Hi there, cooldawn. Welcome to NeoGAF, that's a great first post!
Thank's fella.
I've missed all the GT chat of the past few months (registered in February but didn't get done until last week) and I wanted to say so much...but alas that time has gone.
It's always nice seeing people come with comparisons. Like, hey, this is 60fps, don't compare it to DC! Okay, but we can compare DC to Project CARS or Forza. Or we could, back when GT Sports didn't even exist and people were thinking next GT would be DC at 60fps.
But let's get DC aside. Now we compare it to Project CARS. Hey let's forget about advanced physics, heat modelling, damage modelling, or about dynamic weather and time. Let's forget about everything that is not convenient enough.
Then we compare it to iRacing, just because. And yeah, the game wins. My mom wins against iRacing when it comes to graphics. Now, could you please compare what's under the hood for both games? Ah, no, you forgot to do that.
Yeah, GT Sport is aimed at eSports, but it's definetely not competing for the sim sector because it's not a sim.
Sorry fella but I never compared DriveClub to GT Sport, or any of those games because your right...it's not like-for-like. Besides that, it was my first ever post!
I will say DriveClub is a visual tour-de-force but, for argument sake, it's fair to say people have only themselves to blame when coming up with comparisons with games that don't provide the same experiences. We can use any metric you like for comparative reasons but, practically, that has infinite possibilities and no meaningful resolution.
If you want, just to help this along a little, I can go back to the games you listed and I'll still say GT Sport is looking better,
however, this part is important, is it looking as good as I thought Polyphony Digital could push for, considering their heritage and technical know-how? No. Does that mean it doesn't look as good as the other games? No. Reading NeoGAF GT threads has been very informative and the general consensus seems to be people expected a fully featured GT7, not a focused e-sports title. I think that particularly plays it's part and these reactions have an edge of pure disappointment...because they haven't strove for the visual characteristics of previous titles.
Now the complicated part. How much better could the other games be, visually, without other aspects holding them back? Since you understand the amount of physics calculations, the tyre modelling and damage modelling better than me, can you explain how much that impacted Project CARS and compare it GT Sport in it's unfinished state? I don't have anything like that data and insight from either developer. To be fair there has been plenty of positive reports pointing to improved physics in GT Sport. Of course that still leaves tyre modelling but do we know if that isn't already integrated and part of the perceived improvements? Like I said before, I don't have that information.
Damage modelling...that's a whole other can of worms. Polyphony Digital tried to implement it in GT5 and people hated it. I thought procedural damage modelling was a step in the right direction, the future in the genre, but because people complained so much it never got the development it deserved. I flat-out blame gamers for the lack of damage modelling development in the GT series. We're now stuck with hideous dents and scrapes that take no processing whatsoever. It's horrid...but that's OK because all the others are doing it, right? That's just not the Polyphony Digital way. Thank god for that.
However, to that end, in many aspects GT5 was a landmark title for the genre but the excessive complaining meant GT6 was regressive, not progressive. GT6 was the first title I didn't feel Polyphony Digital strove to achieve something. Instead I felt it was the first title they tried to accommodate the complainers...and look how that ended up. Well done everyone.
Sorry, I digress.
As for the dynamics. Technically it can be done but it's just not anywhere near ready. Is that such a bad thing right now considering what GT Sport is? Adding dynamics is fine for hardcore gamers but the message is quite clearly different so maybe the idea of an e-sport GT needs to be established first. Strategically, maybe it's the right thing to do anyway. I don't know so I'm just throwing that out there but the lack of dynamics certainly doesn't put me off this title. GT Sport is still going to look gorgeous anyway. GT7 will have dynamics, so do we actually need it now when it's not ready?
Just going back to comparing visuals, Project CARS has decent dynamic effects but still, to this day, I'd put a pre-dawn Nurburgring Nordschleife (24hr variant) with Variable Weather set to '1' at 2 or 3 x speed on GT5 above anything else. Seeing the silhouette of the surrounding forests come out of the pure darkness against a changing dark royal blue sky or the sun rise and burn through a mist covered track is the most evocative thing I've ever seen. So when I visually compare games to GT, it's more likely to be that benchmark experience. Project CARS simply can't command that emotion. Not in the slightest.
Oh, and I was just using iRacing because it's what GT Sport is becoming. Plus iRacing is on a platform that has, what NeoGAF would say, 'infinite power' yet I have never seen a stream that doesn't have 2D trees or any dynamics. But I guess that's because it's doing more under the hood, right? Comparatively iRacing should be way ahead of GT Sport visually anyway. So no, I didn't forget anything. Plus GT Sport has official FIA integration. Not a bad start to a new vision, eh?