balanced with AI using cars around the same level. There's also the option to setup AI opponents to use upgraded cars that are as close as possible to the PP limit. Occasionally AI opponents make mistakes and go off-track, every once in a while they hit me, AI if FM4 isn't perfect but it's way better than in any GT game.
Racing against AI cars in FM4 is definitely more fun & challenging than the catch-up races with slow AI & unbalanced grids that we have in GT6's career & arcade races.

 

[GBO Possum]

I've never played Forza. How was the AI in Forza 4? Was the pack fairly close together? Did they behave like real drivers by attacking, defending, leaving room in the corners etc? Were you able to get a field of diverse cars on the track and have a close race?

I have played Forza, Forza 2, Forza 3 and Forza 4 extensively since 2006. I built a triple screen system back then to satisfy my driving urge. I'd guess I have put in over 80,000 miles of Forza racing. Maybe 100,000 miles. A lot!

I see few significant differences between Forza's AIs and GT6's.

If you google "forza bad ai" you'll find all the same comments that you read here about GT's AI.

That said, Forza never appeared to have "rubber banding".

The AI were programmed to be much more consistent in their driving, one might say "robotic". GT's AI seem to be somewhat emotional, and in recent events (release 1.09), I no longer see them stopping at Starbucks to let me win, rather I see them pulling out all stops if they are close enough to threaten my lead, sometimes to their detriment. If I have a decent lead they seem to be happy to consolidate their position with less risky behavior.

Forza AI will collide with you, will hog the racing line even if they are being lapped, seem to have only partial awareness of their surroundings. I did not notice them aggressively using drafting like the GT6 AI do.

What I never saw them do is suddenly change their lap time by +/- 10+% which I have seen in GT6 by examining replays. That's just over the top.

My sense is that apart from the magnitude of GT's AI's inconsistency, the GT AI is more "human" and "emotional". I'm guessing this comes from the way things were in GT5's B-Spec.

Neither game's AI seems to show me courtesy in long races. They will hog the racing line. Slow cars will duel for position when I'm coming up behind about to lap them and they hold me up when I want to get by and chase the race leaders.

Finally, there is a big difference in race implementation. GT6 seems to depend on the "rolling start" where Forza uses grid starts. This makes for a very big difference in race experience. The pack is seldom close together in short GT6 races. Having the leader over half a mile ahead at the time when I'm able to take control of my car leaves me with a frustrated feeling of "unfairness". However, I can't blame the AI programming for this.

EDIT: Neither game's AI seems to EVER drive as badly as me. When they can do this sort of stuff, I'll take my hat off to them. Click PLAY and then ponder the fact that this happened in a "clean" lap.

 

[CarreraGT]

The AI has come a LONG way in the GT series. I remember back in the older games you could park in the middle of the track, and even if it took an entire lap for the AI to come around, they would 100% run into you. They ran a racing line and did not move out of that line at all.

While it is not perfect in GT6 it has come a long way with many improvements. I have actually seen them fly off the track to avoid hitting me. The rubber band effect can be a bit frustrating for sure but its better than it used to be.

The problem is, given the rate at which racing games and consoles in general are developing, simply being better than before isn't good enough.

Besides, in the case of GT, better than crap is still crap

 

[Pootis]

Since I played the seasonal events that involves overtaking cars, this is what I instantly thought:

The AI need major improvements and i'm getting sick of rolling starts and having to wait 15 seconds to start the race for some tracks.