Why?

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Can you show me the copyright law on it? I've never seen it but I do know there is a movement that people tolerate not owning what they buy.

I'm not talking about distributing, pirating, etc. Do you own your ps3 and copy of gt5 or not?

You don't have to see the fine print to know what's right or wrong or to know if a commercially sold software have copyright that is protected by law. What's your computer OS ? Windows ? Does that comes with copyright ? Do Microsoft allows you to make a custom OS by modifying the contents ( codes ) ?

Copyright covers a lot of bases, piracy, distributing, broadcasting, altering the contents included. We own PS3 when we buy it, it's ours to use, but we still have to follow the license agreement for the PS3 system ( I posted the link earlier ). There are always limitation to all electronic devices that we use, because companies who made them have patents, copyrights, licenses etc.

If you have GT5, check the manual, last few pages, under limited warranty, there's unauthorized use of product sub section

"Please contact SCEA at 1-800-345-7669, if you are unwilling to accept the terms of this license."

The license to own and use the copy of GT5. The copyright notices are right at the bottom of the page. I have the manual - from original 1st release GT5.

Here is the interesting part, the copyright of the cars, associated imagery and materials licensed to PD is also protected by the law, now with hacked cars, they literally messed up the cars that are licensed by manufacturer to PD.

I wonder what the implication to PD, when car manufacturer knows about the hybrids, what does Ferrari, Nissan, Toyota and other car maker feels about their represented cars being hacked ? Do they allow this in their license agreement with PD ?

Weird arguments..

There is no need to alter the software on the PS3 to let hybrids come to life. My PS3 is running totally legit original firmware. And it is capable of firing up some strange creations
PD haven't put any security on the savegame. They have counted on data integrity on another level. The flaws of inefficient encryption on the savegames is to be found somewhere else..

Encrypted file means the creator does not want it to be accessed by unauthorized user. I am not talking about whether the PS3 FW is legit or not. Hybrids only uses edited game save, I know that, I can edit the save too if I want to, but I chose not to do it.

If you don't feel bad about what you did, good for you then, not all people are the same when it comes to moral and integrity.

 

[arora]

You don't have to see the fine print to know what's right or wrong

But you do if you want to know what contract you have agreed to.

Copyright covers a lot of bases, piracy, distributing, broadcasting, altering the contents included. We own PS3 when we buy it, it's ours to use, but we still have to follow the license agreement for the PS3 system

Speaking of the psn tos again I presume.

There are always limitation to all electronic devices that we use, because companies who made them have patents, copyrights, licenses etc.

Indeed, usually limited to some of the things you spoke of above, not what we can do on our own for ourselves only.

Here is the interesting part, the copyright of the cars, associated imagery and materials licensed to PD is also protected by the law, now with hacked cars, they literally messed up the cars that are licensed by manufacturer to PD.

I wonder what the implication to PD, when car manufacturer knows about the hybrids, what does Ferrari, Nissan, Toyota and other car maker feels about their represented cars being hacked ? Do they allow this in their license agreement with PD ?

That is a weak argument I've seen over and over on gtp about this subject. The license sellers know damn well how pd is representing their products and most likely also know the risks involved with video gaming contracts.

Lets not mention the fact that everyone under the sun uses photo shop to alter said cars.

 

[Tornado]

We buy the license to play the game and even though we do have the hard copy, we do not have the right to alter the software contents through other means than what the game allows ( it's protected by copyright ), thus we are not allowed to break the security measure PD has put on the game save, they gave us the means to copy it for back up purpose, not to hack it away.

You don't have to see the fine print to know what's right or wrong or to know if a commercially sold software have copyright that is protected by law. What's your computer OS ? Windows ? Does that comes with copyright ? Do Microsoft allows you to make a custom OS by modifying the contents ( codes ) ?

Copyright covers a lot of bases, piracy, distributing, broadcasting, altering the contents included. We own PS3 when we buy it, it's ours to use, but we still have to follow the license agreement for the PS3 system ( I posted the link earlier ). There are always limitation to all electronic devices that we use, because companies who made them have patents, copyrights, licenses etc.

Now you're claiming that to do so breaks the copyright PD have on the game software; and thus hybriding is a violation of copyright law, which:

No... no it's not. PD has a copyright on the game programming and the game content. If you were hacking the game software to get the hybrids or change PP values manually then it might be copyright infringement (but probably not even then, since that's exactly what cheat devices like the Gameshark and Action Replay did and Nintendo lost that court case in 1992), but these hybrids are being made just with hex editing a save file. The most it does is violate Sony's ToS.

Your argument was already disproven in two other threads; one of them a thread in site support that stated the most it does is break Sony's ToS. It's not against copyright law for the end user to modify the game environment to his liking (the fact that devices were sold on the market for 20 years that did exactly that is kind of telling in regards to how illegal it is). It's not against copyright law for the end user to modify Windows to his liking. It's against the law to distribute that changed software without permission, or to take portions of the software/content and distribute that; but it's not against the law to distribute things that can change the software, the changes themselves or instructions for doing so.

I wonder what the implication to PD, when car manufacturer knows about the hybrids, what does Ferrari, Nissan, Toyota and other car maker feels about their represented cars being hacked ? Do they allow this in their license agreement with PD ?

How do those car makers already feel about the huge misrepresentation some of them have in GT5? Shelby has 3 cars in GT5 and 2 of them are incorrect by a wide margin. Spyker has one and the car was functionally broken for the first year after the game was on sale. Lamborghini has 9 cars in the game, and all but 2 of them are wrong, including one that PD made up the specs for entirely; essentially an official hybrid. I don't see any of them pulling their licences for that.

 

[X R 8]

When people buy the game they are spending their hard earned money that they worked to get.
The person who bought the game should be damn right able to do whatever the hell they please.

And if you quote this post complaining then I will not read it.

Another thing. I'm sick with all these frickin' hybrid threads. If you really need to challenge the topic then look at the hundreds of other threads.

Sorry if I seem rude but I have not been myself lately...................

 

[arora]

Sorry if I seem rude but I have not been myself lately...................

We've been successfully hybridizing you muahahaha

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

@ Toronado :

My main concern is the act of hacking the game save, which is wrong in my opinion.

About the law, I don't really care if they break it or not, it's their problem. I only follow what's right according to my moral conscience and I held up my integrity when I decided not to mess with something I should not to.

About the car licenses, I assume all manufacturer are aware of the game contents when PD signed the deal with them. They allow it as agreed by both parties ( PD and manufacturer ). The problem now is, another party who never signed the agreement made changes to their heart's content. I honestly don't know if the car maker will ignore this or will they take this hybrids into consideration on their future license deal.

Windows is a proprietary commercial software, I don't see how modifying it is not against the law.

How can I use the software?
We do not sell our software or your copy of it – we only license it. Under our license, we grant you the right to install and run that one copy on one computer (the licensed computer), for use by one person at a time, but only if you comply with all the terms of this agreement. Typically, this means you can install one copy of the software on a personal computer and then you can use the software on that computer. The software is not licensed to be used as server software or for commercial hosting - so you may not make the software available for simultaneous use by multiple users over a network. For more information on multiple user scenarios and virtualization, see the Additional Terms.


Are there things I’m not allowed to do with the software?
Yes. Because the software is licensed, not sold, Microsoft reserves all rights (such as rights under intellectual property laws) not expressly granted in this agreement. In particular, this license does not give you any right to, and you may not: use or virtualize features of the software separately, publish, copy (other than the permitted backup copy), rent, lease, or lend the software; transfer the software (except as permitted by this agreement), attempt to circumvent technical protection measures in the software, reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the software, except if the laws where you live permit this even when our agreement does not. In that case, you may do only what your law allows. When using Internet-based features or Microsoft Family Safety, you may not use those features in any way that could interfere with anyone else’s use of them, or to try to gain access to any service, data, account or network, in an unauthorized manner.

Taken from Windows 8 EULA.

 

[arora]

About the law, I don't really care if they break it or not, it's their problem. I only follow what's right according to my moral conscience and I held up my integrity when I decided not to mess with something I should not to.

Something you cannot impose on others.

About the car licenses, I assume all manufacturer are aware of the game contents when PD signed the deal with them. They allow it as agreed by both parties ( PD and manufacturer ). The problem now is, another party who never signed the agreement made changes to their heart's content. I honestly don't know if the car maker will ignore this or will they take this hybrids into consideration on their future license deal.

There will be zero repercussions.

 

[Tornado]

About the law, I don't really care if they break it or not, it's their problem.

Then don't comment about how they are breaking the law.

The problem now is, another party who never signed the agreement made changes to their heart's content. I honestly don't know if the car maker will ignore this or will they take this hybrids into consideration on their future license deal.

I don't know if you realize this, but this particular subforum has been here for over a decade now. Hybriding isn't new to GT5, and I'd argue that it was a hell of a lot bigger when GT3 was the big game than it is now. Hybriding in GT3 even allowed you to gain access to a car that in no uncertain terms PD did not have the licence for in the US, namely the Lamborghini Diablo.


And lo and behold, we have Lamborghini in GT5 anyway.

Windows is a proprietary commercial software, I don't see how modifying it is not against the law.

Think about that for a second. If modifying Windows was against the law, you wouldn't be able to install anything on your computer unless Microsoft made it or approved it. I don't understand how you can have a CS degree and work in IT and not realize that it's perfectly legal for the end user (important distinction) to modify Windows to their liking. Even something as simple as installing tweaked graphics drivers would be illegal if it was against the law to modify the system.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Something you cannot impose on others.



There will be zero repercussions.

Well, I'm not forcing others to follow me, I was just stating my view and opinion. I feel sorry about the current condition of online portion of GT5 ( mainly public lobbies ) as some of my friends have their rooms "invaded" by these hybrids, but I am yet to have my room ruined, as I have comfort medium and no ABS restriction when I am hosting a public lobby.

How can you be so sure that there will be no repercussions ?

Then don't comment about how they are breaking the law.


I don't know if you realize this, but this particular subforum has been here for over a decade now. Hybriding isn't new to GT5, and I'd argue that it was a hell of a lot bigger when GT3 was the big game than it is now. Hybriding in GT3 even allowed you to gain access to a car that in no uncertain terms PD did not have the licence for in the US, namely the Lamborghini Diablo.


And lo and behold, we have Lamborghini in GT5 anyway.


Think about that for a second. If modifying Windows was against the law, you wouldn't be able to install anything on your computer unless Microsoft made it. I don't understand how you can have a CS degree and work in IT and not realize that it's perfectly legal for the end user (important distinction) to modify Windows to their liking.

I only said about them breaking the terms of use agreement, I also know about past GT hybrids, but they were not online capable, not sure if that would make any difference now.

I was talking about modifying the OS ( reverse engineer, disassemble, altering the codes,etc ) not the general users capability ( installing software ) There's a big difference there as most users don't even know how to defeat the built in protections in the OS.

 

[CodeRedR51]

@ Toronado :

My main concern is the act of hacking the game save, which is wrong in my opinion.

You act like this has never been done before. It's not much different from the hybrids that were created in GT2, GT3, and I think GT4 (I don't have experience with them in GT4) except that this time it's done manually through decryption of the save instead of using a program like MK's. (which basically does the same thing, just easier to use)

The only difference now is that we have online play.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

You act like this has never been done before. It's not much different from the hybrids that were created in GT2, GT3, and I think GT4 (I don't have experience with them in GT4) except that this time it's done manually through decryption of the save instead of using a program like MK's. (which basically does the same thing, just easier to use)

The only difference now is that we have online play.

Even GT1, too; I was on regular speaking terms with one of the (accidental) creators of them way back then.

Turbo's right, though; this is exactly the same as MK's program a decade ago, the only difference is he provided a GUI to make it easier for people to understand what they were doing. That, and it was much easier for him to amass a database of all the parts in the game, since he was working with ~200 cars.

If anything, judging by the variables contained, it shows PD has done little to change their system in the past 10 years.

 

[Maccer_42]

If anything, judging by the variables contained, it shows PD has done little to change their system in the past 10 years.

👍 This makes me question Kaz's words he said a long time ago early or before the release of GT5 about how they "threw away the code from GT4 and wrote GT5's code from scratch". Maybe I imagined that, but i'm almost positive he said something along those lines. Well it might be new code but I guess it's still structured in the same old format as it was 10 years ago in GT3.
Also just thinking the code can't be that "new" if glitchs like the transmission flip still work the same way they did in previous GT games, and it can't be an intended feature otherwise PD would have gave instructions on how to do it when pressing the "?" on the transmission when in the tunning garage.

Also unrelated to what I quoted, some people feel and mention that these hybrids ruin the integrity of the game, to me hybrids do nothing to effect the integrity of the game, it's integrity was ruined by PD them selfs by not giving us proper options to regulate online rooms/lobbys.

By not giving us proper dedicated servers to race on, insted we have to rely on peer to peer connections.

By allowing corner cutting to take place in every seasonal time trial, (No doubt top 10 time trialers are skilled no question about that but when only your outside tyres are just touching the inside white line and the rest of your car is over the grass/curb it's not a clean lap)

By taking many years to develope the game and still having so many incorrect spefications for cars (https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=193920&highlight=incorrect and there is many, many more incorrect car specs than what is just posted in that list, some cars even have the incorrect body for what their model should be)

To me hybrids are just a mere blip of the many things that effect the integrity of the Gran Turismo franchise.
/End rant.

 

[Fazerfan]

Painting non paintable cars, more suspension settings, engine swap----Yes (Offline).

Adding more HP-----------------------------------------------------No.

 

[Patruck GT2]

Made hybrids in Gt2 and GTPSP, of every kind. Obviously not online, although one should make some distinctions. For example, I'd consider perfectly legal to have engine-swapped cars in online mode, or even extreme cars which could be, somehow, related to reality. The problem is, who's going to tell wheter a car is legal or not? This is why online should be restricted (as it officially is) to non-hybrid cars.
Also I'd get quite angry if I got beaten by a hybrid car during a race in online mode. I mean, do some people really like easy winning? That's pointless.

 

[PR1VATEJ0KER]

Each car records all of it's parts in every GT. You could say it's unnecessary.
i.e. Instead of recording a car's Chassis, Susp, Transmission etc.. we just have the car's ID.
But PD like to record each part, this could be in case they wish to adapt the game in some way,
or it could be for efficiency.
(Because a table of car's parts does not need consulting every time the car loads).

Saying that GT4 & GT5 have not changed in this way is like saying, there is little difference between GT1 & GT5 because they both record their data in a binary file (It's just how they record the data)

👍 This makes me question Kaz's words he said a long time ago early or before the release of GT5 about how they "threw away the code from GT4 and wrote GT5's code from scratch".

It is different, the only similarity is the IDs of the cars & part IDs
There are an extra 200+bytes recorded for each car's param blob in GT5.
The order is not identical either.

If anything, judging by the variables contained, it shows PD has done little to change their system in the past 10 years.

If you stick with a system that works it reduces time to develop/debug and improves reliability. No need to re-invent the wheel for each iteration of the series.

 

[Colin Howell]

Each car records all of it's parts in every GT. You could say it's unnecessary.
i.e. Instead of recording a car's Chassis, Susp, Transmission etc.. we just have the car's ID.
But PD like to record each part, this could be in case they wish to adapt the game in some way,
or it could be for efficiency.
(Because a table of car's parts does not need consulting every time the car loads).

Not just that, but multiple cars use the same parts. For instance, the same engine or transmission may be shared by multiple car models. This is the source of some specification errors in GT2, in which sometimes a car will be set to use the wrong engine or transmission. (Examples: GT2's 1998 Daihatsu Mira TX uses the turbocharged engine of the Mira TR instead of its real naturally aspirated engine, and GT2's Fiat Cinquecento Sporting uses a Suzuki kei car transmission.)

If anything, judging by the variables contained, it shows PD has done little to change their system in the past 10 years.

If you stick with a system that works it reduces time to develop/debug and improves reliability. No need to re-invent the wheel for each iteration of the series.

It would be nice if they fixed long-standing physics bugs, though. GT2 unfairly penalizes cars with small engines by giving them the same engine rotational inertia as cars with large engines. This makes the small-engined cars accelerate slower than they actually would, since they must spend more of their limited power merely spinning the engine up. (This web page explains in detail how rotational inertia, in particular that of the engine, affects a car's acceleration.) The effect is especially strong in low gears, when the ratio of engine speed to car speed is much greater. It has a big effect on 0-60mph and quarter-mile times, and naturally would also have an impact when accelerating after having slowed for a tight corner. It's this effect that a lightened flywheel is designed to reduce, but even GT2's lightest racing flywheel cannot overcome the horrible penalty of forcing a 660 cc engine (or worse yet, a 360 cc one) to spin up the effective mass of a 3000 cc engine.

What surprised and disappointed me was to find (based on a comment by Shirakawa Akira and on some acceleration times in Parnelli Bone's GT Car Reviews as compared with real acceleration times for those cars) that this bug has never been fixed; it's present all the way to GT5. (Example: Parnelli Bone tested the 550 cc Mitsubishi Minica Dangan ZZ and got 0-60 times in the 15-17 second range. Australian auto magazine Autospeed tested the real thing and got a time around 12 seconds using "a relatively gentle launch".) And it's not like the bug would be hard to fix; all you need to do is appropriately scale a constant by the size of the engine. (This may not be as accurate as a precise calculation of the engine's rotational inertia, but it would be close enough to eliminate the unfair penalty.) It seems to be a matter of either not bothering, or even worse, deciding that people now expect the little cars to be slugs and would be upset if that changed.

 

[quatschkopp]

Either your shift key broke or you're not realizing that your caps-lock is stuck when you are raging..
Set up decent limits in your online room and you should be save.. Or go and participate in Time Trials. As they are running on fixed cars right now, there should be no way of cheating.. 👍

 

[PR1VATEJ0KER]

Not just that, but multiple cars use the same parts. For instance, the same engine or transmission may be shared by multiple car models. This is the source of some specification errors in GT2, in which sometimes a car will be set to use the wrong engine or transmission. (Examples: GT2's 1998 Daihatsu Mira TX uses the turbocharged engine of the Mira TR instead of its real naturally aspirated engine, and GT2's Fiat Cinquecento Sporting uses a Suzuki kei car transmission.)

I just checked and from 1019 unique cars I found 1019 unique engine IDs & transmission IDs.
So any shared parts could only be data innaccuracy.

It would be nice if they fixed long-standing physics bugs, though. GT2 unfairly penalizes cars with small engines by giving them the same engine rotational inertia as cars with large engines. This makes the small-engined cars accelerate slower than they actually would, since they must spend more of their limited power merely spinning the engine up. (This web page explains in detail how rotational inertia, in particular that of the engine, affects a car's acceleration.) The effect is especially strong in low gears, when the ratio of engine speed to car speed is much greater. It has a big effect on 0-60mph and quarter-mile times, and naturally would also have an impact when accelerating after having slowed for a tight corner. It's this effect that a lightened flywheel is designed to reduce, but even GT2's lightest racing flywheel cannot overcome the horrible penalty of forcing a 660 cc engine (or worse yet, a 360 cc one) to spin up the effective mass of a 3000 cc engine.

What surprised and disappointed me was to find (based on a comment by Shirakawa Akira and on some acceleration times in Parnelli Bone's GT Car Reviews as compared with real acceleration times for those cars) that this bug has never been fixed; it's present all the way to GT5. (Example: Parnelli Bone tested the 550 cc Mitsubishi Minica Dangan ZZ and got 0-60 times in the 15-17 second range. Australian auto magazine Autospeed tested the real thing and got a time around 12 seconds using "a relatively gentle launch".) And it's not like the bug would be hard to fix; all you need to do is appropriately scale a constant by the size of the engine. (This may not be as accurate as a precise calculation of the engine's rotational inertia, but it would be close enough to eliminate the unfair penalty.) It seems to be a matter of either not bothering, or even worse, deciding that people now expect the little cars to be slugs and would be upset if that changed.

These are also inaccuracies in data, not a system problem.

 

[Colin Howell]

I just checked and from 1019 unique cars I found 1019 unique engine IDs & transmission IDs.
So any shared parts could only be data innaccuracy.

Well, it sounds like you're talking about GT5; the examples I gave were from GT2. And I'm a bit surprised to hear that all of GT5's cars have unique engines and transmissions, because engines and transmissions are shared amongst real cars.

[discussion about engine inertia omitted]

These are also inaccuracies in data, not a system problem.

You're assuming that the game includes data on individual cars' engine inertia. It may not, in which case the program code must compute a reasonable estimate.

In any case, the real issue as far as I'm concerned is that for over ten years, the GT series' developers have neglected to fix a problem which clearly hurts the series' performance realism, and does so in a fashion which is easily tested and verified, even though a solution is as simple as multiplying two numbers. (Simple enough that it might even be fixable in GT2 with a Gameshark code, applied to the right area.)

 

[StarLight]

I just don't get why people are hybriding. I wanted to do it at first, but I realized that hacking a game that is built with blood and sweat is wrong. I don't mind doing it offline, but online is a totally different story. I am just stating my opinion. It looks fun, but I don't like changing original. I want to see your point of view. Everyone has the right to share their opinion, though.

I totally agree with you ... but replica builders want to built a car as close they can be to the specifications.

For example: Gallardo Underground replica

The car is more than 1000HP and with a twin Turbo and so on ... in GT5 there is no way to built such a car, so hybriding is the only way out.

Other parts are needed as well, like other chassis, exhaust or engine.
Maybe you want to built a specific replica, a Lotus with a Honda engine.

Hybriding is something PD must think about. They supply hundreds of gear, horns and MC's ... but sadly forget the replica builders.
So let people create there fantasies or try to built a real replica.

Further they let paint you a lot of cars but some totally not (I know car builders licenses and so on issues) ... but for God's sake, it's only a game.
Every car present in GT5 is free publicity for the car builders in the real world.

PD should also think about this, repainting a car, wheels or carbon hoods and so on, is no big deal ... it won't harm nobody.

And another thing PD really should consider is to deliver a Livery Editor in GT6, so replica builders and others have the possibility to chance the look of their car ... something Forza did and also many games.

Anyway, hacking, modding or what ever you will call ... will always be there but PD in this case could discourage this by supplying the above discussed topics.

That's my personally thought's.

 

[Tornado]

These are also inaccuracies in data, not a system problem.

Actually, if the system still fails to take into account engine inertia as a data point because the system is virtually unchanged since they switched to it in GT3 and it's leading to performance issues that large, it is a problem with the limitations of the system that they are using.



To say nothing about how the "performance multiplier" power modification concept that they've used since GT3 is the entire reason that the tuning system is so antiquated.

 

[Bounkazz]

I just want to be most realistic as possible.

Enough said. GT5 realistic?

 

[Mubble]

Before GT5 came out, it seemed everybody was asking if there would be the option to transplant different engines, adjust wheel size, slam the suspension, remove spoilers, make 1200bhp GTRs.

When the game came out the modding options were limited. In fact, there is very little to do in GT5 when you're off the race track.

Someone found a way to implement the things a lot of us wanted in the final version of the game, but which were never included. The fact you have to put the game data in to a piece of software to access these options doesn't bother me at all.

I think the fact that hybrids have been so popular highlights the fact that a lot of GT5 players were bored with the game. Me included.

To all the people against hybrids, let me ask you this:

If you had the option of creating (in the game) a 1200bhp Nissan GTR Black Edition which used the brutal-sounding engine from a Calsonic GTR (GT500), or putting a 1240bhp Chevvy engine in to an Elise to replicate a Hennessey Venom GT would you?

I'm going to assume you would.

Well, just because it's not an official option in the game shouldn't be a big stumbling block for you. It opens up a whole new line of creativity in an otherwise dying game.

I understand the frustration with people driving around in 50000bhp Veyrons, but mildly tuned, painted and stanced cars shouldn't bug you this much.

 

[KiroKai]

^ Completely agree. Modding is what some fans do in every game once they get bored after some time, to create new stuff, be creative, create awesomeness. I don't see why it should be different for GT5. Sure, currently it's being abused by morons, but there are a lot of responsible hybrid users and creators, making the game a lot better and innovative.

 

[C53A 4G63T]

People saying that they won't use hybrids because, the creators, went to so much trouble making the game how it is, need a reality check. If you want to follow that line of thought, then upgrading turbos and the suspension in game is a slight against the hard workers who created the vehicles in the first place. If it has 120hp from the factory, thats what it should have in the game. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

 

[PR1VATEJ0KER]

People saying that they won't use hybrids because, the creators, went to so much trouble making the game how it is, need a reality check. If you want to follow that line of thought, then upgrading turbos and the suspension in game is a slight against the hard workers who created the vehicles in the first place. If it has 120hp from the factory, thats what it should have in the game. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

I love this

 

[MisterWhiskers]

People saying that they won't use hybrids because, the creators, went to so much trouble making the game how it is, need a reality check. If you want to follow that line of thought, then upgrading turbos and the suspension in game is a slight against the hard workers who created the vehicles in the first place. If it has 120hp from the factory, thats what it should have in the game. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Turbos and all that special shizzle is called aftermarket. If that were the case the manufacturer would do something about it. 💡 And if I bought the cake, I wanna eat it!

 

[C_Raccoon23]

@ Toronado :

My main concern is the act of hacking the game save, which is wrong in my opinion.

If it's wrong, then why can anyone buy Game Sharks and Action Replays to do this very thing?

 

[MisterWhiskers]

If it's wrong, then why can anyone buy Game Sharks and Action Replays to do this very thing?

You can buy drugs, correct? Just because you are able to buy something, doesn't mean it's necessarily right to use or do whatever with it. What a brain fart moment...

 

[C_Raccoon23]

You can buy drugs, correct? Just because you are able to buy something, doesn't mean it's necessarily right to use or do whatever with it. What a brain fart moment...

Comparing cheating devices to drugs, which can harm and potentially kill you? Terrible analogy. My point is, if things like Action Replay are "wrong" then they would be outlawed and major retailers wouldn't be selling them. As stated earlier, this has been going on since GT1.