First of all, great response, cheers.
Well...you might say I only see the cons (actually not: I am talking only of the cons... wich is not the same), but i could tell that you have a very mastered science of underestimting the cons.
Of course we're both biased and never completely objective. I think I'm not underestimating, but rather try to state the condition of the game as accurately as possible (including the faults!). As much as I like the game, you won't find me using superlatives in a positive sense all that often. At the same time however, I'm seeing lots of more 'flamboyant' reactions when talking about downsides of the game. All I'd like to promote is a more neutral view towards the game instead of throwing in all kinds of negative emotions.
Just some examples: GT6 was supposed and marketed as a 60fps game... it fails delivering it most of the time (in short: delivers 60fps only when you are alone on the track, with no cockpit view, no rain, no smoke, etc...). The framerate is much more "unsteady above 40" than '60fps with some dips here and there". We are talking of a 30% performance difference between the theory and the reality... THIS IS HUGE. An objective regression in terms of framerate... and in terms of gameplay: because framerate impacts the gameplay directly. This is fact too.
But to you: it is just "not superb". Well. Talk about subjectivity.
I agree that it's not unplayable to everyone... but I said "hardly playable sometimes if you are framerate sensitive" : see? I made some nuances and took some precautions. I know some people are not bothered at all with that (hell! some don't even notice it!): but that does not mean it's not a massive regression and problem for many. Fact.
True, it's a fact that it's probably a problem that is experienced by a relatively small amount of players. But I question why you need to mention it. What is the reason behind this statement, certainly because you state that is only applies to some people? That's not very fair nor neutal view and is more akin of only adknowledging stuff when they are in line with your general thoughts about the game. To make things more balanced, I mentioned the number of '> 40' fps for most of the time and that's objective, isn't it? You can pick on the fact that I elaborated on this by mixing in my own experience and saying that it's 'not superb', but the number of over '40' for most of the time still stands.
ABS is not even real ABS... as Amar212 explained it. It's more an electronic help that impacts more than braking (in short): you don't care if it's not accurate? No problem. But i do...because the game is marketed as a simulator. Fact again.
No torque steering is fact again: that you don't care about it doesn't make it right.
If you word it like this, then there is absolutely no game ever that will satisfy you, simply because
everything in a game is an approximation or real life. Also, you take my words out of context...I don't say that I don't care that it's not accurate. I said that it is acceptible, i.e.: accurate enough for what function those driving dynamics have in the game under the driving conditions those driving aids were designed for (driving and drifting at speed, occasionally starting off the line). For absolutely the largest amount of time I am enjoying the suspension movement and grip distribution among the tyres rather than experience the fact that torque steer is limitedly simulated (and not entirely absent like you falsely state and even saying that is a fact). So you can see where I'm coming from: when I'm talking about physics, am I going to talk about the good stuff that I encounter for most of the time or put an emphasis on the bad stuff that's limited, but not anywhere near dreadful and certainly is only encountered for a very limited part of time that I'm playing the game?
This opposed to your too simplified view of that these things are just regarded as 'unrealistic' and that's it. Calling that a fact is right in a sense (because nothing at all is completely realistic), but the statement itself doesn't hold much substance purely because everything in every single game is then considered unrealistic as well. It's the fact that there's no gradation in your view of what's 'realistic' or 'unrealistic' that's making these points invalid.
About the game's simulation of ABS I'm just saying that the effect of having it 'on' or 'off' is accurately reflected in what inputs are needed to effectively brake a car. That's it's not entirely accurate, does certainly not mean it's fully unrealistic, not at all.
Tyre screech: samples are good. Well yes... I hope they are. We are in 2014! They recorded them didn't they? But their use, omnipresence, volume, and lack of many other kinds of screeches make them very annoying and, yes, unrealistic. If you follow races IRL, I don't think you can even argue on this. (I actually could not really go into details in english... lack of vocabulary...but wheels make other sounds than screeches...MANY others).
So I follow real-life races and occasionally go to rally stages as a spectator....and still find it pretty realistic. Yes, volumes may be off (although I certainly recommend the Mégane RS vid on the Nordschleife...you can hear the tyres scream all the time just like the Comfort Soft tyres in GT6 do, so the 'If you follow races IRL, I don't think you can even argue on this' claim is just a fallacy).
While playing the game, these noises are what I hear during cornering as well...it's rather damn realistic rather than not.
Again, same point as the one above: there's a much more nuanced middle ground between 'realistic' and 'unrealistic'. And again, all I see in your post is a very elaborate view on what's wrong with the game and deliberately ignore what's there, making it a very biased view.
The documentary was not "directed" by Sony... obviously. But it was produced by Sony. Come on man. You got my point. Universal or 20th century Fox make movies... that does not mean they direct them. And the film maker can not be independant if SONY produced the thing. And i was talking about it in terms of bad PR and very bad timing. We're all waiting for updates and promised features...and they deliver 90 min Kaz praising doc. Bad PR.
While all of what you're saying is true, it's not really helping in properly discussing about the state of the game or in what state the communication of PD towards the gamers is. This is a completely independent undertaking; if it wasn't there, PD's communication and PR would still be the same as it is now. Therefore I think it's pointless to mention this, unless you're deliberately try to blackguard PD.
the car list is a subject that was raised hundreds of times. I even got people telling me they'd rather drive 3 versions of an old Nissan Micra than driving a Ferrari FXX (that was GT5's times)... basically: to me, GT is like a museum where 80% of paintings are made by crappy sunday paintors... and the 20% left are masterpieces. Why you would make room for more crappy paintors instead of adding masterpieces is just a mystery for me. But hey, you are allowed to see no problem here.
This is a much better statement than your previous one, where it was implied that the entire car list is junk
purely because a few hypercars are missing.
Now all my gripes don't mean you can't have fun with GT6... I am not trying to convice you that you are wrong enjoying GT. You do what you want. I am just pointing some undeniable facts in terms of game design and production value/
I'm glad it's not about convincing, because that's what I'm not trying to do either. Of course, when you're disappointed, it's good to talk about it and share your views with others. But don't let it take over control and get all angry...because, - and this is a cliche, but true - in the end it's only a game. There's no point either to deliberately put an emphasis on certain aspects and use of strongly negative language to describe what's wrong with the game, not for your own mood but also the atmosphere of the forum. But hey, that's my take on it.
Also, i realize how complicated it is to build a physics engine as good as GT's. Please don't presume you know more than me just because we disagree.
It was certainly not my intention to imply that I have superior knowledge. Not at all. Just pointing out that a physics engine has many nuances and from an engineering standpoint, there's much more to it than the negative points you mention.
The matter of scale is hard to explain : i mean that GT does not transcend car sims at all. For example; F1 games from codemasters try to convey an F1 driver exerience, they add stuff to build a different experience than any others. GT just gives you more tracks and cars to play. And when it tries to be original, we end up with a mission to the moon!
The online mode is also a good example of PD lack of ambition and vision: it's archaic, buggy, laggy and boring. Almost any other online game, car sim or not, does better than that. PD completly missed the online turn. EA's Autolog puts them to shame. So, yes: GT does not take car games further and lacks imagination... that's what i meant by scale.
I think I get what you mean. Not trying to argue what you're saying, but my take on this is that you can make the online part as exciting and fun as you'd like. I'd like to think in solutions and so far it has worked quite well for me. Doesn't mean that there are no issues though. No, I'm the last to not admit that there are problems with it. But I feel this is again a bit too harsh and too biased towards negativity.
At the end of the day, you are a happy GT player and I am an unhappy one. I even feel that you agree on my technical gripes.... but they just don't bother you that much. Good for you. Too bad for me.
Yeah, I certainly do agree on the technical bits. I can see why you're not satisfied and that's a shame. I myself am just a bit more forgiving, because right now there's no alternative for me for this game and there are several workarounds possible to still enjoy the game.
Edit: Btw... I was talking about how PD's reputation was very damaged with GT5 and GT6. If all the problems you aknowledged are not enough to tarnish their perfectionism reputation, then you must be a very happy optimistic man.
My take on it is that PD's reputation doesn't matter to me at all...in the end I'm spending 50-60 dollars (or even less now) for a game that is ought to deliver driving pleasure. At the moment there's a lot of choice in the sim category (some more realistic and hardcore than others), but GT6 for me personally remains to be the better compromise due to the complete package that it offers in terms of content (cars and tracks) and gameplay (as in: handling). There are a lot of issues, but there's also a lot to enjoy. And to be frank, speaking for myself, there's no substitute for the variety it offers. So I'm quite happy with the game at the moment, also knowing that more features will later be come to the game, even while I'm at the same time experiencing the exact same bugs and other faults that you mention. It's all about the entire picture.
Final words: wow, another wall of text was produced. All this stuff gives you stuff to think about, though.
2014 developers race: driveclub, pcars, asseto corsa?, gran turismo 
