The Future of Polyphony Digital

  • Thread starter JAGUAR1977
  • 133 comments
  • 8,884 views
I do not care about the GTPSP. I do not own one and I will not. Therefore their work on that game for me is irrelevant.
Well, but you act like it had nothing to do with the delay with GT5. It was out of Kazunori's hands anyway. This was a SONY Japan decision. Kaz always insisted he was going to work on GT Mobile when GT5 was out the door, so it's not his fault.

Why don't you just demand that SONY wave a magic wand and bring out the PS5 and GT11 fifteen years early? ;)
 
And one more thing what kind of idiot has great software but releases a "toned down" demo? Better render and sound does not require more size in megabytes, because I can already hear the "it's only 200mb" explanation.

What's funny is that little demo looks already so much better than Prologue, I honestly don't know what's the problem.
 
Is it time PD made changes to their structure, perhaps leave the Japanease dpt. to car/track modelling, transfering everything else to a western based dpt. Or just bring in a western producer to drive the development, rather than their current role of simply localising whatever the Japanease dpt. produce.


two words...HELL NO. Seriously, would Sony do such a thing when PD is light years ahead of most game developers, even bungie?
 
Well, but you act like it had nothing to do with the delay with GT5. It was out of Kazunori's hands anyway. This was a SONY Japan decision. Kaz always insisted he was going to work on GT Mobile when GT5 was out the door, so it's not his fault.

Why don't you just demand that SONY wave a magic wand and bring out the PS5 and GT11 fifteen years early? ;)
Yes, you're right that SONY is to blame for the situation too. They never seem to pick the right time to release something. Their marketing approach sucks both for them and us.
 
I kinda agree with the OP. I want to believe that PD has already finished developing everything that is important and just didn't include it in the Academy demo.

And if we take off our fanboy hats, we have to agree that little things like skidmarks and dust/smoke just HAVE to be in the final game.
Major features like damage, *real* handling, tuning of all important parts (and even optical tuning) are expected.

If you accept the full game as "The Real Driving Simulator" while any of those features are missing, you are living with a lie.
 
Is it time PD made changes to their structure, perhaps leave the Japanease dpt. to car/track modelling, transfering everything else to a western based dpt. Or just bring in a western producer to drive the development, rather than their current role of simply localising whatever the Japanease dpt. produce.

I'm sorry but with a comment like that i have to ask this,
are you a forza fanboi?
This is KY's view,if aren't happy with it then don't play it.
 
Personally, if they keep the damage modeling simple but effective good on em, But all in all damage for me isn't a great concern! whats there is there.

For me personally, Physics and sounds are the main priority for me, and im sure many others. physics makes the game. and sound of the engines and tires and turbos put it up on another level again.

Let's not forget 60% of idiots will just play it as bumper cars again no doubt. and the other 40% take it seriously and want to race properly.

Another main thing along with the physics and sound is a great penalty system for those fools who think its funny to ruin a great race.

All in all. Physics is a MASSIVE PART that immerses you into the game, and so is sound. graphics also with all the details play a part also.
 
What's funny is that little demo looks already so much better than Prologue, I honestly don't know what's the problem.

I know double post im sorry!

But you can tell the graphics are a lot more dull in the demo, but you know what the particular 210mb demo was only for physics purposes and the competition!

Prologues gfx were better then the current demo, but we all know that GT5 will be on par or lets just say a fraction better then gt5p! With bit more definition and bit more polished off! Technology since gt5p has come a long way, and the computer programs they have are capable of making it look a bit nicer then gt5p!
 
The car modeling in GT Academy demo is way better than what you saw in GT5p the poly count is obvious. The only thing I hate about GT academy demo is the tire graphics! It look worst! Even GT5prologue has better tire model than that. they should add a lot of polygon in their tire model, it's very noticeable it's not a proper circle.(Rims and Tire)
 
I know double post im sorry!

But you can tell the graphics are a lot more dull in the demo, but you know what the particular 210mb demo was only for physics purposes and the competition!

Prologues gfx were better then the current demo, but we all know that GT5 will be on par or lets just say a fraction better then gt5p! With bit more definition and bit more polished off! Technology since gt5p has come a long way, and the computer programs they have are capable of making it look a bit nicer then gt5p!
Now that again is funny, I don't know , maybe I was mistaken, but to me Prologue was extremely dull( the word is perfect )... after 5 minutes playing I couldn't usually hold my eyes open, because there is nothing going on, no sense of speed, whatever.
This demo actually looks and plays like I expected Prologue to be.
So now maybe it's up to personal preference and taste, but to me it's obvious PD tried to improve everything and - succeeded.! 👍

Don't let you fool by the small file size...
What's funny is that little demo looks already so much better than Prologue, I honestly don't know what's the problem.
 
dont get me wrong, i think the physics of it add a whole new dimension to it. but i was more so referring to the textures of certain things.

That demo is small and well we can all expect gt5 (final release) to be top notch quality!

*we hope*

/runs away
haha
 
I know some textures don't look as good, but IMO it looks much better as a whole picture, cars and environment match much better together, if that makes sense?

:)
 
Skidmarks and damage are easy all said and done.

Viper Racing on the PC had good visual and physics damage and skidmarks, as did Gran Prix Legends... they were 90's games and had tiny budgets.

PD are good, but there is no denying that somewhere in there they would appear to spend 75% of their time doing non-GT related things, because if they REALLY spent all their time doing JUST GT, then it would have all these things and more.
If they actually do spend 90%+ of their time making GT stuff, then they are still good, but they are damn slow (and not as good as they should be for the slowness evident!)


Personally, considering how fast the quality competition are moving these days, if GT6 takes the same time to appear as GT5 has since GT4, then I don't think the GT series will remain *the* driving game/sim to have!

Dave

Made in games that feature average graphics and 7 or 8 cars. Need for speed 1 had Skidmarks, but they never stayed longer then 5 seconds.

Take a look at the competitions games on the X circle. Forza 3 has less tracks and half as many cars as GT4. It is being touted as a face lifted Forza 2. Thats not development. Thats just, we'll make more money somewhere, neglecting the fact that a DEMO with 5 tracks and 70 odd cars, comprehensively outsold their flagship model.

And what is this 75% of non GT related work are your talking about?

They have a studio of 100 people working day and night, perfecting the game. You sound exactly like that stupid clown on Youtube, calling PD lazy.
 
I have to agree, skid marks go a long way. excellent way to judge wheel spin... luckily the new experience and physics model help the player ''feel'' the car losing grip. skid marks would be expected this late in the series though....
 
1. Physics-for some already realistic, for some ruined. I can't decide, so let's say they'll go through it and make a final decision which I'll be ok with.
2. Graphics-since 2 years ago they've been amazing. I want nothing more than interesting tracks. I even like the demo. Car modeling is in here.
3. Sound-we all know about the sounds. A little improvement but a long way to go.
4. Online-I believe they'll manage to get it right.
5. GT mode-They better make it long and immersing.
6. Damage-Allright if its 170 cars then let it be so.
7. Skidmarks-A must have for me
8. Weather Day/Night cycle

A lot of things to work on (missed AI), but PD are not amateurs. They've been doing that for 10 years. An experienced bunch like the is expected to be able to focus on multiple tasks.
 
After reading about the US influence being the driving force behind damage implementation in GT5, I'm beginning to worry about PD.

I find it amazing a sim developer didn't consider realistic damage a priority alongside the three other fundamentals, physics, graphics and sounds.

Perhaps this gives an insight into the PD/Japanease mentality and is the reason behind the GT series lagging behind in a number of other areas such as weather, day/night, customisation and online.

Even sounds, particle effects, skidmarks etc, which you would think PD would be obsessive about to complement their amazing car models and improving physics, are neglected.

You also have a long list of misjudgments from the lack of news and interaction with the GT community, leaving the GT mode out of GT Mobile, and now a lacklustre GT Academy demo that has been trailed by the videogames media as a GT5 demo, and turned into a PR own goal.

Is it time PD made changes to their structure, perhaps leave the Japanease dpt. to car/track modelling, transfering everything else to a western based dpt. Or just bring in a western producer to drive the development, rather than their current role of simply localising whatever the Japanease dpt. produce.

GT5 will likely be spectacular, so my worries will be for nothing, but when the GT Academy demo doesn't even feature a small improvement like skidmarks, just three months to the full titles release, you wonder are PD going to implement the far more complex features they've promised.
It was Kaz's standpoint from day one that he did NOT want damage.
I personally don't care, most will turn it off just like he said anyway, so what's the point?
Skidmarks? Unless they'll stay there forever, what's the point? If they're implementing skid marks, I wanna see my burnout marks from last week yet.

FYI: It is a GT5 demo, I don't care who told you otherwise, it calls itself a demo.

I kinda agree with the OP. I want to believe that PD has already finished developing everything that is important and just didn't include it in the Academy demo.

And if we take off our fanboy hats, we have to agree that little things like skidmarks and dust/smoke just HAVE to be in the final game.
Major features like damage, *real* handling, tuning of all important parts (and even optical tuning) are expected.

If you accept the full game as "The Real Driving Simulator" while any of those features are missing, you are living with a lie.

I think you confuse "real driving" with real life.
Sure, smoke and skid marks happen, and I can slap a fart can on an 82 civic and gain 2.4 HP. Does a game need that to simulate driving? no. It only need that to simulate driving an 82 civic with a fart can and +2.4 HP.

I can also put a giant HKS banner across the hood of my Buick, so if I can't in GT5, does that mean I can't drive realistically? No, it doesn't.
It means I can't put a giant sticker on a Buick realistically. :sly:
 
I think you confuse "real driving" with real life.
Sure, smoke and skid marks happen, and I can slap a fart can on an 82 civic and gain 2.4 HP. Does a game need that to simulate driving? no. It only need that to simulate driving an 82 civic with a fart can and +2.4 HP.

I can also put a giant HKS banner across the hood of my Buick, so if I can't in GT5, does that mean I can't drive realistically? No, it doesn't.
It means I can't put a giant sticker on a Buick realistically. :sly:

I think you mean the only thing that matters is the gameplay, and that has to be as realistic as possible for "The Real Driving Simulator", right?

I agree with that, but right now the 370z seems to have worse handling than my Golf II :P

I'm just concerned that Turn 10's badmouthing won't get told by PD, because right now, Forza 3 has a great visual editor AND awesome handling of the cars.
 
It was Kaz's standpoint from day one that he did NOT want damage.
I personally don't care, most will turn it off just like he said anyway, so what's the point?
Skidmarks? Unless they'll stay there forever, what's the point? If they're implementing skid marks, I wanna see my burnout marks from last week yet.

FYI: It is a GT5 demo, I don't care who told you otherwise, it calls itself a demo.



I think you confuse "real driving" with real life.
Sure, smoke and skid marks happen, and I can slap a fart can on an 82 civic and gain 2.4 HP. Does a game need that to simulate driving? no. It only need that to simulate driving an 82 civic with a fart can and +2.4 HP.

I can also put a giant HKS banner across the hood of my Buick, so if I can't in GT5, does that mean I can't drive realistically? No, it doesn't.
It means I can't put a giant sticker on a Buick realistically. :sly:

Ok I guess FPS games dont need muzzle flash right? And bullet holes in walls dont matter either right? I guess you can do away with the spectators in driving games too right since theyre not making any difference in your driving. These little things only add to the polish of the game and let you know youre playing a quality game.
 
guys can yall cool it? yall are not spokespersons of the videogame. its not gonna hurt YOUR sales. btw he is gotta point. but i think the physics are great. About damage, the people that are saying it is not a priority because of idiotic ai are idiots themselves. Like real life if you change something has to absorb the impact by changing itself. E.g: God gives you breath but you dont have a brain. it makes no sense. i think kaz is smart enough to change the ai. god! im just 11 and it makes complete sense to me.
 
Japanese philosophy is the only reason why GT series is so good.

And that is the only reason why GT maybe does not have many options and things that western games have, but there is certanly no other game in the world that has what Gran Turismo have.

And that is why GT is so unique.

And I remain strong hopes it will never change towards being "western".
GT stood out from the crowd due to great graphics and lots of content.

These days the competition has caught up on that front, which highlights other areas were the GT series has been lacking.

PD has essentially been turning out the same game, with the same failings, since the original's debut, the only significant improvemts have come on the physics and graphics front.

Doesn't every GT fan want more than GT5P with revised physics and extra content?

I'm not asking for everything on my wishlist to be included in GT5, I do however want to see at least one ground breaking advancement, that could take the form of a realistic damage model, dynamic weather or a track creator.

I wouldn't like to think PD have just been revising the physics and creating car/track models, that would mean GT5P could have been released as a stripped down GT5, and supported with patches and DLC.
 
GT stood out from the crowd due to great graphics and lots of content.

These days the competition has caught up on that front, which highlights other areas were the GT series has been lacking.

Some call it lacking, other call it focused ;)

If you'd ask me, why change something that is still unique?

GT debuted in 1997, I played Test Drive 1 since 1989. And yes, it had manual gears and you could actually shift gears while pressing the clutch. Try this for realism ;) Oh, and of course you could over-rev the engine and so forth.

If you really want radical changes, you shouldn't look in the direction of other sims. There's nothing to be gained from that other than minor game-design changes. Sure, a bit tweaking here, a bit tweaking there. Add some headtracking if you wish, introduce a racing series. But that's about it, the core fundamentals of GT are still cars, cars, cars. And maybe: cars. Not spectators, trees, roll-over ;)

Now, if you want something groundbreaking and genre changing, look at the first Burnout titles. Or more recently Pure and the upcoming Split/Second. Maybe even Midnight Club, which is in my view up to it's third instalment still one of the most carefully crafted new racing franchises. Rockstar has the same kind of obsessiveness if it comes to gameplay design as PD has in visual style.

But you can only do so much to racing sim games. T10 went a radical different way and turned the franchise in an online centric sandbox platform. If you must, you can do some racing. But why bother? There's so much more you can do without ever once joining an online race or make money from doing carer. In my view, Forza isn't a racing game anymore.

It's a showcase and proving ground for Microsoft in testing new online network concepts. It's not focused on racing and choosing cars and racing is about the only 3+ rated genre you have if you want to address a male audience.

In the 18+ bracket, you have GTA and shooter. In the 16+ bracket, there's Halo.

No, if PD wants to succeed, they have to stay the same. Because in its limits, the concept is still sound.

A GT5 with updated graphics and slightly updated gameplay still works. Maybe the GT5 engine is versatile enough for using it for other genres, so there are enough free resources to work on content rather than technology. Kazunori said he wanted to be a film director, so maybe after a decade he switches genres.

But, if you change GT, you're about to lose and share the same faith as Test Drive (I know they were bought by EA to work on NFS) or so many other great franchises that were lost in history. Don't even get me started on Sonic ;)
 
PD have been more innovative than you give credit for.

As far as I am concerned, the competition has not caught up graphics or content-wise. The exteriors and interiors are unmatched. Approx 1000 cars is insane.
 
These days the competition has caught up on that front, which highlights other areas were the GT series has been lacking.

PD has essentially been turning out the same game, with the same failings, since the original's debut, the only significant improvemts have come on the physics and graphics front.

Doesn't every GT fan want more than GT5P with revised physics and extra content?
I think you're exaggerating just a scouche.

You could say to a degree that other racing titles look stellar graphically, in fact most games these days do, and offer a lot of content. I should just cut to the chase and discuss Forza. As much as I hate Microsoft as a monopoly trying to absorb just about every aspect of the electronic side of our lives, and as full of themselves as Turn 10 is, Forza is a great achievement in racing games. Forza 2 and 3 have terrific graphics. The physics are very good. The damage modeling is very good. The car models, though often flawed, are very good, as are the sounds and sensation of racing or drifting. The extent to which you can customize your cars is crazy cool, and with the livery editor, you have the capacity, especially in F3, to recreate just about any race car in history of the offerings in the car list.

Then again, the entire series is plagued with bugs and issues, so it's evidently not so easy to produce a stellar product in every aspect. Gran Turismo comes close, very very close. Other racing games look great, but none of them have replays that look like racing film footage. None of them offer half the cars a Gran Turismo game does, save for GT3, especially considering the wealth of sports cars we get. And this is excluding dinky cars and a herd of Skylines, so don't even go there. No game gives me so much to collect and do.

Perfect? Obviously not, but then you can't name one that is. Now, they are trying at Polyphony. Everything you mentioned is in their to do list. But you have to understand that every video game runs up against a performance budget. Even the most powerful computing system can only draw so much on screen, and when you demand a big feature set, especially if they are performance hogs, something has to give. Take skidmarks. Those have to be drawn too, and if you have 16 cars on track at once in a graphically superior game, they may not last too long. Maybe seconds.

Proper weather is a huge performance pig, especially getting it to look right. A lot of games fudge certain things to get the dynamics on your car right, but the only game I'm aware of that has proper looking weather effects is F1 Championship, which does a lot of fudging, and certainly not the best graphics around.

Damage is another performance albatross, and every game does some short sheeting to get a decent damage build. Heck, just look at Toca 3. If you watch replays, your car is the only one with any sound properties attached. It pulls a lot of smoke and mirror tricks like that to perform as well as it does. The worst issue seems to be getting agreements with the various car manufacturers, and I think we'd be shocked what Microsoft had to spend to get companies like Ferrari to go along with their requirements. If you've followed interviews with Dan Greenawalt as I have, you'll have caught him mention on rare occasions that each carmaker has to be dealt with individually, and sometimes even different models! If you'll notice, some race cars won't let you paint the windshield banners, and a few teams - or possibly sponsors - didn't want to go along with allowing any user content in their spot.

Kazunori doesn't want to do that. He knows he has to, with even a beast of a machine like the PS3, but he wants to do that as little as possible. And he's determined that the cars and racing be near perfect, and that nothing has a noticeable impact on these two things, so everything else has to yield. While many of us here, myself included, would be happy to have a lower res 720p GT5 to give more horsepower to the programmers, it seems Kaz wants to go 1080p again, even if its a stretched 1280x1080. And with these better-than-Prologue graphics, some things may not make it, like tire marks, dynamic weather and time of day transitions, or a livery editor. Loss of the livery editor in particular would make me sad, but I want the game with whatever features I can get. Besides, what other serious racer really innovates anything? Each GTR game is pretty much the same as the last.

It's not like Kazunori-dono doesn't want rain to mess up the pretty look of his cars. He has his priorities, and we can like them or not, but he's The Man, and this is His Game.
 
Proper weather is a huge performance pig, especially getting it to look right. A lot of games fudge certain things to get the dynamics on your car right, but the only game I'm aware of that has proper looking weather effects is F1 Championship, which does a lot of fudging, and certainly not the best graphics around.

To me, the question rather is what weather does to gameplay. I played a lot of PGR4 lately, just for the fun of it lying on the couch and having a blast.

The dynamic weather and different weather conditions keeps replaying the same tracks over and over again entertaining and interesting. Because there isn't really that much finesse in the tracks themselves.

I spent hundreds of laps on Mugello in Forza2, because I found the track to be so intriguing in getting the setup right. If I look back at it I wonder if I was mad, mental or obsessed watching replays and taking down corner speeds to judge where I lost and gained time in different corners with different suspension setups.

So weather in PGR4 was like having 20 variations of the same track so it didn't grow old too fast. And sometimes the visuals were really stunning - the rain having stopped and sun shining on the wet track. On the other hand driving in fog or heavy snowfall was dull, visually.

Maybe weather doesn't add enough depth at this point, maybe the tracks will be more challenging because of very detailed modelling of the surface.

As a simple gameplay decision, weather is a mixed bag.
 
What worries me is the fact that KY is so indecisive. Here's just a few of the things they considered fairly late in the game's development: damage, weather & possibly bikes

I don't know about you, but when you work on a project of this magnitude you better know what you want in it (this is pretty much one of the first things you do) & be focused on meeting those targets. The fact that KY is always "we might add this or that" only several months before the release date gives me impression that they're not really focused.
Couldn't agree more.

As you say, the first thing they need to do before they start a new project is to decide what features they want and set goals. If they then realise they can't make all the things they wanted that's a shame, but they can't come up with new ideas and begin to test them only months before the release... 👎
 
I think you're exaggerating just a scouche.

You could say to a degree that other racing titles look stellar graphically, in fact most games these days do, and offer a lot of content. I should just cut to the chase and discuss Forza. As much as I hate Microsoft as a monopoly trying to absorb just about every aspect of the electronic side of our lives, and as full of themselves as Turn 10 is, Forza is a great achievement in racing games. Forza 2 and 3 have terrific graphics. The physics are very good. The damage modeling is very good. The car models, though often flawed, are very good, as are the sounds and sensation of racing or drifting. The extent to which you can customize your cars is crazy cool, and with the livery editor, you have the capacity, especially in F3, to recreate just about any race car in history of the offerings in the car list.

Then again, the entire series is plagued with bugs and issues, so it's evidently not so easy to produce a stellar product in every aspect. Gran Turismo comes close, very very close. Other racing games look great, but none of them have replays that look like racing film footage. None of them offer half the cars a Gran Turismo game does, save for GT3, especially considering the wealth of sports cars we get. And this is excluding dinky cars and a herd of Skylines, so don't even go there. No game gives me so much to collect and do.

Perfect? Obviously not, but then you can't name one that is. Now, they are trying at Polyphony. Everything you mentioned is in their to do list. But you have to understand that every video game runs up against a performance budget. Even the most powerful computing system can only draw so much on screen, and when you demand a big feature set, especially if they are performance hogs, something has to give. Take skidmarks. Those have to be drawn too, and if you have 16 cars on track at once in a graphically superior game, they may not last too long. Maybe seconds.

Proper weather is a huge performance pig, especially getting it to look right. A lot of games fudge certain things to get the dynamics on your car right, but the only game I'm aware of that has proper looking weather effects is F1 Championship, which does a lot of fudging, and certainly not the best graphics around.

Damage is another performance albatross, and every game does some short sheeting to get a decent damage build. Heck, just look at Toca 3. If you watch replays, your car is the only one with any sound properties attached. It pulls a lot of smoke and mirror tricks like that to perform as well as it does. The worst issue seems to be getting agreements with the various car manufacturers, and I think we'd be shocked what Microsoft had to spend to get companies like Ferrari to go along with their requirements. If you've followed interviews with Dan Greenawalt as I have, you'll have caught him mention on rare occasions that each carmaker has to be dealt with individually, and sometimes even different models! If you'll notice, some race cars won't let you paint the windshield banners, and a few teams - or possibly sponsors - didn't want to go along with allowing any user content in their spot.

Kazunori doesn't want to do that. He knows he has to, with even a beast of a machine like the PS3, but he wants to do that as little as possible. And he's determined that the cars and racing be near perfect, and that nothing has a noticeable impact on these two things, so everything else has to yield. While many of us here, myself included, would be happy to have a lower res 720p GT5 to give more horsepower to the programmers, it seems Kaz wants to go 1080p again, even if its a stretched 1280x1080. And with these better-than-Prologue graphics, some things may not make it, like tire marks, dynamic weather and time of day transitions, or a livery editor. Loss of the livery editor in particular would make me sad, but I want the game with whatever features I can get. Besides, what other serious racer really innovates anything? Each GTR game is pretty much the same as the last.

It's not like Kazunori-dono doesn't want rain to mess up the pretty look of his cars. He has his priorities, and we can like them or not, but he's The Man, and this is His Game.
If PD's ambition is a virtual museum they should say as much, non existent A.I, no damage consequences if you crash, no variation in weather conditions or time of day etc., are not conducive to simulating driving and racing a car.

I'm not even convinced PD are the market leaders when it comes to content, considering we don't expect GT5 to feature Porsche, while Turn 10 are always very quick to release new DLC like the LMP1 Audi R15 and Aston Martin.

In GT5 are we going to be stuck with the LMP1 Audi R10 that PD have had three years to model, and those remodelled prototypes from GT4?
 
Last edited:
If PD's ambition is a virtual museum they should say as much
They did, many times, especially with GT4. In fact, have you noticed in Prologue, you spend time in the virtual Museum during idles?

non existent A.I.
I know this is a popular cliche, but I disagree with you guys. I've played PC sims lauded for "proper" bot A.I. and I was appalled at their performance in different situations. I'm pretty much down to ignoring anyone's criticism of GT's A.I. because there's too much personal bias involved.

no damage consequences if you crash, no variation in weather conditions or time of day etc., are not conducive to simulating driving and racing a car.
Well, all you have to comment on is GT4 right now. No one in their right mind is going to release a Prologue of a future full release with a complete feature set. Even now, we're learning things about GT5, when it's just a few short months from release. So, the racing sim world has surpassed what Polyphony has been able to accomplish on the PS2.

Well, duh. ;)

I'm not even convinced PD are the market leaders when it comes to content considering we don't expect GT5 to feature Porsche, while Turn 10 are always very quick to release new DLC like the LMP1 Audi R15 and Aston Martin.
T10 are very quick to release repackages of existing cars, for the most part, and are almost always supercars or race cars. So, it's a good thing to pay actual money for cars we essentially already have in Forza to start with?? And here, I thought the "Skyline" argument applied to everyone...
 
Back