Your thoughts about "standard" vs. "premium"

[the Interceptor]

Camaroboy makes a good point: GT5rologue was released pretty much exactly three years before GT5. Prologue featured 6 HD tracks and about 70 cars of GT5 premium standard in a well-working game. So what the hell did they do in those three years after that?

Also, Kaz admitted that they went a bit overboard with the level of detail of the premium cars. A more realistic planning would probably have brought us a much bigger number of cars.

 

[Zonda R]

Premiums have this much detail, and therefore they take up a lottt of space on the disc.

However hopefully the rest of the cars, or at least everything worth doing (I'm looking at you, Midget II), will be patched at a later date.

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/57948409@N06/5327703059/] Lamborghini Murciélago LP670-4 Super Veloce - 7 by miami_heat_no-1, on Flickr[/URL]

 

[Luminis]

yeaahhhhh but we really need some updates quickly as possible!!!

some cars that need update more than others are:

jaguar xj220 (look the front lights at night!!)

saleen s7 (the back is too pixeled)

but even after those ones, this get the GOLD!!:

2004 is calling. It wants its cars back

 

[IncredibleMind]

Well I suppose you might also think some people would assume anyone who complains about anything would have complained about anything...

I have referred to the 6 year dev cycle and the Forza comparisons quite a few times... oddly there are many games I have not complained about... I am not sure how you could posssibly know that I would have found something to complain about with GT5.

This is all assuming, of course, that you do not mean finding something complain about literally as no game is perfect and there is something complainable in any game... if so it's an empty statement.

But if you mean in the allegorical form, I think you are making poor generalities.

You've taken me completely out of context. I have no idea how you reached some of these conclusions. I was only referring to the Forza/GT5 flamewar and I'm basically saying it's fueled by overzealous brand loyalty.

Legit complaints are good for the franchise. Saying things like GT5 is going up in smoke and dying out because the game is only 20% complete is complete nonsense.

 

[IncredibleMind]

Firrst off, I'm still in disagreement with your sentiment on the six year issue, so, yeah, the disagreement isn't just happening in my mind,
Furthermore, it seems more like Camaroboy is getting more worked up about some people (seemingly) defending GT5 like their firstborn child rather than the flaws of the game themselves. Not that O could speak for him or anything, that's just the impression I'm having.

Besides, I doubt someone with 8000+ posts is just contributing to these boards just to make GT5 look bad.

Last but not least, if you're on GTPlanet, chances are, you already do know about GT5 to a cartain extend, so I doubt there'll be much harm coming from that. And, ladditionally, if someone didn't play the game and got to read some of the overly positive opinions of GT5, he/she'dm be led on to believe GT5 was some kind of flawless game, so some contrasting opinions should be accepted around here as well. And you can't really expect everyone to add a sentence or two about some of the good stuff GT5 brings to the table whenever they post something about a flaw in the game, just to make a few folks around here feel better about their pet franchise.

I responded to what he said, not what YOU think he implied.LOL

Also, like I said you're creating conflicts in your own mind. The gist of my original message was that there are people here who are simply trolling. The 6 year issue is merely a sidebar.

Criticism is good as long as it's constructive. When people start going off the deep end, at best their motives should be questioned.

 

[Uxi]

Camaroboy makes a good point: GT5rologue was released pretty much exactly three years before GT5. Prologue featured 6 HD tracks and about 70 cars of GT5 premium standard in a well-working game. So what the hell did they do in those three years after that?

How many total tracks do we have now?

207 Premium cars, right? If it was 3 years from GT4 to GT5P with 70, they were actually faster in adding 137 more in 3 years from GT5P to GT5, no?

 

[SlipZtrEm]

One could easily say that Forza 2 was a demo to Forza 3, therefore it took 4 years to make it. Of course people don't say this though, despite the game just tweaking the engine, adding cars and adding customization. Heck they even imported cars from Forza 2 to 3.

Well now this is a dangerous train of thought to be taking. Specifically the part about the imported cars. No other racing game out currently has models in it that have been carried over from the year 2000. Only GT5 manages that one (the C5-R, the Nomad Diablo, a bunch of other GT3 cars).

As for the trolling, like I said I've caught enough Forza fanboys blatantly lying about their experience with the game along with the plethora of anti GT5 YouTube videos to conclude that they are far more aggressive in their trolling, at least at this point in time.

You keep tossing out the "fanboy" and "troll" insults (something that isn't generally acceptable around here, anyways), but it looks to me this is just another issue of someone picking a side when it doesn't need to be that way. Plenty of us appreciate both series, as both existing is definitely better than only one, and we the consumers benefit from the competition. And if you have picked a side... it's far more likely you'll overlook similar actions to the ones you're complaining about if they're happening in your favour. See Luminis' point about how easy it was for plenty of GT5 fans to post with impunity pre-release, about how surely, the game was going to be perfect, or as near-perfect as the racing genre had ever seen.

A better example, actually, would be the glitchy F1 2010 fiasco, and how so many people wouldn't hesitate to pile on it and its need to get patched so quickly after release. They knew GT5 would ship finished and completed, how could it not after all these years? And yet, here we are...

(though, mind you, at least we're getting these patches, which is better than not getting them, unpolished game or not).

Like I said though, in a repeat of what I said in my first message, there are people who come here simply for trolling purposes.

Yep. On a daily basis.

 

[Luminis]

I responded to what he said, not what YOU think he implied.LOL

Yeah, and I'm just reading those posts in the context of the posts directly before them. Taking bits of a discussion out of context isn't really going to end well.

Also, like I said you're creating conflicts in your own mind. The gist of my original message was that there are people here who are simply trolling. The 6 year issue is merely a sidebar.

You also went on about the rabid Forza fanboys. I'm simply pointing out that the guys on the GT side of fanboyism aren't any better.
Besides, while you're right about some guys trolling the boards, I highly disagree with who you seem to be considering to be trolls, for the most part, at least.

Criticism is good as long as it's constructive. When people start going off the deep end, at best their motives should be questioned.

The same can be said for blindly defending something. Neither is going to contribute to an unbiased discussion.

 

[the Interceptor]

How many total tracks do we have now?

26, not counting the variations of the tracks.

207 Premium cars, right? If it was 3 years from GT4 to GT5P with 70, they were actually faster in adding 137 more in 3 years from GT5P to GT5, no?

Yes they were, also in adding the tracks. If you look at the whole picture however ... say you would assign 50 programmers to design 20 racetrack 3D models and 137 3D cars, what timespan would you find acceptable? Three years?

Also, as brought up before, it has to be questioned whether this depth of modeling was really necessary. Of course the premiums look brilliant, but with a more realistic approach in terms of time management, we probably would have seen 500 premiums and no standard cars at all in GT5. I think a lot of people would have preferred that.

 

[NOS Waster]

26, not counting the variations of the tracks.

Yes they were, also in adding the tracks. If you look at the whole picture however ... say you would assign 50 programmers to design 20 racetrack 3D models and 137 3D cars, what timespan would you find acceptable? Three years?

Also, as brought up before, it has to be questioned whether this depth of modeling was really necessary. Of course the premiums look brilliant, but with a more realistic approach in terms of time management, we probably would have seen 500 premiums and no standard cars at all in GT5. I think a lot of people would have preferred that.

But then 40 of those premiums would have been skylines and 15 would have been miatas
(Tryin to make a joke )

 

[Revelation1115]

I still don't get why they didn't just hire more people. Surely there are lots of talented people willing to help out..

 

[BOneFIshzz_]

26, not counting the variations of the tracks.

Yes they were, also in adding the tracks. If you look at the whole picture however ... say you would assign 50 programmers to design 20 racetrack 3D models and 137 3D cars, what timespan would you find acceptable? Three years?

Also, as brought up before, it has to be questioned whether this depth of modeling was really necessary. Of course the premiums look brilliant, but with a more realistic approach in terms of time management, we probably would have seen 500 premiums and no standard cars at all in GT5. I think a lot of people would have preferred that.

I'd prefer 500 premiums...I mean the interior view is nice, they only give it to 20% of the cars??

 

[Predwolf]

Looks ok to me...

Well... there's some cars that really needs some work. But some of them are just lovelly.


Nürburgring Nordschleife_2 por GT5_delayHATER_BMWbrasil, no Flickr

Yeaap.

I'm happy with the standards, especially since 99% of the time, I'm in the bumper cam. The other 1%? I'm behind the car, listening to the amazing exhaust notes PD worked in, even to the standards!

 

[ElSecundo]

I wonder if PD will be capable to turn all standards in to premiums,it seems like a hell of a job.

It would be a staggering amount of work.

I'm happy as the proverbial clam with what we have so far. I see 200 premium cars as a bonus. What I'm hearing from some folks is that they want all cars to be premium, and that anything less is garbage.

Is it possible that having two different levels of detail (and the ability to do direct comparisons) is making people dissatisfied with standard cars? I'm not driving with the cockpit view, and honestly, I never know (or care) if I'm in a standard or premium car.

 

[FLIGHT50]

PD shot themselves in the foot with these Premiums. They went overboard for sure. They could have made all cars medium detail or just touched up the worse imported standards to the level of the standards that look great. While driving in GT, you race going forward. It should not be so crucial to detail the rear seat or any of the interior besides the dash board. When driving you don't see all the extra stuff. In replays they could have given the same view to replay in which we have to drive in turn, eliminating alot of precious space and time that could have went elsewhere.

They goofed in a lot of areas with GT5. In house priority and decision making was poor and the results show.

 

[Luminis]

Is it possible that having two different levels of detail (and the ability to do direct comparisons) is making people dissatisfied with standard cars? I'm not driving with the cockpit view, and honestly, I never know (or care) if I'm in a standard or premium car.

They would be compared to the other games available on current-gen hardware and still look pretty horrible in comparison.

 

[afc2112]

I wonder if PD will be capable to turn all standards in to premiums,it seems like a hell of a job.

They'll certainly try. Although the only problem I see is that they'll be facing an uphill battle considering the fact that newer model cars would be released in that same time frame.

And we all know how PD is already missing some newer cars in a 2010 game.

In a way, the 1k+ car list has become a burden when they started going overboard with the details.

 

[Cärbä]

I'd rather PD spent time revisiting their old models from GT4.
As opposed to them creating a big bunch of premium cars with detailed nobs that provide very little for a racing game.

Yes I know. Some of you will cry for realism, interior view only for me please. My reply for this is: Reality is usually way more boring than a good computer game. That is if you cannot get a real race car and gun it on a track...

 

[analog]

They'll certainly try. Although the only problem I see is that they'll be facing an uphill battle considering the fact that newer model cars would be released in that same time frame.

Kaz already mentioned that the upgrading of Standard cars (which effectively means replacing them) would be limited regarding GT5-DLC to classics only which makes sense as classic cars (which is a broad term perhaps including iconic nineties cars as well) won't "age" anymore.

A good strategy might perhaps be to model a batch of classic cars first as they can be used in future GT-games and won't risk looking outdated once the game arrives, the problem with this is (due to the time it takes to model a Premium car) that the balance between new and classic cars would be heavily biased towards the classic cars and would mean more classic than modern (Premium) cars in GT5 (or GT6).

The choice of some modern (although already replaced or facelifted in real life....) cars suggests to me they were planning to release GT5 much sooner and with much more Premium cars than it turned out to be.
PD however has a close relationship with many car manufacturers which makes it possible they can model a new car before it's actually released to the public in real life (BMW 3-series in GT4 is an example of that) but with the time it takes to create a Premium model, putting off modelling new cars until the last minute isn't an option I guess.

It's a tricky balancing act, although starting with a large selection of classic or iconic cars seems a safe bet, making sure there's plenty of time left to create newly released cars to make GT6 more up to date than GT5 turned out to be, with a few exceptions (although managing time isn't perhaps their strong suit).
Oh, and I'm pretty confident they won't remodel each Standard car and won't even try to do so, as some are now completely obsolete (you can fill in which yourself but some cars are just best left forgotten, they had their 15 minutes of fame or at least were "there" but will never be iconic or considered a classic apart from someone, somewhere with a weird, disturbing fetish...).

 

[ultraviolet]

i allways play in bumper-cam, so i don't realy notice the differance

 

[mlt456]

I would be pretty happy about standard cars if only you could change rims on it. That's it. I don't care about anything else as long as you can change rims on a standard model car.

 

[deftonesmx17]

They should have just lowered the car count to say 300 and made all premiums.

I really never understood the urge to have 100 Skylines or 100 kei class cars.

 

[Elstro]

I happen to like the sheer variety of playable cars (what other game lets you race a Citroen 2CV for example)...the only GT game I never bought was GT3 because of the pitiful (in comparison to GT2 and GT4) amount of cars. If GT5 was just 300 premium supercars I wouldn't have bought it. If I want to just race supercars I'll buy Burnout.

 

[diegorborges]

I would be pretty happy about standard cars if only you could change rims on it. That's it. I don't care about anything else as long as you can change rims on a standard model car.

+1... I agree!

 

[kjeezy23]

Yea, I never even see my car because of bumper cam. So I could care less abut premium.

 

[Inferno251]

I find it unlikely that all 1031 cars will be premium in GT6-My estimate would be at least 500-750 cars.

I would much rather have had just 200 premium cars and had a second bonus game called "GT History HD" or something for the other cars... then it wouldn't feel like they are polluting GT5.

I think so too. Before Gran Turismo HD was cancelled, the plan was to create two games: GTHD Premium, which contained their newly developed and realistic cars/tracks, and GTHD Classic, which was GT4 optimised into 1920x1080i High Definition.
Coming back to my idea, they should've placed the GT5 Tracks and Premium cars into a 'GT5 Premium' game, while all of the standard cars and along with tracks from GT4 (and not in GT5) be placed into a 'GT5 Classic' game. Both with 1080i HD and Online Play.

 

[Skiddy]

510 pages of posts. Wow..I'm impressed. It'just polycount guys, get over it.

 

[boredgunner]

510 pages of posts. Wow..I'm impressed. It'just polycount guys, get over it.

Poly count, texturing and other shaders make large differences.

Standard - are you satisfied with this in a 2010 Playstation 3 title that was delayed who knows how many times?

Here's an example of the attention to detail on a premium car.

 

[im playing gt5]

^ LOL if you're gonna make a car look that terrible, don't even put it in the game. thats just embarrassing.

 

[diegorborges]

^ LOL if you're gonna make a car look that terrible, don't even put it in the game. thats just embarrassing.

It doesn't look like that since like the 1.04 update... they just made a mistake and swapped the LOD meshes or something like that. Just race around or buy one of these and you'll see that its a LOT better now.