Better Gamplay or More Content ??
- Thread starter SPORTVAN
- 102 comments
- 5,714 views
- 369
- Spain
- wejhvabewjty
- 931
I am completely aware of how games are developed.
I am a software developer with 12 years experience.
I also have developed games myself for disabled kids using specialised control devices for a company specialising in assistive technologies.
I stand by what I have said, your question just isn't applicable to how work is divided up in a development project.
Your first example is a case-in point:
Simulating humidity/atmospheric pressure is a job of an engineer. The lunar rover is a model created by an artist/modeller. One doesn't come at the expense theanother.
I agree, The producer (Kaz) gets to decide what gets worked on - but he doesn't make the decision like you suggest. When the GT6 project started, it is unlikely he was thinking ok, "which do we spend more time on: modelling the lunar rover, or developing the course creator?" He wasn't thinking that because those things don't come at the expense of each other. Which is the "OR" part of you original question.
- 154
- United Kingdom
- BORDER323
Yes they do come at the expense of another.. its called time & budget and what is possible and what is not ... and what is worth pursuing and what is not..and what the boss wants. doesn't matter if its a 3d guy or a baker making it.
" we havn't got the budget to do both boss " ... well lets pick one then team ... the lunar rover is more important than proper tyre wear.. we'll go with that.
It is always a decision do we go with one " or " the other when using a budget, time and resources because they are limited.
Bodger Mate your totally not getting this thread... lets just leave the discussion on it there ..
Last edited:
- 6,086
- Simcoeace
There's absolutely no question that there are time & budget constraints. Spending time & money doing one thing inevitably means there will be less resources available for something else. You don't have to be a software developer to realize that - it's just common sense!
Damage is precisely useful because it discourages crashing - it adds a level of realism & restraint to driving at the limit.
There isn't one. But, unfortunately, much of that "replayability" is mind-numbingly repetitive, unrealistic, grinding - the old, familiar GT formula of overtaking 15 cars in 3 laps - something which resembles platformer gameplay rather than racing gameplay. Every objective observer complains about this (see the Inside Sim Racing comments for example). More sophisticated AI would replace the requirement for all those fake "racing puzzles", with a genuine, challenging & varied racing experience.
Damage is precisely useful because it discourages crashing - it adds a level of realism & restraint to driving at the limit.
There isn't one. But, unfortunately, much of that "replayability" is mind-numbingly repetitive, unrealistic, grinding - the old, familiar GT formula of overtaking 15 cars in 3 laps - something which resembles platformer gameplay rather than racing gameplay. Every objective observer complains about this (see the Inside Sim Racing comments for example). More sophisticated AI would replace the requirement for all those fake "racing puzzles", with a genuine, challenging & varied racing experience.
- 2,567
- Upstate NY
- BWX232
Exactly.
People that don't understand this, or that do understand this and look the other way or make excuses for GT (because after all GT is GT, and if it's GT, it is great, because it is GT) aren't helping GT at all.
GT didn't become popular because of online racing features. It became popular because it had a great single player career that had a lot thought put into it (unlike now) with lots of great cars to drive.
- 926
- machschnel
- 1,689
- NY
- SavageEvil
Interesting thread, OP makes little sense to me since the vast majority of us have not played the game in full release form yet. So what exactly are we attempting to choose this based on what exactly? Color me confused!
As usual people still wanting to thrust their vision of what "GT" should be into what "GT" is! Listen it's great to want things but the FACT remains GT is not our brainchild, we did not devise, we did not burn countless hours attempting to build it, we did not lose sleep, time with family and missed holidays just to finish the game...who are you to be so full of yourselves to tell a man how to build his game? I already addressed this gross attitude from individuals on this site, frankly it's disgusting. It's bad considering many of you are not kids but grown men speaking horribly about Kaz and PD.
Please lets think a little further than our own selfish thoughts, this game is his vision not ours, enjoy it or not its a choice but everything else is unnecessary. Can you imagine if Kaz read some of the pompous self righteous posts about how Kaz and company are incompetent or alluding to them being inept. If it were you having to listen to someone tell you how you should build your vision(an not in the most respectable way either), you'd tell them in the politest way possible to go 🤬 themselves.
How about we learn to not be jerks when critiquing? You can say all you have to without coming across as a complete pompous ass, use the power of polite and carefully worded criticisms. You can catch more bees with honey than you can with vinegar. Isn't that why this site was founded to built out the community and have a place where GT players can congregate and toss around ideas, finally GTP became big enough that Jordan gets invited to places to see GT games before they launch. So how about we all drop the attitudes, understand that not everything you want will end up being something that the creator will want to add at the present time, when you approach people with respect they hear you out. The online part of the game got upgrades that the community really pushed for, lets see what else we can get. Do not expect everything to be given the green light since it's still his vision and he is only allowing us to tinker in it a little bit. I myself have a lot of things I would tweak and add that would add to the GT experience that I am used to, most of them come from GT's past.
I'm not defending PD they don't need any, but I am a human and I know what it's like to have someone changing your ideas to suit their vision. If you know the feeling then you probably get where I'm coming from. Anyway lets do try to be a little bit more professional and leave our emotions out of some of the disappointments. I do believe we have vent threads for that, but lets leave the others that are pointing out things that need attention clean and easy to spot, heck we can even compile things to make it easier for PD who may skim the site for ideas about what improvements can be done.
I am bored but as I get older, being around children reminds us of how overzealous we get when we are a bit too entrenched in a game and take it to another level. Cheers all, I think I may have had too much time on my hands hence the length of this post. Sorry guys don't crucify me for this
As usual people still wanting to thrust their vision of what "GT" should be into what "GT" is! Listen it's great to want things but the FACT remains GT is not our brainchild, we did not devise, we did not burn countless hours attempting to build it, we did not lose sleep, time with family and missed holidays just to finish the game...who are you to be so full of yourselves to tell a man how to build his game? I already addressed this gross attitude from individuals on this site, frankly it's disgusting. It's bad considering many of you are not kids but grown men speaking horribly about Kaz and PD.
Please lets think a little further than our own selfish thoughts, this game is his vision not ours, enjoy it or not its a choice but everything else is unnecessary. Can you imagine if Kaz read some of the pompous self righteous posts about how Kaz and company are incompetent or alluding to them being inept. If it were you having to listen to someone tell you how you should build your vision(an not in the most respectable way either), you'd tell them in the politest way possible to go 🤬 themselves.
How about we learn to not be jerks when critiquing? You can say all you have to without coming across as a complete pompous ass, use the power of polite and carefully worded criticisms. You can catch more bees with honey than you can with vinegar. Isn't that why this site was founded to built out the community and have a place where GT players can congregate and toss around ideas, finally GTP became big enough that Jordan gets invited to places to see GT games before they launch. So how about we all drop the attitudes, understand that not everything you want will end up being something that the creator will want to add at the present time, when you approach people with respect they hear you out. The online part of the game got upgrades that the community really pushed for, lets see what else we can get. Do not expect everything to be given the green light since it's still his vision and he is only allowing us to tinker in it a little bit. I myself have a lot of things I would tweak and add that would add to the GT experience that I am used to, most of them come from GT's past.
I'm not defending PD they don't need any, but I am a human and I know what it's like to have someone changing your ideas to suit their vision. If you know the feeling then you probably get where I'm coming from. Anyway lets do try to be a little bit more professional and leave our emotions out of some of the disappointments. I do believe we have vent threads for that, but lets leave the others that are pointing out things that need attention clean and easy to spot, heck we can even compile things to make it easier for PD who may skim the site for ideas about what improvements can be done.
I am bored but as I get older, being around children reminds us of how overzealous we get when we are a bit too entrenched in a game and take it to another level. Cheers all, I think I may have had too much time on my hands hence the length of this post. Sorry guys don't crucify me for this
- 2,822
- Espoo
- GTP_Raitzi
There is no budget big enough for PD in the universe as long as they focus only on graphics and physics and don't fix the other areas in the game. Like the obvious "Nintendo" engine sounds.
- 2,567
- Upstate NY
- BWX232
They probably had a much smaller budget when they made GT3 and GT4, but they made better overall career modes, with more races, so they should be able to make better ones now.. that proves that budget is not the constraint for career more development, it is just that Kaz doesn't care anymore. He doesn't care if GT fans want a better career mode.
- 6,086
- Simcoeace
Interesting thread, OP makes little sense to me since the vast majority of us have not played the game in full release form yet. So what exactly are we attempting to choose this based on what exactly? Color me confused!
As usual people still wanting to thrust their vision of what "GT" should be into what "GT" is! Listen it's great to want things but the FACT remains GT is not our brainchild, we did not devise, we did not burn countless hours attempting to build it, we did not lose sleep, time with family and missed holidays just to finish the game...who are you to be so full of yourselves to tell a man how to build his game? I already addressed this gross attitude from individuals on this site, frankly it's disgusting. It's bad considering many of you are not kids but grown men speaking horribly about Kaz and PD.
Please lets think a little further than our own selfish thoughts, this game is his vision not ours, enjoy it or not its a choice but everything else is unnecessary. Can you imagine if Kaz read some of the pompous self righteous posts about how Kaz and company are incompetent or alluding to them being inept. If it were you having to listen to someone tell you how you should build your vision(an not in the most respectable way either), you'd tell them in the politest way possible to go 🤬 themselves.
How about we learn to not be jerks when critiquing? You can say all you have to without coming across as a complete pompous ass, use the power of polite and carefully worded criticisms. You can catch more bees with honey than you can with vinegar. Isn't that why this site was founded to built out the community and have a place where GT players can congregate and toss around ideas, finally GTP became big enough that Jordan gets invited to places to see GT games before they launch. So how about we all drop the attitudes, understand that not everything you want will end up being something that the creator will want to add at the present time, when you approach people with respect they hear you out. The online part of the game got upgrades that the community really pushed for, lets see what else we can get. Do not expect everything to be given the green light since it's still his vision and he is only allowing us to tinker in it a little bit. I myself have a lot of things I would tweak and add that would add to the GT experience that I am used to, most of them come from GT's past.
I'm not defending PD they don't need any, but I am a human and I know what it's like to have someone changing your ideas to suit their vision. If you know the feeling then you probably get where I'm coming from. Anyway lets do try to be a little bit more professional and leave our emotions out of some of the disappointments. I do believe we have vent threads for that, but lets leave the others that are pointing out things that need attention clean and easy to spot, heck we can even compile things to make it easier for PD who may skim the site for ideas about what improvements can be done.
I am bored but as I get older, being around children reminds us of how overzealous we get when we are a bit too entrenched in a game and take it to another level. Cheers all, I think I may have had too much time on my hands hence the length of this post. Sorry guys don't crucify me for this
Fascinating post! I couldn't disagree more. I don't think it it's an indication of a lack of respect to offer criticism of what is, in the end, a commercial product. There's an odd element of "hero worship" that comes across in a lot of GT "fanboy" comments. Who are we to "to tell a man how to build his game"? We are the consumers - the people upon whom the whole enterprise is based - without us, there would be no GT! We are perfectly entitled to voice our hopes & desires for the game & perfectly entitled to be disappointed when they are not met.
In the case of this thread, the particular criticism is that too much attention has been paid on a lot of content & not enough on some fundamental shortcomings of the game - AI, gameplay, sounds. These areas have been generally recognized as being weak in GT for a while now. Making excuses for these shortcomings is not doing Kaz, or PD any favours - it reminds me of the "Emperor's Got No Clothes" story.
- 6,086
- Simcoeace
I would just add that most of the GT players I know have moved on to iRacing & other PC sims, because of their frustration with some aspects of the GT experience, even though they would have preferred to avoid getting involved with all the expense & complication of PC gaming.
GT still offers something worthwhile & all respect is due for what Kaz HAS achieved, but it certainly would be great if GT continued to evolve & address some of shortcomings, rather than just pile on more & more content.
GT still offers something worthwhile & all respect is due for what Kaz HAS achieved, but it certainly would be great if GT continued to evolve & address some of shortcomings, rather than just pile on more & more content.
- 154
- United Kingdom
- BORDER323
Its great that Bodger is a programmer .... really .. but programming doesn't mean he understands how to run a team in this industry... I however do.
The driver training aid I mentioned earlier , I was the team manager.. basically KAZ .. but on a smaller scale of around 20 guys. I had 2d artists , 3d guys , sound guys , painters , physics guys that I was in charge of and It was my job to delegate the work and produce our vision between the team.
I never once asked a sound person to make models or an engineer to be an artist.. that's just ridiculous
However..what I did do... was
Decide what would be in the sim and what the core aspects were and what my customer wanted.. then decide how we went about it .. and guess what .. we STUCK to the core aspects and did not deviated by making lunar rovers.
We could have decided to make extra things to DAZZLE the client... but that wasn't what we wanted from our sim and we didn't want to waste time making things that were not relevant.
We took our Sim to the 1000kms of Silverstone endurance race where the LMS team we were making it for tested it along with many seriously famous drivers including the late Sean Edwards..Stefan Sarazin / Pedro Lamy / nicholas minasion / Jamie campbell walter.
Here are the proof pics of two of them on the driver training aid Me and my team built
This is not a name dropping bragging post .. .or an im great you lot are fools post.. but more.. I was seriously in to this .. and do have a very real understanding of what is involved with this kind of stuff.. I HAVE created this kind of stuff with a team.
Decisions on what is going to be in the SIM .. and what is not.. and what you can afford to do.. IS a very real parts of game / sim making.
Hopefully now you will understand ... Im not saying Kaz is bad... or not very good at what he does.. or I am better.
I simply do not understand why his simulation..is called the real driving simulator .. and yet it is missing in so many area's, and he continues after 15 years to not add these things.
- 745
- Canada
The gameplay is what makes up a driving game. These days I don't give two damns about a livery editor. A driving game is for driving, haters gonna hate.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
I won't crucify you but I will address some of what you said.
Obvious statements are obvious. The "vision" of anything is that of it's creator. Even if the creator incorporates fan feedback, it's still his "vision" of what he thinks fans really want. Statements about incompetence on the part of Kaz and PD might be hyperbolic but are often backed up by facts and statements that are truthful. If you choose to focus on how a message is delivered, rather than it's content, it's hard to learn anything or see past the hyperbole and see that most criticism's of GT have some basis in truth.
Let's use your online upgrades example and go with what we know at this point. With PD it's often said it's two steps forward and one back. Yes the online has been upgraded and it looks pretty good. More options, more choice, more flexibility. However, at the same time Nitrous has been added to the game and it does not affect PP nor can you keep it out of a lobby through toggle options. So now we have this great system for creating open lobbies but you have to buy a $100,000 upgrade for every car if you want to have a chance to compete and, you have to use a car upgrade which is totally unrealistic for circuit racing. Two steps forward and one back, although I'd argue 3 back.
These two statements are contradictory. The success and legacy of the GT series is based on fanatic loyalty of GT players. Fanatic loyalty brings passion. The bigger the passion, the more entrenched the loyalty, but also the deeper the disappointment, especially when seemingly simple and obvious things (see nitrous above) are overlooked. When we are passionate and loyal about a series it becomes "ours". When we see other series, less prestigious, less successful, less popular, doing things we can only dream of, having features we can only dream of, it's bound to make some people angry, especially if it goes on for years and years.
The best response to PD is not measured criticism, it's anger, bitterness and outright rage. It's people loving a game so much, wanting the series to succeed so intensely, that they get really pissed off when they feel "their" game, "their" developer is dropping the ball. To be able to stoke such negative emotions is actually complimentary to Kaz and PD, and should be taken as a positive, not a negative.
Fans that only partially invested in something leave weak little polite comments like,
"Well done Kaz, great game, I know you are busy so when you get a chance in GT7 or GT8 can you work on the sounds please? Thank you"
Fanatics that really love this series, that really want it to succeed, that are completely invested in it will leave comments like,
"For 🤬 sake Kaz, you've had 15 years to work on the sounds and they are pathetic in GT6. I have loved this series for 15 years but I'm seriously considering not buying this game because the sounds and AI are so 🤬 pathetic".
As someone who has been self-employed most of my life, a customer with the latter feedback, is more valuable to me than the former.
Obvious statements are obvious. The "vision" of anything is that of it's creator. Even if the creator incorporates fan feedback, it's still his "vision" of what he thinks fans really want. Statements about incompetence on the part of Kaz and PD might be hyperbolic but are often backed up by facts and statements that are truthful. If you choose to focus on how a message is delivered, rather than it's content, it's hard to learn anything or see past the hyperbole and see that most criticism's of GT have some basis in truth.
Let's use your online upgrades example and go with what we know at this point. With PD it's often said it's two steps forward and one back. Yes the online has been upgraded and it looks pretty good. More options, more choice, more flexibility. However, at the same time Nitrous has been added to the game and it does not affect PP nor can you keep it out of a lobby through toggle options. So now we have this great system for creating open lobbies but you have to buy a $100,000 upgrade for every car if you want to have a chance to compete and, you have to use a car upgrade which is totally unrealistic for circuit racing. Two steps forward and one back, although I'd argue 3 back.
These two statements are contradictory. The success and legacy of the GT series is based on fanatic loyalty of GT players. Fanatic loyalty brings passion. The bigger the passion, the more entrenched the loyalty, but also the deeper the disappointment, especially when seemingly simple and obvious things (see nitrous above) are overlooked. When we are passionate and loyal about a series it becomes "ours". When we see other series, less prestigious, less successful, less popular, doing things we can only dream of, having features we can only dream of, it's bound to make some people angry, especially if it goes on for years and years.
The best response to PD is not measured criticism, it's anger, bitterness and outright rage. It's people loving a game so much, wanting the series to succeed so intensely, that they get really pissed off when they feel "their" game, "their" developer is dropping the ball. To be able to stoke such negative emotions is actually complimentary to Kaz and PD, and should be taken as a positive, not a negative.
Fans that only partially invested in something leave weak little polite comments like,
"Well done Kaz, great game, I know you are busy so when you get a chance in GT7 or GT8 can you work on the sounds please? Thank you"
Fanatics that really love this series, that really want it to succeed, that are completely invested in it will leave comments like,
"For 🤬 sake Kaz, you've had 15 years to work on the sounds and they are pathetic in GT6. I have loved this series for 15 years but I'm seriously considering not buying this game because the sounds and AI are so 🤬 pathetic".
As someone who has been self-employed most of my life, a customer with the latter feedback, is more valuable to me than the former.
- 5,766
- USA
- TPC_Raccooon23
- CRaccoon23
That's pretty short sighted.
- 6,086
- Simcoeace
All that may be true Johnnypenso, but I think most telling, in the end, is commentary from more objective commentators (like the ISR guys), who can evaluate sim racing games in a somewhat more detached way & clearly see the shortcomings of GT relative to other products out there.
I really have a suspicion that part of this is cultural. In Japan Kaz is a man with great influence & power within the gaming community. It could be that there's nobody he comes into regular contact with who speaks to him critically about GT. They are all "yes-men", overly respectful of his status. I suspect, by contrast, in the dog-eat-dog world of US business, there's a lot more critical thinking exercised by the people around Dan Greenawalt - which results in a more dynamic & responsive approach to the development of their product (Forza).
I really have a suspicion that part of this is cultural. In Japan Kaz is a man with great influence & power within the gaming community. It could be that there's nobody he comes into regular contact with who speaks to him critically about GT. They are all "yes-men", overly respectful of his status. I suspect, by contrast, in the dog-eat-dog world of US business, there's a lot more critical thinking exercised by the people around Dan Greenawalt - which results in a more dynamic & responsive approach to the development of their product (Forza).
- 3,826
Ooooh let me think....oh i know! we're only the people who fund his vision! No one is telling him how to build his game, We're telling him what we would like to be added to it and what would make his product better, We're telling him where his product is lacking, We're also giving him early warning signs that his vision will one day stop being funded by us if its the same ol frusterations and the product isnt up to he standards of the competition, He will have to start upping his game on the ps4 as we will have options then so from that point kaz can ignore the flaws in his product all he wants,
I couldnt careless about kaz and who gets butthurt by hearing the flaws being pointed out, i buy into a product and will evalute each product accordigly and regardless of people viewing kaz as a messiah (which is damn crazy btw) i wont spare his product if it doesnt meat my expectations,
Do you think if ferrari sell a piece of crao that falls apart someone will say "oh well i cant moan as its their vision who am i to tell them to build a better car"?
- 211
- Va
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
👍👍
- 1,973
- Florida - USA
- Flsurffisher
Dull? Until my intro to GT5 I thought Codemasters Grid was the be all/end all. Without the "experience" of GT5 under my belt I probably would have been happy with Grid & NFS. For serious racing and pure driving enjoyment GT is hands down the best out there.
Now I can never play Grid again. I might be able to play NFS for what its designed for "running from the cops".
What do you mean that GT is the Kimi? Kimi is a near great driver who may or may not reach his full potential. I would think you mean Vettle.
- 1,973
- Florida - USA
- Flsurffisher
Similar threads
- Poll
