yup...so if you're bored, correct your joke...i'll give you 3 minutes to find the answer...it'll be fun.

hum since when you can compare a simulation GT5 and arcade game PGR4.... you'll have to explain me ???
and pushing further since when the most important part in a simulation is the graphics ??? I'd rather have a better control, physics, AI, etc. in a sim than graphics....

see flight simulator for planes, which wasn't really kicking ass for years on graphics but was certainly the best in simulation....

now you want a real good simulation ??? GTR 2 on PC kicks the butt of Forza 1-2 all the GT and basically any other car sim ever made.... hopefully we'll see a number 3

we have a bunch of fanboys here, we all know that neither pgr 4 nor GT 5 can stand up to big rigs racing

In terms of graphics and gameplay, nothing can beat that game

The reason the GTR series is so deliciously good as a racing sim is not because of the graphics or sound effects (although it has more than enough of that) - it's their impeccable tire modeling.

If you watch Formula 1, you know that the FIA decided to have just one tire supplier for the championships because after all's been said and done, you can have by far the best car in the field but without the right rubber that car will never live up to its full potential - and can be soundly thrashed by an inferior car but with superior grip thanks to a better tire.

If you are after real simulation, graphics are really - and I mean really secondary. It's all about the accuracy of the physics and in the crucial tire modeling department no game has yet managed to surpass the GTR series.

i actually got confused on which was which on a few parts, i thought they had switched them on me. just for a few seconds though, but thats still really good

 hum I never said GTR was better graphical, I said GTR is the best simulation serie for what sim serie is suposed to be good in first place... and I stated that for a sim the most important is not graphics.... so we totally agree....

now for the FIA... it's also because michelin choose to leave the competition anyway..... before that new rule was made.... but I don't really follow F1 now that i'm in USA... I don't have any chanel showing it :( same for WRC :(

...and I never said I disagreed with you - I'm corroborating your comments!

BTW, you may want to try out RFactor - the amount of mods available are simply out of this world!

Michelin decided to leave because - well, in their own words:

"Michelin is perplexed by the step backwards of the FIA's F1 regulation for 2006, felt to be incoherent with the FIA’s proclaimed policy to reduce costs

On October 26, 2005 the FIA’s World Motor Sport Council adopted new rules concerning the use of tyres in 2006: restoration of tyre changes during the race as well as increase in the number of tyres allotted per team. This is to be effective immediately for the 2006 season.

This urgent change, without advance notice: 

Is incoherent with the cost reduction objectives sought by the FIA President

Is a step backwards in regards to the 2005 regulations presented, at the time, by the FIA solely for cost reduction purposes.

As a result, these new rules will immediately increase tyre development, production and logistics costs by 15% since, contrary to what has been said, the 2005 solutions can by no means be adapted to the new 2006 regulation. This decision reveals a lack of technical understanding of the product and of what a tyre really is.

In fact, tyre wear and grip are calculated to ensure an optimum performance for a specific distance. To switch from a tyre designed to run for 350 kms in 2005 to a tyre that can be changed every 100 kms (or less) in 2006 will require tyre manufacturers to design an entirely new generation of tyres and will therefore increase costs.

As many have said and written in the past few weeks, we can only question the meaning behind this decision which negates all of the benefits of Michelin’s research in 2005 to design a tyre capable of running for 350 kms, allowing its partners to win 18 races throughout the year.

Michelin, therefore, questions the FIA's hidden motivations for the 2006 F1 regulation.

Once again, this event illustrates the F1’s problems of incoherent decision-making and lack of transparency.

In light of this situation, Michelin would like to thank its partner teams who did everything possible, unfortunately in vain, to inhibit a last minute new regulation returning, in fact, to previous regulations."

The FIA, of course, offered this in response:

"The FIA has noted the latest press statement made by Michelin regarding the 2006 Formula One regulations.

The decision to reintroduce tyre changes in Formula One was supported by an overwhelming majority of the Formula One Commission members and by a unanimous vote of the FIA World Motor Sport Council.

The Formula One Commission is made up of all the F1 stakeholders including representatives of the teams (10), event promoters (8), engine suppliers (1), tyre suppliers (1), sponsors (2) and just one representative each from the governing body and the commercial rights holder.

Michelin are clearly confused, but it is difficult to understand which part of the very basic and entirely democratic voting procedures adopted by the FIA that Michelin is perplexed by. As Michelin themselves point out this is the same regulation as in 2004 when, we must remind them, their tyres ran without problem at Indianapolis."

Do you actually follow F1? The FIA wanted a single tire manufacturer, and after the Indianapolis fiasco two years ago, they knew that the was no way the FIA would pick them as the single manufacturer, so they decided to not even bid to continue in F1 at all.

Also, the new tires had done nothing to help the competition: The new tires are way worse than last year's: They provide significantly less friction than last year's Michelin's, and less friction means less turning. Aggressive drivers like Kimi and Fernando just haven't been able to cope at all.

I do wish tires were done better in console games. Gotham is to arcade-y. Gran Turismo's tires are very forgiving while green and change characteristics much quicker than real tires. Forza is probably the best option, but it still doesn't feel quite right.

Those graphics are amazing. I see they really have some +points to it, as far as Gran Turismo is concerned.

Gran Turismo is a nice franchise, but extremely hard. I had a hard time beating GT3, I ended up trading that game in. Considering I bought the game at my local Gamestop for $2. It was in the bargin been a couple of months ago. Every since I got thrashed in that game, I just stepped away and never came back to the franchise.

PGR series and the Forza series are the best IMO and I can play those games, because it has the diffculty level that is like mine.

Are you referring to me?  or endimion?

I sure follow F1 - been doing so for the past 24 years. The Indy fiasco is just as much as Michelin's "fault" for flubbing the numbers (hence the tirewalls couldn't handle the pressure of the last banked turn) but I wouldn't say that the Indy race was the sole reason (if any) why the FIA wouldn't elect Michelin. Besides, Michelin compete in many other motorsport disciplines, and normally are one of, if not the de-facto dominant force in whatever category they run in, so they can afford not to compete in F1.

About the new tires: This is what happens when you have a monopoly. Since there is no competition anymore, Bridgestone could just as well strap the cars with bars of soap. Since the playing field is "level" now, there is no way for the layman to see just how well Bridgestone tires really perform. Kinda reminds me of the Goodyear days - everyone thought Goodyear Eagles were far and away the best tires out there by no other virtue of being the solo tire supplier in F1. That all changed when tire competition was allowed - Goodyear did the right thing (image-wise) and got out before they had their rear buttcheeks handed to them.

As for the tires in console games, isn't there a GTR for consoles?