I feel GT6 will be a disappointment.

[Wolfe]

@machschnel: It depends on what you value in a driving/racing experience. I've never understood the desire to drive high-powered racecars around ovals in a game. If I had to choose, I'd rather take on mountain switchbacks in a Toyota Prius.

I don't think driving in real life is mundane in the first place. If not for the costs and potential risks, I'd do it all the time and skip racing games entirely.

 

[mister dog]

Well it's a matter of taste really, but i'll take iconic european cars like the M3 E30 above a Mazda anyday

I've never understood the desire to drive low-powered street cars in a game. I drive a street car daily. It's mundane to drive in real life, I can't imagine what it's like to drive in the risk-free environment of a game.

Bring on the high powered race monsters. You know, the cars I'd never actually be able to drive in reality.

Seeing that i drive a volvo 440 in real life; driving a M3 is actually exciting for me

It's also about how much you love classic cars that made a name for themselves through history, a Lotus Elan for example can be a lot more fun than a 800hp race monster. What also comes with those monsters is that you have to be concentrated the whole time whilst the slower saloons can be more fun and less nerving to race.

 

[uchia1234]

Sadly cars in gt5 from the other Gran Turismo series weren't added I hope they add more cars not a few at least 1, 000 more new cars and never been in the Gran Turismo series. Like the Honda Accord Coupe '03 which didn't show in gt5. Hope they add new cars and better cars that we know from the past and the future cars. Also I hope they would add in vinyls, and remove spoiler buttons for cars

 

[Tenacious D]

Europe is at slightly less than two million copies, so the US would still be a bigger market.

Seriously?? Since GT2, Gran Turismo has traditionally sold about 20% higher in Europe. But if this is true, it means that North America has gone completely bonkers over a racing game that wasn't Need For Speed or based on NASCAR.

I've never understood the desire to drive low-powered street cars in a game. I drive a street car daily. It's mundane to drive in real life, I can't imagine what it's like to drive in the risk-free environment of a game.

Bring on the high powered race monsters. You know, the cars I'd never actually be able to drive in reality.

While I can understand this sentiment... well, I also can't. I live in a major city and value my driving record, so I hardly ever get a chance to cut loose as I'd love to. Gran Turismo - and Forza now - give me a chance to do that in just about any car I want. And I want to see what those daily drivers are made of. You can blame Kazunori-sensei for that. His enthusiasm for wanting to push the mundane around curves the same as racing machines is quite infectious.

 

[dr_slump]

Europe is at slightly less than two million copies, so the US would still be a bigger market.

Where on earth did you get that from? Vgchartz?
If yes then you surely saw that they're missing the enitre 2010 sales for europe and simply took the rest (global - NA - europe - japan) as "rest of world".

This is the only really trustworthy link (just be careful with Asia sales, PD counts Japan sales separately):
http://www.polyphony.co.jp/english/list.html

Europes sales are about 2.4 times as high as the ones from NA.

Seriously?? Since GT2, Gran Turismo has traditionally sold about 20% higher in Europe. But if this is true, it means that North America has gone completely bonkers over a racing game that wasn't Need For Speed or based on NASCAR.

No, that stuff only happens if you trust sites such as vgchartz.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Frankly, it's fine to say you don't get any special connection to GT5 or Gran Turismo in general. But you insist that because you don't, that those of us who do are fooling ourselves into believing that the cake is there when it's not.

I wouldn't say it's about fooling yourselves, so much as it's about the fact PD is not the only developer to have such devotion. Sleeping at the office, pulling insanely long hours? Yeah, welcome to nearly any creative job.

You can't state that because you don't like the car list in GT5, we're sheeple or something if we do.

The only person stating that, at least that I see recently, is you.

And this is what you and critics of Gran Turismo, Polyphony and Kazunori do, and this is the issue I have with you.

As above, and something Luminis touched on - I don't think PD should get a free pass because they "try really hard" or "have passion" or "it's their first current-gen full title". I don't think any of that really matters - the game should stand on its own merit. Every other game is judged on that - like I said, there's bound to be people who worked for some of GT's competition that surely spent many late hours at the office - so why is it that only GT gets recognized and largely excused because of this?

I wouldn't buy a car with problems and then constantly overlook them or make excuses because the people who built it were passionate. If I'm spending my money on a product, then I sure should be able to voice my criticisms.

But what I know about Kazunori Yamauchi and Polyphony, I rely on from those who get inside his world, and on rare instances, those who get to know him personally:

Because an obviously bias-toned review that you "transliterated" is a fair-handed approach.

In a word, yes, especially versus a game made by a developer that seems devoted to the almighty dollar.

Read: every developer.

Plus, you assertion that any developer could produce a game with zero improvements and get away with it is just ludicrous. Just look at the arguments in this board. A lot of us are very passionate about Gran Turismo, but just as passionate about what we want to see it evolve into. And that includes me. That sure as heck doesn't sound like a bunch of complacent fanfolk with which PD can pass off whatever they want to.

Doesn't it? Tell me again how you spend a lot of time racing pretty terrible AI in Arcade Mode with a selection of Standard cars.

And on those PS2 models, you're sure talking to the wrong guy here, because I gave them a chance and I love them. Most of my cars are Standard. And you can accuse me of being one of those blind devoted sheep all you want.

Ah. Gotcha.

Here's an interesting question; what would PD have to do to get you to actually not buy GT6? The damage model is untouched, and that doesn't bother you. You've already said the sounds in GT5 are acceptable. Decade old car models, too. We're still in the dark about the career style of GT mode, and obviously other features, but it's an honest question.

But to that I say, having and racing a car is sure a hell of a lot better than not having and racing a car. Am I right?

There's no right or wrong, technically - it's a matter of opinion. If you're so in favour of quality taking a back-seat to quantity, that is certainly your choice.

I'm going to reiterate amar212's words again, because it seems they completely escape you, or that anyone could say this with any assurance:

Nothing escapes me in that quote, especially as Amar's wise enough to bookend it with the personal opinion declarations. But an intangible, subjective "something" is becoming the increasingly common reason for people preferring GT over anything else out there, and I think perhaps that's what Luminis is getting at. After years of being here, I can say it definitely started cropping up more frequently once the competition started seriously challenging (and in many ways, surpassing) GT's "realistic simulator" title.

The funny part is, I won't even argue GT has a special "something". For me, it's undoubtedly different than what it is for others. It's the reason I still want to see the game succeed. But I'm finding less and less objective reasons to place it higher than other games on my personal preference list.

Damage... yeah, that's no good. It's barely there at all in GT5, and because of that I turn it off. I do miss it when I come back from Forza with its very good damage model, and knowing that it won't be all that different in GT6 is kind of a bummer. But will that keep me from racing in GT6, and does that keep me from enjoying GT5? Oh hell no.

The funny bit is GT5's damage, at least on Premiums, is technically more impressive, since it's all real-time. The fact it looks poorer is unfortunate, since they could probably save themselves even more processing power by using the multi-level, pre-baked damage model approach in FM4.

And for those who accuse us fans of an almost religious devotion to this series and its creators, we can talk about the essence of Gran Turismo and all its aspects and how we don't get that from other racing games - and have at length.

Except that could apply to literally any game.

I like Forza's car list, but the only reason I do is because I also have Gran Turismo 5. They don't even have the Mazda 6, which is a staple of many medium range racing teams. So don't expect everyone to agree with this.

Other than the old first-gen that ran in the Koni Challenge years ago, and the current Grand Am Mazda 6 (which is a RWD, 400hp diesel, so quite a bit different from the road car), it's hardly a "staple". At least not the same way cars like the E30, E36, and E46 M3's are, the first two of which don't even have any representation in GT5, while the latter gets saddled with a few last-gen examples. Then there's Porsches, or MKIV Supras, the AE86. See, it works both ways.

 

[Tenacious D]

I wouldn't say it's about fooling yourselves, so much as it's about the fact PD is not the only developer to have such devotion. Sleeping at the office, pulling insanely long hours? Yeah, welcome to nearly any creative job.

Citation please. Seriously. I know that a few Japanese studios have this kind of self-slavery attitude towards their work, but rarely mentioned so I can't even google one up. Maybe Dan Greenawalt had a secret suite made up at Redmond that accidentally left open during one developer showcase? Probably not. Artists? Writers? Why not let's drag devoted surgeons into this who are burning midnight oil to save a patient's life, because that's all the same thing, right?

As above, and something Luminis touched on - I don't think PD should get a free pass because they "try really hard" or "have passion" or "it's their first current-gen full title". I don't think any of that really matters - the game should stand on its own merit. Every other game is judged on that - like I said, there's bound to be people who worked for some of GT's competition that surely spent many late hours at the office - so why is it that only GT gets recognized and largely excused because of this?

(snip) I wouldn't buy a car with problems and then constantly overlook them or make excuses because the people who built it were passionate. If I'm spending my money on a product, then I sure should be able to voice my criticisms.

Excused of what? Producing a game which we disapprove of certain aspects of? Are you new here?

There are a number of people here like amar212 and Griffith500 who are quite definite about what they see as flaws which should be fixed in GT5 and Polyphony's development choices which got them there. At the same time, quite outspoken as defenders of that very same developer because of the care and quality put into the same game. Loving a game and admiring a game company which produces it, and having issues with that same game, are not mutually exclusive. Maybe that's news to you.

Read: every developer.

That develops their games out of love for the subject, and considers their members as family? Uhm... help me out with this.

Tell me again how you spend a lot of time racing pretty terrible AI in Arcade Mode with a selection of Standard cars.

No, because if GT5's bots are terrible, then every game's bots are terrible. Let me quote myself:

I haven't been impressed with any game's bots. Forza's are rowdy brats. Ferrari Challenge's bots will move aside to let you pass just long enough for you to get beside them so they can swerve right back in their line and smash you off the road. GTR's bots slam into each other and grind through chicanes in a horrific mess. And most of the rest are pretty much boring cruise missiles as Gran Turismo has had through the first four games. So I get the feeling that many of these grumpy posters have been racing against other humans for so long, they only vaguely remember how good their game's bots behave.

Gee... humanlike A.I. there? Maybe not.

As for Standard cars, I know you dislike them with a passion. Many of us have posted that we would take serious objection to having them removed because we like them very much, so your opinion is widely shared, but not universal.

Here's an interesting question; what would PD have to do to get you to actually not buy GT6? The damage model is untouched, and that doesn't bother you. You've already said the sounds in GT5 are acceptable. Decade old car models, too. We're still in the dark about the career style of GT mode, and obviously other features, but it's an honest question.

Well, what would get you to abandon your favorite restaurant/bar? Quit watching your favorite show? Leave your wife/girlfriend?

What a weird question, but I'll answer it anyhow. If the driving model and physics of the various cars was crap, that would do it. That's what got me to quit Toca, because Codemasters in a number of their games couldn't seem to come up with a reasonable steering model. In lower powered race cars it was livable, but at a certain point up the scale, the cars became utter hell to control. Not for me.

PC sims like the GTRs are very good at recreating the racing world. By the numbers anyway. Before the arrival of rFactor 2 and Project CARS, and an update to iRenting, the graphics were like a PS2 game in HD. rFactor was so poorly designed that it took me half an hour to find the damned shifting settings, and I had to use the freaking manual! On top of that, the racing was just weird. I've never seen a game in which the car seemed so poised on a spindle while the world rotated beneath it. The GTRs are nice. Sort of. Once again, lame graphics, sounds that are just okay, bots that are just okay but really boring, car models that are like PS2 models in HD, a very sterile clinical driving feel, none of the liveries grabbed me and I felt like every car was a loaner. Not for me.

Need I remind you that Forza 4 was such a jarring experience that I quit after racing it for about seven weeks, my shortest stint with a Forza game ever, and didn't touch it again for more than a year because the driving model was so difficult and unengaging, and the bots mean, cruel monstors. Now, I did give it a second chance back in February along with some PC sims, and even though my first reaction to it was the same revulsion that made me quit after a few weeks, I tasted a sharp edge that was missing from every other racer I owned, and had me give it a third shot. And needless to say, my PC sims are ignored while I'm still playing Forza 4. Do I love it? Uhh... love is such a strong word.

One quick edit: another thing which would get me to reconsider getting not just another Gran Turismo but another Playstation, is if SONY made the PS5 as intrusive, and dealing with their service as entangling, as Microsoft is The ONE. And I'm not saying it can't happen either. If a certain American leader precipitates a global economic implosion, all businesses may become so desperate for money that they all behave like Microsoft.

There's no right or wrong, technically (regarding Standard cars) - it's a matter of opinion. If you're so in favour of quality taking a back-seat to quantity, that is certainly your choice.

Many of us have, I'm hardly the only one. You have argued this with a number of others in the Standard Cars thread, as I recall.

Nothing escapes me in that quote, especially as Amar's wise enough to bookend it with the personal opinion declarations. But an intangible, subjective "something" is becoming the increasingly common reason for people preferring GT over anything else out there, and I think perhaps that's what Luminis is getting at. After years of being here, I can say it definitely started cropping up more frequently once the competition started seriously challenging (and in many ways, surpassing) GT's "realistic simulator" title.

The funny part is, I won't even argue GT has a special "something". For me, it's undoubtedly different than what it is for others. It's the reason I still want to see the game succeed. But I'm finding less and less objective reasons to place it higher than other games on my personal preference list.

Not a problem, thanks for admitting at least that "it" is there.

And for those who accuse us fans of an almost religious devotion to this series and its creators, we can talk about the essence of Gran Turismo and all its aspects and how we don't get that from other racing games - and have at length.

Except that could apply to literally any game.

A-hem.

The funny part is, I won't even argue GT has a special "something". For me, it's undoubtedly different than what it is for others. It's the reason I still want to see the game succeed.

In the same post, no less...

Other than the old first-gen that ran in the Koni Challenge years ago, and the current Grand Am Mazda 6 (which is a RWD, 400hp diesel, so quite a bit different from the road car), it's hardly a "staple". At least not the same way cars like the E30, E36, and E46 M3's are, the first two of which don't even have any representation in GT5, while the latter gets saddled with a few last-gen examples. Then there's Porsches, or MKIV Supras, the AE86. See, it works both ways.

Some images for your perusal.

 

[MeanElf]

[...This is the only really trustworthy link (just be careful with Asia sales, PD counts Japan sales separately):
http://www.polyphony.co.jp/english/list.html

Europes sales are about 2.4 times as high as the ones from NA.

Cheers, I wasn't going mad and inventing things in my head then - that's a relief

 

[Luminis]

Where on earth did you get that from? Vgchartz?
If yes then you surely saw that they're missing the enitre 2010 sales for europe and simple took the rest (global - NA - europe - japan) as "rest of world".

This is the only really trustworthy link (just be careful with Asia sales, PD counts Japan sales separately):
http://www.polyphony.co.jp/english/list.html

Europes sales are about 2.4 times as high as the ones from NA.

No, that stuff only happens if you trust sites such as vgchartz.

My bad. So, Europe should be the priority market for PD. While that changes things (slightly), the primary point still stands: PD has absolutely no reason to cater to a supposed "Japanese taste" if it is. Going by PD's website, Japan's getting 7.3% of GT5's sales, North America is getting 26.4%, Europe a whopping 63.2%. The remaining 3.1% go to Asia.

But an intangible, subjective "something" is becoming the increasingly common reason for people preferring GT over anything else out there, and I think perhaps that's what Luminis is getting at. After years of being here, I can say it definitely started cropping up more frequently once the competition started seriously challenging (and in many ways, surpassing) GT's "realistic simulator" title.

Pretty much what I was on about. Excusing all the flaws GT comes with, because of... Well, because of that "intangible something", as you put it, is what kind of rubs me the wrong way. Not so much because I can't feel it, but mainly because giving PD a free pass due to that will only lead to them believing the community actually likes GT the way it is. The only way to get the message that we're unhappy with the sounds, the damage model and whatever else across would be not buying the game. But since many people do, just because of that something, that won't ever work.

Besides, that sort of behaviour is mighty close to what I would consider fanboyism. That in and off itself isn't an issue, but I really dislike it when people give GT bonus credit for being GT and being made by PD, only to get furious as soon as someone points out they're biased.

That develops their games out of love for the subject, and considers their members as family? Uhm... help me out with this.

Well. Even if PD created the games purely out of passion and love for the franchise (paying for paint chip DLC sure indicates how they don't care about money, like, at all), what do you think would happen if the game turned out to not sell well? Sony wouldn't give Kazunori an 80 million Dollar budget to play around with, for starters.

So, even if PD is just about the only developer in the world that creates their game without any thought about profitability in their mind, they'd still have to create a game that sells well because they're no indie studio that can do whatever it damn well pleases. And believe it or not, Sony is as much devoted to the 'almighty Dollar' as any other mega-corporation out there.

Aside from that, the question still stands. What sort of objective difference does that make? And just to remind you, that'd mean a difference that someone who has absolutely zero connection to PD would notice. Say, my girlfriend. She doesn't even know the name Kazunori Yamauchi, and I can tell you now that she never felt anything special when playing GT5. It's the exact same thing when discussing religion with religious people. They'll tell you that "you can feel god in your heart and soul", but someone who doesn't deeply believe in god won't ever feel that. Same with GT. That special something that nobody can explain (and I've tried to get that point across earlier) isn't so much rooted in the game, but in yourself. Basically, it's your own bias/nostalgia/memories/whateveryouwanttocallit that gives that special feel to you when playing. And there's nothing wrong with that, as long as one doesn't claim that that special something makes the inherently better, or good enough to excuse whatever flaws someone else might find with it. Because, frankly, your bias isn't going to make my game feel special, better or good enough to excuse whatever issues I have with it.

And, please, don't argue that you're not biased. You admitted as much yourself.

 

[MeanElf]

...Well. Even if PD created the games purely out of passion and love for the franchise (paying for paint chip DLC sure indicates how they don't care about money, like, at all), what do you think would happen if the game turned out to not sell well? Sony wouldn't give Kazunori an 80 million Dollar budget to play around with, for starters...

Sony actually encourage indy game devs, there's a part of Sony called Studio Japan dedicated to giving those devs a chance to prove their stuff. I have a few titles they've bought out and other than the fact that I'm glad they did so, I do think that it isn't just about the money.

The religious leader comparison, well I think that's stretching the point a bit - my wife, who incidentally introduced me to GT4 did not play much of that game, or any of GT5. She enjoyed certain aspects of it but that's that. I have no religious inclinations myself, though I do understand why people have the need to follow a certain path - this isn't it.

Devotion can be ascribed to the game, but I think out of the few reasons you gave, nostalgia would probably fit best for some. Now having said that, I think those who feel nostalgia are the ones who are more vocal for change.

There is a joke aphorism: Nostalgia isn't what it used to be which fits the point I'm stumbling around. Nostalgia isn't a good reason for liking something, because as people we have all changed during the intervening time and invariably the experience doesn't live up to what we felt back then.

I'm not sure what that 'special something' is - it's just there. Maybe Amar will go into it at some point, not that I need another's sanctioning of something to enjoy it

Perhaps you are right though, we should all do a bit of navel staring as to our reasons for liking this game. I do suspect that the answer(s) will not be easy to nail down however.

For me though, it's like chocolate, or coffee - it just makes me feel good and I enjoy it for those reasons.

 

[Imari]

Sony actually encourage indy game devs, there's a part of Sony called Studio Japan dedicated to giving those devs a chance to prove their stuff. I have a few titles they've bought out and other than the fact that I'm glad they did so, I do think that it isn't just about the money.

You don't think Sony is doing this thinking of the profits if they manage to hit a wildly successful indie game, or nab a fledgling revolutionary developer?

I'd say that Sony have to be fairly happy with how That Game Company are doing, and I seriously doubt they've lost any money supporting them.

Big companies do nice things sometimes, but even when they give stuff away for free they do so in the knowledge that the positive effect on their reputation will likely help their bottom line.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Aside from that, the question still stands. What sort of objective difference does that make? And just to remind you, that'd mean a difference that someone who has absolutely zero connection to PD would notice. Say, my girlfriend. She doesn't even know the name Kazunori Yamauchi, and I can tell you now that she never felt anything special when playing GT5. It's the exact same thing when discussing religion with religious people. They'll tell you that "you can feel god in your heart and soul", but someone who doesn't deeply believe in god won't ever feel that. Same with GT. That special something that nobody can explain (and I've tried to get that point across earlier) isn't so much rooted in the game, but in yourself. Basically, it's your own bias/nostalgia/memories/whateveryouwanttocallit that gives that special feel to you when playing. And there's nothing wrong with that, as long as one doesn't claim that that special something makes the inherently better, or good enough to excuse whatever flaws someone else might find with it. Because, frankly, your bias isn't going to make my game feel special, better or good enough to excuse whatever issues I have with it.

And, please, don't argue that you're not biased. You admitted as much yourself.[/COLOR]

This is brilliant actually:tup:👍 I think it gets to the heart of the matter in understanding the differences between the various sorts of fans of GT5. The differences between us are all internal. Failing to understand and embrace those differences is what creates a lot of the tension you see here...lol..

 

[Tornado]

Citation please. Seriously. I know that a few Japanese studios have this kind of self-slavery attitude towards their work, but rarely mentioned so I can't even google one up.

"The love of my life comes home late at night complaining of a headache that will not go away and a chronically upset stomach," she wrote. "My happy supportive smile is running out."

Within 48 hours, ea_spouse had received more than 1,000 sympathetic responses -- from colleagues of her fiance at Electronic Arts Inc. and from men and women across the fast-growing $25-billion video game industry.

Links to her plaint rocketed through in-boxes at game studios nationwide and touched a nerve among the young, mostly male programmers whose engineering prowess brings ever more elaborate monsters and car chases to television screens and computer monitors.

"People regularly joke about forgetting their wives' names, but it's not funny," said one senior developer, who asked that his name not be published. "When I read ea_spouse's article, it just hit me."

Since its founding as a garage industry in the mid-1970s, the video game business has been fueled by a dicey mix of testosterone and caffeine. Programmers routinely boast about napping under their desks or of forgoing sleep for days on end. Now, as those workers mature along with their industry, many are grappling with failed relationships, neglected families, weight gain and anxiety attacks. They complain that as budgets and expectations for games explode, so do the workloads for those making them.

Linky.

Clingman's warning should be sobering even to those who are adamant that crunch is necessary to create great entertainment. In the past five years we've seen some of the industry's great designers retire at young ages compared to other creators in the film industry. The industry is being molded to fit the needs and abilities of young, energetic people and is incompatible with the needs of older, more experienced designers.

This is an issue our own Ben Kuchera has thought about at length. "I've been told that people who write about the business all want to be developers and make games," he told me. "It couldn't be any less true. We get to tour these studios and see how the people who make the games live. They seem to always be tired, the offices are dimly lit, and people are sleeping on cots." He points out that while many developers have benefits such as gyms and cafeterias onsite, that just drives home the idea that you're never supposed to leave.

Linky.

Anna Marsh, game designer and owner of Lady Shotgun, gave an engaging talk about game development's infamous "crunch time," and how important it will be to change course for the better. In her words, "You don't have to work 18-hour days, sleep under the desk and 🤬 in the corner to make games." Marsh argued that with proper pre-production, game developers could live more balanced lives, and, crucially, the result of this would be better games. It's not healthy, she argued, for creators to live, eat, breathe and sleep games, not only for basic lifestyle reasons, but because it leads to creative stagnation. A more diverse lifestyle and reduced crunch won't just make game developers' lives better, it'll lead to more interesting, varied games.

Linky.

Pick a game. Any game with hype around its development. It doesn't even have to be a sterling silver AAA game, and it certainly doesn't have to be a Japanese game. When deadlines start coming around, people don't go home. And if they're lucky, that means they get to sleep under their desks. If not, they don't really get to sleep at all. If they're really unlucky, they end up working through something like this:

Which infamously nearly killed two members of its development staff through overwork, and had an entire team of developers who basically weren't even allowed to go home.



EA was even sued over the practice (which is what the LA Times article was covering); not because the practice exists (and is commonplace), but merely because they weren't properly compensating their developers for doing it.

Some images for your perusal.

The overwhelming majority of those pictures are of the RWD diesel Grand Am car, as Slip said.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

The overwhelming majority of those pictures are of the RWD diesel Grand Am car, as Slip said.

Off topic but...those Mazda's are sexy, I should pay more attention to Rolex.

 

[LarryL]

ALL people are biased and never forget that. Regardless of what anyone tells you about how UNbiased they are.....it's BOVINE-EXCREMENT. All people have things they like more than other things, or views on things. Since we all have our own conscience, all 6 billion other people have their own likes and views and everyone has some bias towards their likes and views. Some people like myself are a bit more empathetic and can truly put ourselves in other's shoes and look at things from their point of view a bit better than others, but even the most empathetic people still have biases because I'll be DAMED if someone's going to tell me DC is better than MARVEL, or Pepsi is better than Coca-Cola.

Now I'm biased towards Gran Turismo.....obviously.....since my opinion is that GT has been the best racing simulation availible on console for QUITE some time now, and still is up to this point in time. Forza topped it graphically with it's post GT5 offerings, but graphics are like 3rd or 4th on the list of important things in a racing simulation video game. Gran Turismo is the best on console in terms of the more important things I'm looking for: Handling/feel, physics and content (I would also say a good crowd to race with online would be more important than graphics as well). Until PCars hits consoles (which I think is going to be over a years from now (Fall 2014), or something else in the sim racing genre hits consoles, GT is still tops. That is not to say I don't have my criticisms of GT5.....because I have quite a few.

A.I. is one area I DON'T bash GT on. Because as I think Tenacious D said, NO racing games has what I would call "GOOD" realistic A.I. and that BS on the new Forza doesn't look any better. The only racing game I've seen with TRULY good A.I. is what I'm seeing in Project Cars. Motorstorm 1 and Pacific Rift had good A.I. once you got into 1st place.....they'd run good lines and not spare the bumper, but they were also heavily assisted by a VERY TIGHT rubber band. I don't expect any truly good A.I. until the 2nd or 3rd wave of next gen racing games aside from PCars, but you know what?.....eventually we'll learn that A.I.'s habits too and it will also be predictable. The truth is, when I'm in the mood for good, hard, fair racing with real unpredictability........I go online.

Other than the A.I. GT5 obviously has NO customisation to speak of, which is a pretty big problem for sure. Luckily this is fixed IN SPADES with GT6.

What was the point of GT5 having a "track creator" in which you can't really creat a track. It's just a random track generator really. It should have just been a "generate random track" option in the track selection because to call that a "create-a-track" makes it look bad. They havn't been clear whether this is going to be fixed for GT6. We've heard GPS something-or-other, but no specifics on how that's going to work. I don't care about the GPS thing anyway, I want to know if we can properly create a track now. Actually lay out the curves, adjust elevation.......a simple version of Mod Nation. I don't see what's hard about that. SOME kind of control on how the track will turn out would be swell, thanks. One time I actually created a REALLY good Watkin's Glen. All the turns were pretty dead on, just the scale was off (it was like 4miles instead of 2.something). But when I lost the save, even though I remembered the settings I used to create every part of that track, and put them all back in......I could NEVER get that same track again. Even though I got the same shape, the terrain is totally random, so it never happened again within thousands of tries. So I lost an almost perfect recreation of Watkin;s Glen made on GT5....which is like mindblowing odds to be able to create. The real truth is, if they want to sell people DLC tracks, they never should have offered or promised a track creator anyway.

Another issue I had with GT5 was the way the used/standard model cars were handled. Unlike other cry babies constantly complaining about the old PS2 model cars, I LOVE them. My favorites list in GT5 is literally 99/100 standard cars and 1 lone premium, no BS. Also I think they look fantastic now. When GT5 launched I admit they didn't look much better than PS2 models. They were so pixelated you couldn't even hardly read most lettering on the cars. But they way the standard cars are rendered in GT5 was changed DRASTICALLY throughout GT5's life. Aside from the darker windows so you can't see the interior, I notice almost no difference between the body's quality without looking REALLY closely while not racing. Someone on this site once posted pics of standard models then and now and the difference is night and day. And those improvements were done through patching. They're going to look even better in GT6 now that the engine could be opened up and real ground up rendering changes implemented.......................anyway, the issue I had with the standards was the BS random used car dealerships. That's non-sense. They should have just all been in the dealerships, and all able to be bought in any of the factory colors. It just would have been better and FAR less tedious not only in car collection, but also paint chip collection. I PRAY this is how the old cars are handled in GT6.

Trade limits? Really? All need to be removed. The only limit I think would be OK on trading is like cars over say........5 million. But under 1 million when the only option is to pray to the gaming gods that the one car you're looking for happens to randomly come up in the used car lot?? And if you need that once car in a specific color, like me trying to collect every color R8 LMS.........forget it. It's impossible. I hope since GT6 is a swan song that there will be little - no limits on trading imposed. Just let people have at it.

And while graphics aren't the most important to me, they are like 4th or so on the list. GT5 lacked polish. It still looked better than anything else when it came out, but it was quickly surpassed graphically by not only Forza but also on some 3rd party multi-plat racers like Shift 2 (yeah, the game was ****e in every way, except graphically it was stunning imo, though totally inaccurate at places like Nurb). GT6 looks quite a bit better than GT5, but more importantly has a nice coat of polish on whatever graphics it does have.

These are all the issues I had and have with GT5. So yeah, while I'm totally biased towards GT I can still look at it objectively. The thing with GT6 is yeah......it probably is just pretty much what they promised with GT5...........that's a good thing because as much as I love GT5 and believe it's the best racing sim on consoles, it still missed the mark on enough of the periphary type stuff and U.I. which can all be brought up to the standard of the rest of the game and you have an all new game that goes from an 8.5/10 critically to a perfect 10/10 racing experience. I'm not expecting anything as far as the create-a-track so that won't affect my opinion of the game in any way (unless it's great which I highly doubt), but in all the other areas I mentioned above, I expect total greatness. From what they've shown and said, I'm totally confident in that.........I just wish they'd hurry the hell up and release the game so I can make sure of that for myself. I'm hoping the Nov rumor is false and it comes much earlier, like early September.

 

[Spagetti69]

I don't think it will disappoint me this time around. I've lowered my expectations. I'm not expecting the best console racing sim. I'm not even expecting a livery editor or leader boards or even a stable frame rate.

Going with that I won't be disappointed. Just business as usual.
I remember the announcement of standard cars and certain people being rightly annoyed by it.

Come GT6 and standards are just another, yeah it's PD again along with sounds.

Shame to see the series evolve(or not)this way.

 

[Wolfe]

I wouldn't buy a car with problems and then constantly overlook them or make excuses because the people who built it were passionate.

You wouldn't drive a classic Alfa Romeo?

There are a number of people here like amar212 and Griffith500 who are quite definite about what they see as flaws which should be fixed in GT5 and Polyphony's development choices which got them there. At the same time, quite outspoken as defenders of that very same developer because of the care and quality put into the same game. Loving a game and admiring a game company which produces it, and having issues with that same game, are not mutually exclusive. Maybe that's news to you.

That's well and good, but just because Polyphony care and quality put into the game, that doesn't mean they cannot be faulted on the way they spend that effort. So Kazunori and Polyphony are passionate about their game. Excellent! How about putting that passion into sound design, physics, a paintshop, events for their motorsports licenses, or converting Standard cars...instead of seat stitches, fantastically detailed headlights, horn options, or racing suits?

What's frustrating for some of us who follow the series is how Polyphony seems to take a "heads down" approach to cranking out fiddly details when the larger picture is a uneven mess of half-baked gameplay or broken promises. I'm not saying that things haven't changed with GT6 -- we have to wait and see -- but the complaints over GT5 had everything to do with this misdirected passion and an apparent lack of time-management skills.

What a weird question, but I'll answer it anyhow. If the driving model and physics of the various cars was crap, that would do it.

Maybe you can imagine, then, why I was disgusted with GT4 when we clashed on the subject years ago. It wasn't simply that I didn't enjoy the game. GT4 took a dump on a series that I had been convinced would offer a wonderful driving/racing experience for years to come. It still had so much cool stuff, I wanted to enjoy it (I stomached ~75% completion), but the driving model was an unruly mess and it was just a brutal letdown.

Another issue I had with GT5 was the way the used/standard model cars were handled. Unlike other cry babies constantly complaining about the old PS2 model cars, I LOVE them. My favorites list in GT5 is literally 99/100 standard cars and 1 lone premium, no BS. Also I think they look fantastic now. When GT5 launched I admit they didn't look much better than PS2 models. They were so pixelated you couldn't even hardly read most lettering on the cars. But they way the standard cars are rendered in GT5 was changed DRASTICALLY throughout GT5's life.

The Standards were the most disappointing thing about GT5 for me, and it had absolutely nothing to do with the way they look. Like you, all of my favorite cars landed in the Standard list, pretty much because I prefer older cars. But the way they drove was rubbish compared to Premiums. They felt barely a step ahead of GT4; understeer everywhere, no lift-off oversteer, wacky overcorrective spins and twitchy steering. What's the point in playing a Gran Turismo where the only cars I want to drive all handle like last generation's abortion of an entry?

One of the things I'll be watching closely with GT6 is whether they've evened out the physics between the Standards and Premiums, since the Standards are coming back.

 

[Spagetti69]

One of the things I'll be watching closely with GT6 is whether they've evened out the physics between the Standards and Premiums, since the Standards are coming back.

The standards were running a different physics model??? I wasn't aware of that. I bailed out after Patch 2.05, is this true? First I've heard about it.

 

[MeanElf]

You don't think Sony is doing this thinking of the profits if they manage to hit a wildly successful indie game, or nab a fledgling revolutionary developer?

I'd say that Sony have to be fairly happy with how That Game Company are doing, and I seriously doubt they've lost any money supporting them.

Big companies do nice things sometimes, but even when they give stuff away for free they do so in the knowledge that the positive effect on their reputation will likely help their bottom line.

No disagreement from me there - however it seems that Sony will get lambasted if they do or if they don't...no win under those terms.

My point happened to be that it isn't just about the money for Sony. Certainly they keep an eye out for devs who can produce a break out game, yet they also take a gamble each time. Okay, potential profits and rights revenue might feature when making those choices at some level, but in a declining industry, they do seem to be offereing hope and options.

 

[dudejo]

One way PD could solve this situation is to go : "Ok, here's the deal. If you want the game within a reasonable time frame, we can implement X amount of major features. Now, which ones will make you give us money the most?"

 

[LarryL]

I don't think it will disappoint me this time around. I've lowered my expectations. I'm not expecting the best console racing sim or leader boards

Why would you not expect the best console racing sim when that is exactly what PD has delivered every time? GT5 hasn't been surpassed as a console racing sim, so I'm not sure where your low expectations for GT6 being the best console racing sim us coming from. That is a forefone conclusion imo.

And, Leaderboards? GT5 has leaderboard on every single time trial even it's ever had. What are you talking about? I certainly hope you don't mean Win/Loss record rankings. Unless GT5 is your first and only ever online racing game for consoles in which case you don't know any better so you're forgiven,........ you're out of your mind. W/L records RUIN online racing. 1st of all they aren't representative of how good of a racer you are when there are 4-15 other people in the race and a win counts as a W while any other place counts as a L. Secondly W/L records and ranks do nothing but make for more A-hole and d-bags online in general, wrecking for every position on the track. But a bigger issue is the "team racing" that it creates........teams padding each other's records in private rooms with alt accounts, and in public lobbies you get team members wrecking anyone not on their team to help pad their teammate's records by taking out any possible competition.

GT5's online while not perfect and in need of more options, has by a H-H-H-HUGE margain the least amount of d-bags wrecking for any and every position on the track compared to any other online racing game I've ever played. The only wreckers you get in GT5 are the trolls doing it for fun. And GT5's online has absolutely ZERO problem with the dirty "team racing" I'm talking about.

And trust me, this is NOT because PSN's online gamers are older and more mature. It is 100% due to the fact that GT5 has no W/L records or rankings outside of Time Trials. And I hope that's how it stays. The closest thing I'd like to a W/L record/ranking system in GT6 is if someone clicks on your name in the lobby it just displays a set of bronze, silver and gold trophies just stating your numer of podium finishes. Any more bragging rights than that and people's egos take over.

Like I said, if you aren't familiar with many other online racing games, I'll forgive you, but if you are an experienced online racer who's had to deal with these issues in other games (or perhaps if you're actually one of the people who cause them), then shame on you for suggesting GT get ranks online. No online rankings if the best decision PD made with GT5 imho.

 

[Tenacious D]

Excusing all the flaws GT comes with, because of...

AGAIN with excusing PD of everything??

Look, you probably don't stalk my posts the way Slipztrem does, but surely you saw me in ONE post or other grouch about the paint chip system, experience points, the good bots being solely in Arcade Mode, the tiny handful of Race Mod cars we got and the poor excuse of a livery edit we could do on them... something. Jeepers, talk about putting text in people's mouths...

believe it or not, Sony is as much devoted to the 'almighty Dollar' as any other mega-corporation out there.

I don't believe that anyone has stated otherwise, like... ever. Now I will go along with MeanElf, because SONY is definitely taking a wonderful lead in supporting indie developers, as well as their dev partners in general. I'm unaware of Nontendo asking anyone, "How can we make your job better and easier?" Then again, this is SONY Computer Entertainment, which seems to be filled with actual human beings, in contrast with SONY Corporate.

the question still stands. What sort of objective difference does (team Polyphony loving their game) make? And just to remind you, that'd mean a difference that someone who has absolutely zero connection to PD would notice.

The Daihatsu Copen, the Daihatsu Midget II D, the Fiat 500 F, the Fiat Panda Super, the Honda BEAT, the Honda CITY Turbo II, the Honda FIT, the Isuzu 117 COUPÉ, the Mazda Autozam AZ-1, the Mazda Cosmo Sport, the Mitsubishi i-MiEV... shall I continue?

Originally when these, as I refer to them, dinkmobiles began showing up in Gran Turismo, I kind of cringed. But whenever Kaz was interviewed about them, he would remark that the Japanese ones were a part of his life, and the ones from other regions a part of some other gamer's life, and he thought they should be included because they were part of the gene pool of the automotive world, the way that first rickety, slow, almost powerless 1890's era steam powered Mercedes relic is. And... ya know, I agree. And I raced them all. Sometimes it was fun, but I thought if they were good enough to include, they were good enough for me to race them. I still can't believe that a few people took those pre-1900 steam mobiles around the Nurb... or could!

As I stated previously, other race game developers will pick out the top five or ten monster cars to showcase in their idle demos, while in GT5, you could see one of the cars I posted. If that doesn't say something to you about the kind of people Polyphony Digital are... well, have a nice life.

Linky.
Linky.
Linky.

Yes dear, I stand corrected - strangely, this is something I never hear from you when I'm right. But like I said, I couldn't find anything when I googled for it, so I did give it a shot. However, you will also have to yell at the entire gaming journalist world who make quite a point about how the employees of PD are different in this regard. You are a grumpy little unicorn...

The overwhelming majority of those pictures are of the RWD diesel Grand Am car, as Slip said.

One, I may be wrong, but I don't think it's all that overwhelming. Two, I think it's a pretty dumb distinction to make anyway, as if it's not really a Mazda 6. Is the RWD Skyline not a Skyline, or the RWD GT-R not a GT-R?? I'd love to hear that argument.

(erm... never mind)

Uhh... he may not be slapping Gran Turismo with a broad brush. Kind of beat, and could be misreading...

The Standards were the most disappointing thing about GT5 for me, and it had absolutely nothing to do with the way they look. Like you, all of my favorite cars landed in the Standard list, pretty much because I prefer older cars. But the way they drove was rubbish compared to Premiums. They felt barely a step ahead of GT4; understeer everywhere, no lift-off oversteer, wacky overcorrective spins and twitchy steering. What's the point in playing a Gran Turismo where the only cars I want to drive all handle like last generation's abortion of an entry?

Sounds rather like my experience with Forza, but different. Anyway, I drive with a wheel, and frankly I love them. And I'm hardly the only one around here who does.

 

[Tornado]

One, I may be wrong, but I don't think it's all that overwhelming.

There are 3 Mazda6 race cars there in that link. The old SCCA Speed World Challenge car based on the original Mazda6 that Slip already mentioned which was widely raced (at least within the realm of that one series) and was directly based off the road car but mostly competed through partial-factory efforts, the current Grand Am car which is tenuously connected to the road car since it was built to a racing class wholly incompatible with it (and there are only 3 of them so far, and they are all factory efforts) that also only debuted this year and makes up a huge portion of the pictures, and a bunch of cars that Mazda prepared for their Celebrity Challenge series.


If there is some racing series that the Mazda6 was the go to car to use cheap, I'm not seeing it there. The Miata and RX-8 are absolutely cars that fit that bill, and were in fact what privateers entered in Grand Am before Mazda entered themselves.

Two, I think it's a pretty dumb distinction to make anyway, as if it's not really a Mazda 6. Is the RWD Skyline not a Skyline, or the RWD GT-R not a GT-R?? I'd love to hear that argument.

That depends. Is the RWD GT-R a current SuperGT-spec GTR, which shares absolutely nothing with the road car but the taillights and maybe the headlights? The old RWD GT1-spec GT-R, which was barely related to the road GT-R outside of having the same exterior with aerodynamic accoutrements added? Or the RWD GT3-spec GT-R, which actually takes quite a lot from the road car and uses it as a basis?


Because if you're making the claim that disabling the front differential on an AWD car is the same thing as completely gutting a Mazda6 shell before installing an extensive tube frame and turning it into a RWD race car that competes with Porsche Caymans and Lotus Evoras and so on, then yeah, it's not "really" a Mazda6. Certainly not one within the grasp of a medium level race team even if it hadn't just come out 5 months ago.

 

[Tenacious D]

Tor, regarding your above line of reasoning, then very few named cars exist in the racing world, really. I don't think you'll win many over with that argument though.

Anyhow, I really need to bug out of here and do something that really matters involving highly modified name brand cars.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Why would you not expect the best console racing sim when that is exactly what PD has delivered every time? GT5 hasn't been surpassed as a console racing sim, so I'm not sure where your low expectations for GT6 being the best console racing sim us coming from. That is a forefone conclusion imo.

And, Leaderboards? GT5 has leaderboard on every single time trial even it's ever had. What are you talking about? I certainly hope you don't mean Win/Loss record rankings. Unless GT5 is your first and only ever online racing game for consoles in which case you don't know any better so you're forgiven,........ you're out of your mind. W/L records RUIN online racing. 1st of all they aren't representative of how good of a racer you are when there are 4-15 other people in the race and a win counts as a W while any other place counts as a L. Secondly W/L records and ranks do nothing but make for more A-hole and d-bags online in general, wrecking for every position on the track. But a bigger issue is the "team racing" that it creates........teams padding each other's records in private rooms with alt accounts, and in public lobbies you get team members wrecking anyone not on their team to help pad their teammate's records by taking out any possible competition.

...wall of additional text....

I think he's referring to leaderboards for different car/track/tire combinations within the game, perhaps with an online driver ranking system as an effort towards matchmaking and tailoring lobbies to certain kinds of drivers.

You're probably right that keeping statistics online will encourage some dirty driving, but it's up to the hosts to police that, along with PD giving hosts the tools to do so (instant replay would be a nice addition for hosts wouldn't it?). For example if online stats were tracked and part of that was a "clean" rating system as iRacing does, you could potentially set a minimum standard for in your lobby, or leave it wide open if you prefer to not worry about it. The more options the host has for making decisions on how to set up his lobbies, the cleaner racing will be.

 

[Tornado]

Tor, regarding your above line of reasoning, then very few named cars exist in the racing world, really. I don't think you'll win many over with that argument though.

It's a good thing I wasn't making that argument then, since that reasoning doesn't follow remotely from what I said. GT3 class cars share plenty with their roadgoing counterparts (as the example above that I already mentioned does). GTE cars share plenty with their roadgoing counterparts. Even some of the GT1 cars were fairly close to their road going counterparts (the GT1 GT-R just wasn't a good example of one). To say nothing of the current SCCA Showroom Stock series and other similar ones. But a tube framed RWD race car using lengthened subframes carried over from the older RX-8 race cars (including the overall body structure, including A, B and C pillars, being made up almost entirely of carbon fiber; with the only metal parts seeming to be the hood and trunk) is not particularly related to an FWD sedan that it looks similar to.



Also, when you try to change the subject so obviously it just draws more attention to the claim you're trying to avoid backing up.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Citation please. Seriously. I know that a few Japanese studios have this kind of self-slavery attitude towards their work, but rarely mentioned so I can't even google one up. Maybe Dan Greenawalt had a secret suite made up at Redmond that accidentally left open during one developer showcase? Probably not. Artists? Writers? Why not let's drag devoted surgeons into this who are burning midnight oil to save a patient's life, because that's all the same thing, right?[/url]

Sure, especially since they're doing something far more important than creating a video game. Tornado already provided a few examples, and while I haven't witnessed full-out cots in offices, as a graphic designer I work with dozens of creative types, and I've definitely seen my fair share of "those are the same clothes as yesterday" mornings.

Excused of what? Producing a game which we disapprove of certain aspects of? Are you new here?

There are a number of people here like amar212 and Griffith500 who are quite definite about what they see as flaws which should be fixed in GT5 and Polyphony's development choices which got them there. At the same time, quite outspoken as defenders of that very same developer because of the care and quality put into the same game. Loving a game and admiring a game company which produces it, and having issues with that same game, are not mutually exclusive. Maybe that's news to you.

The fact you have to see yourself as a "defender" of the game says a lot. The game should stand on its own merits - it is a product, after all - and if people don't like it, I don't think they need to be reminded that, like, the team worked real hard and stuff. Nearly every team works hard.

That develops their games out of love for the subject, and considers their members as family? Uhm... help me out with this.

That the primary purpose of their effort is to make money.

No, because if GT5's bots are terrible, then every game's bots are terrible. Let me quote myself:

Ah. So GT's AI is the standard for which all others are judged?

As for Standard cars, I know you dislike them with a passion. Many of us have posted that we would take serious objection to having them removed because we like them very much, so your opinion is widely shared, but not universal.

I'm not a fan of ridiculously outdated assets making up the vast majority of the car list, no. Assets that don't offer not only a bunch of the features other games in the genre offer for their car list, but not even all the features the Premiums in GT5 have (which is still not as much as most of the rest of the genre). I'm not a fan of mediocrity - and I know that PD is capable of far more.

Well, what would get you to abandon your favorite restaurant/bar? Quit watching your favorite show? Leave your wife/girlfriend?

Wait, wait wait wait. Just so we're clear, I ask that question, and one of your first comparisons to GT is the wife/girlfriend?

You know what, no need to cover the rest of the post. This explains everything.

Pretty much what I was on about. Excusing all the flaws GT comes with, because of... Well, because of that "intangible something", as you put it, is what kind of rubs me the wrong way. Not so much because I can't feel it, but mainly because giving PD a free pass due to that will only lead to them believing the community actually likes GT the way it is. The only way to get the message that we're unhappy with the sounds, the damage model and whatever else across would be not buying the game. But since many people do, just because of that something, that won't ever work.

Besides, that sort of behaviour is mighty close to what I would consider fanboyism. That in and off itself isn't an issue, but I really dislike it when people give GT bonus credit for being GT and being made by PD, only to get furious as soon as someone points out they're biased.

It all feels like the racing game equivalent of other areas of entertainment, if I'm honest. If I want to be charitable, Apple. If not... Bieber?

I don't think it will disappoint me this time around. I've lowered my expectations. I'm not expecting the best console racing sim. I'm not even expecting a livery editor or leader boards or even a stable frame rate.

Going with that I won't be disappointed. Just business as usual.
I remember the announcement of standard cars and certain people being rightly annoyed by it.

Come GT6 and standards are just another, yeah it's PD again along with sounds.

Shame to see the series evolve(or not)this way.

Smart move. I realize I'll likely own the game - because another racing game is very rarely a bad thing in our household - but I'm not sitting around impatient for it. My expectations are roughly similar Spag-man, and that way, any of those features being included will be surprises!

You wouldn't drive a classic Alfa Romeo?

I'm amazed it took that long for that joke to happen

What's frustrating for some of us who follow the series is how Polyphony seems to take a "heads down" approach to cranking out fiddly details when the larger picture is a uneven mess of half-baked gameplay or broken promises. I'm not saying that things haven't changed with GT6 -- we have to wait and see -- but the complaints over GT5 had everything to do with this misdirected passion and an apparent lack of time-management skills.

The standards were running a different physics model??? I wasn't aware of that. I bailed out after Patch 2.05, is this true? First I've heard about it.

There's a theory that, since GT5's physics engine undoubtedly has more variables than GT4's, the carryover cars may not have received the same amount of in-depth attention as the new Premos.

Why would you not expect the best console racing sim when that is exactly what PD has delivered every time? GT5 hasn't been surpassed as a console racing sim, so I'm not sure where your low expectations for GT6 being the best console racing sim us coming from. That is a forefone conclusion imo.

For you, perhaps, and you're certainly not alone on that opinion, but it is just that - just as it's also the opinion of a fair amount that there are indeed better console options out there, at least from the simulation aspect.

It's a good thing I wasn't making that argument then, since that reasoning doesn't follow remotely from what I said. GT3 class cars share plenty with their roadgoing counterparts (as the example above that I already mentioned does). GTE cars share plenty with their roadgoing counterparts. Even some of the GT1 cars were fairly close to their road going counterparts (the GT1 GT-R just wasn't a good example of one). To say nothing of the current SCCA Showroom Stock series and other similar ones. But a tube framed RWD race car using lengthened subframes carried over from the older RX-8 race cars (including the overall body structure, including A, B and C pillars, being made up almost entirely of carbon fiber; with the only metal parts seeming to be the hood and trunk) is not particularly related to an FWD sedan that it looks similar to.

Also, when you try to change the subject so obviously it just draws more attention to the claim you're trying to avoid backing up.

Good to see I'm not alone on wondering about the 6's apparent motorsports pedigree. Not that I wouldn't mind it having one - really, it's one of my favourite midsize sedans out there - but it's not exactly the 90's Accord.

 

[Tenacious D]

You know what, no need to cover the rest of the post. This explains everything.

That's fine with me, because you seem to like arguing with me for the sheer sport of it, like some unicorns, and I have better things to do like sleep.

Also, when you try to change the subject so obviously it just draws more attention to the claim you're trying to avoid backing up.

What the heck are you accusing me of now? I'm tired so I'm just going to you what you call a Mazda 6 which is extensively modified until it's no longer a street car.

Now prior to this frankly bizarre series of posts, I'm used to people calling the Honda NSX race modified extensively with a lowered body on wide custom axles into a Super GT car with a Raybrig livery as "The Raybrig NSX." And a Supra similarly reworked with a Castrol livery as "The Castrol Supra." And that's always worked for everyone else in the universe. You call them whatever you want, I'm going to bed.

 

[mister dog]

Sure, especially since they're doing something far more important than creating a video game. Tornado already provided a few examples, and while I haven't witnessed full-out cots in offices, as a graphic designer I work with dozens of creative types, and I've definitely seen my fair share of "those are the same clothes as yesterday" mornings.

Spend the whole night binge drinking in the discotheque eh? No wonder games get on the shelves half finished!

 

[Wolfe]

The standards were running a different physics model??? I wasn't aware of that. I bailed out after Patch 2.05, is this true? First I've heard about it.

As SlipZtrEm said, the impression I got was that the Standards don't take advantage of the new physics engine the same way that Premiums do. Not that the Premiums provided a superb simulation either.

Uhh... he may not be slapping Gran Turismo with a broad brush. Kind of beat, and could be misreading...

Aww, I don't even get a coherent reply?

I have better things to do like sleep.

...I'm going to bed.

These posts will all still be here tomorrow. Or you can duck out of debating Tornado's and SlipZtrEm's points, that's cool too.