The biggest problem with GT5 that nobody talks about.

[aarror]

Next time you race at Monaco, take a look at the boats in the harbour. The graphics are horrible, they look so boxy sitting on top of the perfectly flat water.

 

[RikkiGT-R]

Amazing.
The game has practically no A-spec content, almost none of the best Tracks, no car setup saves, no wheels for 80% of the cars, that also look inferior, the worst progession system I've ever seen in a game, and he's pointing out the lack of naturalization of trees, birds, grass and spectators.

Buddy, thats the least of this games problems.

What he said 👍

I only ever look at the trees and other environment when my eyes start to hurt from looking at the horrid menus.

 

[Zathra5_]

No offense intended, but these fanboy comments get really old. You do realize that there are other games out on the PS3 that don't have the majority of issues that GT5 does...right? So how is it that other devs can get around these issues, but PD can't?

I'm sorry but comments like these get really old. Everyone brings up several games that all add up to having the same features as GT5. The thing is none of those games have all the features that GT5 has. Name one game on a console that has GT level graphics, GT level physics, weather, Day/night transitions, damage, etc. The answer is none. Your not even going to get that with a pc game with out significant mods. I'm sure if you look at any one feature, you will find a another game that does something better or at least better in your opinion. As many are saying, the ps3 is limited and you have to choose where you put your priorities. I'm doubt many people would agree with all the priorities PD chose. I find many of them downright baffling but others I totally agree with. For instance, I'm glad that they went with blocky shadows rather than take out things like weather.

 

[skywolf23]

Game was in development for more like 3 to 4 years with breaks for gt psp, gthd, gt5p, granted hd and 5p many things were ported over. But even from hd to gt5 we saw how textures and things had to be toned down to get the cars on track they wanted, and i blame the push for 3d to some of the graphic downgrading. Since the game has to be able to render everything twice for the 3d effect for the handful of people that have 3d gear.

I agree also that is a bigger crime in a real driving simulator that tire temp, engine temp, are not modeled at all and play no factor in driving.

Lets also remember how many things kaz wanted to do and got canned outright, we do not know how much time and effort went into trying some of the things kaz wanted to do before they realized they could not do them at all on the ps3.

Maybe some of this stuff will be remedied in the next gt title, maybe we have to wait for the ps4, ps5, to get everything possible in the game we and kaz wants. But the reason some of the tracks look "bad" is that some of them were ported from earlier gts and did not get the reworking that nurburg/24 got. More tracks will get reworked or more ported for the next game, 2 or 3 titles down the line maybe all cars and all tracks will get the full hd reworking.

 

[calan_svc]

Everyone brings up several games that all add up to having the same features as GT5. The thing is none of those games have all the features that GT5 has.

Agreed, and THANK GOD!

Because if those games also incorporated things like 3D support (?), nauseating and limited cockpit views, detail in back seats that you'll never see, hundreds of poorly rendered cars that nobody cares about, features that don't work, beautiful cars surrounded by screen tearing and FPS drops, and some of the worst sounds ever designed...they would be just as much of a debacle as GT5 is.

FWIW, I'm pretty happy that those other companies focused on what matters and made some pretty good all-around racing games. Let's hope that PD figures that out sooner than later.

 

[Forcednduckshn]

If you are on this site there is a 99% you think GT5 is great, and it is. However, it is not extraordinary. It has flaws. What a shock. Most of these are actually not all that critical, they are just spotted everywhere. Some have been fixed with a couple megabytes of patches. The most obvious are the blocky shadows and smoke aliasing. It’s pretty hard not to notice sitting next what is a stunning game. But in the end they do not ruin the experience.

While observing the game yesterday I found a flaw that I do not think anyone has mentioned or at least in the detail I am about to. Also, I am in no way saying that I expected any of what I am about to say to be in GT5. That would be crazy.

GT5 implemented new smoke effects. They are very nice. If you kick up smoke it has a weight that has been missing for years in the series. It even blows in the wind. And this has lead me to what I think to be one of the biggest visual and immersive flaws in GT5.

Besides the smoke and a few bits of grass, nothing else in the game's environments reacts and acts naturally. And besides the time of day the environmental effects are more on/off. All grass moves. It is not a flat texture. Trees sway in the wind and are more than just two pieces of cardboard stuck together. Snow whips up from the ground and builds up as time passes. Rain is more than a blotch on the windshield and pools where there are changes of surface. Also snow and rain are simply filters put over a screen with added volumetric effects. This may seem like a trivial matter but it is not.

The cars in GT5 are near flawless. But the environments and their lack of effects do not hold up. I feel like the world I am in is static, lifeless. There is no life. There are no birds flying across the sky. No sun glare off of the car in front of me. The 24hr layout of The Ring is the most convincing track because it has life to it. I can't believe I am saying this but it is the smoke from people grilling outside their tents. Like Kaz said, you can almost smell the BBQ. This brings me into the moment.

For the next GT, PD need to think real hard what they want to accomplish. They have a tremendous opportunity to work with the next hardware and create something that is truly extraordinary. Imagine a world where the crowd changed as the race when on. People moved about in the off track area. The clouds, sun, shadows all changed. Bugs hit your windshield and your car got dirty over the course of the race. Imagine racing up Spa and suddenly a plume of fog engulfed the track. Or experiencing a white out at Chamonix. Small waves hitting the port at Monaco. I miss things like the moving crowd on the Gran Canyon track in GT4. Things like this make me feel like I am experiencing something real.

This is what takes out of the world you are in and fools your mind into thinking what you are doing is real. GT5 offers moments of this. In fact it does it better than almost any other game. NFS Shift was not bad, but overdone. It is the essence of what GT is and it is what the next game needs to improve.


If you read all that give yourself a pat on the back.

Well said. These things would be another step forward that would take the game to the next level. I do really have a feeling that GT6 will be GT5, but fixing all of the crap they failed to include that it should have been. Including the things you discuss would be amazing.

 

[deftonesmx17]

Day/night transitions, damage, etc. The answer is none. Your not even going to get that with a pc game with out significant mods.

Comments such as these get old.
How many times do I need to post these before people stop saying there isnt a single game out there with more realistic damage.


Thats a PS3/PC/360 game from 2008 without any mods

 

[Sincx]

Console will have always these limits... step forward would be GT for PC

Silver

This....ps3 is old hardware 👎

 

[xchristox]

No offense intended, but these fanboy comments get really old. You do realize that there are other games out on the PS3 that don't have the majority of issues that GT5 does...right? So how is it that other devs can get around these issues, but PD can't?

Check out the moving plant life, water, and other environmental details in Dirt 2 (along with the sounds of gravel and crap hitting the underside of the car). Or how about the close racing and shear intensity of Grid, and the incredible detail of the suspensions and engines...not to mention the damage modeling.

It's down to choices. GT5 has, by far, the BEST physics of all those games. How much processing power do you need to make 1000 cars feel totally different in every corner on the 'ring?

Yeah dirt rocks in damage and surroundings, but the physics are freakin' horrible. Why GT is missing out on surroundings and crashing beauty? It's because the PS3 lacks power, and realism is NUMBER ONE for GT games. All other less important beauty features are left out, or kept to a minimum. It's beauty, or great physics. You simply can't have both on the ps3.

 

[p-coletray]

Dude, go to a race track or go outside if you want weather and people. If you prefer VR than go play GTA series, so real they die when you run them over. I'd rather have more tracks and some more events! Admittedly the game is massively flawed, but it's supposed to be racing sim, not earth sim.

 

[calan_svc]

GT5 has, by far, the BEST physics of all those games.

LOL

It's like you people all have blinders on or have never played anything but GT...much less actually driven a real car at it's limits.

Please explain why GT5's physics engine is so superior. I see countless threads that say things like "GT5 has the best physics!"...but I have yet to see even a single post explaining why. The FFB system is third rate at best compared to other games; there is no linear progression of grip loss whatsoever. It's simply a centering spring algorithm with some canned effects thrown on top. Only on rare occasions do you feel any grip loss at the rear, and when you do you are way past the slip angle and point of correction. The collision modelling is no better, and drafting is either too much or too little. Want to talk about tires? Check out my thread or one of several others that contain objective testing on the subject.

So I ask again...WHY are GT5's physics so uber?

How much processing power do you need to make 1000 cars feel totally different in every corner on the 'ring?

Cars are usually defined by a data file for each car; so it doesn't take any more processing power (per car) for 1000 cars than it does 1,000,000. The same math gets run no matter what data is fed into the equations. All that matters is the number of cars being processed simultaneously. And even the crappiest NASCAR games were doing 43 cars at once with reasonable physics modelling years ago.

Yeah dirt rocks in damage and surroundings, but the physics are freakin' horrible. Why GT is missing out on surroundings and crashing beauty? It's because the PS3 lacks power, and realism is NUMBER ONE for GT games. All other less important beauty features are left out, or kept to a minimum. It's beauty, or great physics. You simply can't have both on the ps3.

Non-tarmac forces and interactions are some of the hardest there are to model, and Dirt 2's gravel and loose particle physics are far superior to GT5's.

Next...

 

[xchristox]

Cars are defined by a data file for each car; so it doesn't take any more "physics" for 1000 cars than it does 1,000,000. The same math gets run no matter what data is fed into the equations.



Non-tarmac forces and interactions are some of the hardest there are to model, and Dirt 2's gravel and loose particle physics are far superior to GT5's.

Next...

yeah dirt is the real deal man. Took me 1 day to complete, got bored after day 2 and never looked back at it again.

NEXT.

 

[deftonesmx17]

Non-tarmac forces and interactions are some of the hardest there are to model, and Dirt 2's gravel and loose particle physics are far superior to GT5's.

Next...

Not to mention when you hit a wall in that game, you don't just bounce off while hearing the worst sound effect in racing game history.

 

[Destinkeys]

It's threads like this that maybe explain just how BAD many 'gaming' aspects of this game is. You spend 100% of your attention modeling stuff no-one even sees except in photo mode, or trying to have as accurate a model of day/night transitions, and you end up forgetting to put 75% of the A-Spec content from the previous game in it.

Limited resources mean prioritization. I'd rather have the GAME be great, and a bit less scenery detail, than ultimate realism in a game so flawed, who wants to race it?

Better AI, for instance. Who wants a 3D tree over THAT? I know I don't!

 

[calan_svc]

yeah dirt is the real deal man. Took me 1 day to complete, got bored after day 2 and never looked back at it again.

You completed that game in one day? On which difficulty setting? How did you complete it, because as far as I know there is no upper limit to the level you can reach.

You must be a BEAST! Congratulations!

Please see my edited first paragraph and provide us with some insight.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

LOL

It's like you people all have blinders on or have never played anything but GT...much less actually driven a real car at it's limits.

Please explain why GT5's physics engine is so superior. I see countless threads that say things like "GT5 has the best physics!"...but I have yet to see even a single post explaining why. The FFB system is third rate at best compared to other games; there is no linear progression of grip loss whatsoever. It's simply a centering spring algorithm with some canned effects thrown on top. Only on rare occasions do you feel any grip loss at the rear, and when you do you are way past the slip angle and point of correction. The collision modelling is no better, and drafting is either too much or too little. Want to talk about tires? Check out my thread or one of several others that contain objective testing on the subject.

So I ask again...WHY are GT5's physics so uber?

I'm so glad somebody finally said this.
I agree, the physics are not that good.
In addition to your points, when I can out-corner some of the tire/sportcar combos in this game with my pickup truck, I know they've missed the mark.

 

[calan_svc]

I'm so glad somebody finally said this.

LOL

I'm waiting patiently for:

1). Silence in regards to my question, or
2). A reprimand for being so blantantly honest in my opinion, or
3). The thread to be locked due to negative comments against GT5

j/king

I enjoy GT5...I just don't understand why people get so defensive and claim it to be "all that", when it just isn't. My real hope is that someone with some clout at PD reads these threads from time-to-time and learns something from the few intelligent debates that take place, and we all benefit in the long run from it.

 

[CodeRedR51]

I'm so glad somebody finally said this.
I agree, the physics are not that good.
In addition to your points, when I can out-corner some of the tire/sportcar combos in this game with my pickup truck, I know they've missed the mark.

Maybe not, but better than most. (console sim racers)

 

[panjandrum]

There are always some types of compromises made when designing video-games. If you add detail in one area, you might have to sacrifice in another area. GT5 has some absolutely stunning graphics in certain regards. But when you take it and compare it to Dirt 2, you can see where each developer put their effort. This makes an excellent comparison because both GT5 and Dirt 2 look very good, especially for PS3 games, and yet they do it in very different ways. The most obvious example is that the GT5 world is much more "static" than the Dirt 2 world, but is also crisper and more detailed. The Dirt 2 world, on the other hand, is more more alive and dynamic, but the overall detail levels are less. In the end, IMHO, they look "about the same" in terms of their overall impact, but they achieve that impact differently.

 

[F1Addict]

Agreed, but the better issue to fix is the very crappy aliasing on at the cars edges when smoke, snow or dirt is near...

 

[FLIGHT50]

A problem GT has right now is competition. I can almost promise you that GT is being compared the every other game out there. When it comes to driving references the comparison of GT and some other title always reaches the surface.....well GT does this GT does that, Forza does this Forza does that, Grid, NFS, Toca the list goes one. Every game is going to be different. Period. Sure each one has it pros and cons and those pros and cons are what makes that game what it is. Its easy for us to sit back and say blah blah should do this and or they should have does that when we don't know the hurdles it took to make it.

In today's time and age in the gaming industry, they are really critiqued because of what gaming has grown to. We should appreciate the pros that they do have and await the improvements or patches to fix flaws. Am I perfectly fine with GT as is, heck no. I rated the game at a 75 for its Nov 24 release content. My rating now still doesn't give it a B but I am not on here knocking the game for everything. I have my gripes but they are reasonable. Some of the gripes in the threads are just lack of knowledge on hardware/software limitations. I don't know what all it takes to make these high end games but I am very reasonable for what's necessary and what is not so important in a game. GT wise tracks/events are necessary. Environmental effects, not so much.

 

[craze561]

no smoke in the rear view!! why cant we see the smoke we kick up in the rear view mirrors?

 

[kayman]

Agreed, but the better issue to fix is the very crappy aliasing on at the cars edges when smoke, snow or dirt is near...

I'd be very happy to keep the graphics where they are and fix physics and FFB issues as well as game play issues first. Graphics can only make a game so good.

 

[GTP_FastM3]

But they don't stay dirty. I want to take my Subaru to the car wash in the game caked in mud and dirt. This is not something required, but certainly would be cool.

You know what would be even better? If my real life car became instantly clean when I parked it in the garage. I think this time GT has it right. LOL

 

[CodeRedR51]

You know what would be even better? If my real life car became instantly clean when I parked it in the garage. I think this time GT has it right. LOL

Yeah true.

I haven't washed my car in over a month...

 

[GT5Junkie]

In addition to your points, when I can out-corner some of the tire/sportcar combos in this game with my pickup truck, I know they've missed the mark.

Examples/specifics?

 

[panjandrum]

It's like you people all have blinders on or have never played anything but GT...much less actually driven a real car at it's limits.

Please explain why GT5's physics engine is so superior.

Actually, there are a number of threads where real motor-sports drivers talk about the physics. You just haven't seen them I guess.

I do amateur motor-sports and am honestly very good at them. Are GT5's physics perfect? Not on your life. And in online mode there are some huge issues with certain cars that there is no way to address here.

But, in many ways the physics of GT5 are excellent. Sure, rFactor on the PC and a few others seem like they have a bit more realistic in term of their pure physics engine, but GT5 is quite good (even GT4 holds up very well). There are some sanctimonious PC SIM purists, but just like GT fanboys, their opinions can be immediately dismissed because they are so obviously biased. Why do some people seem to think that what they like has to be "the best"?

But GT4/5 does one thing better than any other SIM I've ever driven, and that is it makes the cars feel truly unique (note, if you aren't using an FFB wheel, you may not be able to feel this). You get a real sense of what that car was like to actually drive. In the case of those cars I can compare with cars I've driven in motorsports (autocross, PCA events, ice-racing), I would say that the cars stack-up against their real-life equivalents extraordinarily well. Most people, no matter how hard they drive on the street or for how long, don't have a clue how difficult cars can be to control when they are truly at the limit. I know I was sure a ham-fisted idiot when I started driving GT4 and doing motorsports in real-life (at about the same time). Cars understeer and oversteer much more easily than people realize, and often the edge between having grip and plowing straight-ahead can be as little as a couple of miles per hour or just a slightly incorrect corner-entry.

At any rate, I think that what PD tries to do is to make it so that when you climb behind the wheel of a Ferrari Enzo, that experience (sublime, refined) is completely different then when you climb behind the wheel of a Ford GT (brutal, heart-pounding), even though those two cars would look at least fairly similar on paper. I've simply never felt anything like this level of detail out of any other SIM. So different types of simulations for different purposes.

I enjoy all kinds of racing SIMS, but if I were forced to choose I would say that I prefer the GT style of SIM: When I climb inside the elegant, curvaceous Jaguar e-type, or inside the trim athletic angular Lancia Stratos, I don't care if the sim has the tire-deformation 100% correct, or the acceleration accurate to the thousandths of a second. What I care about is how it feels to be inside each of them when I take them for a ride....

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Examples/specifics?

Tsukuba Academy TT/ Fairlady.
Challenging? Yes, however anything but realistic.

 

[paskowitz]

To all those who are pointing out that the PS3 can only handle so much and has a ancient GPU... really I did not know that tell me more . I am not saying I expected PD to do all this. I did not say I was disappointed in GT5 because it does not have X, Y and Z. I am simply pointing out a flaw that I believe is very valid. If you read the entire post you would understand that this is more a statement of what PD should work on for the next game if it is on new hardware.

To me at least the whole draw of GT is experiencing driving in ways that I probably never will in real life. I will never drive an F1 or a GT40. This being the case I want to get as close as possible to what it would be like.

 

[calan_svc]

I'd be very happy to keep the graphics where they are...

Not me. I want the screen tearing and ridiculous drops in frame rate when more than 5 cars are visible on a city track to go away.

There are always some types of compromises made when designing video-games. If you add detail in one area, you might have to sacrifice in another area. GT5 has some absolutely stunning graphics in certain regards. But when you take it and compare it to Dirt 2, you can see where each developer put their effort. This makes an excellent comparison because both GT5 and Dirt 2 look very good, especially for PS3 games, and yet they do it in very different ways. The most obvious example is that the GT5 world is much more "static" than the Dirt 2 world, but is also crisper and more detailed. The Dirt 2 world, on the other hand, is more more alive and dynamic, but the overall detail levels are less. In the end, IMHO, they look "about the same" in terms of their overall impact, but they achieve that impact differently.

Very well put.

For me, it's a matter of the game taken as a whole. With GT5, there are so many things that they "wanted" to do, but it all adds up to a complete mess and none of it was really accomplished. Like the beautifully detailed premium cars; ok, they look great. But so what? Put them on the track and you get graphics issues and can see how bad some of the other cars look. So was it worth it?

How about if they had all the cars with quality somewhere in between the current premiums and standards, and put more effort into additional (and more detailed) tracks, gameplay, etc. Of course the answer is that we would have a much better game experience in many ways. By going so outrageously overboard on some of the cars' detailing, all they did was provide a reference to compare every other car against (and hurt performance, use time and resources, etc)... so the non-premium cars stand out like a sore thumb. And as discussed ad nauseum, there are many, many of these types of derailments.

This is why (for me) Dirt 2 for one example is a much "better" game. It doesn't have some of the top shelf car graphics and setup options that GT5 does, but it doesn't matter. Everything meshes together and there are very few negative issues to detract from the positives. (Which is strange for me to say, because I've had more than one moment when it comes to Codemasters). It's about the complete package; I can race Dirt 2 for a couple of hours and get out of the sim rig exausted and grinning. I can race GT5 for a couple of hours and I'll be mumbling something along the lines of "Why the hell did they...".

GT5 is a case study in project creep, and a case of too much ambition given the time, platform, and resources they had to work with.

But, in many ways the physics of GT5 are excellent.

I'll ask once more... how are they excellent? I still haven't seen anyone explain that type of response or offer up any proof of it.



*****

To get back somewhat on topic, I would challenge the notion that the Novigrad track (lighting, textures, etc) in Dirt 2 isn't as good or better than any track in GT5.