Standard cars ARE in GT6. (100% confirmed)

[Terronium-12]

All I see is whiners, PD has supported this game more than any other dev has supported a non P2P game... grow up guys..

So?

 

[TheeFrogmanlego]

You see it's this attitude that makes what could have been just a good game, a great game. It's like saying she's pretty but deep down you know you don't have enough beer to back up that claim. It's like having sex with a porn star and knowing damn well She's your sister.

I don't get the last part but I have been pretty critical of this game my self but man the amount of complaining has gone beyond the flaws , you have to at least give PD credit about them actuary acknowledging the problem's and attempting to fix them. I can tell most people here only play granturismo and don't know how lucky they are. 90% of devs out there could give a rats ass Pd abit launching a flawed game TRIED to fix it.. I cant comment on there blatant lazyness because I know funds aren't a problem but man just quit whining already , they are obviously listening and trying , people are starting to nit pick stupid things for the sake of nitpicking 👎

 

[PepeMickey]

When you are a AAA franchise with many years of experience and a very large fan base, "trying" isn't good enough.

 

[Downhill Dino]

The more popular something is, the tendency for negative feedback increases. Then intensifies if there's a slip-up. If one would consider it a slip-up in this case. Despite general nit-picking, you just have to ignore and move on.

 

[C_Raccoon23]

I don't get the last part but I have been pretty critical of this game my self but man the amount of complaining has gone beyond the flaws , you have to at least give PD credit about them actuary acknowledging the problem's and attempting to fix them. I can tell most people here only play granturismo and don't know how lucky they are. 90% of devs out there could give a rats ass Pd abit launching a flawed game TRIED to fix it.. I cant comment on there blatant lazyness because I know funds aren't a problem but man just quit whining already , they are obviously listening and trying , people are starting to nit pick stupid things for the sake of nitpicking 👎

Can you give an example of this nit-picking instead of coming in here and basically telling people to shut up? If there's one thing I don't understand, is people coming into threads like this and vaguely telling them to quit whining, when there are all sorts of issues. You're supposedly telling everyone complaining to just shut it, even when there are perfectly legitimate things to complain about. There are still a boat load of things we don't know are fixed yet, so until PD let's us know what is being done about them, of course people are going to keep complaining.

 

[Golfman2]

Haha PD you still have to have standard and premium models? REALLY? What a load of rubbish! Every car featured in the game should have full working cockpit view, full tuning options and be of the highest quality in visual modelling. You really are light years behind Turn 10 and Forza in this regard. Get a grip!!!

 

[Golfman2]

All I see is whiners, PD has supported this game more than any other dev has supported a non P2P game... grow up guys..

Gt5 was a rushed mess. 6yrs in development and even KY himself promised 'perfection'. I have lost all faith in the series

 

[Tenacious D]

The more popular something is, the tendency for negative feedback increases. Then intensifies if there's a slip-up. If one would consider it a slip-up in this case. Despite general nit-picking, you just have to ignore and move on.

Well, and this always happens when a AAA developer throws out a weird, uncharacteristic game that has numerous aspects very few like. I'm not sure what the consensus is about GT5. I guess a slip-up is a good a term as any, as I don't think it reached fiasco level. It's like we got a brand new sports car, and the AC blows out hot air, and the subwoofer rattles, and then the gas tank begins leaking. And you take it to the dealer and it takes months and months, but they fix things. Mostly. And then to make up for it, they give you nice accessories to appease you...

I think this is apropos, because some car buyers would be outraged and demand their money back or sell it, and others would like the goodies, and the drive, and the power in their hands and be happy.

The thing that does get old to some of us is all the conclusion jumping that happens over GT6 from those who are sure the sky is still as in freefall as ever, and that the team is incompetent, and the boss even worse, a deranged lunatic who lost it when the world didn't love his last game. I think many of us keep forgetting that PD is in a serious conflict with a certain developer, and both of them are playing a game of chicken meets detente, and are keeping just about all their cards hidden. And Kaz is in the unfavorable position of trying to make GT6 relevant in the face of a few potentially very serious next gen racing games, while his is still in this generation. That's not a position of power.

However, he's been making serious progress with PS3 and producing a mostly amazing demo. Of course there are a ton of features that no one knows about. Since this is the Standard car thread, let's talk them. Kaz says they're improved. Well, some people insist on perfect Premium models across the board, and "improved" sure doesn't sound like "Premium," especially when he's talking about them in separate terms. I read back a bit and noticed that Slipztreme had remarked about including PS1 models in GT6 and 7 because "having a car is better than not having a car, right?" Well, let me freak everyone out by saying "Sure!"

And I've already said so, asking for all the cars and tracks from all the previous games. Updated of course, but yes, I want them all. I want to enjoy those cars with the new physics model, and throw them around tracks I haven't visited for years in HD glory. Well, what PD can manage after a face lift anyhow. I'm sure this flabbergasts a number of people, but it's what I truly want. To the haters, improved or face lifted isn't good enough, and for us Standard lovers, we get a lot of abuse for accepting the status quo, even when no one knows what that means.

So while most other fans are celebrating their new teasers and squirming in anticipation, we have to deal with buckets of ice water being dumped on us daily, when all we want to do is wiggle with delight like we used to do before a GT was released. It's a vexing situation for both sides, but more so for us because we're the targets too.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

I've said many times that there are definitely things to criticize about GT5.

At least you do acknowledge it.
With that in hand, all I was trying to point out, was that with the GT6 reveals we have, at this point, there are more legitimate areas for pessimistic concern, than optimistic elation. The song and dance concerning standard cars among them.

It's like a raw quartz crystal to me. Chipped, cracked, embedded in rough stone, even broken here and there. But still beautiful, even though it's not a well cut, polished diamond.

Most of us here see the same stone, however our reaction is:

This is an absolute travesty, with the great potential of this stone and this is all that has been done in almost 6 years,
The flaws almost completely obscure the the beauty.
Our confidence in the Jeweler is severly shaken.
After all, he has been able to accomplish so much more with much less in the past.
Will he be able to bring out the great potential of this stone by the next viewing?
Thus far, it's not looking too good.

I'm not sure, but I recall that for every improvement, such as the changeable rims, the black framed interiors on Standards and whatnot, there was quite the block party here.

Yeah, uh huh.
But you didn't answer my question.
Concerning the rims, how many months after release was that instituted, and how much rim selection was available?

One side likes GT5 and sees hope for a very good GT6. The other is dour and grumpy about the prospects, or at least doubtful, and sometimes is as harpy at us as the trolls, as if any happy dance over the game rubs them raw.

I don't agree, I think both sides hope for a great GT6.
However, at this point, there are more substantive negatives than positives.

This is what I don't get, how some people insist on dumping cold water on everything positive.

That just goes with forum participation.
You might as well get use to it.
Quite frankly, it needs to be there sometimes, otherwise there would be no balance, and you would just have a flat earth club.

No again. I'm confronted by a few dozen posters here or more who insist that those of us who like GT5 and still like Kaz and the team are emotional airheads, while they are reacting quite emotionally but refuse to acknowledge it.

Yeah, but again, the difference is, the substantitive realities are on there side, at this point.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Exactly. Seemingly it's impossible to critique the demo in any manner because someone will turn up and tell you it's only a demo, it's not final etc. We know that, doesn't mean we shouldn't critique what we're given and the above excuses being rolled out are pretty tiresome.

C'mon Samus that's oversimplified and you know it. Most of the critics of the critics disagree with the naysayers because they condemn or infer that the full game GT6 is going to suck or that PD sucks because of the demo. One can say all they want about the demo, you can't argue with facts, the objection is drawing the same conclusion about the full game which no one has seen and no one can talk about with any conviction because it doesn't exist as yet.

 

[Mr P510]

Haha PD you still have to have standard and premium models? REALLY? What a load of rubbish! Every car featured in the game should have full working cockpit view, full tuning options and be of the highest quality in visual modelling. You really are light years behind Turn 10 and Forza in this regard. Get a grip!!!

And Turn 10 are light years behind PD in Model accuracy and scale.

 

[Imari]

C'mon Samus that's oversimplified and you know it. Most of the critics of the critics disagree with the naysayers because they condemn or infer that the full game GT6 is going to suck or that PD sucks because of the demo. One can say all they want about the demo, you can't argue with facts, the objection is drawing the same conclusion about the full game which no one has seen and no one can talk about with any conviction because it doesn't exist as yet.

I want somebody to make a remix of the badger song with the word "badger" replaced with the word "placeholder".

 

[Cosbuster]

I want somebody to make a remix of the badger song with the word "badger" replaced with the word "placeholder".

👍

 

[another_jakhole]

When you are a AAA franchise with many years of experience and a very large fan base, "trying" isn't good enough.

lol Aye guey, that's a new one.

 

[steve30x]

Two things:

1. It was an insulting post aimed at members you don't agree with.

2. It was not an infraction.

So, uh, there's that. Not that you're alone in misrepresenting the truth - Tenacious wasn't temp-banned for "arguing with Scaff", as much as he'd like it to seem that way. Just in this thread he's tried to make up insults that I've apparently said, and when asked to back up this claim, has ignored it twice. This sort of behaviour is what the staff can take issue with - the suggestion that excitement about GT is not approved (or rather, that only criticism is acceptable) is ridiculous; take a look at any number of announcement threads as proof of that.

Now, people can either get back on the topic at hand without having to resort to personal insults (or making up ones targeting themselves, which is all sorts of bizarre), or actual infractions can start being handed out.

According to my profile I have an infraction that is perminant and in my opinion it wasn't an insulting post.

 

[Tenacious D]

At least you do acknowledge it.
With that in hand, all I was trying to point out, was that with the GT6 reveals we have, at this point, there are more legitimate areas for pessimistic concern, than optimistic elation. The song and dance concerning standard cars among them.

For you guys who hate Standard cars and tracks, and/or want damage, it's probably the end of the world as you know it. I would say that I'm not the only one who has to get used to things, because just to reiterate, there is no consensus on those points making GT5 a horrible game, and the reason that GT5 scores as well as it does on Metacritic is because a number of sources regard the game as 9 out of 10 or better. You can't just take the negatives as evidence for your cause and ignore the positives, which many of those on your side of the divide do. Meanwhile, it seems all we can do is shut up and agree or we're idiot fanboys. And as evidence, I present this quote of yours:

Most of us here see the same stone, however our reaction is:

This is an absolute travesty, with the great potential of this stone and this is all that has been done in almost 6 years,
The flaws almost completely obscure the the beauty.
Our confidence in the Jeweler is severly shaken.
After all, he has been able to accomplish so much more with much less in the past.
Will he be able to bring out the great potential of this stone by the next viewing?
Thus far, it's not looking too good.

I submit to you that while agree a good number of people here feel that way, I'm very much unconvinced that "the majority" do, and I think this is coloring your thinking. I will hardly skew my posts by saying that "most of us here like the Standards," simply because 99% of the members won't complain about them, and making a count of those who like them versus a count of those who don't seems roughly even according to a recent poll, going from memory here, because those who don't care can fit into either category. But at the same time, they can't be said to be down on PD for including them.

I don't agree, I think both sides hope for a great GT6.
However, at this point, there are more substantive negatives than positives.

...Yeah, but again, the difference is, the substantitive realities are on there side, at this point.

You'll have to school me on this, because all I'm aware of from the GT Academy demo is that the tire model is just tweaked. Everything else is a judgment based on an unreleased game we have very little information on yet.

Yeah, uh huh.
But you didn't answer my question.
Concerning the rims, how many months after release was that instituted, and how much rim selection was available?

I said...

I'm not sure, but I recall that for every improvement, such as the changeable rims, the black framed interiors on Standards and whatnot, there was quite the block party here.

And come on, you know full well that the selection of rims is as limited in almost all cases for the Premiums as Standards. It's just not all that swell for either side, just six or seven basic types with variation, which is why I'm very much looking forward to GT6. More so for the aerokit selection than rims though.

Are you aware that some of the Standard cars have more aero upgrade options than their Premium counterparts, such as the Mini Cooper and one of the Peugeot's?

Anyhow, I'm hopeful that the grouchers want a better GT6, but for some of them, it doesn't show. I have to run and take care of some court aftermath, and then have some fun, but I would like to see more civil dialog like we're having between the two sides. 👍

 

[UkHardcore23]

I want somebody to make a remix of the badger song with the word "badger" replaced with the word "placeholder".

Haha forgot about that old school classic!

 

[SuperCobraJet]

For you guys who hate Standard cars and tracks, and/or want damage, it's probably the end of the world as you know it. I would say that I'm not the only one who has to get used to things, because just to reiterate, there is no consensus on those points making GT5 a horrible game, and the reason that GT5 scores as well as it does on Metacritic is because a number of sources regard the game as 9 out of 10 or better. You can't just take the negatives as evidence for your cause and ignore the positives, which many of those on your side of the divide do. Meanwhile, it seems all we can do is shut up and agree or we're idiot fanboys. And as evidence, I present this quote of yours:

Perhaps at this point I should clarify my position on the standard cars.
Personally, they are a secondary or possibly even lower concern for me.
Do I hate them? No, not particularly.
Even so, I have to consider them a legitimate negative.
For that reason, and the fact it is the topic of the thread we are posting in,
I make mention of them.
Not because I personally give much of a hoot, one way or the other.

Ultimately, I'm not concerned about anyones review but my own.
Obviously, Metacritic or most any game reviewers have no in depth association with the GT series, even remotely close to the level here at GTP.
Besides it's a given for me, that I can routinely, subtract 2-4 from almost every game review out there.
If thats a positive, the GT series must be in worse straits than I figured.

BTW, the main focus here concerns GT6, even though, there is some carry over baggage from GT5.

I submit to you that while agree a good number of people here feel that way, I'm very much unconvinced that "the majority" do, and I think this is coloring your thinking. I will hardly skew my posts by saying that "most of us here like the Standards," simply because 99% of the members won't complain about them, and making a count of those who like them versus a count of those who don't seems roughly even according to a recent poll, going from memory here, because those who don't care can fit into either category. But at the same time, they can't be said to be down on PD for including them.:

Again, they're not a primary concern for me.
While I don't hate them, I don't particularly like them, either.

You'll have to school me on this, because all I'm aware of from the GT Academy demo is that the tire model is just tweaked. Everything else is a judgment based on an unreleased game we have very little information on yet.:

You say that as if GT6 wasn't mentioned in the same galaxy, with the demo.
It's a GT6 demo, representative of the game and its been judged as such legitimately and accordingly.
I already schooled you on this one.
Here is my comment from the first post I addressed to you on the subject:

Then release a demo with graphical issues out the yeng-yang, and a completely uninspiring AI.

If it is not representative of GT6, it should have been kept in another Galaxy, or at least been called the GT5.5 demo.
Even so, you will be happy to know, IMO the driving physics are an improvement.

I said...I'm not sure, but I recall that for every improvement, such as the changeable rims, the black framed interiors on Standards and what not, there was quite the block party here.

Well it was many months after release.
In the case of the rims, I believe I had already quit playing GT5.
Again, for me, too little, too late.

Let me make this absolutely clear,
I am in no way interested in a jumbled unfinished hodgepodge GT game, to be fixed months later with dlc.
Particularly features that should have been in before release.
Thats precisely what instigated much of the pessimism you are still experiencing here at GTP,
and represents a complete departure, from prior GT standards.
BTW, I don't want to here how, "thats the way games are done now".
GT, isn't, or at least, wasn't, any other game.

Anyhow, I'm hopeful that the grouchers want a better GT6, but for some of them, it doesn't show.

It doesn't show, as I've been explaining for several posts now, because of the legitimate skepticism,
and lack of confidence in GT6 being a return to prior GT quality, and up to date features in general.

but I would like to see more civil dialog like we're having between the two sides. 👍

Perhaps you will, but even if not, don't let it bother you.

 

[glassjaw]

And Turn 10 are light years behind PD in Model accuracy and scale.

At least Turn 10's models are light years ahead of Polyphony's standard models. I would take a slight drop in overall quality of the premiums just so all cars can be on a level field. Honestly, Polyphony should just outsource modeling or hire additional artists, because clearly they can't handle it as they stand now.

 

[DonZonda]

At least Turn 10's models are light years ahead of Polyphony's standard models. I would take a slight drop in overall quality of the premiums just so all cars can be on a level field. Honestly, Polyphony should just outsource modeling or hire additional artists, because clearly they can't handle it as they stand now.

I agree, also the Premium models are kind of useless, why model all those details so accurate, if you can't even look in the cockpit up and down, and the chase view isn't even rotateable and far away from the car that you can't really enjoy them either. I never understood the point of it. Except for photomode.

 

[Imari]

Let me make this absolutely clear,
I am in no way interested in a jumbled unfinished hodgepodge GT game, to be fixed months later with dlc.
Particularly features that should have been in before release.
Thats precisely what instigated much of the pessimism you are still experiencing here at GTP,
and represents a complete departure, from prior GT standards.
BTW, I don't want to here how, "thats the way games are done now".
GT, isn't, or at least, wasn't, any other game.

I think a lot of people forget just how broken GT5 was on release. No mechanical damage. No Seasonals (and therefore a totally broken EXP progression). No OCD. No power limiter or ballast. No PP. Extremely limited restrictions on lobbies. Inexplicably different physics online and offline. No control over weather. No FF/RWD on replays. Basic features of a racing game, missing or broken.

The game now is kinda OK, but on day one it was pretty close to awful. Frankly, it hardly deserved the review scores it got at the time. It drove well and looked pretty, and everything else was a shambles. Over the years they've fixed a lot of stuff, which is good because they really needed to. But I can really sympathise with people who remember day one GT5 and are worried about getting burned again.

 

[glassjaw]

I think a lot of people forget just how broken GT5 was on release. No mechanical damage. No Seasonals (and therefore a totally broken EXP progression). No OCD. No power limiter or ballast. No PP. Extremely limited restrictions on lobbies. Inexplicably different physics online and offline. No control over weather. No FF/RWD on replays. Basic features of a racing game, missing or broken.

The game now is kinda OK, but on day one it was pretty close to awful. Frankly, it hardly deserved the review scores it got at the time. It drove well and looked pretty, and everything else was a shambles. Over the years they've fixed a lot of stuff, which is good because they really needed to. But I can really sympathise with people who remember day one GT5 and are worried about getting burned again.

Completely agree. For all of those reasons and a few others, GT5 was a mess at launch. It's a much more exciting and rewarding game to get into now than it was when it released. I can vouch for this; I stopped playing the game for about two years and recently came back, starting completely from scratch. And I'm enjoying it much more the second time around.

 

[Brend]

People can call the EXP system broken but it was just your typical JRPG set-up. That's not broken. Is the pokemon battling system broken? No. It's just the way the game is. You need to 'train' to get better. Just like originally in GT5 (Rightly or wrongly) you had to 'drive' to get better.

 

[Imari]

People can call the EXP system broken but it was just your typical JRPG set-up. That's not broken. Is the pokemon battling system broken? No. It's just the way the game is. You need to 'train' to get better. Just like originally in GT5 (Rightly or wrongly) you had to 'drive' to get better.

No. On release, the EXP system was broken.

JRPGs are set up so that if you're playing through the standard storyline and partake in the normal amount of random battles, you will be approximately appropriately levelled for whatever section of the game you're in. A well designed game will make sure you have enough EXP thrown at you that you don't find yourself horribly underlevelled just by following the storyline.

In GT5, you could do every race, license and special event available, fail a few times but generally win, and at about level 23 (or maybe 24 if you were lucky) you'd run out of races to do. You would have to grind out a level or a level and a half (not a trivial time investment at that level and without seasonals) to get to the next race. Which is then an endurance race which doesn't give you nearly enough EXP to get to the next level, and you have to grind again.

Getting far enough to do the Nurb 24 hours required ENORMOUS amounts of driving, such that people were resorting to rubber band+controller+Like The Wind to grind out EXP 24/7 just to get to the next race. Any time you have people doing that, there's something wrong.

It was a badly, badly designed EXP system. The seasonals largely fixed it by making it trivial to gain large amounts of EXP very quickly, and having a vastly larger number of races accessable at any given time. But before there were seasonals it was a very broken system. From memory seasonals came in about a month after release, but there wasn't really enough of them to make a dent until at least six months later.

Arguably it's still a broken system after seasonals, because seasonals make the EXP system mostly pointless, but at least it's broken in a way that doesn't irritate players.

 

[sems4arsenal]

And Turn 10 are light years behind PD in Model accuracy and scale.

Wait what ?

 

[Samus]

No. On release, the EXP system was broken.

JRPGs are set up so that if you're playing through the standard storyline and partake in the normal amount of random battles, you will be approximately appropriately levelled for whatever section of the game you're in. A well designed game will make sure you have enough EXP thrown at you that you don't find yourself horribly underlevelled just by following the storyline.

In GT5, you could do every race, license and special event available, fail a few times but generally win, and at about level 23 (or maybe 24 if you were lucky) you'd run out of races to do. You would have to grind out a level or a level and a half (not a trivial time investment at that level and without seasonals) to get to the next race. Which is then an endurance race which doesn't give you nearly enough EXP to get to the next level, and you have to grind again.

Getting far enough to do the Nurb 24 hours required ENORMOUS amounts of driving, such that people were resorting to rubber band+controller+Like The Wind to grind out EXP 24/7 just to get to the next race. Any time you have people doing that, there's something wrong.

It was a badly, badly designed EXP system. The seasonals largely fixed it by making it trivial to gain large amounts of EXP very quickly, and having a vastly larger number of races accessable at any given time. But before there were seasonals it was a very broken system. From memory seasonals came in about a month after release, but there wasn't really enough of them to make a dent until at least six months later.

Arguably it's still a broken system after seasonals, because seasonals make the EXP system mostly pointless, but at least it's broken in a way that doesn't irritate players.

Indeed. Plus there is also the point that you know, GT5 wasn't a JRPG and shouldn't have had a system similar to one in the first place.

 

[glassjaw]

The EXP system made the license tests absolutely irrelevant, and I prefer the license tests. But either way, they should choose one or the other and stick with that. And cars shouldn't be locked by experience, that just limits my enjoyment of the game severely.

 

[Imari]

Indeed. Plus there is also the point that you know, GT5 wasn't a JRPG and shouldn't have had a system similar to one in the first place.

There's that too. It's fundamentally a poor choice to control pacing in a racing game. It should be limited to being a electronic wang measurement device.

 

[Tenacious D]

@ SuperCobraJet
I forgot about the A.I., you got me there, because that part was just a speed bump to the Time Trials for me. As for the rest, horses for courses, and I think we've ridden that debate about as far as it can go, so no worries.

@ All The Above
I agree that a number of things griped everyone out about GT5. Me too, I HATE the XP system and paint chips. The leveling deal not only locked me out of doing more races, but buying cars! And having to win or BUY a car to get a color I want? Not fun. And I have about ten other things on my gripe list too that I hope aren't in GT6, or are improved. But having said that, the debate will never end on whether GT5 is a bad game overall, because many folk just don't agree. Consider that it sold about another million copies since the end of November, and if you haven't heard of GT5's issues after more than two years, you must have emerged from a lengthy coma or come from another star system.

Concerning Forza's car models, I agree that they are very good, but I do have a caveat. As a car artist, I'll have to say that a number of cars and bodykit parts just don't work right with the Livery Editor. And even after seven-plus years of experience as of 2011 when Forza 4 was released, they have a problem with symmetry. I don't know if this is due to outsourcing or what, and if T10 modelers are guilty of the same things, that's not good. But at the very least, their quality control people aren't doing their jobs because something in their system is broken, and outsourcing is an obvious culprit.

 

[Brend]

No. On release, the EXP system was broken.

JRPGs are set up so that if you're playing through the standard storyline and partake in the normal amount of random battles, you will be approximately appropriately levelled for whatever section of the game you're in. A well designed game will make sure you have enough EXP thrown at you that you don't find yourself horribly underlevelled just by following the storyline.

In GT5, you could do every race, license and special event available, fail a few times but generally win, and at about level 23 (or maybe 24 if you were lucky) you'd run out of races to do. You would have to grind out a level or a level and a half (not a trivial time investment at that level and without seasonals) to get to the next race. Which is then an endurance race which doesn't give you nearly enough EXP to get to the next level, and you have to grind again.

Getting far enough to do the Nurb 24 hours required ENORMOUS amounts of driving, such that people were resorting to rubber band+controller+Like The Wind to grind out EXP 24/7 just to get to the next race. Any time you have people doing that, there's something wrong.

It was a badly, badly designed EXP system. The seasonals largely fixed it by making it trivial to gain large amounts of EXP very quickly, and having a vastly larger number of races accessable at any given time. But before there were seasonals it was a very broken system. From memory seasonals came in about a month after release, but there wasn't really enough of them to make a dent until at least six months later.

Arguably it's still a broken system after seasonals, because seasonals make the EXP system mostly pointless, but at least it's broken in a way that doesn't irritate players.

Not every JRPG is set up the way you suggested. 2 of the most popular series of recent times; Ni no Kuni and disgaea both dont utilize the standard way that EXP won't hinder progress. In fact, they are both serial offenders of having 'grinds' so no. Its not broken. It was just a grind happy experience. And for what its worth. I didn't enjoy it either.

And oh so GT5 isnt a JRPG and shouldn't incorporate an EXP system like it had? Better tell NHL it's a sports sim and not an RPG too and ditch the be a pro mode.