mister dog
(Banned)
- 8,396
- Spain
- misterdog
- misterdog7
I feel GT6 will be a disappointment.
- Thread starter RedPartyhat
- 460 comments
- 34,707 views
GTP_Remo
Premium
- 809
- Michigan
- remo_of_oz
It doesn't matter, this demo was to show off the physics model and GT Acadamy 2013 , nothing more... GET OVER IT.
- 9,295
- Duisburg
First off, great post, White & Nerdy đź‘Ť Agreed with everything that was said.
If someone else found a great way of doing something, why not do so yourself? Take the wheel, for example. You can't re-invent it. You may somewhat improve on the idea, but that's it. And at times, it seems that some developers seem to try and invent their own wheel, but come up with something octagonal. They'd be better of just taking notes from someone else who's already created a perfectly round wheel.
Also, one more thing: There being a reason for all the Nissans in GT doesn't make the car list any better. Okay, so Kazunori's got a strong relationship with Nissan and is still involved with the company. That's one way to put it, another would be to call it bias. Whether you paraphrase it in a positive way or a negative one, doesn't really change a thing about the result. And, as can be seen, the majority of people seem to think that the result isn't the best it could be.
As a consumer, on the other hand, I'd consider it rather naive to assume that only the physics (a part people like) are representative of the final product while the AI for example (stuff people didn't like) aren't. That's more wishful thinking, isn't it? Okay, I'll admit that demos aren't necessarily representative of the final game. That's pretty normal, but you either take everything in the demo with a grain of salt or nothing that was presented in the demo.
Completely ignoring the competition isn't something that I think is very wise in the long run. Sure, not all trends that are arising amongst other games of the genre should be emulated, but taking a few hints here and there wouldn't be a bad idea. In my opinion, it's better to copy a good idea (in a way that doesn't infringe copy rights) than to come up with a bad idea of your own.
If someone else found a great way of doing something, why not do so yourself? Take the wheel, for example. You can't re-invent it. You may somewhat improve on the idea, but that's it. And at times, it seems that some developers seem to try and invent their own wheel, but come up with something octagonal. They'd be better of just taking notes from someone else who's already created a perfectly round wheel.
Also, one more thing: There being a reason for all the Nissans in GT doesn't make the car list any better. Okay, so Kazunori's got a strong relationship with Nissan and is still involved with the company. That's one way to put it, another would be to call it bias. Whether you paraphrase it in a positive way or a negative one, doesn't really change a thing about the result. And, as can be seen, the majority of people seem to think that the result isn't the best it could be.
Dunno. You can't release a demo and expect players to focus on the physics alone, can you? I mean, as a developer, you've got to assume that players will look at what they've got (read: the entirety of the demo) and base their impression of the game around what was demonstrated.
As a consumer, on the other hand, I'd consider it rather naive to assume that only the physics (a part people like) are representative of the final product while the AI for example (stuff people didn't like) aren't. That's more wishful thinking, isn't it? Okay, I'll admit that demos aren't necessarily representative of the final game. That's pretty normal, but you either take everything in the demo with a grain of salt or nothing that was presented in the demo.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
There is no competition on the PS platform for GT5. Forza is not competition anymore than the NFL is in competition with soccer for fans.
This "demo" is not a GT6 demo, it's a NISSAN GT Academy demo. It showcases new physics and graphics and not much more. Could it have been better? Yes, of course. But it's a demo. Judge the game by the full release. Don't buy it on release day, hang around the forums here in the week after release and you'll see what it's all about.
- 7,830
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
I think this is a good focus point for my disagreement with your post. I originally thought the Course Maker was kind of an after dinner mint. The courses made with it by PD for the Special Events, while enjoyable, seemed kind of meandering and generic. But the more I raced them, the more I wanted to race them, especially the Eiger forest course. Discovering that I couldn't access it at all outside of the SEs became a big sore point with me, because every time I raced it, the more I liked it. This drove me (ba-dum-bum) to open up the Course Maker back in March and fuss with it.
Well, the first track I made with it, a long meandering squashed broccoli looking map - which they advise you not to try first off - became my favorite course in the game next to the Nordshleife. I intend to chase down some of the better user-made tracks over summer because this is a greatly overlooked feature. Why didn't they offer a more comprehensive from-scratch generator like ModNation Racers offers? Probably because of ram limits, and because most users wouldn't know what the heck to do with it. I think a full blown Course Maker is coming, but will take PS4 to realize properly. But quite a few of us think it's not "horrible" at all.
Very few request it, I see no point to it.
Like Naughty Dog and Insomniac for instance?
Says you. I happen to have a garage stuffed to the roof with Standards, and while a good majority of them are Japanese, I happen to like Japanese cars. I wouldn't keep them if I didn't. But having said that, there is no shortage of Fords, Beemers, Lambos, TVRs, Aston Martins, Jaguars, and some other non-Asian makes. A certain competitor has a car list more slanted in favor of American and European cars, and while that's nice, I also don't like the resulting exclusions.
I really don't find much to commend in lengthy posts detailing why GT5 sucks and why one poster or other is about done with the series unless PD does what they want. Especially in pre-judging a game which we know so very little about. We don't even know if used cars will be in GT6 yet, and that's not a given. GT3 didn't have any either.
As Griffith500 said, rants don't accomplish anything other than reveal how important the poster feels in the grand scheme of things. All developers make the game they want, not just Polyphony Digital, and this shouldn't be a news flash or something. GT6 is going to be what it is, it's likely going to sell like tacos, and be a much better game than GT5 was. If that doesn't suit some of you, oh well.
- 4,209
- Wasilla, AK
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.
That's exactly what I was talking about - their selections aren't 100% deliberate. For some reason, possibly Sony executive meddling, they've decided that the most important thing is to have the biggest car list out there, so they'll grab just about anything with four wheels and a propulsion system. And yes, since they're in Japan, that means lots of near-duplicate Skylines and Miatas, along with a lot of tragic taller-than-wide boxes. Also, the process of developing and construcing a video game probably approaches zero-sum status. Time spent padding the car list with Mazda Miata Yet Another Editon II (NB, J) '99 or Suzuki Inline3Box Boxline Custom '00 was time not spen adding a Mercedes AMG or a Trans Am. Time spent adding premium kei cars, catering to the millitary history types with Volkswagen Notasgoodasawillysjeep '44, or adding a Tesla Model Self Righeous or Mitsubishi iTiNNiTUS so players can save the planet in GT, is time not spent adding a premium Camaro ZL1 or non-R Zonda. Or Cadillac CTS-V or Ford Mustang Cobra R.
The majority of DLC was paid for, and it was a real farce when they introduced the first wave. First it was delayed by a week (in North America only, of course), then the car and track packs worked for one account only until a fic on 12/07/11 (NA release was on 10/25/11 IIRC). They did finally figure everything out and get to work on adding premium VW Beetles and Nissan Leaves, however.
True, there could be ways to have a paint chip system that wasn't totally annoying, but I'm not counting on PD thinking what I'm thinking in that direction.
No, I didn't see that image. Can you point me to it?
Possibly, but according to one of the news articles on here, it will still be a random generator and not a fully manual editor. Why they bother with reprogramming algorithms instead of just giving us full freedom is beyond me.
I would actually prefer the supercar-heavy lists of other games to what we have now, but my main balance issue is that Japanese cars make up over half of GT5's car list, they made up well over half (probably over 3/4) of GT4's car list, and many of those are nearly identical. And somehow that wasn't a waste?
If disc space had something to do with it, then it goes right back to what I said about allowing the basics to languish. Instead of having more tracks, which are integral to a racing game, they went with horns and museum cards. And then wasted disc space on Cape Ring and London, never-before-seen tracks which regularly ruin online lobbies.
My problem was never with fantasy tracks, it was with the tendency of PD to let old tracks, including community favorites, fall by the wayside with every new game. People have wanted Grindelwald, Red Rock Valley, SSR11, and Complex String back since they were removed, and PD's talent for track design seems to have seriously deteriorated since GT3 (though Eiger and El Capitan were pretty good).
It's a sore point with me as well, and I do happen to think they should put their SE courses up for download somewhere. I've even made quite a few courses myself with it, and I just about had a fit when patch 1.06 ruined Mt. Aso. Doesn't mean I wouldn't rather have more control over the course layout. Franly, it does seem a little strange to go to the trouble of programming complicated algorithms instead of giving the players some freedom, thouhg to be honest PD doesn't seem to like the idea of giving the player freedom anyway.
OK, maybe "horrible" was too strong a word, but see above.
I don't know, I see plenty of "cruise" and "80MPH COPS" rooms out there. It just seems like giving us some free roam maps to do those things on would greatly enhance the game experience. More than horns and another Nissan Skyline LOL-Spec II '98, certainly.
Like Naughty Dog and Insomniac for instance?
Explain.
As do I. I have hundreds of cars I got years ago intending to mod them out, and I like tuning odd cars, but still, less than 10 Camaros and more than 30 Skylines. The Camaro's better-looking variant, the Pontiac Firebird, is among the also-interesting cars that were sadly left out, and you just have to wonder if they'd have been able to add more interesting muscle & exotic cars if they hadn't been so busy trying to increase their car count.
I wouldn't mind not having used cars. Permanent engine damage is a really obnoxious feature I could have done without.
Technically true, but if people were just content to take things as they came, this thread wouldn't exist. PD apparently does read forums, so our feedback could eventually have an effect somewhere down the road.
Last edited:
- 7,830
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
Like Naughty Dog and Insomniac for instance?
I figured these should be connected to help with context. Anyway, come on dude, it's the exact opposite from what I've seen. The popular series are the ones which have the Gold, Platinum, Extra Special Edition or whatever versions with goodies. Forza, Halo, Metal Gear Solid, Devil May Cry, Tekken... most of the special edition versions of games are there to entice some extra cash from faithful fans in exchange for a few nifty trinkets to milk some added profit. It's fairly uncommon for special versions of unpopular or flagging games to be offered because they almost always bomb and cost the company more than if they hadn't bothered. And check the sales figures again, GT5 is still selling right along at good volume, even with a ton of used copies floating around. So your point really doesn't seem to have any weight to it.
Anyway, you sound much less grouchy in your new post, and it seems we're mostly in agreement, and I think most of us really are. There are a few malcontents who are truly sore at Kaz and Polyphony for putting out such a weird un-Gran Turismoey Gran Turismo and want to make a stir about it. Some of them might want to get Kaz's attention for the sake of a better GT6, but it's kind of hard sometimes to tell the difference between that and trolling.
Like I said, GT6 is going to be what it is, and this late in the development cycle, asking for very different goodies might be a lost cause. Like with the Cruise, Cops n Robbers or Cat & Mouse thing, I'm lucky to see one server when I peek at the online list. I see way more dragstrip rooms, so I'm betting we don't see anything like that oddball stuff in GT6, or ever.
For everything else, Kaz remarks in interviews that he's aware of our wish lists. Even though damage is mostly going to be a no-show in GT6, he knows how much a huge number of fans want it, so something substantial is likely going to be made for GT7. The same with a Livery Editor; if a serious one isn't in GT6, he knows there will be an outcry, so one will probably be in GT7. But things like sound have been improving right along in GT5 with updates, so I fully expect a good number of cars if not all of them to be getting an audio tweak in GT6, some a complete makeover. Standards won't be an issue this time, or much of one.
This is Gran Turismo of course, so something about GT6 will anger someone. But I suspect that it's going to be such an overall better game by far that most of us will be plenty happy.
- 9,054
- Murica
- BasedAckbar
Just from the demo alone the game feels much better than GT5. The car feels much more alive now and snappy. Now TCS doesn't equate to on rails driving anymore.
- 4,209
- Wasilla, AK
First off, strike all Microsoft games from your list. As Forza proves, Microsoft is greedy and will do anything to gouge a few more dollars out of the player's pocket. Not only do they have constant pre-order and VIP exclusive content, plus Forza Horizon's $60 season pass with time-sensetive exclusive cars, I was watching a Horizon LP at one point and the loading screens in that game constantly remind you to BUY MORE TOKENS WITH YOUR MICROSOFT POINTS! So to qualify as desperate, an MS exclusive would have to hold back half the game as pre-order content.
My example was, as I said, Shift2 Unleashed. The use of such staple cars as the Silvia and Murcielago as pre-order content doesn't really make much sense (unless you assume EA is just run by jerks) until you realize Shift2 was a horrible game and EA just wanted to sell as many of them as possible before people had a chance to find that out.
- 4,538
- Australia
- 9,054
- Murica
- BasedAckbar
Oh no we were slightly inconvenienced by making us do four races. How dare they.
- 2,055
- United States
- Brucifxr
- 10,956
- Canada
I'm pretty sure many people wanted to try out the demo for the physics more than those "races".
That was good.
- 9,295
- Duisburg
The game doesn't have to be on your system or directly competing for sales with the game you, as a developer, are creating to take some inspiration from, does it? Seriously, how complacent does a developer have to get to be like "yeah, who cares about the plethora of racing games, they aren't competition to us, any way, so let's just not look at them at all". I don't know about you, but that sort of attitude can't be good for anything. For no product there is.
Oh, it's not a GT6 demo? Someone should've told PD!
Also, from the official GT website:
So, it is very much a Gran Turismo 6 demo, not just a GT Academy '13 demo.
And what's the point of a demo if you're not supposed to judge the game by it by any means? Also, again: The good is there to stay and the bad is going to be changed for sure? Yeah, right...
- 27,387
- Toronto
- NewAesthetic
- SlipZtrEm
if a serious one isn't in GT5, he knows there will be an outcry, so one will probably be in GT6. Oh...
I think it's fair to say "outcries" don't always equal inclusions in the series. I don't think it's even entirely fair to put the blame on PD for that one; there's only so much time, and they can't be expected to add every in-demand feature. I mean, I'm sure the entire paint chip system took a lot of time.
Seeing as how all Kaz has said about them is that some select few will be worked on (and obviously, some others have been replaced/augmented with proper Premium counterparts), they'll be nearly the same issue as they were three years ago. Though kudos to PD for getting rid of that silly limitation for Photo Travel; if folks want to see the Standards up close, I say let them. I'd wait before getting too excited at this promise of increased customization, though...
I have little doubt GT6 will be a much better, more well-rounded game than GT5 - and that's even taking into account the past two years of continued refining. I just worry it might be too little too late, and its timing is absolutely crucial this installment; they can't delay it, or it will be releasing after the next-gen systems, and as good as the new physics might be (hopefully, in the final version, a fair sight better than the demo's), I'm not sure the promise of those and a handful of new tracks and cars will be enough to sway the more casual gamers that make up the bulk of GT sales.
- 926
- machschnel
Polyphony are free to do as they wish of course, but perhaps hiding the AI (or are they placeholder AI?) away until customers actually put money on the table would have been wise. Not to mention the race was still the same old chase the rabbit, no qualifying deal, which isn't to say it won't be different in GT6, but I'm not exactly optimistic.
I bet you said the same about gt5 prologue and gt5......Name 1 game where the game was vastly improved over the final release?
Why would PD release a demo with no AI, or racing improvements? Aren't Demos supposed to showcase a game for those who may or may not buy the game? Right now people on the fence didn't see a reason to buy gt6, the AI, racing looked bad.
GT cannot get by on physics anymore, where is the racing? It is non existent in GT5 and this needs to be fixed for 6. If not the damage gt5 did to the series will be felt in sales.
It's 2013, it's time for decent races of varying length, good challenging AI, qualifying. The racing in GT is so lifeless as it currently is.
- 6,318
- West Virginia
- HBR-Roadhog
- HBR Roadhog
It´s the vacuum cleaner used for the GTR sounds?
Anyway it certainly is better then GT 5 physics wise but even if they fix the huge framerate issues and low field of view jury is still out if they can fix the AI and other issues. I suspect it will be to little to late. Sure I am not buying a PS 4 just to run GT 6 as I am not really fan of GT 5 so the odds is still bigger I get GT 6 on PS 3 as it´s less of an investment.
Anyway it certainly is better then GT 5 physics wise but even if they fix the huge framerate issues and low field of view jury is still out if they can fix the AI and other issues. I suspect it will be to little to late. Sure I am not buying a PS 4 just to run GT 6 as I am not really fan of GT 5 so the odds is still bigger I get GT 6 on PS 3 as it´s less of an investment.
- 5,761
- USA
- TPC_Raccooon23
- CRaccoon23
When there are people like me who could possibly go out and buy a Xbox One for Forza 5/6 instead of a PS4 for GT7 if GT6 shows that PD hadn't learned much from the past 3 years, then I don't see how Forza isn't competiton. My disappointment in GT5 is what made me buy a 360 in the first place to check out Forza, thus giving more money to MS. And I'm not the only one either with this mindset:
Ironically, this post was above you.
Last edited:
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
- 10,956
- Canada
- 4,538
- Australia
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
I see, nothing to do with GT6, must be a fake picture posted by HKSracer.
- 4,538
- Australia
That's my point. If the AI is that poor, why not cut straight to the time trial?
There you go - best thing that you can say about the racing aspect of the demo is that it's a "slight inconvenience". As aforementioned by others, a demo is meant to showcase a game, so I really don't see the logic in including those races in the demo when it undermines what PD have been announcing with regards to an AI rebuild. It certainly doesn't reassure me whatsoever, and I am already on the fence regarding whether or not I will buy GT6.
Indeed it is. I thought it was amusing.
- 10,956
- Canada
Hmm, don't know. Not like it was much work anyway, but I'm guessing because to PD progressing through the demo is more funner than just going straight to time trials with a flick of a figner.
