We need fun!!!!

[R35 SKYLIN3]

I'm saying that blindly following others is a bad idea. Of course you can do stuff others have done, unless there are supposed legal reasons against it, but only if it actually fits in with the package you're trying to create.

The problem with this thread is that it hinges on a particular definition of "fun". Some people get all the fun they need standing outside an airport with a pair of binoculars, whilst others can do nothing less than jump off a cliff and fly close to obstacles in a squirrel suit.

That said, I'm not against things like mini-games appearing, although I think there should actually be a "rules and regulations" editor / tool-set that allows us to create our own games as we wish, rather than rely on the developers' sense of "fun".

you make a good point, if they gave you a r&r editor then how would you play these "mini games" against anyone other than friends? my idea would be like a select few "modes of the week" gt would put lobbies up for or something

 

[dojOdRiFTeR]

WE NEED MORE TNA'S IN THE GAME. MAYBE A DESTRUCTION DERBY MODE.

 

[MSTER232]

In GT5 i have noticed a real abundance (lack of, cant spell that word) of any sort of fun game modes bar a weak attempt at drifting, GT6 really needs to take example from the likes of PGR and have things like Cat and mouse and in my opinion the best online mode in any game ive ever played, Bulldog mode, along with Forza's Tag modes and its cat and mouse, it offers a much more varied online experiance, you see these things popping up unofficially in lobbies but usually it falls apart. GT6 could benefit greatly from this so long as they were kept equal, (class limiting system like forza or group in PGR) or a pp limit, does the community agree or am i growing insane before my time?

Cheese.

(But I do think that we need a little more fun modes in GT6)

 

[Griffith500]

you make a good point, if they gave you a r&r editor then how would you play these "mini games" against anyone other than friends? my idea would be like a select few "modes of the week" gt would put lobbies up for or something

I honestly don't have an infallible way of promoting access to these modes, outside of a gallery of user-created content, LBP style, maybe. The course generator tracks suffer in a similar way for not having this universal access to others' creations.
"Mode of the week" sounds good, with perennial favourites being included into the game "as standard" as the game is updated, maybe. We only really have two modes as it stands: "normal race" and "shuffle race", plus one extra if we never start the race.

It would probably play out like the mod-scene on the PC; you search active rooms and look for those servers hosting your particular brand of fun, or host your own and hope others join. Of course, that means improving the browser and filtering to make searching easier, as well as improving the visibility of the room options; too many people don't seem to read those options and join "constrained" rooms expecting to be able to race whatever they want. Also those rooms that get "inherited" and whose spirit of operation thence gets changed against what's described in the title and original "owner's" intent.

 

[dr_slump]

Yes yes, we need tracks with loopings, ramps, flamethrowers, banana peels, boost arrows, etc.

 

[R35 SKYLIN3]

Yes yes, we need tracks with loopings, ramps, flamethrowers, banana peels, boost arrows, etc.

killer tortoises, tanks, 300mph buggies and dinosaurs also

 

[dr_slump]

killer tortoises, tanks, 300mph buggies and dinosaurs also

I agree, no good game without dinosaurs. BF3 is a great example.

 

[Griffith500]

You can't have dinosaurs without jetpacks! Dinosoars!
Imagine a Velociraptor Deinonychus with wings...

In all seriousness, though, I think the ability to reincarnate Stunts in GT would be awesome.

 

[Samus]

I really hate it when people use "It's a simulator" as a reason for not having more quirky and laid back features. GT is not a racing simulator, it features very little to do with racing except the basic core driving. That is the only thing GT5 really simulates and as such there is no valid reason it can't feature some casual driving modes as long as they're still relatively realistic with real world physics.

The way some people talk you'd think GT is a serious sim like rFactor, iRacing or even the Simbin games. It's not, it's a fun game with fairly realistic vehicle physics.

 

[JBanton]

"Tag" sounds good, if the physics are improved and the Tank Car returns, it should be very interesting indeed

 

[Downhill Dino]

@SimonK: It's made for a wider audience, no? Because it's made for such people doesn't make it a simulator? It is simulating driving is it not?

 

[Samus]

@SimonK: It's made for a wider audience, no? Because it's made for such people doesn't make it a simulator? It is simulating driving is it not?

Yes but what in itself is serious about simulating driving? Nothing, driving can be serious or it can be silly/fun. Those other games I mentioned are serious racing sims, that is their only purpose and are super serious and as close to real serious racing as possible with practice, quali, flags, rules, penalties etc etc. Those games wouldn't suit casual game modes, GT would.

 

[Downhill Dino]

Well yes, sorry I read your post thinking that you were saying it wasn't a simulator because it's not like these other games. My bad.

 

[whereSTheFUhd]

[...]zohsix i am not in any way calling your post stupid i am saying that in my opinion a person who plays games is a gamer, which is simple logic, when you say im not a gamer that does not imply that you dont play games much it implys you dont play games at all

That's only your singular opinion, however, that does not make it the more widely accepted use of the term in the gaming world, which would be where the most apropos distinction would be determined, since you are indeed talking about games and gamers.

A true gamer is someone that plays a wide variety of games (first person shooters, RPGs, MMOs, real-time strategy, platform games, fighting games, action adventure, etc). They embrace and enjoy games in general, not just one select genre that happens to coincide with a specific interest that exists outside of the gaming world (which in this case would be cars and driving them).

On the other hand, if a person embraces and enjoys cars and everything about them, including driving them to their full potential (i.e., a driver / car guy), that passion may very well extend into games that attempt to simulate the interconnected systems of a car and its dynamics. Yet, if the only games one plays are those directly related to cars and the attempted true simulation of their dynamics, that does not make them a gamer. They are a driver / car guy.

Likewise, a true gamer, who enjoys a wide variety of games, may also happen to enjoy games that are decent driving simulators. However, that does not make them a true car guy.

The two worlds of gaming and cars may happen to slightly overlap in such an instance, however, it does not change the people who happen to exist in those two distinct spheres. They are very different people.

Of course, there are varying shades of grey and you will have people who straddle both camps to differing degrees, however, the distinction still remains.

Simply put, someone that enjoys driving simulators, solely due to their passion for cars, driving them at their limits, and the distinct connection one has with the car while communicating with it at those limits (hence the prerequisite for a faithful physics engine), is not a gamer. The only tether securely anchoring him or her to that game is firmly rooted in the real world cars that it attempts to accurately simulate. Without that, he or she would not be playing or enjoying it.

 

[R35 SKYLIN3]

After that I'm just thinking your making an elongated (I think that's a word) of why these people play games, just because they play it because they only care about the cars makes them a specific type of gamer, a person who plays and appreciates a wide range of games is indeed a true gamer, a person who plays only sports games, a "sports gamer" a person who plays only car games "car gamer" as far as I am concerned no matter whatever reason you play games for does not change that these people are still "gamers"

 

[PiRacingChamp]

This is one of the times I'm glad PD doesn't listen so well.

 

[R35 SKYLIN3]

This is one of the times I'm glad PD doesn't listen so well.

dont like it move on, give an opinion but dont just come here and slate it without saying what you dont like about it 👎

 

[whereSTheFUhd]

After that I'm just thinking your making an elongated (I think that's a word) of why these people play games, just because they play it because they only care about the cars makes them a specific type of gamer, a person who plays and appreciates a wide range of games is indeed a true gamer, a person who plays only sports games, a "sports gamer" a person who plays only car games "car gamer" as far as I am concerned no matter whatever reason you play games for does not change that these people are still "gamers"

As you stated yourself, that's as far as you are concerned, which still makes it only your singular opinion...

The person that you were initially responding in contention to categorized himself as a person that was not a gamer. In the broader sphere that encompasses the larger majority outside of you, he would be right. That is all.

 

[JBanton]

In kart races give us power-ups like red shells, green shells, banana skins etc jk

If we had a free-roam world then driving would certainly be a lot more fun, it would be a change from racing all the time.