Lots of Games have it Now. Should GT 5 have a Rewind Option?

[Earth]

Actually, it does. Certain cars are very difficult to drive in real life, i.e. race cars. However, GT allows these cars to be easily driven (as does Forza). So, obviously, the accuracy of the physics is lost somewhere when we can all race the Formula 1 very quickly after 15 minutes.

Not as much as some people make it out to.

From what I've heard and seen about Forza 2 and 3 the cars are easy to drive. GT5P is one of the toughest sims i've ever tried.

Also its a low blow to say since the F1 is too easy to drive it means the rest of the sim is not accurate.

All I see here is you confirming that, no, you can't prove your claim. Best keep your trap shut then until you do.

Again, you take the easy way out.

You turned 63% of no-rewind folks into 90% of the entire GT fanbase. You manipulated the poll.

I did not manipulate the poll, you and those trying to promote rewind did. 63% is more then enough to dismiss something. It's almost 2/3, which is more then enough for congress to overturn a vetoed bill.

If anyone needs to face facts, it's you. Some people do want rewind, & thankfully, there isn't a damn thing you can do to tell them otherwise.

Wrong again, unfortunately. Some people happen to be in the minority. Your one of them. Accept that.

Just like you tried to pawn off the Audi R8 rollover video as a physics bug?

Yeah, irony is a b*tch, huh?

Your pot is blacker then mine.

That's why he said in another video that Forza was like a low quality watch, right?

And do not even attempt to try to use Ismoke's argument when you can't even keep your own logic in check.

Not sure what you mean, but its obvious you are out of control now.

Don't race them and realize they can get these without rewind)
or
Help them get better
or
Realize that the guy who laps you in the next race with an inferior car may have gotten their with rewind training

BTW, Forza's "sleazy" route is much more attractive than adding an aracde game with its own physics to a "simulator". Rewind helps you drive, arcade games don't.

Both are evils, though rewind is by far the worst of the two evils.

 

[Northstar]

Again, you take the easy way out.

Well, you are doing the same thing. Why should he have to go in depth when you keep using your manipulation of the poll as fact. You can't say that is a valid representation of the whole GT community either since the amount of people that play GT is in the millions, the active user count here is around 50,000 and the number of people that voted in this poll is 217. Ask any professional poll company(reuters and AP are the biggest) and they will say you need at least 10% of the population of a given area to participate in the poll for it to even be considered representative, 217 people isn't even a microscopic blip on the GT radar.

Edit: I will wait for a valid argument before I respond to you again.

 

[McLaren]

Not as much as some people make it out to.

From what I've heard and seen about Forza 2 and 3 the cars are easy to drive. GT5P is one of the toughest sims i've ever tried.

You must have missed the part where I mentioned Forza being guilty as well....

And I had at GT5P being on the toughest sims ever. Forza & GT are around the easiest.

Also its a low blow to say since the F1 is too easy to drive it means the rest of the sim is not accurate.

Sorry if it makes you sad, but the F1 is too easy to drive. I can drive it decently fast in 5 laps. Nobody should be able to do that in their first attempts.

Again, you take the easy way out.

Hilarious. I asked you to back up your claim and all you did was bring up the US.

The chances are high that alot of casuals/mainstream will aquire vehicles that they will not be able to control to a safe degree online by means of rewind.

Prove it. Prove rewind is the cause and not just inexperience.

I did not manipulate the poll, you and those trying to promote rewind did. 63% is more then enough to dismiss something. It's almost 2/3, which is more then enough for congress to overturn a vetoed bill.

I manipulated it?

Sorry kiddo, I'm not the one who went from 88-90% and then stated 90% of the GT fanbase doesn't want rewind when in reality it was 63%. But again, you bring up the govt. which is a completely different topic.

Not sure what you mean, but its obvious you are out of control now.

You said KY knew nothing about other games. How then, can he compare his game to Forza in a watch analogy? Looks like he knows something about it.

 

[Devedander]

While now it seems that your intention of the poll was pure, others have twisted it to fit their own wishes and thinking. The original poll was more then enough to quickly dismiss rewind, your poll, while pure in intention, only fanned the flames and gave rewind zealots new life.

Actually this poll allowed the proper responses and was appropriate considering it shows only about 65% of members are actually against rewind while the other poll was touted as showing that 90% of people didn't want it.

Bear in mind that people who don't care are less likely to bother voting than those who are opposed. Had more people voted "I don't care" the % of "against" votes would be smaller.

Good point. But beyond bad online drivers rewind does not teach them to be good offline drivers either. PD has implemented many assists to new drivers, while Turn 10 jumped onto the latest fad of rewind, most likely just to claim they have something on Gran Turismo.

Rewind probably isn't going to carry a driver all the way from "can't beat a level in burnout" to "top contender for GT Acadamy", but the point is that it could well be the tool that keeps the game accesible enough that lesser drivers stick with learning until they outgrow the need for rewind and then they can progress to get better in other ways (learning rythm and timing etc).

Think of it this way, a baseball T doesn't allow someone to become a major leaguer, but it can be the difference between learning how to hit a ball and being so frustrated you give up.

Remember it's not usually the ones who want to learn using the right tools tend to cause trouble, it's the ones who gave up trying and thus the only way they can have fun is to be disruptive that are.

Though GTP may be a small portion of Gran Turismo's fan base it is the largest and most diverse fan base on the internet. A poll here is no different then a gallup poll.

I can't say it's not, but is that really an accurate description? What do you use to come to that conclusion? Was there some study done on the membership of GTP?

And no, a poll here is not the same as a gallup poll. Gallup polls factor in error rate and do their best to get a random polling group.

Remember this poll is about something that effects everyone, not just the hardcore fans (which make up a large part of GTP) so holding a poll in GTP forums is like holding a gallup poll about federal arms control outside a shooting range in Texas.

I dont think you can call me wrong when the majority of the pollsters agree with me. Varying levels of damage is not something Kaz would want but something that has to do with manufacturers. At this point other parties are involved, not just Kaz.

Being wrong en mass does not mean you aren't wrong. The whole world used to believe the planet was flat... that didnt' make them right.

No, actually he didn't. B-spec is not comparable to rewind. From what was written in the posts I'm sure the results of the poll are firmly against rewind. You don't have to quiz every single GT player to get a definitive answer on rewind.

Every GT player or every GT player who takes it seriously enough to join a forum about GT? There is a difference...

IsmokeGT got very in depth a few pages back about rewind not teaching rhythm, discipline or teaching you the consequences of your actions. These three areas are very important in the art of race car driving.

Rewind doesn't have to replace learning those, it can very much be used to get to the point where you can start focusing on those. Those arguing against rewind seem to think that those who use it sometimes will never stop or outgrow it. That's pretty flawed, similar to my baseball T analogy above.

Does the United States government have to prove that if they don't secure their enriched uranium terrorists will try and steal it? No.

Well if it's my tax dollars at work I say they have to prove to a pretty reasonable doubt... but that aside, it's not too hard to prove when it has actually happened before... the thing is rewind has not ruined any game so far, it has helped some if not all of them to some extent.

So the analogy is flawed, a more accurate one would be "Does the Gov have to prove that airbags increase your chance of dying in a car accident before banning them?" because just like airbags haven't increased fatalities, rewind hasn't actually broken any games despite being in a few already. Remember if it isn't historically true, then yes you do kind of have to prove it.

Way to twist the truth and facts. That's become a trademark of your posts. Describing B-Spec as a mode that "does the whole race for you" is misleading and not true at all. B-Spec is a race manager mode. Not a sit back and watch the AI win for you mode as you try to put it.

Well in all fairness, at least with rewind, while you get to try again and again, you do actually have to DO it in the end.

When will they have learned rhythm or discipline? Both are vital when attempting to race someone else online. Rewind will certainly not have taught them that.

After they have outgrown needing rewind? When do baseball players learn to spot the spin on a pitch and recognize a curve ball? Probably after they stop using a T... does using a T mean you will never learn those things? Of course not, so why would rewind?

Don't race them (and realize they can get cars without rewind)

Agree. It seems to me that the bigger threat isn't from peopel who will use rewind to try and try until they can get a course down, but from people who find out what races net you big Cr, do those over and over again and then buy the monster cars which they then smash into you online because their only experience has been doing one simple race over and over.

 

[Exorcet]

Not as much as some people make it out to.

From what I've heard and seen about Forza 2 and 3 the cars are easy to drive. GT5P is one of the toughest sims i've ever tried.

Also its a low blow to say since the F1 is too easy to drive it means the rest of the sim is not accurate.

From what I've played, Forza is in no way easier or dumbed down compared to GT. In fact, I think I like their race cars/tires a lot more. Unlike the GT glued-to-road-cars, the Forza cars want to step out when you put too much power down. And in Forza, non ABS is manageable without a pedal. Forza also doesn't have an exaggerated draft as in GT. Where Forza does fall somewhat is in creating a difference in feel from car to car (though I honestly don't think it's as strong as it should be in GT either). I also recall it being kind of hard to really upset a car in transitions.

Both are evils, though rewind is by far the worst of the two evils.

The worse evil can help you/others drive in Pro physics and thereby increase competition, fun, and activity for all. The lesser one can't.

 

[RedSuinit]

All this over a poll? An online poll from a forums where half of the members are biased one way or the other? It seems like a lot of foolishness to argue over a poll that was run on these forums. All those who don't like Forza voted neigh, whether or not they even thought about what having rewind in this game would mean, or what it would even look like. Wrapping the entire, hell even the majority of the GT fanbase in this poll is not what I would deem worthy of all this time spent arguing over it.

 

[RACECAR]

Off-Topic Distracton:

 

[Organ-Donor]

 

[Horde_R35]

I just wanna say NO!! And... i hate forza 👎!

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

Completely irrelevant. As long as restarting makes you win, then it's the same as rewind.

If such is the case, why not cut through the chase and make the Ferrari F1 car available for 10,000 credits, since it doesn't matter how you win....

Anyways, I'm quite happy to see the diversity in the poll. 👍 It proves not everyone has the same opinion, which is what I wanted to see.

Correct. This is what you guys wanted to see when you dismissed the original poll, not what the GT fanbase wants. Just to turn the stats in a way that it looks as if more people wanted it.

 

[Lain]

lmfao, great pics! 👍

 

[Devedander]

Correct. This is what you guys wanted to see when you dismissed the original poll, not what the GT fanbase wants. Just to turn the stats in a way that it looks as if more people wanted it.

I would say it's what we wanted to see becuase it doesn't artificially make the do not wants look bigger than they are.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

I would say it's what we wanted to see becuase it doesn't artificially make the do not wants look bigger than they are.

In the same way, it artificially devalues the will of those who oppose rewind, by fracturing their votes into 9 multiple choice options, when in reality the question only has 2 answers: yes or no.

 

[Lucas]

And thus, I retreat from this thread forever...

By the way, I joined your group, yaywalter! 👍

I'm afraid I have to retract myself. Thanks go to SUPER NUMBBER.

If such is the case, why not cut through the chase and make the Ferrari F1 car available for 10,000 credits, since it doesn't matter how you win....

I'm sorry, what does this have to do with what I said? The point was that restarting and rewind were made for the same purpose, restart the race. Unless you want to have some fun, you restart a race because you want to win.

Since you know I'm right, you come up with this. And who says it doesn't matter how you win? I never said that, please point out where if I did. All I said was that restart and rewind make you win. If you don't agree, please explain why. If you can't, then I'm right.

Correct. This is what you guys wanted to see when you dismissed the original poll, not what the GT fanbase wants. Just to turn the stats in a way that it looks as if more people wanted it.

What the GT fanbase wants? We don't even have over 250 voters. Explain how around 230 voters are the GT fanbase. It seems like the smallest fanbase to me.

In the same way, it artificially devalues the will of those who oppose rewind, by fracturing their votes into 9 multiple choice options, when in reality the question only has 2 answers: yes or no.

As I said before, you can do the math yourself. The numbers you want to know are in options 2, 3, 4. I don't know how hard can it be to look at them.
Options 1 and 5 are telling me how much people love or hate rewind, to the point of people only buying the game if it comes with rewind, or not buying it if it comes with rewind. 6, 7, 8, 9 tell me when would people use rewind should it come with the game. 10 asks people to explain something they would have voted should it have been in the poll.

Really, how did I managed to fracture the votes? Everyone who votes must vote one of options 2, 3, 4, because the other options are based on them.

Want to see?

Let's say I vote number 2, rewind should be in GT5. Then I vote number 1, I would only buy GT5 if it comes with rewind, if that's my case. Then I would have to choose between options 7, 8 or 9, since honestly, who would vote Yes on a feature they would never use?

Let's say I vote number 3 (my case), I don't care whether it is included or not. That rules out 1, 2, 4, and 5, otherwise, if I vote for one of those, I do care about it. I can then vote for 6, 7, 8 or 9. I voted 7, I will win by myself without the use of rewind.

Let's say I vote number 4, last option. I can then vote number 5, I wouldn't buy GT5 if it comes with rewind. Honestly, you can stop here, since if you won't buy the game, you won't even be able to vote for 6, 7, 8 or 9. If I will buy GT5, even if it comes with rewind, I have 6, 7, 8 and 9 left. I find it comical when people are against the feature, but would still use it. I even find it more comical when people would use it in races. "Correct" choice would be 6, never to use it.



So, after all this typing, how is it that this poll fractured the votes? It's a multiple choice poll. You can vote for many things. And the question doesn't have two answers, my friend. To do not care is the third one. And the reason why I started this poll. Moreover, Devedander is right, those who don't care about the feature, will probably not be voting, unless those who do care about it not being in GT5, who will make their opinion known since they are opposed to every feature related to Forza.

 

[GREGC92]

with rewind option it would be too prince of persia or timeshift like :S

 

[Lain]

with rewind option it would be too prince of persia or timeshift like :S

lol i know, next thing you know they're gonna add guns and stuff. And a slow-mo feature as well. Itd be pretty cool if Polyphony added some sort of power-up that temporarily pauses time for everything except your car, so that you can get a massive headstart!!!!

Sorry, but rewind is nothing more than a tool. And knowing PD, if they did add rewind, it would be tastefully implemented.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

I'm sorry, what does this have to do with what I said? The point was that restarting and rewind were made for the same purpose, restart the race.

No. Restart gets you back to the beginning of the race. Rewind takes you back anytime before that. Huge difference.

Since you know I'm right, you come up with this. And who says it doesn't matter how you win? I never said that, please point out where if I did. All I said was that restart and rewind make you win. If you don't agree, please explain why. If you can't, then I'm right.

I'm not interested in stroking your ego. I clearly said the means you use to win DO in fact matter if you want to learn driving. You said it's "completely irrelevant". I took that to mean that you disagree with the main premise of my post. But I can take a misunderstanding, so I'm gonna give you another chance to clarify, because as it seems, you're dragging me into arguing that restart doesn't make you win, a point I never contended. I argued the means to get the win, which are more helpful as a teaching tool by just restarting the race.

What the GT fanbase wants? We don't even have over 250 voters. Explain how around 230 voters are the GT fanbase. It seems like the smallest fanbase to me.

You know I'm loving the irony of you trying to defend a poll that, in your view is useless because it's not representative of the GT fanbase. First the poll was biased; take the same poll twice with different words, and now it's too small a sample....what's the point of polling GTPlanet if in the end their views don't matter in the grand scheme?

You also seem to be ignoring the main issue with this poll: you guys didn't like the results on the original poll (which directly addressed the issue at hand), so you made a new one that fit you argument better while performing a bury attack on the first.

As I said before, you can do the math yourself. The numbers you want to know are in options 2, 3, 4. I don't know how hard can it be to look at them.
Options 1 and 5 are telling me how much people love or hate rewind, to the point of people only buying the game if it comes with rewind, or not buying it if it comes with rewind. 6, 7, 8, 9 tell me when would people use rewind should it come with the game. 10 asks people to explain something they would have voted should it have been in the poll.

Really, how did I managed to fracture the votes? Everyone who votes must vote one of options 2, 3, 4, because the other options are based on them.

Want to see?

Let's say I vote number 2, rewind should be in GT5. Then I vote number 1, I would only buy GT5 if it comes with rewind, if that's my case. Then I would have to choose between options 7, 8 or 9, since honestly, who would vote Yes on a feature they would never use?

Let's say I vote number 3 (my case), I don't care whether it is included or not. That rules out 1, 2, 4, and 5, otherwise, if I vote for one of those, I do care about it. I can then vote for 6, 7, 8 or 9. I voted 7, I will win by myself without the use of rewind.

Let's say I vote number 4, last option. I can then vote number 5, I wouldn't buy GT5 if it comes with rewind. Honestly, you can stop here, since if you won't buy the game, you won't even be able to vote for 6, 7, 8 or 9. If I will buy GT5, even if it comes with rewind, I have 6, 7, 8 and 9 left. I find it comical when people are against the feature, but would still use it. I even find it more comical when people would use it in races. "Correct" choice would be 6, never to use it.

Blah....if you need 4 paragraphs to explain a yes or no question, you're clearly doing something severely misleading.

Compare that to the instructions on the original poll:

1. If you want rewind in GT5, pick "yes".

2. If you don't want rewind in GT5, pick "no"

3. If you don't care, DON'T VOTE.

And you find this pollwas "misleading"???

But let's further humor the argument, shall we?

You fail to see a glaring problem in the very argument you made. To wit, the fact that you can indeed vote for multiple conflicting statements (especially if they're closely worded) gives a lot of room for unintentional votes......make that a football field's worth.

Example: I want to vote "No I don't want rewind"; obviously for the sake of completeness, I have to vote "I'd never use it if it's in the game" But choice 1 and 5 look very similar, and anyone can easily confuse the two, potentially making it seem as if someone would only buy GT5 with a feature they don't want.

Strike 3: Fractioning the vote. Like I said before, 9 options for such a simple question is completely unnecessary. Even if 2 people have the same opinion, they could conceivably vote different options, further weakening the positions of those polled.

Say a guy doesn't want rewind. It just so happens he's new to the forum, and doesn't notice this was a multiple choice poll. He picks the first line that pops out to his view - "I would never use it if it's in the game." That's one less vote for "No, it shouldn't be in GT5", which benefits the opposing argument by breaking up the anti-rewind vote. In the end, the anti rewind group is artificially divided into 2 groups - those who voted "No, it shouldn't be in GT5", and those who voted "I would never use it if it's in the game.", even if essentially they're in the same camp, against rewind. Thus it gives the misleading appearance that not many people are against the feature now that the percentage ratio is split. I suspect this was the intended effect by making so many ridiculously unnecessary multiple choice options.

Moreover, Devedander is right, those who don't care about the feature, will probably not be voting

Then why are you complaining about the old poll? I just said that! The poll didn't need an option for people who don't care in the first place; they just don't vote!!!

And another thing: before you claim I'm just opposed to anything that's Forza related, you obviously haven't seen me argue for the inclusion of damage modeling. Rewind is not on the same level.

 

[Devedander]

In the same way, it artificially devalues the will of those who oppose rewind, by fracturing their votes into 9 multiple choice options, when in reality the question only has 2 answers: yes or no.

Actually there should have been 3 answers, yes, no and I don't care/won't bother me. I agree there are too many choices in the current poll.

Although I think this was a multipel choice poll so I thought you were supposed to choose yes no or I don't care and also fill in how you felt below with one of the other choices.

 

[Devedander]

Then why are you complaining about the old poll? I just said that! The poll didn't need an option for people who don't care in the first place; they just don't vote!!!

Because the old poll did not instruct people not to vote, and the wording of the old poll (as I explained many times) meant that someone who didn't care was included in the "no" category. You can see quite a few people actually posted comments in the thread saying "I don't care so I voted no".

However when the results were then counted, the nos were simply refered to as "Do not want" rather than "do not want or don't care".

You can see how significant that flaw was as is mentioned, the old poll claimed 90% of people do not want. This poll shows only about 65% of people do not want.

If that's doesn't show the problem with that poll I don't know what would...

 

[Exorcet]

those who voted "No, it shouldn't be in GT5", and those who voted "I would never use it if it's in the game.", even if essentially they're in the same camp, against rewind.

I voted I would never use it* and, and I'm not against it. The original poll didn't have my opinion within it. This one did.

Anyone who is neutral can eventually slide either way. Neutral is not no.


*This may exclude earning money/cars, as to me this is classified in the same "fun-category" as waiting in line to buy the game.

 

[Devedander]

I voted I would never use it* and, and I'm not against it. The original poll didn't have my opinion within it. This one did.

Anyone who is neutral can eventually slide either way. Neutral is not no.


*This may exclude earning money/cars, as to me this is classified in the same "fun-category" as waiting in line to buy the game.

Actually technically the way the question was asked, you are a no in the previous poll which is exactly the reason it was flawed.

You do not care and are thus neutral.

I ask do you want rewind? yes or no.

The answer is no you do not, someone who is neutraul does not want anything and thus does not want rewind.

The distinction come between not wanting something and wanting something to not happen. The previuos poll took those who dindn't WANT it to happen and made it appear that they wanted it to NOT happen. Those are two different things which shows clearly in this poll.

 

[turbomp301]

Both polls clearly show how a majority of the folks here at GTP feel.

From a "hardcore sim" stand point, rewind has no place in GT.

From "GT needs to give the fans what they want" stand point, we got 0 people that will only buy this game if it has the feature and 6 people that won't buy the game if its in.

Why is this thread still going? Babies, babies that whine and whine, thats why.

The debate is over, PD can only hurt its sales and its reputation by adding this feature based on this poll.


/my posts here
/the whining
/thread

 

[Exorcet]

The debate is over, PD can only hurt its sales and its reputation by adding this feature based on this poll.

You have no basis for saying this. Unless only 229 people are buying GT5.

And as has been said before, rewind and sim do not conflict.

 

[Zathra5_]

Wow, the logic in this thread is baffling.

This is not a scientific poll as many people have said. The main reason is that the population answering it is highly skewed. It makes something interesting to have a debate about. You can not infer how sales would be affected by having rewind, especially when you consider that the largest population of GT players (casual players) is not represented in this poll.

"From a "hardcore sim" stand point, rewind has no place in GT."

This comment is not justifiable from either the discussion or the poll. The only people who can say whether it has a place in GT or not is PD. From a "hardcore sim" stand point several of us have made arguments why rewind MAY have a place in hardcore sims. The arguments against using it as a training tool appear to be centered on the belief that anyone using it will always use it whenever they make a mistake and thus would never learn rhythm and so on. This is obviously a flawed argument since there is nothing forcing someone to always use rewind whenever they make a mistake.

The poll clearly shows that most people who voted do not want rewind in GT and that a fairly large group of people do not care. It says nothing about whether or not it could be a useful addition to GT or not.

 

[Devedander]

Both polls clearly show how a majority of the folks here at GTP feel.

From a "hardcore sim" stand point, rewind has no place in GT.

From "GT needs to give the fans what they want" stand point, we got 0 people that will only buy this game if it has the feature and 6 people that won't buy the game if its in.

Why is this thread still going? Babies, babies that whine and whine, thats why.

The debate is over, PD can only hurt its sales and its reputation by adding this feature based on this poll.


/my posts here
/the whining
/thread

You said it quite clearly, from the GTP perspective, and from a hardcore sim perspective yes the message is that a simple majority is against. Remember my gun poll analogy at the exit to a shooting range in Texas?

This poll just says it more accurately and fairly than the other. Against is not black and white, 90% against is not the same as 65% against.

However from a marketing perspective, that this could only hurt PD... that is not something you can infer from this poll.

First of all, rewind is not a feature likely to be desired by the more skilled userbase, it is something that is likely to be more desired by the less skilled and or not current userbase. Thus the majority of users (and potential users) is not only not represented here, but is in fact probably the opposite of what is represented here.

By definition, the hardcore userbase is smaller than the general populace. So what is a negative amongst the hardcore is not necessarily negative overall.

In all likeliehood the 6 GTP users who would not buy the game would be far outnumbered by the millions of people who don't play GT because it's too hard and frustrating or those who are not hardcore enough to be on a forum voting on such things but woudl be positively influenced by a new tool to help aid their driving.

So again, this poll does not prove what's best for everyone, what's best for PD sales wise or antying else of the kind.

It proves that amongst a the more devoted (and likely thus more skilled) group, a tool that would benefit the exact opposite demographic does not get a majority vote. That's not surprising at all.

A gun control poll outside a shooting range would probably not reflect accurately the countries desires towards gun control.

 

[Bimmer Jay]

Why do other people care how I or any casual player race against the AI?

Rewind can't be used online where the racing counts and lap times indicate whether it was used or not offline.

It's a video game and I hope none of you are taking these games that serious in your real life and thinking any of these games represent reality. Too many people wreck because of ignorance so please be careful.

 

[Earth]

You must have missed the part where I mentioned Forza being guilty as well....

And I had at GT5P being on the toughest sims ever. Forza & GT are around the easiest.

Sorry if it makes you sad, but the F1 is too easy to drive. I can drive it decently fast in 5 laps. Nobody should be able to do that in their first attempts.

GT5P is easy? How? It should be noted GT5P does not simulate tire heat like previous GTs so saying the race tires are too grippy is unfounded because the tires are at 100% optimum temperature because there is no tire changing in the simulation.

You say because the F1 is too easy? Aa Formula 1 car is suppose to be one of the better handling cars. Jeff Gordon (NASCAR) drove one for the first time at Indy, and other then a few lockups he got within a second or two of Montoya's best within 5 laps. He commented on how it was the best handling racecar he has ever raced and how it braked, accelerated and turned perfectly. They're not the hardest cars to drive, but they are probably the hardest cars to push to the limit.

Please don't post a video of some chipmunk looking guy from Top Gear who has no idea what hes doing screw around with a F1 car. That hardly is anything to go by.

Have you driven a Ferrari F40 in GT5P on S2 tires? I doubt many will find that easy. I own GTR2, rFactor, and NASCAR 2003, three of the greatest racing sims ever made. Some cars in GT5P on certain tires are more difficult to drive then any of those sims.

Difficulty does not say how good a sim is. I noticed you said something about a Ferrari game that was so difficult for consoles. Again, difficulty has nothing to do with how good a sim is. Accuracy is what matters. An experienced driver who is aware of how a car behaves and understands things like racing line will have little problems driving within reasonable range of another driver using a car he has limited experience in.

Hilarious. I asked you to back up your claim and all you did was bring up the US.

I dont need to back up the claim. It's common sense and the law of averages demands it. Knowing that I can't test it in a controlled labatory as you would have me you go ahead and say I shouldn't say these things. You are taking the easy way out, not me.

Prove it. Prove rewind is the cause and not just inexperience.

It's no different then all the bad drivers who flooded GT5P online a few days after it was released thanks to all the game saves that were uploaded to this site and others. I never said rewind will be 100% at fault for bad driving online. I have only said it will contribute to the problem. From your claims it can be asserted that you think rewind will make better online drivers. I think it will make worst online drivers.

You say that having the ability to rewind your every mistake will make better drivers as they will find the limit of their cars better etc etc. This is not true. It's quite obvious in every Forza 3 video I have seen the drivers are wreckless. They make a mistake, whoops, rewind it right back, brake a bit earlier, still boss the AI in front out of the way.

That is not teaching the driver discipline. You need discipline when racing online. It's like the army simulators that teach you to shoot first and ask questions later. While this may make soldiers take that shot faster, it also makes them take shots too fast at times.

You have the same problem with rewind. Constantly having a graphic on screen telling you to rewind a mistake is also telling the driver its OK to make mistakes. They are not being punished for making mistakes.

Why do you think it is our bodies are not made of unbreakable steel and we feel pain? We are built like this to stop us from doing stupid things. If we couldn't get hurt and were "unbreakable" so to say people would be jumping off of buildings, acting a fool and doing stupid things.

But because there is a consequence to their actions they think before they act.

Same thing goes with other things like invisibility cloaks. What type of chaos would there be if people could become invisible? Not all advances in technology are for good. Same thing with rewind. Just because it is a feature that games feature does not mean it is good or helpful to the simulation industry.

There are plenty of AIDs already instituted in Gran Turismo to help new drivers. Traction control. Stability control. Standard physics. Racing line. Different views, not just the cockpit view. These assists are more then enough to help get a new driver on his feet.

Spoiling them by means of a rewind button is not the way to go. According to the laws of averages some of these spoiled drivers will find their way online will they will make the same mistakes they did offline which were corrected then because of rewind, but are now detrimental without rewind.

I manipulated it?

Sorry kiddo, I'm not the one who went from 88-90% and then stated 90% of the GT fanbase doesn't want rewind when in reality it was 63%. But again, you bring up the govt. which is a completely different topic.

Yes, you and others manipulated the poll results.

63% alone is more then enough of a one sided vote to show the world rewind is not needed nor wanted. 63% in any vote is a landslide. Only in those who wish to manipulate the results is 63% not the majority.

That does not include the 25.86% (hopefully this exact number satisfies you) who say they would never use it if it is included in the title as a feature. 80%+ of GTP's users would never use it. Why should it even be considered?

You said KY knew nothing about other games. How then, can he compare his game to Forza in a watch analogy? Looks like he knows something about it.

Once again you take things at face value. There is always something a little bit further down the tunnel if you just look for it instead of just seeing things that are right in front of your face.

Well, you are doing the same thing. Why should he have to go in depth when you keep using your manipulation of the poll as fact. You can't say that is a valid representation of the whole GT community either since the amount of people that play GT is in the millions, the active user count here is around 50,000 and the number of people that voted in this poll is 217. Ask any professional poll company(reuters and AP are the biggest) and they will say you need at least 10% of the population of a given area to participate in the poll for it to even be considered representative, 217 people isn't even a microscopic blip on the GT radar.

Edit: I will wait for a valid argument before I respond to you again.

Is there anything to suggest if the entire GTP community was polled the result would be different?

If you polled a pro football team asking them whether or not referees should be allowed to use instant replay to clear up plays the result of the polling of one team would be the same throughout the entire league because they all have the same ideals and mentality.

I think it's pretty sad that so many excuses are being made when its obvious the majority does not want rewind.

Actually this poll allowed the proper responses and was appropriate considering it shows only about 65% of members are actually against rewind while the other poll was touted as showing that 90% of people didn't want it.

Bear in mind that people who don't care are less likely to bother voting than those who are opposed. Had more people voted "I don't care" the % of "against" votes would be smaller.

And you conviently forget about the 25% who would never use it. Way to twist the poll results.

Those who don't care probably won't use rewind. So -1 again for rewind.

Rewind probably isn't going to carry a driver all the way from "can't beat a level in burnout" to "top contender for GT Acadamy", but the point is that it could well be the tool that keeps the game accesible enough that lesser drivers stick with learning until they outgrow the need for rewind and then they can progress to get better in other ways (learning rythm and timing etc).

Think of it this way, a baseball T doesn't allow someone to become a major leaguer, but it can be the difference between learning how to hit a ball and being so frustrated you give up.

Remember it's not usually the ones who want to learn using the right tools tend to cause trouble, it's the ones who gave up trying and thus the only way they can have fun is to be disruptive that are.

Why should GT be dumbed down further then it already is? It's because of the causals mainstream we don't have insanely realistic damage. Kaz even mentioned this himself, saying that your average crash at Daytona would shatter your car, and he wasn't sure if most people would like that.

I can't say it's not, but is that really an accurate description? What do you use to come to that conclusion? Was there some study done on the membership of GTP?

And no, a poll here is not the same as a gallup poll. Gallup polls factor in error rate and do their best to get a random polling group.

Remember this poll is about something that effects everyone, not just the hardcore fans (which make up a large part of GTP) so holding a poll in GTP forums is like holding a gallup poll about federal arms control outside a shooting range in Texas.

GTP is by far the largest and most diverse GT website on the internet. What is said or thought up here is the best it gets. We dont have to go polling the entire world to get an answer about rewind. Sorry.

Being wrong en mass does not mean you aren't wrong. The whole world used to believe the planet was flat... that didnt' make them right.

Pretty bad excuse here for rewind failing in every poll and in every forum its been brought up.

Every GT player or every GT player who takes it seriously enough to join a forum about GT? There is a difference...

The serious ones are the ones that matter.

Rewind doesn't have to replace learning those, it can very much be used to get to the point where you can start focusing on those. Those arguing against rewind seem to think that those who use it sometimes will never stop or outgrow it. That's pretty flawed, similar to my baseball T analogy above.

I dont think its flawed, every single Forza video i have seen features large amounts of rewind. I'm really sure someone is going tos pend the first month rewinding, and when they finally got it down they race 5 laps clean and on the 6th lap crash, you think they won't rewind? yeah right.

Well if it's my tax dollars at work I say they have to prove to a pretty reasonable doubt... but that aside, it's not too hard to prove when it has actually happened before... the thing is rewind has not ruined any game so far, it has helped some if not all of them to some extent.

So the analogy is flawed, a more accurate one would be "Does the Gov have to prove that airbags increase your chance of dying in a car accident before banning them?" because just like airbags haven't increased fatalities, rewind hasn't actually broken any games despite being in a few already. Remember if it isn't historically true, then yes you do kind of have to prove it.

Sorry that some things can't be tested with flasks inside a labatory and rather are common sense. If you dont want to accept it, then too bad.

Well in all fairness, at least with rewind, while you get to try again and again, you do actually have to DO it in the end.

Again, b-spec is a totally different mode from a-spec. Two totally different things. One is a race manager mode where you are SUPPOSE to manage the AI driver during the race.

After they have outgrown needing rewind? When do baseball players learn to spot the spin on a pitch and recognize a curve ball? Probably after they stop using a T... does using a T mean you will never learn those things? Of course not, so why would rewind?

Heres something for you to prove.

Prove they will outgrow rewind.

Because I dont think they will

From what I've played, Forza is in no way easier or dumbed down compared to GT. In fact, I think I like their race cars/tires a lot more. Unlike the GT glued-to-road-cars, the Forza cars want to step out when you put too much power down. And in Forza, non ABS is manageable without a pedal. Forza also doesn't have an exaggerated draft as in GT. Where Forza does fall somewhat is in creating a difference in feel from car to car (though I honestly don't think it's as strong as it should be in GT either). I also recall it being kind of hard to really upset a car in transitions.

Not sure what Gran Turismo your racing, but the cars do step out when exiting corners. If your talking about stepping out from launches from a standstill, then I bet you think Forza's reverse lights and skidmarks add a whole lot to the game as well. Manageable non ABS without a pedal is nothing to boast about. The draft in GT is very unrealistic, but again its the driving mechanics that make a sim.

The worse evil can help you/others drive in Pro physics and thereby increase competition, fun, and activity for all. The lesser one can't.

One makes the cars easier to handle, the other rewinds time.

 

[Exorcet]

Not sure what Gran Turismo your racing, but the cars do step out when exiting corners. If your talking about stepping out from launches from a standstill, then I bet you think Forza's reverse lights and skidmarks add a whole lot to the game as well. Manageable non ABS without a pedal is nothing to boast about. The draft in GT is very unrealistic, but again its the driving mechanics that make a sim.

Every GT on a home console.

Skidmarks are as worthless as GT's overdone graphics. I'm not going to point out something that only effects the first .5 seconds of a race, so no I'm not talking about launches. The race cars in Forza had more noticeable power oversteer. that felt more like it did when I drove on race slicks in reality. In GT, they break away slow and are pretty easy to catch early. In Forza and real life, I couldn't really cut them off as they came out, I had to regain control and reel them in.

This is the type of car I drove:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdAXhRb8bzo

One makes the cars easier to handle, the other rewinds time.

What's you point? That defying physics is better than defying time? Aracde physics is pretty much pointless compared to pro. It exists to give people a reason to buy the game if they can't drive pro. It can't train or make them better driver.

Rewind can improve skill. I read above that you said a percentage will use it sloppily and go online causing havoc. Completely ignoring your option to only race the hundreds of people from here and using confirmed private rooms, what makes you think the majority of rewinders will cause a problem? Where is your evidence? Why can't the majority learn and become better from it and then increase the value of your and everyone else's GT experience?

 

[Devedander]

And you conviently forget about the 25% who would never use it. Way to twist the poll results.

I thought the poll was setup so you could vote no you don't want it and the the never use it part was an optional extra so it's not ANOTHER 25% it's just to same person voting on two different poll options at once... maybe I am wrong, I already voted and thought I voted for I won't use it but also voted I want it becuase I think it woudl help others and not hurt me. That's why I am only counting the wants, don't wants, and don't cares. I said up front though the poll had too many choices. I think this one is better than the previous, but has too many choices.

Those who don't care probably won't use rewind. So -1 again for rewind.

You can't really posite that. How many things have you seen and though "what's the point of that" and once you use it you realize "holy cow this is aweseom" and now it's part of your daily life. So no, you can't assume that because you don't care now you won't use it later... many of those who don't care now might well try it, totally like it and be happy it's in! That's kind of how don't care works.

Why should GT be dumbed down further then it already is? It's because of the causals mainstream we don't have insanely realistic damage. Kaz even mentioned this himself, saying that your average crash at Daytona would shatter your car, and he wasn't sure if most people would like that.

Forcing Rewind on everyone would dumb down GT, I mean if every crash resulted in a rewind then yes it would. But as an option it doesn't dumb down GT, it provides an optional tool, that if you don't use, then had no effect whatsoever on your GT experience.

Why should it be there? I think we all hate bad drivers... we all especially hate the ones that gave up learning how to drive well and the only fun they can have is smashing you around online...

We should give as many tools as we can to learning and weaker drivers in hopes that they will use then to learn how to improve rather than just give up.

And again, assuming that rewind dumbs down anything is just that an assumption. It provides a facet that can be exploited and abused, but so does almost anything else. It could turn out to be a great learning tool that helps a lot of bad drivers become decent drivers... woudl you consider that dumbing down GT?

GTP is by far the largest and most diverse GT website on the internet. What is said or thought up here is the best it gets. We dont have to go polling the entire world to get an answer about rewind. Sorry.

Someone better alert facebook and myspace

I don't think that's true and I don't think it's even something you could come close to arguing succesfully with factual data.

First off, it's a gaming forum, so it's already less diverse than forums which don't cater to gaming alone.

I am a member of lots of forums, and I can tell you that GTP is neither the biggest nor most diverse forum I belong to let along any forum and let alone any WEBSITE.

Sorry, unless you have some data and graphs to back that up (which I don't think you do because it's a pretty outrageous claim) I am going to say you are totally making a false statement.

To use my gun control analogy, you MIGHT be at the biggest shooting range in the world, but even then, you aren't at the biggest building in the world and you are still polling a skewed audience.

Pretty bad excuse here for rewind failing in every poll and in every forum its been brought up.

It's not an excuse, it's a statement. BTW do you mean every forum, or the GT5 forum here at GTP? Becuase I would be curiuos how you searched every forum on the whole internets to find that out.

And as I said, numbers don't make you right. Do you think we should go communist because China did? I mean they have a much larger population so they must be right?

The serious ones are the ones that matter.

Depends on what you are addressing... from a marketing and sales standpoint, the casual players $ is just as green as yours or mine.

I dont think its flawed, every single Forza video i have seen features large amounts of rewind. I'm really sure someone is going tos pend the first month rewinding, and when they finally got it down they race 5 laps clean and on the 6th lap crash, you think they won't rewind? yeah right.

Well, considing I have played a lot of Grid and it had rewind and I rewound the crap out of it in the begining until the novelty wore off... yes I do think people will eventually grow out of rewind, just like people grow out of using the T in tball.

There are 2 signifncant kinds of people, those who play to get better and want a challege, and those who play to play and don't care if they get better and thus probably won't.

For the former group, rewind will be a great starting tool that they will outgrow. Eventually the challenge and satisfaction of doing it without rewind will ween them off it, just like training wheels and baseball Ts.

The latter group... well they weren't really giong to get better anyway, they were the "7 year old boys" (generalization) who want to smash stuff and screw around and don't care. They are just going to be as bad as they were anyway.

So you can help some and the others... well they are just as bad as before. So it seems why not help those you can and the others, hey that's how it was gonna be anyway.

BTW the Forza demo has been out for a few days/weeks right? And there are lots of videos showing off the new feature (which admittedly can be quite fun and some eye candy)? I wouldn't say that's enough to base too much of an opinion of the long term on. I mean a huge number of the videos for any racing game invovle spectacular crashes... does that mean that most people are only interested in crashing?

Sorry that some things can't be tested with flasks inside a labatory and rather are common sense. If you dont want to accept it, then too bad.

Yes, the point was common sense says that a few games already have rewind, and nothing earthshatteringly bad has happened due to it, so if you are giong to draw any conclusions, it should be that your fears are unfounded.

As I said, your example was flawed because you picked something in which empircal evidence (ie it actually happened before) says you are right.

In this case, empirical evidence says you are wrong.

Again, b-spec is a totally different mode from a-spec. Two totally different things. One is a race manager mode where you are SUPPOSE to manage the AI driver during the race.

And they both let you complete the race and B spec doesn't in any way make you a better driver. At least rewind means you had to finish the race and if you had to make the turn (even if it took you 10 tries) that's more likely to improve your driving skills than not doing it at all right?

I am not saying b spec isn't different from A spec, I am just saying it has even less merrit than rewind in terms of any postive effect on the player.

Heres something for you to prove.

Prove they will outgrow rewind.

Because I dont think they will

Well it's fine you don't think they will. But just remember that's what you think, that's all and that it's not in any way a fact.

Now as for proof? Well as you said, some things can't be proved in a laboratory with test tubes, so the only proof I could offer is to look around at empircal evidecne in similar situations and draw an educated guess:

Personal experience: Every driving aid to date I have tried. Early on in my gaming days I needed most of them and to some point badly. The result, I outgrew them. That's just me though, not a large sample by anymeans, but it proves that it's at least possible.

Look at similar situations: Training wheels, baseball T's, Bumpers in bowling and mulligans in golf. How many people have you seen who don't outgrow those things eventually? Logic says that by human nature, outgrowing your handicaps and aids is what most people will do. Not saying everyone will, but quite a few.

So I can't time travel and do a study and find absolute proof for you, but the educated guess certainly seems to favor outgrowing your aids.

So yeah... what you seem to have is a fear of something bad happening rampantly that hasn't happened yet in other circumstances where this same device has already been implimented and seems fear driven of the worst case scenario. It's like the fear that legalizing marijuana will bring rampant crime and violence with widespread drug use... Well... we look at countries which have legalized marijuana and we see that fear is unfounded...

I am not saying you are absoutely certainly wrong, I am not psychic and I can't tell what the future brings.

But what I am saying is that you are ignoring reason in favor of fear and eschewing logic in favor of irrationality.

 

[Exorcet]

So yeah... what you seem to have is a fear of something bad happening rampantly that hasn't happened yet in other circumstances where this same device has already been implimented and seems fear driven of the worst case scenario. It's like the fear that legalizing marijuana will bring rampant crime and violence with widespread drug use... Well... we look at countries which have legalized marijuana and we see that fear is unfounded...

^