Rewind feature.

[BJBEOSmitty]

I think I only had to retry the snow and gravel ones lol. Also rewind in license tests defeats the whole purpose.

A "simulator" simply cannot have a rewind feature. That's crossing the line.

I understand GT5's place (the entire series actually) at or near the peak of driving games relative to realism, depth of gameplay, etc. but I don't know if I will ever be convinced of "a real simulator" should not have the ability to "rewind" back prior to say a difficult corner, while in practice mode and try the corner again, simply because t aspires to be a "simulator."

Citing such a feature as "unrealistic" has merit, but ignoring the fact that currently racing damage is only slightly enhanced from Mario Kart's damage model is conveniently choosing game feature facts to suit one's argument and ignoring others when they do not. Tire wear can be turned off, along with fuel consumption for example.

Don't get me wrong... I don't want physics which lead to totaled cars, or guaranteed crashes which shred front suspensions as well as end your ability to race if open wheel F1 cars do as much as merely touch wheels... But I don't go on about realism, simulator, and judge other's suggestions with selective facts either.



"I want to try that corner again... I just can't get it.

"Sorry, you have to go all the way around or back up try again. Make sure you are at __ mph prior to the corner- that is the speed you were at last time. This is a simulator."

"But on my way around again, I have no tire wear, and if I hit a wall at 200 mph, no damage. I simply drive off."

"yeah, cool isn't it? Keep working on that corner, try changing camber and toe maybe? What about the transmission or downforce? Differential or Spring rates? This is as real as it gets!"

 

[avens]

The difference that it makes still needs to be established. Else it still boils down to this (equally facetious) argument:

Which Slip covered pretty well when he responded to it.

If PD adds the ability to rewind replays (which, after the joke that GT5's system was, they should already be doing), then all of the work is already done.

The line is already drawn by what types of racing games have a rewind feature: not a single "simulator" has it, and supposedly the GT series aims to be one.

Is SlipZtrEm a programmer? Are you? Do you both have worked on programming racing games, particularly the rewind system? If not all what you both said means absolutely nothing.
And even if it is "easy" it still means shifting priorities over, therefore resources and time on it instead of all other things that are requested a lot more often than this.
For example I, and everyone else really if you look at this subforum, would prefer PD's employees working on the suspension model instead of a rewind feature, even better spend their salaries into modelling tracks and cars.

This is why a rewind feature crosses the line. It means focusing on the "arcade-iest" aspect of them all instead of actual racing.

 

[Exorcet]

The line is already drawn by what types of racing games have a rewind feature: not a single "simulator" has it, and supposedly the GT series aims to be one.

Forza has it. And if the other sims don't, that is there problem. It does nothing to the legitimacy of rewind.

Is SlipZtrEm a programmer? Are you? If not all what you both said means absolutely nothing.

Don't need to be a programmer. Though if you'd like to here from someone with programming experience, I had to learn programming. The only difference running something forward and backward in physics is which direction you go from a time step.

At every time step, GT has a specific state. The physics are identical forward and backward, and the inputs are recorded (they must be to even have replays). To rewind, GT simply needs to reverse the physics and the inputs. Done.

And even if it is "easy" it still means shifting priorities over, therefore resources and time on it instead of all other things that are requested a lot more often than this.

Should GT avoid new features forever?

For example I, and everyone else really if you look at this subforum, would prefer PD's employees working on the suspension model instead of a rewind feature.

What about the people who want a new aero model? Does PD have to choose between suspension and aero because doing both is impossible?

This is why a rewind feature crosses the line. It means focusing on the "arcade-iest" aspect of them all instead of actual racing.

Rewind is a simulation feature, it's been explained over and over. It's usefulness in a simulation should be extremely clear at this point.

 

[avens]

Forza is not a simulator by any means whatsoever, and actually is not the most realistic game on consoles. The point is proper "sims" (not one in consoles) focus on the game itself instead of gimmicks, which is why there isn't a single one that has rewind.

Of course you need to be a programmer to talk about programming. Do you do medical diagnosis as an engineer? Do you judge a doctor's diagnosis?

What people want the most is perfecting GT5 instead of adding more unfinished features. As an avid GTP member you should know that already, and also that with finite resources prioritizing is of the essence.

 

[C_Raccoon23]

Forza is not a simulator by any means whatsoever,

You forgot to add "in my opinion" to that, because not everyone thinks this is true. I know I don't.

 

[Exorcet]

Forza is not a simulator by any means whatsoever, and actually is not the most realistic game on consoles.

Then at least it far exceeds GT in modeling vehicle dynamics. Whatever Forza is, it is on the same level as GT.

The point is proper "sims" (not one in consoles) focus on the game itself instead of gimmicks, which is why there isn't a single one that has rewind.

Rewind isn't a gimmick, it can be a useful training tool. It fits very well with sims, whether developers realize it or not. Arguing based on how many use the feature is pointless.

Of course you need to be a programmer to talk about programming. Do you do medical diagnosis as an engineer? Do you judge a doctor's diagnosis?

You don't need a degree or formal training to know things. Some self study would probably be enough to convince yourself that going backwards isn't that different for going forwards in a simulator.

What people want the most is perfecting GT5 instead of adding more unfinished features. As an avid GTP member you should know that already, and also that with finite resources prioritizing is of the essence.

Sure, but there is nothing that says that if PD tried to add rewind (or anything), that they would have to compromise the quality of the game.

Around GTP at least one of the opinions on GT5's issues was that they stemmed from poor planning on PD's part, not solely from trying to do too much at once. If PD can sit down and manage themselves, I think it's reasonable to expect a game that is both much bigger than GT5 and much less buggy.

 

[Tornado]

Is SlipZtrEm a programmer? Are you? Do you both have worked on programming racing games, particularly the rewind system? If not all what you both said means absolutely nothing.

The obvious response to this is that your opinion on the matter is just as worthless then. Funny how that works.



The problem being that one doesn't need to be a programmer to know that rewinding the physics in real time is the same thing as rewinding the physics in real time. It makes no difference to the physics or game engine whether after leaving that rewind it goes back to recorded inputs (as in a replay) or goes back to player inputs (as in an in-race rewind).

The line is already drawn by what types of racing games have a rewind feature: not a single "simulator" has it, and supposedly the GT series aims to be one.

This is why a rewind feature crosses the line. It means focusing on the "arcade-iest" aspect of them all instead of actual racing.

That's not establishing anything. That's just saying that it isn't commonplace, so it shouldn't be.

 

[MSTER232]

It would not be of benefit to go 100% pace in an endurance race if you can't drive at 100%, end up in the wall, and then rewind to the start line to end up in the wall again.

That's where you learn from your mistakes. We all do it when driving. If for example I think I can take a corner full throttle but in reality you need to lift off for a while to make it around the corner, then when I end up going off track or into the wall, I know not to do that again if I want to win future races.

 

[Samus]

Once again people seem to be forgetting that this is a game. It's not real life, it doesn't have to be exact to real life, even if it is trying (and mostly failing) to be a "sim". It's still a game, and it already has hundreds of unrealistic, game like features. Adding one more as an optional extra isn't going to make it any less of a "sim", it'll still be a $60 video game.

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

I hope not too. what is the point of The Real Driving Simulator if it simulates things that are impossible in real life.

Anyone that replies in this thread hating on the rewind button that has ever used the pause button or restarted a race, is a hypocrite. Period.

 

[Prototyp3]

You must be new here .
Ya, new to the forums but not GT as a whole. Although I've never been one to limit my experiences so I've played Forza, the need for speed games, ect.

It comes up often; if a feature is suggested that isn't yet a part of the GT franchise (and especially if it's a popular feature of any other driving game), there tends to be some resistance, typically under the argument of protecting "the essence" of GT. See livery editors, engine swaps, and this; rewind. I'd love to see all those features in GT6. The more options and features the game has the more engrossing the experience of playing the game will be.



Perhaps it's more about the other end of the spectrum, about appeasing the older generation. The ones that have 40+ hour work weeks in addition to other responsibilities, and don't really want to practice the entire Nurburgring when they really only feel uncomfortable with the bits between Hohe Acht and the main straight.
Exactly. Some of us are getting older and have other things to do such as working, having sex with our girlfriends/wives, exercising, reading, playing instruments, ect.. the world simply demands more of my time then it did when I was younger.





Excellent post 👍thank you!

Great post, Prototyp3.

It's the whole thing where some people are so concerned and almost want to police how others might play the game that totally baffles me. It makes no sense. Especially so when it can't be used online, so those against its inclusion can never come in to contact with it.

That right there hits the nail on the head, some players want to Police how other players play the game. Very authoritarian and strange to me. Don't elect those kind of people to office!

I find it difficult to understand how someone can be opposed to rewind during free runs or practice laps... Has that person has ever taken any license test more than once?

^ This is something I wanted to touch on again. I think rewind should be included in a practice or free lap setting but not in race events like A-spec for example. This would require that people still "honestly" win the single player events but still allow them to go to practice mode and use rewind to practice those trouble corners and other areas of the track.

 

[Jav]

This is the lamest of all lame features in any game!

 

[BJBEOSmitty]

Anyone that replies in this thread hating on the rewind button that has ever used the pause button or restarted a race, is a hypocrite. Period.

Post of the day.... Because every single poster in this thread has paused the game at some point. Guaranteed... Or I will eat the iPhone I'm posting this with.

 

[TokoTurismo]

Anyone that replies in this thread hating on the rewind button that has ever used the pause button or restarted a race, is a hypocrite. Period.

This. Talk about pure shut down. I like it. I dare to see those who're disliking the rewind feature, pause the game for breaks or even restarting in a endurance race, WHICH in fact you CAN'T do in real life. Hahaha.

 

[avens]

In real life drivers don't do 24h straight and do pee while driving.

 

[Prototyp3]

Wait, I have to change the channel on my television. Excuse me while I walk up to it and press the buttons. Remotes are for impatient teenagers.

Golden.

In real life drivers don't do 24h straight and do pee while driving.

But GT is a game... not real life.

BREAKING NEWS:
!! Pre-orders of GT6 come w/ a catheter for endurance races and the PS4 can measure vital signals and fluid loss. If you don't piss yourself during an endurance race at least once the game w/ disqualify you for cheating!


All joking aside, the game is meant to simulate driving/racing. A simulator will never be as good as the real thing. Furthermore, simulators, by their very nature allow for us to test things that we otherwise couldn't or things that would be extremely prohibitive to repeatedly test in real life.

For instance, testing airflow and the aerodynamic capabilities of a car. In real life most of this is done purely through computers and mathematical models. It would be insanity to build a car and re-manufacture its shape every time you went to test it. They could easily add this to a GT game. Thus cutting down on us having to race over and over to see if the downforce we applied in a menu is working the way we intended. We could instead just run a simulation of it within the game (a simulation running inside another simulation! talk about going meta).

the rewind feature is exact same concept. It'd be like running a simulation of a particular event on a particular track over and over w/ different variables. Since it can only be used in a single player setting this would be the real world counterpart to prepping for a race. Once race day comes however (in GT this would mean an online race or event where the feature is disabled like time trial for instance) it's all on the driver to show their skills -- the very skills they've honed using all the tools available to them, whatever those may be.

Finally, from just a logical standpoint, I'm failing to see any real conclusive arguments from the side that doesn't want the feature in the game. It's been either blanket statements or simply flat assertions that don't stand up in the realm of debate. Also, there have been many straight anecdotal assertions of how something "feels". Feelings are not arguments. Claiming that a certain feature would change the way the game "feels" is highly subjective at best, since you are only taking your own perspective into account.

If there is a good argument, i.e. both valid and sound, as to why such a feature (and others as mentioned a livery editor, engine swapping,ect) shouldn't be included in future games, I've yet to see it.

 

[Samus]

It just seems to me that a large number of GT fans are very stubborn in their ways and don't want to accept big changes, especially not ones that are also in Forza, that's the golden level of sacrilege it seems.

 

[Exorcet]

That's where you learn from your mistakes. We all do it when driving. If for example I think I can take a corner full throttle but in reality you need to lift off for a while to make it around the corner, then when I end up going off track or into the wall, I know not to do that again if I want to win future races.

Then what's wrong with rewind? Smashing into the wall, rewinding, and then learning from your mistake will make you a better driver, and it will do it faster than waiting for the next race.

In real life drivers don't do 24h straight and do pee while driving.

GT5 would have you believe other wise given race saves weren't implemented until people complained. And then, other people complained that you couldn't save during a race in real life and that race saves were for arcade games. Even if they were right, adding race saves shouldn't have mattered to them in the slightest, as they could simply not use the feature.

Rewind is pretty much the same.

 

[Samus]

There is a theme, isn't there? It's like the thread in the GT5 section about all cars being available in arcade mode, people comment that they don't want it because "that isn't what GT is about".

People just don't seem to want change, even when it's optional.

 

[Prototyp3]

There is a theme, isn't there? It's like the thread in the GT5 section about all cars being available in arcade mode, people comment that they don't want it because "that isn't what GT is about".

People just don't seem to want change, even when it's optional.

Ya, I've noticed that too. Optional being the key word. As in, a player would never, ever, have to use said feature.

None of the features mentioned would be forced on anyone. It seems as if the people against them don't want others to have access to them, since supposedly, they wouldn't be using the features themselves.

 

[Samus]

It's like they're trying to protect the brand (Or rather what they personally think the brand is) when they have nothing to do with it.

I also don't see the same people slamming PD when they do add new features such as paint chips, something like that is what GT is all about apparently even when it goes directly against their other idea that GT is a realistic simulator.

 

[ZohsixGT5]

This argument reminds me of the Great Battle over the endurance race suspend/save.

 

[Yauma9]

For me, the problem isn't the rewind, if it ever gets added, the problem is: How would it work?

 

[another_jakhole]

Still, SimonK, that's not what GT's all about.

This argument reminds me of the Great Battle over the endurance race suspend/save.

I've never done an endurance race. There should be a suspend race feature.

Perhaps it's more about the other end of the spectrum, about appeasing the older generation. The ones that have 40+ hour work weeks in addition to other responsibilities, and don't really want to practice the entire Nurburgring when they really only feel uncomfortable with the bits between Hohe Acht and the main straight.

Ooh yea, that's a very good point. To be clear, from a personal standpoint (like with not liking all cars being unlocked in Arcade) I wouldn't want to use the rewind feature. If it were there, I'd be inclined to use it like I did with FM3. For the greater good, let's add it. Same goes for all cars being unlocked from the beginning.

 

[another_jakhole]

double post :/

For me, the problem isn't the rewind, if it ever gets added, the problem is: How would it work?

If implemented, I'd like a Save Checkpoint type feature too. It'll be useful when the time presents itself. Hate a specific part of a track? Skip it by setting a checkpoint after it.


Toronado, I get what you're saying, but a rewind feature is completely different. You don't have to install tuning parts yourself. Say that's how a racing game somehow is like. Adding a quick install option would be "better". Or, adding a quick tune feature in racing games like it is already in some places. That isn't LAAAAAZY like how I intended gameplay rewind to sound like.

 

[Spagetti69]

This argument reminds me of the Great Battle over the endurance race suspend/save.

Great thread that one. Hmm needs one on this side.

 

[Exorcet]

If it were there, I'd be inclined to use it like I did with FM3.

Despite not liking it? Seems kind of strange. What's keeping the temptation to ask for it to be included at bay?

Toronado, I get what you're saying, but a rewind feature is completely different. You don't have to install tuning parts yourself.

It wasn't about installing parts, but what you had to do to install parts. Instead of just adding them to the car from where ever, you had to go to a tuning shop.

 

[Samus]

So far then the only arguments against it are hypocritical or because people don't like it but would have no self control and end up using it, so they'd rather PD didn't add the temptation.

 

[C_Raccoon23]

So far then the only arguments against it are hypocritical or because people don't like it but would have no self control and end up using it, so they'd rather PD didn't add the temptation.

The second one just baffles me.

"I can't resist using a feature in a way that would make the game significantly easier, so it's best if PD not put it in and make other people miss out, because of my lack of self-control."

Yeah, that's really fair...

 

[1241Penguin]

I think a compromise would be that for the rewind feature to be implemented, but instead of being rewarded for not using it, you lose rewards for using it.