Trust me the feeling is mutual in return you're not that intelligent anyway to understand what you've posted.
I'm amused that you never read any of the posts I've posted, but it's cool people like you with backwards thinking are what is keeping GT complacent while other racing games are or have blown right past it.
With your drivel saying "Go play another racing game" Keep saying that and soon people will
Btw these polls give us at least a picture of how some people sway on opinions genius.
I mean doesn't take long to realize most don't want standards, and people wanting quality > quantity
Such hypocrisy. Much amaze.
The poll says nothing of use, except to bigots.
How is that last sentence not "self-appointment of authority", though, really? I can't believe you have the cheek to accuse me of lacking in reading comprehension, when you have no idea what you're writing yourself.
And there's that anxiety again. So what if people play another game? Why shouldn't they have fun?
The elements that make GT different like huge car selection, quirky cars, a focus on ordinary street cars from a broad range of eras, stellar graphics, the best lighting engine etc. etc. etc. will not somehow be degraded by incorporating the elements of other games that make them attractive and fun. Every other game has scalable AI in their career mode so somehow we must keep the crappy AI in the GT series so it can take it's own path? Adding a scale where the bottom of the scale is the current AI and the top of the scale is challenging and competitive for those that want it somehow will detract from the series? I don't see it.
That's not really what I said.
Scalable AI is not a feature in itself, it's parameters for a feature (AI) exposed to the user. The AI is already scalable; it scales in the events and in Arcade mode, we just don't have (enough) control over it in the right places. Many games only have one difficulty level, though, right or wrong.
Options are always welcome, because then it's easier to make the game more to your liking - it won't matter how diverse the marketplace becomes, because practically speaking there still won't be that perfect game for every individual, certainly not straight out of the box.
If GT's path should take it where user-adjustable AI is included, then rejoice (and I shall rejoice with you). Otherwise, you can still play other games that do allow for closer racing (relative to your skill level), if that's what's important to you. This is not some spiteful "if you don't like it, then 🤬 off" type retort, this is simple pragmatism. In an ideal world, GT would offer that capability, and would of course be better-off for it. Much as, in an ideal world, all the cars would be Premium and we'd have every car to appear in the series, plus everything from the wishlist. It's a matter of practicality, again.
The push for homogeneity in products discourages other developers from entering the market, because there's simply too much pressure to achieve top marks in every aspect. That is inherently bad. We should be allowing games to be what they are and allowing players to enjoy them for what they are, just like it used to be. This will not stifle development through a perceived lack of competition, in that "it doesn't matter what you make because someone will buy it" sense, only encourage it through the freedom of experimentation and innovation thanks to unconstrained creativity (by not having to conform to the homogeneous mandate). Just like it used to be. It's even easier now in this well-connected world (well, part of it), to find your market, so there should be less of an excuse not to diversify.
Then maybe the message will filter through to marketing types and production directors that there's more than one kind of cool, that different people like different things, and that's actually potentially really lucrative. Then maybe marketing will become more transparent. Yeah, I know hippie utopic fantasy, but I can dream!
This is borderline off-topic, though the Standards and the huge car count are examples of areas where GT is quite substantially far from the mean - the key thing to take away is that some people like that. Those people deserve games, too.
Additionally, I think there is an argument to be had as to whether something like scalable AI is really analogous to the Standards issue when it comes to taste / preference (of experience, aesthetics etc.) in games. Options would "fix" both, but that doesn't tell us very much.
) Then you won't call out the fact that during that analogy you might as well trade Mayo for Mazda and Nissan, and Mitsubishi etc etc. Same Cars different label when I say that talking about the Lancers, GT-R, Skyline, and Miata.
