GT6 News Discussion
- Thread starter Matty
- 8,352 comments
- 836,873 views
- Status
- 858
- United Kingdom
- 11,339
- The 51st state of america
- sparkytooth50001
- 163
- tam38gti
Notifications section of GT6 for me in the UK says maintainance takes place every Tuesday between 0200 and 0400. Now, this may be server maintainance, seasonals or whatever - and I'm certainly not one to be rabbid for an update, but it would be nice to see some progress towards DLC etc considering we are fast approaching the end of January. Fingers crossed.
- 7,830
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
I would, if I was the only one who said they liked them.
But fair enough, a majority of us like the Standard cars, or aren't bothered that they are included. Better?I'd like to know what that broader audience would be.
Some people here are fine with the Standards, some hate them.
Some people here are fine with the car sounds, some hate them.
Some people here are fine with the bots, some hate them.
Some people here are fine with the limited damage, some hate it.
Some people here think the physics are amazingly realistic and very close to a PC sim, some think they're meh, the best arcade physics in a racer.
I could go on, but I think my point is pretty clear. GT Planet seems to have about the same wide spectrum of opinion as the "wider audience" you speak of, especially since the membership is quite large in number. Hardly made up of fanboys that drive everyone else away but fellow cheerleaders. But about that wider audience. If the Standards were harfed at by the vast majority of gamers, it would be obvious. Boards like this one would be flooded by Standard haters. Gaming journalists would harshly flame Kaz and PD for doing something they see as a bone headed move. Instead, it's much like it is here. Some shake their heads and think including them is purely for car count. Some are overjoyed that these legacy cars are included so we can enjoy them with the new physics, and go out of their way to point out that some of them are great looking when improved. And that in a race, you won't be able to tell any difference.
So rather than say that people here aren't being honest and just saying they like them because of some nostalgia, maybe you should trust us to mean what we say. And I would point out that there is an entire thread and Photo Mode albums in the GT5 section devoted to those "ugly" Standards. Most of my Photo Mode pics are of those "ugly" Standards. So make of that what you will.
- 11,343
- Chicago, iLL
- GTP_Nismo
- 2,978
- England
- WilliamsJIM_Adam
I'd be suprised if someone thought that, nevermind some people.
- 1,211
- Earth
- TheLordSnowden
- LordSnowden
I believe its the lack of any real news, yet a punch list of things to come larger than the core game features, with no roadmap for them... New cars? A track? That's news but relatively tiny when waiting for features.
So people talk about them, pontificate and scrutinize every word in any news, and wonder about previous news as much as current. Perhaps chatting about and news is ok, but the arguments are long winded due primarily to personal attacks more than healthy debate...
Its easy enough to start deleting people's long arguments or moving them to a 'garbage' thread, this will make some think twice about long winded arguments.
So people talk about them, pontificate and scrutinize every word in any news, and wonder about previous news as much as current. Perhaps chatting about and news is ok, but the arguments are long winded due primarily to personal attacks more than healthy debate...
Its easy enough to start deleting people's long arguments or moving them to a 'garbage' thread, this will make some think twice about long winded arguments.
- 7,830
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
Actually, there are real life racers here who liked the physics in GT5, and thought they were pretty realistic.
And I did my own shootout with GT5 last year, along with Forza 4, and I find both F4 and GT6 to be very close to PC sims.But to bring this back on topic, as I've unfortunately done my own bit of derailing...
I don't expect the Course Maker to appear for a few months, maybe mid-spring, maybe late spring. What they want to do is ambitious, load in as much area as possible, as much as 50 x 50 kilometers. That's a LOT of data for a PC loaded with ram, never mind a console with 256MB of system ram.
And then there's the online system. Making all those club and league features work, along with getting the Event Maker running well and shareable, has to be a bit of a task. What if this is all in concert with a new Race Mod implementation and a Livery Editor, even if only templates, to support the club and league concept? And then the Event Maker should also be offered for offline play too. More work. The offline version could show up first, which would make many of us ecstatic, but it has to work right.
And about that "track a month." Keep in mind that a Premium track can take as long as two man-years to make. I wouldn't be surprised if Ronda hasn't taken more time than that. So I'm thinking that the soon to appear tracks will be legacy guys like El Capitain, Red Rock Valley, the Tahiti Roads and Grindelwald, built to Standard track levels. Some like me will love and buy every one of them. Some will balk like they always do. But if you want a track a month - or so, this is the most logical way for PD to achieve that.
All that is a load of work. I know that everyone wants Christmas to come weekly, but I'd suggest that everyone keep in mind that we have the core game to play with now, and delivered ON SCHEDULE no less! We didn't have to wait two more years, or to buy a PS4 with possibly a new wheel to enjoy GT6. Things will be added when they're ready. I want everything now too, but I'm a realist and understand that these things take time. And you sure don't want something rushed and buggy, do you?
- 1,211
- Earth
- TheLordSnowden
- LordSnowden
I'm one of those real racers and will argue that GT 5 physics are almost better with respect to consistency of them. GT 6 physics are clearly not done and though there are cars in GT 6 that feel much better (many in fact) than GT 5, they don't appear to be have a linear relativity to the others (looking at you MR race cars). To test this, add ballast to any none MR car but attempt to replicate the mid weight and it's not at all the same... Rear engine cars tend to handle better than MR in GT 6... Real MR cars advantage is in handling due to even weight distribution, more predictable attitude. But I digress.Actually, there are real life racers here who liked the physics in GT5, and thought they were pretty realistic.
But to bring this back on topic, as I've unfortunately done my own bit of derailing...
I don't expect the Course Maker to appear for a few months, maybe mid-spring, maybe late spring. What they want to do is ambitious, load in as much area as possible, as much as 50 x 50 kilometers. That's a LOT of data for a PC loaded with ram, never mind a console with 256MB of system ram.
And then there's the online system. Making all those club and league features work, along with getting the Event Maker running well and shareable, has to be a bit of a task. What if this is all in concert with a new Race Mod implementation and a Livery Editor, even if only templates, to support the club and league concept? And then the Event Maker should also be offered for offline play too. More work. The offline version could show up first, which would make many of us ecstatic, but it has to work right.
And about that "track a month." Keep in mind that a Premium track can take as long as two man-years to make. I wouldn't be surprised if Ronda hasn't taken more time than that. So I'm thinking that the soon to appear tracks will be legacy guys like El Capitain, Red Rock Valley, the Tahiti Roads and Grindelwald, built to Standard track levels. Some like me will love and buy every one of them. Some will balk like they always do. But if you want a track a month - or so, this is the most logical way for PD to achieve that.
All that is a load of work. I know that everyone wants Christmas to come weekly, but I'd suggest that everyone keep in mind that we have the core game to play with now, and delivered ON SCHEDULE no less! We didn't have to wait two more years, or to buy a PS4 with possibly a new wheel to enjoy GT6. Things will be added when they're ready. I want everything now too, but I'm a realist and understand that these things take time. And you sure don't want something rushed and buggy, do you?
The course a month thing, I fear these will be tracks built with the track creator and not real world class circuits that have a rich history with auto sports... I do hope I'm wrong, perhaps the next track announcement will give us a better indication.
- 2,976
- Curitiba
I would, if I was the only one who said they liked them.
I'd like to know what that broader audience would be.
Some people here are fine with the Standards, some hate them.
Some people here are fine with the car sounds, some hate them.
Some people here are fine with the bots, some hate them.
Some people here are fine with the limited damage, some hate it.
Some people here think the physics are amazingly realistic and very close to a PC sim, some think they're meh, the best arcade physics in a racer.
I could go on, but I think my point is pretty clear. GT Planet seems to have about the same wide spectrum of opinion as the "wider audience" you speak of, especially since the membership is quite large in number. Hardly made up of fanboys that drive everyone else away but fellow cheerleaders. But about that wider audience. If the Standards were harfed at by the vast majority of gamers, it would be obvious. Boards like this one would be flooded by Standard haters. Gaming journalists would harshly flame Kaz and PD for doing something they see as a bone headed move. Instead, it's much like it is here. Some shake their heads and think including them is purely for car count. Some are overjoyed that these legacy cars are included so we can enjoy them with the new physics, and go out of their way to point out that some of them are great looking when improved. And that in a race, you won't be able to tell any difference.
So rather than say that people here aren't being honest and just saying they like them because of some nostalgia, maybe you should trust us to mean what we say. And I would point out that there is an entire thread and Photo Mode albums in the GT5 section devoted to those "ugly" Standards. Most of my Photo Mode pics are of those "ugly" Standards. So make of that what you will.
Some people are man, some are woman. So what's your point, really? That people are different?
What I did said is that only a broader audience would settle this standard issue. People who are pleased about GT6 being so much easier to master than the previous GT games, for instance.
Those are the ones who can't quite understand why they have such a materpiece in terms of "3D craftsmanship", and in the other hand, a very crappy pixelated model on a Full HD TV.
@Tenacious D , I really aprecciate your passion about GT. Is very cool, really. It's something special, but I don't understand why you always jump to arguments that have nothing to do with the issue that we're discussing.
I never said that people who don't care about the utter ugly standards aren't honest. You did. I just said that they're focusing on the legacy aspect of them, just like you are. This majority of yours is just people who care about the history, the sheer amount of cars that we enjoy since the first game, not the quality of the models.
I very much doubt that if we ask if people want them made as premium models, the majority would say "No! Leave them pixelated and uggly forever! We want a blurred Demio on PS4!".
And about your photos. Well, cool. Play the game as you want, I don't see how this is even remotely relevant to this discussion.
Last edited:
- 247
- Philippsburg
- GTP_Flinx
- Flinx66
As almost...
They know the limitations of their hardware, at least they should.
If they cannot implement it then there's no need to advertise it.
The one track a month was initialised by PD, not the customers or the community. Again, if they cannot hold their promises better do none.
Nobody wants a weekly christmas and one good thing you can say about it: it has been spot on datewise the last 2000 years.All that is a load of work. I know that everyone wants Christmas to come weekly, but I'd suggest that everyone keep in mind that we have the core game to play with now, and delivered ON SCHEDULE no less! We didn't have to wait two more years, or to buy a PS4 with possibly a new wheel to enjoy GT6. Things will be added when they're ready. I want everything now too, but I'm a realist and understand that these things take time. And you sure don't want something rushed and buggy, do you?
Last edited:
- 7,830
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
Well, now that's a totally different argument. I'm completely with you on wanting every car to be Premium, and I sincerely doubt anyone would rather no Standards be improved. Many of us are ecstatic over the new sub-Premiums, but would be even happier to have them be fully Premiumized. Still, that's a step in the right direction, and a good sign.
As I said above, I wasn't expecting Course Maker II to be ready yet. I was hoping though that the big announcements at Taipei and in Japan from this weekend might involve what they expected CM II to be, and how they used it to make the Zahara course, how it will work with Ronda, how many environments would be available, if we might be able to import our tracks from GT5, etc. Other things: that the team is converting legacy cars and tracks from previous GTs for GT6 and beyond on PS4. Some mention of new cars coming soon as DLC. Something about the Event Maker, possibly the new Race Mod and Livery Editor, when the massive online build would be ready, etc. Something about the next few months about GT6.
Maybe Jordan has something he has to sit on for a while longer. But I'd think that someone would have found an article or interview by now, so I'm thinking the new track and Red Bull events might be it. Maybe, the weekend did just end, so we'll see.
Greenwich in the UK. So for Washington State, PST would be -8 hours from GMT.
hmm I'm not seeing it in my phone. Is there a bigger city nearby that might be? Can I just use london time?
- 7,830
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
I'd think London time would be good, but since I gave you the scale, can't you convert from Seattle time? Or is that one of those phone things you can't adjust?
- 1,997
- United Kingdom
GMT is the 0 point for time, it has to be in your phone.
Don't forget, in the UK our clocks have gone back 1hr for daylight saving and won't go forward till March.
Don't forget, in the UK our clocks have gone back 1hr for daylight saving and won't go forward till March.
I'm trying to make it so I don't have to do math.
now I can just look at THIS:
Assuming the URl Worked...
- 5,068
- Glasgow
- GTP_iainoflo
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
