Poll: what would you do with standards?

[Samus]

Someone who wants to keep standards doesn't have to justify their decision because it makes logical sense.

Someone who wants to remove them from the game (rather than just choosing not to use them) does not make sense.

Yeah, just no. If anything is logical its having all PS3 quality assets in a PS3 game.

 

[SCER]

Yeah, just no. If anything is logical its having all PS3 quality assets in a PS3 game.

It's hard to argue that the removal of content is better than the inclusion of content. It's not like the driving physics are lower quality or anything, and they contribute massively to the variety of cars in the game, so to remove them from a driving simulator for purely aesthetic reasons would piss off far more people than it appeases.

 

[Fusion]

I had to vote to keep them. There are more than 100 that I really, really like.

I'd love to see them all upgraded to a level where they look 90% as good as a premium but without an interior, but it seems unlikely. I'm expecting if they really do get improved, that it won't be by quite that much.

 

[Rage Racer]

I kinda like the last option in this poll. Never thought about this before, but now I find it a good idea.
However, online players would still use standard cars even in this case.

 

[Samus]

It's hard to argue that the removal of content is better than the inclusion of content. It's not like the driving physics are lower quality or anything, and they contribute massively to the variety of cars in the game, so to remove them from a driving simulator for purely aesthetic reasons would piss off far more people than it appeases.

Well in GT5 they were more than just visually inferior, we've been told that won't be the case in GT6 but it remains to be seen just how the gap has been closed. Still the point I was making is PS3 content in a PS3 game is far more logical than a PS3 game stuffed with PS2 cars.

It's also still the point that the op is asking what we would do if we were in Kaz's shoes, we don't need to justify anything we would do just as he doesn't.

 

[Downhill Dino]

It's also still the point that the op is asking what we would do if we were in Kaz's shoes, we don't need to justify anything we would do just as he doesn't.

The only problem I had was the attitude that was given for being asked. 👎

 

[Ills1999]

I would remove the nomenclature 'premium' and 'standard'.

 

[ItsHim]

I'd offer them as a vintage DLC pack for 100 Euros to give people a valid reason to complain about them on the Internet.

 

[Samus]

I'd offer them as a vintage DLC pack for 100 Euros to give people a valid reason to complain about them on the Internet.

Are you suggesting any current complaints about them are not valid?

 

[Nurburgthing.]

I was going to say something like this.....

None of those poll options accurately describe what I'd like to see done with them. I want PD to do exactly what they seem to be doing to them.. have some upgraded to full premium quality and the rest given a reasonable exterior makeover to bring up their base quality level above what is currently considered a "standard" car in GT5's terms.

Tree'd.

 

[another_jakhole]

"Keep them all: quantity over quality"

sly


I choose "None Of The Above".

 

[glassjaw]

I would remove the nomenclature 'premium' and 'standard'.

Kaz has stated that's exactly what's being done. Although there will still be aesthetic differences between standard and premium models in GT6, they will be functionally the same, supposedly.

I'm kind of curious as to how that will play out, because standard models obviously don't have separate body panels and therefore adding aero parts beyond, say, a racing rear wing seems out of the question. It seems like the only options therefore are custom wheels and paint, yet again.

That's precisely the reason I want standard models gone. Their very inclusion lessens the overall quality of the game; it creates an arbitrary divide where there just shouldn't be one. I hoped that Polyphony would do what they did with GT3 and focus on providing a smaller number of extremely detailed cars, but they seem committed to keeping legacy content in the GT ecosystem and I just cannot figure out why. I doubt anyone would be too upset if they cut back the car count from 1,000 to 500 or so. I'm sure people would understand. Hell, even Turn 10 is planning on doing that with Forza 5. It's just common sense.

 

[Ills1999]

Sure have to come up with convoluted logic in order to justify taking cars away from people who want to keep them.

I don't look at my wheels and paint while I'm playing the driving simulator.

 

[HBR-Roadhog]

Sure have to come up with convoluted logic in order to justify taking cars away from people who want to keep them.

I don't look at my wheels and paint while I'm playing the driving simulator.

Yep, the only time I pay attention to the way the car looks is when I watch a replay and there are a few cars which do not look that good on the replay but only 2 or 3 that I can think of that looked bad. I watched a replay just the other day of the Ford GT Spec II LM and it looked very good on the replay. In many cases you can not tell which cars are standard and which are premium on the replay.

I personally do not care if the cars have a detailed interior but considering that it takes a lot more time to model them with an interior than without I would probably rather not have the detail of the interior and instead have a few more cars done with the time saved.

 

[glassjaw]

Sure have to come up with convoluted logic in order to justify taking cars away from people who want to keep them.

I don't look at my wheels and paint while I'm playing the driving simulator.

It's not convoluted, it's very simple. It's just an opinion. It's not my job to worry about what those people think, just like it's not their job to worry about what I think.

 

[pritchardqs]

It's not convoluted, it's very simple. It's just an opinion. It's not my job to worry about what those people think, just like it's not their job to worry about what I think.

Except when a lot of people share that opinion and it could gain momentum and be listened to by the game developers.

And then the game would be ruined for a lot of people who enjoy the standard cars.

 

[Megamarcx84]

Best case scenario would be to keep them all and premiumize them..logic dictates that would delay GT6 until Forza 8 or so..I say the "vintage" option would be best. There are a lot of vehicles that a drifter like me knows full well won't make the premium convert cut, so i would be missing out if they were gone altogether. However some seem to take it as a personal affront that their senses are subjected to the subpar models, so an option to make them not used by AI, or even as a filtering option for online play should be sufficient.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Except when a lot of people share that opinion and it could gain momentum and be listened to by the game developers.

And then the game would be ruined for a lot of people who enjoy the standard cars.

...And the opposite could be just as true. Especially if, as in GT5, Standards are unavoidable for completing GT Mode.

I still would've bit the bullet and made GT5 Premiums only. GT3 was great, even with a small car collection, and sure, I missed some of GT2's unique cars, but it was the price to pay for massively improved graphics - adding the old PS1 assets into the game would've taken away from that. 220+ cars is hardly a tiny amount.

glassjaw's earlier post sums up my thoughts pretty well 👍

 

[analog]

and I just cannot figure out why.

Agree with everything else you wrote but I think the reason why is simply that GT5 included them and GT6 being on the same console.
They probably don't want to risk people sticking with GT5 or people buying GT5 instead of GT6 when they casually read on the back cover it includes about 800 cars more (they needn't worry about that for the PS4).
The GT3 approach should've started with GT5 but they chose this rather odd approach instead, if only they had a sufficient amount of Premium cars by then (both sufficient enough for the game to last a while and to offer roughly the same amount as the competition) we wouldn't even be having this discussion (not once but twice now).

 

[Tornado]

Except when a lot of people share that opinion and it could gain momentum and be listened to by the game developers.

And they would take that into account alongside the people who the game would be "ruined" for if they were removed, and make the judgment based on that.


At which point it is purely a numbers game.

 

[Ills1999]

And they would take that into account alongside the people who the game would be "ruined" for if they were removed, and make the judgment based on that.


At which point it is purely a numbers game.

Only assuming everyone who had an opinion, voiced it.

The tendency is to not complain when the status quo is acceptable, therefore the 'anti-standard' crowd is over-represented.

And call it a hunch, but I doubt removing the requirement to complete GT mode will really silence the elitists.

 

[FernandoAchonso]

Gran Turismo series has always been popular mostly of the number of cars it included. No other game left you with that kind of feeling of diversity in terms of car selection. So the first option seems to be the best one for GT, but yet I choose 3rd one, cuz ''Standard'' cars really ruin the racing experience.

 

[Tornado]

Only assuming everyone who had an opinion, voiced it.

The tendency is to not complain when the status quo is acceptable, therefore the 'anti-standard' crowd is over-represented.

That sounds suspiciously like their problem rather than the problem of those who would prefer them gone. It's been obvious since they were first announced in early 2010 that it would be one of the biggest hot button issues in the series for as long as they continued to be included in GT games. If people want their voices to be heard for them to stay or go, they should make them heard regardless of what they are saying.

And you're again combining "the status quo is acceptable" with "the opposite is unacceptable," even though I was responding to someone who specifically said something fitting under the latter.

 

[Ills1999]

That sounds suspiciously like their problem rather than the problem of those who would prefer them gone. It's been obvious since they were first announced in early 2010 that it would be one of the biggest hot button issues in the series for as long as they continued to be included in GT games. If people want their voices to be heard for them to stay or go, they should make them heard regardless of what they are saying.

And you're again combining "the status quo is acceptable" with "the opposite is unacceptable," even though I was responding to someone who specifically said something fitting under the latter.

That's a lot of words to say "if you're happy with something, make sure you make some noise"

That's not the way people work.

 

[Tornado]

That's a lot of words to say "if you're happy with something, make sure you make some noise"

That's not the way people work.

Again. Sounds like their problem.

Especially when it is more like "If you're happy about something that you know is controversial and don't want it changed as a result, make sure you make some noise." Someone who is going to go so far as to say the game would be "ruined" if they were removed has quite a vested interest on the subject for them to just be silent over it.

 

[Ills1999]

Again. Sounds like their problem.

Especially when it is more like "If you're happy about something that you know is controversial and don't want it changed as a result, make sure you make some noise." Someone who is going to go so far as to say the game would be "ruined" if they were removed has quite a vested interest on the subject for them to just be silent over it.

Continue to petition PD to change the game for the worse. I won't be spending money on it if it turns into your average supercar/racecar sim.

Again, you postulated that it's a numbers game.

It is a numbers game, but the way you approach the numbers will have PD making incorrect assumptions based on internet chatter.

When this is pointed out to you, your response is "well that's their problem", as if EVERYBODY should make their opinions known about EVERYTHING instead of just enjoying the game.

It's silly and a bit juvenile.

 

[Tornado]

What's silly and a bit juvenile is making the logical leap that PD dropping the Standards would turn the series into "All Supercars all the time" when the Premium cars that they have modelled to this date shows that PD is just as across the map with the cars they choose to include as they've always been.

Also:

When this is pointed out to you, your response is "well that's their problem", as if EVERYBODY should make their opinions known about EVERYTHING instead of just enjoying the game.

You've pointed out no such thing, be it in this or that other thread. You repeatedly (and purposely) mix up people who are okay with the status quo with people who would be negatively impacted by changing the status quo. When that is pointed out to you say that it is human nature to not voice concerns about something that they have no problem with. Which is true, but that's not what pritchardqs said and isn't what is being discussed.
He said that the game would be ruined for a lot of people upon their removal, and that is what I was responding to. And if there are people who feel that strongly about what is already a controversial topic, the onus absolutely is on those people to voice their concerns about it; just like it is on PD's hands to try and get an overall determination of how many people their changes would affect.




So I'll again ask straight up: If you are of the opinion that GT6 would be ruined if the Standards were removed outright, and you didn't voice that when PD was thinking about what to do with them, how come it's up to the people who want them gone to censor themselves rather than you to voice your opinion (and we're already assuming that PD didn't make the decision for their own reasons); and why should the people who wanted them gone care about your opinions on the matter over their own in the first place? Because the "it's human nature" reason doesn't fly when you're that invested in the outcome; nor does the "the people who want them gone are just elitist" excuse when you could swap "gone" for "to stay" and have a sentence with the same meaning.

 

[glassjaw]

Except when a lot of people share that opinion and it could gain momentum and be listened to by the game developers.

And then the game would be ruined for a lot of people who enjoy the standard cars.

So, based on what you're saying, I shouldn't voice my opinion because it might be heard, and someone out there might disagree with that opinion. Uhh...

When this is pointed out to you, your response is "well that's their problem", as if EVERYBODY should make their opinions known about EVERYTHING instead of just enjoying the game.

Here it is again. Everybody should! You have the right to voice your opinion just as I have the right to voice mine. Simply telling people to shut up and smile all the time is absolutely ludicrous. That wouldn't make for a good discussion, would it?

 

[pritchardqs]

So, based on what you're saying, I shouldn't voice my opinion because it might be heard, and someone out there might disagree with that opinion. Uhh...

If your opinion makes no sense, yes.

If you don't like standards you can just not use them. They do not have to be removed from the game. Like I said earlier, it's like going to a restaurant and telling them they should remove all of the menu items that you don't personally like.

 

[Tornado]

If you don't like standards you can just not use them.

That argument stopped having meaning November 24th, 2010; and even before then it was already being misused to mean "shut up."