Gran Turismo 7: Latest news and discussion thread

[ScottPuss20]

I don't like licence tests as they are now, I think they could be made a lot better. How that isn't already perfectly clear I don't know.

So you are against them in their current format. Understandable. Have a nice day.

 

[Nielsen]

No, I'm not the one who keeps bringing them up but if other people do, I'm gonna comment as long as I'm not hugely repeating myself. If people broach into other subjects, I'm not gonna just keep saying "YEAH BUT WHAT ABOUT DEM LICENSE TESTS HUH?" all the time.

The only points people seem to bring up is

• They're tradition
• They don't take that long anyway
• They're good for beginners

But forgive me if I've missed some other compelling arguments why they're the best tutorial method, as if nothing else could be good for beginners.

Your urge to fix something that isn’t exactly broken seems rather excessive. That’s all.

You can argue the license tests may be boring to the most experienced players, but at the same time you must also acknowledge how their tedious nature promote an effective learning curve to the basics of driving.

Why is it a good thing? They're going to have to string it all together eventually, why not just throw then into a track? The straight line tests teach nothing but knowing which button is the brake and when to press it. No other game does these tests and you don't see a widespread issue of people complaining they can't play the game. Choosing not to brake is not the same thing as not knowing how they work at all.

I largely explained this in my post just above yours where I replied to @05XR8. Basically, beginners like to be rewarded for doing well, and the license tests in GT have always appealed to this psychological mechanism. Beginners don’t like to struggle, and especially for young players this initial phase can make the difference between staying focused or giving up on a game. The license tests can help to prevent the latter from happening.

I'm not saying you just throw everyone into an LMP1 on the ring straight away, but are that many people really going to struggle if you stick them in say a Polo at Silverstone and let them have at it?

It depends. Many new GT players are inexperienced with serious driving games in general, and these people can really benefit from learning it all step by step. For them it’s not as tedious and pointless as it is to people who have a fairly good sense of how a simulated car will respond.

Then when they get the hang of that, send them for a few laps in a GR86 with an instructor, and keep moving up? That's how it happens in real life. Then you get thrown straight into a race, you don't get asked to overtake 3 cars in 5 corners in a preset challenge. You go racing, and you're judged on how well you drive, whether you earn a license. You don't earn a RACING license by showing you can go around X corner in 15.442 seconds or beat a lap time. You've got to race, and show you can be clean and safe, being fast is actually pretty low down the order at that stage. You get fast as you go on.

It sounds like an approach more fitting for a Codemasters title. GT is first and foremost about driving cars but with the quirk of taking place on racing circuits. You could say this is an overarching identity problem with GT, and one it would need to overcome before we could expect it to adopt a proper racing school mentality.

Also, taking inspiration from real world scenarios kind of irks me because the charming thing about video games is their freedom to chase their own visions. Games don’t have to reflect every aspect of reality, and those that do often lack warmth and character to the point where the experience just feels bland and soulless.

Tutorials in general used to be usually a chore but modern games now do a much better job of integrating them into the initial gameplay naturally.

Which I personally hate. My mind is almost never in the learning mood when playing a game for the very first time, which is another reason why having a dedicated training mode like License Centre is convenient.

GT, other than that brief dalliance with GT6, hasn't made that progression. It's stuck with the same structured, off-to-the-side format since GT1.

Perhaps I could see the problem if the old design choice had serious flaws, but it achieves exactly what it tries to do.

You can skip driving school and be taught by an experienced driver. The basics of driving, don't need a test. Only the law requires it.

I'm not talking about beginners buying a full Sim. We're talking about different ways to implement changes or improve the tests.

Before you said players could learn simply by trial an error, and now you derail the point by bringing other elements into the equation. I don’t know how to respond to this.

I don't like licence tests as they are now, I think they could be made a lot better/evolved.

🦭

 

[ShiftingGears]

What I really like seeing from games is like what GT sport did with the MFD, or like what GT5 did with Shuffle Racing. I wouldn'tve thought of it and didn't know I needed it but I'm glad they put it there. You can't improve when you don't try new things. What I don't like is when the same thing keeps getting regurgitated out of laziness or obstinance, when other games do it better or its just extraordinarily obvious that what's being implemented isn't fit for purpose.

Example - slalom tests and braking to a stop are not useful to players at all.

The license tests were also used because it added variety and it was new to racing games.

Unfortunately its boring and outdated, and PD dont know any better so they try things like the Moon Buggy or getting their Willys out in the GT7 trailer but invariably that falls flat because modelling a novelty car for that scenario isnt really worth it either. The physics aren't fun at low speed, collisions aren't realistic or satisfying in a way that would entertain casual or serious players.

They should invest some effort into drifting or drag racing and not just half arse it, that way there is something for players to do.

Some of the best tutorials also dont brain you over the head with the fact they're tutorials. Solitaire was introduced for Microsoft Windows to get people comfortable with using a mouse. You can embed that learning into other parts of the game without it being the same standalone feature.

 

[Samus]

Your urge to fix something that isn’t exactly broken seems rather excessive. That’s all.

I never said they were broken and need fixing, I said they need improving and evolving to be better. There is a nuanced difference. Everything can be improved, even if it's not already broken. Standard definition TV wasn't broken, it still evolved to 8K definition. 1940s cars weren't broken, but we vastly improved them.

You can argue the license tests may be boring to the most experienced players, but at the same time you must also acknowledge how their tedious nature promote an effective learning curve to the basics of driving.

No, I really don't think they do.

I largely explained this in my post just above yours where I replied to @05XR8. Basically, beginners like to be rewarded for doing well, and the license tests in GT have always appealed to this psychological mechanism. Beginners don’t like to struggle, and especially for young players this initial phase can make the difference between staying focused or giving up on a game. The license tests can help to prevent the latter from happening.

Again, is this a big problem in other games in the genre? Not that I've heard of. It also doesn't seem to have much of a positive effect, going by the trophy percentages GT is no different in having large swathes of players barely making progress. 25% of GTS players never won a race of any kind, 50% never bought a car. 47% of GT6 players didn't complete National B license, 30% didn't get out of novice class. These percentages line up with most other games.

Also, don't the incredibly simple Sunday Cup type events appeal to this nature any way? If anything forcing people to do these tests before they go racing is going to have the opposite effect.

Also, taking inspiration from real world scenarios kind of irks me because the charming thing about video games is their freedom to chase their own visions. Games don’t have to reflect every aspect of reality, and those that do often lack warmth and character to the point where the experience just feels bland and soulless.

Seems like a weird thing to say about a game that broadly attempts to simulate the reality of driving and racing a car.

Perhaps I could see the problem if the old design choice had serious flaws, but it achieves exactly what it tries to do.

No, it doesn't. And besides as said at the top, something can still be vastly improved even if it doesn't have any serious flaws.

🦭

Is there any need for jabs like that? I wouldn't have to keep explaining myself if people read my posts properly.

 

[05XR8]

Your urge to fix something that isn’t exactly broken seems rather excessive. That’s all.

You can argue the license tests may be boring to the most experienced players, but at the same time you must also acknowledge how their tedious nature promote an effective learning curve to the basics of driving.

I largely explained this in my post just above yours where I replied to @05XR8. Basically, beginners like to be rewarded for doing well, and the license tests in GT have always appealed to this psychological mechanism. Beginners don’t like to struggle, and especially for young players this initial phase can make the difference between staying focused or giving up on a game. The license tests can help to prevent the latter from happening.

It depends. Many new GT players are inexperienced with serious driving games in general, and these people can really benefit from learning it all step by step. For them it’s not as tedious and pointless as it is to people who have a fairly good sense of how a simulated car will respond.

It sounds like an approach more fitting for a Codemasters title. GT is first and foremost about driving cars but with the quirk of taking place on racing circuits. You could say this is an overarching identity problem with GT, and one it would need to overcome before we could expect it to adopt a proper racing school mentality.

Also, taking inspiration from real world scenarios kind of irks me because the charming thing about video games is their freedom to chase their own visions. Games don’t have to reflect every aspect of reality, and those that do often lack warmth and character to the point where the experience just feels bland and soulless.

Which I personally hate. My mind is almost never in the learning mood when playing a game for the very first time, which is another reason why having a dedicated training mode like License Centre is convenient.

Perhaps I could see the problem if the old design choice had serious flaws, but it achieves exactly what it tries to do.


Before you said players could learn simply by trial an error, and now you derail the point by bringing other elements into the equation. I don’t know how to respond to this.


🦭

What? Other equations? I said players don't need a licence test to drive. You said it's like skipping driving school. What other equations? I responded to you maybe not understanding that we don't need the licence tests to actually drive. The licence tests are a lock to advance in the game. Not to learn to drive.

Here, even simpler. As proof none of us need the licence test to learn to drive.
On the back of games and even in the leaflets, even in the game itself before starting, there are instructions for the wiser when using a controller.
It shows the accelerator, brake, steering, handbrake and buttons for looking around and signalling. Amazing, no licence required.

I'm saying, to do the licences in another way. I gave an example from another game. The only reason I said we can learn to drive by an experienced driver, didn't have to do with adding another equation. It was in response to you about saying something different to what I was saying.

 

[NanoSaibou]

View attachment 1083227
The 25th anniversary of GT7 is a best seller in Japan. And yo, check out that price, almost behind of the Switch, that's outrageous

its not the best selling videogame, but it has been the best selling PS5 game in the Amazon US store ever since pre-orders went live as well. The excitement is real

 

[FPV MIC]

The only real problem I see with the licence tests is locking content behind them. Are they basic? Certainly, but that wouldn't affect gameplay if they're not required.

Also, two of the most basic tests are very similar to real life advanced driver training. Start to stop as quick as you can is akin to go to whoa, and slaloms are just about a given in ADT.

Another thing I've noticed over the years is a common theme in regards to advice to new wheel users, ''re-run the licence tests''. They can't be all bad then can they?

Personally I like the quick cash grab and handful of cars I get. I also don't mind the bit of competition the friends list brings too. Just don't make them compulsory for those who don't want to stuff around with them.

 

[RACECAR]

What I really like seeing from games is like what GT sport did with the MFD, or like what GT5 did with Shuffle Racing. I wouldn'tve thought of it and didn't know I needed it but I'm glad they put it there. You can't improve when you don't try new things. What I don't like is when the same thing keeps getting regurgitated out of laziness or obstinance, when other games do it better or its just extraordinarily obvious that what's being implemented isn't fit for purpose.

Example - slalom tests and braking to a stop are not useful to players at all.

The license tests were also used because it added variety and it was new to racing games.

Unfortunately its boring and outdated, and PD dont know any better so they try things like the Moon Buggy or getting their Willys out in the GT7 trailer but invariably that falls flat because modelling a novelty car for that scenario isnt really worth it either. The physics aren't fun at low speed, collisions aren't realistic or satisfying in a way that would entertain casual or serious players.

 

[ShiftingGears]

View attachment 1083303

I regret nothing

 

[Silver Arrows]

My mind is almost never in the learning mood when playing a game for the very first time,

This doesn't make an absolute lick of sense, especially if you play any game that has a modicum of difficulty in its gameplay loop.

 

[Nielsen]

I never said they were broken and need fixing, I said they need improving and evolving to be better. There is a nuanced difference. Everything can be improved, even if it's not already broken. Standard definition TV wasn't broken, it still evolved to 8K definition. 1940s cars weren't broken, but we vastly improved them.

Televisions evolved and still serve the basic function of displaying a picture. Cars evolved and still serve the basic function of transporting people/things. GT games evolved and still serve the function of letting people drive virtual cars. I fail to see how those other examples have evolved better than GT, which has also made technological leaps.

No, I really don't think they do.

Which is amazing. How can you possibly deny it?

Again, is this a big problem in other games in the genre? Not that I've heard of.

I would think it’s the same. GT’s lifetime sale are way ahead of the direct competition. Probably not because of licence tests alone, but the sum of its parts has obviously contributed to its success.

It also doesn't seem to have much of a positive effect, going by the trophy percentages GT is no different in having large swathes of players barely making progress. 25% of GTS players never won a race of any kind, 50% never bought a car. 47% of GT6 players didn't complete National B license, 30% didn't get out of novice class. These percentages line up with most other games.

I don’t know the percentages for other games, so it’s difficult to comment on this.

Also, don't the incredibly simple Sunday Cup type events appeal to this nature any way? If anything forcing people to do these tests before they go racing is going to have the opposite effect.

The GT League events are all about consistency and momentum. Exactly what players are taught to master in the driving tests. You don’t need a racing school diploma to win the GT League events, because all the AI does is to block the racing line here and there.

Seems like a weird thing to say about a game that broadly attempts to simulate the reality of driving and racing a car.

Why? GT undeniably has a distinctive vision for what a driving simulator can be. Just look at Trial Mountain. It’s like the embodiment of the creative freedom the GT series has embraced over the years.

No, it doesn't. And besides as said at the top, something can still be vastly improved even if it doesn't have any serious flaws.

So you think the licence tests make inexperienced players none the wiser? That would be a stretch.

Anything can be improved, but it’s not where GT should take priority in improving. It works for what it is

Is there any need for jabs like that? I wouldn't have to keep explaining myself if people read my posts properly.

Is there any need to still say that you don’t like the licence tests? Not exactly new information.

What? Other equations? I said players don't need a licence test to drive. You said it's like skipping driving school. What other equations? I responded to you maybe not understanding that we don't need the licence tests to actually drive. The licence tests are a lock to advance in the game. Not to learn to drive.

Here, even simpler. As proof none of us need the licence test to learn to drive. On the back of games and even in the leaflets, even in the game itself before starting, there are instructions for the wiser when using a controller.
It shows the accelerator, brake, steering, handbrake and buttons for looking around and signalling. Amazing, no licence required.

I'm saying, to do the licences in another way. I gave an example from another game. The only reason I said we can learn to drive by an experienced driver, didn't have to do with adding another equation. It was in response to you about saying something different to what I was saying.

You said, letting players loose on a track will teach them everything they need to know through trial and error. Then I pointed out it doesn’t work like that in the real world, and for this reason license tests also have a function in the game. Then you started talking about driving instructors and the law. I fail to see the connection, because it doesn’t seem relevant to the point I initially made against your point.

This doesn't make an absolute lick of sense, especially if you play any game that has a modicum of difficulty in its gameplay loop.

With new games there are always multiple first impressions fighting for attention. It’s distracting and why I prefer tutorials that aren’t too overwhelming at first. In some games this approach might be necessary, but not in GT where players can just embark on the license tests when they want to.

 

[05XR8]

Televisions evolved and still serve the basic function of displaying a picture. Cars evolved and still serve the basic function of transporting people/things. GT games evolved and still serve the function of letting people drive virtual cars. I fail to see how those other examples have evolved better than GT, which has also made technological leaps.


Which is amazing. How can you possibly deny it?

I would think it’s the same. GT’s lifetime sale are way ahead of the direct competition. Probably not because of licence tests alone, but the sum of its parts has obviously contributed to its success.

I don’t know the percentages for other games, so it’s difficult to comment on this.

The GT League events are all about consistency and momentum. Exactly what players are taught to master in the driving tests. You don’t need a racing school diploma to win the GT League events, because all the AI does is to block the racing line here and there.

Why? GT undeniably has a distinctive vision for what a driving simulator can be. Just look at Trial Mountain. It’s like the embodiment of the creative freedom the GT series has embraced over the years.

So you think the licence tests make inexperienced players none the wiser? That would be a stretch.

Anything can be improved, but it’s not where GT should take priority in improving. It works for what it is

Is there any need to still say that you don’t like the licence tests? Not exactly new information.


You said, letting players loose on a track will teach them everything they need to know through trial and error. Then I pointed out it doesn’t work like that in the real world, and for this reason license tests also have a function in the game. Then you started talking about driving instructors and the law. I fail to see the connection, because it doesn’t seem relevant to the point I initially made against your point.


With new games there are always multiple first impressions fighting for attention. It’s distracting and why I prefer tutorials that aren’t too overwhelming at first. In some games this approach might be necessary, but not in GT where players can just embark on the license tests when they want to.

Okay, personal take and I’m sure many have been introduced to driving the same.

I started learning to drive, in The Bronx, at 14. My Mother would rent cars when we visited relatives in Coram, NY(Long Island). Dead end street and my Mother would let me drive one Way, make a u-turn and drive the other way. Repeating a few times.
Learned to drive stick by my brother at his high school campus. Saturdays, when no one were around. It does work like this in the real world. Whether in a paddock on a farm or on an empty street.

What I posted has relevance, because PD are simulating the driving like the real world. You accelerate, brake and Turn the wheel. The GT6 tutorial I posted, even advises players to try following the guide line during the actual tutorial.

But in GT, the licence tests are required to advance in the game. You’d need a certain licence, to play various parts of the game. To unlock that section.

 

[p78]

Can we stop nagging and bickering about the license tests? Some of you like it, some of you don't. Let's end it at that.

 

[Greatbee]

Can we stop nagging and bickering about the license tests? Some of you like it, some of you don't. Let's end it at that.

Wise men.

 

[o000o]

Do you mind pointing out exactly what is ironic? There really isn't a connection there like you're thinking. You're not going to want to throw people out on the Nordschliefe, there's obviously going to have to be a better common ground to run a mock up on. What are you even arguing against, and for, on that point? Throwing everyone on the same track is treating everyone as equals, then afterwards it can determine how accurate that is. If you're a great driver you can just treat this as a regular race, as you'll very likely not get dinged for many mistakes, if any. If not, you can jump into tutorials if you'd prefer. Using an easier track in general, for everyone, is not the same as assuming that everyone is going to need the absolute basics described to them. Throw the Nordcshliefe in that test and you'd get dinged left and right even for some of the more well versed people - and that's exactly why a simpler track is fine.

I mean it's about someone who pleads for GT to stop treating everyone like beginners (not that I disagree, but still quite ironic to suggest "make it easier for beginner's sake" suggestion to happen there of him).

Also, taking inspiration from real world scenarios kind of irks me because the charming thing about video games is their freedom to chase their own visions. Games don’t have to reflect every aspect of reality, and those that do often lack warmth and character to the point where the experience just feels bland and soulless.

I guess you being this type is the reason you reject GT Auto, which simulates some realism to determine how good/bad of a driver you were, like how much you crashed or went off track. But that also can mean you'd have closed mind that can't think up about solutions? If you're someone who'd just "if it's fine keep it, if it's annoying remove it", like if GT Auto is annoying due to more menu navigations, there can be solutions like for example put the GT Auto menu (like car tuning) on the Quick Races or probably or also have the game give an option to have the game automatically takes care of your car without you doing it personally? (like after race the game automatically pay for maintenance cost, but it'll be deducted from your credits or such).

What I really like seeing from games is like what GT sport did with the MFD, or like what GT5 did with Shuffle Racing. I wouldn'tve thought of it and didn't know I needed it but I'm glad they put it there. You can't improve when you don't try new things. What I don't like is when the same thing keeps getting regurgitated out of laziness or obstinance, when other games do it better or its just extraordinarily obvious that what's being implemented isn't fit for purpose.

So you'd tolerate MFD and Shuffle Racing. Thought you'd search for things to criticize regarding those 2 too, like MFD really disrupting your racing or the Shuffle Racing being chaotic or such.

Unfortunately its boring and outdated, and PD dont know any better so they try things like the Moon Buggy or getting their Willys out in the GT7 trailer but invariably that falls flat because modelling a novelty car for that scenario isnt really worth it either. The physics aren't fun at low speed, collisions aren't realistic or satisfying in a way that would entertain casual or serious players.

Yeah, certainly only for you to hate low speed/novelty, not 100% certain for any other players. Really we got a stop having fun guy here in you to expect others to do things in the same way as yours for having fun or such; I wonder what'll you say to someone who enjoys every kind of car, from everyday cars, sports cars, supercars, race cars, rally cars, SUV's, trucks, the weird and wacky ones, etc., as every car is someone’s favourite car.

 

[ShiftingGears]

Can we stop nagging and bickering about the license tests?

No u

So you'd tolerate MFD and Shuffle Racing. Thought you'd search for things to criticize regarding those 2 too, like MFD really disrupting your racing or the Shuffle Racing being chaotic or such.

I don't tolerate it, I like it. Because I am a connoisseur.

Yeah, certainly only for you to hate low speed/novelty, not 100% certain for any other players. Really we got a stop having fun guy here in you to expect others to do things in the same way as yours for having fun or such; I wonder what'll you say to someone who enjoys every kind of car, from everyday cars, sports cars, supercars, race cars, rally cars, SUV's, trucks, the weird and wacky ones, etc., as every car is someone’s favourite car.

no, I clearly speak for everyone everywhere

Seriously though, I would be happy if the Willys Jeep is actually fun... the Kubelwagen and Schwimmwagen certainly weren't. As for your other varieties of car, I don't have issues with the cars themselves but the way they are used. Rally cars are cool but Gran Turismo doesn't even do rally stages. The dirt courses don't resemble rallycross either and are marred by invisible walls and lack of soft object collisions. GT Sport introduced fictitious Group B cars, but the best they could think of was putting them on paved road courses, or driving on the infield of the worlds tiniest oval. Trucks exist but they aren't trophy trucks - there is no event in the game they are actually catered for. And novelty vehicles aren't particularly interesting when you really can't do anything with them that you can't with any other vehicle. They might be easier to roll over, but that just really exposes another problem with GT, and that is that the rollover physics has never been something they are good at. The tracks don't really play to slow cars either, because wide dirt tracks that allow overtaking just make cars feel slower.

Compare this to something like Wreckfest. where novelty vehicles like lawn mowers complement the game's excellent physics both in driving, collisions and in particular ragdoll physics.

 

[ImaRobot]

You say that like I told people to stop, which I actually didn’t. I said the criticism is unwarranted by now, and why I think so.

I did, because it's the very way you worded things. Starting the sentence like that and then saying it's unwarranted is doing exactly that. Shouldn't be hard to understand that you're not one to decide that.

The difference between this discussion and your example there - I’m not simply saying the discussion is unnecessary. I’m saying it’s unwarranted criticism for the reasons stated. The outright denial of justifiable points in the counterarguments is just getting ridiculous after more than two weeks of ping pong. Especially because GT has flawed design choices in general and nothing indicates GT7 will improve dramatically in this regard.

Unwarranted, unnecessary. There's little difference. If you're done with the discussion that's one, thing - just remove yourself - However, just because of that isn't a reason enough to claim it's unwarranted.

This discussion actually inspired me to retry some Driving School tests in GT Sport today. It wasn’t that bad to be honest, and it felt nice improving a few personal best scores from 2017 and 2018.

I'm glad to hear you're ok with them. Some people aren't though.

That reminds me of how Forza Horizon 4 repeatedly asked me to increase the difficulty level to something higher than expert because I kept winning too often. Fair enough if you prefer that sort of thing, but personally I don’t like it when games interrupt my flow with “hey, try this”.

I'm not asking for it to interrupt the game, I've elaborated on a later post on the idea.

Ok, then remind yourself that some ignorant kid out there probably learned something by dwelling solely on the process of stopping a heavy object. For you it was just 1-2 minutes of second nature. Big deal?

I don't really like it, its not helpful to me, or find it necessary for players like myself. I for one would rather skip it entirely. Big deal? It's as if you're not responding to things I'm actually saying and instead are pretending that I'm trying to get it removed outright. Improving the system isn't going to detract from that ignorant little kid.

This would require a seriously good behavioural detection system in order to work as intended. It doesn’t sound like something PD could pull off considering how much trouble they’ve had with their penalty detection system alone. GT games have never utilized very advanced programming, so let’s be realistic here. I’d rather have basic and tedious license tests that work than some advance system that is bound to be full of shortcomings.

Sounds like an extremely similar system is already in ACC, or close enough to it. If it's been started it can be improved, and if such a small developer can get this going there's no reason in my mind why a huge one like PD can't. It sounds plenty realistic to me. Them not using better programing is one of the reasons people want things improved, thanks for pointing that out.

Mind pointing out what exactly is unrealistic about it or was that just a vague pass? It's like you're actively trying to fight against valid improvement with nothing but "I want something basic and tedious" and nothing more. All wild guesses on your part.

For someone who hates and talks down massive quote trains, you sure do have a knack to do it it quite often.

Is there any need to still say that you don’t like the licence tests? Not exactly new information.

Didn't you just chastise @Imari and now you're going to do things you yourself complained that others similarly did to you

I mean it's about someone who pleads for GT to stop treating everyone like beginners (not that I disagree, but still quite ironic to suggest "make it easier for beginner's sake" suggestion to happen there of him).

You answered absolutely no part of what was asked and it's as if you didn't read the post. It would make sense to not aim for the most demanding track, and you don't need that in order to gauge that. I'd suggest re-reading the post.

So you are against them in their current format. Understandable. Have a nice day.

Yes, and that should have been obvious had you actually read anything in the thread. Should have read that entire post instead of snipping a very specific part of it.

 

[ImaRobot]

DP

 

[Samus]

Can we stop nagging and bickering about the license tests? Some of you like it, some of you don't. Let's end it at that.

I really don't understand this attitude on a discussion forum. If you're not interested, ignore it. Not every discussion is going to interest you.

Televisions evolved and still serve the basic function of displaying a picture. Cars evolved and still serve the basic function of transporting people/things. GT games evolved and still serve the function of letting people drive virtual cars. I fail to see how those other examples have evolved better than GT, which has also made technological leaps.

Why have you shifted to talking about GT as a whole? We were talking about license tests specifically. You said they aren't broken so don't need fixing, I gave you examples of things that also weren't broken but got improved. I could list millions of things fitting that description. So again, why shouldn't they evolve just because you don't think they're broken?

Also it's funny to suggest GT has evolved at the same rate as those things. Graphics and physics might have, but every GT game bar Sport is practically the same game in terms of structure and gameplay. It's what I take issue with, in case you haven't noticed.

 

[Keef]

I really don't understand this attitude on a discussion forum. If you're not interested, ignore it. Not every discussion is going to interest you.

Let's not get bogged down with who is interested in what, okay?

 

[p78]

Discussion yes. But we're way beyond that point. @Samus

 

[Samus]

Discussion yes. But we're way beyond that point. @Samus

Nope, still discussing it.

 

[NAXEHT]

Discussion yes. But we're way beyond that point. @Samus

Yeah. Borderline spamming at this point. Most tiresome thing I’ve read here in over a year.

 

[Samus]

Yeah. Borderline spamming at this point. Most tiresome thing I’ve read here in over a year.

It's borderline spam to talk about an aspect of Gran Turismo in a Gran Turismo forum? Well that's a good one.

If you have another aspect of the game you'd like to talk about by all means stoke a discussion but until @Famine tells us to stop posting, I'll continue conversing about license tests until the discussion naturally fizzles out, like all other discussions do.

 

[ImaRobot]

What is more akin to spam is coming in here just to complain about what you see(because you don't like what someone posted), posting off-topic rants that have nothing to do with the game or the discussion about the game.

Like this post, and the many other recent ones.

 

[Canucks_9419]

Ignore button exists for a reason, may as well use it instead of talking in circles over semantics. 😘

 

[Lux Klonoa]

Ignore button exists for a reason, may as well use it instead of talking in circles over semantics. 😘

Yep, and I'm already using it on the usual suspects.

Anyway, shall we move on now?

 

[apexpredator100]

I think it's fair for people to question why the license test debate is still ongoing, when the conversation is just going in circles at this point.

 

[Tired Tyres]

4 hours would give about 240 minutes of endurance racing, with the time multiplier 6X to have the 24 hours compressed, better than the 24 minutes of Le Mans from GT6

Compressing time is okay for players that don't want to do full endurance races but the full length races should be there for those of us that want full races.

 

[ImaRobot]

I think it's fair for people to question why the license test debate is still ongoing, when the conversation is just going in circles at this point.

And if they don't want to see it there's simple solutions to that. Not sure what coming in and basically shouting "I don't like talking about this!" is helping, or how it's any better than actual discussing aspects of the game.