The GT Sport Epic Whining and Crying Thread

[JvM]

There's no sim, just arcade left with this steering model.

Heh..

Weird how same lock gives less steering in low speed, isn't speed sensitive steering usually the opposite way..?

Either way, that is just ridiculous for wheel users.

 

[05XR8]

That human race video was a bit dramatic, but isn't this to be the "2nd chapter" in the GT series?

What if this being the .Motorsport version, there is a driving version in the works. Or GTS is the beginning of a bigger picture. Possibly tapping into online gathering. Then, having that open world of being the driving game it tauted is was.

 

[marcvic]

I still fail to see how GT Sport has had a radical change for the worse - It appears that the only radical change was to include a far better online experience. Car/track count is down (which I give them a pass on the tracks due to the many different conditions to race in), but it appears that every other aspect of the game is still there.

The whole CarRPG aspect is still there, and appears to be stronger than ever - train, race, buy cars repeat - and all the stuff in between.

 

[ImaRobot]

I still fail to see how GT Sport has had a radical change for the worse - It appears that the only radical change was to include a far better online experience. Car/track count is down (which I give them a pass on the tracks due to the many different conditions to race in), but it appears that every other aspect of the game is still there.

Strict regulation on car classes without being able to place a car in a class you'd like as well as lack of customization, a "campaign" mode that might as well be called "license tests", dropping of assets that where apparently supposed to be future proof already(just to future proof them?) Those are a few reasons I think are issues.

I think it's the major change in direction, as well as the fact as issues like delays and extreme lack of communication is what is throwing people off. I wouldn't necessarily say its a bad direction just yet, but it's not looking to appealing to me in certain area's. Car/track count being down is an issue, but a minor one that I can live with.

What I fail to see is how you think the only major change of direction this game has had is it's online features.

 

[JKgo]

The whole CarRPG aspect is still there, and appears to be stronger than ever - train, race, buy cars repeat - and all the stuff in between.

...Hmm. Not sure if I agree with this. 140~177 cars, with more than a few of them being, for a lack of better descriptors, duplicates, the available car count has gone way down, so no matter how PDI spin it, it's not stronger in that aspect alone.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

The whole CarRPG aspect is still there, and appears to be stronger than ever - train, race, buy cars repeat - and all the stuff in between.

It hasn't been outright confirmed, but the customization/upgrading — a major part of RPGs — doesn't appear to be a part of GT Sport. Really, outside of keeping the credit system, the game's basic career premise doesn't seem drastically different to Project CARS'.

 

[fasj6418]

They're no doubt taking more liberties than usual with the car count and overall it is indeed less variety. It is still comparable though and the number is big enough for car collecting.



Last gen's main issue for me was the focus on quantity not quality. I think if they've gone for the same route again this year, it would've felt too familiar. Speaking of experience, my fav GT game last gen was Prologue. Time trialing with proper leaderboards and a proper online mode where you can enter a race instantly was more enjoyable for me than the chasing the rabbit sequence in every career mode event in the other games.

This is so true. I remember spending countless hours on Prologue. If you only wanted to race, there was always a quick race with at least 10 people in it, and if you wanted to hotlap, no setups or settings to mess with, just choose the car and go. I´ve played Prologue more than GT5 and GT6 combined.

I´m yet to play GTS, but some of the things i´ve seen just give me a bad vibe. I´ve always liked their original tracks and really loved some of the LM cars, but considering how little content we have, i find it troubling to see fantasy Veyrons and stuff racing in a fantasy oval track.

You already have licenses to Indy and Daytona, so i´m not sure why you would waste time trying to build a short oval like Super Speedway in GT2.

You only have a handful of cars and you have dozens of make believe Vision cars and fantasy LM created cars...

I mean, if you can have those things as an extra, ok, nobody is going to complain, but if there´s only a handful of content you should have a laser focus on what really matters.

I´m still waiting to comment on gameplay, but some design choices are just all over the place.

Most GT fans in here were boys when this all started, i was 16 when GT1 came out. It´s like we evolved in one direction expecting something and they have evolved in a different way.

 

[Johnnypenso]

This is so true. I remember spending countless hours on Prologue. If you only wanted to race, there was always a quick race with at least 10 people in it, and if you wanted to hotlap, no setups or settings to mess with, just choose the car and go. I´ve played Prologue more than GT5 and GT6 combined.

I´m yet to play GTS, but some of the things i´ve seen just give me a bad vibe. I´ve always liked their original tracks and really loved some of the LM cars, but considering how little content we have, i find it troubling to see fantasy Veyrons and stuff racing in a fantasy oval track.

You already have licenses to Indy and Daytona, so i´m not sure why you would waste time trying to build a short oval like Super Speedway in GT2.

You only have a handful of cars and you have dozens of make believe Vision cars and fantasy LM created cars...

I mean, if you can have those things as an extra, ok, nobody is going to complain, but if there´s only a handful of content you should have a laser focus on what really matters.

I´m still waiting to comment on gameplay, but some design choices are just all over the place.

Most GT fans in here were boys when this all started, i was 16 when GT1 came out. It´s like we evolved in one direction expecting something and they have evolved in a different way.

On one hand I can understand the desire for tracks like Indianapolis in Daytona from the fan perspective period at the same time, I can understand why they would opt for a fantasy track. Obviously a huge focus of this game is the ability to show off their graphical prowess and with a fantasy track they have a free hand to do as they wish and create as visually a stunning track as they can imagine. Personally I will always favour real circuits over fantasy any day but, given the car list and the focus of the game design, a large number of fantasy tracks is not surprising.

 

[marcvic]

Strict regulation on car classes without being able to place a car in a class you'd like as well as lack of customization, a "campaign" mode that might as well be called "license tests", dropping of assets that where apparently supposed to be future proof already(just to future proof them?) Those are a few reasons I think are issues.

I think it's the major change in direction, as well as the fact as issues like delays and extreme lack of communication is what is throwing people off. I wouldn't necessarily say its a bad direction just yet, but it's not looking to appealing to me in certain area's. Car/track count being down is an issue, but a minor one that I can live with.

What I fail to see is how you think the only major change of direction this game has had is it's online features.

See below video at 2:49 for customization. Fixed classes is indeed gone - no more Honda Preludes racing against Ferrari F430s (or Preludes or F430s in general ). Campaign mode looks to be full and robust, not just license tests. And now that we know Single Races are useful (we get credits), we now have the training/racing aspect of the game taken care of - we now just need to see how much control we have over the opponents we face (which cars/how many).

And are you really surprised by the delays/communication? Not saying it's OK just because it's PD, but there are many other developers who release -0- details and have delays outside of E3 trailers (GOW, MGS, GTA & many others) - but after GT5/6, I can understand the frustration behind the lack of communication.

...Hmm. Not sure if I agree with this. 140~177 cars, with more than a few of them being, for a lack of better descriptors, duplicates, the available car count has gone way down, so no matter how PDI spin it, it's not stronger in that aspect alone.

Yes, the car count is very low, that's the one thing I can bash GT SPort for - but honestly I was expecting a big chop. The whole standard/premium model left a really nasty taste in my mouth from PS3 GT, so not only did I expect a massive chop, I'm glad it happened. That means PD don't plan on pulling that crap again. You're exactly right about the number of duplicates and I am anxious to see how the final car roster pans out.

I know this will seem irrelevant, but was there any part of Gran Turismo 1 that you stopped and said to yourself, "I sure could use more cars"? I think 140-177, with more to come, is more than acceptable, even by today's standards (not by Forza standards, though ). And GT Sport has a more diverse representation that GT1 had as far as manufacturers is concerned.

Still though - the car count is waaay down. I get it.

It hasn't been outright confirmed, but the customization/upgrading — a major part of RPGs — doesn't appear to be a part of GT Sport. Really, outside of keeping the credit system, the game's basic career premise doesn't seem drastically different to Project CARS'.

It looks like customization is there (see 2:49 below). Like you said, we have to see about the upgrades. But outside of power upgrades (turbo, supercharger, exhaust, ECU tune), brake/tire/suspension modification is there. The difference is that rather than buying an automatic sport suspension, I have to tune a sport suspension setup.

The CarRPG/driving simulator aspect looks strong - Train on 145 events/race anywhere with anything/buy cars/tune, repeat - and everything in between.

It'd be cool if we had to pay to entry fee for single races, and for fuel though!

2:49 for customization 3:08 for tuning upgrades


I get the worries (I was worried about Kratos losing his Blades of Chaos/ over the shoulder view), but this looks to be the most Gran Turismo game ever. There are more details to be revealed but I'm liking everything I see (except the car count).

 

[ImaRobot]

See below video at 2:49 for customization.

Video showed absolutely nothing, but is interesting. Whats the depth of it, is what I'm wondering.

Fixed classes is indeed gone - no more Honda Preludes racing against Ferrari F430s (or Preludes or F430s in general ).

While I wasn't talking about extreme cases like that, you seemed to have gotten my point

Campaign mode looks to be full and robust, not just license tests.

Care to show me? I see nothing full and robust. It literally still looks like license test, outside of that one single, one lap race, or punt your way to first place, race. There will likely be more, but like we've been saying, that is hardly what anyone would call a race, or a career mode in general.

If you have some more pictures that we can go off, instead of using what you'd hope, I'm all ears. I'm just going off information we have as you seem to be going off possibilities. You're optimistic, and I'm pessimistic, but I don't think either of us is wrong in our approach.

And are you really surprised by the delays/communication? Not saying it's OK just because it's PD, but there are many other developers who release -0- details and have delays outside of E3 trailers (GOW, MGS, GTA & many others) - but after GT5/6, I can understand the frustration behind the lack of communication.

Me being surprised or not doesn't mean much in this aspect. Them continue to have horrible pr tactics doesn't mean its just "ok" by now. However, yes, I'm surprised after all these years that they still continue to play that route. We aren't talking about other devs, we're talking about PD, so that's completely irrelevant to me.

As for tuning upgrades, that video showed nothing of the sort.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

Video showed absolutely nothing, but is interesting. Whats the depth of it, is what I'm wondering.


While I wasn't talking about extreme cases like that, you seemed to have gotten my point


Care to show me? I see nothing full and robust. It literally still looks like license test, outside of that one single, one lap race, or punt your way to first place, race. There will likely be more, but like we've been saying, that is hardly what anyone would call a race, or a career mode in general.

If you have some more pictures that we can go off, instead of using what you'd hope, I'm all ears. I'm just going off information we have as you seem to be going off possibilities. You're optimistic, and I'm pessimistic, but I don't think either of us is wrong in our approach.


Me being surprised or not doesn't mean much in this aspect. Them continue to have horrible pr tactics doesn't mean its just "ok" by now. However, yes, I'm surprised after all these years that they still continue to play that route. We aren't talking about other devs, we're talking about PD, so that's completely irrelevant to me.

As for tuning upgrades, that video showed nothing of the sort.

Yes, my take on the livery editor is that it is just that, a livery editor.
It would be nice to change rims, or even change rear wing styles, but I'm not very confident.
The only positive thing I can offer is that the road cars have different rims to their race versions.
So some sign there, but who knows.
A GT Auto with PD's regular rather large selection of rim options would be good though.

As for tuning, I imagine these will be purchasable items.
We've seen the option to swap standard suspension and drive-train components to adjustable versions in the beta.
So in that respect, tuning parts are available.
I guess all parts could simply come with the car, but that would also include all tyre options, so I'm picturing some type of economy involved there.
But yet again, we'll just have to wait and see.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Yes, the car count is very low, that's the one thing I can bash GT SPort for - but honestly I was expecting a big chop. The whole standard/premium model left a really nasty taste in my mouth from PS3 GT, so not only did I expect a massive chop, I'm glad it happened. That means PD don't plan on pulling that crap again. You're exactly right about the number of duplicates and I am anxious to see how the final car roster pans out.

I know this will seem irrelevant, but was there any part of Gran Turismo 1 that you stopped and said to yourself, "I sure could use more cars"? I think 140-177, with more to come, is more than acceptable, even by today's standards (not by Forza standards, though ). And GT Sport has a more diverse representation that GT1 had as far as manufacturers is concerned.

Still though - the car count is waaay down. I get it.

After years of hearing that GT5/6 models were "future proof" you're telling us that you were expecting a big chop and all the premiums to be cast aside? I find that very hard to believe. Sounds like revisionist history to me.

Saying that GTSport has a more diverse representation in terms of manufacturers isn't exactly a ringing endorsement. The game was released nearly 20 years ago and was the first in the series and likely created with a very limited budget. With 200 staff and 4+ years to work on the game, the car list should trounce GT1 by a light year.

 

[marcvic]

After years of hearing that GT5/6 models were "future proof" you're telling us that you were expecting a big chop and all the premiums to be cast aside? I find that very hard to believe. Sounds like revisionist history to me.

Saying that GTSport has a more diverse representation in terms of manufacturers isn't exactly a ringing endorsement. The game was released nearly 20 years ago and was the first in the series and likely created with a very limited budget. With 200 staff and 4+ years to work on the game, the car list should trounce GT1 by a light year.

The main point of mentioning GT1 was to ask the question at what point you were wanting for cars when playing - then I said it had more manufacturer presence. It wasn't meant to be an endorsement for the car count - there isn't much endorsement that can get by the huge decrease in cars.

But we still don't know the future of the prior premium models (if there is one). Hopefully at GamesCon someone can pick his brain about them. I know I'd like them Super Premiumised cause a lot of my favorite JDM cars were in that bunch.

 

[ScottPuss20]

Saying that GTSport has a more diverse representation in terms of manufacturers isn't exactly a ringing endorsement. The game was released nearly 20 years ago and was the first in the series and likely created with a very limited budget. With 200 staff and 4+ years to work on the game, the car list should trounce GT1 by a light year.

Yeah but it doesn't. It costs much more money to create a game nowadays, especially when you include licensed vehicles and the fact that much more effort is needed to make the necessary assets.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Yeah but it doesn't. It costs much more money to create a game nowadays, especially when you include licensed vehicles and the fact that much more effort is needed to make the necessary assets.

Forza will have 700ish cars in their next game. So there's that.

 

[ScottPuss20]

Forza will have 700ish cars in their next game. So there's that.

Then again they've had Xbox One assets for a hell of a lot longer... Forza 5 was released in 2013 and their games have developed since then on current gen. GT hasn't had PS4 assets for that long and the fact that they don't use outsourcing is a problem. They literally started from scratch as you know.

 

[Northstar]

Yeah but it doesn't. It costs much more money to create a game nowadays, especially when you include licensed vehicles and the fact that much more effort is needed to make the necessary assets.

If money was that big of an issue for them they would have released the game already since it's not making them any money sitting on the "Coming Soon!" list and the sooner they get it out the door the sooner they can get to work on DLC as well as the next full game.

 

[ScottPuss20]

If money was that big of an issue for them they would have released the game already since it's not making them any money sitting on the "Coming Soon!" list and the sooner they get it out the door the sooner they can get to work on DLC as well as the next full game.

Yeah probably but you know what PD are like...

 

[ImaRobot]

Then again they've had Xbox One assets for a hell of a lot longer... Forza 5 was released in 2013 and their games have developed since then on current gen. GT hasn't had PS4 assets for that long and the fact that they don't use outsourcing is a problem. They literally started from scratch as you know.

So what does that have to do with licenses?

 

[Johnnypenso]

Then again they've had Xbox One assets for a hell of a lot longer... Forza 5 was released in 2013 and their games have developed since then on current gen. GT hasn't had PS4 assets for that long and the fact that they don't use outsourcing is a problem. They literally started from scratch as you know.

Yet somehow T10 has managed to license 700 vehicles with very little, if any, duplication and to put out 3 games in the time it takes for PD to do 1. Outsourcing is available to everyone so it's not an excuse in any way.

 

[Imari]

The main point of mentioning GT1 was to ask the question at what point you were wanting for cars when playing - then I said it had more manufacturer presence. It wasn't meant to be an endorsement for the car count - there isn't much endorsement that can get by the huge decrease in cars.

When counted by today's standards, GT1 actually had double the amount of cars that it says on the box. GT1 had racing mods. Since PS3, those count as entirely separate models, and given that GTS looks to be counting modified versions of the same base car as uniques I think that continues.

So actually, GT1 was probably closer to 250 cars. I can't remember how many, if any, were unable to be race modded.

Then again they've had Xbox One assets for a hell of a lot longer... Forza 5 was released in 2013 and their games have developed since then on current gen. GT hasn't had PS4 assets for that long and the fact that they don't use outsourcing is a problem. They literally started from scratch as you know.

T10 also supposedly remodeled from scratch. I believe it about the same as I do from Polyphony. They both probably rebuilt using existing assets as a base.

Realistically, both developers have had the same amount of time to build assets. Polyphony have less than 200 cars, T10 is over 700. Quality can be argued, but the difference in quality between the game assets is not that large. Polyphony shouldn't be producing assets 3.5 times slower than the game that was traditionally their largest rival.

Polyphony have fallen behind in basically every respect bar pure graphical beauty, and so far even that has come at the cost of a steady frame rate. Even the FIA branding seems to have gone quiet recently. I have no idea what tentpole they're going to build the marketing campaign for this around. Scapes?

 

[ScottPuss20]

When counted by today's standards, GT1 actually had double the amount of cars that it says on the box. GT1 had racing mods. Since PS3, those count as entirely separate models, and given that GTS looks to be counting modified versions of the same base car as uniques I think that continues.

So actually, GT1 was probably closer to 250 cars. I can't remember how many, if any, were unable to be race modded.



T10 also supposedly remodeled from scratch. I believe it about the same as I do from Polyphony. They both probably rebuilt using existing assets as a base.

Realistically, both developers have had the same amount of time to build assets. Polyphony have less than 200 cars, T10 is over 700. Quality can be argued, but the difference in quality between the game assets is not that large. Polyphony shouldn't be producing assets 3.5 times slower than the game that was traditionally their largest rival.

Polyphony have fallen behind in basically every respect bar pure graphical beauty, and so far even that has come at the cost of a steady frame rate. Even the FIA branding seems to have gone quiet recently. I have no idea what tentpole they're going to build the marketing campaign for this around. Scapes?

That's fair enough. There is really no excuse for PD

 

[Greek]

the fact that they don't use outsourcing is a problem

That is one of the good things. They are in control of everything by doing everything themselves. We just need to wait a bit longer because of that.

 

[marcvic]

When counted by today's standards, GT1 actually had double the amount of cars that it says on the box. GT1 had racing mods. Since PS3, those count as entirely separate models, and given that GTS looks to be counting modified versions of the same base car as uniques I think that continues.

So actually, GT1 was probably closer to 250 cars. I can't remember how many, if any, were unable to be race modded.

Yes, I think pretty much 100% of them were race modification capable. We gotta keep in mind too that GT1's car count was a bit controversial as well - ~10 Skylines, ~10 NA miatas, ~6 3000 GTs, etc. (don't know the exact numbers). So that still leaves the question; at what point did you ever stop and say to yourself "I could use more cars"? Even today, when you're playing a driving game with 100 cars (which is a very healthy amount), when have you said "I'm tired of these 100 cars". Yes, other games have more, but is 140-177 actually bad - I think only in comparison to Forza (but Forza makes everyone look bad in that department).

Also, why is GT being compared to Forza so much?

After years of hearing that GT5/6 models were "future proof" you're telling us that you were expecting a big chop and all the premiums to be cast aside? I find that very hard to believe. Sounds like revisionist history to me.

It might've been that I didn't focus the GT5 future-proof comment til recently with the rants (or maybe cause I didn't hang my hat on it), and it might be that I knew the PS4 is completely different from PS3, or it might be seeing what happened to T10 with their XB1 debut, but yes I did expect a chop. Believe it or not - I have no reason to lie.

HDR didn't exist (to my knowledge, could be wrong) in 2010 so that alone could potentially make the premium car models of PS3 GT null and void.

That's fair enough. There is really no excuse for PD

But why do they need an excuse? Did they say that their plan for GT Sport was to beat T10 in the car numbers game?

This isn't directed at you @CLowndes888, but there does seem to be an heir of entitlement regarding this future-proof comment from 2010 - as if PD owe us this, as if we paid for them already and they didn't deliver. I could be missing a few recent articles where they have asserted that PS3 GT models were still going to be future-proofed?

 

[C_Raccoon23]

We just need to wait a bit longer because of that.

That's a massive understatement.

 

[JKgo]

Also, why is GT being compared to Forza so much?

...Well, that's probably because Forza Motorsport is/was THE natural rival to GT series in its philosophy. Both are/were a first party, platform exclusive titles designed to showcase the graphical fidelity of the systems they are trying to sell, both straddle the middle ground of arcade and hardcore sim, both focus more on car collecting and personalization aspect of the gameplay, both feature ridiculous amount of cars.... I could go on and on. Okay, maybe not really, but there you go.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Yes, I think pretty much 100% of them were race modification capable. We gotta keep in mind too that GT1's car count was a bit controversial as well - ~10 Skylines, ~10 NA miatas, ~6 3000 GTs, etc. (don't know the exact numbers). So that still leaves the question; at what point did you ever stop and say to yourself "I could use more cars"? Even today, when you're playing a driving game with 100 cars (which is a very healthy amount), when have you said "I'm tired of these 100 cars". Yes, other games have more, but is 140-177 actually bad - I think only in comparison to Forza (but Forza makes everyone look bad in that department).

Also, why is GT being compared to Forza so much?



It might've been that I didn't focus the GT5 future-proof comment til recently with the rants (or maybe cause I didn't hang my hat on it), and it might be that I knew the PS4 is completely different from PS3, or it might be seeing what happened to T10 with their XB1 debut, but yes I did expect a chop. Believe it or not - I have no reason to lie.

HDR didn't exist (to my knowledge, could be wrong) in 2010 so that alone could potentially make the premium car models of PS3 GT null and void.



But why do they need an excuse? Did they say that their plan for GT Sport was to beat T10 in the car numbers game?

This isn't directed at you @CLowndes888, but there does seem to be an heir of entitlement regarding this future-proof comment from 2010 - as if PD owe us this, as if we paid for them already and they didn't deliver.

Sounds like you know what you're talking about. Please explain the process by which the mesh used to create the 500,000 polygon premiums from GT5/6 suddenly becomes so useless that cars have to be completely recreated from scratch, and why it takes 4 years to model 140 cars when T10 has modeled 700 in that same time also using PBR?

 

[marcvic]

...Well, that's probably because Forza Motorsport is/was THE natural rival to GT series in its philosophy. Both are/were a first party, platform exclusive titles designed to showcase the graphical fidelity of the systems they are trying to sell, both straddle the middle ground of arcade and hardcore sim, both focus more on car collecting and personalization aspect of the gameplay, both feature ridiculous amount of cars.... I could go on and on. Okay, maybe not really, but there you go.

Yeah, but from a physics and game design aspect, they seem to be two very different titles. I'll stay away from the arcade/sim talk

Edit: I understand those points completely, but Forza hasn't really changed their design much in the last 3-4 titles.

Sounds like you know what you're talking about. Please explain the process by which the mesh used to create the 500,000 polygon premiums from GT5/6 suddenly becomes so useless that cars have to be completely recreated from scratch, and why it takes 4 years to model 140 cars when T10 has modeled 700 in that same time also using PBR?

Come on, man - I said "potentially" and "I could be wrong". I didn't claim to be a graphics modeling expert. Meaning maybe the pre-4K/HDR normalization had something to do with it.

Seriously bro?

 

[Johnnypenso]

Come on, man - I said "potentially" and "I could be wrong". I didn't claim to be a graphics modeling expert. Meaning maybe the pre-4K/HDR normalization had something to do with it.

Seriously bro?

Just trying to get a handle on what you based your fantastic prediction on bro. I don't recall a single person on these boards making such a prognostication. You'll have to pardon me if I still find your claim unbelievable.

 

[marcvic]

Just trying to get a handle on what you based your fantastic prediction on bro. I don't recall a single person on these boards making such a prognostication. You'll have to pardon me if I still find your claim unbelievable.

Again - did I claim it to be true? It was more of a speculative observation. "potentially" "I could be wrong".... but couldn't a change in technology make you change something about your design?

Please note the "couldn't" and don't mistake it for "It will".

Edit: admittedly I had to look up "prognostication" - very nice word! But it turns out it deals with future events, while we are discussing past events