Your thoughts about "standard" vs. "premium"

[eSZee]

To some it's a nuisance the first time they hear it cause they don't want to acknowledge the faults. Unless there's some rules about complaining, they'll do it til they get tired of it.
I wouldn't want to be some of the people when the game comes out and the sounds aren't improved. The GT5 SOUND thread is already pretty lively and I wouldn't want to step in there when the game comes out.

 

[MichaelDelaney]

I agree with you, Dave. I don't really see the point in obtaining the licenses for NASCAR and WRC when they aren't (to our knowledge to this point) going to have a large number of tracks and stages the real cars race on.

To me, there is no difference in the content of NASCAR or WRC and the content of JGTC, which have been in GT since the beginning. (The only difference being the names of the drivers in the former.)

To see NASCAR and WRC promoted so heavily and find the content barely matches what we've seen with JGTC is perplexing to me.

 

[eSZee]

I agree with you, Dave.

Must be a Chicago thing.

 

[Dravonic]

Yes, yes I did. Kaz is a perfectionist remember, everything he touches has magical powers that turns turds into Unicorns. However, with GT5, it seems those turds are there to stay.
If he's such a perfectionist why bother with licenses that he has no plan to fully utilize? I don;t think NASCAR fans just want to see NASCAR vehicles, they want to run NASCAR races(which they will be able to do but not in a full grid which is more than half the point). Same with WRC. People love RALLYing cause it's different. In GT games, rallying is different cause it's on dirt and gravel, that's it.
Your argument is that since GT5 is doing so many things it's can't fully focus to do one thing to the fullest. My argument is why is it spreading itself so thin when it doesn't have to? Why is it trying to please everyone when that NEVER works.
GT5 will be great and we'll all love it. Doesn't mean everyone who isn't PD/GT/KAZ worshiper has to get gangbanged after voicing valid opinions.

I agree, GT5 appears to suffer from the worse case of "but" I've ever seen. GT games always suffered from it but GT5 has so many more features it's much more apparent. Nearly every feature comes with a "but" attached to it. Even the cars which are the key aspect of the game come with a huge "BUT" that is pretty much impossible to ignore.

Would I have it any other way though? I don't think so. Focusing on a few features to completely nail them means loosing many other ones and I don't think there's a single one of them I would give up.

 

[freshseth83]

How do you know what tracks are going to be included? Do you expect every oval Nascar runs on? I don't. Daytona, Indy, Texas, Las Vegas, Dover, Bristol- the popular one's, those might be in there. I know Indy and Daytona are, but he doesn't have to have every single oval there is, that's unnecessary. I'm sure there'll be the majority of the Super GT tracks as well. They only have 9 races this season. And they go to Fuji twice. Autopolis isn't even on the menu anymore. WRC might not have point to point tracks we know but do any of them have a great following in GT anyway? Point is, there hasn't been point to point in GT before so any of those included will be a big deal. Don't even get into LeMans because it's there, LaSarthe. The other tracks LMS races on are tracks F1 races on or FIA GT races on. I'm just glad GT5 is coming in November. Premium, Standard, so what for me. I use bumper cam or hood or bonnet view. I don't need to see my steering wheel on screen if it's in front of me.

 

[Organ-Donor]

Would I have it any other way though? I don't think so. Focusing on a few features to completely nail them means loosing many other ones and I don't think there's a single one of them I would give up.

💡 👍

To see NASCAR and WRC promoted so heavily and find the content barely matches what we've seen with JGTC is perplexing to me.

Do you walk into an all you can eat buffet and expect one of the best mouth watering steaks you've had? No, you go to a steakhouse for that.

 

[Nielsen]

I really hope this game proves all the pre-critisism wrong. It hasn't been delayed time and time again, just to add a few premium cars. I have a feeling that WRC and Nascar will do just fine in this game. Some of you almost make it sound like it will be similar to those olympic games which include a bunch of disciplines within just a few mothns of development. GT5 has taken forever and in the end it's all about driving and capture the things that make the different styles unique.

 

[Forza4life]

Would I have it any other way though? I don't think so. Focusing on a few features to completely nail them means loosing many other ones and I don't think there's a single one of them I would give up.

👍

Gold Coast area, Chicago (@ Mike and Dave )

 

[Devedander]

As far as NASCAR, WRC, etc. not being fully fleshed out, did you really expect a game that offers this much content and variety to be as in depth as a full scale game that only concentrates on a specific type of race genre?

If that game is going to tie up the official license and take half a decade in the making and toute itself (both creator and fans) as the biggest and best car game? Yes... Yes I do.

I am not expecting RBR or NASCAR 2003 levels to be packed in necessarily, but I haven't seen anything that hints at more than a cursory nod to real ralli racing.

For the track creator, I know many people that suspected it for karts ONLY, and others that just thought you would place some cones around an enclosed area. The track creator already surpasses those expectations. So I think its peoples own fault for expecting too much not GT5's, especially when no information was present besides the hint of a track tool. Although the ability to create real world tracks that aren't present in GT5 would of been really neat.

Did you see where I say it's awesome that we have it at all?

And how is picking the lower expectations and saying the were surpased evidence of anything? I could just as easily pick those who thought it would be like Modnation Racing or so complex as to recreate any real world track to GT5 visual standards and use that as evidence it's a total letdown. Can't just pick and choose and then use that as a base for an argument.

I won't go into the tree subject, if you get hungup on that after seeing all the improvements and features added to GT, I don't know what to say. The trees look fine to me.

Am I hung up on it? You asked specifically for things besides standard cars that are half assed or unfinished... how is giving you what you ask for me being hung up on it?

And back to the point, if I was hung up on it, would that make them any less half ass?

Livery editor would be nice to have.

Understatement, but yes.

All in all, IMO GT5 is far from an incomplete GT or 'time passer till GT6'. Too much has been added to the series, like I said before they have taken GT to the next level, not just an expansion on what the previous game offered like so many other games do.

I think you mistake expansive for finished or polished.

You know that unifinished and impressive are not mutually exclusive right?

It's not like GT5 is either going to be a flat out bust or super awesome. Just like real cars you can have both in the same body... perhaps a rip roaring engine with a bullet proof tranny tied to a crap drivetrain and differential... perhaps the most luxurious cabin and dash paired with painfully uncomfortable cloth seats.

Don't let yourself get too defensive and one dimensional with your view...

Therein lies the downfall of demanding so much of PD, and pushing too hard for the things 'you' think GT should have, or defending too devoutly your idea of what PD should have done.

Demanding? I let my expectation be guided by:

The direction KY and PD have announced they wanted to go

What is standard in the industry and expected

Even somehwat by the fanbases insistance that KY is a perfectionist, he is an artist, he is some kind of God, he should only be address as sensei...

I don't demand... I just expect what I am believe to be reasonable.

There are games out there that are better examples of a dedicated rally game. There are a few with livery editors. There are even games that have all 3D trees. But why don't we play those games? Because the core essentials don't hold up.

There is a rash generalization...

I played the crap out of 24 Hour Lemans, Rallisport Challenge 1/2, TOCA 2/3, RBR the list goes on...

You want to know honestly what has caused me to stop short in most cases when a game doesn't hold up? A lack of consistency in the experience and imersion.

The physics and the graphics. PD knows what the priories are, and those bullet points are bullseyes. Couple that with what looks to be a pretty robust online interface, and that alone makes for the best racing game on a console, because when we all get down to business, that job is driving, and if the driving doesn't feel or look right, it's game over.

No PD has their priorities and we NOW know what they are.

And apparently the priority is EVERYTHING and thus the very issues I am addressing.

 

[Organ-Donor]

If that game is going to tie up the official license and take half a decade in the making and toute itself (both creator and fans) as the biggest and best car game? Yes... Yes I do.

I am not expecting RBR or NASCAR 2003 levels to be packed in necessarily, but I haven't seen anything that hints at more than a cursory nod to real ralli racing.

Rules are one thing, the actual driving experience of driving those cars/tracks is another. Yes it would be great to have actual accurate races with full rules an all, but just the experience of participating in these races with an awesome physicis engine is good enough for me atleast, I was never expecting a full fledge game inside of a game for each racing category. We don't know what rules and flags they have incorperated into NASCAR, all we have seen is a bare bones demo of a NASCAR driving around a track with an 8 car grid.

And how is picking the lower expectations and saying the were surpased evidence of anything? I could just as easily pick those who thought it would be like Modnation Racing or so complex as to recreate any real world track to GT5 visual standards and use that as evidence it's a total letdown. Can't just pick and choose and then use that as a base for an argument.

All I was getting at was that expectations of people can get out of hand when no details other than a track tool was mentioned.

Am I hung up on it? You asked specifically for things besides standard cars that are half assed or unfinished... how is giving you what you ask for me being hung up on it?

And back to the point, if I was hung up on it, would that make them any less half ass?

Half ass? Do you know how much processing power is being used? 16 photorealistic cars on track, 60fps, dynamic day/night with possible weather, damage, skidmarks, heavy smoke etc. You want all this and 3D trees? For example, look at the Nurb on Forza3, it looks empty like a fire burnt down most of the forest because the trees are 3D but that comes at a price, the ammount of trees is so minimal, and this is with only 8 cars on track.

Understatement, but yes.

Well to me all I really wanted was a couple racing stripes, color options, some decals and numbers.

I think you mistake expansive for finished or polished.

You know that unifinished and impressive are not mutually exclusive right?

It's not like GT5 is either going to be a flat out bust or super awesome. Just like real cars you can have both in the same body... perhaps a rip roaring engine with a bullet proof tranny tied to a crap drivetrain and differential... perhaps the most luxurious cabin and dash paired with painfully uncomfortable cloth seats.

Don't let yourself get too defensive and one dimensional with your view...

I'm not defensive, and I criticise PD where criticism is due. I will atleast wait until the full game to judge how ''unfinished'' GT5 is.

 

[II IVORBIGUN II]

I can understand some of the comments because even im wondering if PD have stretched themselves too much by incorporating so much in GT5. However I then cast my mind back prior to FM3 being released and reading what the forza community wanted and I shall list these below.

1. More than 8 online (GT5 is 16).
2. Day/Night transitions (GT5 has this)
3. Weather (again GT5 has this)
4. Track editor (well GT5 has a track creator)

This list was the most requested features that the Forza community wanted and im delighted to say these are in GT5. The thought of creating a track which I can then race online against my friends is just mind blowing to me.

Personally after reading how much content GT5 has im now even thinking how did PD manage to fit so much into the game after 5 yrs. Im afraid those who complain really need to get a grip on themselves and lower their expectations. Having said this im sure GT6 will be even more epic because the much of the hard work has been done by developing GT5. As you know Kaz stated that GT6 won't take aslong because they had to develop GT5 from scratch.

 

[Tired Tyres]

My thoughts about "standard vs, "premium"

This is my opinion only.

I think PD fully intended to release this game last November with approximately 200 cars and approximately 20 tracks and then Forza 3 made a big splash at E3 last year with 400 cars and 100 tracks and someone at Sony or PD was shocked by that and that this caused the delay due to technical reasons.

I would not have had a problem with 200 cars and 20 tracks. The first, odd numbered, GT game on a console always has about this number of cars and tracks give of take. See GT1 and GT3 for more information.

The trouble is that someone at Sony or PD is more interested in big numbers than quality and I don't think that person's name is Kaz. How do they then go about increasing the car count quickly enough for only a 12 months delay?*

Simple really. Just add 800 upscaled previous generation cars. Problem solved.

New problem. Everyone and his granddad starts bitching about the quality of the 800 upscaled cars.

I don't think it could have been done any other way. There just aren't enough people working for PD to do it any other way. 140 staff just are not enough for this generation of consoles. Personally I think they should just have released the game with 200 cars and trusted people to chose quality over quantity.

I recall Kaz saying in an interview, I can't remember where, that PD can make 50 cars a year and each car take six months to complete. I take this as meaning one person take six months. A team of six people therefore can make that car in one month and therefore 12 cars per year.

So what happens with GT6 then? It should have about 600 cars and about 40 to 50 tracks. How are they going to make all those extra cars. If PD can only make 50 cars in one year and GT6 comes out 2.5 years after GT5, then PD in that time will make 125 more cars for a total of 325 cars when added to the GT5 premiums. That's not enough for an even numbered, feature rich, GT game. See GT2 and GT4 for more information.

PD would need 60 additional staff to create an extra 300 cars in this time period to make a total of 625 cars. That's 60 highly skilled people with correspondingly high salary requirements.

That's ten teams of six making 120 cars per year in addition to the current PD staff making another 125 cars.

Of these 425 new cars how many do you think would be new cars the GT and how many would be new premium editions of standard cars? I think 225 would be brand new cars and 200 will be upgraded standards. That would still leave 600 standard cars. What to do with them? Drop them because you have now got 625 premium cars is the only answer that makes any sense. Why? Because you would need an additional 120 more staff, that's in addition to the 60 they really need, to make premium versions of the remaining 600 standard cars in the 2.5 years available and that is not a practical proposition in any language.

* Yes I know if they never actually gave a release date then technically it wasn't delayed. Additionally 2.5 years to the launch of GT6 is a guess on my part.

 

[Custer85]

Iam happy with what PD did with GT5. I was one of the guys back than, that lamented over the standard cars not having cockpits and the "20 tracks issue", but after GamesCom 2010 I think GT5 delivers.

 

[II IVORBIGUN II]

My thoughts about "standard vs, "premium"

This is my opinion only.

I think PD fully intended to release this game last November with approximately 200 c Forza 3 made a big splash at E3 last year with 400 cars and 100 tracks and someone at Sony or PD was shocked by that and that this caused the delay due to technical reasons.



.

Forza 3 doesn't really have 100 tracks, what you have is numerous variations of the same track. The only new tracks on FM3 were Camino, Catalunya, Le Sarthe, Sedona, Kaido. I won't add the Nurburgring GP track as this was DLC but also the actual modelling of the track is dreadful.

 

[ItsHim]

Iam happy with what PD did with GT5. I was one of the guys back than, that lamented over the standard cars not having cockpits and the "20 tracks issue", but after GamesCom 2010 I think GT5 delivers.

+1 👍

 

[Spagetti69]

@Ivorbiggun. Are you TRC IVORBIGGUN, if so hats off to you sir. You have some pretty fast times out there. Been checking the leaderboards.

Well done.

 

[VXR]

Have the rally physics been sorted for this game? There's no point having the WRC cars license - because hey, it's not a full WRC license without the real stages - if the cars still seem to rotate on a circular point as they round corners ass first.

GT's rallying has been a shambles every time it's appeared thus far.

As for Forza, if they had been allowed the same time to create FM3, then there's no doubt in my mind GT5 would look like the poor relation. You might not want to accept it, but considering they've built three full games in the time between GT4 and GT5, if that time frame had been the development of one game, then it would be damn-near perfect. The things I hear people complain about most with Forza are glitches and bugs and you'd have those sorted in six years of development. Then you add the customisation of cars factor, which a great deal want to see in GT5 and these two would be on a more even playing field.

Besides, MS's hardware snafu of not using HD-DVD as the disc format has hamstrung all of the developers. Blu-Ray would be No.2 if all 360s came with HD-DVD as it was on the market sooner and we've seen Blu-ray has been driven by being built into the PS3.

 

[ItsHim]

As for Forza, if they had been allowed the same time to create FM3, then there's no doubt in my mind GT5 would look like the poor relation.

They haven't and it doesn't. End of.

 

[Piotrov]

^^ yea.... and if the PS3 was made of pure gold and sold for the low price of 199 it would defenatly be the better system..
but its not so lets not get into the what if's.

 

[G.T.Ace]

Half ass? Do you know how much processing power is being used? 16 photorealistic cars on track, 60fps, dynamic day/night with possible weather, damage, skidmarks, heavy smoke etc. You want all this and 3D trees? For example, look at the Nurb on Forza3, it looks empty like a fire burnt down most of the forest because the trees are 3D but that comes at a price, the ammount of trees is so minimal, and this is with only 8 cars on track.

And even in Forza 3 only a handfull of the trees are actually 3D, the leafs are 2D and all background trees are flat textures.

 

[gtracedriver]

GT5 has a lot of stuff that sounds great as a bullet point and would be absolutely spectacular if fully fleshed out, but as is looks like it's going to be more of a taste... kind of a rough draft if you will...

The official WRC license shows nothing to make me think it will be more than a slight improvement on GT4's ralli events, nothing near a real fleshed out ralli mode.

Karts are in but what we've seen so far hints at pretty much the same level of depth as ralli looks lilke it's going to have.

No livery editor, which was on the plans from pretty much the start but has apparently been scrapped along the way.

I hate to bring it up, but yes, X Trees... in a world of supremely gorgeous premium cars and hyperaccurate tracks, trees that clearly turn 2 dimensional when you are doing anything but zooming by at high speed just stand out as a WTF why isn't that taken care of?

The track creator is simultaneously awesome in that it's there but has so much room to go with being a full editor instead of a creator.

GT offers so much, but so much of what it offers seems to still be very much a work in progress.

And that is (as you requested) not touching on the elephant in the room which is standards.

The only way to take the edge off what basically amounts to an unfinished product in that sense is to say it's not really a finished product, it's just a step on the journey to the ultimate finished product.

WRC, Nascar, Karts are all extra features. There was no necessity to have but they have got the license of some WRC, Nascar cars and tracks. What is wrong in having extra. I think it is good lol.

Trees are ok for racing sim
http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/3376/77539.jpg

Have the rally physics been sorted for this game? There's no point having the WRC cars license - because hey, it's not a full WRC license without the real stages - if the cars still seem to rotate on a circular point as they round corners ass first.

GT's rallying has been a shambles every time it's appeared thus far.

As for Forza, if they had been allowed the same time to create FM3, then there's no doubt in my mind GT5 would look like the poor relation. You might not want to accept it, but considering they've built three full games in the time between GT4 and GT5, if that time frame had been the development of one game, then it would be damn-near perfect. The things I hear people complain about most with Forza are glitches and bugs and you'd have those sorted in six years of development. Then you add the customisation of cars factor, which a great deal want to see in GT5 and these two would be on a more even playing field.

Besides, MS's hardware snafu of not using HD-DVD as the disc format has hamstrung all of the developers. Blu-Ray would be No.2 if all 360s came with HD-DVD as it was on the market sooner and we've seen Blu-ray has been driven by being built into the PS3.

The physics are all new and updated. I think they did a good job in GT4 and GT5 obviously will be more realistic. Shame for you though if you din't like it. Obviously they will want everyone to enjoy so even if you are used to more arcade racers will little practice I am sure you can learn how to drive without spinning in circles

Not sure what is going on with Turn 10. IMHO they are not serious about sim at all. Had they spend more time to get cars, tracks, physics, gfx and other things right, I don't think so. They did ok job I guess. May that is the best they could do. Forza2,3 was released on 2007,2009. 360 was released on 2005. So basically it took them 4yrs to get their best game since 360 was launched.

 

[Pierced Lead]

Have the rally physics been sorted for this game? There's no point having the WRC cars license - because hey, it's not a full WRC license without the real stages - if the cars still seem to rotate on a circular point as they round corners ass first.

GT's rallying has been a shambles every time it's appeared thus far.

As for Forza, if they had been allowed the same time to create FM3, then there's no doubt in my mind GT5 would look like the poor relation. You might not want to accept it, but considering they've built three full games in the time between GT4 and GT5, if that time frame had been the development of one game, then it would be damn-near perfect. The things I hear people complain about most with Forza are glitches and bugs and you'd have those sorted in six years of development. Then you add the customisation of cars factor, which a great deal want to see in GT5 and these two would be on a more even playing field.

Besides, MS's hardware snafu of not using HD-DVD as the disc format has hamstrung all of the developers. Blu-Ray would be No.2 if all 360s came with HD-DVD as it was on the market sooner and we've seen Blu-ray has been driven by being built into the PS3.

Blue crosses out the red. Sorry. And blu-ray is the superior media in every way. The PS3 may have driven the Blu-Ray to success, but the same couldn't have been said of the 360 with the HD-DVD, it was not even marketed as an HD-DVD player.

And if Forza were given that much time as much as GT5 was, it may be possible. But apparently I don't think so. Despite having many more employees T10 didn't really manage to bring the changes and improvements everyone was expecting from FM2 to FM3. They only made an extra 150(?) cars for the next game and only a handful more tracks. The rest was recycled as is. They didn't even redo the poorly modeled vehicles (and tracks) of the previous game, which I believe is possible enough in 1-2 years according to their LOD.

 

[PirateThom]

Besides, MS's hardware snafu of not using HD-DVD as the disc format has hamstrung all of the developers. Blu-Ray would be No.2 if all 360s came with HD-DVD as it was on the market sooner and we've seen Blu-ray has been driven by being built into the PS3.

Not true.

Waiting for HD DVD would have delayed the 360 and brought it's launch (and price) closer to the PS3s. Sony, with the PS brand (people more likely to wait for a PS3 than picking up a 360 in the interim), and the studio support for Blu-ray would still have dominated HD DVD, perhaps not as quickly, but the outcome would be the same and, probably, the 360 would be in dead last place right now.

 

[Robin]

I agree, HD DVD's demise was based on much more than the 360 not having it built in. Sony had massive support behind it from many other companies and more crucially its owns many movie studios so all those releases where on Blu Ray.

However even in HD DVD had failed if MS had put it in the console they wouldnt have the problem with space that they do now. They could have used it as a propriety format. I'm sure the next MS console will use HD DVD disk technology even if it isnt branded that way because they dont want to pay Sony royalties.

As for PD I feel they have turned out less given the amount of time they had over Forza. As I said they really should have hired many more people for this one.

Robin.

 

[Devedander]

Half ass? Do you know how much processing power is being used?

First off do you? Only the devs working on this know how much is being used.

But as for the logic of all the other stuff on screen at once, I do know that if you pulled a few hundred polys from each car, or from some of the environments and added it to trees to go from X to at leats * you would end up with much better looking trees and cars and environments that were virtually indinstinguishable from what's there already.

Well to me all I really wanted was a couple racing stripes, color options, some decals and numbers.

I wanted skilled artists out there to be able to create all the NASCAR liveries, all the ralli liveries and the famous racing teams....

I'm not defensive, and I criticise PD where criticism is due. I will atleast wait until the full game to judge how ''unfinished'' GT5 is.

You don't really though... you kind of mention but dismiss where it's due... and we have KY's interviews to confirm some of thes shortcomings, you don't have to wait for release for those even if you are tried and true to "you don't know till it's out."

WRC, Nascar, Karts are all extra features. There was no necessity to have but they have got the license of some WRC, Nascar cars and tracks. What is wrong in having extra. I think it is good lol.

See again? Where it's less than polished, dismimsive rationlization. It's just extras... really? They went through the trouble to get licenses and we will just say they are extras?

This is exaclty the kinnd of behavior I am talking about.

Trees are ok for racing sim
http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/3376/77539.jpg

I am amazed that after this many years and all the adament fan praise, "ok for a sim" cuts it for anything in GT....

BTW photos never show the real problem with X trees, that doesn't show up until you end up spining out near one and the continuity of forward motion is broken... then they stick out like sore thumbs.

I suppose the anser is "never spin out" right?

The physics are all new and updated. I think they did a good job in GT4 and GT5 obviously will be more realistic. Shame for you though if you din't like it. Obviously they will want everyone to enjoy so even if you are used to more arcade racers

Nice, because I totally mentioned that as one of the things I was dissapointed in right? That was totally on topic right?

Oh no it wasn't. It's just standard fan practice to bring up something good about GT in every post even if it's not on point.

will little practice I am sure you can learn how to drive without spinning in circles

Uh huh... this is like those guys who said "damage is uncessary, if you were a good driver you wouldn't collide with stuff". Yeah... that's how it works at all...

BTW don't let the guys posting videos of their driving the demo see that, many of them have spun out a few times. Wouldn't want to insult them now would we?

Not sure what is going on with Turn 10. IMHO they are not serious about sim at all. Had they spend more time to get cars, tracks, physics, gfx and other things right, I don't think so. They did ok job I guess. May that is the best they could do. Forza2,3 was released on 2007,2009. 360 was released on 2005. So basically it took them 4yrs to get their best game since 360 was launched.

So what you are saying is T10 has been in the semi sim business for about as long as PD has been working on GT5 alone and they have already cranked out 2 legitimately quality games across 2 generations of hardware with a third that could be viewed as a massive content update in some lights than a real new version...

That doesn't sound too shabby to me...

 

[Devedander]

Dupe

 

[killanite]

@ Davedander
You know for someone who critisizes GT so much and praises Turn10's work so much you sure spend alot of time talking about GT instead of playing Turn10's games. If you're so clearly unhappy with GT5's foibles (and I don't deny it has foibles, just like any other game) then I don't understand why you spend so much time on this forum trying to tell people how wrong they are.

I don't have a problem with you speaking your mind and opinion but when you do it repeatedly and constantly rebuttle anyone who has a different opinion, I mean surely one can begin to think you're just trying to pot stir. I just want to know your motive. "I just want to voice my opinion/criticism" won't cut it cause you've been doing it for about 3 months straight and it's like a neverending loop. you pounce upon anything negative and you completely disregard the positives.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

I really hope this game proves all the pre-critisism wrong.

Well, I don't think I am willing to go out on the "all" pre-critisism limb, but I do think it will quell some of it.

The game is going to suffer from some fractionalization as evidenced by this thread. The extent to which it carries over we won't know until after release.

I'm likewise somewhat skeptical of how the standard/premium, a pretty limited NASCAR, and unknown implementation of WRC will affect the game.

Overall I think the game will be great, but I also think some cracks will be visable.

 

[Smoke&Slide]

As long as the standards, can be modified in the same way as the premium cars i don't mind.Also if PD can model the underside, because of roll overs that'd be even better.

 

[Devedander]

@ Davedander
You know for someone who critisizes GT so much and praises Turn10's work so much you sure spend alot of time talking about GT instead of playing Turn10's games. If you're so clearly unhappy with GT5's foibles (and I don't deny it has foibles, just like any other game) then I don't understand why you spend so much time on this forum trying to tell people how wrong they are.

I don't have a problem with you speaking your mind and opinion but when you do it repeatedly and constantly rebuttle anyone who has a different opinion, I mean surely one can begin to think you're just trying to pot stir. I just want to know your motive. "I just want to voice my opinion/criticism" won't cut it cause you've been doing it for about 3 months straight and it's like a neverending loop. you pounce upon anything negative and you completely disregard the positives.

You'll noteI don't praise FM much really, it only appears that way relatively because I am constantly not panning it in a forum in which the norm is to pan it. Compared to that, it looks like I am prasing it.

I haven't had it bad for Forza since FM1 when I loved it because it tackled a lot of things I felt were missing from GT... since then it's been fun but it hasn't been the next rallisport challenge or anything...

I have been waiting to see if GT5 will be the next GT4 for me and in the meantime playing a slew of other games (and doing non game related things also!).

BTW this is also a common tactic... don't like what the guy is saying? Hit a nerve? Attack him for being on the forums at all...