Demo - Too much simulation, not enough game

[mafia_boy]

Both sides have valid points here.

On one side, jcmc is talking about how the GT Academy TT will scare off people who aren't used to the physics and think that it's too hard for them, blah blah blah, which will affect sales in a way and this may be true. But, I don't know how to put it without sounding too harsh but the harder, the better I say. It's like when people transitioned from GT4 to GT5P....hundreds of people would get on here and complain about the physics being so much harder and that they couldn't get a grip on how to drive the cars in GT5P properly. Most of those same people have changed their tunes because they have become accustomed to the physics now and actually enjoy the game these days...be it in pro or standard physics form, and the same thing has occurred with the transition from GT5P to the GT Academy trial, many people who are/were used to the physics of GT5P are struggling to get to grips with the new physics but given enough time they will enjoy it as much as the people who have already got their heads around the changes. 👍 And the same thing WILL happen when GT5 itself comes out.

On the other, you have R1600Turbo talking about how this is to find out the best person to be able to drive in real life, in a real 370Z in a real racing competition series. This is true, because if you have some person who is complaining about how hard it is in the video game, then how in the hell are they going to be able to control a car that will more than likely have somewhere in the 400-450hp range?? Also, if they crashed the car, are they going to blame the car because "it didn't feel this way when we played the demo"??? If they did, the team owner would more than likely laugh them out of the pit area and tell them to go back to lounge chair racing on PSN. It's designed to bring the best of the best from the living room to the racing seat, so you can't expect it to be a cakewalk to master. It's just like going from a 80hp Escort to a 800hp Supra in real life, even if you're a master at driving the Escort, you are not going to master the Supra straightaway and more than likely punt it into the nearest barrier because you aren't used to the changes in performance and the mannerisms of the cars.

But if you look at the leaderboards, a lot of GTP registry drivers who are good at GT5P (ie. D1 Gold or Silver) are at or near the top of the charts, so the changes can't be too bad because those same people took the time to master GT5P and are doing so with the Time Trial.

 

[darkblu]

I didn't say anything of the sort. If you read my posts what I did say was that the Academy should not have been the FIRST GT5 related demo to be released.

it wasn't the first gt5 demo released. there've been both free and paid gt5 demos. if you looked around in a game store today you might be able to spot one.

There's no reason it has to be now anyway, they can run something like that anytime, it;s a pretty niche thing.

if it's anytime why is now not a good time? also, have you considered that PD may not see the need to prove the arcadness of their game, but on the opposite - they may see the need to prove their position as a sim? people know that GT5, like every GT before that, will have an arcady side. we know it, the market knows it. and PD are well aware of that.

That's not much of an argument. A cursory glance at the car gaming market out there throws up big selling titles like Burnout and Need for Speed which are wholly mass market titles. Even so called simulations like Forza are pretty arcadey and accessible. Don't you think that market research has told all these publishers why their games have to appeal in some form to the mass market, when your dev costs are so steep you cannot afford to make niche games these days or you won't be making anymore subsequently.

apparently PD & sony think their game will appeal to a wide-enough market so it would meet their bottomline. all said and done, i'm willing to bet that by the end of the generation GT will have sold more than either burnout or NFS.

again, you can either argue that PD should aim for the broadest market (btw, burnout, nfs an forza do not hold a candle in revenue to the racer of the generation so far - 18.36M MKWii copies sold as of sep '09), or you have to admit that they're aiming for something more focused, in which case, unless you know what market they're aiming for (i.e. you have their marketing research data) you're speculating based on your own limited ideas of the market (not trying to offend you here, just making an observation).

 

[kayman]

I love the updated physics of this demo as well. Good improvement over Prologue. (Graphically/visually, it's different story).

That being said, to those people who say this is *not* the demo of GT5.. you're *probably* right. However, you guys are making a groundless statement.

To be clear, when you start up this GT5 Time Trial Demo.. it says..

It's the latest official words from Polyphony. How more official could it be? So, until PD updates us further, this demo is a good indication of what is coming. This should be regarded as THE demo of GT5 for time being.

May i refer you to https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showpost.php?p=3685843&postcount=40

 

[long5056]

I hope they aren't using this to try to sell the game.
However my love was rekindled after a CAREFUL evaluation of the Demo. Face it GT has a rock steady base of fans and that fan base WILL continue to grow because people love quality and PD always provides it. Even newbie teenagers will fall in love with GT5, cause they have the skill to play well and they have the same thing inside that brought the old dogs to GT1 back in the day (when they were teens).
Too many demos seem alike today whether dirt2, shift, grid etc etc etc. throwing the junk up on the screen....kudos to PD for seperating themselves from all that! lol

 

[killanite]

PD aren't trying to sell games with this demo, Theyre trying to find contestants for GT academy .. GT academy is a very serious competition requiring skill from those who partake in it, you can't make a competition where any casual gamer can pick it up and come up the rankings, that's not it's purpose.

Plus I think GT academy provides more publicity for GT than any demo ever would. What other game provides that oppertunity to be a racing driver let alone anything?
People would see GT academy and go : WOW, "Playing this game can make me an actual racing driver", rather than saying "OMG, I JUST WANT TO DO DOHNUTS AND CRASH INTO A WALL, WHY IS THIS TIME TRAIL SO NOT FUN, WHERE ARE ALL THE PEDESTRIANS I CAN RUN OVER?"

 

[Dravonic]

Having spent 5 or so frustrating days slipping and sliding around the demo tracks in 2 different but equally hard to master cars, as impressed as I am by many under the bonnet elements of this demo I can't help feeling that this is a very poor marketing move to make this the first broadly available public demo of the game.

With the huge wait and enormous expectation for the game, first sight of it breaking cover was going to be so important for Polyphony & Sony to get strategically right. I think they've made a serious error of judgement.

GT brands itself as the real driving simulator and boy have they gone to town in proving this in the demo. The question is, do most people play with pro-physics - no, it may be real and all but for a great number of people - and GT needs to be a game that pitches itself to the wider masses rather than just a hardcore audience - it's bloody hard work and a pretty frustrating experience. Do race tuned cars slide about at 50mph coming out of a corner on racing tyres like bambi on ice ? They may well do but that reality does not pander to likely perceived expectation that they shouldn't.

A first playable demo should an inclusive thing - about fast, chuckable cars running high speed laps at 60fps on beautiful looking tracks designed to make people go wow. There's some hardcore wow for people admiring the complex physics, but come on, a single lowish speed, slippery car on a bland, non-descript track like Indianapolis. To do any justice to it you need a wheel peripheral which the majority of potential customers don't have. How inclusive and welcoming is that ?

Everyone on this site like myself will buy GT5 anyway, but what about the floating gamers who try out the demo to see it it draws them in. It's one of the least accessible and punishing game demos I have ever played, I think it will turn a lot of people off if they think that is symbolic of the games approach which is a shame.

Of course there is a time and a place for such demos as this one, I just think that time and place should have been later when at least most people would come to it knowing that GT5 will also be fun rather than the bone dry simulation replica that this demo suggests.

I have to agree. I can see a lot of people who were interested in the game downloading this demo and never wanting to hear about GT5 again. Certainly a bad move.

A lot of the confusion could be cleared if PD weren't so scared to open their mouths and let everyone know that the game will have easier settings.

I'm aware that this is for the GT academy, but it could be a regular demo (with everything we wanted to see, like damage, the easier settings for the casuals, etc...) with the GT academy competition inside. Would work both ways and prevent the bad first impressions quite a lot of people had and that we all can see in this and other forums.

 

[WolfRacer543]

i'm willing to bet that by the end of the generation GT will have sold more than either burnout or NFS.

I'm willing to bet they'll sell more than the current burnout or NFS SHIFT, but I doubt they'll sell more than the 4 or 5 Burnout games and the 5 or 6 NFS games that have been released this generation

 

[Nsane1]

Well, this is going to be an interesting first post. LOL Plz, don't take this post as how I am as a person I usually am a nice guy. Ok, on with the b!tchfest...

Here's the deal, I wish all the people that complain about not seeing skid marks, "this SIMULATOR is too realistic", and all the other complaints would just stay with NFS and Grid.
Here's the fact, I wish GT would make GT5 only be able to be played in professional physics with all helpers like traction control, stability control, and brake assist never to be seen again. I was kind of disappointed that they now have a driving line option. I will never turn this on and wish it wasn't in the game.
This is supposed to be a simulator. Do you really think when you get in a real car that your going to have a cool line that shows you everything your supposed to do. Also, as far as the physics I absolutely love them. In a real car you will not have a fast lap time if all you do is try to drift corners. I am an avid SCCA member and love racing in real life. I am glad they are trying to make GT's physics as real to life as possible. All the people that would rather spend precious processor room on skid marks and smoke shouldn't even be playing this game. Granted it would be nice to have, but it is no where near a top priority for me. I am just super happy they are finally penalizing people who thing in a 500 hp "tuned" car with race tires that you can just hammer the gas or brake in a corner and expect it to hook. It's kind of a slap in the face of professional drivers to think that is all they do. Anyways, sorry for the first post rant but I love GT for it's constant goal of realism and they're strive to get as close to it as possible on a video game. These comments that we all hear all the time is just a slap in the face of the creators who are trying to make something special. Oh, and I don't have a steering wheel yet so I do use the controller. My own fastest time with it is a 1'38.654 and ranked 422. If you don't think that's anything, the number 6 guy on the leaderboards, R1600Turbo has a lap time of 1'36.442 and he's using a controller. So, it can be done, you just have to actually have a little skill. It's nice that a video game finally is difficult and requires skill.
Ok, I'm really done now. lol
Oh, and I do like playing NFS and Grid, they're good games, just not simulators.

 

[RedBaron]

Here's the deal, I wish all the people that complain about not seeing skid marks, "this SIMULATOR is too realistic", and all the other complaints would just stay with NFS and Grid.

Again and again. There are many people that don't want to dumb the simulation, but to CORRECT it to be more real actually.

 

[NLxAROSA]

But if you look at the leaderboards, a lot of GTP registry drivers who are good at GT5P (ie. D1 Gold or Silver) are at or near the top of the charts, so the changes can't be too bad because those same people took the time to master GT5P and are doing so with the Time Trial.

I think you pretty much nailed it there. The same applies to lower division racers though, I'm usually at 3-5 seconds per lap behind the fastest guys in GT5P. And guess what? After getting used to the track/car, I am once again 3-5 seconds behind the fastest guys. So even the slower racers have no excuse for not adapting.
Adapt, and enjoy the GT Academy Time Trial for what it is, or don't, and annoy yourself.

 

[TokyoDrift]

Edit : Responding to R1600 Turbo


Which bit did you not understand and I'll explain it again with even simpler words.

I KNOW what it is, i KNOW who it is aimed at but there are masses of people who are going to take a look as it is the first time anything GT5 specific has come out in 3 or so years of development. They will make assumptions based around this hardest of hardcore experiences.

And this demo is not what you want to show the mass market if you want to reassure them that GT5 is a game they must buy.

Now you might not agree but repeat it back to me so at least I know you understand.

It's not worth it dude - I know exactly what you mean, and have conceded to the difficulty of it, but you are absolutely right. Regardless of who this is aimed at, the fact is that anybody interested in Gran Turismo in any capacity is likely to download this time trial, and they are going to get a shock, just like I did. This will, without doubt, be doing harm to their image, which is why I'm expecting some damage control sooner rather than later regarding the final game and how it will have more mass-appeal.

 

[Strittan]

Again and again. There are many people that don't want to dumb the simulation, but to CORRECT it to be more real actually.

I'm one of them.

Although I'm using the sixaxis I think the physics feels very, very accurate! However, I wouldn't mind at all if it was possible to make it 50 times more realistic from what it already is, even if it meant it would at the same time get 50 times more difficult!

What I'm saying is that we can't get too much realism in my opinion!

 

[xpfloyd]

I couldnt agree more with jcmc.

I think a few people who have replied are missing the point. I was thinking that perhaps this should only have been playable if you had the GT5P disc in the drive. Then at least PD would be sure that only people who know what its all about and have purchased GT5P will be playing the free time trial for purposes of finding an academy driver.

If they had then wanted to broaden their market to people who may not have discovered GT yet they could have released a free to all demo with standard physics (so anyone can play fairly easily) with pretty tracks etc.

 

[Sturdy]

I'm inclined to agree with jcmc as well.

The thing is, no matter how much we understand that it's meant to be realistic as it's for GT Academy, Joe Schmo won't. I think those who expect the 'Average User' to understand that this is not strictly a demo are underestimating just how stupid the 'Average User' is.

They will see this as the demo of GT5, and they'll be greeted with a couple of similar cars, and a visually very plain track. On top of that, they'll be using a controller, they'll find it very hard to drive and if they do stick with it long enough to do a whole lap, they'll then see that they're 20 seconds off the top times anyway, and they'll never play it again.

Now it's all very well to say good, get rid of these sorts of people (it'll certainly improve online multiplayer ), but part of jcmc's point was that it is unusual from a marketing point of view to do something that will turn customers away...

Sony are in the business of making money, they want to sell copies of GT5. Thus it's strange to release a very limited, and very difficult 'demo' to the masses that will most probably turn a lot of people away from the series. Especially when they could presumably quite easily turn out a much friendlier demo that would turn less people away, and may well attract some new customers as well.

Just to confirm, I know we realise it's not a demo, but the 'Average User' won't...

 

[mr_VOLCANO]

If less people buy gt5 cause its to “sim“ then im a happy camper. Less punters online..

 

[xpfloyd]

yeah the online "ramming" gets annoying fairly quick

 

[kayman]

If less people buy gt5 cause its to “sim“ then im a happy camper. Less punters online..

Yes please.

Hopefully everyone complaining its too sim-like, and do actually buy the game will stick to the standard physics with all the punters and wall-slappers.

 

[Sele1981]

GT will sell, even if it will become the worst game in 2010... so don´t worry...

 

[RedBaron]

I don't worry about sales at all, but about all obvious imperfections that are still alive after 10 years of GT and that are starting to deal this forum into two camps because of some intollerancy. One camp is screaming about them on every corner and the second camp is pretending they don't even see them in simillar manner like PD. Decent discussion is slowly becoming impossible as the release date comes and nerves do their work.

 

[jcmc]

Picking up on a few points, mainly those from darkblu.

it wasn't the first gt5 demo released. there've been both free and paid gt5 demos. if you looked around in a game store today you might be able to spot one.

Surely you are not trying to say that 2 year old GT5 Prologue is a paid demo ? And what are the free ones. I'm only aware of things they have done for game shows which are hardly public demos in the sense we are discussing.

if it's anytime why is now not a good time? also, have you considered that PD may not see the need to prove the arcadness of their game, but on the opposite - they may see the need to prove their position as a sim? people know that GT5, like every GT before that, will have an arcady side. we know it, the market knows it. and PD are well aware of that.

Hmm. For the reasons I have expounded a number of times at length on this thread.

apparently PD & sony think their game will appeal to a wide-enough market so it would meet their bottomline. all said and done, i'm willing to bet that by the end of the generation GT will have sold more than either burnout or NFS.

A later post summed it up well, these other brands will have shipped numerous iterations of their titles in the same time it takes PD to do one. The game that sells the most copies is not the most profitable and console games have a higher break even figure than PC games because of the licence fee they have to pay the console manufacturers. Add in 3+ years of development, a lot of bespoke technology and a huge team of 15-200 people and you need to sell many millions just to cover your costs. Your NFS and Burnout games will be made roughly yearly with sub 100 man teams and technology that is shared across their publishers group.

Let's remember that GT built its brand weight on the strength of being a wholly accessible game, not the sort of hardcore sim you and some others are advocating this next one should be.

again, you can either argue that PD should aim for the broadest market (btw, burnout, nfs an forza do not hold a candle in revenue to the racer of the generation so far - 18.36M MKWii copies sold as of sep '09), or you have to admit that they're aiming for something more focused, in which case, unless you know what market they're aiming for (i.e. you have their marketing research data) you're speculating based on your own limited ideas of the market (not trying to offend you here, just making an observation).

Well, as above firstly. You talk about them making it more focused so why then are they putting in WRC and NASCAR if it's not to broaden out the appeal of a mass market game. GT does not sell especially well in the US compared with the rest of the world, again from my own knowledge of driving game market research from working on major car games (where does your knowledge derive from incidentally) here the bottom line is that the American market doesn't do corners. A simplistic generalisation, but an absolute truism. That's why rally for instance will never garner the slightest interest for Americans. If the mountain won't come to Mohammed etc.

There have been a few deliberately obtuse comments about how if more mass market players are scared away there will be less punters online. I think this misses the point totally. One of the great things about Prologue is that you can go online and find matches nearly 2 years down the line, why would you want to have less people who might even go online in GT5 ?

The problem of punting is a gaming design one and not a numbers of players one and PD have had a couple of years of Prologue to work out how best to do it. Private rooms will help, perhaps licence tests to pass before you can play some of the higher powered races, a ranking system that matches you with people of a similar skill..... there are a lot of options for PD to explore but discouraging people from being there in the first place is not one of them.

 

[kayman]

I don't worry about sales at all, but about all obvious imperfections that are still alive after 10 years of GT and that are starting to deal this forum into two camps because of some intollerancy. One camp is screaming about them on every corner and the second camp is pretending they don't even see them in simillar manner like PD. Decent discussion is slowly becoming impossible as the release date comes and nerves do their work.

yet when the game comes, both camps will buy and and deal with it and love it.

and frankly those that dont like it (when it comes out) can b*tch and moan all they like, but the fact is no-one else will hear them because they will all be too busy playing GT5.

 

[kikie]

Am i the only one happy about this thread? "To much simulation" Thats an extremely good thing in my eyes.

I mark this day down in my calender where some one has said GT has to much simulation.

+1
I hope that the new physics of this TT competition demo will be included in the final version. I haven't played it but from what I've read so far, it sounds very promising. A simulation based physics in GT is what I have been waiting for all these years.

Simulation is a horribly misused word in gaming. Too many people slavishly hold it to mean utter realism in every possible facet which is patently daft. It can of course aim to be broadly realistic but at the end of the day it's a game and it has to be fun first and foremost.

Have you ever come to think of this; some people consider a hardcore simulation "game" to be fun.


Just trying to help but can you please use the Quote button. It's difficult to see when you're quoting someone and when not.

 

[jcmc]

Let me emphasise that at no stage have I criticised people who like or want GT5 to be hardcore - although there is an issue that each of you would have your unique take on what that actually means and might not be happy if it did not tick every one of your individual boxes which would be impossible.

But basic economic sense suggests that PD primarily need to get the more accessible, mass market bit right as that is where the majority of their sales will come to justify their enormous dev costs. They know the hardcore people like a lot on folks on this forum will buy it anyway, it's the people who in difficult economic times might need a bit more convincing that they should spend £ 45 odds on this. Demos are their main way to convince.

 

[xpfloyd]

Well, this is going to be an interesting first post. LOL Plz, don't take this post as how I am as a person I usually am a nice guy. Ok, on with the b!tchfest...

Here's the deal, I wish all the people that complain about not seeing skid marks, "this SIMULATOR is too realistic", and all the other complaints would just stay with NFS and Grid.
Here's the fact, I wish GT would make GT5 only be able to be played in professional physics with all helpers like traction control, stability control, and brake assist never to be seen again. I was kind of disappointed that they now have a driving line option. I will never turn this on and wish it wasn't in the game.
This is supposed to be a simulator. Do you really think when you get in a real car that your going to have a cool line that shows you everything your supposed to do. Also, as far as the physics I absolutely love them. In a real car you will not have a fast lap time if all you do is try to drift corners. I am an avid SCCA member and love racing in real life. I am glad they are trying to make GT's physics as real to life as possible. All the people that would rather spend precious processor room on skid marks and smoke shouldn't even be playing this game. Granted it would be nice to have, but it is no where near a top priority for me. I am just super happy they are finally penalizing people who thing in a 500 hp "tuned" car with race tires that you can just hammer the gas or brake in a corner and expect it to hook. It's kind of a slap in the face of professional drivers to think that is all they do. Anyways, sorry for the first post rant but I love GT for it's constant goal of realism and they're strive to get as close to it as possible on a video game. These comments that we all hear all the time is just a slap in the face of the creators who are trying to make something special. Oh, and I don't have a steering wheel yet so I do use the controller. My own fastest time with it is a 1'38.654 and ranked 422. If you don't think that's anything, the number 6 guy on the leaderboards, R1600Turbo has a lap time of 1'36.442 and he's using a controller. So, it can be done, you just have to actually have a little skill. It's nice that a video game finally is difficult and requires skill.
Ok, I'm really done now. lol
Oh, and I do like playing NFS and Grid, they're good games, just not simulators.

To make it professional physics only would be slashing their target market considerably. If it was as realistic and hard as we all want it on here you have wiped out all the people that dont take it as serious as many on here and just want a thrash about in some nice cars. Agreed there are other games that give this experience but why would PD not compete with them and make that an option if you wanted it.

As for the driving line that also helps beginners/small children/ old people etc etc etc (sweeping generalisations I know) learn how to corner properly and race properly if they dont know already.

Any future GT full editions will never be released with no option for standard physics etc as it would simply cut PD's sales and they wouldnt do that to theirselves

 

[eddietrout]

Not sure how many times I have to say this, so I'll say it again.

This demo is NOT for the every day Joe Schmo. This demo is a hard core, bare bones sample of the new physics, designed to do one thing, and one thing only. Find participants for the next GT Academy. End of story. Sheesh.

Edit: and this belongs in the GT5 time trial section.

i dont agree with you there turbo you will always get best lap times from the best drivers no mater what the physics of a car. you try beating alang on SCC with default setup in any car or track your in for 2nd place for sure.

 

[Duke]

i dont agree with you there turbo you will always get best lap times from the best drivers no mater what the physics of a car. you try beating alang on SCC with default setup in any car or track your in for 2nd place for sure.

Hello, and welcome to GTPlanet.

Please use proper spelling, capitals, and punctuation when posting here at GTPlanet. Not only does it make reading easier for our non-native English users, but it improves the general quality of GTP immensely.

Thank you.

 

[JasBird]

Firstly I want to say I haven't played GT5P or demo. Getting a PS3 when GT5 is finished.

I think GT is such a strong brand today that they are in a position to do what they want. It will sell no matter what. PD seems to wanna move more towards the sim experience, which is good for us sim fans.

Reading the forums it seems to be that there are 2 discussions going on here. The physics and the feel. As far as I can tell, people are more happy with the physics and less with the feel. Not getting enough feedback from the car on the limit, etc. I'm sure that must very difficult to get right.

Maybe that's the reason people find it more difficult, because it needs improvment on feedback to player?

 

[darkblu]

Surely you are not trying to say that 2 year old GT5 Prologue is a paid demo ?

Surely you're not trying to say that Prologue is a proper GT installment? And it does not matter how old it is - if it gives a fair taste of the final product and is generally the vehicle by which PD have been promoting their final product, then it is the proverbial demo of said final product.

And what are the free ones. I'm only aware of things they have done for game shows which are hardly public demos in the sense we are discussing.

The free ones were circulating on PSN along with Prologue. Alas, not anymore. Not on the NA store, anyway. Prologue remains now the only means to get a full-bodied taste of the upcoming game.

if it's anytime why is now not a good time? also, have you considered that PD may not see the need to prove the arcadness of their game, but on the opposite - they may see the need to prove their position as a sim? people know that GT5, like every GT before that, will have an arcady side. we know it, the market knows it. and PD are well aware of that.

Hmm. For the reasons I have expounded a number of times at length on this thread.

Then I'll have to ask you to repeat (or refer me to where you did that originally): could you, please, explain why PD should be concerned with proving the arcadeness of the GT series, and not its simulation standing?

A later post summed it up well, these other brands will have shipped numerous iterations of their titles in the same time it takes PD to do one. The game that sells the most copies is not the most profitable and console games have a higher break even figure than PC games because of the licence fee they have to pay the console manufacturers. Add in 3+ years of development, a lot of bespoke technology and a huge team of 15-200 people and you need to sell many millions just to cover your costs. Your NFS and Burnout games will be made roughly yearly with sub 100 man teams and technology that is shared across their publishers group.

Sorry, are you suggesting that GT should become yet another NFS? With 4+ iterations in the span of a single console generation? Perhaps go multiplatform? With all the consequences for the franchise stemming from that? You surely must be aware of the reputation that PD have built up with their franchise?

Let's remember that GT built its brand weight on the strength of being a wholly accessible game, not the sort of hardcore sim you and some others are advocating this next one should be.

The only people touting how much of a hardcore-only sim the next GT will be are those who for some reason found TT's pro physics intimidating (I'm not among those). But as much as their egos may have been hurt this one time, their fears are unfounded: the next GT will not be a strictly hardcore sim, unless it ships with all simulation settings set in the 'pro' end of the spectrum. Which I sincerely doubt. Perhaps you think otherwise?

Well, as above firstly. You talk about them making it more focused so why then are they putting in WRC and NASCAR if it's not to broaden out the appeal of a mass market game.

Broadening your market =/= appeal to mass market. If Ferrari released a new entry level spyder this year, that does not mean they are competing for the Toyota Camry market all of a sudden.

GT does not sell especially well in the US compared with the rest of the world, again from my own knowledge of driving game market research from working on major car games (where does your knowledge derive from incidentally) here the bottom line is that the American market doesn't do corners. A simplistic generalisation, but an absolute truism. That's why rally for instance will never garner the slightest interest for Americans. If the mountain won't come to Mohammed etc.

Sorry, I don't claim to have such marketing knowledge (I know who has, though). I do claim GT have a certain marketing image and that one is not of a hardcore driving sim (where we seem to agree). Their image is one of meticulous attention to details in their work, and of being the one computer entertainment product emblematic for the car industry. Them extending their licenses outside of the GT domain is a natural step. By that they clearly hope to apply their PD reputation in those new 'sub-genres', not change their reputation per se.

Aporpos, which driving games have you worked on (just curious)?

 

[carcoll13]

As with everyone I know, EVEN my girlfriend.. the more simulations, the more fun.

I don't think the "demo" was quite simulation enough, though I think it will be in the full game.. but never have I been so excited for Gran Turismo (I started with GT1 on release) since I played the TT.

GT has always been a simulator, but now with the Ps3, Kaz's vision can be put into the game that much more.. and he says what is it.. he wants to make the most realistic driving simulator?

It seems he is doing exactly what he's always said, people should expect this from GT by now, people also expect driving aids and "standard" physics for the less hardcore who, in my experience, switch to "professional" physics over time.

NFS Shift is out there for the more casual, while GT5 seems to be more along the lines of PC sim quality physics and its about time.

Why, OP, do you care about the sales and new GT'ers buying the game so much?

I know I'm hoping for the fullest racing sim to date but I'm sure we won't control our car during yellow flag laps, warm-up laps, coming into and out of the pits, tires coming off the car - and I could go on, and I can also hope some of those features are in the game - as an option perhaps?

 

[Masi_23]

I want GT to stay hardcore, if i want a game, ill play Dirt or NFS Shift.