The GT6 Epic Whining and Crying Thread

[TouringDevotee]

+1. Awhile back, I recall Kaz stating that his vision of a GT can't be done with today's hardware (before PS4). Now with the PS4 being as powerful as it is and a Playstation exclusive at that, there should be no excuses what so every to deliver a GT title to its full potential. There is no porting or dump down to other consoles to worry about.

Is there ever really enough power for graphic intensive visions? They've spent an awful long time with graphics, but I would like to see the next GT have a heavy focus on gameplay, physics. Hopefully some of this has happened with GT6, but we won't know for a little bit.

The statement that GT5 pushed the PS3 to its limits is a lie imo. So the improvements to GT6 doesn't push the PS3 to its limits. This makes me fell that they are leaving hardware performance on the table. If a system was pushed to its limit, its pushed to its limits with very little cushion. The upgrades to GT6 with the weather, night and day transistions, the lighting, the aerodynamic, the suspension modeling and the tire modeling and so forth is beyond GT5. Its to been seen if these improvements are worthy of their efforts. With what they have done with GT6 can be done on a PS3, the next level on the PS4 should be limitless. The RAM is definitely there and although the processor isn't top notch its still an upgrade to the PS3. The power of the PS4 should definitely make GT7 and beyond shine and tower over any competition once again. Unfortunately, the second installment of GT on new hardware is deemed at being the better game. GT7 needs to be ground up and not ported in my opinion. I prefer to see GT7 in 4 years instead of a year or two as a ground up game. Problem here though is that the PS4 would be 4 years old with no GT on the platform yet. But setting the base on new hardware for GT7 sets up GT8. Porting will involve upscaling more than likely which isn't the same as true 1080dpi at 60fps.

I don't know if it is a lie so much as a misrepresentation of the story (bending the truth, self promotion) or improperly worded. I take it to mean that they are pushing their programming skills to the limit and taking quite a bit of time to streamline processes that they'd rather not, in order to keep frame rate, et al, proper. However, a heavier weight machine is always desirable.

In my opinion, GT doesn't need a long period of time for a PS4 title, nor a huge graphic improvement. What they need is a focus on gameplay, fun factor, tuning, ability to make it feel yours, community, and as always, a way of direct customer feedback (input).

I only wish good things for the GT series and hope that they challenge the hell out of the competition, and that the competition answers the challenge; it can only be good for the consumer, no matter which series they support (if not both).

 

[CTznOfTime]

Watch out, everyone! We have someone making a valid argument supported by evidence here! 👍

 

[FLIGHT50]

I believe they did say new "tracks" every month...I don't believe they said new "cars" every month..IIRC

This is what I recall seeing as well. Getting a new track every month is a big task for PD. Although I am removed from school by 10+ years as a computer animation grad, it shouldn't take too long to model one track if the layout is already known.

The design part is what can delay a finished model. The order should be that the scanning team stay ahead of the design/layout team by a month or more (for real world tracks). The design team then needs to stay ahead of the modeling team by a month or more. Then the modelers have to give the programmers the time in order to get the track out. If everyone can stay ahead of the programmers, then it should be possible to get a track per month. Even if we got a track every two months it would still be fine by me. But it is a known fact that GT needs more tracks.

The original and real world tracks are being requested left and right. Midfield, El Captain, Seattle, Spa, Silverstone, Brands Hatch and Bathhurst were among the most heavily requested. Pd granted those wishes for the real world tracks so kudos to PD for that. The original tracks should be even easier since they are PD designed tracks. They can enhance and change whatever they wish without complaints that they don't resemble this or that. In a dedicated team, with dedicated task, it should be feasible within 30-31 days to add to the track list. It sounds like GT can easily have 50+ tracks and that's not counting the configurations. The problem I have with this, is why didn't we get this with GT5 and they had 4-5 years. Although dlc is not on disk, I am perfectly fine loading up my hard drive with GT tracks and cars.

Cars I am not so concerned about. We can get those left and right but without a track to race them on, they are worthless. For example, its much more pleasing to drive a GTR on 10 different tracks vs being about to drive 10 different cars on one track.

 

[mister dog]

With the risk of sounding ignorant, what kind of news could there possibly be? I think the GT6 website covers everything we need to know before next friday. There also has to be some nice surprises left for us to discover.

Breaking news! An early copy that someone acquired as it fell of a truck, a hands-on preview revealing new details, just something!

 

[FLIGHT50]

I only wish good things for the GT series and hope that they challenge the hell out of the competition, and that the competition answers the challenge; it can only be good for the consumer, no matter which series they support (if not both).

I couldn't have said it any better. Competition means that to keep up with the Jones, you have to be able to play like the Jones. Each competitor has to push one another. There is no advancement for any game for that matter if being push doesn't come into play.

 

[OriginalCheezIt]

Like I said, I can read. All the information you need is on youtube gameplay videos, and on the Gran Turismo official Website. Plus, we all know the way GT series is going since GT4, we all know that KAZ is not about hiding features for the release date; but rather about stripping announced features.

- We know the full car list.
- We know that the track creator won't be on disc.
- We know there is not much improvement with the A.I.
- We know that there will be no hood view.
- We know that B spec won't be on disc.
- We know that there will be a system with stars instead of a ranking system
- We know weather will not be for all tracks
- We know standard cars are still there, with no cockpit view
- We know that there won't be a livery editor
- And it's pretty much given that the A spec core experience will be the same. (Rabbit chasing, pointless economy, not much diversity, pattern : buy upgrades, rince repeat.)

WARNING: HERE BE SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF IGNORANCE!
PROCEED WITH CAUTION! ​

- We do not know the full car list
http://www.gran-turismo.com/local/jp/data1/products/gt6/carlist_en.html
* This list is one part of the cars planned for inclusion, and is subject to change.

- Yes, we have known that since the new track creator was announced. What is your point here? Even if we don't get the GPS course maker, it will still be completely different than the generator we got for GT5.

- Actually, there is significant improvement in the AI
https://www.gtplanet.net/gt6-hands-on/

- Ok.... And?

- B-Spec is now combined with A-Spec, like it was in GT4
https://www.gtplanet.net/famitsus-h...ibes-early-single-player-gameplay-experience/

- Ok.... And?

- Ok.... And?

- You try modeling 1200+ cars, each with 500,000+ polygons over the course of 3 years and let me know how many you get done.

- There probably won't be a livery editor. This is the only point you made that actually fazes me a little. But still not much.

- Once again, unless you have played the final version, YOU DON'T KNOW THAT.

And to your introduction points. You are correct in saying that all of the information necessary can be found on the GT official website and in gameplay footage. But apparently you still have to find that information. And GT5 was a bit of a stumble for PD. So what? You make it sound like PD is just flushing the entire GT series down the toilet. GT5 was still an improvement over GT4 in most areas, it just wasn't as big of an improvement as we originally wanted. And Kaz isn't really about taking away announced features. Remember GT5 Spec 2.0? The only time PD dropped announced features was prior to GT5's release when they had to cut some features because they had delayed the game for so long and had to release it to market. Kaz and PD appear to have learned their lesson in that regard: release the game on time, and add the features you wanted to add later.

Good day to you, sir.

Nope, there isn't any sarcasm here at all. That was a valid point that Deol made.

Fixed.

 

[eSZee]

This also brings up a rather interesting point; Kaz has mentioned GT6 will have regular, monthly car and track DLC's. If GT7 is to really show up so soon, to have any unique content over GT6 (and not just end up a simple visual upgrade), I can't imagine these monthly packs will be very big at all.

Aside: Cadwell Park is possibly one of my favourite tracks, judging by years of videos (and thanks to either Car or Evo introducing me to it). I'm hoping it shows up in either of the two big console racers eventually...

Because gt6 and gt7 will be on different consoles, I think they might get away with them being very similar, content wise. I'm almost expecting gt7 to be a pretty version of what GT6 ends up being after all the DLC has dropped.

 

[karelpipa]

What i liked on past Gran Turismo games (EXcluding GT5) was freedom in Aspec mode, your only limitation was money.
In GT5 they included XP/Level system. They now included Stars system for GT6 which effectively is the same ***ing thing!
Why, why, why they did so?

 

[HaylRayzor]

Here with barely a week left before release I find my misgivings deeper than ever. I have been hoping for something positive to trickle out but the latest news is just more *meh*.

I may not buy this game at all.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

- We do not know the full car list
http://www.gran-turismo.com/local/jp/data1/products/gt6/carlist_en.html
* This list is one part of the cars planned for inclusion, and is subject to change.

While I'm sure that's the case - and it already has changed, what with losing the DeltaWing - do people really expect it to be missing anything drastic? How much change are you really expecting?

Yes, we have known that since the new track creator was announced. What is your point here? Even if we don't get the GPS course maker, it will still be completely different than the generator we got for GT5.

The point is it's not in the game, and as far as we know, there is absolutely no time frame for when it might be. That's a bit disappointing for a feature that PD has talked up quite a lot this year. It's become acceptable false advertising - sort of like how LBP2 claimed it had Move support on the box, and that didn't show up until well over a year after release. Or, more aptly, like the GT5 box's claim of leaderboards; I mean, they did show up, eventually, for seasonals and nothing else...

- Ok.... And?

Certainly an interesting rebuttal to any valid criticisms.

- Ok.... And?

- Ok.... And?

Quite.

- You try modeling 1200+ cars, each with 500,000+ polygons over the course of 3 years and let me know how many you get done.

The "you try it" response is such a bad one. Have you ever been critical of a car you've driven? Maybe a movie you've watched? Well you shouldn't be - you haven't made either!

Besides, PD wouldn't have to model 1200+ cars in three years for (at least) two reasons:

• They already had nearly 300.
• Given the number of duplicates making up the Standard ranks, the number needed to be converted (and can't be heavily based off existing Premiums) would be hovering somewhere in the 500-600 range.

Not saying I'd expect every Standard to have a Premium replacement in this timeframe, but then again, I'm one of the people who thinks we could easily lose a few of them and only offend a handful of folks.

And Kaz isn't really about taking away announced features.

Well, unless you look back at the course maker answers this year.

Remember GT5 Spec 2.0? The only time PD dropped announced features was prior to GT5's release when they had to cut some features because they had delayed the game for so long and had to release it to market. Kaz and PD appear to have learned their lesson in that regard: release the game on time, and add the features you wanted to add later.

I'm not entirely sure that's a good lesson; the idea of shipping a stripped game simply because your new features aren't ready in time says, to me, that either the scope of the project was massively misaligned with the target release date (not a new thing with GT), or that the parent company is making said release date final (also not new).

Oh, and you can multi-quote folks; just hit Reply to every post you want to respond to, and then head down to the reply box. They should all be there sequentially 👍

Because gt6 and gt7 will be on different consoles, I think they might get away with them being very similar, content wise. I'm almost expecting gt7 to be a pretty version of what GT6 ends up being after all the DLC has dropped.

That's pretty much what I expect, too. For better or worse.

 

[p3bucky]

What i liked on past Gran Turismo games (EXcluding GT5) was freedom in Aspec mode, your only limitation was money.
In GT5 they included XP/Level system. They now included Stars system for GT6 which effectively is the same ***ing thing!
Why, why, why they did so?

Atcually, it is now money (for cars), stars, and licenses. So there are really 3 limitations.

 

[Johnnypenso]

This is what I recall seeing as well. Getting a new track every month is a big task for PD. Although I am removed from school by 10+ years as a computer animation grad, it shouldn't take too long to model one track if the layout is already known....snip... The problem I have with this, is why didn't we get this with GT5 and they had 4-5 years. Although dlc is not on disk, I am perfectly fine loading up my hard drive with GT tracks and cars.

I think the reason you didn't get this with GT5 is DLC. I don't think PD was prepared for ongoing development for whatever reason. They were also scrambling trying to fix all the faults in GT5 for quite some time and a lot of the focus is on that. Those bugs are mostly ironed out IMO and now they realize they can focus on DLC. We'll never know, but I'm guessing half the tracks are complete or nearly so and ready to go and what they'll be working on now is Summer 2014 DLC forward. We already know that fans are craving the old tracks more than new cars, so having one every month for even $5 x 1-2 Million is a good chunk of change for the next few months or couple of years. Throw in some car packs, maybe photomode DLC and it could easily add up to $50-100Million by next Christmas...nothing to sneeze at.

 

[OriginalCheezIt]

While I'm sure that's the case - and it already has changed, what with losing the DeltaWing - do people really expect it to be missing anything drastic? How much change are you really expecting?



The point is it's not in the game, and as far as we know, there is absolutely no time frame for when it might be. That's a bit disappointing for a feature that PD has talked up quite a lot this year. It's become acceptable false advertising - sort of like how LBP2 claimed it had Move support on the box, and that didn't show up until well over a year after release. Or, more aptly, like the GT5 box's claim of leaderboards; I mean, they did show up, eventually, for seasonals and nothing else...



Certainly an interesting rebuttal to any valid criticisms.



Quite.



The "you try it" response is such a bad one. Have you ever been critical of a car you've driven? Maybe a movie you've watched? Well you shouldn't be - you haven't made either!

Besides, PD wouldn't have to model 1200+ cars in three years for (at least) two reasons:

• They already had nearly 300.
• Given the number of duplicates making up the Standard ranks, the number needed to be converted (and can't be heavily based off existing Premiums) would be hovering somewhere in the 500-600 range.

Not saying I'd expect every Standard to have a Premium replacement in this timeframe, but then again, I'm one of the people who thinks we could easily lose a few of them and only offend a handful of folks.



Well, unless you look back at the course maker answers this year.



I'm not entirely sure that's a good lesson; the idea of shipping a stripped game simply because your new features aren't ready in time says, to me, that either the scope of the project was massively misaligned with the target release date (not a new thing with GT), or that the parent company is making said release date final (also not new).

Oh, and you can multi-quote folks; just hit Reply to every post you want to respond to, and then head down to the reply box. They should all be there sequentially 👍



That's pretty much what I expect, too. For better or worse.

Ok, now here are some valid points.
In fact, you just shut me up. Apologies for attempting to cure a bad argument with a bad argument.

All I have to say now to the "whiners and complainers" is, please provide an argument (with evidence) that pertains to the majority of the GT audience. Don't just blather on about how the game is crap because certain personal preferences (hood view, some random car being included [except for high-profile cars, like Ferrari F12, LaFerrari, P1, E30, and the like] and other nuances that don't really provide to the community as a whole).

And it's funny that you mention me not designing/building cars, because that is precisely what I want to do after college. So I'll be able to criticize other cars one day. 👍

Whoops, sorry 'bout that double post as well. *facepalm*

 

[HKS racer]

All I have to say now to the "whiners and complainers" is, please provide an argument (with evidence) that pertains to the majority of the GT audience.

Are you serious? Read this thread from page one. You'll find plenty of them.

 

[FLIGHT50]

I think the reason you didn't get this with GT5 is DLC. I don't think PD was prepared for ongoing development for whatever reason. They were also scrambling trying to fix all the faults in GT5 for quite some time and a lot of the focus is on that. Those bugs are mostly ironed out IMO and now they realize they can focus on DLC. We'll never know, but I'm guessing half the tracks are complete or nearly so and ready to go and what they'll be working on now is Summer 2014 DLC forward. We already know that fans are craving the old tracks more than new cars, so having one every month for even $5 x 1-2 Million is a good chunk of change for the next few months or couple of years. Throw in some car packs, maybe photomode DLC and it could easily add up to $50-100Million by next Christmas...nothing to sneeze at.

I agree here. PD had to cover alot of ground to better GT5 and that was insane. I expect GT6 to be what we all thought GT5 could be. Add in the dlc for the next year and we should have a killer of a racer. Outside of graphics, I think it could still be better than Forza 5. Gameplay to me is superior to graphics. In a way it is good that GT6 is on PS3. GT does best when it has one installment that had a chance to iron things out so I agree here as well. That's why I fear for GT7 unfortunately. Considering there is a pattern that we seen now, GT7 will suffer at tad bit. However, GT6 should be in great standing once dlc starts rolling out. The potential is there just as GT5 had it. I am getting all anxious all over again as I was with GT5. I sure hope I don't have to trash talk GT6 as well. My lil ole heart can not take another down GT game, lol.

All I have to say now to the "whiners and complainers" is, please provide an argument (with evidence) that pertains to the majority of the GT audience. Don't just blather on about how the game is crap because certain personal preferences (hood view, some random car being included [except for high-profile cars, like Ferrari F12, LaFerrari, P1, E30, and the like] and other nuances that don't really provide to the community as a whole).

This is the whining thread you know. Better here than making other threads and wasting the mods time by them policing and locking those threads.

 

[mister dog]

Are you serious? Read this thread from page one. You'll find plenty of them.

And we are almost at page 100!

A milestone for us 'whiners'!

 

[OriginalCheezIt]

Are you serious? Read this thread from page one. You'll find plenty of them.

I'm not saying that there aren't any, in fact, I'm sure many of the arguments brought forth are entirely acceptable and well-supported. This was aimed to the ones that are not.

People have a right to an opinion, just as I have a right to have an opinion on their opinion. If they want me to agree with them, such as I did with SlipZtrEm, then they will have to provide sufficient evidence to persuade me.

For example, I would much rather see an argument proposed like this:

"The BMW M3 E30 was such a historic car for the industry. It's prominence in motorsports in the 1980's warrants it's inclusion in the GT series. I am disappointed that it is not in GT6."

Rather than this:

"y did pd not put e30 m3 in gt6?! kaz is just so dumb gt just needs to DIE!!!11!

This is the whining thread you know. Better here than making other threads and wasting the mods time by them policing and locking those threads.

Truth. 👍

 

[SCER]

People have a right to an opinion, just as I have a right to have an opinion on their opinion. If they want me to agree with them, such as I did with SlipZtrEm, then they will have to provide sufficient evidence to persuade me.

For example, I would much rather see an argument proposed like this:

"The BMW M3 E30 was such a historic car for the industry. It's prominence in motorsports in the 1980's warrants it's inclusion in the GT series. I am disappointed that it is not in GT6."

Rather than this:

"y did pd not put e30 m3 in gt6?! kaz is just so dumb gt just needs to DIE!!!11!

To be fair I'd say that most of the whiners/criers here have pretty coherent arguments, and before you accuse me of bias I'll tell you now I can't stand them

 

[Johnnypenso]

I'm not saying that there aren't any, in fact, I'm sure many of the arguments brought forth are entirely acceptable and well-supported. This was aimed to the ones that are not.

People have a right to an opinion, just as I have a right to have an opinion on their opinion. If they want me to agree with them, such as I did with SlipZtrEm, then they will have to provide sufficient evidence to persuade me.

For example, I would much rather see an argument proposed like this:

"The BMW M3 E30 was such a historic car for the industry. It's prominence in motorsports in the 1980's warrants it's inclusion in the GT series. I am disappointed that it is not in GT6."

Rather than this:

"y did pd not put e30 m3 in gt6?! kaz is just so dumb gt just needs to DIE!!!11!

Truth. 👍

I understand your position and sympathize but so long as posters on this thread or any other are not violating the AUP (the example you gave would violate the AUP for grammar, spelling, sentence structure etc. ) they are free to post whatever they want. You may not like it, it may not convince you, and they may not care. It's all good, so long as the AUP is respected.

 

[OriginalCheezIt]

I understand your position and sympathize but so long as posters on this thread or any other are not violating the AUP (the example you gave would violate the AUP for grammar, spelling, sentence structure etc. ) they are free to post whatever they want. You may not like it, it may not convince you, and they may not care. It's all good, so long as the AUP is respected.

Just an example, my good man.

But maybe this thread is not the place for me...
💡 I'm gonna board the hype train and go on down to the "Why are you excited for GT6?" thread!

 

[TorqueHappenS08]

Any new info regarding tuning options?

 

[The Stig Farmer]

Any new info regarding tuning options?

NAAAWWWZ is back. So expect realistic damage modelling

 

[TorqueHappenS08]

That is hilarious.

 

[fredyellowone]

Speaking of cars, I always wondered why the 1989 Pontiac Trans Am Turbo wasn't featured anywhere on the GT series.
Beside the Corvette, in 1989, that Trans Am was the fastest car you could buy anywhere in the United States.

And it's rare a lot. Only 1550 copies ever made.

 

[mistersafeway]

What i liked on past Gran Turismo games (EXcluding GT5) was freedom in Aspec mode, your only limitation was money.
In GT5 they included XP/Level system. They now included Stars system for GT6 which effectively is the same ***ing thing!
Why, why, why they did so?

You may want to play the earlier games again, as GT-GT4 forced you to earn licences before competing in race series, a restriction GT5 actually removed.

 

[machschnel]

"Step 3 describes the new Star system in GT6 that requires you to collect a certain number of them before you’re allowed into new races."
https://www.gtplanet.net/famitsus-h...ibes-early-single-player-gameplay-experience/

So how does this differ from the EXP system used in GT5? Will cars be locked by the "Star system" as well?

 

[eSZee]

So how does this differ from the EXP system used in GT5? Will cars be locked by the "Star system" as well?

It doesn't.

 

[machschnel]

It doesn't.

So why "change" it? Are they after the Mario audience?

 

[wowbaggerBR]

So why "change" it? Are they after the Mario audience?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Expect some serious challenges with turtles.

Man, I love GTP humor.

 

[Tier 2 Racing]

So why "change" it? Are they after the Mario audience?

Same premise as the "standard" cars not being in GT6?