Your thoughts about "standard" vs. "premium"

[SuperCobraJet]

After playing prologue though, I thought prologue meant that it was a prologue of things to come and expect.

Along with most of the rest of us, that assumed the same thing and legitimately so. There was nothing remotely definitive to indicate anything to the contrary.

 

[infamousDee]

So you'd rather have just 200 cars? You're more concerned about them bumping up the car count for marketing/sales reasons than you are about your overall enjoyment of the game. This is why some people find your point of view hard to understand. We have already established that they led us on about the cockpit view... But as Amar stated, standard cars were added as a bonus and were talked about as early as 2008.

Standard Cars were confirmed for Gran Turismo HD at TGS 2006. Another interesting observation is that Yamauchi also confirms the two car classes will be segregated into separate game modes.

The game will essentially be split into two parts: Gran Turismo Premium and Gran Turismo Classic. The GT Premium portion of the game will feature 30 cars and two tracks (one of which is the mountainous course found in the TGS demo). Gran Turismo Classic, on the other hand, will feature approximately 770 cars, more than fifty tracks, and literally thousands of downloadable items.

So why the need for the split? The answer is time. Using the GT Premium demo as his example, Yamauchi explained that each of the ten cars found in that demo took six months to model. All the cars and tracks in GT Premium are literally being built from the ground up. The cars, tracks, and items found in GT Classic, then are essentially upgraded HD assets of the data found in previous Gran Turismo games. If, Yamauchi explained, they wanted to make a game as big in scope as GT 4 and bring them to the same standards as GT Premium's cars and tracks, it would take a minimum of three years before the game came out. Thus the need for the Gran Turismo HD as a sort of "holdover" until Gran Turismo 5 arrives, whever that may be.

http://uk.gamespot.com/events/tgs2006/blog.html?board_id=

 

[Griffith500]

That was unnecessary, to say the least. 👎

But interesting, nonetheless.

 

[Dravonic]

Over a year ago (kind of funny they cite GTPlanet)-
http://www.1up.com/news/gran-turismo-5-1000-cars

Standard cars made their first appearance at gamescon 2009 as the form of a single sentence. I'm well aware of that. I was here. I remember as nobody knew what they were back then. Your article only proves my point as they too had no idea what standard cars were back then.

I'm wondering if you were here too...

It's not misleading, it's marketing. They never lied about any of it. Just because you thought all of the cars were going to be the same doesn't mean that they came right out and told you that all of the cars would be the same.

And to counter your last, I've been following GT5 pretty much since GT4 launched. And I wasn't "shocked" by the "surprise announcement" of standard cars.

And I'll repeat my last. How many of those standard cars will people actually drive? How many of them are cars that people actually want? "Oh, I'm really pissed by my 1994 Nissan Micra didn't get the Premium treatment"? Come on. Yeah, GT4 had a bazillion cars in it, and everybody here drove the same 50.

There's a lot more to the game than how many cars it has.

It's maketing at it's best - a.k.a lying out of their asses while still not technically lying.

 

[analog]

You do understand "casual observers" have no clue what this thread is about?

Yes ofcourse I do and I don't envy them when they'll only realise it when firing up GT5 for the first time, I meant casual observers as in those who don't read these sorts of forums but heard GT5 will feature a 1000 cars.
Half the time the members and readers of this forum probably haven't a clue what this thread is about.

Exactly. Remember that every public announcement is carefully written and approved before it goes out. If you read the actual announcements and press releases, you'll find they promised no such thing. "1000 cars and interior view" is NOT the same thing as "1000 cars with interior view". It's all in the wording.

This could be forgiven when it was small print in a sleazy contract and it would most definitely be considered legal in the lawsuit "The people versus PD" but it isn't exactly what I consider clear explanation.
Like I've mentioned before it can't be considered lying or strictly regarded as dishonest but surely a case of being economical with the truth.

 

[Jedi2016]

Like I've mentioned before it can't be considered lying or strictly regarded as dishonest but surely a case of being economical with the truth.

And this makes them different from every other developer in the world how?

You want to talk true misrepresentation, go talk to EA.

 

[TouringDevotee]

To be honest, the more I think about it, the more I wish PD had simply given us 200 + premium cars and left it at that, rather than shoving in 800 half-arsed inferior quality models from GT4 for the sake of saying "We got double the cars of Forza". So what if they had less than FM3?
At least they would have been of a very high quality and this standard vs premium thing wouldn't have spoiled it. I mean, 80% of cars not having a cockpit view? That's just half-arsed imo and not something I would expect from PD.

Why is getting more cars than we would have otherwise, viewed as a problem? Maybe it creates incongruity for the fanboy wars, but I'd rather have all the models than worry about what someone else thinks. Allow the Forza fanboys to rot in their absurdity (fanboys who've stated that GT4s large car count is the result of model color being included in the equation ).

In the end, I don't really care about the actual numbers, but as this isn't a PC sim with mods available to it, I'd rather not miss certain models of cars that I happen to love, simply because someone else is discomforted by their presence.

If you do not want these vehicles, then just ignore their existence, as this is all beginning to look and sound like some version of Gran Turismo apartheid. 👎

 

[regnar]

Come TGS, & Standards make a no show (again), I think will be sending a big message about PD lack of confidence in the quality of these models.

It would seem psychologically that as anal as Kaz is with the amount of detail put into the Premiums, that he wouldn't be able to help himself into, at minimum touching up textures & materials on the Standards as opposed to just doing just a direct port, which would seem to be a opposite mind set.

With all that said, I prefer to have the larger variety of cars.

 

[Tornado]

Standard Cars were confirmed for Gran Turismo HD at TGS 2006. Another interesting observation is that Yamauchi also confirms the two car classes will be segregated into separate game modes.

News that had to do with that GT:HD could not be counted on when it was first announced as applying to GT5 proper when GT:HD was canceled. Nor can anyone use that news if GT5 has a similar system as some kind of "I told you so" ammunition.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Standard Cars were confirmed for Gran Turismo HD at TGS 2006. Another interesting observation is that Yamauchi also confirms the two car classes will be segregated into separate game modes.

The game will essentially be split into two parts: Gran Turismo Premium and Gran Turismo Classic. The GT Premium portion of the game will feature 30 cars and two tracks (one of which is the mountainous course found in the TGS demo). Gran Turismo Classic, on the other hand, will feature approximately 770 cars, more than fifty tracks, and literally thousands of downloadable items.

So why the need for the split? The answer is time. Using the GT Premium demo as his example, Yamauchi explained that each of the ten cars found in that demo took six months to model. All the cars and tracks in GT Premium are literally being built from the ground up. The cars, tracks, and items found in GT Classic, then are essentially upgraded HD assets of the data found in previous Gran Turismo games. If, Yamauchi explained, they wanted to make a game as big in scope as GT 4 and bring them to the same standards as GT Premium's cars and tracks, it would take a minimum of three years before the game came out. Thus the need for the Gran Turismo HD as a sort of "holdover" until Gran Turismo 5 arrives, whever that may be.

I direct your attention to this part of the quote:

"If, Yamauchi explained, they wanted to make a game as big in scope as GT 4 and bring them to the same standards as GT Premium's cars and tracks, it would take a minimum of three years before the game came out."

What we got after 3 yrs was GT5P, then a name change to GT5.

What we got after 5 yrs. was still no GT5 and BTW when you do get it after almost 6 yrs. you will get 800 Standards and 200 Premiums.

What happened to the "3yr all premium plan"?

His quote directly contradicts what the reality is.


EDIT: Accordingly there is no reason for any of us not to have expected we would get more than the 800/200 split.

 

[analog]

And this makes them different from every other developer in the world how?

And there was me thinking I was cynical , but I guess you're right although it being commonplace universally therefore doesn't make it okay now does it?
I don't see the benefit of it either to be honest, I can see the point of not disclosing new features in the fear of being copied but this issue would eventually arrise anyway.

I direct your attention to this part of the quote:

"If, Yamauchi explained, they wanted to make a game as big in scope as GT 4 and bring them to the same standards as GT Premium's cars and tracks, it would take a minimum of three years before the game came out."

What we got after 3 yrs was GT5P, then a name change to GT5.

What we got after 5 yrs. was still no GT5 and BTW when you do get it after almost 6 yrs. you will get 800 Standards and 200 Premiums.

What happened to the "3yr all premium plan"?

His quote directly contradicts what the reality is.

Interesting, whatever they planned from the start........

 

[eSZee]

Wow you've played the game already? How did you get it so early?!!

You need to play the game to say what he said?
Your trolling is humorous.

 

[Dravonic]

And this makes them different from every other developer in the world how?

You want to talk true misrepresentation, go talk to EA.

Not sure about you, but before the standard car fiasco I thought PD wasn't like every other developer. Apparently I was just being naive.

 

[analog]

In the end, I don't really care about the actual numbers, but as this isn't a PC sim with mods available to it, I'd rather not miss certain models of cars that I happen to love, simply because someone else is discomforted by their presence.

If you do not want these vehicles, then just ignore their existence, as this is all beginning to look and sound like some version of Gran Turismo apartheid. 👎

Although apartheid is a rather strong and equally strange word to use in this context I do want to make clear it's not the type of car, brand or model being discussed here as for me the whole point isn't the fact these cars ( as in types or models ) are included but the way they were modelled and the implications of lacking certain key features like cockpit view, etc.
I really loved a lot of cars in GT4 now destined to be Standard although I assumed they were playable in a new way, not an upgraded GT4 Retro with new physics but there you go.
And even when someone should be discomforted by their presence, they will be in regardless.

 

[warp9engage]

Come TGS, & Standards make a no show (again), I think will be sending a big message about PD lack of confidence in the quality of these models.

Agreed 100%. PD normally likes to showcase all of its high-quality work, so if they aren't keen on showing the Standard Cars, then something isn't quite right about them. It's true that PD still has TGS and might be wanting to keep something as a surprise, but this is the last major gameshow before launch-date. They've got to show all their major stuff now and if the Standard Cars (representing 80% of the car count) don't make an appearence, then, don't expect a positive result.

 

[Devedander]

Also, you're absolutely wrong: there is no fuzzy line with hardware generations, especially since we're talking about consoles.

Really? What gen is the wii?

What was the Dreamcast?

What abou the 3D0 and the Jaguar?

The big players set the generation markers with hardware, the rest of the stuff kind of falls somewhere in and around. It's not solid.

Why are you quoting stuff from the media? You know where those guys get their info

Hehe caught with your pants down and still doding... face it, you just didn't know software generations was a legitimate term in the game world and stuck your foot in your mouth over it... oh and these guys get there stuff from... themselves.... saying software generations is blindsiding you with marketing crap is like saying "model year" is some obscure term... grow up and admit it when you're wrong!

No idea where you got this from! I think you're making stuff up to suit your own needs now!

Or we are in a thread about standards and premiums and it was in response to a post showing pictures of cars from a game and comparing it to cars in GT5... you really don't get the whole topic thing do you...

You were just crying about the Standards not jumping high enough and bringing the bar down with them, landing all awkward on their left ankles and having to retire from irrecoverable damage (I know how analogy works too!! Me so clever!)

Do you cover your eyes while you read posts and yell "alallalalalala"?

See, that's the benefit of plain English - no chasing round the houses looking for hidden subtext or encrypted bull****.

Are you a child?

Funny from the guy who calls BS on a term he doesn't know about and then dodges for pages to avoid admitting it

It's ok, no one likes to be obviously wrong and stick their foot in their mouth... you are just one of the most skilled at being bad at it I have seen in quite a while

Shall we review where this started?

What nonsense! "Many generations deep" - What does that even mean? The hardware hasn't change

You are the one who started with all the angry jumping around, your quotes of "patronizing crap" are ironic since you are the one who started being rude and patronizing out of your own ignorance of a common term. Something which seems to be a trait with you since any kind of slang seems to through your comprehension into a tail spin.

 

[Dapper]

@ Deve- So other games making sequels on the same console affects the GT series how? I am just curious, that is all. I am also a layman, so please be scrupulous.

 

[witham]

It's not misleading, it's marketing. They never lied about any of it. Just because you thought all of the cars were going to be the same doesn't mean that they came right out and told you that all of the cars would be the same.

And to counter your last, I've been following GT5 pretty much since GT4 launched. And I wasn't "shocked" by the "surprise announcement" of standard cars.

And I'll repeat my last. How many of those standard cars will people actually drive? How many of them are cars that people actually want? "Oh, I'm really pissed by my 1994 Nissan Micra didn't get the Premium treatment"? Come on. Yeah, GT4 had a bazillion cars in it, and everybody here drove the same 50.

There's a lot more to the game than how many cars it has.

Thats what I was thinking if I'm honest when I play prologue I have plenty of choice the same for shift, never have I thought when playing either of these games that I need anouther 900 cars, maybe anouther 20 tracks, BUT lets get this clear I will never complain about standards as they are a nice bonus.

 

[Devedander]

@ Deve- So other games making sequels on the same console affects the GT series how? I am just curious, that is all. I am also a layman, so please be scrupulous.

Covered that back here:

Just because GT5 is the first GT on PS3 (second if you count GT5P) doesn't mean it falls into the category of first gen software. It falls into a timeslot which I would put PS3 on roughly 3rd gen by now at least. That's the problem with long dev cycles... when you release determines the standard and the competition, not when you started working on it or how many iterations you have under your belt. It's a reason why DNF is going to have to be pretty darn awesome to impress... when it started out a 3D poly FPS with some grimey humor was enough to put you on top of the ranks... the world has changed a lot since then...

Basically you know those games that look sweet at launch of a console? Well 3 years down the line they aren't so impressive anymore... maybe lighting effects have gotten better, more is done at higher resolutions etc... when you release a game 3 or 4 years into a console life cycle, even if it's the first game you did on that console, you don't want to go releasing something that looks like a launch title... you want to hit the going "generations" standards.

So that's kind of how it works... when someone says "that game looks like it should have come out back when the console was still new" they are referring to the same issues that make up software generations. Expected quality goes up as time goes on and that's why a game that is several generations old should be expected to be shown up by a current game.

 

[Dapper]

Thanks. I see your point, I don't agree, but I understand.
Your agrument rest on something being better than GT5, and I don't think anything is.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Although apartheid is a rather strong and equally strange word to use in this context I do want to make clear it's not the type of car, brand or model being discussed here as for me the whole point isn't the fact these cars ( as in types or models ) are included but the way they were modelled and the implications of lacking certain key features like cockpit view, etc.
I really loved a lot of cars in GT4 now destined to be Standard although I assumed they were playable in a new way, not an upgraded GT4 Retro with new physics but there you go.
And even when someone should be discomforted by their presence, they will be in regardless.

Exactly. We will get what the game has and you will have to like it or lump it.

Contrary to how it may appear, I don't have big problem with it. (concern maybe)

What I do have a problem with are those using selective hindsight to say:

We shouldn't have expected more than the Standard/Premium situation.

We had every legitimate right to expect more and IMO, after nearly 6 yrs, we should have gotten more.

But as they say, it is what it is.

Personally I anticipate it will be a great game, and I still have faith Kaz will
do everything possible to minimize the graphical disparities between the Standards and Premiums.

 

[analog]

And I'll repeat my last. How many of those standard cars will people actually drive? How many of them are cars that people actually want? "Oh, I'm really pissed by my 1994 Nissan Micra didn't get the Premium treatment"? Come on. Yeah, GT4 had a bazillion cars in it, and everybody here drove the same 50.

There's a lot more to the game than how many cars it has.

I'm amazed how often people here tend to use this argument, are there seriously that many people here, who also love cars, who only used the same 50 cars over and over again in GT4?
There's indeed more than just cars in the game but not that much to be honest, even when I completed the whole game and knew every track better than my own street I would always return to this game purely for the variety it offered regarding cars.
If true and it isn't just another lazy assumption making me appear like some freak who did own and drove almost each and every car ( not the duplicates ) on a regular basis depending on which phase I was going through then I'm equally amazed as you seem to be that people do drive more than 50 cars.......

 

[Devedander]

Thanks. I see your point, I don't agree, but I understand.
Your agrument rest on something being better than GT5, and I don't think anything is.

Not really... my point rests on a large part of GT5 not being graphically superior to something that came out years ago on an often claimed lesser console.

It's not an overall statement about GT5, it's a statement about the part of GT5 we are discussing in this thread.

 

[Dapper]

It's not an overall statement about GT5, it's a statement about the part of GT5 we are discussing in this thread.

Thanks for clarifying.

 

[Lucas]

no metter what, people will always, always complain...if you want a full perfect product you need to wait

That clears my doubt whether Duke Nukem Forever will be the best game ever or not.

You need to play the game to say what he said?
Your trolling is humorous.

This goes to my sig.

 

[Ryan81]

Why is getting more cars than we would have otherwise, viewed as a problem? Maybe it creates incongruity for the fanboy wars, but I'd rather have all the models than worry about what someone else thinks. Allow the Forza fanboys to rot in their absurdity (fanboys who've stated that GT4s large car count is the result of model color being included in the equation ).

In the end, I don't really care about the actual numbers, but as this isn't a PC sim with mods available to it, I'd rather not miss certain models of cars that I happen to love, simply because someone else is discomforted by their presence.

If you do not want these vehicles, then just ignore their existence, as this is all beginning to look and sound like some version of Gran Turismo apartheid. 👎

Having 800 extra cars is not a bad thing in itself. Far from it. What I don't like is the inconsistency between the two groups. One has the latest graphics, the other doesn't. One has lovely cockpit views, the other doesn't. One has full damage, the other doesn't. It makes it look like something that was just kind of "attached" to the game at the last minute, just to increase the numbers. Incomplete. Unpolished. Unfinished. Half-arsed.

You're right: it has turned into a form of GT apartheid but that is exactly what PD have given us.

Now, I wouldn't mind a bit if we had "only" 200 + cars. The numbers are not a big deal for me, the quantity over quality thing is. Let's face it, 200 + is still a bloody load of cars, more than any other racing game out (with the exception of FM3)

 

[Devedander]

Having 800 extra cars is not a bad thing in itself. Far from it.

While I agree 800 extra is not a bad thing in itself, the question arises of whether it's 800 extra or 800 missing.

 

[shirakawaa]

If they are 200+ unique premium cars (excluding doubles, very similar versions, different paintjobs or rims (!), etc) then I will be happy. If not, I'll be left wondering what the hell did the PD staff do over these years.

 

[regnar]

If they are 200+ unique premium cars (excluding doubles, very similar versions, different paintjobs or rims (!), etc) then I will be happy. If not, I'll be left wondering what the hell did the PD staff do over these years.

To add, are the Race Modification cars part of the 200 or in addition to the 200?. Race Modification in earlier games such as GT1 & GT2, in some cases where completely different modelled cars from the one that where started from.

Assuming Premiums will be the basis for Race Modifications.

 

[VXR]

Allow the Forza fanboys to rot in their absurdity (fanboys who've stated that GT4s large car count is the result of model color being included in the equation ).

Whilst the rational amongst this forum will appreciate that two of GT4's car list were different purple-coloured GT-R V-Specs available separately and only in that colour.