Point of endurance race?

[KorvinLears]

I really don't understand the purpose of endurance races in Gran Turismo since there is no chance for mechanical failure. Isn't the whole point of the race to see if the car can last the full time period without failing due to the stresses of racing? I understand tire strategy but once that is figured it out, your car is good to the end of the race. It'd be nice if certain parts of the car were prone to failure to spice things up. What do you guys think? Perhaps in gt6?

 

[GODfreyGT5]

The test is primarily in the drivers, is that not obvious?

 

[MrWednesday]

I really don't understand the purpose of endurance races in Gran Turismo since there is no chance for mechanical failure. Isn't the whole point of the race to see if the car can last the full time period without failing due to the stresses of racing? I understand tire strategy but once that is figured it out, your car is good to the end of the race. It'd be nice if certain parts of the car were prone to failure to spice things up. What do you guys think? Perhaps in gt6?

It's certainly true that the endurance of the machine is part of the point of endurance racing, but the performance of the drivers is also an important part of it. If anything, the bigger loss is the lack of mechanical damage, because part of the test of drivers is not making a mistake that destroys the car. In GT5, though, there are no such mistakes, as even if you go hard into a wall, you won't lose more than 15 to 20 s.

 

[KorvinLears]

Maybe in the real world yeah, a test of driver skill. But in gran Turismo in the comfort of your home.... Doesn't work quite the same way. If you had to deal with some of the mechanical problems real teams deal with however, that could lead to a more interesting racing experience no?

 

[KorvinLears]

It's certainly true that the endurance of the machine is part of the point of endurance racing, but the performance of the drivers is also an important part of it. If anything, the bigger loss is the lack of mechanical damage, because part of the test of drivers is not making a mistake that destroys the car. In GT5, though, there are no such mistakes, as even if you go hard into a wall, you won't lose more than 15 to 20 s.

Exactly, we'll said. Even if you make a mistake due to fatigue mentally or physically there is no repercussion. In an endurance race those repercussions are what makes it so interesting

 

[roflcoptor]

Maybe in the real world yeah, a test of driver skill. But in gran Turismo in the comfort of your home.... Doesn't work quite the same way. If you had to deal with some of the mechanical problems real teams deal with however, that could lead to a more interesting racing experience no?

Whilst I agree with you on the realism point, I can also see the other side of the coin that says not many game players (if any at all) would be happy to invest 24 hours of playing time with the knowledge that they might lose the race in the last few laps due to terminal mechanical failure.

It depends how it was all implimented. Setting aside any terminal race-ending failures, then some mechanical failures that allowed you to limp to the pits at a slow rate (similar to running out of fuel speed already in the game) would be worth considering as a user-definable option.

 

[DGXR]

I really don't understand the purpose of endurance races in Gran Turismo since there is no chance for mechanical failure. Isn't the whole point of the race to see if the car can last the full time period without failing due to the stresses of racing? I understand tire strategy but once that is figured it out, your car is good to the end of the race. It'd be nice if certain parts of the car were prone to failure to spice things up. What do you guys think? Perhaps in gt6?

If it was just about a car being able to go a certain distance without failure, this testing (which it would essentially be) could be done independent of other teams and there would be no need for a race. So it's about going the distance quicker than any other race team. And in the case of a mechanical failure, it's about which team can quickly and successfully repair the failure and get back out on track with any hope of still winning the race. This repair factor in endurance racing often goes beyond strategy... it calls on preparedness, team experience, and creativity in getting those repairs done.

Having said that, yes it would be *awesome* to have a good vehicle wear/damage simulator in future GT endurance races... the driver who launches his car over curb after curb eventually has a shock, shock tower or other suspension component failure... or the driver who is very fast but constantly bangs the rev limiter has an engine failure... and I'd imagine that brake abuse/wear should be very easy to simulate.

 

[KorvinLears]

Very good points. I can definitely see your point roflcopter but I like DGXR's idea of perhaps having your driving style effect the type of problems you may encounter, so not only do you have to drive fast but you must do so whilst preserving the car.

It'd definitely be very interesting, but yes terminal failures are probably not the best idea unless using your idea of limping to the pits ( maybe even a tow truck I racing style lol?)

 

[Samus]

It's a very good point, GT endurance races are basically normal races that happen to last 24 hours. There is no real test of endurance for either car or driver.

 

[Sage Ages]

Maybe in the real world yeah, a test of driver skill. But in gran Turismo in the comfort of your home.... Doesn't work quite the same way. If you had to deal with some of the mechanical problems real teams deal with however, that could lead to a more interesting racing experience no?

You sure about that? Doing the exact same thing for a long amount of time can get annoying/boring/difficult.

 

[KorvinLears]

You sure about that? Doing the exact same thing for a long amount of time can get annoying/boring/difficult.

Exactly what I am saying. You drive 24 hours and nothing changes lap to lap no matter how you drive. Of course it gets boring but what if your driving and now you have to deal with a certain problem, maybe certain temps are getting to high so you have to back off a little maybe you've fallen behind and the car ahead gets a problem, now you can pounce and take advantage. Point is running 24 hour qualifying lap after qualifying lap gets very dull.

 

[Yukon]

It all depends on how you tackle the races.

You could start a race in a far superior car and drive off into the distance, lapping everyone, winning by ridiculous amounts of time and/or distance. You don't even need to have a far more superior car to make them completely boring and a waste of your own time. Any car with a performance advantage over the opponents will make the races some of the longest drags you could think about doing on GT.

However, if you take the race, as an actual race - it's much more fun. Get yourself in a car that's equal to, or less powerful than your opponents and then you have something which will keep you on your toes for the duration of the race. When you're battling for the lead, and every little thing like lap times, fuel and tyre economy and overall consistency count, you're bound to enjoy it.

Does it matter that your car won't break down? Not necessarily. In modern day endurance racing, mechanical failures still happen, but it's nothing compared to what endurance racing used to be like. Most cars nowadays manage to last the distance. They're built to last.

 

[CBH]

why not try the Red Bull X2011 for the 24 hour race that will definitely be a challenge

 

[lpfuelfan42]

why not try the Red Bull X2011 for the 24 hour race that will definitely be a challenge

For a race, definitely NOT. Any race where your car can go 100+ mph faster than the closest competition is not a race. That's the worst way imaginable I think I could spend 24 hours.

 

[moolett]

Well you get better rewards, more money and more xp and there tougher to do.

 

[Outeke]

Whilst I agree with you on the realism point, I can also see the other side of the coin that says not many game players (if any at all) would be happy to invest 24 hours of playing time with the knowledge that they might lose the race in the last few laps due to terminal mechanical failure.

It depends how it was all implimented. Setting aside any terminal race-ending failures, then some mechanical failures that allowed you to limp to the pits at a slow rate (similar to running out of fuel speed already in the game) would be worth considering as a user-definable option.

Before reading your post I had exactly the same idea...

Driving 23 hours and 45 minutes...with end in sight...
No driver mistakes but suddenly the car stops saying "some oil tube broke, please start over another day"

 

[scrambles175]

why not try the Red Bull X2011 for the 24 hour race that will definitely be a challenge

I don't know about it being a challenge but its defiantly a lot of fun to drive when your tired of the headaches of dealing with a regular LMP car. I only get to race 4 to 5 hours at a time, with an LMP car, one day it would be great, but next day or the day after it would be complete garbage, then some days I would think the car is great again but can't remember the racing line I took that made me fast during the first day, screw that

 

[Jaywalker]

I'm about 8 hours into the Le mans 24 hr race & while I'm not that far ahead (de-tuned Pug), I can't afford any major mistakes. However, I'm finding it a bit mind-numbing, since reasonably clean laps allow me to steadily increase my lead. If KorvinLears & Roflcoptors ideas were incorporated, things would be more interesting. (Limp mode after parts failure & the game being unable to allow mechanical failures in the last hour or something like that...)

 

[Samus]

However, if you take the race, as an actual race - it's much more fun. Get yourself in a car that's equal to, or less powerful than your opponents and then you have something which will keep you on your toes for the duration of the race. When you're battling for the lead, and every little thing like lap times, fuel and tyre economy and overall consistency count, you're bound to enjoy it.

Does it matter that your car won't break down? Not necessarily. In modern day endurance racing, mechanical failures still happen, but it's nothing compared to what endurance racing used to be like. Most cars nowadays manage to last the distance. They're built to last.

The point is it still just feels like a normal race that goes on an on, it doesn't feel like a test of endurance for either you or the car. There is no danger of working hard for 6 hours to build up a 2 minute lead only to lose it all with a crash and pit stop. You can make as many big mistakes as you want and you'll never lose more than a few seconds.

 

[Shoe67]

I really don't understand the purpose of endurance races in Gran Turismo since there is no chance for mechanical failure. Isn't the whole point of the race to see if the car can last the full time period without failing due to the stresses of racing? I understand tire strategy but once that is figured it out, your car is good to the end of the race. It'd be nice if certain parts of the car were prone to failure to spice things up. What do you guys think? Perhaps in gt6?

Had we been racing cars from the 90s, I'd see your point with no mechanical failures. However, watch modern endurance racing, and in the top teams you will almost never see mechanical failure. You push the car as hard as you can for 6,12,24+ hours. The idea of endurance racing in GT5 is to test your mental ability to turn fast laps over and over for many laps in a row. It's not just having a few lucky fast laps. You need to be consistently quick for 24h straight. I enjoy 200 lap races over the 5 lap sprints almost every time. That's just the type of racing I enjoy. 👍

 

[Kitten]

When you do a endurance race online with really good drivers it gets intense. And some strategy in the pits stops. But I love it especially lmp and races at nurburgring.

 

[speedrcr]

I see the point of this. If some are familiar with GTR2 (PC racing game focusing on the FIA GT series of 2003-2004) there was various Dedicated server options in which you could set (obviously) tire wear degradation similar to GT5, but you could set it separately to Fuel consumption, and in addition, add a random variable which would include percentage of how much mechanical failure could happen. This was depending on how much you would over rev engine and how much you would go off the course.

I really wish this was incorporated in GT5 and hopefully in the new GT6 engine.

If anyone with PD is reading this, these are needed options and instead of combining tire wear with fuel consumption, with fuel management, this would make some very interesting races, as the tire wear model is a joke in GT5.

The mechanical wear was very wonky however especially on custom made tracks that didn't come with the game like, Laguna Seca, Nurburgring, Watkins Glen, etc. Sometimes the game would detect going off the track when you didn't so it wasn't used a lot if you ran custom tracks.

 

[MrWednesday]

The biggest issue that I can see with tire wear is that tire availability is effectively unlimited aside from a low up-front investment in having a particular compound available. In real life, availability and cost of tires are both important factors that impact how teams conduct their tire strategy. In GT5 life, you don't care if you use up a set of tires because you have an unlimited supply and they're free.

 

[grashopper]

The biggest issue that I can see with tire wear is that tire availability is effectively unlimited aside from a low up-front investment in having a particular compound available. In real life, availability and cost of tires are both important factors that impact how teams conduct their tire strategy. In GT5 life, you don't care if you use up a set of tires because you have an unlimited supply and they're free.

I could see that being kind of cool. Stockpiling tires for the big race. Each change uses up a set. Having the wear stay from race to race until you change them.
I think paying for fuel would even be cool. Setting how much you want to add to the tank to keep the weight down on shorter races.

 

[XS]

I could see how things like running on old tires too long causing a damaging blow out, or hard impacts causing drivability issues would spice up endurance races. As mentioned it would have to be a setting, so not to anger a lot of players. I did always think it was silly that if you ran out of fuel, you could still drive to the pits, or if you ran on tires too long the car would just be difficult to control. Make it so things like that actually damage the car, like blow outs do IRL, or a cut scene of your car being towed after running out of fuel.

 

[CBH]

XS, when you said top teams you will almost never see mechanical failure you are 100% right there

 

[XS]

What? I didn't say that. Or I'm confused on what you're saying.

 

[CBH]

What? I didn't say that. Or I'm confused on what you're saying.

XS, Sorry about that wrong person.

 

[Atarwii]

Extended periods of time with GT's AI does not really sound much fun. Grid's AI was much more fun with Endurance races because the cpu cars drove like they had a purpose would attempt to capitalize on your mistakes or attempt to cause you to make one. I'm not making a case for Grid 1 but after beating Grid 1 and getting into GT5, it's quite noticeable.

 

[Carbonox]

Maybe in the real world yeah, a test of driver skill. But in gran Turismo in the comfort of your home.... Doesn't work quite the same way. If you had to deal with some of the mechanical problems real teams deal with however, that could lead to a more interesting racing experience no?

Disagreed. There's nothing less enjoyable than having your car break down on the closing laps of a long race after all that strategizing to get to the front of the pack. I would be OK with tire deflations, but only if they happened for a reason (i.e. running over sharp debris on the race track). Same goes for all other fixable problems that drivers encounter during race days, like the loss of a wing.