Stop Hating Polyphony Digital

[Morphisor]

Oh look. Another thread filled with "PD should have done this, they're doing this totally wrong, I can see it all right from my lazy chair."

 

[C_Raccoon23]

Oh look. Another thread filled with "PD should have done this, they're doing this totally wrong, I can see it all right from my lazy chair."

Yeah, because we all know the game is perfect just the way it is, right?

 

[VBR]

I don't know of anyone who hates Polyphony Digital, come to think of it, I don't know of anyone who hates GT5 either. However, I do know plenty of people who hate certain decisions PD have made, & who hate certain aspects of GT5, I am one of them.

 

[DrJustice]

^ On no, VBR, you aren't getting away with nuances like that! This is a gaming site on the internet; either you're a Fanboy or a Hater, and either a game Totally Rocks or it Completely Sucks.



DJ
--

 

[Exorcet]

Why would they include photomode for standards when the graphics are no where near as nice as premiums? Who wants to look closer at jagged edges and low quality graphics, when you can look at premiums to ADMIRE the detail?

Why would they take the option out? If it took more effort to have standard and premium photomode than it did to make a premium only mode, you might have a point (though not really for the reasons you stated).

As far as I'm concerned the standards are more than good enough for photomode. It's a constant annoyance that the replay photomode tells me "oh you can't get this close to standard cars". There is no reason for that. I should be able to get as close as I want. PD doesn't decide when the zoom level starts to make cars look "ugly". I do. And it's even more ridiculous because I can use the unlimited zoom on premium cars and find many ugly looking parts of the cars.

Doing leaderboards is very easy when you have fixed variables, but GT5 have very complex and dynamic variables that can't be compared to other games IMO.

GT5 leaderboards:
-Time trials for each track - stock, stock with PP limits, tuned, tuned with PP limits
-Official time trials for certain cars, etc.

Why can't they do this? Not exactly complex.

 

[another_jakhole]

Yeah, because we all know the game is perfect just the way it is, right?

Of course, it is.

/s

We all know it isn't perfect, but always with the repetitive complaining. If you find anything New to hate about it, please share. I hate that you can't skip songs during a race.

 

[599GT]

Leave Britney alone!



Sorry, I had to.

 

[jaycee_xr3]

"Stop Hating Polyphony Digital" sound to me like "Leave Britney alooooneee"

EDIT: 599GT, hahaha I see you post now, sorry...

 

[VBR]

^ On no, VBR, you aren't getting away with nuances like that! This is a gaming site on the internet; either you're a Fanboy or a Hater, and either a game Totally Rocks or it Completely Sucks.



DJ
--

Your argument is mere fallacy dear sir, whereas mine is an entirely logical & justified revelation of the erroneous nature of this threads original title, what-what!

 

[DrJustice]

Are you, Sir, suggesting using logic to reveal errors? We're having none of that!



OK - I'll get my coat...

DJ
--

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Than you do not understand the purpose and value of B-Spec as presented in GT5.

You got that right. The value and purpose totally elude me.
But for me thats no mystery, because I don't find either in B-spec, and not much in A-spec for that matter.

It only resemblances the system introduced in GT4, but it is an vast evolution of that system. Complexity and actual execution - together with ability to confront your B-Spec drivers through online and Remote Races with other people drivers - is on entirely different level than one basically introduced in GT4.

Sounds impressive enough, but actually does nothing for me.

If you only see B-Spec as a way to earn you Aspec money or to drive Aspec endurance races for you - than I can see your point. However, that is obviously not a way how GT5's full-standalone B-Spec was imagined and delivered - so it is not the actual system that have flaws, but it is what you would personally want from that system that does not meet your expectations.

Obviously.

However, from the perspective as it was imagined and delivered through GT5 - as 100% standalone RPG part of the game - B-Spec is great and does everything it do almost perfect, especially after 1.10 AI update.

While your explanations are admirable, the truth is B-spec is nothing more than a novelty part to A-spec.
I believe it could have more merit and truly evolutionized, if it had been kept integrated in that vein.

The attempt by PD to turn it into a seperate worthwhile feature in GT5 was a mistake IMO.
Possibly this was done in an attempt to make up for the lacking A-spec.
Not a chance.

I have yet to run one lap in B-spec and have no intention of doing so.

Sorry, but I can't bring myself to any conclusion, other than PD sadly went backwards both in A-spec and B-spec.
Sadder yet, is the awesome unrealized potential that was left on the table.
We can only hope it will be picked up and utilized in GT6.

 

[CSLACR]

B-Spec was implemented IMO, the way it is to cater to some whiners, in a poor attempt at making the game last longer, and a poor attempt at making the game harder in a-spec.

As we all know, B-Spec and A-Spec are all the same events... It's called "easy programming". Filler, to make the game seem more complex and in-depth than it really is.

However, I have high hopes something will happen in not to distant future and current prolongation of Prologue leaderboards is assurance that something is going on overthere.

Yes it is. 👍
Surprise! It's taking them longer than "anticipated". 👎

I'm surprised to not hear anyone suggest this...
In GT5P the leaderboards were simple: Any stock car, on sport mediums or less, around a track had it's own board.

It doesn't have to jump to every car with every tuning variable gets it's own board.
It could start as just stock premiums, or even "Arcade-only" cars.

Surely having leaderboards for all the arcade cars on S2's otherwise un-modified would be incredible compared to what we have now, which is... cheating.

But there's another problem, PD can't seem to figure out how to stop corner cutting.
You can tell me how hard it is to set boundaries, etc all day long, but if I recall GT5P managed it fairly well, so there's no argument against time trials on those tracks plus 2 and a half years of making boundaries on new tracks.

 

[Big Ron]

But there's another problem, PD can't seem to figure out how to stop corner cutting.
You can tell me how hard it is to set boundaries, etc all day long, but if I recall GT5P managed it fairly well, so there's no argument against time trials on those tracks plus 2 and a half years of making boundaries on new tracks.

That´s a point, I never understood in GT5. Have a look at practice sessions. It is so easy on a lot of tracks to get a canceled lap time because of cutted corners or slamming walls.

But you never see that in races or similar sessions.

And now the strange question appears: Why are practice sessions so severly punished, while races are not? Shouldn´t it be the exact opposite?

 

[zqxwjv]

Stop telling people to Stop Hating Polyphony Digital

 

[VBR]

Are you, Sir, suggesting using logic to reveal errors? We're having none of that!



OK - I'll get my coat...

DJ
--

I'll get my coat too & leave with you, we'll lust leave the fanboys & haters to fight it out amongst themselves!