Would you welcome a clean driver rating in GT6?

Would you welcome a clean driver rating in GT6?

  • Yes

    Votes: 232 88.2%

  • No

    Votes: 31 11.8%
  • Total voters
    263
The way I see it, if it works like the penalty system then no. Most definitely not.

If it's user vote, no again. People have a habit of lying and that only gets worse online.
 
JohnScoonsBeard
Would you welcome a clean driver rating in GT6?

Lot's of ways to do it but do you like the idea in principal?
Click to expand...

In principle, yes. Online or Offline? Having one for Online (sort of a 'licence') makes sense, but implementing it would be more than a nightmare in logistics, it would make for some very complex programming. What about people who like to gather and drive the way they all agree upon - and that might be demolition-style rugby with one of the players as the ball?
Actually, I played that game once - it was hilarious. TG it was virtual cars, and virtual drivers seated in them.
The almost unlimited scenarios that can be arranged have 'clean' driving as only a slice of the pie.
Personally, I would like everybody to have the appropriate licence to drive the appropriate events.
It's annoying being punted off-course when you are driving in a random room with a group that's like-minded about the rules and someone jumps in and behaves inappropriately.
That happened to me last time I was online - maybe 3 weeks ago - and I haven't stepped into an online room since.
However - Clubs and GTP leagues solve the problem of like-minded drivers getting together.

Ratings are always a good idea when it comes to controlling the event and making sure the participants are aware of the code to be followed.
 
As someone who likes to push myself in being faster, both virtually and in real life, the one thing missing is driving safely. I do Autocross and so I don't have to worry about other drivers.

I want GT to provide training via the license tests the same way they teach you slightly tougher turns, to teach us how to handle passing. They try to do challenges with passing, but most of them are with different cars and ours always being overpowered. these should be same make/model and a good pass is the only way to do it. If they really have AI that is good, this will prove it too.

The system itself should provide people with a clear indication of what they are ready for, (my example classes) either Simulation Racing, Safe Facing, or Open Racing. Safe racing would heavily penalize hitting someones rear bumper, or going off track, with light penalties for hitting while passing, where in simulation all of that is a big no-no, and in Open is whatever goes.
  • By having strict differences between the classes there is no way someone could just enter a lobby for simulation racing without hours of proof in the safe racing class. While there might be some contact in this class, there is a very good chance that the one who caused it would feel bad, or there is a moderator for serious leagues anyway.
  • Mainstream people who want to race properly can still earn and join the Safe racing lobbies and when ready move up to Simulation.
  • The Open rooms are for those who don't care if you go off-course, or bump, but can still use the built in penalty system anyway (the one most of you seem to hate). Please note, the system does not reduce your rank for driving aggressively if you joined an Open racing lobby.

I think PD would have to do more than just put in a quick system to track collision history, they need to offer us ways to advance our skills, thats what i really want to see. GT to me is a learning tool, my Autocross talent has really changed since I took it seriously and want to keep pushing myself.
 
I don't know what the SRF-enabled Lobbies are like, but from my experience of racing online, GT6 has been much cleaner than the likes of Forza or Codemasters' F1 games. I very rarely come across a griefer on-track, which is a pleasant surprise.

It may have to do with the fact that I'm a bit selective in terms of which lobbies I join. Usually it's SRF off and PP restricted, with a minimum of 5-7 people already present. Takes a while to find a suitable room but when I join it's often a good, clean lobby that's already been going on for an hour or so.

So from my perspective the game doesn't need a driver rating system. That opinion may differ from others but so far GT6 has been the cleanest racing game I've played online and hopefully it stays that way for a very long time.
 
Yes if the room/lobby host has the option to turn it off and on (rooms that alternate between clean and dirty for example) so that if you're in a dirty room, your rating isn't affected.
 
I voted no. Not because it's a bad idea. Just because it would be open to abuse and I'd rather PD prioritised other suggestions. It a rating system was programmed to work automatically, accidents when it's not your fault would probably ruin your rating. If it was done via people's votes or likes then it would be open to abuse and people liking or disliking indiscriminately. I don't think online racing needs a rating system. It's fairly obvious when people are being idiots and you can just kick them out.
 
I don't think we need an algorithm that decides who was actually responsible for a crash, just one that registers a total number of crashes that the player has been involved, and possibly categorize them in "minor" and "major" categories, depending on how much damage was dealt to the cars (or would have been dealt if damage was turned on in a race that was played with damage off.).

Of course, you could say "why should I be punished for someone elses error?". This is understandable, but if you look at the big picture, you'll see that over time, clean drivers will be involved in less accidents. There will be a certain amount of crashes on every players' statistics, but dirty drivers will have a much higher crash rate because they'll get both the crashes they are responsible for, and the crashes others are responsible for on their statistics. At the same time, a clean driver will only get the crashes others are responsible for in their statistics, a value that should be a lot lower.

At the same time, a dirty driver will also get their crash statistics increased from the times they hit stationary obstacles, for whatever purpose they do that. In a race with damage turned off, they might choose to just hit something to brake instead of actually braking.

In the end, you will get a "damage graph" that is way higher for dirty drivers than for clean drivers. The game could also supply an average/median figure for you to compare a player's statistics to.

Because people can actually get better over time, I think the statistics shouldn't go infinitely back in time, but have a cutoff point at something like... 500 hours of online driving (or have it based on distance driven instead of hours driven, I'm not sure what would be a sensible distance to cut off at). Older crash data than that should perhaps not be included.

I agree that it should be possible to make rooms where damage tracking is turned off.
 
Last edited:
Pseudopod
I don't think we need an algorithm that decides who was actually responsible for a crash, just one that registers a total number of crashes that the player has been involved, and possibly categorize them in "minor" and "major" categories, depending on how much damage was dealt to the cars (or would have been dealt if damage was turned on in a race that was played with damage off.).

Of course, you could say "why should I be punished for someone elses error?". This is understandable, but if you look at the big picture, you'll see that over time, clean drivers will be involved in less accidents. There will be a certain amount of crashes on every players' statistics, but dirty drivers will have a much higher crash rate because they'll get both the crashes they are responsible for, and the crashes others are responsible for on their statistics. At the same time, a clean driver will only get the crashes others are responsible for in their statistics, a value that should be a lot lower.

At the same time, a dirty driver will also get their crash statistics increased from the times they hit stationary obstacles, for whatever purpose they do that. In a race with damage turned off, they might choose to just hit something to brake instead of actually braking.

In the end, you will get a "damage graph" that is way higher for dirty drivers than for clean drivers. The game could also supply an average/median figure for you to compare a player's statistics to.

Because people can actually get better over time, I think the statistics shouldn't go infinitely back in time, but have a cutoff point at something like... 500 hours of online driving (or have it based on distance driven instead of hours driven, I'm not sure what would be a sensible distance to cut off at). Older crash data than that should perhaps not be included.

I agree that it should be possible to make rooms where damage tracking is turned off.
Click to expand...
Excellent points:tup: You can resolve the time issue simply by making your rating a rolling average, weighted forward. If it was time based (as opposed to total laps or races) then say your last 20 hours on track might be the root of your driver rating, with most recent racing counting for more and older stuff for less. That would make it fairly easy to turn your rating around quickly and encourage people to stick with it, if they are a little rough around the edges to start with.

As long as you can toggle this on and off in a lobby, I don't see how anyone could be against it.
 
Another statistic I could imagine being interesting is average time between crashes. If you have three crashes in 50 hours of driving, you will have an average of 1000 minutes between each crash. In this case, a higher number will be desirable. I'm not sure of this is necessary to add to a system that already tracks damage like i talked about earlier, but it could be a useful/interesting statistic in either case.

Or perhaps again, number of miles between each crash is a more useful statistic. That would prevent people from just parking their car in their own online lobby and leave their console on overnight and rack up incredibly good statistics.

edit:
In short, the game could give us these two statistics on a player's online profile or whatever:

Damage per 100 miles.
Miles per accident.

The game could automatically compare these values to an average, and just let the players know in simple terms ranging from terrible, bad, average, good and excellent.

Perhaps precise values would be available with a few extra button presses, for those who are interested.
 
Last edited:
Pseudopod
Another statistic I could imagine being interesting is average time between crashes. If you have three crashes in 50 hours of driving, you will have an average of 1000 minutes between each crash. In this case, a higher number will be desirable. I'm not sure of this is necessary to add to a system that already tracks damage like i talked about earlier, but it could be a useful/interesting statistic in either case.

Or perhaps again, number of miles between each crash is a more useful statistic. That would prevent people from just parking their car in their own online lobby and leave their console on overnight and rack up incredibly good statistics.

edit:
In short, the game could give us these two statistics on a player's online profile or whatever:

Damage per 100 miles.
Miles per accident.

The game could automatically compare these values to an average, and just let the players know in simple terms ranging from terrible, bad, average, good and excellent.

Perhaps precise values would be available with a few extra button presses, for those who are interested.
Click to expand...


i think it would be a fine statistic if handled with 1 additional piece. a room should have a setting for how they want their drivers to act (perfectionist/clean/fun), and so you wont be penalized for have a dirty record while racing in fun rooms, but a good record in clean rooms proves you can handle yourself. and obviously someone with a bad record while in a clean room would be a red flag for all others.
 
Yes, I would welcome a clean driver rating in GT6. It's all of my competitors that I wish dirty ratings upon......:lol:
 
Does the clean driver rating take a day off if you like doing quick matches?

If it doesn't, the clean drivers among us who get the ridiculous penalties from other drivers mistakes (or bad behaviour) would tar us with the same brush as the bad drivers. Maybe not as bad, but bad enough for other people to question our racing ethics and possibly exclude us from their races.

Ideally, a brilliant idea. Realistically, impossible. I still voted yes on principle though.
 
It's ironic how some people come up with all these lame excuses as for why they don't want a online driver rating system.

-As suggested by the link on the OP the system would be based on driving only, no player vote/report bs.
-Obviously quick races & online lobbies could be split into ranked & unranked races. So, if you want to take a break from proper racing and play demolition derby/cat & mouse/whatever with your buddies you could join an unranked quick race or make an unranked lobby, and your driver rating wouldn't be affected at all.
-About the "other players will ruin my rank" excuse: unlikely as long as you keep driving clean. If you have a good rating you'll be matched up with other players of similar rating in quick races, when looking for lobbies to join you can stick to ranked lobbies that ban players below a certain rating level, and when creating your own ranked lobby you can set driver rating/performance/driving aid restrictions to keep bad players out. Now if you for some stupid reason decide to join/create a ranked lobby with no restrictions then that's your mistake, it isn't the driver rating system's fault.
 
;edit

It seems like i created a new post rather than editing my old. If a mod wants to delete this one that's probably fine.
 
Last edited:
kilesa4568
Does the clean driver rating take a day off if you like doing quick matches?

If it doesn't, the clean drivers among us who get the ridiculous penalties from other drivers mistakes (or bad behaviour) would tar us with the same brush as the bad drivers. Maybe not as bad, but bad enough for other people to question our racing ethics and possibly exclude us from their races.

Ideally, a brilliant idea. Realistically, impossible. I still voted yes on principle though.
Click to expand...
There's always a chance that a significant amount of other quick race players will try to avoid a bad rating as well, if the system was implemented. Furthermore, there is a chance that the best players will make the least mistakes anyway, so if you're near the front of the race, you might be surrounded by mostly other players that are pretty good and don't want a bad damage rating.

Perhaps the quick match system should try to sort players by their damage scores as well, so that clean drivers get to mostly race against other clean drivers, although if there aren't enough players to separate them into two categories like that, you'd get some bad ones in among the good ones.

In either case, all my suggestions are made with an option to disable damage tracking in whichever race you create in mind. People should never be discouraged from just having fun and doing whatever they want.
 
Given that a safety rating is somewhat niche (in terms of demand, if not necessarily appreciation) for a game like GT, how far would a self-divided community go in achieving the same effect?

That is, the existing categories and room labels already cover some of the spectrum, and having clubs / groups / leagues can fine tune that further.

I don't really race online any more (no shuffle), but I'd be curious to know how effective the new community features have been, and what still needs to change to achieve the effect of a safety rating (segregating drivers) for the likes of us.
 
I stand firmly by the NO vote I made in 2013. The "system" has no business trying to judge anyone. Especially when it is running on a system with less than $3.00 worth of memory. :lol:
 
Chrunch Houston
I stand firmly by the NO vote I made in 2013. The "system" has no business trying to judge anyone. Especially when it is running on a system with less than $3.00 worth of memory. :lol:
Click to expand...
So, in all that time, you've still managed to miss the fact that the "system" would not make judgments at all, but rely on statistical inevitability?
 
Griffith500
So, in all that time, you've still managed to miss the fact that the "system" would not make judgments at all, but rely on statistical inevitability?
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, I missed the 'fact' that you engineers had solved all of the problems. Be sure and let me know when the update is ready.
 
Every argument I read for why people say "No" seemed to be based on assumptions that were already covered. I think we need the OP to update with some common suggestions and options so people can quickly see what the core concept is about, instead of wondering 'what-if' and assuming the worst.
 
Pseudopod
There's always a chance that a significant amount of other quick race players will try to avoid a bad rating as well, if the system was implemented. Furthermore, there is a chance that the best players will make the least mistakes anyway, so if you're near the front of the race, you might be surrounded by mostly other players that are pretty good and don't want a bad damage rating.

Perhaps the quick match system should try to sort players by their damage scores as well, so that clean drivers get to mostly race against other clean drivers, although if there aren't enough players to separate them into two categories like that, you'd get some bad ones in among the good ones.

In either case, all my suggestions are made with an option to disable damage tracking in whichever race you create in mind. People should never be discouraged from just having fun and doing whatever they want.
Click to expand...

I should have pointed out I only do the 500pp races. Where anything and everything turns up to race. A lot are rolling road blocks, badly driven, poor connection tail wagglers, or a simple petty jealousy from a lot of the drivers to stop quicker drivers completing a clean pass.

I use my own version of the rating now anyway. I've done that many races in there, I recognize the bad drivers and short cutters and will quit to find another race. If they're bad too, I keep looking.

In my opinion, the penalty system needs addressing before they consider a safe driver rating.
 
With a safety rating, the penalty system can more or less be thrown away. Except as an option.
Chrunch Houston
I'm sorry, I missed the 'fact' that you engineers had solved all of the problems. Be sure and let me know when the update is ready.
Click to expand...
I'm not an engineer, and I don't see why that should be an insult, either. Technophobia, much?

Just because you don't understand the concept, doesn't mean you're right to dismiss it. Unless you didn't read the thread since you last posted, and genuinely "missed" it; in which case: read, digest, learn.
 
I don't think it would make sense to have your driver rating impacted in Quick Match unless it's revamped with some sort of host control or an autoboot feature for excessive violations. On top of that, a 2 lap sprint is about the worst possible formula for clean racing. For the safety rating to be truly effective, a host has to be able to set a minimum value for the lobby and the ability to see the number of incidents that occured and deal with offenders as they see fit. Quick Match being a purely random crapshoot at this point, IMO wouldn't fit in with the goals of the system. Doesn't mean that they couldn't sort your placement into lobbies via your safety rating though.
 
Johnnypenso
Doesn't mean that they couldn't sort your placement into lobbies via your safety rating though.
Click to expand...

That is the best part of your post (shame its at the end)
Even if we dont use the system for booting or banning, its a great way to keep like-minded people closer together, which would reduce the quantity of issues seen, but with no negative side effects! (at least for automated match making, user lobbies would still need their own thing)
 

Latest Posts

Back