Sound Off! What Will it Take to Impress Arcade Racers about Gran Turismo?

[JohnBM01]

Ah, the question I never thought I'd ask. GTPlanet, I learn from inspiration, so I post with inspiration. If you thought G-Phoria was a joke, some of you may have seen the very first award up for grabs- Best Racing Game. The contenders were "Burnout 3: Takedown," "Gran Turismo 4," "WipeOut Pure," "Ridge Racer," and "Rallisport Challenge 2." The winner? Burnout 3: Takedown. This got me wondering. Is it in any way possible that arcade racing fans will love Gran Turismo games in much the same way people like the crashfests in "Burnout 3: Takedown?" I am very sure that there won't be overhyping of crashing and damaging, not to mention an emphasis on taking out your opposition. As I normally ask, is Gran Turismo unsatisfactory in the realm of racing games? Are there people who don't really care about simulation racing, proper driving techniques, or realism? I'll even play a Ridge Racer or a WipeOut game, but I am highly convinced about Gran Turismo. I don't mind realism or simulation, so I'm not complaining. Folks, this topic is in no way related to any news topic on the next GT. Instead, it is public opinion. Or as I do things, sounding off.

I've initiated the discussion, so I'll draw first blood.

I don't consider myself boring for not playing something like Burnout 3 or anything. I have my interests, and I don't feel like Gran Turismo is getting boring. I don't think I've been down the same road before (no pun intended) playing this series of games over and over again. I'm not as critical as "X-Play," "Judgment Day," or any such- show that's super-critical about games to the point of fault-finding. Even Adam Sessler (X-Play) said about GT4, "...it's easily the most deep and thorough racing game on the market." I can understand why you'd want to play an arcade racer and prefer it over Gran Turismo games. No worries over accurate handling or certain physics. My thing is, this kind of lets you know what realistic-type handling is like. Another thing I discussed with someone once is, how many arcade racing fans will actually grow into liking real racing? Do they understand actual car control... or, even care about actual car control?

Your turn. SOUND OFF!

 

[Jedi2016]

I've often wondered about this myself. I can't understand people who don't like sim racers, but love arcade racers.

For me, the big difference is in the feel of the game. With Burnout, I feel like I'm playing a video game. With GT, I feel like I'm driving a car. Which gives me more satisfaction... I mean, you know how it is... you shave that half a second off your laptime at Motegi and you're so giddy you want to crack a beer to celebrate.

I've heard the complaint that sim racers are "too hard". Which I find somewhat odd.. I mean, you just drive the way you'd drive a real car, and you're fine. It's worked for me ever since GT1.

Bear in mind that I like arcade racers, myself. I have Burnout 3, and I'm seriously eyeballing Burnout 4. And right now, I've got NFS:HP2 in my PS2. That one's not quite so "arcadey" as some, but it's no sim. But none of those games gives me the overall satisfaction of GT.

But going back to the original question.. how do you get arcadey fans to like sim racers... Tricky one, that. I think it would be easier if the person in question owned a car that was in GT4. Then, you could tempt them with the opportunity to drive their own car 'round the 'Ring. Other than that, I really don't know. I've never had any friends that didn't like GT. Hell, my friend's wife spent over an hour and a half doing lap after lap on the 'Ring (with DFP), trying to shave her time down (I was teasing her about not getting 'round in ten minutes (small hatchback, as I recall), so she was determined to prove me wrong).

 

[McLaren]

Not unless they can figure that you either
1) Die doing that
2) GT isn't about going 200Mph smashing into things and that purposely blowing yourself up will get you no where in GT.

 

[niky]

I kind of enjoyed Burnout 3, but as to whether it was better than GT4? Don't make me laugh. It's a great diversion for a week or two, but afterwards, that's it.

NFS makes some of the best "arcade" games around, and though I loathe to admit it, I finished NFSU:2 twice, just for the thrill of it. Now that's a replayable title, because unlike burnout, there's a lot to keep you coming back, and a very beautifully detailed full-roam environment to pass the idle time away with if you don't feel like playing.

It's sad that violence and carnage seems to have permeated even the racing game market, what with games like GTA and Burnout making tremendous sales off of crashes and roadkill. But modern gamers have short attention spans and a zillion products to choose from, and to really penetrate the market, new games have to have this kind of edge, sad as it may seem.

GT survives in this industry because it attracts the non-gamer. People who've never picked up a joystick in their life enjoy GT for what it is, a driving-sim. The young race-car drivers just love it. The older ones get a tickle. If you took a survey of people who play GT, you'd find a lot of 30-40 year olds in there. If it turns off arcaders in the process of attracting drivers, tough.

I think GT could attract these kids by providing what NFSU2 did, total immersion. That's the one thing missing from GT1 through GT4. NFSU2's detailed environment drew me into the game for a long time, even more so than any other NFS title. I know kids love it, and if GT5 were to come with a free-roam feature, and (better yet) have events location-based in this free-roam environment (and with this on the net, it would kick ass), I think even the jaded gamers would give it a go. Aimless roaming is so generation X-Box, it's bound to be a hit.

 

[madmax 2006]

I think it's *the way your car looks*. If I could customize the way my car looked, I would be SO much more into this game. That's why I play NFSU2 (sometimes, just not very often). Looking at the same old cars everyday is boring (I already have to do that everyday in real life, lol)

 

[JohnBM01]

Nice answers from what I've seen. I usually press the issue as to what would really help arcade-type racers get into Gran Turismo games. The obvious response would be that Gran Turismo and your favorite arcadish racing game are just that- racing games. GT and most other racing games have the clichéd "Point 'A' to Point 'B'" goal intact. You're just dealing with a different environment. I normally ask if arcade-type racing fans will actually learn to appreciate automobiles, motorsports, and what it REALLY takes to win races. You wouldn't press a special button to activate super tires, turbo boosts, or whatever in real life, so should you expect such things in a game like Gran Turismo? Of course not.

In terms of talking about that Gran Turismo games are hard, what would be the basis of your argument? Is it that you can't simply go flat out around a course with little or no braking? This is probably one reason why arcade-type gaming exists. It exists because people want flat-out, no holds barred racing. You don't get that by racing competitively in real life. Does that make a Gran Turismo game not very fun because of this? I wouldn't say so. It just means that you go from arcade to realistic. Time and time again, the "Real Driving Simulator" has been debated endlessly since I've joined GTPlanet. I think what GT games have managed to do is make simulation racing fun and easily accessible to motorsports fans and automotive enthusiasts alike. Maybe it is just my reasoning, but I'm not trying to say that only so few will APPREACIATE what this game is about, because that is something the gamer him or her self has to come to.

Gran Turismo is about racing, but it is also about automobiles because the automobiles are real and pretty much accessible to anyone on any level. There are no completely fantasy cars. This reason alone should warrant any arcade gamer to get into a game like this. I know "OutRun 2" is Ferrari heaven, but what about people who can't afford sports cars, much less 6-figure priced cars? I am not trying to be hypocrtical or try to brag, but some of the reasons people hate the game series are for the same reasons many of us love the series. Carry on.

 

[madmax 2006]

I think 1 of my top 3 reasons for loving the GT series is the fact that you can push the car to extreme limits, without crossing *the line* if you know what I mean. In NFSU2, you can drive through *alot* of races without even touching the break, and it's too easy, not in GT.

JohnBM01-I don't know why, but the way you explain everything, rocks, lol, you must be very intellegent, =)

 

[JohnBM01]

I normally just take my time and try to come up with responses. There's no limit to how much I can type, think about, or mention. All I do is just take my time. On top of that, I normally like to post from passion and inspiration. I know what I'm talking about in a general issue deal like this one here. I've played Gran Turismo for at least 5 years, and I don't plan on stopping unless I'm convinced about some other game. Other than that, thanks for the compliment.

That's the way I normally like to think half the time about something like this. The answer is obvious, but if you're into performance and speed, would you rather have an automobile dreamt up by a bunch of 3D modellers during a lunch break that isn't a real automobile in real life, or would you want a car with believable performance and can actually be bought even if you don't have the money? Usually, this is the argument some people who love sportscar racing kind of discuss. Some people will say that people who are into stuff like the American Le Mans Series, the 24 Hours of Le Mans, and all are basically people rich enough to actually afford these cars. If you ask me, that is COMPLETELY untrue. Want proof? Me. I don't even have a driver's license though I'm currently 22. When I see the Chevrolet C6 and Porsche 911s in sportscar racing, I know they are actually based on real cars that can be bought off the lot. Does that mean I'd want one? Probably not, but at least I know that most of GT race cars have commercial versions available to the public. To me, that is something most arcade-type racing games cannot give the gamer. I don't care what game it is, most of them have either completely fictional cars, or real cars with completely unrealistic handling. Gran Turismo has cars down very well with realistic handling. At least you know what you're getting if you can't have its real-life variant in your garage.

Henceforth, there is perhaps the biggest plus to Gran Turismo (and Forza too)- both are quite believable with the cars in the game. I think that's something almost ANY racing fan has to appreciate, the fact that the cars are believable and real ranging from Kei cars to 6-figure supercars. Why play a game with cars based on or resemble real life cars, when you can have the actual car with realistic handling and realistic driving physics? That's one big reason I'd throw out on this issue.

 

[Mad Murphy NZ]

I would really like a decent arcade mode in GT5, for multiplayer etc. What's on offer now (and in the other GT's) is pretty crap. I'd like to have to player with AI opponents too. Being able to pick racing tyres in GT5 on road cars would be nice too. Plus I want to be able to race modded cars in 2 player. I don't think GT needs to appeal to arcade players anyway, they're looking for action rather than racing simulation and I just don't think GT can or should deliver that. The only arcade racing series I have any time for is Wipeout (except for fusion).

 

[arsenal]

I think there is a slight problem in Gran Turismo's strategy for appealing to arcade players. They think that because they have an arcade mode, the games are easy for novices to pick up and play, but I think the arcade mode doesn't work well in this way because the arcade mode is still too much of simulation to work for this purpose, even though I love it. A lot of people just want a racing game where they can go really fast without worrying about crashing into walls on every turn, and I'm one of them which is why I bought Burnout 3 about two months ago. The game is an absolute blast, in my opinion, but simply cannot compare to the far superior GT4. The reason I enjoy Burnout 3 so much is because I can go really fast and crash into stuff, two things that this game delivers by the buttload. However, I can't even think of all the reasons of why I love GT4, but the main reason is that in this game I can drive cars that are based on real ones, and I know that in the game they perform very much like they do just in real life.

It is obvious to anyone that has played GT4 that the developers have put A LOT of work into the game, which gives it way more depth than an arcade racer. Like I said before, I bought Burnout 3 about two months ago, and I bought GT4 back in February. I went through Burnout 3 fairly quickly, and now it spends about 5% of the time in my PS2 as GT4 does, even though I really liked Burnout 3.

In the end I think that Gran Turismo doesn't need to appeal to arcade drivers, or especially G4, because Gran Turismo is one of the best selling video game franchises ever. I believe Sony and PD took the right path by choosing to make deeper racing simulations that can appeal to people who have never played video games before. As far as a good arcade mode for Gran Turismo, I recently broke out my old GT1, and found the physics to be very arcade-like, at least compared to GT4. It is still very fun to play, though, when all you have to do to drift is turn sharply. Maybe PD could throw in a "GT1 Mode" in GT5 for nostalgia's sake.

 

[Dave A]

Funnily enough I feel like I'm playing a game when I play GT or Burnout, I like both. Burnout 3 was more fun but short lived like all the Burnout games. GT is not as much fun but more involving. I think the majority of gamers will not choose one type of game and onloy ever play that. I prefer realistic racers in general but an arcade racer such as Burnout 3 can often provide more fun. Gran Turismo isn't a true, true sim anyway, it has always on driver aids. You can't put power down hard, you can't lock the brakes as much as you can in real life either, ther cars have too much grip in general as well. It's a very good game but it's not what it claims to be.

 

[Encyclopedia]

To me, GT is a arcade-sim. It's not nearly as realistic as i want it to be. And that's why arcaders can enjoy it while still having to work a bit to master it.

I agree with what Jedi2016 said, I can't understand how one can't like sim-racers. To me the challenge makes the game so much worthwhile and satisfying. But that's just me, or should I say us.

So, I think that if PD keep their formula for the next one, arcade-gamers will find something to enjoy. To impress them however, might take something special. Like a "turbo" mode or something with unrealistic speed and formula one handling. Maybe also some spectacular damage-modeling.

 

[gt_masta]

I love GT because I can go around the ring and try almost always different cars on N tires to give me the realism that I want. And When I take a new car It feels completly different and feels like a new fresh game.
In NFSU:2 I love to customize ( not rice ) my car in the beginning but, when I finished it I tried every other car... and well they felt the same, so it was not fun at all.I wanted a different feeling, but didn't get it. So I got bored and never rented it again.
I still play gt4 and I'll have a dfp soon to push the feeling even further. And I think that why arcade gamers don't like gt is because it feels to difficult for them and they can't get to race without crashing but they need to put dedication in gt games not in arcade-racer

 

[futuredrifter]

When i got my first playstation console my mom chose GT1 to go with for my christmas gift. I opened the pakage, looked at the cover and jumped around for joy, knowing i finnaly got the best driving simulator at the time. I prefer the gt series to other games because, it brings u to more real-life situations. Burnout is nice when u want to let of some steam and NFU is cool when u want to feel like a street tuner rolling around looking for races. But no-matter what i still come back to play GT4. Something about playing Gt4 gets me going and i dont know why, the game may have its glitches but nothing is fully perfect. There are just some people out there that dont have real life racing in there blood and dont appreciate it, they just want to crash and watch their car go up into bits and pieces, and thats not what (i think) true racing is about.
In the end to us here at gtplanet the GT series is the best and will always be the best. Does anybody disagree with that?


FUTUREDRIFTER

 

[Dave A]

GT is a very good game, it's realistic but it's not nearly as realistic as other games out there. It's too compromised, GTR on the hand, I know I keep raving on about this game but I haven't found any racer better so far. Infact I'm off to have a race in a bit then I'm gonna watch From Russia with love.

 

[futuredrifter]

GT is a very good game, it's realistic but it's not nearly as realistic as other games out there. It's too compromised, GTR on the hand, I know I keep raving on about this game but I haven't found any racer better so far. Infact I'm off to have a race in a bit then I'm gonna watch From Russia with love.

Sorry but im really bad sometimes when it comes to abbreviations but .....um....wat is GTR.


Back to topic what other other games are more real than Gt, cause i would like to kno, but when it comes to rally the best one i have found and love is rallisportchallenge 2, my god that game is so awsome, not to mention the great engine and environment sounds.

F.D.

 

[Encyclopedia]

Futuredrifter, GTR is a PC race-sim made by Simbin. Much, much more realistic than Gran Turismo in terms of both handling and sound. Check it out and download the demo. Great fun!

Live4speed, I concur! 👍

 

[Danny]

When i got my first playstation console my mom chose GT1 to go with for my christmas gift. I opened the pakage, looked at the cover and jumped around for joy, knowing i finnaly got the best driving simulator at the time. I prefer the gt series to other games because, it brings u to more real-life situations. Burnout is nice when u want to let of some steam and NFU is cool when u want to feel like a street tuner rolling around looking for races. But no-matter what i still come back to play GT4. Something about playing Gt4 gets me going and i dont know why, the game may have its glitches but nothing is fully perfect. There are just some people out there that dont have real life racing in there blood and dont appreciate it, they just want to crash and watch their car go up into bits and pieces, and thats not what (i think) true racing is about.
In the end to us here at gtplanet the GT series is the best and will always be the best. Does anybody disagree with that?


FUTUREDRIFTER

futuredrifter, you have a cool mom.

 

[vtec_guy]

I think it just depends on the type of player, I love GT games and I dont play anything else other than driving sims. I mainly do it because I cant drive yet and I want to get as close to real racing as is technically possible without driving a real race car. People that dont like sims I think tend to be people that are just interested in gaming in general. Someone my friend knows plays GTA San Andreas and Timesplitters and all that stuff and he bought GT4 expecting it to be a typical racing GAME but was really dissapointed with it. IMO racing sims are the best form of computerised racing but I dont think there is one that is generally better than the other, I suppose it's just all down to personal preference, or ambition as the case often may be with racing sims...

 

[JohnBM01]

Would most of you say that finding the middle ground between arcade and sim is impossible to reach with gamers?

To me, the Gran Turismo series is a sim, but for those not too skillful, there are the driver aids you can use. In GT2, you actually had to pay 50K Cr for TCS and ASM. Since GT3, those handicaps are available for all cars. Contrary to popular belief, you can turn them off by toning down the seperate settings to zero. If you need to use the aids again, just tone them back up. This is more like "there when you need it," like a good friend or your best friend. I don't think a game should be boring because you're not racing flat-out all the time. I played the Nintendo 64 game "F1 World Championship." In this game, racing Monaco, Monza, Magny-Cours, Albert Park, or whatever, were all fun because you had competitive racing. You are already racing 1997-spec race cars in this 1998 game. This was before Michael Schumacher completely dominated well after his first title with (then) Benetton. The game was a sim, but if you choose, you can select racing without damage, with conditions ranging from hot to heavy rain, and all that.

To me, I think PD is kind of doing all it can to make their racing juggernaut appeal to as many styles as possible. Depending on your racing skill, driving skill, and devotion to being better than before, it shouldn't be too hard to acclimate yourself to a game like a Gran Turismo game. I think one person played GT4 and cried to his mom about the game being too hard. You just have to fight for every race. Even if you're going to land a blowout against the competition, you still need to perform as best as you can. Remember, if you can win arcade-style racing competition, all you'll have to do is apply those skills to sim-type racing, and give it your very best. If it makes you feel any better, "you have nothing to fear, but fear itself." If you can dig that, keep the discussion going.

 

[luftrofl]

If they've tried Gran Turismo and don't like it, but prefer their arcade racing, then they'll never be convinced, eas as that.

 

[Shadow Fox]

In advance, sorry for this poorly conceived and written response.

From reading the previous posts in this thread I couldn't help but think of another genre where simulation and arcade style games exist. The sports genre also has its arcade-style games (NBA Street, NBA Ballers [this one is kinda different IMO], NFL Street etc..) and simulation style games (EA Sports' Madden and Live series and the Sega 2k series). Take NBA Street and ESPN NBA 2k5 for example. When you compare the two side by side, it's easy to tell the differences between the two. As you play the two games, it's also easy to tell that the method of playing would be different for each of them. In NBA Street, to score would require a lot of jukes, fakes, and jumping to heights that aren't physically possible but are really entertaining to look at. In ESPN NBA 2k5, the player would probably do a plays like pick and rolls to get a better shot at the basket. Originally I wanted to compare NFL Street and ESPN NFL 2k5. The reason for this is that basketball sims as of now aren't even close to the depth and realism that their football counterparts possess. However, I have never played NFL Street so I couldn't use it in comparison. I mentioned NBA Ballers in the arcade list as sort of an odd-ball. It's different from the Street series in that you won't see the players jump twice as high as the rim. When using players like Kobe Bryant and Tracy McGrady, the moves and dunks they pull off are similar to the ones they perform in real-life. However, you will also see 7 footers such as Shaquille O'Neal and Yao Ming perform 360 dunks and And 1 style dribbling. This is a 1 on 1 basketball game and certain aspects about it make it feel realistic. However, the arcade style of it still dominates more than 70% of the game so it still should be considered an arcade sports game.

Sorry for that long rant but I kinda wanted to mention that. Anyway back to racers. To be honest, with the exception of the Gran Turismo series and Sega GT, I've never played any other type of simulation racer. So throughout this paragraph I'm going to refer to GT as the image of the simulation racers. As for arcade racers there is a larger style of variety. There are the car racers like Ridge Racer, Burnout, and NFSU. There are the futuristic racers such as Wipeout and F-Zero. Then there are the kart (sp?) racers like Mario Kart. For my purposes I'm going to use NFSU since that's the only arcade car racer I've actually played (unless you count the SNES Top Gear and Genesis Out Run in this topic). The driving methods that I use for GT and NFSU are totally different. In NFSU I typically powerslide into the majority of the tighter corners and just NOS my way out. In Gran Turismo, I use the slow in fast out approach as much as possible. The feel of both games are not really similar to each other at all. I just don't think it's possible to create an "arcade" style gameplay in a game that is meant to be "a driving simulator."

However, I think it's still possible to appeal to the arcade racers, the NFSU ones anyway. Both NFSU and Gran Turismo use licensed cars in their games. The use of licensed cars are what appeals to a lot of people when they play NFSU. Gran Turismo would be pointless without licensed cars in the first place. In GT5 a tuner aspect might work to entice non GT players to try the game some more. I'm not saying that there should be 20' spinning chrome rims on a car. The tuner aspect would put the player into the same shoes as tuners such as Amuse, Spoon, and Mine's. They could install body-kits, add custom paint-jobs, as well as tune all the technical aspects of the cars. I remember in Gran Turismo 2 that some of the maker races featured cars with the racing modification. This is what the tuner aspect would be, a more indepth version of the racing mod (well, the racing mod in GT2 was basically, pay 80,000 credits to mod your car with a preset paint job.) Due to the vast amount of cars in the Gran Turismo series, I'm pretty sure that players that liked customizing their cars in NFSU would like to see this in GT. It'll also be interesting to race your custom Supra against the Woodone Tom's Supra.

 

[futuredrifter]

In GT5 a tuner aspect might work to entice non GT players to try the game some more. I'm not saying that there should be 20' spinning chrome rims on a car. The tuner aspect would put the player into the same shoes as tuners such as Amuse, Spoon, and Mine's. They could install body-kits, add custom paint-jobs, as well as tune all the technical aspects of the cars. I remember in Gran Turismo 2 that some of the maker races featured cars with the racing modification. This is what the tuner aspect would be, a more indepth version of the racing mod (well, the racing mod in GT2 was basically, pay 80,000 credits to mod your car with a preset paint job.) Due to the vast amount of cars in the Gran Turismo series, I'm pretty sure that players that liked customizing their cars in NFSU would like to see this in GT. It'll also be interesting to race your custom Supra against the Woodone Tom's Supra.

I see your point, its true, not being able to custumize is kinda dissapointing, i guess because the of the growth in the tuner scene, games like NFU2 catch their eyes, maybe if Gt5 was to bring a more tuner feel to it, then PD might be able to pull in some of those arcade racers.

FUTUREDRIFTER

 

[vtec_guy]

This thought has just occured to me, why does GT5 need to impress arcade racers?

 

[arsenal]

This thought has just occured to me, why does GT5 need to impress arcade racers?

I agree that GT5 doesn't really need to impress arcade racers. I think I said something in my post about how well the series is doing already, and I think that simulation racers are probably a better target audience because I think they are more likely to follow the GT series more faithfully, while arcade racers are more likely to rent any given racing game and maybe not care about a sequel.

 

[futuredrifter]

This thought has just occured to me, why does GT5 need to impress arcade racers?

To think of it, u have a point, there r so many of us that appreciate GT for wat it is already.

 

[niky]

This thought has just occured to me, why does GT5 need to impress arcade racers?

Well, that's a whole different kettle of fish...

You could say the same thing about Ferrari... why do they need to impress gamers? Their target demographic and customers are all 40-50 year old rich businessmen, so why try to appeal to the MTV crowd? But they NEED to.

Cadillac realized this only after the fact, but appealing to kids is good. Appeal to the youth market generates sales. Caddy was lucky that rappers and ballers picked up on their products, making the "old-school" luxury Escalade "hip". Other "luxury" brands, like Lincoln, learned from this... youth appeal = $$$. Plus, it guarantees that your target market stays young... it doesn't just grow old and die, leaving you hanging (re: Oldsmobile, the Camaro, etc... get my drift?)

Take the Camaro. Wonderful car, really fast, really cheap. So why are kids on a speed trip going for Hondas? It's because Chevrolet has let its demographic grow too old. They focused too much on pleasing their core customers, they forgot the fact that those core customers would not always be there. Many of you may disagree, but that's the primary reason musclecars died out.

The reinvigoration of the muscle market (if it ever takes off) depends on impressing the kids. That hinges on the new designs (Mustang -yes, GTO and Charger, sadly, no) and technology (even though some of it is borrowed) to keep the kids interested.

GT4 appeals to the enthusiast, yes... but most of that market is mid-twenty to thirty-something to fifty-something. Yes, I know some of you guys online are 16-21, but that's exactly why you're online, because most of us OGs (Old Guys) don't even know how to use e-mail. If you build a racing sim that's so hardcore that only previous customers and real racing drivers can drive it, you're alienating the pick-up and play crowd.

That pick-up and play crowd will someday grow up into 30 year old enthusiasts, who will someday actually WANT a hardcore racer, but will remember HOW HARD GT was and be somewhat turned off by it.

That's why GT needs to broaden its appeal... not just for short term economic reasons, but to ensure that there will be a future crowd of hard-core racers who will embrace GT5, GT6, GTX, etc... with open arms.

 

[madmax 2006]

Take the Camaro. Wonderful car, really fast, really cheap. So why are kids on a speed trip going for Hondas? It's because Chevrolet has let its demographic grow too old. They focused too much on pleasing their core customers, they forgot the fact that those core customers would not always be there. Many of you may disagree, but that's the primary reason musclecars died out.


That's why GT needs to broaden its appeal... not just for short term economic reasons, but to ensure that there will be a future crowd of hard-core racers who will embrace GT5, GT6, GTX, etc... with open arms.

you picked my favorite car, '69 camaro =)
although I have a truck that's a beast...I want that '69!!
I love having 100% american muscle racing the ricers around here, lol, although they aren't any competition whatsoever

you're right, most of the people my age (16-21), i'm 17, drive ricers, don't even know what GT is! It's pathetic, how can you even appreciate a car, when you don't even know the history of cars...wait, they don't appreciate crap! I built my truck, their parents bought them their "ricer" and drive it like it's nothing, when you work for it, you're more appreciative.
I have absolutely no English skills and I'm probably going off topic not knowing what to say.....O well..

 

[niky]

That's another thing. They don't appreciate something you have to work for. And for some, GT4 is too much work, even if it is much better than the arcade racers, it's too much work for them to get to the meat of the game.

Rice isn't the problem, though... it's also hard work to modify Japanese cars. But the perception of imports as rice comes mostly from the number of kids who give them a bad name. There are some hardcore import racers, but they HAVE THE ADVANTAGE of a big youth market and industry supporting them, whereas the domestic crowd is getting older and older. Muscle is nice, but with old muscle so cheap, and most muscle owners so old, sales of NEW muscle aren't so good. New imports are cheap. You can get a four-banger for very little... upgrade it for power... upgrade some more... then some more. There are levels of involvement in the import scene, from the BLATANTLY superficial to the SERIOUS RACER/MODIFIER.

With Muscle, it's the same, but on a much smaller scale, as since American cars don't attract the BLATANTLY superficial crowd as much as imports, the pyramid going up to the hardcore enthusiast is (relatively) small... and getting smaller. I remember one motoring journalist writing that his kids don't seem to appreciate the new Corvette as much as he does, but go "gaga" over his RX-7. It's those people muscle needs to attract!

Same with GT. GT's advantage is that it appeals primarily to the import crowd... but how long will that last? What with NFSU and its clones catering very specifically to that crowd, GT is seen as more of an Old Guy's Game.

Ten years down the road, we'll be awash with One-Hit Wonder racers, and we'll be at Gran Turismo Five or Six. If Sony gets it right, just adds a little more bling, and adds the online play element so pick-up-and-play racers would be tempted in, then more of those arcaders would become interested, and some may actually stay for the long haul.

 

[JohnBM01]

I usually say "account for everyone." As far as accounting for everyone goes, I think of it as if arcade racers wanted to know what the Gran Turismo experience is like, you want to be able to have an arcade-type racer be able to enjoy the GT experience as much as one would enjoy "Need for Speed: Underground," a Ridge Racer game, a Wipeout game, or even the Burnout series.

The premise of all this is to ask how it can be possible for arcade gamers to not feel like Gran Turismo is too hard or not as exciting as their favorite arcade racer. To "Shadow_Fox's" holla' back (or just "reply." Just wanted to try something new), he brings up a nice point. From the fiasco-licious G-Phoria last week, there was an award for Best Traditional Sports Game. Madden NFL '05 won the award. To me, I think that many people think racing games are all the same, so they are all categorized the same. Tackling curves in Gran Turismo is no different from tackling curves in Project Gotham or NFS. That isn't true, right? Well guess what? It ISN'T true! Many people just don't see driving games as a sport. So Gran Turismo and Burnout 3 are in the same category. And who does America pick over 4 over in "Best Racing Game?" Burnout 3: Takedown. I'll tell you this. If there was "Gran Turismo 4" and "Forza Motorsport" were part of "Best Simulation Racing Game," then things would be better in terms of what racing game is actually good, as opposed to what PRETENDS is the best.

I know what I'm talking about when I say "attracting arcade racers into GT," or at least having respect for Gran Turismo. Arcade racers will normally dismiss Gran Turismo games, saying it's too hard and too impossible to win races. Some would even say that races are no fun for sliding around, getting super tires, turbos and shortcuts, and all that. So what will it take for arcade gamers to love, or at least respect Gran Turismo better?