I feel GT6 will be a disappointment.

[ShiftingGears]

Kaz states that the GT series is first and foremost a driving simulator, basically the racing aspect (fun bit) comes 2nd or possibly 3rd after photo mode. This is shown by the poor choice of offline races in GT5 and the dull and unadventurous AI. This needs to change in GT6, I have a feeling it won't.

A lot of aspects of racing are missing, challenging AI, offline custom races, qualifying, fastest lap, offline grid starts etc.

But if it is a driving sim then why are the gear changes modelled so poorly, just watching vids of GT6 you can see the gear changes are exactly the same as GT5 no effect to the car other than less revs on the counter, a gear change in a car is part of the thrill, it's where you get the kicks of power, there is no drama shown in GT. GT5's changes are all sequential shifts no matter what you're driving but without any noticeable effect on performance. Plus what makes it worse is that you can quickly shift from 6th to 1st at 300km/h without a hiccup.

They've had 15 years and 6 game releases to work on the sounds and other than on a handful of cars, they sound like crap. Other franchises have come along and done much better work on car sounds. At some point we have to realize it's just not a high priority for PD and may never be which is sad. The GT series has the potential to blow everything else into the weeds in every aspect of driving/racing simulation, I believe the resources are there to do so and have been for some time. Look at what iRacing has done with just a sliver of the funding that GT has. Look at what PCars has done with a hairs worth of the funding available to GT.

Agreed with both posts completely. Now for my spiel about Gran Turismo, in general;

All things considered, Gran Turismo 2 and Gran Turismo 4 were two of the games I spent the most time on on the PS1 and PS2 respectively. Nowadays if I would play either of the two games, I would pick GT2 any day of the week, simply because the majority of the tracks are enjoyable, the cameras gave a good view of the car, the car customisation was like GT1, and then some (unlike any other racing series I played), and the driving physics were highly enjoyable.

As far as GT4 goes, there were many good real-life tracks included, like Nurburgring, Suzuka and Sonoma, but frankly some gameplay aspects were very problematic. The sounds did not give me an adrenaline rush, the AI was still poor, and there was chronic understeer when driving many cars. However the sheer amount of content in GT4 - the events, the cars, the tracks - ensured that I played the game for a long time. However, gradually when I'd explored all the new content, I gradually lost interest in playing the game, which is fine. I went through a long period of not playing any GT game. I noticed over the years that the GT series had a big problem with sounds and AI, which made me enjoy the games (particularly GT4) less and less as I kept playing it.

On the eve of the GT5 release I saw the car list and was incredibly disappointed with the amount of recycled content. Eventually I did buy GT5 in 2012, and I didn't have any good reason why, besides the fact that it was GT and I had bought GT1-4. I spent the least amount of time as I could on the offline content, less than any time I spent on previous GT games. It had no replay value - I simply felt compelled to complete events, and then never touched most of them again. If it wasn't for online mode I would have stopped playing GT5 within three months of me buying it.

I really feel that with the resources that PD has, they have severely under-delivered in the last ~10 years. Aspects of gameplay that needed dramatic improvement in GT4 still need dramatic improvement now, nearly 10 years later. I won't gamble on buying GT6 like I did with GT5 - GT6 will have to convince me on its merits, like independent reviews, online feedback etc. The Gran Turismo series has given me many great gaming experiences over the years, but the games are no longer a guaranteed buy for me. I hope enough people feel the same way so that PD feel the impact of poor game design on their sales figures.

 

[Zuku]

Agreed with both posts completely. Now for my spiel about Gran Turismo, in general;

All things considered, Gran Turismo 2 and Gran Turismo 4 were two of the games I spent the most time on on the PS1 and PS2 respectively. Nowadays if I would play either of the two games, I would pick GT2 any day of the week, simply because the majority of the tracks are enjoyable, the cameras gave a good view of the car, the car customisation was like GT1, and then some (unlike any other racing series I played), and the driving physics were highly enjoyable.

As far as GT4 goes, there were many good real-life tracks included, like Nurburgring, Suzuka and Sonoma, but frankly some gameplay aspects were very problematic. The sounds did not give me an adrenaline rush, the AI was still poor, and there was chronic understeer when driving many cars. However the sheer amount of content in GT4 - the events, the cars, the tracks - ensured that I played the game for a long time. However, gradually when I'd explored all the new content, I gradually lost interest in playing the game, which is fine. I went through a long period of not playing any GT game. I noticed over the years that the GT series had a big problem with sounds and AI, which made me enjoy the games (particularly GT4) less and less as I kept playing it.

On the eve of the GT5 release I saw the car list and was incredibly disappointed with the amount of recycled content. Eventually I did buy GT5 in 2012, and I didn't have any good reason why, besides the fact that it was GT and I had bought GT1-4. I spent the least amount of time as I could on the offline content, less than any time I spent on previous GT games. It had no replay value - I simply felt compelled to complete events, and then never touched most of them again. If it wasn't for online mode I would have stopped playing GT5 within three months of me buying it.

I really feel that with the resources that PD has, they have severely under-delivered in the last ~10 years. Aspects of gameplay that needed dramatic improvement in GT4 still need dramatic improvement now, nearly 10 years later. I won't gamble on buying GT6 like I did with GT5 - GT6 will have to convince me on its merits, like independent reviews, online feedback etc. The Gran Turismo series has given me many great gaming experiences over the years, but the games are no longer a guaranteed buy for me. I hope enough people feel the same way so that PD feel the impact of poor game design on their sales figures.

Honestly I know it's suppose to be a simulator, but it's marketed at me like a racing game.

Really if this was a simulator they should just sell them to DMV's all over the U.S.

But since that's not the case they need a swift kick in the rear to realize something whatever that is needs to happen quick.




Even with all that I still think GT5's biggest problem is online itself as I've said since Call of Duty 4 and games around at that time in 2007. They've been suffering because people becoming toooo focused on online.

 

[Earth]

Based on the demo, if you love Gran Turismo 5 and what it is you wont be disappointed, as theres little to nothing different in Gran Turismo 6.

That for me is enormously disappointing. At the end of this console generation the graphics arent even impressive anymore. Framerate issues especially in cockpit, lots of flickering, undefined shadows incockpit, inconsistent quality from track to track (Autumn Ring armco and barriers are better looking then Grand Valley's, and of course from standard cars to premium) low resolution textures on terrain and grass outside of the track, and now even the 2D trees look kinda weird.

Just dont get your expectations too high. I have a feeling this one will score around the same or less then GT5 because reviewers will be expecting alot more after 3 years of development and they wont get it.

Everyone is saying GT6 is what GT5 was suppose to be. Even those expectations may be too high after playing the demo

 

[Goudvis]

That's pretty much the whole thing it was snowball effect.

Like I said 3 things people these days looking for in a Racing Game no matter what it tries to be 1. Online function/Play, A.I, and # of Events in Single Player if it has a single player counterpart like most do.

GT5 only did 1 of these things correct, and actually it didn't because lot of people complained about it as well, but I was going to say that was online.

Physics, graphics and number of cars aren't important?

By focusing on the stuff which isn't great, you completely forget why you play gran turismo.
Few features will ever be perfect. The course maker could be better, but there is one and I know people are using it. The problem is that everybody wants a game built to their preferences and then they're disappointed/angry when some feature isn't entirely as they imagined.

They've added carting, rally, 24h racing but it's not good, because we can imagine it being better. That's not fair.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the game. I think there's something wrong with the expectations.

 

[HKS racer]

I don't think there's anything wrong with the game. I think there's something wrong with the expectations.

It's all people fault. Why do they ask for decent AI? That's not fair. They should enjoy Aspec slalom instead, and catch the rabbit seasonals.

 

[Goudvis]

It's all people fault. Why do they ask for decent AI? That's not fair. They should enjoy Aspec slalom instead, and catch the rabbit seasonals.

I see your point.
You're right. GT6 will be disappointing, as it's probably going to be this demo with some more cars.

 

[Zuku]

Physics, graphics and number of cars aren't important?

By focusing on the stuff which isn't great, you completely forget why you play gran turismo.
Few features will ever be perfect. The course maker could be better, but there is one and I know people are using it. The problem is that everybody wants a game built to their preferences and then they're disappointed/angry when some feature isn't entirely as they imagined.

They've added carting, rally, 24h racing but it's not good, because we can imagine it being better. That's not fair.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the game. I think there's something wrong with the expectations.

# of cars, Physics, and graphics are important, but they aren't as important as Career mode, A.I, and Online(at least this generation).

I would possibly upgrade Physics as far as GT is concerned to be up there with A.I and the rest, but guess what most people complained about A.I and Career Mode after that

As for # of cars I've played other racing games even if they are arcade and they had enough for me NFS Hot Pursuit comes to mind only had less than 100, but it was enough for me I'd rather have 50 very different cars then 1200 with 800 being different variations of the same 🤬 car.

 

[Exorcet]

Few features will ever be perfect.

There is no point in saying this. Everyone knows. No one is asking for perfection.

The course maker could be better, but there is one and I know people are using it.

The course creator doesn't even live up to its name. It provides so little control that the word "creator" doesn't even belong in the name. I can't create tracks, only have the game throw random poorly planned sections of pavement at me. I'm glad that PD decided to include something like this, but the execution was beyond subpar. At the minimum, it would be nice to actually have control over the track you're supposedly creating.

The problem is that everybody wants a game built to their preferences and then they're disappointed/angry when some feature isn't entirely as they imagined.

I'm sure some group does that. In general I think it's more a case of PD making odd or bad decisions. The course creator that doesn't let you create is one. The level system is another. Forced SRF. Changing things without making them options (chase view cam). Etc.

They've added carting, rally, 24h racing but it's not good, because we can imagine it being better. That's not fair.

Not because we can image it being better, but because we can imagine it being better with practically no effort in a lot of cases. That is very fair.

What's unfair is expecting praise for doing a poor job.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the game. I think there's something wrong with the expectations.

I completely disagree in the case of GT5. Many parts were simply bad. GT6 is not clearly defined yet.

 

[RacingOtaku86]

Speak for yourself, GT5 was not perfect, but it damn well entertains me whenever I pop it in. I expect GT6 to do the same.

Honestly, people keep thinking that the next game in the series should always have this or that innovation. GT5 tried to do that and succeeded in some, and slugged in others. What I want in GT6 is just a good game.

Congrats, but as someone who has played better games past and present GT5 holds no candles.

No not just talking about Forza(which I've actually never played).

I have to agree with brown; I play to be entertained. I'm not like some who live and breathe GT5 like it was oxygen (you know who you are). Yes, I also played bad games, but GT5, with its flaws, is still a game I will come back to. You go ahead and tune your cars to destroy everyone else, I'm here to have fun, and you doubters can't take that from me.

 

[Wolfe]

The course creator doesn't even live up to its name. It provides so little control that the word "creator" doesn't even belong in the name. I can't create tracks, only have the game throw random poorly planned sections of pavement at me. I'm glad that PD decided to include something like this, but the execution was beyond subpar.

I found the course creator similarly disappointing, but I would be happy with a similar system if it worked better. It's not even "random" for one thing, it seems to hone in on predetermined base layouts while you to pick from predetermined section curves. If you like the way a track is turning out, and you switch one part, it could end up changing into a completely different base layout (as I recall). I appreciate that Polyphony wanted to make sure you could share setups with friends and drive the same track, but the interface is terribly misleading and like you said, you have little control.

Not because we can image it being better, but because we can imagine it being better with practically no effort in a lot of cases. That is very fair.

That seems to be some kind of systemic issue in this HD age of gaming, and I'm not sure why. Little tweaks or UI features that would make a big difference relative to the effort involved in implementing them are either ignored or left on the cutting room table, in several kinds of games.

In my opinion, Polyphony is actually one of the most thoughtful developers around -- take the SDTV menu zoom feature in GT5, for example. 👍 I just hope that means GT6 will expand upon some of the features that were underrepresented in GT5, including rally.

 

[z71L28]

What disappointed me most about gt5 was the standerd cars. If pd dosen't address this issue then it's just a couple new tracks and cars. the physics engine was fine, felt it diden't need improvement. It won't be such a disappointment however, if thay at least make some of the cars I enjoy into premiums. here's a short list. All rx7's, all nsx's, all ruff's and all those tuned nissan gtr's:idea:.

 

[RandomCarGuy17]

^I'm with you on the rufs, but not with everything else. The only standard NSX I want to see turned premium is one of the '97 or '99 NSXs, I'm comtempt for now with the premium skylines we have. I would rather see more standard american and european cars be made premium as well as all of the aussie cars.

 

[Fogerty_Jr]

In my opinion, it will be a matter of expectations. I believe GT6 will deliver a solid gaming experience compatibly with the hardware it's supposed to run on, and maybe even beyond that. Will this make GT6 the great game everybody would like to see? Of course it won't. It will keep most of the GT5 deficiencies, with some minor improvements here and there. Me, I'm just happy to have the chance to say goodbye to my old PS3 with another GT release which I can play over and over, even if it's still far from being perfect. I'm sure PD could have given more focus on some of the most annoying issues like sounds, AI, collisions. Instead, I think they've focused on the development of those aspects which will give a good contribution to the development for the next gen: talking about adaptive tessellation, improved course maker, physics engine, and (who knows) maybe even free roaming. As long as I have an improved A-spec mode, the new physics engine, some new tracks, something fixed here and there, it'll be fine. It's GT6 on PS3, which is still a good thing for those who will not get a PS4 right away when it's out.

With this I'm not saying that GT6 will be a masterpiece. Far from that. PD has run through its darkest age with PS3, and I don't know if that's because of them requiring too much from the hardware, of because of the hardware delivering less than expected. Either way, my expectations for the current generation have been greatly reshaped since GT5, so I would hardly be disappointed from this new release. I'm just hopeful that both sony and PD will learn from the past mistakes and strike back on the PS4 with the best GT of all times. But meanwhile... GT6. Why not?

 

[White & Nerdy]

I think the more critical atmosphere leading up to the GT6 release is that everyone still remembers the letdown that was GT5. If you believed the magazines, GT5 was set to have a livery editor, dash views and full modification for all cars, and more. Instead we have a thin track selection, horrible course generator (made worse in patch 1.06), no livery editor, horrible customization, outdated physics, lacking online features, a "fun-size" single-player career, and other cool extras. A lot of important elements had to be added in later, by pay-DLC... which was also a badly handled mess. So, having been burned once already, this forum is now inclined to be more skeptical about a new release. Also, GT6 has less of a mystique around it than GT5 did, due to not being the first GT in half a decade or the first GT on a new system.

I also believe myself that GT6 won't be much to write home about. The GameStop pre-order package includes "your own customizable paint chips", which confirms that the paint chip system is still in use. To me, that seems to indicate that a livery editor is still AWOL, for whatever reason.

"Multiple aero parts" for each car probably indicates only a very small upgrade over what we already have, since that's already true for anything that's not a concept car or otherwise incompatible with aero upgrades.

It's already been confirmed that we're getting a rehashed course generator instead of a manually controllable course editor, once again for what reason I'm not sure. Free roam also apprears to be AWOL, though with 16 cars per session pushing the limits of the PS3, there would be a hard choice between extremely small maps and extremely sparsely populated maps, either one of which might be worse than no free-roam at all. (I guess the sparsely-populated option might still allow street racing/cops & racers leagues, but a lack of AI traffic would make the whole thing feel rather barren)

Fortunately I don't think they're going to do region-exclusive pre-order content again, or at least, if they are, we don't know about it yet. Still, such a volume of pre-order content seems to suggest significant desperation on the part of the developers. Usually, the more desperate a game's pre-order bonus packages are, the more disappointing the game itself usually is. Remember Shift2 Unleashed? That game was barely playable even with a wheel, and they held the Nissan Silvia and Lamborghini Murcielago - two important staple cars for a racing game - hostage to get more pre-orders. I fell for it big time. I don't think I've played that game at any time within the last year, and that $60 I wasted on it could come in very handy right now.

I think the whole thing goes back to a problem common among video game manufacturers but exemplified by PD - they're always launching half-finished ideas and using sheer quantity to outshine quality (probably because it's easier for a marketing department to hype "1,000 CARS!" than "best balanced car list in the world!"), then moving on to other things and never giving their previous work a second thought. B-spec, celebrity events, paint chips, horns, and racing suits flourish while the basics languish and may even be completely forgotten.

A case in point, GT3 had one of the smallest car lists ever seen in the GT, but also one of the best. It was well balanced, lacking the 50,000,000,000 JDM near-duplicates and 60hp sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-subcompacts that have become the butt of jokes (or, in the case of the latter, inexplicable affection) within the GT fanbase. The previous title, GT2, had a lot of JDM duplicates, but those at least tried to be interesting and there were a lot of interesting cars from around the world. Since then, most of the growth in car count has been in the form of near-duplicates, cars that make glaciers look quick, and musem pieces (more on that later). Meanwhile, livery editors and significant customization are still buried deep in the depths of the to-do list and the tuning system is getting simpler.

The track list is not immune to this. GT5 has far fewer actual tracks (as opposed to layouts) than GT4, even after DLC. Despite this, the emphasis is still on adding never-before-seen tracks like that stupid Cape Ring, while classic GT favorites like Seattle, old Rome, Grindelwald, Complex String, and more are ignored. Rallying has been pushed aside with only three tracks and a couple of "course generator" environments, kept out of sight in Simulation/GT Mode with the rest of the Special Events.

And remeber what I said about forgetting the basics? The car list is an example of that too. PD's scattered, incohesive approach to constructing a game is exemplified by their scattered, incohesive car lists. In addition to a heavy JDM bias, the lists are beginning to take on a great quantity of old, slow, unusual cars that aren't good for much except trolling, messing around, and wasting prize car slots. Now they're wasting resources and manpower on "LOOK AT ME, I'M SAVING THE PLANET!" cars as well.

I'm warning you now, I might have more to post later.

 

[MisterWhiskers]

Holy Mother of Neptune that explained everything on my mind! 👍 + 250

 

[ShiftingGears]

Even with all that I still think GT5's biggest problem is online itself as I've said since Call of Duty 4 and games around at that time in 2007. They've been suffering because people becoming toooo focused on online.

Suffering? Online racing is the only reason why many are still playing GT5. Online is a problem for PD because it shows what GT5 would be like with challenging opponents. Online exposes their offline shortcomings - I don't feel that the offline mode of GT5 would be any better if there wasn't an online mode, so I don't know why GT5 gameplay suffers because of online.

I think the whole thing goes back to a problem common among video game manufacturers but exemplified by PD - they're always launching half-finished ideas and using sheer quantity to outshine quality (probably because it's easier for a marketing department to hype "1,000 CARS!" than "best balanced car list in the world!"), then moving on to other things and never giving their previous work a second thought. B-spec, celebrity events, paint chips, horns, and racing suits flourish while the basics languish and may even be completely forgotten.

Well said.

 

[Zuku]

That by far was a mouthful, and honestly is everything I wanted to say I'm with MisterWhiskers +251 lol.

 

[Eks]

Well said, White & Nerdy. +252

 

[Wolfe]

PD's scattered, incohesive approach to constructing a game is exemplified by their scattered, incohesive car lists. In addition to a heavy JDM bias, the lists are beginning to take on a great quantity of old, slow, unusual cars that aren't good for much except trolling, messing around, and wasting prize car slots. Now they're wasting resources and manpower on "LOOK AT ME, I'M SAVING THE PLANET!" cars as well.

Every car has fans, and is hated by others. You can say PD needs to implement certain popular classics, and add more foreign cars for balance, but they're not "wasting" anything and there's no reason to exclude any car. Modelling cars for a game like this, especially old cars, is partly opportunistic. A true waste of resources and manpower would be to send a crew halfway around the world to photograph and record data for just one or two cars. Developers go with what they can get, when they can get it. Their selections aren't 100% deliberate.

As it happens, tiny ~60hp cars are relatively common in Japan, and they've been building cars of that ilk for over 50 years, so there's plenty of history to cover. And frankly, Gran Turismo has never had the physics fidelity to give slower cars a fair shake. If any GT game can prove the worth of driving a slow car fast, GT6 and its physics improvements could be the one. People are already enjoying themselves with the Leaf in the demo.

The bottom line is, everyone has an opinion on car lists, and none of them are the same. Feel free to ask for more, but asking for cars to be excised won't accomplish anything but flare tempers. So 🤬 off and leave my Subaru 360 alone.

 

[MeanElf]

...A lot of important elements had to be added in later, by pay-DLC... which was also a badly handled mess...

I seem to recall a lot of the patches and updates that improved areas being free, including the majority of DLC.

The GameStop pre-order package includes "your own customizable paint chips", which confirms that the paint chip system is still in use. To me, that seems to indicate that a livery editor is still AWOL, for whatever reason.

Well, to be fair it doesn't actually confirm that. A paint system that uses chips is there but it could well be different in implementation. It is only the speculation of the people here that have elevated this to 'fact' status.

"Multiple aero parts" for each car probably indicates only a very small upgrade over what we already have, since that's already true for anything that's not a concept car or otherwise incompatible with aero upgrades.

Again, you assume too much I think. Or maybe you didn't see the spoiler and wider selection of kit parts image which will be available for all cars - that looked like a lot more to mee - but now I'm assuming...

It's already been confirmed that we're getting a rehashed course generator instead of a manually controllable course editor, once again for what reason I'm not sure.

My impression from the info we've heard is that it will be a lot more controllable and far broader in scope - so I really don't see where you are getting this confirmation from.

I think the whole thing goes back to a problem common among video game manufacturers but exemplified by PD - they're always launching half-finished ideas and using sheer quantity to outshine quality (probably because it's easier for a marketing department to hype "1,000 CARS!" than "best balanced car list in the world!"), then moving on to other things and never giving their previous work a second thought.

Increasing the 1,000 car list to at least 1,200 is hardly forgetting an idea. The balance is quite good, moreso than the super car heavy lists in many other games. Not everyone wants to drive those things. I honestly thought when driving around Silverstone in the GT6 demo that I'm really looking forward to driving some sub 400pp cars around that track with the new physics. Those cars in their way are more of a challenge. I remember a Fiat race our group had on Autumn Ring - great fun and really quite gripping in those underpowered little beasts.

The track list is not immune to this. GT5 has far fewer actual tracks (as opposed to layouts) than GT4, even after DLC. Despite this, the emphasis is still on adding never-before-seen tracks like that stupid Cape Ring, while classic GT favorites like Seattle, old Rome, Grindelwald, Complex String, and more are ignored.

I think the drop here is more due to the graphical improvements in GT5. I know quite a few have said they cannot see the difference between GT4 and GT5 for some tracks - there again, some people are also saying they can't see any difference between GT5 and the GT6 demo...point is, higher visual fidelity comes at a cost with regard to disc space. True, maybe without a museum card and horn collection more space could have been freed up, but that's just the way they went. The feedback is in, so hopefully they will have looked at that and chosen more wisely, especially as PS3 resource allocation is such an issue.

Also, GT as a series, as you've all but said has been focused mostly on fantasy tracks, so new tracks like Cape Ring and Eiger shouldn't be a surprise. I do believe that a lot of the older and favourite tracks will appear as DLC. That is a hope, not an assumption.

...In addition to a heavy JDM bias, the lists are beginning to take on a great quantity of old, slow, unusual cars that aren't good for much except trolling, messing around, and wasting prize car slots. Now they're wasting resources and manpower on "LOOK AT ME, I'M SAVING THE PLANET!" cars as well.

See below - it's never a waste.

...The bottom line is, everyone has an opinion on car lists, and none of them are the same. Feel free to ask for more, but asking for cars to be excised won't accomplish anything but flare tempers. So 🤬 off and leave my Subaru 360 alone.

👍 Nicely said

 

[Imari]

I seem to recall a lot of the patches and updates that improved areas being free, including the majority of DLC.

Please list what DLC we received that was free and paid, then explain to me how the free DLC is the majority in any way.

I'm with you on there being a lot of free patches and updates (although a lot of them were adding in features that were on the box, or fixing game-breaking stuff), but the majority of the DLC was not free.

 

[BobFrankfurter]

I do agree that GT5 seems to be biased with the type of cars they choose.
I don't need 25 variants for every Nissan or Toyota. I think it should be a little more fair to every car manufacturer. Forza seems to have it right. If there was a choice between Forza 4 and GT5 for my PS3, I would go with Forza.

EDIT: I was looking at Forza's website, and they have SO many more american and french and italian cars it's amazing. Some I'd point out are the AMC Javelin, '65 Mustang coupe, all kinds that GT never had.

 

[Antonisbob]

Wall-of-text.

/Thread.

Everything said was what I was thinking as well.

 

[MeanElf]

Please list what DLC we received that was free and paid, then explain to me how the free DLC is the majority in any way...

You're right, I got carried away there...only three out of the fifteen - I don't know what came over me maybe it was the general air of assumption...

 

[CBH]

Everyone wants this game to be perfect but you can not get it perfect. For example look at the world now and you see that it is not perfect.
So please do what I will do go and buy GT6 when it comes and enjoy it.

 

[iRevelationz]

Everyone wants this game to be perfect but you can not get it perfect. For example look at the world now and you see that it is not perfect.
So please do what I will do go and buy GT6 when it comes and enjoy it.

There's a difference between wanting a game to be perfect and expecting a game to be perfect. If you think everyone wants GT6 to be perfect, then props to you for stating the obvious.

We've all thought about our own individual version of a perfect Gran Turismo. That version for me might be terrible for someone else. Hence why there will never be a truly perfect game.

If you're going to purchase GT6 and enjoy it, then great for you. But just because your expectations are at the bottom of the ocean, don't tell us to buy it. That's our decision, not yours.

 

[VolkswagenX]

Everyone wants this game to be perfect but you can not get it perfect. For example look at the world now and you see that it is not perfect.
So please do what I will do go and buy GT6 when it comes and enjoy it.

I can't stand these kind of responses. I don't see it as asking for perfection. It's about fixing stuff that should be easy to fix, but PD doesn't even seem to try at time's.

Small things that can have a good impact but PD just ignores.

Disappointments will be to me:
* No online leaderboards for all tracks
* Not having good search options in online mode. How hard must it be to ad something like a pp limit in the search option? Its not like they have to redesign the whole game to do that.
* Not having a stupid career mode and by stupid I mean having a super car challenge where a Mclaren F1 is in the same race as a C3 corvette. How about having a field of cars that are actually competitive? Is that like... asking for perfection? The AI is already stupid. Don't make us race against slow cars in a race ment for fast cars.
* Still no livery editor and it looks like it will not come to GT6.
* I could live with the RM cars if they would come in groups that would compete with each other but what we have now are a bunch of cars that are all in a class of there own...
* The RM cars could have better liveries to! But that I think is something personal. They look boring and lack any kind of imagination.
* What about prize cars? Finding out about the standard cars when I first played GT5 was really a kick to the face for me, but having the majority of prize cars being slow crappy standard cars. And after winning the Midget twice I felt like Kaz standing next to me, pointing dan laughing out loud.

They don't have to make big changes to make it a better game than GT6, but knowing PD's history they will not disapoint in being disapointing.

 

[Mr_X]

Have low expectations then you won't be disappointed

 

[VolkswagenX]

Have low expectations then you won't be disappointed

Wow thats a great idea!

 

[05XR8]

being that I cant partake in the demo at the moment, I decided to delete all my data and start GT5 again. no updated version 5.0. no interior views. no DLC. no online play. just me and the game. i bought a used 11,000Cr. '85 Savanna and bought an oil change. i plan on only racing on real circuits in A-Spec, then buy a premium FC RX-7, SS tyres, rims, front splitter and sport suspension. all this just to race in Arcade Mode.

What i found so far, no matter how much i beat the AI, i like driving that Savanna. the sound of the car and the way it handles is cool. if GT6 with all its bells & whistles, can be as fun as GT5 without all the doodads, then PD have done their job for me.