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

[Dravonic]

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.

Many feel it's not a feature that should be in GT regardless of the option to use it or not.

 

[alfy13]

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.

Well if a person walks into a game store , picks up a copy of GT5. Then ask the sales clerk, does this game have rewind, salesmen tells him no. so he doesnt buy just for that reason. Then its probably best that he didtn buy it. Because if a person is buying a racing game just for rewind, then he should stick to burnout series.

Be quite honest, I really dont see how you would think not having rewind would hurt PD . Ppl dont buy racing games for one features, ppl buy racing games for what they like. If a person like arcade racing games, they buy a arcade racing game. If a person likes sim games, they buy sims games.

Its pretty evident, millions upon millions of ppl who bought GT games, love GT because they wouldnt sold milillions if they didnt.

I understand that you want rewind so badly in this game. But a person is not going to make a decision based off if this game has rewind or not.

I do admire you for trying to convince ppl how this would hurt PD, but ppl are not buying it.

 

[Devedander]

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.

Well to be fair that remains to be seen

And surely king of one can be better than jack of all trades, but king of many trades would trump both no? If you are that confident GT will be king of console sims, do you not have confidence that PD would have the ability to be king of the rewind if they so attempted?

 

[turbomp301]

Well to be fair that remains to be seen

And surely king of one can be better than jack of all trades, but king of many trades would trump both no? If you are that confident GT will be king of console sims, do you not have confidence that PD would have the ability to be king of the rewind if they so attempted?



Well to be fair, you can't really call whether something is revolutionary until hindsite kicks in... and so far from what I see, rewind is being touted as quite impressive so it might well end up being revolutionary

I couldnt care less if PD was King of rewind. Burnout is the king of casual racing hands down. I dont want GT to compete with that.

 

[BlackZ28]

Many feel it's not a feature that should be in GT regardless of the option to use it or not.

I can understand that, but at the end of the day it's a choice and GT is still a video game. It doesn't change the sim physics.
I mean, hell, we have b-spec where you don't even have to race the car yourself now too.

 

[Exorcet]

Well if a person walks into a game store , picks up a copy of GT5. Then ask the sales clerk, does this game have rewind, salesmen tells him no. so he doesnt buy just for that reason. Then its probably best that he didtn buy it. Because if a person is buying a racing game just for rewind, then he should stick to burnout series.

Be quite honest, I really dont see how you would think not having rewind would hurt PD . Ppl dont buy racing games for one features, ppl buy racing games for what they like. If a person like arcade racing games, they buy a arcade racing game. If a person likes sim games, they buy sims games.

Its pretty evident, millions upon millions of ppl who bought GT games, love GT because they wouldnt sold milillions if they didnt.

I understand that you want rewind so badly in this game. But a person is not going to make a decision based off if this game has rewind or not.

I do admire you for trying to convince ppl how this would hurt PD, but ppl are not buying it.

Dev's example is not like that, it is like this:

Person A likes cars, but hasn't done any real driving or played many racing games. He's heard of GT and Forza, and is deciding which to buy. He hears Forza has rewind which makes it easier to learn. He hears that GT doesn't have rewind and might be more difficult. He goes and buys a 360 and Forza 3, rewinds his way to being a good driver, and decides to stick with Forza, which is the ultimate driving simulator in his mind.

Also to turbomp301, as far as suggesting a crash and record game to some friend, I'd suggest anything that would allow him to that. So, Burnout, Forza, and GT5 (assuming). Just because you wouldn't suggest GT5, even though it perfectly suits his needs (especially if you suggested Forza which is pretty much the same) doesn't really have relevance to the argument. And if Forza could satisfy his desire to crash and also be a top class sim, I'd call that an advantage over GT5.

 

[CodeRedR51]

I can understand that, but at the end of the day it's a choice and GT is still a video game. It doesn't change the sim physics.
I mean, hell, we have b-spec where you don't even have to race the car yourself now too.

Never used it.

I think that IF it is in the game, when used you should not be rewarded for using it. For example, just like in DiRT2, if you use it during a time trial, your time doesn't count.

I was trying to beat my best time last night on the Croatia rally stage, and I have no idea how many times I hit restart. But, at least my final time will be recorded.

 

[Exorcet]

Never used it.

The key to satisfying everyone.

[Along with reassigning buttons/ on and off options I suppose]

 

[arvin charles]

Well if a person walks into a game store , picks up a copy of GT5. Then ask the sales clerk, does this game have rewind, salesmen tells him no. so he doesnt buy just for that reason. Then its probably best that he didtn buy it. Because if a person is buying a racing game just for rewind, then he should stick to burnout series.

Be quite honest, I really dont see how you would think not having rewind would hurt PD . Ppl dont buy racing games for one features, ppl buy racing games for what they like. If a person like arcade racing games, they buy a arcade racing game. If a person likes sim games, they buy sims games.

Its pretty evident, millions upon millions of ppl who bought GT games, love GT because they wouldnt sold milillions if they didnt.

You guys need to look at this from PD's perspective and not the hardcore racing gamer's.

People who like sim racing games will buy it no matter what, by putting in a feature like rewind opens up their market. They don't need to target hardcore racing fans nearly as hard as those who are casual gamers because the hardcore gamers will buy it no matter what (and I've read that statement on this board many times, regardless of what PD puts or doesn't put in the game).

And adding rewind gives them an easier accessibility that's important when choosing between games like Shift or a possible GT without one.

If you look at it with $$$ in mind, it would be stupid not to include something that caters to casual gamers.

 

[Devedander]

I couldnt care less if PD was King of rewind. Burnout is the king of casual racing hands down. I dont want GT to compete with that.

That's your opinion. Problem with opinion is that it's weight is pretty much cancelled out the second someone else has a different one.

I mean you don't want GT to compete with burnout, and if someone else does... well then back at 0.

But in this argument I think we both know you are taking casual racing a bit to broadly. There are many subsectors in casual racing (burnout and NFS are both casual racing games, but definitely not the same category) and GT can easily be king of casuals in the category it goes for (realistic) while still leaving burnout king of "over the top arcade".

But honestly, lets say somehow GT5 comes with "Career mode" "Arcade Mode" and "Beats the crap out of Burnout mode" and guess what... all 3 are the best there has ever been of that category. The career mode is hardcore and awesome and in depth and everything you want. The arcade mode is approachable, and a fun quick way to get into the game and the burnout mode does everything burnout does and better...

Are you really telling me that's not BETTER than just Career and Arcde mode? I mean you are essentially get 3 games where you got 2 before... even if you don't like burnout, never play it and you still aren't getting hurt in anyway.

I just don't see how being good at more things can be a bad thing.

Now if you are worried PD will do a poor job implimenting these features, that's different. That's a legit concern of almost anything, but again, you seem to have a lot of faith in PD so I don't see how that coudl be.

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

Well to be fair, you can't really call whether something is revolutionary until hindsite kicks in... and so far from what I see, rewind is being touted as quite impressive so it might well end up being revolutionary

Well if a person walks into a game store , picks up a copy of GT5. Then ask the sales clerk, does this game have rewind, salesmen tells him no. so he doesnt buy just for that reason. Then its probably best that he didtn buy it. Because if a person is buying a racing game just for rewind, then he should stick to burnout series.

What if the person is NOT buying a game just becuase it doesn't have a feature he knows makes the game accessible to him?

See you are taking one angle and going with it as if it's the only angle... and whats the logic behind getting to categorize what people should and shouldn't play? By that logic no one would ever be able to get better becuase if you aren't good enough for a game, you need to play games that are easy enough for you... not get into games that will challenge you and let you get better.

Be quite honest, I really dont see how you would think not having rewind would hurt PD . Ppl dont buy racing games for one features, ppl buy racing games for what they like. If a person like arcade racing games, they buy a arcade racing game. If a person likes sim games, they buy sims games.

Again too black and white... it's not as simple as people of one kind buy one thing and not other things... this is a flaw I see a lot also. Basically if you look at things like driving line, auto brake and even rewind, they are there for the purpose of removing this exact problem... the barriers to entry. Again you are saying it as if the way it is is how it should be, as if somehow segregating and hold certain players in a certain realm is better... but what about bringing it all together in one package rather than segregating people out?

Kind of like a real race track. They offer classes of different levels so inexperienced drivers can work their way up and maybe even run some real races all at that one track rather than say "You don't belong here, go back to driving around parking lots".

Its pretty evident, millions upon millions of ppl who bought GT games, love GT because they wouldnt sold milillions if they didnt.

Absolutely! GT did sell millions because people loved it... but again, just becuase it did before doesn't mean it can do the same thing indefinitely with the same results and even if it could, it stands to reason that increasing your market share will bring MORE sales. I know millions of sales sounds great, who could want more right? Well I can tell you that companies always want mores sales. Millioins +1 is better than just milliions.

Here lemme break the logic down for you in steps:

1 GT has some barriers to entry right? Ie learning curves that make the game frustrating and unattainable to many people. Let's say these are X number of people (and I think we can agree that number is quite a few).

2 There are lots of people who are fine with the difficultly lets call these Y number of people (obviously with millions sold this is no small number either).

If GT remains segregated and only something desireable to the Y number of people, it shoudl sell Y number of copies right?

But if GT adds something that allows it to be desireable and accessible to the X number of people also, it will sell Y number of copies PLUS X number of copies.

And X + Y > Y

So that is how not including something could hurt sales. If you could realize X+Y number of sales, but make a decision to limit yourself to only Y number of sales, that is hurting sales.

Does that make sense?

I understand that you want rewind so badly in this game. But a person is not going to make a decision based off if this game has rewind or not.

That's an assumption and not one I think you can make with any level of certainty. I have actually seen people make just such decisions.

Perhaps someone who generally finds racing games frustratingly hard has tried GRID or DIRT 2 and found rewind to be pefect at making the game enjoyable for them. In this case, finding out a game doesn't have rewind might well cause they to shy away, or they might well go to the store and say "Can you recommend a good racing game to me? I like the ones with rewind as it makes it more fun".

So right there the logic is flawed. I think rewind won't be a deciding factor for a HUGE number of people, but to say it won't be a deciding factor or at least a contributing factor just isn't sound.

And remember, it is a contributing factor as I pointed out earlier, GT keeps adding more and more driving aids like driving line and auto brake... so by itself even maybe no, but as part of a package designed to put casual gamers at ease and help them not fear buying the product it is quite likely a plus.

I do admire you for trying to convince ppl how this would hurt PD, but ppl are not buying it.

Some people aren't... some people wont'... can't do anything about that other than keep explaining it in simpler and simpler logic and showing the flaws in their logic

Maybe it's an unwinnable battle... I keep trying to explain to some people why gay people getting married won't ruin their hetero marriage somehow, but they won't buy it either... who knows... all you can do is try

 

[alfy13]

You guys need to look at this from PD's perspective and not the hardcore racing gamer's.

People who like sim racing games will buy it no matter what, by putting in a feature like rewind opens up their market. They don't need to target hardcore racing fans nearly as hard as those who are casual gamers because the hardcore gamers will buy it no matter what (and I've read that statement on this board many times, regardless of what PD puts or doesn't put in the game).

And adding rewind gives them an easier accessibility that's important when choosing between games like Shift or a possible GT without one.

If you look at it with $$$ in mind, it would be stupid not to include something that caters to casual gamers.

So your telling me, ppl are going to make a descisions on buying game, based off of if a game has rewind? Really, is that what your telling me? Are you telling me, a customer will hold both games in his hand, and sit their and decide if he should buy shift over GT5, due to rewind. Are you saying, he would tell him self, I guess i should go with Shift, because it has Rewind. Even though the driving phyics wouldnt change , at least has rewind option. No,he picked shift, because he wanted it over GT5. Its that plain and simple.

COD 4 MW didnt lose sales, because it didnt have feature Forge, that you find in Halo 3. So why would rewind be any different?

I really do not care if this feature is in the game or not . I just find it funny, that ppl actually are posting, that not having rewind in this game, will hurt PD.

 

[RedSuinit]

That's your opinion. Problem with opinion is that it's weight is pretty much cancelled out the second someone else has a different one.

I mean you don't want GT to compete with burnout, and if someone else does... well then back at 0.

But in this argument I think we both know you are taking casual racing a bit to broadly. There are many subsectors in casual racing (burnout and NFS are both casual racing games, but definitely not the same category) and GT can easily be king of casuals in the category it goes for (realistic) while still leaving burnout king of "over the top arcade".

But honestly, lets say somehow GT5 comes with "Career mode" "Arcade Mode" and "Beats the crap out of Burnout mode" and guess what... all 3 are the best there has ever been of that category. The career mode is hardcore and awesome and in depth and everything you want. The arcade mode is approachable, and a fun quick way to get into the game and the burnout mode does everything burnout does and better...

Are you really telling me that's not BETTER than just Career and Arcde mode? I mean you are essentially get 3 games where you got 2 before... even if you don't like burnout, never play it and you still aren't getting hurt in anyway.

I just don't see how being good at more things can be a bad thing.

Now if you are worried PD will do a poor job implimenting these features, that's different. That's a legit concern of almost anything, but again, you seem to have a lot of faith in PD so I don't see how that coudl be.



Well to be fair, you can't really call whether something is revolutionary until hindsite kicks in... and so far from what I see, rewind is being touted as quite impressive so it might well end up being revolutionary



What if the person is NOT buying a game just becuase it doesn't have a feature he knows makes the game accessible to him?

See you are taking one angle and going with it as if it's the only angle... and whats the logic behind getting to categorize what people should and shouldn't play? By that logic no one would ever be able to get better becuase if you aren't good enough for a game, you need to play games that are easy enough for you... not get into games that will challenge you and let you get better.



Again too black and white... it's not as simple as people of one kind buy one thing and not other things... this is a flaw I see a lot also. Basically if you look at things like driving line, auto brake and even rewind, they are there for the purpose of removing this exact problem... the barriers to entry. Again you are saying it as if the way it is is how it should be, as if somehow segregating and hold certain players in a certain realm is better... but what about bringing it all together in one package rather than segregating people out?

Kind of like a real race track. They offer classes of different levels so inexperienced drivers can work their way up and maybe even run some real races all at that one track rather than say "You don't belong here, go back to driving around parking lots".



Absolutely! GT did sell millions because people loved it... but again, just becuase it did before doesn't mean it can do the same thing indefinitely with the same results and even if it could, it stands to reason that increasing your market share will bring MORE sales. I know millions of sales sounds great, who could want more right? Well I can tell you that companies always want mores sales. Millioins +1 is better than just milliions.

Here lemme break the logic down for you in steps:

1 GT has some barriers to entry right? Ie learning curves that make the game frustrating and unattainable to many people. Let's say these are X number of people (and I think we can agree that number is quite a few).

2 There are lots of people who are fine with the difficultly lets call these Y number of people (obviously with millions sold this is no small number either).

If GT remains segregated and only something desireable to the Y number of people, it shoudl sell Y number of copies right?

But if GT adds something that allows it to be desireable and accessible to the X number of people also, it will sell Y number of copies PLUS X number of copies.

And X + Y > Y

So that is how not including something could hurt sales. If you could realize X+Y number of sales, but make a decision to limit yourself to only Y number of sales, that is hurting sales.

Does that make sense?



That's an assumption and not one I think you can make with any level of certainty. I have actually seen people make just such decisions.

Perhaps someone who generally finds racing games frustratingly hard has tried GRID or DIRT 2 and found rewind to be pefect at making the game enjoyable for them. In this case, finding out a game doesn't have rewind might well cause they to shy away, or they might well go to the store and say "Can you recommend a good racing game to me? I like the ones with rewind as it makes it more fun".

So right there the logic is flawed. I think rewind won't be a deciding factor for a HUGE number of people, but to say it won't be a deciding factor or at least a contributing factor just isn't sound.

And remember, it is a contributing factor as I pointed out earlier, GT keeps adding more and more driving aids like driving line and auto brake... so by itself even maybe no, but as part of a package designed to put casual gamers at ease and help them not fear buying the product it is quite likely a plus.



Some people aren't... some people wont'... can't do anything about that other than keep explaining it in simpler and simpler logic and showing the flaws in their logic

Maybe it's an unwinnable battle... I keep trying to explain to some people why gay people getting married won't ruin their hetero marriage somehow, but they won't buy it either... who knows... all you can do is try

Let the 3 page posting begin!

 

[FoolKiller]

So your telling me, ppl are going to make a descisions on buying game, based off of if a game has rewind? Really, is that what your telling me?

No, of course that isn't what he is saying (I think). But overall if the game is more welcoming to the non-niche players (because sim racing is a niche genre afterall) then less people are likely to say, "It's just too hard for me." A rewind feature is just a small part of that overall picture that also includes things like auto-braking and a second physics set. Both of those we know will be in the game.

Are you telling me, a customer will hold both games in his hand, and sit their and decide if he should buy shift over GT5, due to rewind. Are you saying, he would tell him self, I guess i should go with Shift, because it has Rewind.

Just because this keeps coming up; does Shift have rewind? I checked for it while playing last night and didn't see it.

 

[arvin charles]

So your telling me, ppl are going to make a descisions on buying game, based off of if a game has rewind? Really, is that what your telling me? Are you telling me, a customer will hold both games in his hand, and sit their and decide if he should buy shift over GT5, due to rewind. Are you saying, he would tell him self, I guess i should go with Shift, because it has Rewind. Even though the driving phyics wouldnt change , at least has rewind option. No,he picked shift, because he wanted it over GT5. Its that plain and simple.

COD 4 MW didnt lose sales, because it didnt have feature Forge, that you find in Halo 3. So why would rewind be any different?

I really do not care if this feature is in the game or not . I just find it funny, that ppl actually are posting, that not having rewind in this game, will hurt PD.

Are you saying that the above scenario is not possible? Because it certainly is.

I'm saying that PD doesn't have to try nearly as hard to get you, a hardcore gamer, to buy this game nearly as much as a person who normally wouldn't buy these sort of games.

They are trying to expand their target audience and to do that, they have to put features that caters to those that normally does not play these games.

If PD or Turn 10 (or any publisher for that matter) does not care about features that cater to casual gamers, they are leaving money in the table.

If you're a company and there's an untapped market (in this case, those who normally don't play racing sims), you would certainly want to entice them with your product. If you don't do that, you're certainly not maximizing the amount of profits that can be made.

And if you still need me to spell it out for you, PD is in this to make money. They need people to buy their product. More importantly, they want people who have never bought a GT game to buy their new one. If "rewind" helps them make that decision, so be it.

To put it even more bluntly, gamers who don't normally buy racing sims = $$$$ they don't get. Catering to casual gamers with features like auto braking or rewind = the possibility of more $$$$$. And what company doesn't want that?

 

[alfy13]

That's your opinion. Problem with opinion is that it's weight is pretty much cancelled out the second someone else has a different one.

I mean you don't want GT to compete with burnout, and if someone else does... well then back at 0.

But in this argument I think we both know you are taking casual racing a bit to broadly. There are many subsectors in casual racing (burnout and NFS are both casual racing games, but definitely not the same category) and GT can easily be king of casuals in the category it goes for (realistic) while still leaving burnout king of "over the top arcade".

But honestly, lets say somehow GT5 comes with "Career mode" "Arcade Mode" and "Beats the crap out of Burnout mode" and guess what... all 3 are the best there has ever been of that category. The career mode is hardcore and awesome and in depth and everything you want. The arcade mode is approachable, and a fun quick way to get into the game and the burnout mode does everything burnout does and better...

Are you really telling me that's not BETTER than just Career and Arcde mode? I mean you are essentially get 3 games where you got 2 before... even if you don't like burnout, never play it and you still aren't getting hurt in anyway.

I just don't see how being good at more things can be a bad thing.

Now if you are worried PD will do a poor job implimenting these features, that's different. That's a legit concern of almost anything, but again, you seem to have a lot of faith in PD so I don't see how that coudl be.



Well to be fair, you can't really call whether something is revolutionary until hindsite kicks in... and so far from what I see, rewind is being touted as quite impressive so it might well end up being revolutionary



What if the person is NOT buying a game just becuase it doesn't have a feature he knows makes the game accessible to him?

See you are taking one angle and going with it as if it's the only angle... and whats the logic behind getting to categorize what people should and shouldn't play? By that logic no one would ever be able to get better becuase if you aren't good enough for a game, you need to play games that are easy enough for you... not get into games that will challenge you and let you get better.



Again too black and white... it's not as simple as people of one kind buy one thing and not other things... this is a flaw I see a lot also. Basically if you look at things like driving line, auto brake and even rewind, they are there for the purpose of removing this exact problem... the barriers to entry. Again you are saying it as if the way it is is how it should be, as if somehow segregating and hold certain players in a certain realm is better... but what about bringing it all together in one package rather than segregating people out?

Kind of like a real race track. They offer classes of different levels so inexperienced drivers can work their way up and maybe even run some real races all at that one track rather than say "You don't belong here, go back to driving around parking lots".



Absolutely! GT did sell millions because people loved it... but again, just becuase it did before doesn't mean it can do the same thing indefinitely with the same results and even if it could, it stands to reason that increasing your market share will bring MORE sales. I know millions of sales sounds great, who could want more right? Well I can tell you that companies always want mores sales. Millioins +1 is better than just milliions.

Here lemme break the logic down for you in steps:

1 GT has some barriers to entry right? Ie learning curves that make the game frustrating and unattainable to many people. Let's say these are X number of people (and I think we can agree that number is quite a few).

2 There are lots of people who are fine with the difficultly lets call these Y number of people (obviously with millions sold this is no small number either).

If GT remains segregated and only something desireable to the Y number of people, it shoudl sell Y number of copies right?

But if GT adds something that allows it to be desireable and accessible to the X number of people also, it will sell Y number of copies PLUS X number of copies.

And X + Y > Y

So that is how not including something could hurt sales. If you could realize X+Y number of sales, but make a decision to limit yourself to only Y number of sales, that is hurting sales.

Does that make sense?



That's an assumption and not one I think you can make with any level of certainty. I have actually seen people make just such decisions.

Perhaps someone who generally finds racing games frustratingly hard has tried GRID or DIRT 2 and found rewind to be pefect at making the game enjoyable for them. In this case, finding out a game doesn't have rewind might well cause they to shy away, or they might well go to the store and say "Can you recommend a good racing game to me? I like the ones with rewind as it makes it more fun".

So right there the logic is flawed. I think rewind won't be a deciding factor for a HUGE number of people, but to say it won't be a deciding factor or at least a contributing factor just isn't sound.

And remember, it is a contributing factor as I pointed out earlier, GT keeps adding more and more driving aids like driving line and auto brake... so by itself even maybe no, but as part of a package designed to put casual gamers at ease and help them not fear buying the product it is quite likely a plus.



Some people aren't... some people wont'... can't do anything about that other than keep explaining it in simpler and simpler logic and showing the flaws in their logic

Maybe it's an unwinnable battle... I keep trying to explain to some people why gay people getting married won't ruin their hetero marriage somehow, but they won't buy it either... who knows... all you can do is try

Question, do you even take the time and think before posting?

If a person havent figured out after playing GT1, that its not casusal friendly, then rest of the franchise should be in shambles right now. Do you really think the 40millions of GT games that are sold, are due to 40million hardcore players?

Also the driving phyics for nomal mode is easy, I believe that is enough for Casual players. Tehy have a option to go with Pro mode, or Normal mode.

But my debate with you , is not if rewind is in the game or not. My debate t with you is, how is rewind going to hurt PD. All the reasons you stated, really do not make any sense at all.

With all the reasons you stated, I just dont see , how one feature determines if they buy this game or not.

The sales of COD4 MW , even though it didnt have Forge , a feature that you find in Halo 3, didnt stop sales for COD4. so why would rewind, hurt PD?

A person is going to buy this game, because most likely this person played GT1, 2, 3, 4. A franchise that has sold millions upon millions of gamers who like the series. I really doubt that a person is not going to buy this game due to rewind. A person is not going to buy this game for other reasons, and rewind is not that reason.

By your logic, If i was to pick up a cigarette at this very moment and smoked it. I found out that i didnt like the taste of it. So i decided to rewind time, and try it again, my thoughts about cigs wouldnt change.

And that is same with rewind, if a person doesnt like the driving phyics in the game, rewind is not going to change their mind. The driving phyics are still there.

 

[turbomp301]

That's your opinion. Problem with opinion is that it's weight is pretty much cancelled out the second someone else has a different one.

I mean you don't want GT to compete with burnout, and if someone else does... well then back at 0.

But in this argument I think we both know you are taking casual racing a bit to broadly. There are many subsectors in casual racing (burnout and NFS are both casual racing games, but definitely not the same category) and GT can easily be king of casuals in the category it goes for (realistic) while still leaving burnout king of "over the top arcade".

But honestly, lets say somehow GT5 comes with "Career mode" "Arcade Mode" and "Beats the crap out of Burnout mode" and guess what... all 3 are the best there has ever been of that category. The career mode is hardcore and awesome and in depth and everything you want. The arcade mode is approachable, and a fun quick way to get into the game and the burnout mode does everything burnout does and better...

Are you really telling me that's not BETTER than just Career and Arcde mode? I mean you are essentially get 3 games where you got 2 before... even if you don't like burnout, never play it and you still aren't getting hurt in anyway.

I just don't see how being good at more things can be a bad thing.

Now if you are worried PD will do a poor job implimenting these features, that's different. That's a legit concern of almost anything, but again, you seem to have a lot of faith in PD so I don't see how that coudl be.

right, its my opinion. If you want to talk about the weight of it, you should go back to the polls on this topic.

We can go back and forth with "what ifs" all day, it pointless.

I hope if rewind is put in that it brings more people into the series, I just hope its for, IMO, the right reasons and thats why I tell my dear friend to buy another game.

 

[Seismica]

That's your opinion. Problem with opinion is that it's weight is pretty much cancelled out the second someone else has a different one.

Cue the Jeremy Clarkson quote in my sig

You should also bear in mind that not all GT fanboys are pure sim racers. I enjoy my need for speed, i would enjoy Forza if i had a 360, or had access to a 360 regularly (which is the situation i have with my brother's ps3).

Rewind is a good feature for many, but there are certain conditions me and others want in place with the feature to stop it becoming too arcade-like.

This is my list of conditions, think of it what you will:

- Later license tests will not allow rewind. It takes a great deal of skill and effort to gold licenses, and you get cars as a reward. Rewind would make it easier, as in it would not take as long to achieve it. If you nail the first of 5 corners and then screw up the second, you should have to start over, not to rewind to the exit of turn 1 where you already have 1/2 a second on your ghost lap. Of course, the B and A licenses should allow the use of rewind.

- Later career races should not allow the use of rewind. Later in the game the races get harder more because of the skill required to drive the car, not because the AI improves. If you had rewind, a driver of any skill level could easily compete in these later races.

- In time trials, the use of rewind is forbidden/it will invalidate your lap. This is essential, otherwise the online rankings would become completely redundant.

- There should be some advantage/benefit or bonus from not using rewind. A-spec points or trophies are the best contenders so far, additional prize money would be unfair, unless of course you have to pay to repair damages, in which case rewind should be served with a prize money penality.

 

[Devedander]

Let the 3 page posting begin!

WOOT!!!

So your telling me, ppl are going to make a descisions on buying game, based off of if a game has rewind? Really, is that what your telling me?

What do you mean by "ppl"?

Do you mean everyone? No absolutely not then.

Do you mean most people? MMM... I am gonna go with probably not.

Some people? Almost definitely...

But really what I am saying is that YOUR statement (which I understand to mean that rewind does not have the ability to sway any sales) is incorrect.

Basically I am saying that rewind has the potential to generate a sale, and also has the potential to save a sale.

Are you telling me, a customer will hold both games in his hand, and sit their and decide if he should buy shift over GT5, due to rewind. Are you saying, he would tell him self, I guess i should go with Shift, because it has Rewind.

Not often, but certainly I would think this type of scenario might well pop up. There are a lot of gamers who don't really know much about games and are basing their decisions on bullet points and features. And as I illustrated above, some that will find a feature they like and, knowing they like the feature, specifically look for it in other games and weigh in favor of those games that have it.

Even though the driving phyics wouldnt change , at least has rewind option. No,he picked shift, because he wanted it over GT5. Its that plain and simple.

And that's where you go off kilter again... making a black and white generalized statement. You are making an assumption that rewind wasn't a factor and you are assuming the rational he used to pick one over the other - specifically you are assuming he won't use rewind as part of the rational when there is no reason preventing him from doing just that.

This is what I keep seeing from the people who 'won't buy it"... they have some fact set up in their head about how things will, it's a certaintly and it's always right and it thus proves the rest of their logic... accept it's not a certanitly and thus when used as one invalidates the rest of the argument.

COD 4 MW didnt lose sales, because it didnt have feature Forge, that you find in Halo 3. So why would rewind be any different?

First off, how do you know it didn't loose sales? What numbers are you using to compare "with forge" to "without forge sales"? But more importantly and really the issue, do you think it might have sold MORE if it had forge?

And there are your lost sales Remember failing to capitalize on a potential sale is a lost sale.

I really do not care if this feature is in the game or not . I just find it funny, that ppl actually are posting, that not having rewind in this game, will hurt PD.

And you would not be one of these potential sales. If everyone were just like you and thought and behaved just like you, then you would be right. No one would every buy a game with rewind over a game without based on rewind.

But not everyones like you... and that's where your whole argument falls apart. You base it on the assumption that the way you would do it is the way everyone would do it.

Question, do you even take the time and think before posting?

If a person havent figured out after playing GT1, that its not casusal friendly, then rest of the franchise should be in shambles right now. Do you really think the 40millions of GT games that are sold, are due to 40million hardcore players?

Do you think before replying?

First there are new gamers every day, gamers who weren't around since GT1, gamers who are just entering the market, or reentering the market. People who maybe up until now had no interest in racing games but for any number of reasons do.

Here is the same mistake being made... the assumption that everyone is like you and knows waht you know or is like the people in our little gtplanet universe.

And did you stop to think that what you said totally supports my point?

People HAVE figured out it's not casual friendly and guess what? That's probably causing a lot of casuals to not buy it... those are lost potential sales. See above.

Solution to losing these sales? Provide options that can make the game casual friendly without removing the core challenging gameply ie make evryone happy.

Also the driving phyics for nomal mode is easy, I believe that is enough for Casual players. Tehy have a option to go with Pro mode, or Normal mode.

And here we go again, making up a fact and then basing an argument on it. You believe it's easy enough for casual players? Based on what?

Becuase I can tell you plenty of people who find Grid and NFS too challenging... heck I know people who can't keep the cars in GTA on the road.

Sorry but your belief that normal mode is easy enough for anyone doesn't make it so. However my experience with people for whom normal mode would be too difficult kind of backs my position (along with some common sense that GT's normal mode is still more demanding than many racing games).

But my debate with you , is not if rewind is in the game or not. My debate t with you is, how is rewind going to hurt PD. All the reasons you stated, really do not make any sense at all.

I assume you mean how not having it would hurt PD?

I covered it above in quite some detail. Again, X+Y sales > Y sales.

You seem to be stuck on hurting PD in only one viewpoint and that is to loose sales. You fail to comprehend the idea behind failing to capitlize on a potential sale.

Again and as simple as it gets:

There are people who don't buy GT becuase it does not accomodate them.

If GT adds options that accomdodate them they may pick up those otherwise lost sales.

Failing to pickup those sales hurts.

Does that make sense?

With all the reasons you stated, I just dont see , how one feature determines if they buy this game or not.

That's because you keep talking in globals and certainties. Again, rewind won't magically make everyone buy GT and lack of it won't magically make no one buy GT.

But if you honestly don't see the potential for SOME people to buy GT with rewind where they might pass it up if it didn't have rewind... well then you are not thinking clearly or are in denial.

The sales of COD4 MW , even though it didnt have Forge , a feature that you find in Halo 3, didnt stop sales for COD4. so why would rewind, hurt PD?

Again, do you think the ADDITION of forge might have INCREASED sales? See your problem is you are saying it didn't "stop" sales. No one is saying GT will not sell without rewind... the point is GT could only sell MORE if rewind is included.

A person is going to buy this game, because most likely this person played GT1, 2, 3, 4. A franchise that has sold millions upon millions of gamers who like the series. I really doubt that a person is not going to buy this game due to rewind. A person is not going to buy this game for other reasons, and rewind is not that reason.

There you go making assumptions, then extending them to generalizations and then making them facts again...

I am not saying GT fans who bought previous GTs and liked them will suddenly say "GT5 has no rewind? I am not buying!".

By your logic, If i was to pick up a cigarette at this very moment and smoked it. I found out that i didnt like the taste of it. So i decided to rewind time, and try it again, my thoughts about cigs wouldnt change.

You have completely missunderstood what I am saying or suffer have some very odd logic in your head.

And that is same with rewind, if a person doesnt like the driving phyics in the game, rewind is not going to change their mind. The driving phyics are still there.

Way out there... I can only assume you have misstyped something here...

Here is the short of it:

X+Y sales is more than Y sales? Do you agree yes or no?

If you make a decision to leave out an option that then results in only Y sales instead of X+Y sales you have less sales. Do you agree yes or no?

If you agree to both those, then you agree that the decision to leave out something that could increase sales would hurt the company to be left out.

And yes, rewind is an option that (just like driving line, auto brake etc) make the game more accessible to casual players and thus has the potential to increase sales.

right, its my opinion. If you want to talk about the weight of it, you should go back to the polls on this topic.

We can go back and forth with "what ifs" all day, it pointless.

I hope if rewind is put in that it brings more people into the series, I just hope its for, IMO, the right reasons and thats why I tell my dear friend to buy another game.

The point of the "it's your opinion statement" was that it's ONLY your opinon but not backed up with fact or at least reasonable examples and logical arguments.

 

[alfy13]

WOOT!!!



What do you mean by "ppl"?

Do you mean everyone? No absolutely not then.

Do you mean most people? MMM... I am gonna go with probably not.

Some people? Almost definitely...

But really what I am saying is that YOUR statement (which I understand to mean that rewind does not have the ability to sway any sales) is incorrect.

Basically I am saying that rewind has the potential to generate a sale, and also has the potential to save a sale.



Not often, but certainly I would think this type of scenario might well pop up. There are a lot of gamers who don't really know much about games and are basing their decisions on bullet points and features. And as I illustrated above, some that will find a feature they like and, knowing they like the feature, specifically look for it in other games and weigh in favor of those games that have it.



And that's where you go off kilter again... making a black and white generalized statement. You are making an assumption that rewind wasn't a factor and you are assuming the rational he used to pick one over the other - specifically you are assuming he won't use rewind as part of the rational when there is no reason preventing him from doing just that.

This is what I keep seeing from the people who 'won't buy it"... they have some fact set up in their head about how things will, it's a certaintly and it's always right and it thus proves the rest of their logic... accept it's not a certanitly and thus when used as one invalidates the rest of the argument.



First off, how do you know it didn't loose sales? What numbers are you using to compare "with forge" to "without forge sales"? But more importantly and really the issue, do you think it might have sold MORE if it had forge?

And there are your lost sales Remember failing to capitalize on a potential sale is a lost sale.



And you would not be one of these potential sales. If everyone were just like you and thought and behaved just like you, then you would be right. No one would every buy a game with rewind over a game without based on rewind.

But not everyones like you... and that's where your whole argument falls apart. You base it on the assumption that the way you would do it is the way everyone would do it.



Do you think before replying?

First there are new gamers every day, gamers who weren't around since GT1, gamers who are just entering the market, or reentering the market. People who maybe up until now had no interest in racing games but for any number of reasons do.

Here is the same mistake being made... the assumption that everyone is like you and knows waht you know or is like the people in our little gtplanet universe.

And did you stop to think that what you said totally supports my point?

People HAVE figured out it's not casual friendly and guess what? That's probably causing a lot of casuals to not buy it... those are lost potential sales. See above.

Solution to losing these sales? Provide options that can make the game casual friendly without removing the core challenging gameply ie make evryone happy.



And here we go again, making up a fact and then basing an argument on it. You believe it's easy enough for casual players? Based on what?

Becuase I can tell you plenty of people who find Grid and NFS too challenging... heck I know people who can't keep the cars in GTA on the road.

Sorry but your belief that normal mode is easy enough for anyone doesn't make it so. However my experience with people for whom normal mode would be too difficult kind of backs my position (along with some common sense that GT's normal mode is still more demanding than many racing games).



I assume you mean how not having it would hurt PD?

I covered it above in quite some detail. Again, X+Y sales > Y sales.

You seem to be stuck on hurting PD in only one viewpoint and that is to loose sales. You fail to comprehend the idea behind failing to capitlize on a potential sale.

Again and as simple as it gets:

There are people who don't buy GT becuase it does not accomodate them.

If GT adds options that accomdodate them they may pick up those otherwise lost sales.

Failing to pickup those sales hurts.

Does that make sense?



That's because you keep talking in globals and certainties. Again, rewind won't magically make everyone buy GT and lack of it won't magically make no one buy GT.

But if you honestly don't see the potential for SOME people to buy GT with rewind where they might pass it up if it didn't have rewind... well then you are not thinking clearly or are in denial.



Again, do you think the ADDITION of forge might have INCREASED sales? See your problem is you are saying it didn't "stop" sales. No one is saying GT will not sell without rewind... the point is GT could only sell MORE if rewind is included.


There you go making assumptions, then extending them to generalizations and then making them facts again...

I am not saying GT fans who bought previous GTs and liked them will suddenly say "GT5 has no rewind? I am not buying!".



You have completely missunderstood what I am saying or suffer have some very odd logic in your head.



Way out there... I can only assume you have misstyped something here...



The point of the "it's your opinion statement" was that it's ONLY your opinon but not backed up with fact or at least reasonable examples and logical arguments.

I didnt feel like quoting everything you posted, because i feel its just a waste of time.

For starters, you are right. I do not know if COD 4 lost sales due not having forge like a feature that you see in Halo 4. But according to Gamestop ( a store that sales games) COD MW 2 is the most highest game that is being preordered . Oh btw, the game doesnt have forge.

Last, I cant believe you actually think, there are some ppl who will not buy this game, just because it did not have Rewind. I think its a plus that they didn't. Because its pretty evident, they dont like racing games period. so why should any one cater to them in the first place? I just cant see a person who love racing game, not pick up GT5 due to not having rewind. There has to be other reasons for not him buying the game.

But then again, I cant believe I actually debated you and devander on this issue.

 

[Devedander]

I didnt feel like quoting everything you posted, because i feel its just a waste of time.

Yeah the quoting long posts thing gets out of hand fast...

For starters, you are right. I do not know if COD 4 lost sales due not having forge like a feature that you see in Halo 4. But according to Gamestop ( a store that sales games) COD MW 2 is the most highest game that is being preordered . Oh btw, the game doesnt have forge.

Remember not having forge doesn't make the game unaccessible to a large number of people. Actually COD is a great example of options that cater to all levels working well in conjunction (ie the hardcore matches aren't ruined at all by the arcade option matches).

That all said, do you think with forge COD would potentially sell more copies? I think so

Last, I cant believe you actually think, there are some ppl who will not buy this game, just because it did not have Rewind. I think its a plus that they didn't. Because its pretty evident, they dont like racing games period. so why should any one cater to them in the first place? I just cant see a person who love racing game, not pick up GT5 due to not having rewind. There has to be other reasons for not him buying the game.

I think you are looking at it wrong. It sounds from the bold part above you think I am saying people who WOULD have bought GT will suddenly NOT buy it because it doesn't have rewind. That's a seperate argument (and in the face of Forza's rewind getting a lot of good press, maybe it's got something to it) but that's not what I am saying here.

What I am saying is "People who would NOT have bought GT (because it's frustratingly hard) may be turned into BUYING GT because a feature is in that removes that frustrating hard barrier for them and makes the game more accessible."

Are you saying you don't think that could happen?

 

[arvin charles]

Last, I cant believe you actually think, there are some ppl who will not buy this game, just because it did not have Rewind. I think its a plus that they didn't. Because its pretty evident, they dont like racing games period. so why should any one cater to them in the first place? I just cant see a person who love racing game, not pick up GT5 due to not having rewind. There has to be other reasons for not him buying the game.

Why should anyone cater to casual gamers in the first place?

Sim racing games - targets those who like realistic racing. ($$$)

Now imagine opening up that market to those who like arcade racers like Burnout or NFS. (More potential $$$$)

Now imagine opening up that market to those who might like racing games, but haven't really tried. (Even more potential $$$$$$).


As far as how someone could not buy GT5 if he/she likes racing games, one possible reason is that it's too hard for them to get into. The point of features like "rewind" is to get those people who might not try racing games to actually play them.

In reference to the bolded part of your quote, do you think PD would think it's a "plus" if those people didn't buy their game? Why miss the chance to enlarge your market and make more money?

EDIT - An additional food for thought, PD realizes that there's going to be fans (i.e. those on GTPlanet) who will always buy their games. They need to appeal to those who normally would not.

 

[turbomp301]

The point of the "it's your opinion statement" was that it's ONLY your opinon but not backed up with fact or at least reasonable examples and logical arguments.

Same could be said about everything you post. Just calm down and realize not everyone wants rewind. It doesnt make them idiots.

People that endlessly argue about the topic with multiple people at a time with 3 page long posts might be though.

 

[arvin charles]

Just calm down and realize not everyone wants rewind.

Companies that are smart should realize this and take into account the chances of their core audience NOT buying their product because of this feature vs. the chances of more people buying their product because of it.

If PD (and T10 and other racing publishers) have done their research, they probably already know the answer to that.

I'm willing to guess that the # of new buyers gained will offset the # of previous buyers lost.*

*Note that I have not done this specific market research, but I'm willing to bet that any video game software developer has.

 

[alfy13]

Yeah the quoting long posts thing gets out of hand fast...



Remember not having forge doesn't make the game unaccessible to a large number of people. Actually COD is a great example of options that cater to all levels working well in conjunction (ie the hardcore matches aren't ruined at all by the arcade option matches).

That all said, do you think with forge COD would potentially sell more copies? I think so



I think you are looking at it wrong. It sounds from the bold part above you think I am saying people who WOULD have bought GT will suddenly NOT buy it because it doesn't have rewind. That's a seperate argument (and in the face of Forza's rewind getting a lot of good press, maybe it's got something to it) but that's not what I am saying here.

What I am saying is "People who would NOT have bought GT (because it's frustratingly hard) may be turned into BUYING GT because a feature is in that removes that frustrating hard barrier for them and makes the game more accessible."
Are you saying you don't think that could happen?

Look, like i said earlier, I dont have anything against rewind. But you have to ask your self, What caused the player to be frustrated in the first place. THen ask yourself, how rewind has anything do with the player being frustrated.

Rewinding 10sec into the past, is not going to change the game play, driving phyics etc.. Its Just fixes their mistake. Rewind doesnt make the game easier, or harder.

So I just dont see a person not buying this game, because it didnt have rewind. Which is why I dont see this hurting PD.

 

[alfy13]

Why should anyone cater to casual gamers in the first place?

Sim racing games - targets those who like realistic racing. ($$$)

Now imagine opening up that market to those who like arcade racers like Burnout or NFS. (More potential $$$$)

Now imagine opening up that market to those who might like racing games, but haven't really tried. (Even more potential $$$$$$).



.

Ok, I dont have anything against rewind, but this whole post doesnt make any sesne at all.

What does rewind have to do with anything about the driving phyics , gameplay and funfactor? If a person who loves Arcade racers only , are not going to waste money on a sim that has rewind.

Yes it corrects mistakes, but their is a huge reason why arcade racers dont like sims, and its not because a game doesnt have rewind.

Its like me, a person who doesnt like mayo . A chef can put pepper on it, or what ever spice to make it taste better. BUt no matter what, its not going to change my mind on how I feel about mayo. Its either you like it , or you dont.

 

[Lucas]

Many feel it's not a feature that should be in GT regardless of the option to use it or not.

Those people are not qualified to give their opinion. Neither are the people that say the feature should be in GT. The only person qualified to give his opinion about the feature is Kazunori Yamauchi. He knows what should and what shouldn't be in GT, since he made the game.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Those people are not qualified to give their opinion. Neither are the people that say the feature should be in GT. The only person qualified to give his opinion about the feature is Kazunori Yamauchi. He knows what should and what shouldn't be in GT, since he made the game.

I was going to give you crap about this post after the first sentence. But after reading the rest, I totally agree. 👍

 

[tibiquera]

Well sorry for taking so long to reply to something that was posted several pages ago, but I think there are some valid issues:

Well for 1 you are ignoring a very important need (maybe not of the devs but of the company in some way) and that is sales. Quite simply, the broader the crowd who can enjoy your game, the more you can sell. Noob dollars are as greens as pro dollars. Besides you can give someone the option for the most hardcore experience and it's not ruined by also having the option for the easy experience. In pretty much every game I play I ramp the damage up to max, the fact you can race without damage also doesn't change my experience at all.

Well, you make the assumption rewind would increase sales because the casual market would appreciate it. First of all, I'm not so sure the casual market would even notice it. But let's assume they will, does it automatically mean there will be more sales? I won't try to take any guess. But it's something to consider whether appealing to a broader audience would increase sales. So here are some things to think about:

If a console exclusive game sells a certain amount, then making it a multiplatform game would sell twice as much, right? Unfortunately it's not the case. There are people who won't buy it simply because it's not exclusive, and there is also the problem that because the game has to take both technologies in mind, the end product may end up being inferior.

A different example would be a ps1 game that a lot of people liked called Driver. I don't know if you had the chance to play it, but you were pretty much stuck in this one car roaming the city. And the game was awesome. Later games added the ability to get out of the car, get other cars, and even participate in gun fights. But the game stopped being so good. Why? Because it lost its focus. It did one thing very good, but when it tried doing more things, it failed. So what does it have to do with GT? It means that if you expand your game so much, it may end up being a jack of all trades and master of none.

I'm not implying that rewind would impact the sales in the long run, but it's good to remember that if you have a focused audience and decide to expand, you run the risk of pleasing none.

Another different issue about rewind is the following: I was playing f1 07 a few years ago, and in the career I was driving for a bad car (either Midlands or STR). In one race I was in 8th ready to score my first point of the season. But Raikkonen, who had a much faster car kept getting closer to me. It was the last lap and I began feeling the pressure. At that point I was trying to not make mistakes but at the same point I couldn't get too slow. On the last turn, there was so much pressure that I ended up making a mistake, Kimi touched me, I spun, and finished 9th. I was furious and for sure if I had a rewind button I would've used it. But at the same time, all the tension on that last lap wouldn't have happened and I would miss one important aspect of racing: pressure. That's my problem with rewind.

2 I have... usually it's the last hairpin since quite frankly it's the one I have practiced the least as without rewind, as soon as you screw up royally it's restart time and so you don't get to practice the last turn nearly as much as the first. And if we have learned anything from the progression of our education system (well what progress there has been) it's that there isn't a "Best" way for everyone. Some people will do better with one method over anohter and some simply won't or don't want to bother getting as good as others.

I wouldn't bother too much on time trials, but I still don't think it would be such a valiable tool. At least not for me.

 

[Lucas]

I was going to give you crap about this post after the first sentence. But after reading the rest, I totally agree. 👍

It wasn't until I posted it that I realized some people would indeed give me crap for the post, even those in favor of rewind. Still, I wanted to see if people would get the idea of what I wanted to say. I'm glad you did. 👍

 

[Devedander]

Same could be said about everything you post.

The same except that I do provide examples and logical arguments to back it up.

I don't just say "Rewind roxors, GT needs it!"

That's just an opinion. Now if I back that up with examples and logical statemetns then it becomes an valid argument.

Companies that are smart should realize this and take into account the chances of their core audience NOT buying their product because of this feature vs. the chances of more people buying their product because of it.

Yes and this is something I didn't touch on because if you can't show someone how broadening your market demographic can increase sales, then this is definitely too much to go into.

And you have a point, there are very likely some people who will be so mad at rewind they will boycott GT5.

But even without market research... I can confidently say that number is insignificantly small. I would think at most it would delay the purchase for many... kind of a strike if you will... but eventulaly most GT fans will break down and buy it especially since it's just an optional feature and not a change to the fundamental gameplay.

In this particular case, we know a lot of people find GT5 unapproachably frustrating or difficult. That is a large market to tap. It would take some pretty strong resistance from fans to offset gains from opening that market with angry GT fans who boycott the game.

Look, like i said earlier, I dont have anything against rewind. But you have to ask your self, What caused the player to be frustrated in the first place. THen ask yourself, how rewind has anything do with the player being frustrated.

Again you are isolating an issue and arguing it through with one point of view as if that covers all the bases.

What caused the player to be frustrated? Probably the same thing that gives the hardcore fans such enjoyment... the sheer difficulty of the experience.

So what makes it frustrating? For everyone I know who has tried GT and didn't like it, what was frustrating was the fact that for a learning driver, it's almost impossible to finish a race in anything but WAY last place (which is often a frustarting and degrading experience to watch the rest of the cars speed off into the distance with basically no chance to catch them) and this is almost always due to going off a corner or not being able to handle the car in a challenging situation. I have watched many a time when a friend is bogged down in a sandtrap watching the cpus speed off and a frustrated look plastered on his face and he just doesn't want to restart to meet the same fate again..

How would rewind help that?

Rather than basically having the race be over after going off a corner, you could try a few more times until you get it right, learn a bit in the process and continue on.

This makes the game accessible to lesser drivers becuase it is no longer a case of one mistake being enough to pretty much end your race.

There are a lot of other ways as well. But this is just generally one of them.

Well, you make the assumption rewind would increase sales because the casual market would appreciate it.

I don't run gallop polls but from my perosnal experience and what I have read in terms of reviews and feedback from people who have used rewind, it's generally well accepted and liked exactly because it takes out some of the frustration that casual gamers experience.

If a console exclusive game sells a certain amount, then making it a multiplatform game would sell twice as much, right? Unfortunately it's not the case. There are people who won't buy it simply because it's not exclusive, and there is also the problem that because the game has to take both technologies in mind, the end product may end up being inferior.

Well no you don't expect double sales becusae many people own both consoles and wouldn't likely buy two copies.

But I see what you are saying. But there is a reason many games go multiplatform... it costs more for licensing, there is more work involved... so obviously cost is higher... and the result is most of the time return is worth it in terms of increased sales.

Rewind in GT is not really similar though and I will hve to say this analogy is a poor one to choose just because there are too many differences to make it effective at highlighting the similarities.

A different example would be a ps1 game that a lot of people liked called Driver. I don't know if you had the chance to play it, but you were pretty much stuck in this one car roaming the city. And the game was awesome. Later games added the ability to get out of the car, get other cars, and even participate in gun fights. But the game stopped being so good. Why? Because it lost its focus. It did one thing very good, but when it tried doing more things, it failed. So what does it have to do with GT? It means that if you expand your game so much, it may end up being a jack of all trades and master of none.

I loved Driver!

But I disagree with your reasoning as to why it failed.

I think it failed because while it was a king of one thing, a jack of all trades came along that happened to be darn near kingly in most trades. Driver tried to follow suite (as it had to becuase the competition was offering other features - notice a parallel here) and didn't impliment these features well.

Basically Driver eventually failed because the competition offered more, bigger and better and Driver tried to match the competition step for step and just couldn't. GT is in actually very similar to Driver in that it's done it's one thing really well, but suddenly the market is introducing competition that does that thing well as well as lot of other things well and appeals to a broader audience at the samme time. Like Driver I think GT needs to step up to match the competition lest it meet a similar fate to Driver. The difference being I have a lot of confidence PD won't go screwing up the features they impliment. I think very much like Driver they will match the competition almost step for step, but unlike driver they will find a way to do each thing at least almost as well if not better than the competition.

Like I said, if PD impliments rewind poorly... then that will not be a good thing and may very well damage the series. But I don't think many of us are expecting that.

I'm not implying that rewind would impact the sales in the long run, but it's good to remember that if you have a focused audience and decide to expand, you run the risk of pleasing none.

Yes and I am sure PD are well aware of that.

But you also have to remember if you don't embrace change and keep with the times, you become dated and stagnate.

I would miss one important aspect of racing: pressure. That's my problem with rewind.

I can see how that could happen. But I have to disagree that it takes it away... like I said I play a lot of games with God mode or unlimted ammo codes and what have you... and to use one would remove the challenge and thus the satisfaction of overcoming that challenge. The result? Even in the hariest of times, when I am about to die at the very end of a long difficult corrider of hard enemies... I don't use the codes. They are right there to use and I don't becuase I know what they represent and I don't want that.

So I feel that if you are worried about succoming to something that will ruin the game for you, the problem isn't the game, it's your willpower and true inner desire.