Grand Turismo for PC?

Anyone know if Grand Turismo will be ported for PC. I've yet to play the playstation version, but the screen shots and number of cars looks VERY interesting? For those that have played it....... Is it an arcade game (boooooo), or a sim? Are the physics realistic? Are the tracks realistic, or "fantasy"? Thanks all!

> Anyone know if Grand Turismo will be ported for PC. I've yet to play > the playstation version, but the screen shots and number of cars looks > VERY interesting? For those that have played it....... > Is it an arcade game (boooooo), or a sim? Both (no damage though). Yes, except no damage; the actual physics are the best I've played with in any game. In my Supra I lost the rear end coming out of a ver fast turn and in the replay I could see the suspension/wheel bouncing around. Fantasy, although I really like some of the courses. Especially the mini-autumnring. If you like to watch replays of your races this is the best at it. In the replay ou see the reflections of everything off the car. With the amount of cars (I think 166) it's understandable there's no dash or damage model. You would need a DVD to store all that information. Jon B^D

The physics are good but there are no crashes to speak of, not like NFS. Shame really could have been a really good game if it had. Paul

Quoted text (25 lines)

>> Anyone know if Grand Turismo will be ported for PC. I've yet to play >> the playstation version, but the screen shots and number of cars looks >> VERY interesting? For those that have played it....... >> Is it an arcade game (boooooo), or a sim? >Both (no damage though). >> Are the physics realistic? >Yes, except no damage; the actual physics are the best I've played with in >any game. In my Supra I lost the rear end coming out of a ver fast turn >and in the replay I could see the suspension/wheel bouncing around. >> Are the tracks realistic, or "fantasy"? >Fantasy, although I really like some of the courses. Especially the >mini-autumnring. >If you like to watch replays of your races this is the best at it. In the >replay ou see the reflections of everything off the car. >With the amount of cars (I think 166) it's understandable there's no dash >or damage model. You would need a DVD to store all that information. >Jon B^D

>The physics are good but there are no crashes to speak of, not like NFS. >Shame really could have been a really >good game if it had. It still *is* a really good game. Randy Randy Magruder Contributing Reviewer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com

> The physics are good but there are no crashes to speak of, not like NFS. > Shame really could have been a really > good game if it had. > Paul Paul, It's an awesome game already. Who needs damage when the focus is racing? Sure damage is a part of racing, but only a small part. Other than damage this game is pot on to real life. Nobody can say that about any other game, simply because we don't get to drive a Champ Car, NASCAR, or F1 car at any of the circuits; let alone drive them at all. When there's imaginary tracks nobody can say it doesn;t have a turn like that, because it does. And with lots of real cars it makes it real racing. Not some fancy crap. This game provides e***ment and challenge; what more could you ask for out of a game? Well sure damage would be nice, but it wouldn't make or break the game. I'll rephrase what you said. The physics are NEAR PERFECT but there are no crashes to speak of, not like NFS. Shame really could have been a PERFECT game if it had. Jon B^D

> Is it an arcade game (boooooo), or a sim? Played it for 5 days. For those who have access to a Blockbuster, I highly recommend doing what I did: go out and rent a Playstation and GT for about $20 for 5 days and decide for youself. I had a blast! Must admit it is *very* ***ive. I'll post a more complete review when I get a chance (just got back from the Canada GP). Check out Randy Magruder's comprehensive review at the Digital Sports site (sorry, no html ref). Anyway, my short take (well, it was when I started writing): Arcadish. As a "racing" sim, it is arcadish due to its complete lack of collision damage, 6 car maximum, usually 2 lap race length, bumper car though aggresive AI (or was it just me causing all the bumper car action?). Now, this isn't to say it isn't incredibly fun, or realistic in other ways, but a race that misses on some of the above elements isn't much of a sim of a real race. As to... Some say very. I'll have to bow to the opinions of those more savvy, however I'll point out a couple of things that haven't been mentioned: I varied the camber and shock settings of my purchased "sport suspension". I couldn't tell the difference between the stock shock setting (2/2) and the most polar settings (f/r = 1/3 and 3/1). Maybe my own insensitive butt, however I would have expected a noticeable difference. Ditto on the camber settings, but that might be expected to be more subtle? In its defense, switching from the stock tires on a Civic Si to racing compound Soft front, hard rear, did result in a very satisfying shift from understeer to strong oversteer on late braking. Though very controllable oversteer. As Randy mentioned, maybe dialed up in effect for us tail-happy Americans? Where it really failed, and I haven't seen mentioned, is in the modeling of the effects of hp/weight+drag. I have run the stock '94 Lude VTEC to 164 mph, the new Lude SH to 162 mph (both should be about 140), the GSR to 157 (more like 134), a stock(?) CRX Si to 153!! I believe a 205 hp Civic Si that was lightened to 1779 lb would do better than the 13.9 sec 1/4mi I clocked. [PS: yes I like Hondas :-)] If they can't get that right, it raises doubts about the rest of the physics modeling in my mind. Fantasy. I do like the variety. And the Autumn Ring-mini reminds me of auto-x'ing. The license tests are challenging. All the different cars to drive a blast. I really appreciate a chance to run some of the cars I've owned, or contemplated/dreamed of owning. A pleasant change from the pure racers and outright ***s of most games/sims. If this game gets a PC port, I'll certainly buy it. If they add in-cockpit graphics, damage, and more american and European cars (*) it'll be that much more amazing. (*) = it only has the previous gen Corvette's, Z28, an old 427 vette, Vipers, the Aston Martin DB7, some TVR's. Please add BMW's, VW's, Ferraris to race against the NSX et al, Mustang, Contour SVX...

I agree it would have been perfect, I just felt it lacked the fun factor. I`m all into simulating cars,etc its just a shame they failed to simulate the crashes aswell. And like you say if it had them it would be perfect. But unlike NFS you dont get that classic moments when you come round a corner to see a car on its side or roof. I dunno, maybe I should have played Gran turismo for more than a few days, I was just disappointed thats all. Paul

Quoted text (11 lines)

>> The physics are good but there are no crashes to speak of, not like NFS. >> Shame really could have been a really >> good game if it had. >> Paul >Paul, >It's an awesome game already. Who needs damage when the focus is racing? >Sure damage is a part of racing, but only a small part. Other than damage >this game is pot on to real life. Nobody can say that about any other

game, >simply because we don't get to drive a Champ Car, NASCAR, or F1 car at any of >the circuits; let alone drive them at all. >When there's imaginary tracks nobody can say it doesn;t have a turn like that, >because it does. And with lots of real cars it makes it real racing. Not >some fancy crap. This game provides e***ment and challenge; what more could

Quoted text (10 lines)

>you ask for out of a game? Well sure damage would be nice, but it wouldn't >make or break the game. >I'll rephrase what you said. >The physics are NEAR PERFECT but there are no crashes to speak of, not like >NFS. >Shame really could have been a PERFECT game if it had. >Jon B^D

I have a different take on this question than everyone else. The question is not "are the tracks REAL" it is are they REALISTIC. To which I would answer YES, they are REALISTIC. No lava, no weird physics, no amu***t parks, no big jumps or loops, just racetracks that look like converted streets. I think we may be giving the impression that it has arcade style tracks when what we mean is that the tracks do not exist in real life.

I don't mean to offened anyone, but in my opinion NFSII is not a good race game at all. I use a Voodoo for good frame rates and nice scenery. But, the control of the cars are terrible. The sounds truly are synthesized and not sampled. I think a comparison of a a race game to NFSII indicates low expectations. I own NFSII SE and although I played it for atleast 10 hrs of accumalted time. I nolonger do. I don't like the fake sound, and I don't like the physics. When I turn, my whole screen seems to shift to change views. Again sorry to offened if so. Just my opinion, I think it is worth alot. JeffS

Quoted text (38 lines)

>I agree it would have been perfect, I just felt it lacked the fun factor. >I`m all into simulating cars,etc its just a shame they >failed to simulate the crashes aswell. And like you say if it had them it >would be perfect. But unlike NFS you dont get that >classic moments when you come round a corner to see a car on its side or >roof. > I dunno, maybe I should have played Gran turismo for more than a few days, >I was just disappointed thats all. >Paul >>> The physics are good but there are no crashes to speak of, not like NFS. >>> Shame really could have been a really >>> good game if it had. >>> Paul >>Paul, >>It's an awesome game already. Who needs damage when the focus is racing? >>Sure damage is a part of racing, but only a small part. Other than damage >>this game is pot on to real life. Nobody can say that about any other >game, >>simply because we don't get to drive a Champ Car, NASCAR, or F1 car at any >of >>the circuits; let alone drive them at all. >>When there's imaginary tracks nobody can say it doesn;t have a turn like >that, >>because it does. And with lots of real cars it makes it real racing. Not >>some fancy crap. This game provides e***ment and challenge; what more >could >>you ask for out of a game? Well sure damage would be nice, but it

wouldn't >>make or break the game. >>I'll rephrase what you said. >>The physics are NEAR PERFECT but there are no crashes to speak of, not like >>NFS. >>Shame really could have been a PERFECT game if it had. >>Jon B^D

Quoted text (14 lines)

> I don't mean to offened anyone, but in my opinion NFSII is not a good race > game at all. > I use a Voodoo for good frame rates and nice scenery. But, the control of > the cars are terrible. The sounds truly are synthesized and not sampled. I > think a comparison of a a race game to NFSII indicates low expectations. > I own NFSII SE and although I played it for atleast 10 hrs of accumalted > time. I nolonger do. > I don't like the fake sound, and I don't like the physics. When I turn, my > whole screen seems > to shift to change views. > Again sorry to offened if so. Just my opinion, I think it is worth alot. > JeffS

I'll agree that the worst thing about NFS II SE is the control with a wheel. There is a 20% deadzone hardcoded into the game so your wheel effectively becomes a gamepad for control. Do yourself a favour a get the deadzone patch from one of the NFS sites. With it the cars are MUCH more controlable. BOB

And no announcer! "Oh no! Watch that turn!" "Wow, what a rocket!!" argh...I hate those damn games where you can't shut them up. I agree the tracks are very realistic. Nice to play a racing title with no 20 degree off-camber turns, mile-long tunnels, amu***t parks, and 'bumpity-bump' bridges to drive over.

Quoted text (10 lines)

>>> Are the tracks realistic, or "fantasy"? >>Fantasy >I have a different take on this question than everyone else. The question is >not "are the tracks REAL" it is are they REALISTIC. To which I would answer >YES, they are REALISTIC. No lava, no weird physics, no amu***t parks, no big >jumps or loops, just racetracks that look like converted streets. I think we >may be giving the impression that it has arcade style tracks when what we mean >is that the tracks do not exist in real life.

But is it going to get a PC port?

Quoted text (19 lines)

> And no announcer! "Oh no! Watch that turn!" "Wow, what a rocket!!" > argh...I hate those damn games where you can't shut them up. > I agree the tracks are very realistic. Nice to play a racing title with no 20 > degree off-camber turns, mile-long tunnels, amu***t parks, and > 'bumpity-bump' bridges to drive over. > >>> Are the tracks realistic, or "fantasy"? > >>Fantasy > >I have a different take on this question than everyone else. The question is > >not "are the tracks REAL" it is are they REALISTIC. To which I would answer > >YES, they are REALISTIC. No lava, no weird physics, no amu***t parks, no big > >jumps or loops, just racetracks that look like converted streets. I think we > >may be giving the impression that it has arcade style tracks when what we mean > >is that the tracks do not exist in real life.

All I've read is that it is being looked into. I really enjoy it on the PSX, but if they did a 3dfx PC port, I'd buy that too. It's that good.

> But is it going to get a PC port? I asked this in my local Game shop, and one assistant said "definitely not". Damn. Sure looks pretty, though I haven't driven it. Jonny --------------------------------------------------------------------- | Jonathan Hodgson | TTech Predator | | than win by two laps | LSU Archery Club and Orchestra | ---------------------------------------------------------------------

>>But is it going to get a PC port? >I asked this in my local Game shop, and one assistant said "definitely >not". Did you forget a smiley? Or where did that game shop assistant get the inside knowledge of Gran Turismo? Maybe he's in the programming team which made GT?

Just go buy TOCA if you have a 3dfx card. QBM

How about everybody reading this group who is interested in a pc port mail Sony to request it. This may just give them the encouragement they need - I got this address from the Sony Site it may not be any good - if you know a better one...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> >But is it going to get a PC port? > The developer, Polyphony Digital Inc., basically said that it was written to be > easily ported to the PC but they would need approval from Sony Computer > Entertainment to go ahead with the project. And to this date, Sony has not > given the go ahead. > Alex > p.s. I got this from an interview with the developer that was on the web > somewhere.