Poll:Do you believe GT5 works as a simulator...

[tinram]

Just use your common sense and read it within the arcade vs sim context. I think the biggest distinction of being a driving sim is to replicate the real world limitation of racing, namely tire, damage, racing rules, difficulty in handling, wear and tear, surface imperfection etc - features that doesn't necessary improve the entertainment value but is there because it is part of real life racing.

There's no absolute sim but there is always a relative sim vs arcade scale, for example back in the days Indy500 was considered a top sim relative to all other driving games, however in today's standard it is no more.

I'm tired of folks using the the word sim to indicate whether a game is good (a game they like) or not (a game they hate) as if there was something to that would explicitly indicate whether a game is a sim or not. While the truth is that it's all a matter of opinion.

 

[JJ72]

I get fed up with that too especially when elitism kicks in and everything not sim is instantly reduced to garbage, but that's nothing to do with this thread really?

 

[ShortAznGuy]

Once I'm able to fully stall my car, completely ruin the clutch, obliterate my car into pieces, have my driver die, and have my car catch on fire, it will be a real simulator, haha.

 

[racer39658]

In as much as there are generally two classes of racing games, arcade and sim, then yes, this is a simulator. However, until the program emulates the behaviour and action of every seperate part of the car (ie monitoring the individual action of the valves) then there will always be unrealistic action involved.
(side note, someone mentioned grass being too slick... well, on race tires, grass does feel like ice. one touch while you're riding that racing edge, and you're gone)

 

[RacerPaul]

... good graphics, aside from the well documented flaws. i'm not clued up enough to say how good (or not) the understeer/oversteer
on-throttle physics are, but it does one thing convincingly imo...

when you're heading for a turn, you brake straight and hard, then off the brakes and turn in. it does that wallop off to the apex very well imo

if you try turning in whilst still on the brakes, it will push and understeer

that bit, it does very well (again, imo)

Here's a copy of a reply I made in a thread thats very critical of GT5, over at NoGrip.com

GT5 is as good a sim as you'll get on console

Sums it up, for me 👍

side note, someone mentioned grass being too slick... well, on race tires, grass does feel like ice. one touch while you're riding that racing edge, and you're gone

Indeed, a la Reubens Barrichello in Oz gp qualy yesterday

 

[Tower Turn 13]

Maybe the ones working on a shoestring budget, but any team with two pennies to rub together would train on something like iRacing instead, and a well-funded team would have in-house simulators that beat the pants off of common PC sims.

Well yeah that's why it seems a little sketchy to hear those things. I mean PD might have paid racecar drivers to sit there on camera and say "yeah it's like driving on a real track except I don't have to worry about breaking my thumbs or excessive physical exhaustion," but do we really believe it's a useful training tool, beyond basic entry/exit techniques? I don't know about that. All I know is I enjoy the game for what it is.

 

[Zorrin]

GT5 does a nice job, for a console, but is lacking in many areas before it can be called a simulator.

What about the basics such as flags? Qualifying? Free practice sessions? Tyre wear? Fuel consumption? Fuel loads?

There are many things that it lacks. However there are plenty of things that make it enjoyable, namely the fact that it sticks to its GT roots. Lots of cars and the ability to slap a big ****ing turbo on it.

Have to agree wholeheartedly with whoever said it's just marketing hype.

I still kinda begrudge the $50 I spent on GT5, but at the same time am completely hooked. I want to hate GT5 but I can't.

 

[hawkeye122]

It seems the Sim-ness goes down as the cars get faster. Ive driven an Audi TT, and yes, they've got it right. But ive also driven an open-cockpit LMP V8... The amount of grip and power is nothing similar to what they portray it to be.

I think they need to improve on their tyres... it seems like they come up to temperature far too fast.

It has its quirks, but its a good game. Sim? I dont think so... Im tempted to say that GT4 was more "Sim" for its age.

 

[phil bell]

Just to clarify guys I meant "sim" in the way's as stated in the title,im a little less concerned about fuel load,etc.Don't really do endurance racing.I have to agree on the tyre modelling being questionable though...
I also want to ask how come it is used by real racing drivers and has a GTacademy if it's just a arcade game?Just a question,no offense intended.I have no bias over these things afterall.

 

[VINCE__]

It depends on how much of a rig you have. Just a wheel on a coffe table, probably not. A racing seat with a high end wheel and pedal kit combined with trip screens and buttkicker dialed in with dgital sound, maybe more so.

 

[phil bell]

I use a G27 wheel but only one 42 inch TV and standard audio...

 

[JJ72]

I also want to ask how come it is used by real racing drivers and has a GTacademy if it's just a arcade game?Just a question,no offense intended.I have no bias over these things afterall.

Because it is a household name and also has credibility among the gaming world - people who don't actually know anything about driving find it easier to buy GT as a game real enough for driver training. (afterall they have been told this for over a decade)

It simply won't raise the same attention if you have a NetkarPro academy, because people don't know NKpro and unless they are avid sim racers themselves won't be able to tell which one is more realistic.

GT academy is mainly a PR event, if it is a real search for a all rounded racing driver it wouldn't have so much emphasis on hot lapping alone.

 

[RX-7_FD3S]

Yes, try an F40 on the Nurby:tup:

well I voted yes but I believe that old car arent really what they should have been. It's easy to drive a F40 on the ring, when in real life it's next to impossible unless you're a pro driver.

 

[JJ72]

How so? it has grip, it has traction has a stiff chassis, suspension setting might not be of today's standard but still better than many of its contemporaries.

 

[jimy281090]

Because it is a household name and also has credibility among the gaming world - people who don't actually know anything about driving find it easier to buy GT as a game real enough for driver training. (afterall they have been told this for over a decade)

It simply won't raise the same attention if you have a NetkarPro academy, because people don't know NKpro and unless they are avid sim racers themselves won't be able to tell which one is more realistic.

GT academy is mainly a PR event, if it is a real search for a all rounded racing driver it wouldn't have so much emphasis on hot lapping alone.

Like i said.. Some of the supercars etc have no feel like the do in Real Life so I agree with this.. Being lucky enough to have drove most Premium cars in this game!

 

[Bopop4]

Any "sim", that let's people drive without a wheel and not be seconds off of the pace is just a game. How many people could drive the F2010 like they do in GT5?

 

[jantoine]

It's a $50 game. For that money no one should complain about anything.

 

[phil bell]

How so? it has grip, it has traction has a stiff chassis, suspension setting might not be of today's standard but still better than many of its contemporaries.

This:tup:,I love my F40,imo better than most modern car's.

 

[phil bell]

Like i said.. Some of the supercars etc have no feel like the do in Real Life so I agree with this.. Being lucky enough to have drove most Premium cars in this game!

Are there any that do mate? Are the F40 and LP640 ok? *prays*

 

[GeekCred]

I also want to ask how come it is used by real racing drivers and has a GTacademy if it's just a arcade game?

I didn't know GT5 was used by real race drivers as a training tool, where did you get that information?

As JJ said, the GTAcademy is a promotional event; put on by PD to generate interest from motorsports fans, it's not really a reflection of how legitimate a tool it is for actual motorsports. I find it hard to believe that any racing teams actually utilize this game in their training regiments.

 

[phil bell]

Well there ae a few statements from drivers on it,but the details are sketchy to me now.Poor memory you see. As for GTacademy Im also suprised pro drivers have spawned from it;http://www.news.com.au/technology/g...to-podium-sitter/story-e6frfrt9-1226026147841

 

[raceur]

Instead of looking at what GT5 misses, let's look at what it can do. I reckon it can:

- give you a good appreciation of racing lines
- control of speed in to, and out of a corner
- models FWD understeer well if you power-on too early out of a corner
- gives a reasonable idea of power-on and lift-off oversteer
- teaches the concept of smooth, small improvements rather than the gorilla approach
- gives you a sense of pressure...racing online with 15 friends, you're in the lead by half a second knowing any mistake will lose you the race

Yes, there's lots of holes in it as other have righthly pointed out, but I'd argue there's plenty to be learned from it.

In short, if someone is a good GT5 driver I reckon they'd be a long way ahead on a real racetrack compared to someone of the same natural ability but no GT5 experience.

My friends who know how to handle a car on a track do well on GT5 after a little getting used to the game. Those that can't drive, don't do well. You can see the difference...the skilled driver is patiently waiting for the car to touch the apex before powering out, the unskilled is barrelling in too fast, lots of lock on, flying wide, not learning from each corner, not knowing how to correct or even recognising the signs.

 

[jantoine]

👍

 

[BKViper]

To an extent, and for what it is.
It's a cheap console game, and it succeeds at that level.
There are better physics simulators for PCs, such as iRacing. Of course that has the benefit of more processing power and costs at little more.
True simulators cost into the thousands of dollars.
And the ones used at the highest levels, like F1, cost millions.
Is it fair to compare them all? No. Not it is still what it is. It's a racing game for a video console, and currently the one with the most accurate physics (other aspects rate differently among other console racers).

 

[phil bell]

Anymore opinions/votes ?

 

[freedomweasel]

"Simulator" is a vague term as it's more of a sliding scale than a black and white description. Is GT5 more of a sim than many other console games? Is it more of a sim than PC games? What about the set ups F1 teams use?
I'd say, based on the cars I've driven, that it's a pretty good sim as far as consoles go.

Side note, using expectations or youtube videos as judgement of the simulation capabilities isn't a good idea in my opinion. For example, the F40 on the 'Ring. Does it seem real to me? Sure, but I've never driven an F40, let alone driven one at race pace on the 'Ring. Even going by lap times seems like a bad idea. It's possible, though very unlikely I'd think, that a game could get the handling and feel of a car way off but the end result could still be similar to real life times.

 

[dschoene]

It cannot work as a simulator, because of the PS3's limited processing power.

This is why Formula 1 teams spend gazillions of dollars on simulators instead of getting a PS3 from the nearest electronics discounter.

Does it work within the limits set by the hardware? 'fraid not. You can immediately scratch the standard cars, because being able to chuck your car into the wall at the speed of light and sustaining no visible damage nixes that idea immediately. It's a game, but not a simulator. Several points prove that:

1. If a car runs out of fuel, it stops working. In GT5 a car continues to work with limited performance infinitely. FAIL

2. A hard tire lasts significantly longer than a soft one. In GT5 there's no real difference. FAIL

3. If you smash your car into a wall hard enough, it'll stop working and be a write-off. In GT5 there's some dents in the bonnet, but it'll take more abuse than the TopGear Hilux. FAIL

Just three points in which it fails as a simulator. It's a game with good physics, not more.

 

[freedomweasel]

It cannot work as a simulator, because of the PS3's limited processing power.

This is why Formula 1 teams spend gazillions of dollars on simulators instead of getting a PS3 from the nearest electronics discounter.

Does it work within the limits set by the hardware? 'fraid not. You can immediately scratch the standard cars, because being able to chuck your car into the wall at the speed of light and sustaining no visible damage nixes that idea immediately. It's a game, but not a simulator. Several points prove that:

1. If a car runs out of fuel, it stops working. In GT5 a car continues to work with limited performance infinitely. FAIL

2. A hard tire lasts significantly longer than a soft one. In GT5 there's no real difference. FAIL

3. If you smash your car into a wall hard enough, it'll stop working and be a write-off. In GT5 there's some dents in the bonnet, but it'll take more abuse than the TopGear Hilux. FAIL

Just three points in which it fails as a simulator. It's a game with good physics, not more.

Out of curiosity, are you sure that the F1 teams use rigs that have a perfect damage model? If I had to guess, I'd say the damage modeling in those setups isn't amazing.

 

[dschoene]

@freedomweasel:

Yes, I'm certain. They use the simulators to substitute for the now banned in-season testing, so they need a VERY realistic damage model. How else are they going to know, if the suspension takes a 50 lap pounding at Spa or if the engine will not devour itself after lap 20 at indy.

 

[gman07]

@freedomweasel:

Yes, I'm certain. They use the simulators to substitute for the now banned in-season testing, so they need a VERY realistic damage model. How else are they going to know, if the suspension takes a 50 lap pounding at Spa or if the engine will not devour itself after lap 20 at indy.

While they need simulations of damage, stress/strain/fatigue, wear, etc., they're certainly not done in the same package as their driver training simulators. There just isn't enough processing power to calculate all of that in real-time. So they have a driving simulator to accurately represent the car on the track to train the driver and several other simulations for the car.

Edit: As far as whether GT5 is a simulator or not, I gave it "to an extent." It does a good job of teaching basic racing principles and lines, and it works for learning a track. However, the tire physics and weight transfer leave something to be desired.