Stupid review!

[throttlehappy]

so can anyone tell me why i do not have information on each car in the game?

 

[Speedy Samurai]

Some versions don't have it. The Japanese version actually has a narrator talk about the car during replays but that didn't make it into the other versions.

 

[throttlehappy]

Some versions don't have it. The Japanese version actually has a narrator talk about the car during replays but that didn't make it into the other versions.

geez that pi**es me off!

 

[the Interceptor]

You have texts about the cars at the bottom of the screen when you're browsing through the car lists in the manufacturers showrooms. I guess every version has that.

Regards
the Interceptor

 

[throttlehappy]

You have texts about the cars at the bottom of the screen when you're browsing through the car lists in the manufacturers showrooms. I guess every version has that.

Regards
the Interceptor

power and torque figures thats it

 

[the Interceptor]

power and torque figures thats it

May come a tad late, but probably helps anyway: when you're in a manufacturers "showroom", a text scrolls though the screen talking about the manufacturer and the cars. I don't know if other versions don't do that, PAL does.

Regards
the Interceptor

 

[Ignignoc N Err]

GT3 had the ticker telling about each individual car in the NTSC U/C version, with some exceptions, of course. For instance, there was a GREAT deal of information about the Toyota GT-0ne, but not the Mazda 787B.

But, GT4 limits this to the manufacturers and not the individual cars. It's unfortunate, because there are several cars that have much significance whether to racing or automotive history in general, that go relatively unnoticed. You'd have to actually research them on your own, outside of the game.

Not a big deal at ALL. It just woulda been cool if they had retained that feature.

 

[D-Mind]

If you're looking for a good racing game, no, you should not buy Gran Turismo 4.

If ANYBODY puts this in a Gran Turismo 4 review, it states that they haven't even played the game.

 

[EJRocky]

I say just buy the game and see what you think of it. Like it? Great. Dislike it? Slap it on eBay for the next sucker...

 

[KiwiBoy]

"With ASM on the default settings, the game is completely unplayable (especially amusing are the license tests that encourage you to "drift" around turns on dirt courses, which you can't actually do well if the ASM is deliberately defeating your oversteer)."

AIDS are off in rally races

 

[Moloch_horridus]

If ANYBODY puts this in a Gran Turismo 4 review, it states that they haven't even played the game.

Or perhaps that they have played the game to death and are sick of AI opponents that drive slowly, brake too early (occasionally way too late), and don't know you are there. Perhaps they want a game with realistic tyre wear and fuel consumption. Perhaps they want a game where cars can break. The list goes on and on.

 

[Supercar_Killer]

...is a dog, uglier than a Brittany Spaniel whose face has been half gnawed off by a badger.

Clearly he put a home dvd featuring his missus into his PS2 rather than GT4. Seriously this guy's review makes zero sense. PD have created the most realistic looking game the PS2 has to offer. Ye tha AI sucks but if you put it on 10 in arcade mode and lower ur hp and up ur weight at least u get a slight challenge. This guy is clearly an idiot

 

[D-Mind]

Or perhaps that they have played the game to death and are sick of AI opponents that drive slowly, brake too early (occasionally way too late), and don't know you are there. Perhaps they want a game with realistic tyre wear and fuel consumption. Perhaps they want a game where cars can break. The list goes on and on.

They didn't say in that line they wanted a driving simulator, they wanted a racing game. And as far as i know, 200 pt races are surely good racing.

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

Just saw this thread for the first time, so I'm sending out some belated +REP to "the Interceptor" and "JohnBM01" for making some excellent observations in this thread!

No need to restate what's already been well covered already, with one exception:

Or perhaps that they have played the game to death and are sick of AI opponents that drive slowly, brake too early (occasionally way too late), and don't know you are there. Perhaps they want a game with realistic tyre wear and fuel consumption. Perhaps they want a game where cars can break. The list goes on and on.

Actually GT4 has very realistic fuel consumption and tyre wear, so perhaps you are thinking of GT3, or just about every other racing game out there.

As for the AI, I just do not understand all the ranting. Yes, I agree it could be better, and I would love to have a GT game that would allow you to adjust the level of the AI as well as the cars they drive, and not just in Family Cup. I would also realllly like to have more than 5 AI cars in a race!

That said, there is a rather simple solution to having easy AI opponents.... stop using cars, mods, and/or set-ups that dominate the race. For most races GT4 allows you to use a wide range of performing cars. They even let you adjust the AI field by entering and exiting the race until it has a field of cars that you want.

If the AI was always set to drive at their max capability imagine all the frustrated players, who unlike some of the dedicated hardcore GT gamers, don't have countless hours to spend becoming experts at the game.

It is a game, first and foremost, and while GT4, IMO, does an excellent job at offering a simulator experience to the gaming platform, it is still just a game and designed to appeal to a broad audience, not just hardcore driving fans.

That said, GT4 also offers enough variety and choices, that even a hardcore driver can create extremely challenging races against the AI. Unfortunately, it seems those that complain ignore this fact, and blame the game for the car selections they make. 👎


As for graphics, for a game that was developed over three years ago, it has the best graphics I've seen in any console game of its generation.


For the record, what I really do not like about GT4:

• No Online Play
• No Damage Effects
• No Qualifying (except for the championship series events)
• Bad Formula for Calculating A-spec Points for a Race

 

[Wolfe]

Oh man, not this thread again...

They didn't say in that line they wanted a driving simulator, they wanted a racing game. And as far as i know, 200 pt races are surely good racing.

If I want a good racing game, I'll look for something fast-paced and fun to play. If I want a good driving simulator, I'll look for something realistic.

GT4 is neither of these things, to me nor to the author of this review. It's especially bad as a "regular" racing game, because its attempts at realism (understeer, wheelspin, etc) just make it tedious and annoying to play compared with any decent "arcadey" racing game.

 

[Turbo Lag]

Im going with the comments of The Interceptor.

You have texts about the cars at the bottom of the screen when you're browsing through the car lists in the manufacturers showrooms. I guess every version has that.

Regards
the Interceptor

Yes your right. I remember that scrolling text in GT3 and if im right; GT2. It sometimes does provide some useful information and sometimes useless. GT4 does have some extra things that some people may not know about; such as the scrolling text, menu shortcuts, and lots of little features thrown in here and there.

I think the Interceptor gave some really good points there.

 

[Tornado]

GT4 does have some extra things that some people may not know about; such as the scrolling text, menu shortcuts, and lots of little features thrown in here and there.

Where, how and what, respectively.

 

[Turbo Lag]

Where, how and what, respectively.

Ok.

1.Scrolling Text
2.Menu Shortcuts
3.That thing where you can see the torque curve up large.
4.That option to change the Weight distribution ( while racing ) to the DFP wheel and the DF wheel.( i think)
5.(not exactly small but) The ability to transfer photos frrom GT4 to your computer. (maybe to touch up your photos)
6.The driving missions (ok, not really the small)
7.The options while in the pits (eg. change what type of tires)

Ok not HUGE features but they do help and are sometimes useful.

 

[Bruce Spec]

I'm not even sure where to begin. This person is an idiot. I'm sorry if I've just broken any GTPlanet rules, but there's no other way to say. Here's the couple of points I will make:

Gran Turismo 4 is a fantastic game. Yes, fantastic. The menus, the textures, the cars, the tracks, photo mode, B-spec, missions, replays and on and on.

Is Gran Tursimo 4 perfect — no. But I'm not sure why everyone wants this over the top, real-life driving simulator, that can do anything I think of for $60. I seen a couple nice driving simulators at race tracks and car shows — actually, I've just heard that Intel and BMW are working on one for F1 racing — it might set you back about $150,000 or so — if Gran Tursimo 4 just isn't enough for you.

Too many Skylines that make up about 3% of 700 cars — I'm really done with this one.

ASM. For the lame — beginner mode. Yes, this is for beginners. As you get better, you turn off the driving aids. It's no different than any other first-person shooter, sports game, real-time strategy, etc., that have different levels for different skills of play.

This one I love. Racing games have become mainstream in PC and console gaming in the past 5 or so years. Why? Because of the success of the Gran Tursimo series. That's right. Everyone has been trying to create the "Gran Turismo Killer" and no one has done it.

I've played a couple of racing games — not all — but a lot. There are some good ones and a lot of bad ones, but not a single one that I can say is all around better than Gran Turismo 4.

Thanks, I feel better.

 

[Gabkicks]

is gran turismo what is sells itself to be?

 

[Wolfe]

Gran Turismo 4 is a fantastic game. Yes, fantastic. The menus, the textures, the cars, the tracks, photo mode, B-spec, missions, replays and on and on.

I disagree.

Menus -- Convoluted.
Textures -- Overrated, albeit limited by PS2 hardware.
Cars -- There's a lot of them, but that doesn't mean they were all the best choices.
Tracks -- Okay, no faults here.
Photo Mode -- Not everyone cares.
B-Spec -- Band-aid for a boring career mode.
Missions -- Tedious or frustrating, take your pick.
Replays -- Too bad about 2-player mode, eh?

Is Gran Tursimo 4 perfect — no. But I'm not sure why everyone wants this over the top, real-life driving simulator, that can do anything I think of for $60. I seen a couple nice driving simulators at race tracks and car shows — actually, I've just heard that Intel and BMW are working on one for F1 racing — it might set you back about $150,000 or so — if Gran Tursimo 4 just isn't enough for you.

You don't need a hyper-expensive simulator set-up to run a game that drives realistically.

This one I love. Racing games have become mainstream in PC and console gaming in the past 5 or so years. Why? Because of the success of the Gran Tursimo series. That's right. Everyone has been trying to create the "Gran Turismo Killer" and no one has done it.

Actually, racing games have been "mainstream" and a staple of the videogaming world since its resurgance in the mid-80's, with the introduction of the NES and the revival of the arcades. I wouldn't attribute the existence of games like Burnout or Midnight Club to GT...

Also, although Polyphony Digital singlehandedly created what might as well be called the "Gran Turismo clone" genre of racing game, not everyone agrees that they're king of the hill at their own game anymore. The way I see it, Enthusia Professional Racing offers a more realistic drive at the cost of fewer cars/tracks, and Forza offers online play and better customizability at the cost of less realism and laughably inaccurate real-world tracks.

If you're looking for a car/track encyclopedia, GT4 is the game for you. If you're looking for a fun and/or realistic driving experience...eh, not so much.

 

[Car-less]

Menus -- Convoluted.
Textures -- Overrated, albeit limited by PS2 hardware.
Cars -- There's a lot of them, but that doesn't mean they were all the best choices.
Tracks -- Okay, no faults here.
Photo Mode -- Not everyone cares.
B-Spec -- Band-aid for a boring career mode.
Missions -- Tedious or frustrating, take your pick.
Replays -- Too bad about 2-player mode, eh?

Menus - The map screen is a pain, as is the dozen or so button presses needed to get to a race.
Textures - Perfectly adequate considering the hardware.
Cars - Anyone would have picked a different selection of cars to include. At least with their being so many there is something for everyone.
Tracks - I've heard they are the best replicated of any driving game, but not having driven any tracks for real, I couln't say.
Photo Mode - I don't.
B-Spec - Wouldn't have been necessary if you could save progress in the pits during a longer race. 24hours without a break/backup driver is just plain mad.
Missions - Just an extension of the licenses really. Not necessary.
Replays - Why can't I turn them off? Before I found GTPlanet I had no use for them, but even now I only rarely want to see/save them.

AI - Inteligence? They must have been taught at the same school, and by the same teacher. They all drive the same line, brake too early etc. You can match your car to the AI for a difficult high point race, but it doesn't take away the fact that they are too predictable. Put Takuma Sako on the track alongside Schumacher and Coulthard. Mix it up a bit for more interest.

Also, although Polyphony Digital singlehandedly created what might as well be called the "Gran Turismo clone" genre of racing game, not everyone agrees that they're king of the hill at their own game anymore. The way I see it, Enthusia Professional Racing offers a more realistic drive at the cost of fewer cars/tracks, and Forza offers online play and better customizability at the cost of less realism and laughably inaccurate real-world tracks.

I have not tried Enthusia, but have tried Forza and found it to be as laughable as you say. Of all the driving games that I have played, GT is without a doubt the best of the bunch despite its shortcomings.

If you're looking for a car/track encyclopedia, GT4 is the game for you. If you're looking for a fun and/or realistic driving experience...eh, not so much.

As an automotive encyclopedia it excels.
As a driving game it is the best I have ever played.
As a realistic racing simulator there is room for improvement.

 

[KiwiBoy]

I bet the guy who wrote that is laughing his ass off right now, seeing how everybody is stressed up about his review that he wrote in like 10 minutes.

 

[Supercar_Killer]

As a realistic racing simulator there is room for improvement.

Ye, it is lacking a little, GTR2 for the PC kicks it in every department, but think about it realistically, the market for hardcore racing simulators is very limited, i bet alot of Gran Turismo's sales are little kids (no offence to neone here) that just wanna play a racing game, so they kinda have to cater for every market. I remember reading somewhere (dunno if this is true or not) that the retail version of GT is a toned down version of a racing sim used in racing training, but like I said, I'm not sure about the credibility of the article

 

[Tornado]

Ok.
1.Scrolling Text
2.Menu Shortcuts

Where?

Gran Turismo 4 is a fantastic game. Yes, fantastic. The menus, the textures, the cars, the tracks, photo mode, B-spec, missions, replays and on and on.

I don't understand why everyone says this. The Menus in GT4 are so bad that it isn't funny, and are a HUGE step back from GT3.
The textures are decent, at the expense of the framerate, so I'd give it to GT3 here as well. The fact that they were designed for Hi-Def does not mean tehy translate well into low def, whereas GT3 looks pretty good all around.
And the car selection, while great, has nothing on Enthusia's. Yes, there are more cars. There are also many cars that are very similar to each other.

 

[the Interceptor]

I don't understand why everyone says this. The Menus in GT4 are so bad that it isn't funny, and are a HUGE step back from GT3.

What's so bad about the menus?

 

[dylansan]

Where?


And the car selection, while great, has nothing on Enthusia's. Yes, there are more cars. There are also many cars that are very similar to each other.

Your point being...? There are more cars, yes, but how does having more of the same cars make it a worse selection? Take out all the repeats and you still have more than twice as many as Enthusia. I can't find many cars that Enthusia has that GT4 doesn't have. Any more than that can only be for the best.

 

[Tornado]

What's so bad about the menus?

They are cluttered. They are poorly laid out. They have no explanation. And there are far too many of them. GT3's menu system was perhaps simplistic, but it was far, far easier to navigate.

Your point being...? There are more cars, yes, but how does having more of the same cars make it a worse selection? Take out all the repeats and you still have more than twice as many as Enthusia.

Wow. Are you serious? Lets sit down for a minute:
GT4 has 4 models of the new Lotus Elise. Only 3 of them have any variation of specs.
GT4 has 4 Lotus Esprits. Only 3 of them have any variation of specs.
GT4 has 4 identicle Honda Civics.
GT4 has two identicle Mazda 6s.
GT4 has two sets of two identicle Honda Civic Type R's.
Then we get into multiple flavors of the same car (13 NSX's, 7 Honda S2000's, 7 Mazda Miatas, 4 newer Mazda Miatas, 14 Mazda RX-7 FD's, 4 Mazda RX-8s, 5 3000GT's, 7 FTOs), which could very easily shave off at least 100 cars with the Skylines, Evos and WRXs themselves. My point is that Enthusia's car selection, while less, is FAR more varied than the GT series' has ever been. Then there is the fact that there are no cars that can't be used in races (which shaves off a considerable chunk as well), and cars that are nigh useless (another big chunk) in races (of which Enthusia only has 5-10).

 

[Moloch_horridus]

...Actually GT4 has very realistic fuel consumption and tyre wear, so perhaps you are thinking of GT3, or just about every other racing game out there.

Fair enough, I hadn't realised. I did a bit of research to prove you wrong and it proved you right - the Audi R10 pitted about every 14 laps in its win at Le Mans (I am assuming it changed tyres every stop) which would be almost the same as GT4 (not as different as I had expected anyway).

They didn't say in that line they wanted a driving simulator, they wanted a racing game. And as far as i know, 200 pt races are surely good racing.

200 point races often make for good racing however in many cases the challenge is more about overcoming the AI stupidity than it is about driving/racing well.

 

[Tornado]

Actually GT4 has very realistic fuel consumption and tyre wear, so perhaps you are thinking of GT3, or just about every other racing game out there.

I did an extensive test of fuel effieciency between the two BMW 130s, and I found that GT4 didn't moel diesel engines very well. Otherwise, I'm inclined to agree.