Reverse Game Confirmed or highly probably in GT5 (or maybe not)!

[Devedander]

Rewind = gimmick

Please keep the gimmicks away from GT please.

I have heard this a few times... what exactly is so gimmicky about it and is that thing actually bad?

Main Entry: 1gim·mick
Pronunciation: \ˈgi-mik\
Function: noun
Etymology: origin unknown
Date: 1922
1 a : a mechanical device for secretly and dishonestly controlling gambling apparatus b : an ingenious or novel mechanical device : gadget
2 a : an important feature that is not immediately apparent : catch b : an ingenious and usually new scheme or angle c : a trick or device used to attract business or attention <a marketing gimmick>

GT is not a gambling apparatus. Most other definitions paint a rather positive light on the work gimmick. In fact I would say this is probably the most accurate sounding one to me 2 a : an important feature that is not immediately apparent :

The sales thing is the only one left...

Now if this is something being used to attract marketing or attention, why would that be bad for the game and why should it be left out?

Basically I am asking, how exactly does the work gimmicky apply to rewind and whatever way that is, why is that something negative that needs to be kept out of the game? To me the definition that best applies paints rewind in a very positive light and the only one that might be negative at best is an attack on marketing and not an attack on the function itself.

Have you never encountered a moment in your life where you put a thing elsewhere because you wanted to escape the temptation to use it?

Sure... but not things I don't want or don't like... to me that's like saying "I hate brussel sprouts, you better hide them from me lest I eat one even though I don't like them or want to eat them!"

I'm baffled by this comment. Who said they were too good to need rewind?

And for the majority, having the button within reach will be tempting. Removing the button will remove the temptation of using a feature the gamer has chose to live without. I wouldn't expect you to understand this, it's based on the logic that Rewind is a form of cheating.

Well if you don't need rewind, what are you saying if you aren't saying you are good enough that you don't need it?

I don't need training wheels on a bike. Because I can ride a bike well enough they offer me no benefit.

I don't need glasses because my eyes are good enough they offer me no benefit.

If you don't need rewind, aren't you saying you are good enough that it's not of use to you?

So it sounds like from your explanation, the term "I don't need it" would be more correctly replaced with "I am afraid I will succumb to my own desires unless they are removed from my grasp"?

I just don't get it... I mean I don't need people to remove god mode cheats or no clip cheats from games despite the fact I could easily get to them. Why? Because I don't need them and I don't like them so, much like brussel sprouts, I don't need them to be hidden from me.

BTW as for the hardcore SIM argument and why it's in, I forget who but someone on here quoted a line intended for Sonic (but which applies to most games) that went something like:

The sooner hardcore Sonic fans realize they are the minority, the sooner they will realize why a Sonic game will never be aimed at them again.

 

[irnbrutwinturbo]

Strange you should mention Sonic. The game has been selling very poor and so to solve the problem, they're going back to basics, the hardcore fans 2d fast action is making a return.

The hardcore fans are hardcore for a reason.

 

[turbomp301]

Sure... but not things I don't want or don't like... to me that's like saying "I hate brussel sprouts, you better hide them from me lest I eat one even though I don't like them or want to eat them!"

The sooner hardcore Sonic fans realize they are the minority, the sooner they will realize why a Sonic game will never be aimed at them again.

Dev, debating with analogies is pointless. You and I know there is an analogy that can fit with any argument.

The sonic reference is laughable. I dont remember any great Sonic games after the Genesis console. Maybe they should have listened to the hardcore fans.

 

[Zathra5_]

Dislike rewind != Hardcore sim

I guess that is againt the AUP

Put it this way: Thinking rewind rewind is useful does not make you any less of a hardcore sim gamer.

 

[turbomp301]

Dislike rewind != Hardcore sim

ignore rewind = Hardcore sim

driving aids, using rewind, and crashing because its fun to watch = just stick with Forza

 

[Zathra5_]

ignore rewind = Hardcore sim

driving aids, using rewind, and crashing because its fun to watch = just stick with Forza

I don't think you know what a sim is.

 

[Lain]

ignore rewind = Hardcore sim

driving aids, using rewind, and crashing becuase it fun to watch = just stick with Forza

So they shouldn't add rewind to GT5, they should go back on their plans for adding damage, and finally they should also remove all driving aids.

That what you're saying?

 

[G.T.Ace]

Driving aids are okay, because they actually slow you down in GT5P and real cars have ESP and TCS too.

 

[turbomp301]

people that need all the driving aids on all the time, rewind all the time, and crash on purpose because its cool and fun to watch should stick to Forza or Burnout.

I mean driving aids like racing line and assisted braking not real aids that the cars actually have.

 

[Lain]

people that need all the driving aids on all the time, rewind all the time, and crash on purpose because its cool and fun to watch should stick to Forza or Burnout.

Forza's more or less the same kind of game GT is.

The biggest difference between the two is that GT's generally classier.

 

[turbomp301]

Forza's more or less the same kind of game GT is.

The biggest difference between the two is that GT's generally classier.

exactly

 

[Devedander]

people that need all the driving aids on all the time, rewind all the time, and crash on purpose because its cool and fun to watch should stick to Forza or Burnout.

I mean driving aids like racing line and assisted braking not real aids that the cars actually have.

So you are suggesting that Sony and PD intentionally ignore and alienate a huge market share so you don't have to worry about being tempted by or think other people use certain features?

 

[turbomp301]

So you are suggesting that Sony and PD intentionally ignore and alienate a huge market share so you don't have to worry about being tempted by or think other people use certain features?

no

Im saying if a dear friend of mine asked me

" I love crashing cars and rewinding after a crash just to watch the car explode, its awesome! Do you know a game that l lets me do this, but just so you know I have no idea how to actually drive a car"

I would suggest Forza or Burnout or Dirt or NFS

 

[Devedander]

no

Im saying if a dear friend of mine asked me

" I love crashing cars and rewinding after a crash just to watch the car explode, its awesome! Do you know a game that l lets me do this, but just so you know I have no idea how to actually drive a car"

I would suggest Forza or Burnout or Dirt or NFS

Currently I think that would be good advice.

A few years ago though it would have just been burnout as Forza didn't have rewind.

The point being that just because forza has the feature now doesn't seem like a reason for GT to not have it also... becuase by the same logic that a few years ago the recommendation would only have been burnout, if GT gets rewind then a few years from you could suggest Forz, Burnout and GT.

So again, while currently forza and burnout offer something for those people, why shouldn't GT also?

And by saying you would recommend forza or burnout, you are actually showing the point I made about alienating and ignoring a market share. By virtue of your own advice, Sony and PD are missing out on that potential customer.

 

[turbomp301]

Currently I think that would be good advice.

A few years ago though it would have just been burnout as Forza didn't have rewind.

The point being that just because forza has the feature now doesn't seem like a reason for GT to not have it also... becuase by the same logic that a few years ago the recommendation would only have been burnout, if GT gets rewind then a few years from you could suggest Forz, Burnout and GT.

So again, while currently forza and burnout offer something for those people, why shouldn't GT also?

And by saying you would recommend forza or burnout, you are actually showing the point I made about alienating and ignoring a market share. By virtue of your own advice, Sony and PD are missing out on that potential customer.

I dont make the games, I just play them.

I accept these features but I dont ecourage them.

I again point you to your own Sonic game reference.

Its just my opinion that my dear friend doesnt deserve to play GT even though it has all the features he is after. I would rather him play Forza, but thats just me. Sony & PD can market the game how they want.

 

[H20HYBRID_GT]

There's no need to re-mapping buttons if they do it like in Dirt2... you have to press START button 1st and then choose instant-replay. From there you can select the point from where you want start driving again. Just saying, because many people here say you could do it "accidentally"...
I really think how Dirt2 does it is the best way of doing it and the worst option would be if you actually could rewind without pausing the actual gameplay beforehand. Just my opinion, but I don't want to see the race running in reverse on my screen, that would take to much time and would look strange.

But however, there's absolutely no need to re-map any buttons to be able to rewind/ reverse game.



EDIT/ oops ... I just saw you can go to instant -replay by pressing select, but that doesn't change my point of it being almost impossible to use the rewind feature in Dirt2 by accident.

 

[irnbrutwinturbo]

So you are suggesting that Sony and PD intentionally ignore and alienate a huge market share so you don't have to worry about being tempted by or think other people use certain features?

Your thought process always intrigues me. Great discussion, but seriously what made you presume this?

All the previous GT games didn't need auto-brake or rewind to sell millions. There are other games for people to develop thier skills before considering GT, that's why GTPSP is simpler, that's why we heard about 'GT for Boys'. Making GT more hardcore than Need For Speed, makes the game a progression.

 

[Lain]

Didn't Yamauchi in an interview say something along the lines of 'GT for Boys' being a part of GT5? What if rewind and auto-braking are a part of that 'GT for Boys'?

 

[turbomp301]

Didn't Yamauchi in an interview say something along the lines of 'GT for Boys' being a part of GT5? What if rewind and auto-braking are a part of that 'GT for Boys'?

I love it.

GT5 - the game that literally seperates the men from the boys

 

[Lucas]

Rewind doesn't belong anywhere credits are at stake.

Why?

Why should I be awarded for sloppy racing and have rewind to save me? LOL silly.

Why should I Be awarded for not racing at all? LOL silly.

Secondly, the effort PD has put into the damage system seems nearly futile if rewinding a turn can fix your error.

The effort that PD put in GT4's simulation mode seemed nearly futile, considering you could B-Spec almost every race in the game.

Lastly, any body comparing restarting a race to rewinding any turn is a fool. Literally, a fool.

I'm a fool? How come?

This is a driving simulator.

How did I missed that![/sarcasm]

Just because your favorite racer has it, doesn't mean it belongs in every other racing game.

Sure, because that's the reason people wanted rewind. There's a difference between don't having a problem with it and wanting it. I believe you are mistaking the former for the latter.

Fact of the matter, SrRd RacingG, is that players using rewind for earning credits doesn't affect you at all, and if it does, you haven't explained how. Secondly, rewind is exactly like restarting a race: it's fantasy. When restart is not in GT5 anymore, then you may have a valid point.

Lastly lastly, rewind should be a tool (for bettering your skills, not for a saving grace on lap 20 of 20). It shouldn't be an addictive, abused feature, and I think Kazunori realizes this.

If Kazunori didn't realized B-Spec took all the fun from GT4, then I doubt he will realize about this.

 

[Devedander]

I dont make the games, I just play them.

I accept these features but I dont ecourage them.

I again point you to your own Sonic game reference.

Its just my opinion that my dear friend doesnt deserve to play GT even though it has all the features he is after. I would rather him play Forza, but thats just me. Sony & PD can market the game how they want.

I see. Well I can respect the difference between what you want vs what the business wants and needs.

As for the sonic reference though, I still think that proves the point... the hardcore don't want rewind, but they are the minority... so to expect a game company to cater to the minority over the majority seems unreasonable.

Your thought process always intrigues me. Great discussion, but seriously what made you presume this?

The presumption is that if you want a feature left out that makes a game appeal to a broader group of users, you are expecting them to negate and alienate those users. If the game never had this feature, then they are just continuing to negate and alienate vs invinte and accept. And again, noob dollars are just as green a pro dollars.

All the previous GT games didn't need auto-brake or rewind to sell millions. There are other games for people to develop thier skills before considering GT, that's why GTPSP is simpler, that's why we heard about 'GT for Boys'. Making GT more hardcore than Need For Speed, makes the game a progression.

The argument that previous iterations didn't need features to sell is flawed on two points:

1: Without new features, buying a new version is harder to justify.

2: Time has moved on. Many games sold well with only 2D graphics at one point and many cars sold well without air conditioners for years. The fact that we are no longer in those times means you can't base expectations of sales on the same criteria that they were based on then.

I think it shows pretty clearly actually in the way GT is shaping up to have an answer to pretty much every feature Forza does. You can look it at how you want, but to me it looks like indeed PD realizes that you do need to have the features to keep pushing sales.

I think we have all understand the stereotype of the grumpy old boss who won't do it the new way because "this is how we have always done it and by golly it worked before!" and we all understand the fallacy in his position.

I see the logic behind saying "you must work your way up to GT", but I don't see the logic in saying "You must work your way up via other games". If someone isn't good enough to participate in GT's hardest difficulties, the correct response is shovel them off to some other game? That seems elitist and a poor business model.

Wouldn't the best solution for everyon really be put it all in GT so that rather than say "you aren't good enough for GT" you can say "GT offers you the ability to get good enough for the toughest challenge around, which is GT with driving aids turned off"?

It just feels to me like a lot of this argument is a feels good argument and not such a logically thought out and sound argument.

BTW I do keep seeing the history of GT being brought up as if GT is of some mythical status that needs to be preserved for the hardest and most challenging... but if you look back... the trend actually is GT getting more and more open to the less skilled... with the inclusion of driving aids increasing, a seperate and easier physics engine and KY being quoted as saying in GT5 the driving will be "easier"....

It all seems like the arguments for GT "staying the same" fly right in the face of the fact that GT hasn't been staying the same and the trend shows it going squarely in the direction of not being an elitist only club.

 

[alfy13]

.

So again, while currently forza and burnout offer something for those people, why shouldn't GT also?

And by saying you would recommend forza or burnout, you are actually showing the point I made about alienating and ignoring a market share. By virtue of your own advice, Sony and PD are missing out on that potential customer.

Because, PD sold millions, not tending to arcade crowd. I still have not found a understanding on your reasons. On how rewind would hurt PD market share. GT5 will sell millions across the world, regardless if rewind is the game or not.

 

[Devedander]

Because, PD sold millions, not tending to arcade crowd. I still have not found a understanding on your reasons. On how rewind would hurt PD market share. GT5 will sell millions across the world, regardless if rewind is the game or not.

Again you are looking at past performance as a future indicator but ignoring real world changes. Remember PD sold millions while not catering to the arcade crowd in an era where it really was one or the other. Now with games moving more towards being all in one (ie caters to both ends of the spectrum) the pardigm has shifted and thus you can't assume the same market results for the same actions.

Just becuase something sold millions before doesn't mean it shoudln't be looking to add and improve... in the marketing world doing what you have always done becuse it worked before is often considered stagnation.

As for how it will hurt PD? As I pointed it, it's missed sales opportunities if you don't have it. Peoople who would buy the game if it was more casual friendly might not if you leave out the features that make the game accessible to them, thus hurt sales. Remember in the world of sales, missed potential sales are just as, if not more, devastating than actual lost sales.

 

[turbomp301]

As for the sonic reference though, I still think that proves the point... the hardcore don't want rewind, but they are the minority... so to expect a game company to cater to the minority over the majority seems unreasonable.

Give up on the Sonic reference, it doesnt help. I understand catering to a small percentage might yield less sales but referencing Sonic, a franchise that has sucked hard for a long time, isnt the way to make your point.

 

[Devedander]

Give up on the Sonic reference, it doesnt help. I understand catering to a small percentage might yield less sales but referencing Sonic, a franchise that has sucked hard for a long time, isnt the way to make your point.

Ok drop sonic from the phrase (I actually kind of felt it fit because for a while I was a hardcore sonic fan...) and just say "The sooner any hardcore group realizes they are the miniority the sooner they will understand why no game will be directed at them again".

Face it, you may be better, know more about racing and have more experience and skill under your belt than the casual gamers... but they outnumber you and everyone pays the same admission price.

 

[Dravonic]

2: Time has moved on. Many games sold well with only 2D graphics at one point and many cars sold well without air conditioners for years. The fact that we are no longer in those times means you can't base expectations of sales on the same criteria that they were based on then.

Air conditioners are great. After you get a car with air conditioner, you want your next one to have it too. Rewind is in no way comparable to an air conditioner. It's more like a cigarette lighter. Do I want my next car to have one? Not necessary at all.

Just wanted to point that out

 

[Devedander]

Air conditioners are great. After you get a car with air conditioner, you want your next one to have it too. Rewind is in no way comparable to an air conditioner. It's more like a cigarette lighter. Do I want my next car to have one? Not necessary at all.

Just wanted to point that out

You must not have a cigarette lighter USB charger... get one... you won't be caught without a cigarette lighter again!

But seriously the point wasn't air conditioners, it was that just because something sold well without a feature before, doesn't mean it will continue to reap the same rewards today without that feature.

 

[turbomp301]

Ok drop sonic from the phrase (I actually kind of felt it fit because for a while I was a hardcore sonic fan...) and just say "The sooner any hardcore group realizes they are the miniority the sooner they will understand why no game will be directed at them again".

Face it, you may be better, know more about racing and have more experience and skill under your belt than the casual gamers... but they outnumber you and everyone pays the same admission price.

Its a fine line, I dont think rewind will do this but you dont want to alienate both hardcore and casuals. Sometimes it best to be a king at one thing then to be a jack of all trades. With or without rewind GT is still the king of console sims and will sell well because of that.

 

[Dravonic]

You must not have a cigarette lighter USB charger... get one... you won't be caught without a cigarette lighter again!

But seriously the point wasn't air conditioners, it was that just because something sold well without a feature before, doesn't mean it will continue to reap the same rewards today without that feature.

I know, I just felt the comparison was misleading since you associated something revolutionary with something barely useful.

 

[BlackZ28]

I dont understand the heated arguments here. If it has the feature, you don't have to use it. Plus, you cant use it online and I'm sure you cannot set record lap times using the feature.