Please do elaborate
Well, like everyone says that GTS having incredibly good graphics doesn't make it a 10/10 game, no one ever speaks about how bare bones AC is and that the physics (which are amazing, from what I've heard) are really the only thing people talk about.
People always talk about the anger they felt when it was announced that Dynamic TOD and Weather wasn't possible. I mean, think about it; Turn 10 couldn't do it on the Xbox as they needed to maintain a solid 1080/60fps. Even if the PS4 is more powerful than the Xbox One (but not even by that much), if we were to expect graphics that were on the very least, on par with Forza 6's, it a massive ask to get them to bundle in dynamic TOD and Weather, while also keeping a solid 1080/60fps.
AC doesn't even have weather, to my understanding.
I mean, the game looks like an early PS3 game. Hell, I'd argue that Ridge Racer 7 looks better, and that came out at the very beginning of the PS3's lifespan.
People always complain about the supposed lack of GTS' true career mode; no one talks about the fact that AC has an incredibly bare bones career mode.
In fact, I've seen you critisize the fact that it doesn't have a career mode in the past, and yet, a few months ago,
you're here stating that AC should get rid of its career mode.
I could go off on a tangent speaking about the AI (yes, GT doesn't have the greatest AI in the world), and how AC's AI isn't that much better, but I don't think I really have to.
So, if you're saying that GTS is a tech demo (due to the fact that the graphics are mostly what people are talking about), then it's only fair to say that AC is a tech demo based upon the fact that its car physics with a game built around that.
I'm ready for the hate.
Don't you actually own AC?
I don't, no. I was planning to buy it, but I heard too many bad stories about it, and decided that good physics shouldn't be the only reason I'm buying a game.