Reasons to buy gt6

[Dolphin1]

Because you want to.

 

[Scaff]

Wow what a rage...

Please don't use words if you clearly have no idea of what they mean.

I'm not missing nothing. Maybe you expect a 180º degree change in the car character betwen the stock LFA and the Nur edition but I don't. If you can prove the contrary and knows some video or proof of a LFA with the same Forza's characteristics pointed by the reviewer but in real life let us know. Also I would add that maybe you are missing how the reviewer is talking in general about supercars and how the expected driving is not accurately replicated in the game, the same at the edge reactions that you would expect in a supercar at high speeds, not those controlable slides every time he turns. I guess he never experienced that in real life on a similar car.

I've already gone through that in quite some detail, but I guess you were not bothered to read the chain in the link I previously provided.

Sorry but you can't just ignore the differences between the two cars and still say its a valid comparison, have a read of this....



Source - Evo issue 163, page 120

...sounds remarkable similar to one of the 'differences' described in the Autoweek comparison, yet this is a real difference between the LFA and the LFA Nurburgring.

They are two significantly different beasts and more than enough to raise serious issues with the comparison.

Scaff

Its also quite clear that the video is being used as a direct comparisons between the LFA in FM4 (which is the standard car) and the LFA on track (which is a Nurburgring), its not a general discussion about supercars, but nice grasping at straws.

Its also does nothing to change the fact that you stated quite clearly that the standard LFA in GT5 handles like the LFA Nurburgring. I've already linked to a review that clearly discusses just how different the two cars are.

Yes the demo is not locked to 60 fps but as I said not all people are such dramatic about that, specially given the overall good results. You have a lot of examples in this thread, I guess you would not discuss will all them to how wrong they are to not see these things massive under a magnifying glass. But yes it would be better locked at 60fps, who would deny that?

Well you it would seem, given that you like to point out that the frame rate changes are not that noticeable and anyone mentioning them is just making a fuss over nothing.

You have no problem playing Forza games at 720p but lowering a little the 1080p resolution of GT in order to fix something that bothers you is a big deal? At times don't understand you Scaff. Is your standard higher in GT than in other games?

720p doesn't sort out all the issues with GT at all, and as I have pointed out to you before why should I have to jump through these kind of hoops when I switch between GT and anything else. Yes my point was last time in regard to the reduce and zoom 'fix' but the same point remains.

And when I then watch a Blu-ray or play something else I have a picture that is oversized.

Its a solution that causes other issues to a problem that I should not have to be dealing with in this manner.

DF in a frametate analysis should had check that, they forget all the same aspects in GT5. Also they recomend a 720p mode that is worse in the demo both in performance and visually than 1080i (not checked also). If you have that lower standard in these reviews is not really my issue.

So as they didn't use 1080i then it invalidates the whole analysis does it?

No it doesn't, I know you wish it did, but it doesn't.

PD are masters in graphics they know what is the best thing to do. Forza graphics are not that good and 99% people do not notice what handful people are noticing drop in fps. I bet if there were no numbers as evidence. 99.5% would not be able to tell either

That's why we had threads and posts on here discussing frame rate drops, judder and screen tearing (in the case of GT5) long before DF published the analysis of GT5 and GTA?

Oh and Forza graphics are most certainly 'good', not up to a GT premium car on a premium track, but then again more that 80% of GT5 is not that good either.

LMAO. That is the point 30fps are ok then how come 50fps is not. Also 20fps and 48fps is like day and night lol. Also this is not retail version. There is no crowds, some graphics affect I guess are also missing and optimization etc. This is more like beta version. Compare this to GT5A. There is huge improvements

No one said that 30fps is better than 50fps, however you seem to forget that racers that are locked to 30fps will look more stable and less juddery than one that has an average of 50fps.

Its the variable frame rate (and in the case of GTA the dropped frames) that are the issue. If GT5 or GTA were locked at 50fps no one would complain at all, however its certainly not and GT5 has been shown to fluctuate by as much as 20 to 30 fps at times (and drop to as low at 15 with 3D running).

That may not be an issue for you, but for most sim fans a locked frame rate is quite high on the list of priorities.

 

[gtracedriver1]

GT6A was not a demo. Game demo which are 90% of game are usually released just before the release and there is no fixed date for release yet. This is some 50-60% I guess.

 

[PepeMickey]

Currently, I am playing Ferrari The Race Experience at 1080p, finishing Classic Career with 288 GTO - little champ, no assists ( no TC, SC or ABS ) and AI on legend ( haven't tried dynamic - I hate rubber band ).

It has some fluctuation in fps, the game is running at 30fps, no tearing but the frame rate do drop at times, since I use only cockpit view, when in the rain - and 15 cars at the front - frame drop imminent ( around 20fps ). But I can still play it and getting 1st even when starting from last. The game is surprisingly playable with 30fps, a stark contrast to GT5 that I played hours earlier with 60fps. The physics is top notch, wet racing is nerve racking, steering still responsive even with frame drop, I like it better than FM4 that I played again since he's insisting to have a match - couple of days at a friend's place. Ferrari TRE is one unique sim, not sure if this good because of Bruno Senna

So, I just wanted to say that I can tolerate some frame drop, as long as it's not affecting how I drive badly. I doubt GT6 would suffer much due to unstable frame rate, if it never goes below 50fps, frame rate wise, I won't mind

If you liked FTRE then you should really try Absolute Supercars, I'm not so sure where are you coming from when you say it's better than FM4 though.

 

[C_Raccoon23]

GT6A was not a demo.

PD's website says otherwise:

The GT6 demo will guide players through a number of rounds in a GT Academy-themed driving school before unlocking the final qualifying event. Gamers have the potential to qualify for this year’s GT Academy, kick-starting a journey that could lead to a real life-racing career with Nissan.

http://www.gran-turismo.com/us/news/00_1245755.html?t=gt6

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

If you liked FTRE then you should really try Absolute Supercars, I'm not so sure where are you coming from when you say it's better than FM4 though.

Most likely because I don't like Xbox controller, very uncomfortable when driving in FM4, I like FM4 as well, but not as much as I like Ferrari TRE ( I just bought it last week but I felt at home since 1st lap ) or NASCAR 2011 The Game - which I play frequently ( also bought last week ) - Infineon and Watkins Glen rocks

 

[gtracedriver1]

PD's website says otherwise:



http://www.gran-turismo.com/us/news/00_1245755.html?t=gt6

Demo for a game that has no release date A game is complete when it goes gold and the content are copied on a disk. Why do not we have demos of all other games 6 month before release then 💡

 

[McLOVIN5489]

Members are free to discuss both positives and negatives in regard to a subject and if the staff feel a thread is being taken too far off topic then they will deal with that.

Your input on the thread is appreciated, your 'moderation' is not. Next time please use the report button and let the staff determine is action is required.

If you see it as moderation, then that's your perception. I'm just merely pointing out that you guys have ONCE AGAIN turned a positive into a negative. I honestly could care less what you appreciate or are sensitive to. No need for me to report anything, I've made my point and you obviously don't like it.... Big wuff.. go report ME if you think its moderation. Apparently you saw my statements on impression and positives on the game (you know, the actual MEAT of the post?). Tbh youre kind of playing into the point I made by focusing your rebuttal on my ONE statement about it being originally a positive thread rather than anything else I said....that's the community it has turned into. A guy like me just wants to drive & have fun. Hakuna matata 👍

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

If you see it as moderation, then that's your perception. I'm just merely pointing out that you guys have ONCE AGAIN turned a positive into a negative. I honestly couldn't care less what you appreciate or are sensitive to. No need for me to report anything, I've made my point and you obviously don't like it.... Big wuff.. go report ME if you think its moderation. Apparently you saw my statements on impression and positives on the game (you know, the actual MEAT of the post?). Tbh youre kind of playing into the point I made by focusing your rebuttal on my ONE statement about it being originally a positive thread rather than anything else I said....that's the community it has turned into. A guy like me just wants to drive & have fun. Hakuna matata 👍

Fixed that for you

 

[phil_75]

Fixed that for you

Good work Ridox, why do they say that?

It really gets on my wick.:-)

 

[HAL20XX]

GT6A was not a demo. Game demo which are 90% of game are usually released just before the release and there is no fixed date for release yet. This is some 50-60% I guess.

I'm going to wager a guess that your "90%" figure is 100% made up. A demo demonstrates the features of a game, regardless of total completion.

 

[McLOVIN5489]

Good work Ridox, why do they say that?

It really gets on my wick.:-)

Great job 👍

In other news, I also like what they did with the menus.

 

[Cosbuster]

Demo for a game that has no release date A game is complete when it goes gold and the content are copied on a disk. Why do not we have demos of all other games 6 month before release then 💡

Demo stands for demonstration and is not relevant to how earlier than the game is out or what the current completion of the game at the time of release is (which we know nothing about anyway). For all we know, the game could be done.

If it's not a representation of some sort, then it probably wouldn't get released or carry the "powered by GT6" badge. If it's out there, it's ready to be judged.

 

[gtracedriver1]

GT6A was only meant for competition sake and to try out improved physics nothing else

 

[HKS racer]

Frame rates issues are 100% personal.

For me anything lower than 60 / 50 fps with noticeable hickups to 35 / 40 is not worth playing because it really bothers me when it drop. When I play a racing game I can live with some pixels or low anti aliasing filters but I pretend the SAME sense of speed I have in real life. For this reason I can also barely accept 30 fps, even if they are locked.

It's ALL a matter of taste, do not try to convince other people that 30 to 20 fps is not that bad in some games, it may be ok for YOU. For me as soon as I recognize a drop like that my first instict is to rage quit that crap and remove it from my HDD.

So for GT6, let's speak about COLD FACTS. When it's out let's see perfomance with 16 cars on track. So everyone can decide if it's worth for HIM or not. I'm not interested if it drops to 40 in sunny conditions and I'm NOT interested in 720p.

GT6A was only meant for competition sake and to try out improved physics nothing else

That's BS.

 

[Scaff]

GT6A was only meant for competition sake and to try out improved physics nothing else

Citation required

 

[gtracedriver1]

So some of you think they are trying to sell the game to people but releasing the actual demo this early. This makes no sense whatsoever.

As far as fps goes 50-60fps is enough for most people. Majority wins so others need to deal with it. They will probably release a patch if the game drops significant amount during rain or some particular section of track which affects the gameplay for most.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

^ I don't think PD would that foolish to release a game with obvious deficiency in frame rate stability, they would have tested it, Kaz would rage with crappy frame rate that ruins gameplay on a release version

 

[TokoTurismo]

^ I don't think PD would that foolish to release a game with obvious deficiency in frame rate stability, they would have tested it, Kaz would rage with crappy frame rate that ruins gameplay on a release version

Indeed.

 

[GETEDA]

Gt6 looks like a great game, but I already own gt5 and gt6 just looks like an upgraded version of gt5. What are some reasons to get gran turismo 6 that will justify the $60 price.

I wait a very good and very hidden amazing work back of GT6.
Yes, i pay it because say GT.

 

[Lord Protector]

You mean apart from a totally revised tyre model in FM4?

Right, like it made a difference...

Anyway, let's wait for Gamescom and TGS. Kaz said there's a surprise held in Europe and since Gamescom is in Germany I'm sure we all find the reason there (or at TGS - place where the most exciting things about GT were always presented).

 

[Samus]

^ I don't think PD would that foolish to release a game with obvious deficiency in frame rate stability, they would have tested it, Kaz would rage with crappy frame rate that ruins gameplay on a release version

You played GT5 v1.00 right?

 

[HAL20XX]

Right, like it made a difference...

It did. To the point where many cannot play FM3 anymore.

So some of you think they are trying to sell the game to people but releasing the actual demo this early. This makes no sense whatsoever.

Your lack of insight into marketing strategy is obvious.

 

[Lord Protector]

You played GT5 v1.00 right?

I know right? I remember my first race I took Mitsubishi Lancer X at Sarthe. The game was stuck in loading loop. Now imagine me, waiting 3 years from GT5p for THIS?

Then, I tried it again, the game finally loaded up and when I saw the gameplay graphics I couldn't believe it. Horrible tearing and very big framedrops and graphics just like GT5P and some effect actually felt better in GT5P.

 

[Zer0]

I've already gone through that in quite some detail, but I guess you were not bothered to read the chain in the link I previously provided.

Its also quite clear that the video is being used as a direct comparisons between the LFA in FM4 (which is the standard car) and the LFA on track (which is a Nurburgring), its not a general discussion about supercars, but nice grasping at straws.

Its also does nothing to change the fact that you stated quite clearly that the standard LFA in GT5 handles like the LFA Nurburgring. I've already linked to a review that clearly discusses just how different the two cars are.

I have readed but I can't agree with you for obvious reasons. The LFA Nur is not more akin to a race car than a road car compared to the stock LFA like you pretend to invalidate the video comparisson. It's a better LFA thanks to a little changes no doubt, but nothing to think that can be a different animal. Tyres like you stated are not track tyres... just a little better summer tyres.

Scaff
"and runs on totally different tyres (Bridgestone RE 070 track tyres) to the standard LFA."

http://www.bridgestonetire.com/tire/potenza-re070

Weight difference is no more than having a big guy at the passenger side. Etc. And there is no more proof for the subtle performance impact of all the changes than looking at the Nurburgring lap time differences between the 2 cars, the Nur just differs 8 seconds from the stock LFA.

Top Gear:
"It puts it eight seconds faster than the ‘standard' LFA"

http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/lexus-lfa-nurburgring-edition-lap-time-2011-09-06

As I said there is nothing in the LFA Nur to agree with your over exagerated claims:

Scaff
To compare the LFA Nur to the standard car is absurd, of course they will handle differently, its a significantly different set-up and explains why it doesn't match the reviews for the standard car.
Sorry but for me that pretty much invalidates the comparison, particularly if you read the Evo review of the LFA Nurburgring, which is more akin to a race car than a road car (and that includes the standard LFA).

What would be smart to think is that the stock LFA is almost comparable to a race car and that it should drive more like it than a boat.

It would be much better for the discussion that instead of trying to justify how wrong was the reviewer, you tried to tune the stock LFA in Forza to the Nur specs seen in the video and check if with that changes you can obtain a radically different drive to the point to match what is expected by the reviewer. I know that this will end the discussion and would not give much room to new excuses but I also know that maybe that test would not end favourable to the Forza realism you defend.

Yes I stated that the LFA in GT5 is closest to what the reviewer is describing than what he experienced with the Forza LFA.

Well you it would seem, given that you like to point out that the frame rate changes are not that noticeable and anyone mentioning them is just making a fuss over nothing.

Is curious that you see only that side when the insistence of the other side have caused this discussión for those motives.

720p doesn't sort out all the issues with GT at all, and as I have pointed out to you before why should I have to jump through these kind of hoops when I switch between GT and anything else. Yes my point was last time in regard to the reduce and zoom 'fix' but the same point remains.

As I said at times don't understand you.

So as they didn't use 1080i then it invalidates the whole analysis does it?

No it doesn't, I know you wish it did, but it doesn't.

Who says nothing about invalidating a whole DF analysis? You Scaff are doing again, putting words in my mouth and answering your own formulated questions to me. Read what I said:

Zer0
"Digital Foundry analysis have never been very complete"

(This is my third language but I'm sure that I know what the word mean!)

 

[C_Raccoon23]

GT6A was only meant for competition sake and to try out improved physics nothing else

So some of you think they are trying to sell the game to people but releasing the actual demo this early. This makes no sense whatsoever.

So you think all 1,000,000+ people who downloaded the demo give a 🤬 about GT Academy? Give me a break.

 

[gtracedriver1]

Not a excuse.

It did. To the point where many cannot play FM3 anymore.


Your lack of insight into marketing strategy is obvious.

GT6A is not the same as the demo releasing weeks before the release of the game. However it is impossible to prove it. They are still working on the game. Do you really think all games shown at E3 and which had playable demo there are complete and ready to release ??? Nope.

Drive club set to release sometime this year on PS4 was only 35% complete during E3:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2345277/Drive-Club-hands-PS4.html

Same for GT6 and other games releasing later this year.

 

[Tornado]

Demo for a game that has no release date A game is complete when it goes gold and the content are copied on a disk. Why do not we have demos of all other games 6 month before release then 💡

So some of you think they are trying to sell the game to people but releasing the actual demo this early. This makes no sense whatsoever.

Quite a few games tended to have demos several months away from release in the past. There are even examples of GT games that had such demos. It is only in the past few years that game demos have started being made from stripped down versions of the final games rather than earlier builds; and it's still far from being the norm.

As far as fps goes 50-60fps is enough for most people. Majority wins so others need to deal with it.

Argument over, I guess. Everyone go home.

 

[Scaff]

I have readed but I can't agree with you for obvious reasons. The LFA Nur is not more akin to a race car than a road car compared to the stock LFA like you pretend to invalidate the video comparisson. It's a better LFA thanks to a little changes no doubt, but nothing to think that can be a different animal. Tyres like you stated are not track tyres... just a little better summer tyres.

Scaff
"and runs on totally different tyres (Bridgestone RE 070 track tyres) to the standard LFA."

http://www.bridgestonetire.com/tire/potenza-re070

Weight difference is no more than having a big guy at the passenger side. Etc. And there is no more proof for the subtle performance impact of all the changes than looking at the Nurburgring lap time differences between the 2 cars, the Nur just differs 8 seconds from the stock LFA.

Top Gear:
"It puts it eight seconds faster than the ‘standard' LFA"

http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/lexus-lfa-nurburgring-edition-lap-time-2011-09-06

As I said there is nothing in the LFA Nur to agree with your over exagerated claims:

Scaff
To compare the LFA Nur to the standard car is absurd, of course they will handle differently, its a significantly different set-up and explains why it doesn't match the reviews for the standard car.
Sorry but for me that pretty much invalidates the comparison, particularly if you read the Evo review of the LFA Nurburgring, which is more akin to a race car than a road car (and that includes the standard LFA).

What would be smart to think is that the stock LFA is almost comparable to a race car and that it should drive more like it than a boat.

It would be much better for the discussion that instead of trying to justify how wrong was the reviewer, you tried to tune the stock LFA in Forza to the Nur specs seen in the video and check if with that changes you can obtain a radically different drive to the point to match what is expected by the reviewer. I know that this will end the discussion and would not give much room to new excuses but I also know that maybe that test would not end favourable to the Forza realism you defend.

So you honestly don't believe that running 10mm lower, with track biased tyres (I never stated the tyres were slick - but track tyres - drive those in winter and come back and tell me how good they are on the road), a good jump in PTW and a 1/3 more downforce is going to affect a car at all?

Which is rather odd because plenty of people who reviewed both disagree with you. Now lets keep in mind that the video review described the LFA Nurburgring as being rather tail happy and a handleful to tame (I use my own words but that is certainly the general impression. Now how did they describe the standard LFA:

You drive through the bluster, realise it’s not the prelude to a clash of wills, discover a supercar more forgiving than you would ever have guessed. Let the tail move out, then lean hard on it, applying more and more power as any residual nose-drift ebbs away and the trajectory becomes throttle-variable in the most fantastically positive, connected way.

Source - http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/244753/lexus_lfa.html

Through the back section of the Nordschleife where a few off-camber turns can upset the car, the LFA pulls through with minimal drama. The car feels lively as it dances through the corners, the Torsen limited-slip differential helping the car blast out of the turns. Even with the yaw control completely deactivated, the Lexus behaves predictably with mild understeer.

Source - http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/impressions/2011-lexus-lfa

"A bit of oversteer but its easy to correct that" and "Again slightly oversteered, but a small correction with the steering wheel is enough to get it straightened out"

Source - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR66D4BsMMc


None of those suggest a snappy car at all, rather one that easy to drive at pace, these are all from track reviews and the first two at the Nurburgring and the Autoweek one was when they broke the production car lap record at Goodwood.

The impression I get from them is of a car that has a mobile but easily controlled tail, not something that will try and take you head off the second you get over the limit.

Now if you can supply the exact spec and set-up of the Nurburgring (as the suspension and aero change details are going to be quite important. After all without them I could dial in just about any handling balance I wanted, which most certainly would not make for a very valid comparison.

And yet you still insist that its a small difference despite Evo saying of the two (and keep in mind this is in relation to a tiny section of the 'ring:

The LFA Nurburgring leaps over the crest at 170mph, then uses that extra downforce to carry noticeably more speed through the fifth gear left hander than we had managed in the base LFA an hour earlier

Source - Evo issue 163, page 120

Yes I stated that the LFA in GT5 is closest to what the reviewer is describing than what he experienced with the Forza LFA.

And you consider than to be a positive (keeping in mind that no matter how you dress it up its not the same car)?

Personally I think its far more likely that you didn't realise the two cars were different and when for what you saw as an 'easy win', now having to backtrack once again (a bit like the 'true multichannel output' that was nothing of the sort).

Is curious that you see only that side when the insistence of the other side have caused this discussión for those motives.

No the difference is that the other side of it are making a fuss about something (something very visible and measurable).

As I said at times don't understand you.

Why? The point I made was quite clear.

Who says nothing about invalidating a whole DF analysis? You Scaff are doing again, putting words in my mouth and answering your own formulated questions to me. Read what I said:

Zer0
"Digital Foundry analysis have never been very complete"

(This is my third language but I'm sure that I know what the word mean!)

You have consistently attempted to undermine the validity of anything that DF have put together in regard to GT, normally for the most trivial of reasons (this being a rather classic example).

Right, like it made a difference...

Yes, quite a massive one. Forza prior to 4 still had serious issues with regard to its tyre model (just different issues to the ones the GT has), the revised tyre model, while still far from perfect, was a massive step in the right direction. Its a level of tyre modelling that GT5 was not even remotely close to and a gap that GT6 still has to cross (let alone that gap may grow with FM5).

 

[sparkytooth]

Why is the Lexus LFA vs. Nur LFA argument chaps???