Give us better sounds - PLEASE !!

[omgsean1]

Wait, so the BMW Z4 GT3 car...might actully sound like this on release:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AT-jOkjf28

What??? I mean...holy crap. That is bad. I have very little hope faith GT6 will see an update to the sound. And even if it did, what says it will be any good? Especially considering someone thought that Z4 sounds okay. It feels like PD is just trying to string you along. I would LOVE it if PD at least showed an example of their progress with the new sounds.

That's just placeholder sound because BMW Z4 GT3's V8 sound is not done yet till we should have chance to listen, but I don't interest in sound anymore for now.

 

[KinLM]

*snip*

Oh no I still think it's too long to wait, don't get me wrong.

But I'm not getting mad about it like many on here are.

The sounds are taking far too long, the current sounds are rubbish, the new ones may be terrible as well. There's also a good chance that we won't see any difference until GT7.


But Im not gonna get mad about it. What I'm saying is, it wouldn't make a difference if I got mad or not, the sounds will be improved when they are improved.

It's not like PD is unaware of how much we want sounds fixed. They clearly do.

But us getting mad about it at this point isn't going to make them come any sooner.

They will be fixed just the same if I get upset as if I just say, "Meh, at least we may get them in an update." Getting mad doesn't help.

Now, if I were to not buy the game, that may change things. Maybe.

We don't know that they aren't working as hard on sounds as they can. If they couldn't finish GT5 in 5 years then it's clear that they aren't the fastest working company out there.

If that's the case then nothing we do will make the sounds come faster so I don't see why people are getting so upset.

At least they're telling us that it's a possibility that they may be fixed in an update. Most developers wouldn't fix it until the next game, we're actually fortunate that PD are willing to change so much in the games via updates.

Is that to say that I'm not upset that they won't be fixed from day 1? Heck no! They've taken far too long already and I am a bit disappointed. But my point is getting mad wont fix things.

Considering nothing I do will most likely change when we get new sounds, I'd much rather look at the positives of us possibly getting them in an update versus getting angry on here about them not being ready yet.

And as I already said, if anybody is that disappointed that we won't get them from day 1, just don't buy the game. There's plenty others on the market. It's not worth being so upset over faults in a video game.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Do remember that between GT4 and GT5, PD developed Turist Trophy, GT HD, GT: Prologue and GT PSP. So saying GT5 took five years(actually, it's six, 2004-2010) is right, but can't really be compared to GT6 development time of three years.

This has been argued up and down and shown exactly why that mentality is wrong. Also I was being generous in saying 5 I could have really said 9 since they did have a hype about starting four year prior in the 2006 Electronic Expo and were trying to add every car in the world. As for all of this, PSP is the only game that could possibly be argued as a potential kink during GT5 development. GTHD, Prologue were early parts to what we got in GT5 and features in those were actually cut from the final product but good try on trying to make them seem stretched. As for TT that was GT4 with bikes if you weren't aware, and that Development started prior to GT5's.

GT5 was delayed once, and only by a couple of days.

It was slated to be released early March in 2010, Sony made the claim the game was coming out in 2009 and Kaz also made claim that would happen in a 2008 interview but instead saying late 09. I could go on for you if you'd like including the delay you just said...

what you said

I'd question exactly how hard when they've made comments that contradict what the users think. I do agree with you still that we probably wont speed up anything.

 

[KinLM]

This has been argued up and down and shown exactly why that mentality is wrong. Also I was being generous in saying 5 I could have really said 9 since they did have a hype about starting four year prior in the 2006 Electronic Expo and were trying to add every car in the world. As for all of this, PSP is the only game that could possibly be argued as a potential kink during GT5 development. GTHD, Prologue were early parts to what we got in GT5 and features in those were actually cut from the final product but good try on trying to make them seem stretched. As for TT that was GT4 with bikes if you weren't aware, and that Development started prior to GT5's.

It was slated to be released early March in 2010, Sony made the claim the game was coming out in 2009 and Kaz also made claim that would happen in a 2008 interview but instead saying late 09. I could go on for you if you'd like including the delay you just said...

I'd question exactly how hard when they've made comments that contradict what the users think. I do agree with you still that we probably wont speed up anything.

Im definitely questioning it as well. They could easily be working as hard as possible or they could just be lying to us, because my GOD is it taking a long time! But yes, as we've both agreed, most likely anything we do won't change when we get the sounds, and as such I'd rather look forward to the possibility of getting them soon than dwelling on us not having them by December 6th. 👍

 

[Raggadish]

As for all of this, PSP is the only game that could possibly be argued as a potential kink during GT5 development. GTHD, Prologue were early parts to what we got in GT5 and features in those were actually cut from the final product but good try on trying to make them seem stretched. As for TT that was GT4 with bikes if you weren't aware, and that Development started prior to GT5's.

Are you saying GT HD, Prologue and GTPSP didn't have an effect on GT5s developement? Because I'm saying, all these projects DID take away manpower from GT5s developement, and that was (partially)the cause for the 6 year long wait.

It was slated to be released early March in 2010, Sony made the claim the game was coming out in 2009 and Kaz also made claim that would happen in a 2008 interview but instead saying late 09. I could go on for you if you'd like including the delay you just said...

Please point me to where I can read that GT5 was announced officially to be available at those dates. Maybe I'm wrong, but as far as I know, GT5 was officially announced to be released only one time. Anything else isn't really considered being delayed, since the game didn't have a set release date.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Are you saying GT HD, Prologue and GTPSP didn't have an effect on GT5s developement? Because I'm saying, all these projects DID take away manpower from GT5s developement, and that was (partially)the cause for the 6 year long wait.

That would be what I was saying if you didn't read what I said and are just shooting from the hip, which is what you seem to be doing. Read it again and then comment, cause you clearly didn't read it.

Please point me to where I can read that GT5 was announced officially to be available at those dates. Maybe I'm wrong, but as far as I know, GT5 was only officially announced to be released only one time.

Wait, so it only counts if it was given an official banner and what not? I know for sure that GT5 was officially set for March 2010 in Japan with a release in other regions for April, go google it and you'll see. Also when a group that supports and is the platform (only one) for a game and the actual boss and leader of the company that makes the game says it will be released in a certain time frame then we can't take that as an official timeline for release. The same interviews a year later in 09 said the game would be released in Japan official in Q1/March, then a later interview said the holiday season of 2010. Since these are said before official advertising what do you suggest we take seriously and not seriously?

This seems like plenty of excuse to give PD a pass when they really don't deserve it.

 

[Raggadish]

That would be what I was saying if you didn't read what I said and are just shooting from the hip, which is what you seem to be doing. Read it again and then comment, cause you clearly didn't read it.

Then you know nothing about how game development works and make your argument weak.

Wait, so it only counts if it was given an official banner and what not?

Indeed.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Then you know nothing about how game development works and make your argument weak.

Is there a language gap that you seem to be missing. Perhaps you can't tell that I'm being sarcastic. So let me dumb it down for you. As I said and others have as well, GTHD was GT5 and then reworked with many features being kept, but items like bikes being taken out. GT5P is also GT5 just like any other prolouge game PD has put out as being something players can buy to see how the final game will be and expect improvements. However, features in that were taken out and not allowed in GT5 like transfer of data from P to GT5. Or the leader boards that we saw in P but not in GT5 final.

I'll bold this part so it sticks out I suggest you read it a couple times because your back peddling is the true weakness here.

The GTPSP is the only game though there is some info that suggest not fully, that PD had to divert attention away from GT5 for that game. Thus as I said prior the only game I can see harming GT5 was the PSP version. The other games were carry over to the final project and not seperate projects as you suggest. If you can't get over your BIAS for trying to support PD's lack of a true time line and QC (quality control since you don't understand), you have not business to argue this objectively in a fact basis.

Indeed.

Says who exactly? Perhaps you didn't get it, every time the actual source states when their product will be released should be counted as an official timeline since it came from the actual producers. An official banner hardly means anything because that doesn't obligate a company to stick to it as was proven when PD moved to official releases March and early November. Perhaps you should learn to argue reality better, before you put your GT dogmatic rhetoric on the boards and pass off as facts, read the AUP.

 

[Raggadish]

Perhaps you can't tell that I'm being sarcastic. So let me dumb it down for you.

I guess you coming on strong didn't occur to me as being sarcastic.

The other games were carry over to the final project and not seperate projects as you suggest.

Sorry to be blunt, but you don't know much about game development. The physics wasn't straight carried over from GT5 to GT5. GT HD and GT5 UI didn't transfer over, same for end user server functionallity. And add to that - debugging and finalizing the master disc and you have a game that takes a certain amount of employees working on stuff that was NOT in GT5. Alot of things in GT5 were derivatives of stuff GTHD and GT5 though.

You would have an argument if you were talking about the content alone (cars, tracks).

An official banner hardly means anything because that doesn't obligate a company to stick to it as was proven when PD moved to official releases March and early November. Perhaps you should learn to argue reality better, before you put your GT dogmatic rhetoric on the boards and pass off as facts, read the AUP.

English isn't my first languange but even I know the difference between officially announce(formal) and indicate(informal) something. No offence.

And cut the attitude, please.

 

[wowbaggerBR]

It's not even a glass half full analogy. The glass is in the other room and you can't see it and Kaz is standing in the doorway saying, "There might be a glass in the next room, it's possible, and it might be half full, or it might not. I might fill it in the next year or two, or I might wait until the next game to do it, technically I can do either. Now go and buy that glass of water"

It's politicospeak. It means nothing at all. When you tear it down logically, he committed to nothing, promised nothing, and revealed nothing we didn't already know. In other words, he said nothing. I don't include acknowledging the sound issue as something because millions of others can see it's an issue, it's not like it's a revelation of any kind, it's just stating the obvious.

This.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Sorry to be blunt, but you don't know much about game development. The physics wasn't straight carried over from GT5 to GT5. GT HD and GT5 UI didn't transfer over, same for end user server functionallity. And add to that - debugging and finalizing the master disc and you have a game that takes a certain amount of employees working on stuff that was NOT in GT5.

You would have an argument if you were talking about the content alone.


And cut the atitude, please.

I'm being blunt, also I never specified what was carry over and not and if you paid attention there wouldn't be much argument for the content area, since they cut out motorcycles from GTHD to the GT5 transition. GTHD was what GT5 was planned to be and then it was reworked as I said, which is a multitude of things like physics and so on. GT5P as I also said is a glimpse at the final game including physics and other items, but as I said and could be inferred that is also subject to change but has real world carry over.

Also unless you work for PD and wish to contradict what they said then you are the one without a clue. I have attitude (more so bluntness) due to the fact that you come in here spouting and then making a claim about me, when I know quite well what I'm talking about.

Kazunori Yamauchi stated: "Gran Turismo 5 will adopt most of the planned features of Gran Turismo HD...We are hoping to present [...] several Concept versions, each loaded with various experimental features" That makes Gran Turismo 5 Prologue the first title of this planned experimental series since it is dedicated to online playing feature.

This is obviously done to not lose time on GT5 as you wish to suggest.

EDIT:

Obviously you don't know what you're talking about. Once again there is no actual formal deadline or informal because either way such deadlines were blown as I've pointed out on both end. The only reason you wish to count some over others while most count all like I do on this forum, is because it saves face for PD. So how can you call it official or unofficial when they are treated by the company in very same fashion. Also these were speculative, from groups these were quoted announcements by the company themselves, thus when they didn't make that time frame it was pushed back, which is why it is called a delay.

 

[Chippy569]

Sorry to be blunt, but you don't know much about game development.

where do you work?

 

[C_Raccoon23]

GT5 was delayed once, and only by a couple of days.

It was delayed more than once. And certainly for a lot longer than a couple days.

 

[Raggadish]

also I never specified what was carry over and not GTHD

No, and I never said you did either. I was mearly giving you examples of things that did not carry over and PD undoubtly had to assign a certain part of their workforce to implement, thus PD not being at full capacity working on GT5 since those things (UI, debugging,ect) was not part of GT5.

This is obviously done to not lose time on GT5

True, but again, certain things in GT HD and GT5 required resources working on things that were not transferable to GT5 and therefore meant the things PD did during 2004-2009 wasn't going into GT5.

Obviously you don't know what you're talking about. Once again there is no actual formal deadline

There is the post on the official blog detailing the releasedate. Formal:
http://au.playstation.com/ps3/news/...230/GT5-release-date-confirmed-for-Australia/

Informal: Kaz saying he wished to have GT5 out for end of 2009, or something to that extent. And anything being missed doesn't make them un-official or un-ininformal.

So how can you call it official or unofficial when they are treated by the company in very same fashion.

But they are not. I challenge you to find a any Sony official medium announcing GT5s releasedate prior to the one they made officially on GT's website, and PSblog and possible a pressrelease. Website, blog, pressrelease= official. Anything else is unofficial, for example what you're advocating -> Sony or Kazunori saying he hope to have GT5 out by a certain timeframe (not official). An official statement would never say something as diffuse as "coming this holiday" for an defined, actual releasedate.

 

[Raggadish]

It was delayed more than once. And certainly for a lot longer than a couple days.

Ah yes, in japan it was delayed twice, but I'd imagine neither you or I was affected by that.

 

[another_jakhole]

It was delayed more than once. And certainly for a lot longer than a couple days.

Worldwide, it was delayed from March 2010 to thee Nov. 2nd release date, then we had to wait another three weeks.

Are people suggesting something similar will happen to GT6? I thought you were all in agreement that GT6 is incomplete just like GT5, but they're riding the "update/patch post-release" train since they know we'll be buying GT6 based on its name alone. Ah well, PD Wins.

PD 2 -
others 0

It doesn't matter how off any of us are. The news that isn't known about GT6 will be interesting. I bet 1 fake dollar that it'll all be more interesting than what information we've been given as of now.

Vision GT
new Course Maker
Apricot HILL! (and Seattle?)
GT movie!
+1,200 cars (GT5 technically has 1,080-something)
DING DONG THE WITCH (TGTT) IS GONE!

There's a lot of others, but let me catch my breath and leave.

Improved driver animation! Oh yeah. Little, yet it's an improvement.

 

[sk8er913]

GT:HD and GT5P both took away possibly a month or two of the development time that went into GT5, from this perspective, Raggadish is correct. It did take away time from GT5. BUT GT5P helped fund the production of GT5. So it made up those 1 or 2 months of time that it lost. So it would have been released sometime in November 2010 anyways. However, without GTHD and GT5P. GT5s development would have been dramatically changed and it would've came out earlier. Possibly sometime in 2009, and it could have came without some features. Imagine a game halfway between GT5P and GT5 to be released in the 2009 area. Playing the alternate scenario path...

Also, 2009 GT5 would've got the 2.0 patch in late 2010 making it similar to 1.0 GT5 then GT6 would be released in 2012, what did a development build look like last year?

 

[Raggadish]

Text

Agreed with all of your post. Except for how small time implications the other projects had on GT5, but that is a whole different subject!

Edit: wow, what a weird sentence structure. Ah, well, I think you'll understand it nevertheless.

 

[sk8er913]

Agreed with all of your post. Except for how small time implications the other projects had on GT5, but that is a whole different subject!

Edit: wow, what a weird sentence structure. Ah, well, I think you'll understand it nevertheless.

*Didn't get it* you mean how everything would be released earlier?

 

[Imari]

It's politicospeak. It means nothing at all. When you tear it down logically, he committed to nothing, promised nothing, and revealed nothing we didn't already know. In other words, he said nothing. I don't include acknowledging the sound issue as something because millions of others can see it's an issue, it's not like it's a revelation of any kind, it's just stating the obvious.

A surprising amount of what Kaz (and Sony reps as well) say is exactly this. You get the feeling of knowing more than when you went in, but you've actually been told absolutely nothing.

Marketing appears to have devolved into the art of getting people excited by appearing to give information, whilst not actually giving any information at all.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I'm just saying how KinLM was making it sound, wasn't agreeing with him if you might be thinking that.

No worries mate, I knew what you were up to, I was just taking your example and rewording it in Kazspeak to better illustrate the absurdity of Kaz's statement and the resulting rabid fanboy defense of that statement

 

[Raggadish]

*Didn't get it* you mean how everything would be released earlier?

How everything would be release even earlier then your suggestions, but other then that it was a spot on post.

 

[Griffith500]

A surprising amount of what Kaz (and Sony reps as well) say is exactly this. You get the feeling of knowing more than when you went in, but you've actually been told absolutely nothing.

Marketing appears to have devolved into the art of getting people excited by appearing to give information, whilst not actually giving any information at all.

Yeah, but leaning a bit of underlying knowledge, you can actually glean something from it. Not specifics, obviously, but quote after quote is slowly eroding the massive scope of possibility into something much more condensed.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

No, and I never said you did either. I was mearly giving you examples of things that did not carry over and PD undoubtly had to assign a certain part of their workforce to implement, thus PD not being at full capacity working on GT5 since those things (UI, debugging,ect) was not part of GT5.

You said I didn't know how game development worked, and thus implied such by using examples of physics not being the same from GTHD to GT5. Which many would think that you were implying that is a feature I perhaps thought was the same though I never mentioned it and thus putting words in my mouth. Also the full team was on GT5 (other than when working on PSP), many mods on this forum and other users have expressed this time and time again and their is articles showing that GTHD and obviously GT5P were carried over to the GT5 production and worked on further. You have yet to show anything that counters this other than conjecture post after post.

True, but again, certain things in GT HD and GT5 required resources working on things that were not transferable to GT5 and therefore meant the things PD did during 2004-2009 wasn't going into GT5.

Which I made comment about, no reason to echo me, however those things that didn't meet the end result were slated for GT5 and there is a electronic expo picture that shows the items we were to expect in GT5 and only part of those made it in. So them working on an item and shelving it is yet again a mismanagement of QC which you also still have yet to address.

There is the post on the official blog detailing the releasedate. Formal:
http://au.playstation.com/ps3/news/...230/GT5-release-date-confirmed-for-Australia/

Informal: Kaz saying he wished to have GT5 out for end of 2009, or something to that extent. And anything being missed doesn't make them un-official or un-ininformal.

I commented to this on section below.

But they are not. I challenge you to find a any Sony official medium announcing GT5s releasedate prior to the one they made officially on GT's website, and PSblog and possible a pressrelease. Website, blog, pressrelease= official. Anything else is unofficial, for example what you're advocating -> Sony or Kazunori saying he hope to have GT5 out by a certain timeframe (not official). An official statement would never say something as diffuse as "coming this holiday" for an defined, actual releasedate.

Once again, that is an expected timeline and it'd be much easier to say a more vague answer that people don't hold them too, or no answer at all. You still haven't debunked the fact that official or unofficial the time frames were blown either way and all should be looked at theoretical or potential times for release since none were met until the final one which was a push back date. Also there were people not in Japan that ordered the March release of the game, so you have no clue who exactly all it affected.

 

[Raggadish]

Also the full team was on GT5 (other than when working on PSP), many mods on this forum and other users have expressed this time and time again and their is articles showing that GTHD and obviously GT5P were carried over to the GT5 production and worked on further.

You are missing the point, yet again. All I'm saying those projects took away resources that prolonged GT5's development(how much isn't something I'm really debating though - see my last post). If they didn't have to develop some things unique for those games they'd save some resources that could have been put to getting GT5 out earlier. If you are debating this then you do not know how game development works, simple as that.

An example of this would be why some developers decides not to do a demo - it takes away resources they could put into making sure the game releases on time, at the desired quality.

Which I made comment about, no reason to echo me, however those things that didn't meet the end result were slated for GT5 and there is a electronic expo picture that shows the items we were to expect in GT5 and only part of those made it in. So them working on an item and shelving it is yet again a mismanagement of QC which you also still have yet to address.

This

You still haven't debunked the fact that official or unofficial the time frames were blown either way

and this is not something I've set out to do, it's something you've imagined I would.

and all should be looked at theoretical or potential times for release since none were met until the final one which was a push back date. Also there were people not in Japan that ordered the March release of the game, so you have no clue who exactly all it affected.

What are you even on about?

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

You are missing the point, yet again. All I'm saying those projects took away resources that prolonged GT5's development(how much isn't something I'm really debating though - see my last post). If they didn't have to develop some things unique for those games they'd save some resources that could have been put to getting GT5 out earlier. If you are debating this then you do not know how game development works, simple as that.

Once again, that's not how development works, if I'm working on an aircraft and production of that is halted but the work done is not wasted rather carried over to another project further along, or green lit as the main project. No resources prolonged the development because they were already built and just transitioned. If those developments or new developments made after are cut or changed that is part of the design process, but it is QC management that also comes into play. Now if GTHD, GT5, and GT5P were all seperate games that were built to a main title extent then I could see your point.

However, two of those games made the final game and thus the resources used for that game were transitioned, if some were cut out that doesn't mean they couldn't have been transitioned but instead weren't wanted for the final cut. The problem I have with you and others is stretching the facts and then using some emphatic way to say "well GT put resources into certain features that the final game didn't have so clearly you have to give them a break because of they didn't do that it wouldn't take as long."

However, they made that choice so why should any of us give them a break on that angle?

 

[Eager Snake]

Could we just back to the main topic guys?
I mean, could we talk about, I don't know, goals and stuff like that?

Don't get me wrong, I love this kind of discussion, but since that we CAN'T really change ANYTHING, it would be nice to dream at least when it comes to GT.

I'm one of the biggest fans of Gran Turismo and Kazunori itself, but again, this is something that we can't control. I'm pissed off about it, but sadly, that's the truth.
They HAVE the resources, they have Sony behind them, so money it's not the problem. And, this is just MY personal opinion, but I don't think that Sony rushed the release of the game... I mean, c'mon, 5 years. What the ·$$& are you doing? I know that most of the things were new stuff for the team, but you can hire more people, open your doors to new and possibly talented recruits.

They really need to hire someone like Griffith, he seems to have the experience and the common sense that PD needs right now in the SD.

I've seen "better works" made by fans in less than 2 weeks than PD in 15 years. Even with the Goodwood trailer with the Z4, there is a guy who made the sound fix the very same day...
And this is something really hard to write for me, but they can not deliver a proper engine sound right now. They just can't, and I'm not wanting something exaggerated, I'm wanting something real, exciting and engaging.

...BUT, I do believe that they have some really awesome examples in the sound department. Just a few, but they exist.
Some time ago, I was commenting about a re-opening of a circuit in my city, which was honored with Fangio's full name. Anyway, I could see some cars testing just for fun in the track, and there was a Corvette for example. And I remember SMILING like a child, because the sound was THE SAME, nothing more, nothing less, the same.
There are other cars that the sound it's really exciting, but there are just a few and I don't really know if those are accurate.

The sound itself, like echoes, are actually pretty good, but they are lacking enviromental sounds, like rocks, sand or things like that.

I don't know if Forza has better sounds, but the 787b it's amazing in that game. Though the 787b it's pretty exciting even not being the most accurate, but I would love to have more... power on the sound, like in the sound fix.

​

 

[Raggadish]

Once again, that's not how development works, if I'm working on an aircraft and production of that is halted but the work done is not wasted rather carried over to another project further along, or green lit as the main project. No resources prolonged the development because they were already built and just transitioned.

...but it is QC management that also comes into play. Now if GTHD, GT5, and GT5P were all seperate games that were built to a main title extent then I could see your point.

Oh my god, how many times am I going to have to say the same thing? Certain things, for example UI, debugging, ect (I'm not talking about cars and tracks) is stuff that did NOT carry over to GT5, and DID take away manpower from working on GT5 since they are unique for respective game. Jeebus. And don't forget about GTPSP that have reworked camera angles and reworked engine to accomodate the PSPs lower hardware specs. There's even unique content for that game that isn't featured in any follow up GT-game that's gone "wasted" so to speak.

And look here, even Kazunori himself said that GTPSP effected GT5 when asked point blank if GTPSP delayed GT5:

“I will not contradict you, because all versions of GT are developed within the studio Polyphony Digital. If a person works on an item, it necessarily prevents him from doing anything else. So yes, there is some truth in what you say.”

https://www.gtplanet.net/yamauchi-discusses-gt-psp-gt5-interaction/

However, two of those games made the final game and thus the resources used for that game were transitioned, if some were cut out that doesn't mean they couldn't have been transitioned but instead weren't wanted for the final cut.

But they still cost PD working hours that could have gone into GT5.

The problem I have with you and others is stretching the facts and then using some emphatic way to say "well GT put resources into certain features that the final game didn't have so clearly you have to give them a break because of they didn't do that it wouldn't take as long."

I'm not giving PD a break and have never said or alluded to it either, I'm telling how game development works.

Well-written text

Sometimes I'm thinking Kazunori has such a strong vision that it goes over what others think might need improving. I know the traditional japanese workers hierarchy doesn't really cater to anyone from a lower tier to go to anyone but his boss, which can stifle product evolvement. I don't want to think that is the case here but...somethimes I wonder.

 

[Chippy569]

I'm telling how game development works.

I asked you this in another thread but you never answered. Where do you work?

a Corvette for example. And I remember SMILING like a child, because the sound was THE SAME, nothing more, nothing less, the same.

I'm sorry, but the American V8 cars are the most disappointing of all the cars in gt5.

Here's a good example. GT5 Corvette GT2 ("RM"). Pay close attention to when the view flips to "replay camera" at about 1:41.


The first thing I hear is some really, really bad phasing. Phasing happens when you play the same sound twice, and one is slightly delayed compared to the other, which gives a comb filtering effect that sounds "swirly" or "wooshy" in an unnatural way. I noticed it the worst at 1:47 but it's all over the place in external camera. Phasing is also the cause of the sound that's a bit like a jet whipping by at ~2:39.
Second, ask yourself how aggressive that feels, compared to the sounds of like the tires. Part of it is a mix/balance issue, sure, but right at 1:53 for example, the car slides, the tires squeal a bit, and then the engine comes on full-power, but it's quieter than the tires just were.

Here's a good reference for the real car. Check out the shot starting at :32.


To my ear, I hear that the real car has a lot more "tone" - more bassy mids and no where near the amount of airy high-frequency sounds the GT clip does. The shifts are vastly more dramatic in the real car, too. you can hear the direct sound of the car for a lot longer distance-wise than in the GT5 clip as well.


And then... on-board. The kind of microphones you get with "on-board" clips are less-than-desirable, so let's listen to a handful of clips.

Gopro on the driver's helmet (skip to 5:00):


Unknown driver-mounted camera (the saturation in this clip sounds really good):


Lemans on-board:


Those three clips all sound rather different so it's amazing to think they're all the same car (differences in year notwithstanding). Which one is the most accurate? That's a silly question, they're all the exact car. Which one is the most exciting? To me I'd vote #2.

 

[Raggadish]

I asked you this in another thread but you never answered. Where do you work?

I'd rather not say, for the sake of myself and my employer.

The first thing I hear is some really, really bad phasing. Phasing happens when you play the same sound twice, and one is slightly delayed compared to the other, which gives a comb filtering effect that sounds "swirly" or "wooshy" in an unnatural way. I noticed it the worst at 1:47 but it's all over the place in external camera. Phasing is also the cause of the sound that's a bit like a jet whipping by at ~2:39.

Interesting. I always thought that was a conscious design decision, to make the sounds be raspy and not so static.