GTR Review

[topgeartom]

Originally Posted by sfdmalex Have you ever read one of your posts? You sound like a complete retard.

Odd. Exactly the same phrase applies to you, which obviously you'll be very annoyed at, as you are obviously soooo much better than me at everything - us mere mortals who are hopeless at every single simulation game ever made. It must be hard for you.

FYI, i've never played crimson skies, I play GT4 along with the millions of other people because it is fun, something GTR isn't. Which is the point i was making in my previous post, however you are obviously far too illiterate in order to understand it. So this time, ill make it nice and clear for you, ok?

GTR IS NOT FUN. GAMES SHOULD BE FUN. therefore, GTR IS NOT A GOOD GAME.

Better for you?

Oh, and i do fly simulators, i enjoy FS2004 greatly, and yes i fly it as a simulator, not as an arcade type game. i use 2 joysticks - one of which is the throttle/rudder combo, the other being the yoke. I use the analogue throttle roller as the trim adjuster, and the digital throttle on the other stick as the flaps control. However, i imagine this is far too 'amateur' for you.

And lets face it, so what if I am the type who enjoys GT4 - are you decrying all those who do? What exactly are you trying to say, when you use such a comment as an insult?

I used to have a lot of respect for you alex, as i do have for all the other members of JW, however, they aren't in the habit of starting stupid fucking arguments (apart from RC, but then we expect that! )

[mindgam3]

Have you ever spoken to F1 engineers about the simulations they do?

Their computers, which aren't exactly shit can take hours, even days to do calculations with one single element of an F1 car. Even F1 teams are just beginning to simulate transient aerodynamics - eg what happens when their car is cornering rather than going down a straight. So don't tell me that GTR can simulate real life air flow and the effects on the cars aerodynamics because thats just bullshit.

And that's just one element of the car. Tyres and their interaction with the tarmac is far more complicated than GTR simulates.

Data analysis (motec) only takes measurements whether real or virtual - not really very impressive - even GT4 does that

So your mate drove a rally and came second did he?

I don't play simulators often, if at all and I was faster round rockingham, UK in an M3 that a guy who actually owns one. I drive a 1.2 clio.... some of us are just more natural than others

[SFDMALEX]

Originally Posted by topgeartom Originally Posted by sfdmalex Have you ever read one of your posts? You sound like a complete retard. Odd. Exactly the same phrase applies to you, which obviously you'll be very annoyed at, as you are obviously soooo much better than me at everything - us mere mortals who are hopeless at every single simulation game ever made. It must be hard for you. FYI, i've never played crimson skies, I play GT4 along with the millions of other people because it is fun, something GTR isn't. Which is the point i was making in my previous post, however you are obviously far too illiterate in order to understand it. So this time, ill make it nice and clear for you, ok? GTR IS NOT FUN. GAMES SHOULD BE FUN. therefore, GTR IS NOT A GOOD GAME. Better for you? Oh, and i do fly simulators, i enjoy FS2004 greatly, and yes i fly it as a simulator, not as an arcade type game. i use 2 joysticks - one of which is the throttle/rudder combo, the other being the yoke. I use the analogue throttle roller as the trim adjuster, and the digital throttle on the other stick as the flaps control. However, i imagine this is far too 'amateur' for you. And lets face it, so what if I am the type who enjoys GT4 - are you decrying all those who do? What exactly are you trying to say, when you use such a comment as an insult? I used to have a lot of respect for you alex, as i do have for all the other members of JW, however, they aren't in the habit of starting stupid fucking arguments (apart from RC, but then we expect that! )

Your a fucking idiot. I was never talking about GTR being a game, I never talked about the game aspect of it you silly little kid.

[topgeartom]

why? it is a game afterall - something you dont seem to realise.

[SFDMALEX]

Originally Posted by mindgam3 Have you ever spoken to F1 engineers about the simulations they do? Their computers, which aren't exactly shit can take hours, even days to do calculations with one single element of an F1 car. Even F1 teams are just beginning to simulate transient aerodynamics - eg what happens when their car is cornering rather than going down a straight. So don't tell me that GTR can simulate real life air flow and the effects on the cars aerodynamics because thats just bullshit. And that's just one element of the car. Tyres and their interaction with the tarmac is far more complicated than GTR simulates. Data analysis (motec) only takes measurements whether real or virtual - not really very impressive - even GT4 does that So your mate drove a rally and came second did he? I don't play simulators often, if at all and I was faster round rockingham, UK in an M3 that a guy who actually owns one. I drive a 1.2 clio.... some of us are just more natural than others

F1 simualtors that teams use are a whole different thing. They dont test how the car drives, they test parts. A racing sim does not simulate how much wear a piston can take. Their simulators are a whole different thing completly different from any racing sim. They are stress simulators.

A racing sim is a simple input output peice of software. THey get data from telemetries etc which already tells them all the values that are needed to simulate a tranny. When input x=123 output y should =134ew. When somebody builds a simulator they know what the result should be of a given input. F1 stress simualtors etc are build to find out the outcome of a given input.

Tottaly different things mate.

me that GTR can simulate real life air flow and the effects on the cars aerodynamics because thats just bullshit.

HAHA, again do your reaserch. How can a sim exist if it can not model aero dynamics. LOL! Have you ever looked at the GTR setup menus? My god even GT4 simulates aero, you are so lost I cant even bother replying.

F1 teams cant simulate aero effects? LOL were do you get your info. What do you think they do before putting a model in a wind tunel?

Airflow simulation is present on friggin GPL which is like 8 years old mate....do your reaserch please....My god man, why did I even bother replying here when you do not even know something as simple as that. I guess all those flight sims are modeled to fly in vacum environments. How can a sim even be considered a sim withougt airflow?

My god man, dont you use the CFD moddeling software at your school?

Even F1 teams are just beginning to simulate transient aerodynamics

Depends what you mean by transient exactly.

Tyres and their interaction with the tarmac is far more complicated than GTR simulates.

Have you ever bothered to reaserch the tire model of the MOTOR 1.0 engine? Which again has been changed for GTR.


It doesnt take a genious to figure out that we will never be able to simualte the effect of the bug on tire model that I ran over while cornering. But these things have such minor effect that there is no sense in moddeling them.

We will never be able to simulate everysingle peice of matter, because even a fart from a spectator has an effect on the race, everything affects everything, to the 0.000000000000000000000000000000001 maybe but it has an effect somehow on someting, but no one is going to model that.


Honestly my last post here, because you are clearly unaware of what is simulated and what is not. Just assumptions and specultions. How can you even talk about GTR if you have no idea of the systems it simulates? How? All you do is assume. You have not bothered to look at the telemetry even, you have not bothered to do the reaserch on the physics engine but you still argue.

Anyway, adios, play your games and be happy.

P.S Read this http://www.aerorocket.com/aerocfd.html to get an idea of what we are able to simulate these days since you've been under a rock for the last 10 years.

[mindgam3]

Yes we've got CFD modelling software - and as I said it takes hours/days to do some calculations - even on our new 64 processor unit.

Lol, i never said F1 teams cannot simulate aero effects :roll: I said they've only recently begun to simulate transient aero effects.... which i did explain in my post

I've also been lectured by Renault F1 engineers on their CFD modelling and simulations.

Basically, even F1 simulations that they use cannot simulate accurately how a car performs on a given circuit.... if simulations are as good as you say they are, they wouldnt need to test their car at all. If simulators are that good why don't f1 teams save millions and make their drivers test their cars on a computer simulator?

But whatever, it just brings me back to the point i was getting at in the first place - you can't beat real life... you can't feel it though your seat, you can't hear it, you're not getting any feedback, you're not feeling g forces, you can't smell it, you can't replicate real drivers, you're not surrounded in it - its nothing like real life and will never be - not in our life time.

GT4 is a game, GTR is a game, whichever you prefer then great, neither is much closer to real life than the other... one has better graphics, hundreds of accurately modelled cars, the nurburgrin accurately moddled and has enough options to make it a great game.... and no its not GTR

[RC45]

This is an awesome exchange.

Makes one wonder who the trouble makers really are. I lay low for 2 days and you jagoffs start ripping into Alex - seems the common denominator here is the challengers - not the respondents..

Originally Posted by mindgam3 A simulator is the kind of thing the US government spends millions on to train their astraunauts and pilots, where by they get trained on it and then immediately can fly the actual fighters/choppers etc.... not something you can run on your PC

If you for a second think that military (and civilian for that matter) simulators need super computers to run them, you are sorely mistaken.

While the PC with available software may not be up to scratch, the hardware is quite capable - many times over.

It is the SOFTWARE that wins the day - NOT the hardware.

The damn things cost millions because they have to recoupe the hr&da (contractor winners charge the military what ever they can get away with - not market related fees ) - and don't go on to sel 1,000,000 copies on eBay..

Originally Posted by mindgam3 But whatever, it just brings me back to the point i was getting at in the first place - you can't beat real life... you can't feel it though your seat, you can't hear it, you're not getting any feedback, you're not feeling g forces, you can't smell it, you can't replicate real drivers, you're not surrounded in it - its nothing like real life and will never be - not in our life time.

Ever been in a real flight simulator unit (simulator not duplicator)? I have been in a couple - Airbus, Boeing, Lear and Cessna... it is such total emersion, that if you forgot to take your motion-sickness tabs you are going to puke.

So - in terms of how real does it feel to the human operator? Is it good enough to train with? Is it good enough to rate out with? Is it good enough to practice life or death one-chance event evasion manoeuvres?

The answer is YES - to all of the above. So much so that you log enough hours in the Sim you can go in the real thing with almost 0% chance of fucking it up.

Now - back your boffin/nerd/egghead/pocket protector view point - Does it model all aspects of a modern sub-sonic wide body airliner in flight? Does it model precisely the interaction between runway asphalt and stationary tyre rubber as it spins up? Does it model the effect of supersonic air across the turbofan blades ?

The answer NO - because it does not need to. The purpose of the device is to SIMULATE the real thing, to allow HUMANS to try it out and learn in a safe environment - not DUPLICATE real life as a substitute for final run airframe testing. But the flight training simulator is not for simulating the strain/stress on a main spar in a 10 G dive... it is simply assumed that by then the plane broke up.

Does this mean that it is not so real you don't puke you lunch when you come out of a climb into a rate 1 turn and and then level off into a negative G dive?

No - it is so real you will lose your dinner mate.

And all this from a set of computers that is not quite as powerful as everyones desktop.

[mindgam3]

Originally Posted by RC45 Originally Posted by mindgam3 A simulator is the kind of thing the US government spends millions on to train their astraunauts and pilots, where by they get trained on it and then immediately can fly the actual fighters/choppers etc.... not something you can run on your PC If you for a second think that military (and civilian for that matter) simulators need super computers to run them, you are sorely mistaken. While the PC with available software may not be up to scratch, the hardware is quite capable - many times over. It is the SOFTWARE that wins the day - NOT the hardware. The damn things cost millions because they have to recoupe the R&D (contractor winners charge the military what ever they can get away with - not market related fees ) - and don't go on to sel 1,000,000 copies on eBay..

I didnt mention software or hardware, i just said "simulators"

[RC45]

Originally Posted by mindgam3 Originally Posted by RC45 Originally Posted by mindgam3 A simulator is the kind of thing the US government spends millions on to train their astraunauts and pilots, where by they get trained on it and then immediately can fly the actual fighters/choppers etc.... not something you can run on your PC If you for a second think that military (and civilian for that matter) simulators need super computers to run them, you are sorely mistaken. While the PC with available software may not be up to scratch, the hardware is quite capable - many times over. It is the SOFTWARE that wins the day - NOT the hardware. The damn things cost millions because they have to recoupe the R&D (contractor winners charge the military what ever they can get away with - not market related fees ) - and don't go on to sel 1,000,000 copies on eBay.. I didnt mention software or hardware, i just said "simulators"

which is why your whole argument was wrong.

[mindgam3]

Originally Posted by RC45 Originally Posted by mindgam3 Originally Posted by RC45 Originally Posted by mindgam3 A simulator is the kind of thing the US government spends millions on to train their astraunauts and pilots, where by they get trained on it and then immediately can fly the actual fighters/choppers etc.... not something you can run on your PC If you for a second think that military (and civilian for that matter) simulators need super computers to run them, you are sorely mistaken. While the PC with available software may not be up to scratch, the hardware is quite capable - many times over. It is the SOFTWARE that wins the day - NOT the hardware. The damn things cost millions because they have to recoupe the R&D (contractor winners charge the military what ever they can get away with - not market related fees ) - and don't go on to sel 1,000,000 copies on eBay.. I didnt mention software or hardware, i just said "simulators" which is why your whole argument was wrong.

Don't see how but there you go...

Whats your opinion on the general subject though? When you feel the need to indulge in your petrolhead needs.... where do you go; to the computer or to your vette?

[RC45]

Originally Posted by mindgam3 Whats your opinion on the general subject though? When you feel the need to indulge in your petrolhead needs.... where do you go; to the computer or to your vette?

Well - truth be told, we like to brag about on street adventures, but you are rarely going past abou 3/10'ths of the cars potential but are often 9/10th's of the drivers potential and more so - really an accident looking for a place to happen.

For all our fascetious ramblins about "running and gunning" on the street, you spend about 1% of the time getting on it, and the other 99% avoiding other traffic, cops and simply driving to outlying areas to have some fun.

So - while there is no substitute for the real thing, the fact that we seldom hve schedules and budgets that allow uas much track playtime as we would like - street driving often leaves me unfulfilled.

Even a blast through the backwoods roads where we sometimes average 100+mph or more over a 10 mile stretches of B road 2 lane "tracks" (very much like small stretches of the Nurburgring) you still feel somethign was missing.

Keeping an eye the other drivers on the run, oncoming traffic, road conditions, surrounding conditions, sounds, smells and on the radar is refreshing and exilirating for sure - but even a "game" like GT4 lets you remove yourself from that reality of consequence and you get a little crazy.

I think thats what these driving simulators do very well.

The guteral feel of the V8 and stomping the gas at 20mph and launching like a scalded cat with turpine-dipped testicles is for sure better with the real thing - but the strain of keeping an eye out for the local constablary often keeps all this hooligan behaviour at a minimum.

I would have to say that games/simulators meet some requirements that real life and modern traffic levels cannot - and that is going balls-the-wall until you wreck - then get a do-over..

[PaulGT2164]

GTR is a realistic game, i like it cause i have realistic skills
GTR might not have a bazillion cars and every square inch of tarmac mapped, remapped and re-rendered
but as a guy who races cars, builds cars, and has actually been on a race track numerous times in a variety of cars....GTR is more realstic than most of the games out there

GT4 in my opinion is several steps lower on the realistic mark cause to me, it feels like a arcade game...

GTR is a SIMULATION not a GAME
so the jump in and have fun crowd needs not to apply

this whole argument is kinda frivoulous because the arguments are from two people who obvioulsy prefer two different styles of games

i like realism, therefore i play games like GTR, netKar, and LFS
my cousin, on the other hand like arcade
so he plays GT4, NFSU, etc

if he jumps into a game of GTR he cant make it half a lap, yet he can rip through GT4 like it is nothing

granted the real thing is much, much better...but hey track days get canceled, cars break, and i cant race everyday...so when that happens...i fire up GTR and scrape some fenders...

and before you set out to flame me or whatever or try to argue and bring up a bunch of technobabble i dont care about, my views on this game are from my actual interaction with real cars, on real tracks and how i compare the experience to GTR

[mindgam3]

Originally Posted by RC45 Originally Posted by mindgam3 Whats your opinion on the general subject though? When you feel the need to indulge in your petrolhead needs.... where do you go; to the computer or to your vette? Well - truth be told, we like to brag about on street adventures, but you are rarely going past abou 3/10'ths of the cars potential but are often 9/10th's of the drivers potential and more so - really an accident looking for a place to happen. For all our fascetious ramblins about "running and gunning" on the street, you spend about 1% of the time getting on it, and the other 99% avoiding other traffic, cops and simply driving to outlying areas to have some fun. So - while there is no substitute for the real thing, the fact that we seldom hve schedules and budgets that allow uas much track playtime as we would like - street driving often leaves me unfulfilled. Even a blast through the backwoods roads where we sometimes average 100+mph or more over a 10 mile stretches of B road 2 lane "tracks" (very much like small stretches of the Nurburgring) you still feel somethign was missing. Keeping an eye the other drivers on the run, oncoming traffic, road conditions, surrounding conditions, sounds, smells and on the radar is refreshing and exilirating for sure - but even a "game" like GT4 lets you remove yourself from that reality of consequence and you get a little crazy. I think thats what these driving simulators do very well. The guteral feel of the V8 and stomping the gas at 20mph and launching like a scalded cat with turpine-dipped testicles is for sure better with the real thing - but the strain of keeping an eye out for the local constablary often keeps all this hooligan behaviour at a minimum. I would have to say that games/simulators meet some requirements that real life and modern traffic levels cannot - and that is going balls-the-wall until you wreck - then get a do-over..

Get your arse down to a track day then

[RC45]

Originally Posted by mindgam3 Originally Posted by RC45 Originally Posted by mindgam3 Whats your opinion on the general subject though? When you feel the need to indulge in your petrolhead needs.... where do you go; to the computer or to your vette? Well - truth be told, we like to brag about on street adventures, but you are rarely going past abou 3/10'ths of the cars potential but are often 9/10th's of the drivers potential and more so - really an accident looking for a place to happen. For all our fascetious ramblins about "running and gunning" on the street, you spend about 1% of the time getting on it, and the other 99% avoiding other traffic, cops and simply driving to outlying areas to have some fun. So - while there is no substitute for the real thing, the fact that we seldom hve schedules and budgets that allow uas much track playtime as we would like - street driving often leaves me unfulfilled. Even a blast through the backwoods roads where we sometimes average 100+mph or more over a 10 mile stretches of B road 2 lane "tracks" (very much like small stretches of the Nurburgring) you still feel somethign was missing. Keeping an eye the other drivers on the run, oncoming traffic, road conditions, surrounding conditions, sounds, smells and on the radar is refreshing and exilirating for sure - but even a "game" like GT4 lets you remove yourself from that reality of consequence and you get a little crazy. I think thats what these driving simulators do very well. The guteral feel of the V8 and stomping the gas at 20mph and launching like a scalded cat with turpine-dipped testicles is for sure better with the real thing - but the strain of keeping an eye out for the local constablary often keeps all this hooligan behaviour at a minimum. I would have to say that games/simulators meet some requirements that real life and modern traffic levels cannot - and that is going balls-the-wall until you wreck - then get a do-over.. Get your arse down to a track day then

That still only accounts for a small percentage of the time - such as this evening after work - I feel like a balst around Le Mans... sure beats trying to put in 10 laps at a race track before dineer..

[SFDMALEX]

Originally Posted by PaulGT2164 i play games like GTR, netKar, and LFS

:shock: I thought I was the only one BTW LFS2 demo is out, an alpha for some reason, not even a beta but still something