That in racing games the ideal line is the same for all car, much less for all suspension tuning, speaks to me of how utterly simplistic our models are for the best way to throw a car around the track.
The ability to reliably max out your traction circle is good, very last microsecond braking wonderful, and computers are wonderful at this micro-task. But knowing when exceeding it is ok, having a feel for where you need to be, and more than anything the planning and knowledge to max out turn exit speed velocity at all costs, these are all awfully complicated & sophisticated problems that have less to do with micro-optimizing the immediate present.
I certainly think cars will get there too. But I'd be surprised if we were really modelling the right problems at this stage. Emulating a person's sense of agency and purposefulness is, my guess would be, still a stretch. A person's ability to plan better is, my guess would be, trump enough over the micro-cheats of the machine.
It'll be interesting to see the domains where AI surpasses humans quicker. You mention the "no longer has to be a car advantage," which certainly holds true in the military drone regime, but where will in evened parity computerized elegance shine through brightest first? I tend to think something like F1, which is about extremely sharp reactions with extremely capable vehicles will lend itself to the micro-optimizations of the virtual well. What about a GT Touring race, or a club car race? Wouldn't it be a shocker if AI ends up crushing humans blithely in a stock Miata, but throw it in a GT car and it remains only human in performance? Maybe AI responsiveness and terrain estimation ends up dominating the rally circuit before the track? Mapping the domains where AI does succeed the most handily ought give the most remarkable contrast.