Sorry I don't have my pie charts in order just yet, though I'd love to see yours showing that people who don't want to have all cars available would be unaffected by having it as an option.
It's rather telling that most of the time the question of how options (and not just this specific option) hinder other peoples' games is raised, the response is a blank stare. A sizeable portion of the previous thread was several people asking that exact question to the most outspoken person in both threads, and even then the ultimate response was him saying that it doesn't. That certainly leads me to believe that, no, an option that caters to the people who can't spend most of their free time plopped in front of a Playstation just to get to the point where they can actually play the game proper doesn't effect the people who don't have a problem with the current way of doing things.
I've already said that it doesn't seem to be popular enough (based on this thread) to warrant spending any time on it. I've also already said that it would diminish the sense of accomplishment if we could all just choose to have everything upfront.
The amount of things PD does that most people probably don't care about would write a pretty long book; and I struggle to think of any example from that book that would take as little effort as adjusting functionality they already have in the game. Does expanding the arcade mode car selection to include every car take more effort than, say, painstakingly recreating the Lunar Rover and it's driving course on the moon?
I'd also like to point out that 2/3rds of the people who've voted in the poll don't want all of the cars unlocked.
And I'd also like to point out that people who vote in polls (with a sample size of barely tops 90 people, to boot) but don't say anything are meaningless to the discussion about the thing the poll is about.
Now, due to the limited nature of the poll, we don't know specifically why. But they have there reasons just as you have yours for wanting it.
And that automatically makes those reasons equally valid when they aren't even expressed?
I assume you've only been reading yours and Johnnys posts then?
Nope. I've read the entire thread, as well as the previous thread. As well as countless threads about similar concepts that all had the same sort of responses in them against player options.
"Buy GT7, got all cars, finish game in a month...what do you do for the next 3 years? I know, play pcars and codies games
"
Strangely enough, my current GT2 save predates that specific member's join date. Yours as well. It doesn't quite predate mine, but it does do so with the launch of the PS3. I started it with infinite credits and all licence tests completed at the start.
And yet I still put far more time into GT2 than I did any other GT game, with only GT3 coming close. I've played the same save on two laptops, on my PS2, on half a dozen different PSPs, two tablets and three different PS3s. The only reason I don't play it much right now is that my current tablet doesn't natively support PS3 controllers like my old one did.
So it seems I've spent the next 3 (actually closer to 8) years... racing. Since I find getting the cars to do what I want with them the means to the end, rather than the actual goal itself; and the game (and GT4 to an even greater extent, but I always hated GT4's physics and terrible AI, and think GT2 has a better car list) represents the perfect balance of creativity and
accessibility for the series, despite how dated it is
"Part of the charm of the game has always been about collecting stuff."
Certainly. It's nice if the game is up to snuff, though; else you get poorly thought out, painfully padded disasters like GTPSP.
"No, for a racer/ car collecting game like GT or FM (so not just a pure sang racing game), having all those hundreds of desirable cars available from the start would ruin the fun."
"I can't have fun with the game if other people don't conform to what I find fun as well."
"Oh yes the players will get to drive their favourite cars, after they win some races, get their cash and buy them. There's the sense of accomplishment when you save up and buy something. Sure the race factors do improve skills but still, unlocking things seems to be good also, I mean there's a reason why we're earning credits. What's the point of playing and winning when everything is already there? Things must be earned, not just to appear and be like "Soooo what must happen now?". Why should it frustrating to unlock something? Just makes the game too easy."
I don't gain any accomplishment doing largely the same events from the first 5 Gran Turismo games against largely the same cars from the first 5 Gran Turismo games to gain enough credits to purchase largely the same cars from the first 5 Gran Turismo games; all so I can race against the worst AI in the entire history of Gran Turismo games. Online play
should have alleviated that somewhat, but it's literally impossible to play online until you play a certain amount of career mode and extremely difficult to just play online once you have actually unlocked it.
Seriously, step back and look at the crux of the supposedly valid argument you claimed I ignored. "What's the point of playing and winning"?
At what point did playing the game cease to be the point of a game?
"What happens to GT Life when theres no more credits, no more dealerships, no more used cars, no more ladder to climb? You can just jump into a Veyron and tune it to 2,000HP?"
Good thing we spent this entire thread talking about an optional way to play the game rather than replacing outright the traditional Simulation mode.
"that just kills buying the car for me, because it's available in arcade already."
I hope that person was able to keep themselves from buying microtransactions then. Though it's impressive that a car being available in a separate mode impacts their "ownership" sense in the mode they are talking about.
"Having all cars available from the start is gonna kill GT Career mode then more complaints and whining will come.
Things should be locked and entice you to unlock more content by progressing through the game and developing your skill . Even certain cars should be padlocked like they were in the past and be won in a certain event. Reward players for using their skill and not handing things out for nothing which creates bad players"
Let's not even get started on the fallacy that actively locking content away from the player increases player enjoyment.
Especially not in a game with a heavy multiplayer focus.
"1. The grind. Working your way up from a crappy little car to the big boys is quite satisfying, even if it's a bit tedious at times. It gives you the feeling you've been on a long journey, and when you're at the top you can look back and see how far you've come. Starting off being able to partake in any level of racing completely kills this.
2. The sense of car ownership. The fact that you have to wisely choose what cars you want to buy, since grinding enough to buy even half the cars in the game would take an eternity, makes each car you plonk down the credits for feel special. The cars in your garage feel like they're yours, moreso than in any other game, because you really had to put in the effort to earn the precious credits that you used to buy them. That, combined with the fact that having instant access to everything would essentially make the garage, GT Auto, etc. obsolete, would completely spoil what makes GT special."
That's just an attempt to justify the poor game design that GT6 and GT5 suffered so heavily from compared to earlier games. Grinding for hours and virtual car ownership aren't inseparably linked concepts, as shown by all of the GT games that didn't require you to do anything of the sort to nearly the same extent. The really good GT knockoffs (like NFS: Porsche Unleashed) had very little grinding at all while still maintaining a very similar credits-based game progression system as well as a sense of ownership. I've already gone on record as saying that I don't entirely agree with the notion Johnnypenso states that GT
needs an alternate mode of career progression. But what it does need is a
good mode of career progression, something that the games prior to the PS3 era had little difficulty with.
Some of the greatest events the series ever had were limited time only Seasonal Events GT5 had that took all of the great technical achievements GT5 brought to the table (16 car fields, weather and time change) and made theme races about it. 16 car GT500 races at Spa, for example, was some of the most fun I've ever had in the series; and that was despite being a
B-Spec race.
And yet most of GT Life mode proper was 3 lap races at Cape Ring or Tokyo. I'd play the hell out of a GT7 that took GT4's or GT2's design imagination and applied it to the infinitely higher possibilities that PD have included following the jump to PS3. Crappy AI and all.
What I will
not play, and the reason that I gave up on GT6 and sold it after less than two months, are the same basic events (most of which are even worse than they were in GT5) copy pasted half a dozen times with online play literally locked away until you arbitrarily progressed far enough to unlock it, and still pretty much locked away after that since you can't accomplish anything in terms of increasing your car selection with how online play is structured. GT5 I could at least unlock stuff by abusing B-Spec and still have fun online whenever I could; and GT5 at least came out when I had dozens of more hours a week of free time and only one gaming platform.
I guessed you missed those one or two posts huh?
Nope. Just heard all of the arguments before; and a lot of them even cross over into related topics (like how licence tests should be mandatory, or how some cars shouldn't be purchasable, or why garage transfers between games shouldn't be allowed, or why the old GT5 trade limit was good for everyone, or why low credit payouts/artificially inflated car prices are good things, etc.). Very few of them are anything but dictating what should be considered fun to others; usually with some variety of "but if others are given the option I can't control myself from using it" tossed in as a sweetener.
And none of them,
ever, acknowledge that not everyone is a twenty something with dozens of hours a week to put into a single videogame; even as the GT series appeals more and more to non-gamers with options like Photomode and marketing events like Vision GT. In fact, when it is pointed out that that is the case, the people are often just ignored or called "lazy" or told they "think the game is too hard" or similar such idiocy. Sometimes they are even told that the GT series just isn't for them, as if they woke up one day and started hating GT.
Earth provides a great example here of exactly that:
There is no reason in the world good enough for you. Why? Because you and those who share your opinion see the cars as 'digital bits'. Its like saying pokemon cards are nothing but 'paper and ink'. Technically, your correct. But you dont care about the collection side of things so theres no convincing you.
At that point the total disregard you've shown for the entire 15 year history of Gran Turismo disqualifies your opinion.
Let me give you a bit of history:
I had well over a thousand cars in GT5, later pared down to 750 or so when I was trying to speed up load times. I had
thousands of paint chips amassed from buying literally hundreds of cars specifically to get the chips, just on the off chance that I might suddenly want to paint 30+ cars Admiral Blue Metallic. I redid seasonal events and purposely lost them so I could get the wacky horns the game had, and get more racing suits for my B-Soec drivers. Those 750-1100 cars made up no more than probably 500 unique models in the car list, since I only bought cars that interested me but bought quite a few examples of the ones that I really liked. Most of those I only bought so I could tune them up the way I wanted and paint them the way I wanted and occasionally even take pictures of them the way I wanted and then drive them once or twice. I bought and built up cars to certain specific PP levels (mainly 450, 540 and 600) on the chance that
theoretically something might come up in the game where I wanted to use it. I even bought and built up cars specifically for certain B-Spec driver skillsets when they raced in specific races in the game.
I had hundreds of cars in GT4 that I only bought so I could have something that would be tuned just good enough to race competitively in B-Spec mode, but other than that was just garage or photomode candy. I built dozens of classic cars up so they would be competitive in the 1000 Miles classic endurance race, even against the Cobra, then didn't actually use them so much as admire my handiwork in tuning.
I put literally a hundred plus hours into setting up my GT3 garage, all 200 cars extensively hybrided to my exact desires with the Mkgarageedit tool. Mid-engined, Corvette-powered Del Sols. 3000GT VR4 built exactly to the specs of the 2008 Nissan GT-R, all the way down to suspension settings, hand coded aerodynamic values and closest equivalent wheel sizes. 240SXs with PT Cruiser engines so I could replicate an accurately modeled 240SX. There were cars I put together just so I could be amused when the car specs screen said it had a wildly different but still plausible engine from stock, like V12 powered Supras or Twin Rotor Miatas. At least as much time as I spent racing, just setting up my garage.
Most of my GT2 playing history is building up a dozen or so cars around various imaginary racing series I plan out in my head; at which point I test all of them, sell most of them and start again (hence burning through credits
extremely fast). A lot of my cars in GT5, once the power limiter was introduced, were set up along the same lines; since it allowed infinitely more car customization than any game after GT2 did (without hybriding).
I've got 400-500 cars in Forza 4, at least 1/4th of them are duplicates of other cars that I only bought so I could put different liveries on them or group them with cars of equivalent performance/history (and, indeed, how difficult it is to get money after the level bonuses stop is my main grudge with Forza 4). I've got something like 6 Pontiac Fieros in that game, and I only actually drive 2 of them with any regularity.
And yet I still think having (as of GT5's server closure) to put a couple hours of time into a game redoing the same handful of races to purchase a
single wildly overpriced race car was pushing things well past the breaking point; and GT6 is still quite a bit
worse in that regard, though I got rid of it before they fixed it from being as terrible it was when it launched. So if I'm going to be forced to choose between a wholly linear, grind happy slog through a bunch of chase the rabbit races where the AI basically pulls over to let you past; or just getting all the cars at the start and jumping online, I'm going to choose the latter.
So my best advice to you, before you claim to know anyone else's ulterior reasoning behind playing GT games, would be to think a bit before you make another asinine statement like the "people are just lazy" one from the third page.
."
