Why GT owns

[Dave A]

I don't understand

If GT3 was released after GT4 it would be GT3 which you would call boring

No I wouldn't, GT3 was fun GT4 wasn't. People who bash GT3 imo are people who care about one thing, content volume as opposed to quality. The quality of GT3's content was brilliant.

How was GT4 badly done? Where are it's flaws compared to GT3? If it had a simple online mode and a simple color/livery editor nobody would say anything

The physics for one were awful in GT4 imo. Sure GT3's were no more realistic, but at least the falws in GT3's didn't interfere with the whole concept of the cars being fun to drive. GT4's did imo. Neither are the pinnacle of realism physics wise, bother are probably fairly close in terms of how much of a percent of what they do is right and wrong, but GT3's maintaine dthe fun aspect of driving. GT4 didn't.

Also GT3 was a much, much better structured game. GT4 was far too lacking in direction. GT4 had a much worse prize car structure to any GT game in the past. The racing events in GT4 were also as poorly thought of as the poorsst in GT3. There was so much in the gmae that had no real use in the GT mode it was daft.

GT4 was GT3 but much bigger. How is that a bad thing? If you never played GT3 or GT4 before and you were going to buy one which would you buy?

Without knowing any better, I'd buy GT4. But no, GT4 was not GT3 but bigger, GT4 is a bigger game but it is not GT3 but bigger. If it was GT3 but bigger I'd have wondered why the physics didn't improve, but I'd have enjoyed it anyway.

The only problem with GT4 is that the only extras besides more cars and tracks was photomode. There was no online, no car editor, nothing. That was it's problem. Scrapping the online mode at the last minute hurt, bigtime.

And the physics changes they made, which led to some staggeringly odd vehicle behaviour under.

People begain playing Forza and enjoyed it. Why? Because they could satisfy their bloodthirst and crash cars. And there was a good online mode.

Mainly I think because of the online and customisation. Two things Forza and Forza 2 did brilliantly. The customisation is the only reason I kept playng Forza 1. Forza 2 has introdcued good physics into the mix, physics that manage to be good and enjoyable at the same time. It has it's fair share of flaws like GT3 and 4, but like GT3 it made it fun despite that.

But I still enjoyed GT4, much more than GT3.

Fair enough, for you. I didn't, neither did Wolfe. I would much rather GT5 have less than half GT4's content but be a good game at it's core, than a shed load of content and no progression or a backwards step at it's core.

It's not all about what you see, it's the engine under the games virtual skin that determines how good a game really is. GT3's was better than GT4's imo.

Ultimately, the more realistic the physics engine can be, the less scop there is for stupid flaws and oddities like what I kept experiencing in GT4. So if GT5 is notably more realistic, and not just about as realistic but different, then there's a higher chance I'll enjoy GT5 than disslike it.

 

[Hun200kmh]

Well, I have enjoyed GT3 far more than GT4 I have played GT3 far more than GT4. Maybe because GT3 didn't have real competition in the PS2, and GT4 had.

But I think there's another reason that, in my mind, made GT3 better and more enjoyable. The career (GT) mode. In GT3 I started the career mode with a Miata and I had to squeeze out of that car A LOT before I could get enough money to buy a better car. I had to spend carefully the credits I earned. In GT4, for each miserable bronze medal you get in a driving license ... you get a car ...

When I finally started GT4's career mode I had a garage full of cars.

Of course I realize that GT4 is much bigger than GT3. I was delighted to know that GT4 had Le Mans and the Nurb. The old Alpine WRC winner and the 1999 BMW LM winner. And the Bentley. And Citta di Aria (already known through GT4, a game/demo/whatever that made me really drool for GT4).

But in the end GT4 just didn't fill my cup like GT3 did. It was bigger, but not taller ... just fatter.

I wanted: larger grids, better physics, better AI, endurance races with night and day (and midrace saves).

Instead, I got: more tracks, more cars, better graphics, B-Spec and Photomode ...

That's just my view, of course, and I know lots of people here really like Photomode and B-Spec. I respect that. But that's not what I really want when I buy a game that is about driving cars.

I really hope GT5 shows that PD has learned something from their latest competitors. They're all still behind the GT franchise, but if PD keeps relying on graphics and size alone, I'm not sure GT will still "own" in a few years ...

 

[Hun200kmh]

btw, I wrote my post in reply to Earth, without seeing/reading Dave A's post (Livefor Speed, is that you?). Now that I've read it, I find my post redundant, because I agree with everything Dave has written (much better than I, english is not my native language).

 

[stoopid_idiot]

GT4 was, in my opinion, leading up to its release, the most anticipated game of 2005.
Then they took the online mode out, without giving a reason why, and everything changed.
All of a sudden, when the first Forza came out, THAT was the racing sim that everybody to play, why? BECAUSE OF THE ONLINE MODE.
So, does online capibiuldity make or break a game? Personally, I was disappointed, but I could understand why, (even if the reason was kinda iffy) because they wanted to do "WHAT WAS BEST FOR THE GAME", even if it cost it a mode that was for most people (me included) was the reason to buy the game. And it drove a stake into the hearts of almost all GT fans.
Sound familiar? Sony did THE EXACT SAME THING when they announced that they were going to remove the Emotion Engine from all North American PS3s

See? it's just like what Forest Gump's mother said; Stupid is as stupid does.

 

[Dave A]

btw, I wrote my post in reply to Earth, without seeing/reading Dave A's post (Livefor Speed, is that you?)

Yep thats me, the artist formely known as princ... I mean live4speed. .

Your English is good, and your post isn't redundant, it's look into another persons viewpoint 👍.

 

[Ben Aracin]

How was GT4 badly done? where oh where to start.
1. The single biggest problem i had with he game, the physics. I wanted it a more accurate and realistic as console possible, it wasn't, not even close.
2. The engine/exhuast/especially tire sounds were horribly done, even GT3's tire sound was somewhat better.
3. The second biggest problem i had with both GT3-4, oh and 1-2 was and always has been the lack of A.I.
4. the menu structure was to "spread out". I actually prefered GT3's simpler one as it got right to the point.
5. the racing structure. I enjoyed GT3's better but in GT4 i was so ready for a much needed overhual, it just never happened. (Example) say you go into the beginner cup FF race. Or the expert mode Polyphony digital cup race. It's alway's the same tracks and always the same cars, give or take a couple other cars, out of 750+ cars and 50 tracks.
6. To this day i'm still waiting for that feature of having my TUNED garage car against my human opponents offline and online to use instead of just what's unlocked in arcade mode.
I'm not goin to comment on game music as i always turn it off.
To me music is/was supposed to be the background noise of the folk roaring in the stands, the othe cars and my cars engine/exhuast/etc sounds.
If they would have had those options listed above, i'd never have said a thing.
I don't have my system online so online being yanked (while i thought it was a bad move) didn't bother me.
I would have loved having a custom paint/livery editor but i could have let that go. But GT4 didn't. It was a badly done game. The worst offense to me of all was touting Photomode as a "new gameplay option". I know folk just love it, i never have.
B-spec mode was a good idea but poorly implemented and thus ruined any fun it might have brought to the game.
I still from time to time play GT3, i still have my old save. GT4 had such great potential,it was just too much of a graphics over gameplay game for me.
If other folk enjoy it, good for them, it's to bad i didn't as mine just ended up a coaster/dust collector.
Here's hoping PD actually throws the whole book of needed improvements/gameplay ideas at GT5. Or at least the improvement/flaw fixes.

 

[MasterGT]

How was GT4 badly done? Where are it's flaws compared to GT3?

GT4 was poorly designed in things like that stupid Home map, trying to mod a car, missing important features such as the rewind in replays, being able to save a picture to a USB mem-stick but not to be able to save a replay to one (Supremely STOOPID). Everyone has their favourites that are missing or awkward to use.

In my mind, GT4 is "badly done" because it is looks to be rushed and unfinished: missing two-player drag races and other two-player features; no Professional Mode (supposedly making a return in the next version); no on-line (it didn't take them that long to finish it for their beta test); no real improvements in important aspects of the game.

If it had a simple online mode and a simple color/livery editor nobody would say anything

No, we would all jump up and down about it, too.

I like that comparison of GT4 being fatter but not taller.

Cheers,

MasterGT

 

[Earth]

After thinking about this some more and looking over Dave A, Hun200kph, stoopid idiot, and Ben Aracin's posts I've come to the conclusion that,

- Your preference of GT3 or GT4 depends on what aspect you like best of Gran Turismo.

A. The actual driving and racing experience
or
B. The car collecting and viewing experience

For me GT has been, up to GT4, but most likely not continuing in GT5, 75% car collecting and 25% racing. Therefore I fall under 'B'. I am also 'B' because I can just sit and watch a GT4 race and be entertained via B-Spec in LeMans, Nurburgring 4hours, things not in GT3. With GT4 I can test 700 cars at the Nurburgring 4 hour road car race with B-Spec. How cool is that? GT3 doesn't have that.

Those who fall under 'A', Dave A, Hun200kph, and Ben Aracin, are there because they prefer a physics engine and better/more intersting races with better prize cars.

I think, as stoopid idiot also believes, that with an online mode GT4 would have appealed to both A and B.

GT owns

 

[Dave A]

But what good is collecting cars if the stage to show them off is a flawed experience?

I love the car collecting aspect, but the car collecting is no excuse for the racing to be poor. It's not a case of have one or the other, Forza 2 has given us both, and better customisation than GT has ever had to date.

Online would have appealed, but it would have been a shot lived appeal since the flaws in the physics engine that prevented me from enjoying driving the cars offline would still be present online.

I B-specced all the endurance races in GT4, not because I don't like racing, but because I don't have the time. I didn't B-spec much else, mainly out of principal or not falling into a rut, but in the end I just put GT4 down and I think it's only been back in the PS2 once, possibly twice this year.

I'd have loved to have enjoyed GT4, but I just didn't.

If your not bothered about the racing at all and just the collecting, why not collect pictures of the cars, because in the end, that's all GT has to offer if you take the interaction with the cars away.

 

[Scaff]

GT4 was poorly designed in things like that stupid Home map, trying to mod a car, missing important features such as the rewind in replays, being able to save a picture to a USB mem-stick but not to be able to save a replay to one (Supremely STOOPID). Everyone has their favourites that are missing or awkward to use.

In my mind, GT4 is "badly done" because it is looks to be rushed and unfinished: missing two-player drag races and other two-player features; no Professional Mode (supposedly making a return in the next version); no on-line (it didn't take them that long to finish it for their beta test); no real improvements in important aspects of the game.


No, we would all jump up and down about it, too.

I like that comparison of GT4 being fatter but not taller.

Cheers,

MasterGT

Hmmmm I agree with some of this (navigation in GT4 was a serious pain in the rear (bring back the GT2 short-cuts), and while it would have been nice to be able to save replays onto a memory card (as in TT), not being able to do it doesn't make photo-mode itself a stupid idea.

The one thing I can't agree with here is that the GT3 car list was better balanced than GT4, sorry but the car list in GT3 had some serious short-comings. No RS spec Audi's, the only BMW was a 328ci, the Clio V6 as the only Renault (race and road versions - but what about the 2.0 litre), etc, etc. With the Japanese lists padded out with a huge variation of the usual suspects and the American lists being about as well populated as the European ones. Not to forget one whole car from Australia.

Sorry but even with the padding removed the range of cars in GT4 was far, far better than GT3. Lets be honest here, all things aside, who does not want a wider range of cars to pick from? Personally I would be overjoyed if (again all other things being equal) every car manufactured could be included in a sim (any sim).

This reminds me to a degree of the people who went on about how much better Forza's car list was that GT4's, who always then went very quite when asked about BMW road cars.

From my own view point I have always found the GT series to be quite poor in the racing aspect, far preferring them for simply the driving and tuning aspect.

Yes GT4 does get quite a bit wrong in regard to the physics, but so does every other game/sim out; some to a much more significant degree than GT4. While PD did badly mess up the low-speed area of things, they did move the game along in regard to a few areas of the physics. As far as actually including understeer, yes it is a bit overdone, but not actually in how severe understeer can actually be, rather in the ability to try and recover from it. However to be blunt almost every other game/sim out totally underplays the true degree to which understeer occurs (and I most certainly do include Forza 1 and Enthusia in that statement - but not to the same degree). The other area GT4 does well in, and again an area often ignored in other game/sims, is that of lift at speed and how it can effect high speed car control.

Kent has mentioned in other posts (and I believe in an other thread) that people seem quick to criticize GT4 over other sims/games, now while I don't completely agree with exactly what he has said, I would personally agree that a lot of people focus mainly on the problems with GT4 (at the expense of what it did well) and focus on the positives of others (and understate the problems they have), which often leads to a perception of bias against GT4.

Me I prefer to try and look at both the positives and negatives of each and every title.


Regards

Scaff

 

[Dave A]

Yes GT4 does get quite a bit wrong in regard to the physics, but so does every other game/sim out; some to a much more significant degree than GT4. While PD did badly mess up the low-speed area of things, they did move the game along in regard to a few areas of the physics. As far as actually including understeer, yes it is a bit overdone, but not actually in how severe understeer can actually be, rather in the ability to try and recover from it. However to be blunt almost every other game/sim out totally underplays the true degree to which understeer occurs (and I most certainly do include Forza 1 and Enthusia in that statement - but not to the same degree). The other area GT4 does well in, and again an area often ignored in other game/sims, is that of lift at speed and how it can effect high speed car control.

Kent has mentioned in other posts (and I believe in an other thread) that people seem quick to criticize GT4 over other sims/games, now while I don't completely agree with exactly what he has said, I would personally agree that a lot of people focus mainly on the problems with GT4 (at the expense of what it did well) and focus on the positives of others (and understate the problems they have), which often leads to a perception of bias against GT4.

Me I prefer to try and look at both the positives and negatives of each and every title.


Regards

Scaff

I'd agree with that, the big problem with GT4's physics though is that while they improved some areas and faltered in others, imo they went from a flawed buy fun engine (GT3) to a flawed and not fun engine. One of the killers was the tyre phyisics, the grip transitions in GT4 were very poor imo even with the sim tyres on. Anyone who knows my views on the physics debate will know that I'm pretty willing to class some games as rough equal, GT4 and EPR being a prime example when it comes to physics, it's just a case what areas are right and wrong being different in each game. But the difference to me is, I enjoyed driving in EPR, I didn't in GT4.

A lot of people do focus on the problems of GT4, myself included, but unfortunately you take away the enjoyment of the driving, and any plus points are pretty menial imo. I do try to take a balanced view of each game both in and out the GT series, and I won't let my experience with GT4 tarnish the potential the series has for GT5 and other future editions and I'll stick by anearlier point I made, the more realistic the physics engine, the less scope there is for it to be unenjoyable thanks to behaviour oddities that ruined it for me in GT4.

 

[MasterGT]

Hmmmm I agree with some of this (navigation in GT4 was a serious pain in the rear (bring back the GT2 short-cuts), and while it would have been nice to be able to save replays onto a memory card (as in TT), not being able to do it doesn't make photo-mode itself a stupid idea.

That was not what I said or meant. Since PD knew there was so much GT3 replay trading going on, it behooved them to make this easier to do with GT4, and they didn't when they could/should have.

The one thing I can't agree with here is that the GT3 car list was better balanced than GT4, sorry but the car list in GT3 had some serious short-comings.

I hope you are not attributing this idea to something I said because I have to agree. GT4 has a much better balance of cars.

If you referred to "fatter but not taller", I thought it was originally said in light of the fact that GT4 had not matured (hadn't grown) well in some areas. Sure there was some extra fat (cough skylines cough), but there were other things to consider, too.

Cheers,

MasterGT