would it LITERALLY KILL the Polyphony developers to start us in any place other than last?

[Pigems]

I dont race against the AI unless I have to, I find them lifeless even in good implementations because like you said, you know they're not real. That alone changes the dynamic of the racing.

I am sympathetic to those who don't race online though and are unhappy with what GT does currently offer, which is why I want to see change. Racing against AI is pretty much all we had in racing games for a long time, and it's a shame to see efforts to improve them fall through - after all, those AI races are what made the GT franchise so popular, not online.

I get what you’re saying, but I’m not gonna try to get the developers to put more effort into outdated AI technology either, it’s the past, not the future. It seems some people are stuck in the past, or their egos can’t handle not finishing first every time in online racing. Online racing is so much better than AI racing, that it wouldn’t bother me at all if no game ever had AI again.

 

[Jewel Runner]

I dont race against the AI unless I have to, I find them lifeless even in good implementations because like you said, you know they're not real. That alone changes the dynamic of the racing.

I am sympathetic to those who don't race online though and are unhappy with what GT does currently offer, which is why I want to see change. Racing against AI is pretty much all we had in racing games for a long time, and it's a shame to see efforts to improve them fall through - after all, those AI races are what made the GT franchise so popular, not online.

Interesting you say that all we had was racing against the AI. After completing the games what I would do was basically time trial, pushing my own limits. No one really to compare to apart from when one of my friends took an interest for a short time. We time trialed at Deep Forest in Group C cars. My friend was was concentrating so hard his contact lens fell out.

 

[Nebuc72]

Interesting you say that all we had was racing against the AI. After completing the games what I would do was basically time trial, pushing my own limits. No one really to compare to apart from when one of my friends took an interest for a short time. We time trialed at Deep Forest in Group C cars. My friend was was concentrating so hard his contact lens fell out.

Yeah I just mean in terms of an "active" competitor - time trialling etc. was always there but if you wanted to race on track with others, for the longest time, it was AI, relatively limited split screen, or bust.

 

[05XR8]

You have a clear idea of what you want. That's great - for you. But your idea of what you want from the game isn't the same as everyone else's. Not everyone will be happy with a game where you routinely finish third or you spend an entire race to overtake only one car.

PD have to produce a game that will appeal to a broad spectrum of tastes.

Passing a car because you're a few tenths faster over 5 laps? That might appeal to a small proportion of players but not the majority.

I’d say by experience with the GT series, the stakes are too high. People don’t want to finish 5th because, there’s not much reward to accumulate the funds to get what they want.
GT players that haven’t played other games are missing out on challenging AI. Not the challenge of finishing first. The object of rac8ng, IS to ultimately win. No doubt. However, there can be fun had and a fine reward of a race, for finishing dead last.

Probably, the confusing thing, are the Chili races. How can these races dole out competitive AI, but not all races? There is an Easy to Pro AI difficulty. Players that want an easier chance to win can select the easy option. However, players that want a challenging race, for all races, are left frustrated.

It’s been suggested, many times, to have a slider like some other games have. This way, all players can cater the game to their skill level and experiment. The one AI fits all, obviously, isn’t working.

 

[NikNakTobasco]

The chilli race AI is just as inept but they go a bit quicker between the bits where they randomly come to a crawl. They still don’t go full throttle on the straights.

 

[ohho]

Suzuka GT Cup Gr.3 starting grid is 10th, in a total of 14 cars.

 

[Samus]

Okay, I'll break it down for you.

Let's imagine that GT had a qualifying system before every race. Let's then imagine that on one particular race you need a lap time of 2 minutes to get onto pole position. By a combination of driver skill and having a better car, you post a qualifying time of 2 minutes. You start on pole and win the race without overtaking anyone.

You only get to see the other cars in the rear view mirror. You qualified on an empty track and you raced on what might as well have been an empty track.

Now some would say that was realistic. It was how Mercedes won all those world titles.

But others would find it deeply boring. Why go to all the trouble of modelling other cars if we don't get to see them except in the replay?

So PD have rolling starts and catch the rabbit races. They have rubber banding and survivable barrier collisions. Driver aids and difficulty levels. All designed to make the game enjoyable for as many people as possible. Which inevitably means that there is some dumbing down.

That's life, my friend.

Why is that the only scenario you can think of? What about the scenario where I qualify fifth and have a good race to win after hard fought racing? What about the scenario where I am on pole but just barely, and in the race I have to duel back and forth with P2? What about the scenario where I do qualify last, or don't bother, so I start last but I still start on the same grid, with all the cars ahead of me so I have great fun fighting through a pack of cars?

Also even if what you suggested happened every time there is still no harm in making that an option. Why force everyone into a format they don't like?

As has been said, plenty of other games manage. Do you see the F1 games mimic real life with a grid of 20 cars all trying to win, or do you see a catch the rabbit format where you're always last and P1 is already at T5? GRID, pCARS, they all manage it. No excuse for the longest standing and biggest budget game not to.

 

[BangsMcCoy]

Why is that the only scenario you can think of? What about the scenario where I qualify fifth and have a good race to win after hard fought racing? What about the scenario where I am on pole but just barely, and in the race I have to duel back and forth with P2? What about the scenario where I do qualify last, or don't bother, so I start last but I still start on the same grid, with all the cars ahead of me so I have great fun fighting through a pack of cars?

Also even if what you suggested happened every time there is still no harm in making that an option. Why force everyone into a format they don't like?

As has been said, plenty of other games manage. Do you see the F1 games mimic real life with a grid of 20 cars all trying to win, or do you see a catch the rabbit format where you're always last and P1 is already at T5? GRID, pCARS, they all manage it. No excuse for the longest standing and biggest budget game not to.

Perhaps you should go play those other games then instead of wasting time complaining online and trying to start fights about personal preferences and opinion. Based on GT7 active player base and sales though, I’m guessing they’re feeling content with how the average player enjoys the game.

Or better yet, let us know when you’ve developed and released a game with the perfect AI competition that also contains everything else GT series do AND pleases 100% of the end users that can sell millions of copies for $70, since you seem to have it all figured out.

 

[Voodoovaj]

We all need to stop assuming the AI is doing anything more than taking up a slot in a race. That's what it has been told to do, and that's what it is doing.

I’d say by experience with the GT series, the stakes are too high. People don’t want to finish 5th because, there’s not much reward to accumulate the funds to get what they want.

Monaco GP on Sega Genesis (FFS!!!!!) had you race against a rival. You didn't have to win, you just had to beat that one car. In the Sunday Cup, the beginner goal could be as simple as not finishing last. Give the player FULL CREDIT for not being last. Then, as the player progresses, move the goal posts until first place becomes the big pay day.

GT players that haven’t played other games are missing out on challenging AI. Not the challenge of finishing first. The object of rac8ng, IS to ultimately win. No doubt. However, there can be fun had and a fine reward of a race, for finishing dead last.

Exactly

Probably, the confusing thing, are the Chili races. How can these races dole out competitive AI, but not all races? There is an Easy to Pro AI difficulty. Players that want an easier chance to win can select the easy option. However, players that want a challenging race, for all races, are left frustrated.

Because, again, the AI is not playing to win. It may go faster, but it's not playing to win. I'm generalizing here, but Car 19, needs to stay in 18-20th position, Car 18 has to stay in 17th-19th position, etc, etc, etc. There are some rare occasions in the mix where a back of the pack driver gets a decent car and moves up the places to a point, but they are not trying to win.

And THIS...THIS RIGHT HERE...is why the AI is confusing, frustrating, and such a hot topic.

I recall, back in GT1, there was a city race (RR5, IIRC???) where one of the back markers was in a Skyline while others were in lesser cars. It would storm to the front, and sometimes. was super difficult to beat. That's 25 years ago. I think they still point to that example as a reason for maintaining this current direction.

It’s been suggested, many times, to have a slider like some other games have. This way, all players can cater the game to their skill level and experiment. The one AI fits all, obviously, isn’t working.

Because a slider is unnecessary, not to mention that you are asking the player to go fiddle with it.

Crash Bandicoot would adjust difficulty on the fly. Why not do that in GT? IN fact, that's exactly what rubber banding is, the problem is that it should not be done DURING THE RACE. The AI adjusted between races, you as a player would just go "that was easy" or "that was a tough one".

 

[Samus]

Gps you should go play those other games then instead of wasting time complaining online and trying to start fights about personal preferences and opinion. Based on GT7 active player base and sales though, I’m guessing they’re feeling content with how the average player enjoys the game.

Or better yet, let us know when you’ve developed and released a game with the perfect AI competition that also contains everything else GT series do AND pleases 100% of the end users that can sell millions of copies for $70, since you seem to have it all figured out.

"Go play another game" and "I'd like to see you do better", brilliant cliché responses.

Starting a fight? It's a discussion forum, I'm discussing the topic. You're the one playing the man, not the ball.

 

[SkiAndFish]

I get what you’re saying, but I’m not gonna try to get the developers to put more effort into outdated AI technology either, it’s the past, not the future. It seems some people are stuck in the past, or their egos can’t handle not finishing first every time in online racing. Online racing is so much better than AI racing, that it wouldn’t bother me at all if no game ever had AI again.

I do not mind racing against people, although much of the time when I play I need to have a pause button handy.

You cannot pause an online race is the only downside.

 

[Meythia]

What about the scenario where I qualify fifth and have a good race to win after hard fought racing? What about the scenario where I am on pole but just barely, and in the race I have to duel back and forth with P2?

The only difference to the current game is the imaginative qualification lap. Which is exactly the next:

What about the scenario where I do qualify last, or don't bother, so I start last but I still start on the same grid, with all the cars ahead of me so I have great fun fighting through a pack of cars?

Also even if what you suggested happened every time there is still no harm in making that an option. Why force everyone into a format they don't like?

There is no pleasing answer to this and I guess everyone playing this game is wondering why some events have a standing start while most dont.

But most important is

Do you see the F1 games mimic real life with a grid of 20 cars all trying to win, or do you see a catch the rabbit format where you're always last and P1 is already at T5? GRID, pCARS, they all manage it. No excuse for the longest standing and biggest budget game not to.

that GRID uses one of the most aggressive rubberbanding ever since NFS has been started.
It actually was easier to win when you let those Ravenwest guys do p1 and p2 and follow them on p4 so they dont go into fullspeed mode (when you are on p3).
Havent played project Cars nor any F1 entry.

Monaco GP on Sega Genesis (FFS!!!!!) had you race against a rival.

Grid Legends also just asks you to finish at pX, but the same goes for GT7 currently.

Because, again, the AI is not playing to win.

Obviously the AI is differentiated into a lead pack that can battle to win and a grid filler backlot that just wont ever come close to winning.

The AI adjusted between races, you as a player would just go "that was easy" or "that was a tough one".

That is not rubberbanding anymore but scaled difficulty. Ideally this would already be ingame (and very likely is considering the Chili events) but missing from the options for no reason.
Some other games are doing it and it can become frustratingly difficult to win the next event, but this in fact is just pushing you to become better and better. But at the same time losing doesnt mean no progress but instead sets the AI to a lower settings and lets you continue.

Room for improvements? Lots of.
Necessity of change? Not necessarily on high priority to PD, because they either have more data than we do and it tells them "its mostly fine" or because they dont care - 1st seems much more likely to me.

 

[Samus]

The only difference to the current game is the imaginative qualification lap. Which is exactly the next:

Er, how? I'm talking about scenarios where every car starts on the grid, or a rolling start, at the same time. So no matter where you are in that pack, you can have a battle with cars around you that are all trying to win.

That is 100% impossible in GT7 with the catch up format races.

that GRID uses one of the most aggressive rubberbanding ever since NFS has been started.
It actually was easier to win when you let those Ravenwest guys do p1 and p2 and follow them on p4 so they dont go into fullspeed mode (when you are on p3).

It does, and a lot of racing games are guilty of it, GT included. The difference is you're still racing in a pack of cars, it provides excitement just like a real race does.

Havent played project Cars nor any F1 entry.

Well I can assure you they also offer realistic grid and rolling starts. As does Assetto Corsa, as did Driveclub, NFS Shift, and so many others. Even Crash Team Racing does!

Are you seeing the point here? Other than games that do not hide they're massively arcade titles like Ridge Racer and Motorstorm, every other racing game offers realistic grid or rolling starts for all their events. GT is the only one that doesn't, bar a few. Even if they do employ rubberbanding or start you near the back, the difference between racing in a pack of cars with a few in front of you and a few behind you is a totally different experience to lapping on your own and occasionally passing a car moving much slower than you, or having one of the cars rubberband back into your bumper when you're past it.

This:


Is just a complete different experience to this.



Obviously Driveclub in general is more arcadey and "high thrills" presentation with sparks and things breaking but just the difference of racing in a pack from the start is so much different, even if you do start 10/12.

Room for improvements? Lots of.
Necessity of change? Not necessarily on high priority to PD, because they either have more data than we do and it tells them "its mostly fine" or because they dont care - 1st seems much more likely to me.

Is it though? I see a lot of discussions online started around not liking the catch the rabbit format, I very rarely see anyone just come out and say they love it.

 

[Voodoovaj]

Room for improvements? Lots of.
Necessity of change? Not necessarily on high priority to PD, because they either have more data than we do and it tells them "its mostly fine" or because they dont care - 1st seems much more likely to me.

I disagree. "They don't care" is the more likely reason. Kaz in an art guy, that's why the focus is on art. If he were a coder, the focus would be more technical.

They need a design oriented creative director who cars about the experience. Right now, they don't have that, or the person they do have is lacklustre.

Let's face it, this is a hot topic because of how poorly it's been done for so long. Can anyone recall a thread from the last 25 years where it says the AI is doing awesome compared to any other game?

GT is a beautiful game. It even runs on the TV's in Costco. It's attractiveness and feel are the main drivers (pun unintentional). However, multiplayer has keep it alive and they have still thrown it under the bus. I spend as much time here hoping for a change as I do playing it

I literally cringe and sigh whenever I choose the single player events.

BTW, I built a "GR3" Pagani Huyara. Widebody, wings, etc, etc. It clocks in at a hair under 800pp with RM tires. Works great at Sardegna for grinding.

 

[BangsMcCoy]

"Go play another game" and "I'd like to see you do better", brilliant cliché responses.

Starting a fight? It's a discussion forum, I'm discussing the topic. You're the one playing the man, not the ball.

There’s discussing then there’s making comments to instigate arguments with those that don’t completely agree with your opinions, which is all they are. PD is a business, they make games. Games inherently have pros and cons. People have different opinions on what’s “best” for them and what is a flaw. PD is trying to appeal to and satisfy the largest portion of its player base possible within its long list of constraints and limitation. Where one game seems to fail, others may seem to succeed, it’s all dependent on your personal preference. There is no discussion with you because you’ve clearly made up your mind and refuse to accept anything other than what you want. We can all agree that AI isn’t perfect, however that doesn’t mean it needs to cater to your desires or it’s wrong or rubbish or whatever your opinions are. There are options in difficulty settings. If you’re that good that none of them ever provide a challenge for you or give you any satisfaction, then kudos to you, but there is still another option; multiplayer where you can compete against other humans. If that doesn’t appeal to you then you’re playing the wrong game, it’s that simple. Complaining to all of us about how this game doesn’t fit your personal desires does nothing, we can‘t change the game for you. I see no discussion here, just a bunch of complaining and looking for an argument that ultimately changes or improves anything for anyone.

 

[Samus]

There’s discussing then there’s making comments to instigate arguments with those that don’t completely agree with your opinions, which is all they are. PD is a business, they make games. Games inherently have pros and cons. People have different opinions on what’s “best” for them and what is a flaw. PD is trying to appeal to and satisfy the largest portion of its player base possible within its long list of constraints and limitation. Where one game seems to fail, others may seem to succeed, it’s all dependent on your personal preference. There is no discussion with you because you’ve clearly made up your mind and refuse to accept anything other than what you want. We can all agree that AI isn’t perfect, however that doesn’t mean it needs to cater to your desires or it’s wrong or rubbish or whatever your opinions are. There are options in difficulty settings. If you’re that good that none of them ever provide a challenge for you or give you any satisfaction, then kudos to you, but there is still another option; multiplayer where you can compete against other humans. If that doesn’t appeal to you then you’re playing the wrong game, it’s that simple. Complaining to all of us about how this game doesn’t fit your personal desires does nothing, we can‘t change the game for you. I see no discussion here, just a bunch of complaining and looking for an argument that ultimately changes or improves anything for anyone.

There is discussion between myself and other people, we're conversing. You are just playing the man again.

I've given you the reasons I think the current system is poor, I've explained why it will never be a true racing challenge no matter how hard it is. Why it's just a time trial event with moving chicanes. I've suggested at the very least they could make the starting format an option for all races, what is your suggestion? Go play another game. Which is more constructive?

 

[JMR450]

Why do you even play the game?
You realy thought gt7 would be a complete game at launch?
That's a little naive.
We old gamers, (yes, i been playing games since long came out on the Atari), expect that it will take at least a year before it is getting somewhere.
I already saw lots of changes in the last few months,

No, I don't agree with you on your take and I too am an old gamer. We have every right to expect a complete game when we purchase it. You can't give a developer a pass on the expectation that they produce a complete game at launch.

DLC and updates are supposed to be for additional content over the base game and minor fixes. That was the intent and that is what we should expect for our money. The truth now is that developers rush a game to launch knowing they can use DLC and updates to add content that should have been included at launch and fix bugs that should have been discovered during testing.

 

[Pizzapants]

We old gamers, (yes, i been playing games since long came out on the Atari), expect that it will take at least a year before it is getting somewhere.
I already saw lots of changes in the last few months,

Bub, i'm almost 50.

Once upon a time ... game developers finished a game before selling it to the public.

But that's beside the point. I simply don't even think PD's vision for the end-result finished product here is very good. It's lazy and unimaginative. The game today is 10 scoops of plain oatmeal. In a couple years, when the game is actually "done", it'll be 20 scoops of plain oatmeal. Hooray.

 

[DivitLad]

PD isn’t capable of making good AI that’s why they get such ahead start. Otherwise you would pass them 1st lap and whole race would be boring.

The reason why having qually racing ai is pointless for most, get pole and boring race, the choice would be nice.

 

[Funky Monkey]

No, I don't agree with you on your take and I too am an old gamer. We have every right to expect a complete game when we purchase it. You can't give a developer a pass on the expectation that they produce a complete game at launch.

DLC and updates are supposed to be for additional content over the base game and minor fixes. That was the intent and that is what we should expect for our money. The truth now is that developers rush a game to launch knowing they can use DLC and updates to add content that should have been included at launch and fix bugs that should have been discovered during testing.

We absolutly do have the right on a compleet game.
But when i payed the money, i knew i was gonne buy a beta game.That we would all be testpilots, or crash test dummies.
The moment they mensioned Sophi, i knew ai would not be good at the start.
So i am in this with a different mindset then most of you.

 

[MatskiMonk]

I actually got a round to doing the Chilli race at Goodwood in the Mini's today.

Didn't start last.

The bodies must be piling up over in Japan!

 

[05XR8]

We all need to stop assuming the AI is doing anything more than taking up a slot in a race. That's what it has been told to do, and that's what it is doing.


Monaco GP on Sega Genesis (FFS!!!!!) had you race against a rival. You didn't have to win, you just had to beat that one car. In the Sunday Cup, the beginner goal could be as simple as not finishing last. Give the player FULL CREDIT for not being last. Then, as the player progresses, move the goal posts until first place becomes the big pay day.

Exactly

Because, again, the AI is not playing to win. It may go faster, but it's not playing to win. I'm generalizing here, but Car 19, needs to stay in 18-20th position, Car 18 has to stay in 17th-19th position, etc, etc, etc. There are some rare occasions in the mix where a back of the pack driver gets a decent car and moves up the places to a point, but they are not trying to win.

And THIS...THIS RIGHT HERE...is why the AI is confusing, frustrating, and such a hot topic.

I recall, back in GT1, there was a city race (RR5, IIRC???) where one of the back markers was in a Skyline while others were in lesser cars. It would storm to the front, and sometimes. was super difficult to beat. That's 25 years ago. I think they still point to that example as a reason for maintaining this current direction.

Because a slider is unnecessary, not to mention that you are asking the player to go fiddle with it.

Crash Bandicoot would adjust difficulty on the fly. Why not do that in GT? IN fact, that's exactly what rubber banding is, the problem is that it should not be done DURING THE RACE. The AI adjusted between races, you as a player would just go "that was easy" or "that was a tough one".

GT7, as we know, let’s the player choose AI difficulty and probably don’t have to touch it again. How about those Comedy races? How many average players, figured out how to reverse the AI difficulty, to have a shot at winning? There’s a thread so that people can win And claim the top prize. Those poor millions of souls(who don’t use social media) that can’t figure out why they can’t win, because the AI is flipped.

That back marker AI happens in GT7. I’ve followed several AI to the front. Just as an example, I have a timed Custom Race. The AI battled me through the last lap. A pack of ”us” battled for position and I got taken out on the last lap. I recovered, but didn’t win. “That was a good one”.


For sure, many races where the AI hold position no matter what I do to “encourage” that car to “Do it. Do it NOW! Pass me, I’m right here!”

Anyway, PD are capable of adjusting the AI. This recent update, PD adjusted the AI to navigate the final chicane at the WTC 700 La Sarthe event. Yet, they still let the AI brake at Reid-Sulman Parks at Bathurst.

 

[JMR450]

We absolutly do have the right on a compleet game.
But when i payed the money, i knew i was gonne buy a beta game.That we would all be testpilots, or crash test dummies.
The moment they mensioned Sophi, i knew ai would not be good at the start.
So i am in this with a different mindset then most of you.

Yes, you are.

 

[Voodoovaj]

We absolutly do have the right on a compleet game.
But when i payed the money, i knew i was gonne buy a beta game.

Why? This isn't a beta. This is what we're getting. This isn't unfinished, this is their version of finished.

The moment they mensioned Sophi, i knew ai would not be good at the start.

I think people need to temper their expectations on Sophy as well. No matter how fantastic an AI is, if it's told to be slow, it's going to be slow.

And still, beating AI is so very 1990. I want to play against people.

Sophy might make a more interesting B Spec, but I doubt that will happen since it will allow people to farm credits.

 

[CHEN255]

Who the hell plays a racing game to race against AI cars? There is no thrill or race in driving against AI. You can hit pause/reset anytime and there’s nothing on the line at all. I can’t possibly think of something more boring, even if they aren’t fast enough to keep up. iRacing is a perfect example, super fast AI, and I still wouldn’t waste a single lap on a track with them.

Good for you. I can’t stand multiplayer in racing games and haven’t wasted a single second in GT7 in Sport Mode, or in any other of my racing games for that matter. I play the Codemasters F1 games and whenever I see people messing around in multiplayer I shake my head and think why bother? I would rather race the AI in that game a thousand times more than wasting time racing against humans with all the problems that entails. A lot of humans suck and always will do, AI will keep improving, as they have done over the years. I wish the gaming companies would spend less time and resources with multiplayer and utilise them more productively with improving the single player.

 

[Voodoovaj]

Good for you. I can’t stand multiplayer in racing games and haven’t wasted a single second in GT7 in Sport Mode, or in any other of my racing games for that matter. I play the Codemasters F1 games and whenever I see people messing around in multiplayer I shake my head and think why bother? I would rather race the AI in that game a thousand times more than wasting time racing against humans with all the problems that entails. A lot of humans suck and always will do, AI will keep improving, as they have done over the years. I wish the gaming companies would spend less time and resources with multiplayer and utilise them more productively with improving the single player.

So, basically, you don't like racing, you like video games.

What is the "improvement" you are seeking? A better disguise for a system tuned to allow you to win and feel good about yourself? See, because no matter how convincing single player is, it's always a lie. It is literally an A class bug to have an AI that consistently beats you.

Have fun with your gifted wins.

 

[CHEN255]

So, basically, you don't like racing, you like video games.

What is the "improvement" you are seeking? A better disguise for a system tuned to allow you to win and feel good about yourself? See, because no matter how convincing single player is, it's always a lie. It is literally an A class bug to have an AI that consistently beats you.

Have fun with your gifted wins.

But I lose many more times than I win. I have had so many heart racing, sweat inducing mid pack and lower pack races against AI in racing games. My go to mode in GT Sport was Custom Race mode and it really was excellent and provided real racing thrills. If I was winning all the time I would lose interest. I very much am interested in racing, and have had a hell of a lot of fun RACING against AI. You are bundling me with people who if they aren’t winning don’t want to play, that is definitely not me. I want to race.

 

[Silver Arrows]

So, basically, you don't like racing, you like video games.

What is the "improvement" you are seeking? A better disguise for a system tuned to allow you to win and feel good about yourself? See, because no matter how convincing single player is, it's always a lie. It is literally an A class bug to have an AI that consistently beats you.

Have fun with your gifted wins.

You know, you'd be doing better with your arguments if you weren't more or less brow beating people for choosing to do their racing with AI instead of human opponents via online. I certainly don't really care for racing online in most games, certainly not sims, but apparently that means I'm being gifted wins, even in other games outside of this argument.

 

[Samus]

So, basically, you don't like racing, you like video games.

What is the "improvement" you are seeking? A better disguise for a system tuned to allow you to win and feel good about yourself? See, because no matter how convincing single player is, it's always a lie. It is literally an A class bug to have an AI that consistently beats you.

Have fun with your gifted wins.

Disagree. Whilst on a very basic level the game needs to let you have the chance to win, how they go about doing that, and masking it, makes all the difference. Also, despite what some people claim here (not you), people are happy to race against the AI and not finish 1st. It's only thanks to certain racing games, including past GT games, that people got into their head the idea they had to win every single race. People who watch real racing know that isn't plausible.

Look at the F1 games, for example. If you play at the highest difficulty and choose one of the slowest teams in real life, you will not win, and players accept that because they know they're going to need to move up to better cars where they can win. If they get 10th in a Williams, they're happy. Then when they get into a Ferrari, they know they can push for wins.

Now how does a game manage that balance of "must be humanly be possible to win" and "still give them a challenge"? Well, at a basic level you have to match the average speed of the player to allow them to win if they manage to go above their average consistently. You can cheat, with extreme rubberbanding, or just program an AI that can be adjusted in tiny increments so players can find the right level to match their skill. A level so that if they have a good personal race they might win, if they make mistakes, they won't.

I get this in Project CARS 2 which I've been replaying recently. You have a granular difficulty setting in 1pt increments that you can adjust until it's just about at your level. Is it perfect? Absolutely not, some races you'll still easily win because the AI aren't programmed so well at that track/car, others the opposite. But when it works, it works. Your average lap times are 1:15, the AI are 1:15. If you want to win, you'll need to 12 really good laps at or above your average. The AI might make a mistake, or they might also do 12 really good laps and push you to the line.

It also works in qualifying. Nail your lap, you're starting front row. Sloppy, and you'll be mid-pack but in the knowledge you can fight through and win. Still won't be easy though, the AI ahead are still close to your skill level.

It can work. We all know that an AI are never going to rival real human opponents but damn, they can be a whole lot better than PDs efforts.

But as you've said before, you also need to program the cars to all WANT to win. Right now the GT AI don't.

 

[Jeff Goji]

I really hate the current GT formula of starting last in a higher powered or somehow better car and beating a crappy AI to first place by the end of the race.
It seems like amazingly lazy game design, especially when you take to social media to brag about "Sophie" while delivering a racing experience as crappy as this.

This is not just lazy, but odd to me that every single race is like this.
GT3 even had a qualifying and then a race in the higher tier events with your placement in qualifying giving you a place on the grid that made sense.a
And you still had to manage your tires correctly, fast lap didn't mean a thing if you couldn't keep tires on the car or traction in the long haul.

So what happened? Why aren't races run like this anymore?
I think it would cut down on the level of frustration for players realizing they don't have to start from the back of the pack and need to pick "the right car" to win from last place.

To me, it seems like they amped up the drama in doing online searches and in buying the "right" car and spending those precious few credits instead of the actual racing.

What are your thoughts on it? Would you like to see the current format go away entirely? Or be present for some events and not others?