Not sure this rings true, I was a console racer (Gran Turismo series) long before I was a PC racer, I (like many) didn't buy GT because I wanted a simcade experience, I bought it because it was advertised as a SIM and it was the best PS had to offer. I would suggest that people buying something advertised as "The real driving simulator" are after exactly that.
Hardcore simmers on PC are a special breed, and a relatively rare animal. They do not compare in numbers to casual gamers, gamers that play occasional titles, and action gamers. The big money is not in these "specialist gamers". On consoles, a much bigger crowd is still quite young, and the much-famed legacy of GTR and GTR2 may not mean as much to them as it means to those of us here who already are a bit older, at least old enough to have played GTR over a decade ago. Its abolsutely possible that a far greater number of such players will not be positively or negatively affected by this PR and advertising. Because it means nothing to them since they are too young. they have less luggage, so to speak. It is said the most rapidly growing group of gamers now are the so-called silver-gamers: players of age 50 and higher. What should be added to that however is that the overwhelming majprity of these play on mobile devices, and just to kill a little time. So we talk of titles like Candycrush. We talk about games for Android smartphones. Another group that is most unlikely uninterested in the legacy of GTR and GTR2. If the design is good and the technical execution well, GTR3 might surprise some of us, once it gets released. Whatever it then may be.Becasue we who are now so critical, probably are not the target audience anyway. Nor the majority. As a Raceroomer, me personally however is exclusively interested in that they get their engine finished.
I am curious how rich GTR3's featureset will turn out. Not that obsessed with absolute hardcore physics. I hope to see autosport-immersing features. I prefer broad feature set, rather than few features that outshine competition in just one area.
What is funny is, I enjoy racing games ever since "Pitstop" on my Commodore C64 (no, not yet a silver gamer lol). I had many PC titles before trashing my gaming PC in favour of consoles, but for whatever reason I never came across GTR/GTR2. I first heard of it when I joined this forum. But in general I believe that a new title has to deliver to be successful in the market - a good heritage might be an initial selling advantage, but in times of youtube reviews, that advantage is short lived and superceeded simply by what a game/sim can offer.
why do we always go down this road , if your telling me that this concept for gtr3 insults the GTR series then i must assume that you have never played it novice mode , aids , etc etc they are all there , yep you can click the simulation option ... but against todays standards is it simulation? so ill do what any resonable person would do ; ill wait and when it comes out ill make a decision ; instead of having hissy fits about what may or may not happen Andi
You and reasonable person? We've known each other a few years now, didn't think you knew the word reasonable... word of the day calendar? GTR2 still holds up relatively well today but you're right, by todays standards it probably couldn't be called a simulation, however, back in the day, it was the gold standard for racing simulations, what most of us are annoyed about is that the GTR series used to be the standard other SIMs would aim for, with GTR3 (from my understanding of that now infamous interview), SimBin aren't even going to try and make a proper sim (Ironic given the "Sim" in the company name) and are backtracking on previous promises of returning to the roots of the franchise.
Define "Sim" ? What is a Simulation ? It's nothing until you say what you're trying to simulate. Or, in this domain, you can have "driving simulation" as long as "racing simulation", even some team management simulation. They can all offer a way different experience to the players and are all "Sims" in what they try to simulate. A racing simulation can focus on the racing environment (car series, carrer mode, racing rules, etc), and be very good and still be a "sim". On the other end you can have "driving simulation" or even "tire simulation" at the state were we are today. They can offer very accurate simulation of the cars and tires physics but it doesn't make then more enjoyable for the player. I bet you would find more players that will enjoy un good racing sim game (even with some less accurate but good enough physics), than a pure physics simulator (we should let this to the IRL teams that need to work on it). Seems that SimBin is taking the way of the more enjoyable way, the one that talk to most players. The players that prefer a good "racing" experience aside a very pure physical accuracy. The players that don't masturbate themself over the "brand new tire model V25.12" And take note that both approach are not exclusives. You can have racing simu that have good physic / tire model simulation. And as far as we know there's nothing today that allow anybody here to say that GTR3 will not have good physics.
An experimental setup that aims at providing an illusion of reality. The mor eimmersive the illusion is, the more "sim" is the sim. That can but must not necessarily include high loads of hardcore realism. The decisive thing is the immersion. However, realism is closley linked to immersion, and if handling the sim gets broken by lacking realism, so it breaks immersion.
It's good to keep the definition quite open so we can have sci fi sims or genre of games called immersion sims etc So as Birdman said, immersion is key here, game must be based on believable rules and laws and stick to them
An "immersion sim"? What should that be? A software simulating immersion? So that it can try to simualute immersion - while in doing so not being immersive at all? Makes no sense!
its funny we get back into the sim argument , we have no true race sims ; all are games with aspects of simulation that allow us to have the immersion , and that then depends on your opinion on wether the immersion works well enough for you feel that it is a simulation of race cars ..... we can pick holes in everything its possible , the day a 100% true race sim comes out it will have everyone rushing out to buy a Pc that doesnt exist , just to deal with the tyre model...... Andi
Physics is not all. Even compared to R3E there are better "sims" out there, but judged by immersion R3E for me the sim to go. Best feeling of all. Physics have to be plausible, they are in R3E. But other things like sound (especially, thats why i love cars/motorsport), trackside and carclasses match into immersion. Thats why R3E is for me Nr1. I could imagine GTR3 could have plausible physics, why not. PC2 simulates everything/most stuff (turbostuff, oil/watertemprature etc.) but in some situations the physics are far from plausible (still better than PC1). Or take Dirt Rally. It was not RBR, but good enough to have fun with. Best part where the tracks. Thrilling, breathtaking speed. But honestly i have the fear too, that GTR3 would end like Dirt 4. Big name, high hopes from the simcommunity and in the end more "meh" than "yay". At least when UE4 comes to R3E and brings weather and night. Than i must say, its sad that GTR3 issnt that what i hoped for, but say hallo to the new fancy raceroom
It's nice to see how many people on this thread appreciate the fact that it is not only physics that bring immersion to autosport experience. That said, certain physics related features completely missing harm that immersion badly. For example, when I watch F1, I see that locking your wheels produces flat spots, and that, impacts your race, maybe even forcing you to pit earlier. And when I race a game where I can slam my brakes all I want, it disappoints me. I don't care how mathematically correct are flat spots, or rain, or damage is in a game, or if rules are not complete, but when those parts are missing completely, that's a turn off for me. If GTR3 will contain hopefully many features that impact your race (well, aside from G forces affecting you and risk of injury, for the obvious reasons ), I'll be really happy. Really curious how GTR3 (and ACC) turns out.
Having a more commercial title and not target sim-niche is fine to me, but it imo makes little sense to use GTR3 brand name then... Just asking for negativity from the community that actually has a connection to the name. What bugs me most, however is that the title as a whole seems to be in flux, no license, no publisher, no compelling content to show. At that stage claiming the game is out in a year feels not realistic, especially with targeting console. If you shoot for "immersion" say codemasters style, you ought to have something presentable in that direction (background/track details etc. even if the cars were missing there would be things to show). If you do not manage to get one teaser in high quality, how to impress publisher. My main worry is that indirectly s3s is getting burnt. Maybe completely wrong due to the separate companies, but bankruptcy around simbin in the first place and now this weird course around GTR3, that doesn't spark trust. Don't get me wrong I think R3E with its online content/cross marketing etc. is "safe," but it deserves a bigger budget on its own.