GT 5 Prologue this fall, Gran Turismo 5 spring 2008

[ihamoitc2005]

Corner Speed

GT's is just so far off in a lot of cases (4 minute time for the Nurburgring says hello) that I consider FM2 to be a lot better. IIRC, the record for the ring was a 6:11 in a porsche. That car and track is a time trial in FM2, and the record so far is around 6:16. GT4 had records around 4:50 that included going into the grass at 180 mph with no bad effects...

For this kind of comparison we must use same kind of car on same track no? This would be a fun comparison.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

What car was the 4 Min time done with?

It was done with the Toyota Minolta.

You can with the proper settings on the Minolta (or some other similar race car) reach sick speeds on the oval track, like 500+ km\h due to some bug in GT4

 

[NovemberMike]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGvvjB4tRAU&mode=related&search=

That is a Toyota Minolta on the Ring @ 4:44

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JN0wMiAT4gQ

This is a Top Gear episode where he compares GT4 to Real life on Laguna Seca with an NSX.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

Which P-Zero are you refering to? The Semi-Slicks? Performance of semi-slicks like the P-Zero tyres depend also on the weight of your car. Even then, they aren't the best on the market and not much better than ordinary street tyres.

P-Zero Corsa assymetrico rear, Semi slicks

I agree that there are way to many factors in the comparison to just say "tire this equals tire that in GT). However, going with virtually the same car and same tire pressures, the GT4 counterpart, even with cold tires, i got outcornered by to much.

I think i have some proper data comparisons on my old gaming pc.. Il have a look

 

[Cyan]

Interesting comment. The same can be said of 99.9% of movie makers. They create visuals that are appealing, rather than realistic. eg. Film the exterior of a house from one view, and film a different house when looking through the doorway outwards to get the impression that the house you saw front-on is placed somewhere in the world it isn't. Film is awash with bogus, unrealistic lighting too.

The choice Polyphony had was present the mountain in accurate scale, in which case the background would be either solid green field or solid grey rock - or doctor the environment to make a fantastic situation that's far more enjoyable to ride around in. The fact they chose the latter shows a lot of artistic sense! Rather than grumble at Polyphony 'cheating' by being clever in artistry to make their games look good, grumble at other developers that they're not using the know-how of centuries of artistry from painting composition to cinematography to make their games look good too!

Well.., movies, like games, are a heightened form of reality. Going to a movie where most situations and speech were truly real and "conversational" -for instance, the way that people actually talk- would be (again) very awfully unnatural.

Everything is heightened; lighting, dialogue, suspense, action, etc. There is real people with big hearts, and no binary data, though.

PD does not height the reality, they basically height and *fatten* it. Graphics aren't that important for me (Indianapolis 500 for Wii being the exception) but some natural order of things.

What's wrong, imo, with PD's Eiger Nordwand version is that there's no sense of progression. You are in a valley, there is a green hill and then, suddenly, whoah, a giant granitic mass.

 

[Cyan]

I am pretty sure PD is capable to surpass Forza's physics

Good heavens! I don't know why you count on them to solve the serious problem they have with physics. Physics are the holy grail of SIMULATORS and, currently, GT falls (very) short in that regard.

Things like cars not reacting to weight transfers, or the car's common tendency to understeer and how hard it is to turn it into an oversteering car, doing wheelies to reach 606 Km/h top speed.., all are good examples of this.

The day I see a guide on how to properly pass people or some kind of racing school in a GT forum would be a marvel day. That day I would think the franchise is following its way overrated (in all of racing games) motto.

PD is aiming for realistic damage, different weather conditions and 20 cars at once in GT5. It took them several years and three generations to get to that point.

It's all good -although the addition of F1 cars sounds hoarding and doesn't add to the realism-, but how much do you think physics are going to change with PD in control?

I can only think of a single game that would encourage me to actually purchase a PS3, and it's GT5, because I am curious about how PD can take advantage of PS3's hardware.

I'm sure GT 5 will look far better than any racing game to date, no doubt, but it will most certainly fail where it counts the most for me, the physics, the realism and its associated immersion factor...

So most probably I won't ever buy a PS3.

 

[DJ12]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGvvjB4tRAU&mode=related&search=

That is a Toyota Minolta on the Ring @ 4:44

So, the 956 had roughly 700hp, that Toyota has 1100+ PS which assuming he tuned it to the max is 1200+ bhp according to my PAL version of the game.

I think being that much quicker on sitcky slicks (the guy in the game would be using the super softs as there is no tyre wear indicator) and without the risk that he might die makes it seem fairly realistic to me.

 

[Darkon]

PD is aiming for realistic damage, different weather conditions and 20 cars at once in GT5. It took them several years and three generations to get to that point.

A point which no racing game has actually reached yet. heck if Kaz holds his word we may actually see realistic damage for once

Good heavens! I don't know why you count on them to solve the serious problem they have with physics. Physics are the holy grail of SIMULATORS and, currently, GT falls (very) short in that regard.

Compared to what Forza ? hardly and as far as I remember, PD is looking to have for gt5 300-600fps for physics sampling (which of course isn't everything )

 

[NovemberMike]

Surely that would work in real life also (although I doubt anyone would try it religiously as it will probably break the car)

It's just like rallying, if a corner is well rutted, following cars will "hook" themselves in and be able to go round quicker than a car that went before the ruts were created.

With Racing Slicks? On a Car with about 5" clearance?

 

[-tkf-]

its associated immersion factor...

So most probably I won't ever buy a PS3.

I will let the others get into the other points, but the immersion factor is for me UNDISPUTED.

 

[NovemberMike]

So, the 956 had roughly 700hp, that Toyota has 1100+ PS which assuming he tuned it to the max is 1200+ bhp according to my PAL version of the game.

I think being that much quicker on sitcky slicks (the guy in the game would be using the super softs as there is no tyre wear indicator) and without the risk that he might die makes it seem fairly realistic to me.

If by sticky slicks you mean "Space Age Material that only PD is aware of" slicks, then maybe.

Here's another example.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfbBiynAOaA

The real record for that car is 350 kph. GT4? 365 mph. I don't know the conversion ratio of km to miles off the top of my head, but that is at least 100kph above the world record...

 

[Phil]

If by sticky slicks you mean "Space Age Material that only PD is aware of" slicks, then maybe.

Here's another example.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfbBiynAOaA

The real record for that car is 350 kph. GT4? 365 mph. I don't know the conversion ratio of km to miles off the top of my head, but that is at least 100kph above the world record...

I'm sure you are aware that you can tune cars in GT4, let alone change gear ratio's and such rather easily? I'm really not sure what you're trying to prove with this video...

 

[Phil]

Things like cars not reacting to weight transfers, or the car's common tendency to understeer and how hard it is to turn it into an oversteering car, doing wheelies to reach 606 Km/h top speed.., all are good examples of this.

So, in other words, apart from stating the obvious that each physics engine / game engine in todays racing games and "simulators" are limited and offer room to trick the system into doing unrealistic things, that is the reason the physics is off? If I find some inaccuracies in the Forza game, does that make the physics engine any less impressive? Sure doesn't, so I'm not quite sure why it should in GT's case. And in case you haven't noticed - cars do tend to understeer, not at last because car manufacturers design their cars to do so for security reasons. Adding sticky tires might even add to this.

It's all good -although the addition of F1 cars sounds hoarding and doesn't add to the realism-, but how much do you think physics are going to change with PD in control?

I'm sure the cars they are adding has little to do with their physics engine - don't you? Not really sure what your point is here...

I'm sure GT 5 will look far better than any racing game to date, no doubt, but it will most certainly fail where it counts the most for me, the physics, the realism and its associated immersion factor...

Strangely, GT4 is already considered to hit that mark [with the wheel], so I'm really not sure why GT5 should disappoint in that regard. While we're on the topic of realism - GT4 offers by far the most authentic Nurburgring-Nordschleife experience on a console.

 

[Phil]

P-Zero Corsa assymetrico rear, Semi slicks

I agree that there are way to many factors in the comparison to just say "tire this equals tire that in GT). However, going with virtually the same car and same tire pressures, the GT4 counterpart, even with cold tires, i got outcornered by to much.

I think i have some proper data comparisons on my old gaming pc.. Il have a look

How do you know what tire pressures are set in GT4? To my knowledge you can't even set that, let alone know which tire you are running the car on.

BTW: Cold tires == less grip. Too hot isn't good either, obviously. Tire pressure changes obviously (and therefore also grip levels), depending on the temperature of the air inside it, which is why usually you put less pressure on track. Another thing, which you may not be aware of, is that race tracks tend to have a more grippy surface than what you will find on public roads. Which is also why tires last less long there.

 

[pakotlar]

So, in other words, apart from stating the obvious that each physics engine / game engine in todays racing games and "simulators" are limited and offer room to trick the system into doing unrealistic things, that is the reason the physics is off? If I find some inaccuracies in the Forza game, does that make the physics engine any less impressive? Sure doesn't, so I'm not quite sure why it should in GT's case. And in case you haven't noticed - cars do tend to understeer, not at last because car manufacturers design their cars to do so for security reasons. Adding sticky tires might even add to this.



I'm sure the cars they are adding has little to do with their physics engine - don't you? Not really sure what your point is here...



Strangely, GT4 is already considered to hit that mark [with the wheel], so I'm really not sure why GT5 should disappoint in that regard. While we're on the topic of realism - GT4 offers by far the most authentic Nurburgring-Nordschleife experience on a console.

Apparently that honor belongs to Forza 2 now. And I don't know how GT4's physics engine can be thought of as the best. Sure, it probably works fairly well under normal circumstances, but there are a bunch of corner cases that exploit the weakness of the system. Its been documented pretty well that from a Forza's physics model is far more detailed. I mean pulling like 600+ mph doing wheelies and still pulling turns at those speeds is rediculous. Do you know what kind of momentum that speed would generate? Jeez.

 

[Phil]

I mean pulling like 600+ mph doing wheelies and still pulling turns at those speeds is rediculous. Do you know what kind of momentum that speed would generate? Jeez.

So taking one case scenario of a car doing a ridiculous high speed nullfies the entire physics engine?

Besides, we don't even know what settings were done to that car - there are so many values you can set in GT4 to make it fairly unrealistic - it's quite easy to set downforce values for front and back etc which could also influence what is possible and what isn't in the game.

If the game is realistic under the realistc variables it is set, what more can I ask for? Sure, if I play with settings to manipulate the car in an unrealistic way, why pick at the physics engine (which is nothing but a physics calculator with x amount of variables and factors that are fed by the game)?

 

[Nesh]

Good heavens! I don't know why you count on them to solve the serious problem they have with physics. Physics are the holy grail of SIMULATORS and, currently, GT falls (very) short in that regard.

Things like cars not reacting to weight transfers, or the car's common tendency to understeer and how hard it is to turn it into an oversteering car, doing wheelies to reach 606 Km/h top speed.., all are good examples of this.

The day I see a guide on how to properly pass people or some kind of racing school in a GT forum would be a marvel day. That day I would think the franchise is following its way overrated (in all of racing games) motto.

PD is aiming for realistic damage, different weather conditions and 20 cars at once in GT5. It took them several years and three generations to get to that point.

It's all good -although the addition of F1 cars sounds hoarding and doesn't add to the realism-, but how much do you think physics are going to change with PD in control?

I can only think of a single game that would encourage me to actually purchase a PS3, and it's GT5, because I am curious about how PD can take advantage of PS3's hardware.

I'm sure GT 5 will look far better than any racing game to date, no doubt, but it will most certainly fail where it counts the most for me, the physics, the realism and its associated immersion factor...

So most probably I won't ever buy a PS3.

There is no 100% accurate car game simulator at existance. That doesnt stop GT from being one of the best examples even if it "falls short" according to you in some regards.

I suggest playing GT at a cabinet at a car exhibition

Everything you said is irrelevant to whether PD can surpass Forza's physics. GT may not be 100% accurate but for years it has done better work than most if not all (not including Forza)in these regards.

I dont understand the reason of your rant about the game. Its almost as if your are saying GT does a worse job than what other racing games did.

GT for a game it is doing an awesome job and PD has been doing some of the greatest work no matter how you put it and compare it to real life. And it is not PD fault if GT isnt 100% accurate to real life. There are things that NOBODY can apply to a console simulator no matter how good they are. Your experiencing a game on a couch. You dont feel weight, you dont feel g-force you dont feel anything there, despite that they are included in the game. If you cant feel all these you cant blame PD.

If you ever find the chance to try GT's simulator cabinet which is an actual car cabinet connected to a PS2 with GT, you will see all the great physics that is absent from a game steering wheel or a controller but is present in the game. It was far from being the same game or ovverated because PD could depict other elements of physics that arent displayied visually, arent felt with a controller or a steering will on a couch, but are felt on the driver in an actual car. You will feel and experience almost almost all the things if not all you described are absent from the game. They are actually there.

And thats where I take off my hat and bow to PD

 

[scooby_dooby]

GT4 offers by far the most authentic Nurburgring-Nordschleife experience on a console.

Not anymore it doesn't.

 

[Phil]

Not anymore it doesn't.

Considering it doesn't have the an adequate wheel, I seriously doubt it. The bumps on the road is one thing, actually feeling it through the wheel is another. I will post my thoughts on it when I play it.

 

[sir doris]

Not really. GT4 simulation tires were the closest to real life in GT4

Standart tires still have much more grip than my Pirelli P-Zero tires does. And P-Zero tires are pretty much as good as it gets before you put on real racing slicks (P-Zero is standart tires for everything from Merc AMG to Ferrari's)..

Not sure how everyone miss interpreted me - maybe I'm too tired?

I agree Simulation tyres in GT4 = Good road tyres in real life.
Standard Tyres in GT4 (N1-3 or Sport, Comfort, Ecconomy? or whatever they are called?) = Slicks in real life.

Definatley the only way to get realistic lap times is to use simulation tyres for road cars.

This is why I think the Jeremy Calarson Top Gear thing round Laguna Seca was irrelvant. I bet he used the standard tyres in GT4 which equate to slicks in real life. He then went round the track in a real NSX which I bet had road tyres on.

I can only assume he did this to further distance his time from the game (or maybe he didn't realise?) time to emphasise his point (which is very valid) that you can drive faster in a game cause you're not going to kill yourself if you crash. Something which happens a lot on Top Gear (Loading the parameters of a test, not the crashing and killing )

This idea of taking risks in a game that you wouldn't take in real life is a of course another factor in why the GT4 'ring times are much better than real life.