Kaz interview on Eurogamer - Standards are here to stay! Poll added

[MatskiMonk]

So you're telling me that I'm wrong for saying that numbers don't make the game? Do you extend the same sentiment to the guy saying that graphics don't make the game?

Both are to some extent opinions, for some people graphics or numbers may certainly make the game. But neither of them are sure-fire methods for making a great game, a game can have great graphics and be awful, just as a game with huge numbers of cars and tracks can be awful.

Neither graphics nor numbers make the game. Good gameplay makes the game, and everything else is secondary to that.


Perhaps you can enlighten us as to why you think numbers DO make the game.

Sorry, perhaps I should have clarified, my response was in reply to your comment to me, not the other guy. This is the sentence I meant

But you don't have to invest in a new console.

To expand on the point, I do not have the equipment necessary to play Project Cars, whether it's a PS4, XBoxOne or serious PC, therefore I do need to buy a new console (or lots of new bits for my computer) to play it. And for the one or two cars pCars offers that I want, that GT6 doesn't it's not worth it.

I understand the point you were trying to make, and I'm probably not a typical example - GT is the only racing game I ever invest time & money in, so your assumption that being a racing fan means I'll buy a PS4 anyway, and then there would be no point not to buy pCars doesn't really stick. I'll buy one when a new GT game is released for it (or Red Dead Redemption sequel/prequel).

Also, on the subject of car count and graphics -generally speaking they aren't the be-all and end-all of gaming I agree, but they are important - if they weren't I'd have never moved on from Super Stunt-car Racer on the C64. As I said though in another post, I'd be happy if GT only had 50 cars, so long as they were 50 cars I wanted.

 

[NixxxoN]

I've done it before, you dismissed it all because you personally didn't care for them. That's why I told other people not to bother.

The thing is, the people 'bashing' him have personal motivation, they don't like what he's done to the game. What is your personal motivation behind defending everything?

Maybe there could be more online features, I dont negate it, however, I think rating the current ones as "pathethic" is laughable.

I dont defend everything, I have always criticized the sounds for example. But other people just love to bash everything in every possible way and in every circumstance. Those people must have miss universe as girlfriend so they can't criticise their lack of beauty.

 

[Samus]

Maybe there could be more online features, I dont negate it, however, I think rating the current ones as "pathethic" is laughable.

But like I said before, you base that thought on having not played any other racing games online. Without anything else to measure it against how can you truly judge how good it is? That's like finding tin and declaring it a great, valuable metal because you've not personally discovered any other metals that others have.

 

[NixxxoN]

But like I said before, you base that thought on having not played any other racing games online. Without anything else to measure it against how can you truly judge how good it is? That's like finding tin and declaring it a great, valuable metal because you've not personally discovered any other metals that others have.

No need to measure it against other games. I dont know where you get this theory that everything has to be measured against other stuff in order to determine what is good and what isnt.

 

[Samus]

No need to measure it against other games. I dont know where you get this theory that everything has to be measured against other stuff in order to determine what is good and what isnt.

It's human nature. You can't tell me you never buy things based on how they compare to a similar product.

 

[NixxxoN]

It's human nature. You can't tell me you never buy things based on how they compare to a similar product.

Some people like apples and some others like oranges. I dont need to compare oranges to apples because I know I like oranges so I buy them.

 

[SimTourist]

Some people like apples and some others like oranges. I dont need to compare oranges to apples because I know I like oranges so I buy them.

But how do you know if you like apples or not if you've never tried them? There's always a chance that you'll like apples better. than oranges.

 

[IneedSchool]

So people changed from Forza vs. Gran Turismo to talking about fruits? This thread has gotten a bit cooler now.

 

[MatskiMonk]

 

[Samus]

Some people like apples and some others like oranges. I dont need to compare oranges to apples because I know I like oranges so I buy them.

Erm, what? I said similar products, the whole point of the apples and oranges idiom is that they can't be compared. Racing games are similar products, I said you must compare similar products before you buy them.

 

[TokoTurismo]

nvm

 

[diegorborges]

@NixxxoN

Everyone actually.

This became a pretty much useless thread. Pages ago.

There's a thin line between the good old constructive criticism and hate and well, we're here.

Sad GTPlanet once again.

 

[Samus]

Everyone actually.

This became a pretty much useless thread. Pages ago.

There's a thin line between the good old constructive criticism and hate and well, we're here.

Sad GTPlanet once again.

Takes two to tango. If people were just allowed to air their displeasure at this news without retort there wouldn't be so much back and forth. I admit it does go both ways but as I say, it takes two to tango. Don't just blame the "haters".

 

[IneedSchool]

Everyone actually.

This became a pretty much useless thread. Pages ago.

There's a thin line between the good old constructive criticism and hate and well, we're here.

Sad GTPlanet once again.

This is why I usually stay in the GT6 Memes thread. lol

 

[diegorborges]

Takes two to tango. If people were just allowed to air their displeasure at this news without retort there wouldn't be so much back and forth. I admit it does go both ways but as I say, it takes two to tango. Don't just blame the "haters".

Fair enough. Takes two to tango Samus, but one has to invite to the dance.

Edit: well, keep going guys. I'm just being an idiot writing here...

 

[Jose Mendonca]

have you ever tried online racing with full damage on? its pretty much as you described in forza.

Not quite the same. In GT, the damage lasts up to 10 seconds and then is back to normal.
In Forza, aerodynamic damage can't be fixed, and for the mechanical damage you have to pit.
If in GT it worked the same way as in Forza, maybe people would think twice before bumping into each other. And while we're talking about the online damage, implement a rating system like Grid has (red yellow green silver), so we know who to avoid.

 

[Samus]

Well anyway I'm done here, I'll maybe be back when there is something positive to talk about.

 

[NixxxoN]

But how do you know if you like apples or not if you've never tried them? There's always a chance that you'll like apples better. than oranges.

Erm, what? I said similar products, the whole point of the apples and oranges idiom is that they can't be compared. Racing games are similar products, I said you must compare similar products before you buy them.

The example is messed up probably... My point is, if you are satisfied with a product, why have you to be constantly trying to compare it with other stuff... probably is chronic dissatisfaction.

Not quite the same. In GT, the damage lasts up to 10 seconds and then is back to normal.

False. You have the option of temporary damage (as you described) or permanent damage where you have to enter the pits with the car messed up at very low speed in order to repair it.

 

[SimTourist]

The example is messed up probably... My point is, if you are satisfied with a product, why have you to be constantly trying to compare it with other stuff... probably is cronic dissatisfaction.

Because there might be a better product out there. And for the same price. It's like McDonalds and Burger King.

 

[Jose Mendonca]

False. You have the option of temporary damage (as you described) or permanent damage where you have to enter the pits with the car messed up at very low speed in order to repair it.

Bit off topic, but how do you choose that option? I can only find the temporary option one, but something like that would make the online tournaments much better (no more kamikaze overtakes).

 

[IneedSchool]

Basically speaking, Standards in GT7 is like watching Stanley Kubrick's Barry Lyndon and then all of a sudden you see Bruce Willis in a bunny costume show up out of the blue. It sticks out like a sore thumb and it's disturbing, get it out of the game.

 

[NixxxoN]

Because there might be a better product out there. And for the same price. It's like McDonalds and Burger King.

To me both are absolute garbage. I dont need to try other cuisine around the world because paella is awesome

Bit off topic, but how do you choose that option? I can only find the temporary option one, but something like that would make the online tournaments much better (no more kamikaze overtakes).

You have three options, damage off, low damage or high damage. Low damage is temporary and high is permanent.

 

[ImaRobot]

The example is messed up probably... My point is, if you are satisfied with a product, why have you to be constantly trying to compare it with other stuff... probably is chronic dissatisfaction.

Comparisons are made to figure out which product gives you the best bang for your buck. If one product does good, that's fine, but what if one does it 100 times better? Would it not be considered a better purchase, or just as worthwhile purchase?

I would rather know all sides of the field before I determine what is actually satisfying me, rather than just assuming I'm content with one product only because I've neglected the rest.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

Nobody expects to see cars reduced to small, metal boxes after a crash or see a car burst into flames. We know that isn't likely to happen on a game with so many cars and manufacturers. What is realistic to expect IMO is for every car to at least show some sign of visual damage beyond scratches. No reason bumpers and wings can't come off on any car, or other small parts fall off. Then you can lightly crumple panels, crack the windscreens, etc etc. Minor damage but it adds to the realism.

So what advantage of investing more resources into fake damage and how does it add to the realism if it is not like what will happen in real life. If they are going to do damage, they should make it a proper crash simulator.

Valid criticism you mean? I think people mix the two up. If PD did exactly as you say, include standard cars that can't be damaged and premium cars that can, people would be perfectly right to criticise that CHOICE PD made. Do you not agree?

Not really if we are told what cars can be damaged. Just like I expect standard cars not to not have detailed interior before I buy game, it is not a valid criticism from me to complain after knowing already what to expect.

Nobody asks for ultra realistic damage, but it should be at least in line with other sims. If you crash your car should be damaged for the rest of the race or at least until you drive in the pits for repairs.

I haven't raced online on GT6 yet but wouldn't be surprised if there is damage option that stays through the race unless fixed in pit. I find pit repair thing strange though as if staying to realism, it is unlikely you can repair a car with so many damaged parts so quickly unless you are Superman.

Damage works fine in Forza. Works fine in Grid. Worked fine in Shift, despite all the other issues those games had. Works fine in the F1 201x games. Works fine in Assetto Corsa.

Are there actually games that have damage and it's detrimental to the gameplay?

Damage is in GT6 as far as I know and it might work fine but it is not realistic like a lot of other games.

 

[35mm]

Graphics do not make the game.

Damn right! The excellent sounds do!


Oh wait...

 

[SimTourist]

So what advantage of investing more resources into fake damage and how does it add to the realism if it is not like what will happen in real life. If they are going to do damage, they should make it a proper crash simulator.

So bouncing off AIs and walls is more realistic?
They've added weather already, but it doesn't work like it does in real life at all, so what, you want them to take it out? Or maybe they should've made a proper rain simulator
Games like GT are trying to approximate things that happen in real life, but they can never achieve perfection. Because real life has infinite amount of variables, most of which humans simply can't perceive or replicate, it doesn't mean we should give up completely.

 

[ImaRobot]

Not really if we are told what cars can be damaged. Just like I expect standard cars not to not have detailed interior before I buy game, it is not a valid criticism from me to complain after knowing already what to expect.

I'm not sure I understand why its not valid to complain about a choice made, after you find out what that is?

E.G, a new generation of T.V's are coming out, you know no information yet. Months go by and you find out its actually just a CRT TV and that's all that's being released. You wouldn't criticize the choice they made to downgrade, because now you know that the TV is going to be a CRT TV?

 

[Imari]

To expand on the point, I do not have the equipment necessary to play Project Cars, whether it's a PS4, XBoxOne or serious PC, therefore I do need to buy a new console (or lots of new bits for my computer) to play it. And for the one or two cars pCars offers that I want, that GT6 doesn't it's not worth it.

I understand the point you were trying to make, and I'm probably not a typical example - GT is the only racing game I ever invest time & money in, so your assumption that being a racing fan means I'll buy a PS4 anyway, and then there would be no point not to buy pCars doesn't really stick. I'll buy one when a new GT game is released for it (or Red Dead Redemption sequel/prequel).

I see what you mean, pCARS isn't exactly a system seller. I wouldn't buy a system for it either.

My point was that anyone who plays racing games will get either a new gen console or a good PC eventually. You're a perfect example, you're a GT person so you'll buy a PS4.

When pCARS is in the bargain bin for $10, will you really not pick it up? I can see not buying at release, particularly with a new series that may or may not be what it says it is. But would you never buy pCARS at all? It's a pretty bad game that you can't get $10 worth of entertainment out of, and pCARS isn't that bad.

I encourage anyone not enthused about pCARS not to buy at release. But to write it off as a never purchase...well, you'll miss out on some fine racing. I should also point out that the real gems of pCARS lie not in it's car selection, but in it's track selection, all with time and weather. They're magnificent.

Unless GT starts really pumping out the tracks, I suspect the two games will be complementary in that way. GT for the best car selection, pCARS for the best track selection.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

So bouncing off AIs and walls is more realistic?
They've added weather already, but it doesn't work like it does in real life at all, so what, you want them to take it out? Or maybe they should've made a proper rain simulator
Games like GT are trying to approximate things that happen in real life, but they can never achieve perfection. Because real life has infinite amount of variables, most of which humans simply can't perceive or replicate, it doesn't mean we should give up completely.

What I'm saying is to make it as realistic as possible, what is point of investing more and more resources to create knowingly fake damage?

I'm not sure I understand why its not valid to complain about a choice made, after you find out what that is?

E.G, a new generation of T.V's are coming out, you know no information yet. Months go by and you find out its actually just a CRT TV and that's all that's being released. You wouldn't criticize the choice they made to downgrade, because now you know that the TV is going to be a CRT TV?

I'm on about valid criticism. People can complain about anything rightly or wrongly.

 

[MatskiMonk]

When pCARS is in the bargain bin for $10, will you really not pick it up? I can see not buying at release, particularly with a new series that may or may not be what it says it is. But would you never buy pCARS at all? It's a pretty bad game that you can't get $10 worth of entertainment out of, and pCARS isn't that bad.
.

Honestly, I doubt I will. Maybe when I get home I'll take a photo of my computer game shelf - you'll probably spot a pattern! I'm not a gamer, but I am loyal to franchises, and I never trade or sell games (except F1 2013 which I played once and gave away, and NFS: The Run, which I played once and threw away!)