Your thoughts about "standard" vs. "premium"

[SlipZtrEm]

Okay, more or less a month in here's some of my thoughts on this whole Standard/Premium issue:

I was wondering where the heck you went

I share pretty much the same view. Have I changed my mind about Standards? Nope. They're still resolutely last-gen models. Are some of them fun to drive? Yep. Is that "all that matters"? Nope, not for me anyways. It plays an important part, but given the times we're playing GT5 in now, I want a bit more than what Standards can offer. Even the Premiums are behind the curve when it comes to other games (model detail aside), so Standards definitely don't cut it once you look past the physics... again, for me.

The Caterham, the Prowler, the Tank Car... fun to actually pitch against competitors now. And my workhorse M3 is finally great to drive. But I still can't admire it from anything than a huge distance away (unlike the '07 model), and I can't sit inside it as I drive. So I hardly touch it.

What I want to know is after all the talk about how much effort has been put into the interiors of Premiums... why do we have to resort to glitching to get the camera inside? Another perfectly rational decision from PD...

And yes! Bring back B-Spec how it was in GT4... make it optional, not mandatory as a poor excuse for lack of actual series in the game!

IncredibleMind - Labeling those who don't share your personal opinion on the game as trolls simply for expressing criticisms isn't a wise choice. Many of the users I've seen who are critical of Standards are people who have been around the boards, and playing various iterations of GT, for years. As has been mentioned a few times over the course of this thread (though, really, nobody should be expected to read the whole thing ), we criticize precisely because we do like the series, and want to see it get better .

 

[analog]

I was wondering where the heck you went

Don't worry, I'm still around , just find it impossible to keep up with the speed and expansion this section of the forum has taken up since the release.
Oh and there's a little game I've bought recently which keeps me occupied in my spare time.

 

[Afro1]

IMO, standards are pretty much the same as premiums.
I barely use any premiums except my Merc SL55 and my Merc SLR for harder races. I don't care for coloured rims, they look stupid most of the time.
I don't care for cockpit, it's nice but I can still race and drift without it.
Don't see why some of you are reluctant to using them, you're getting the same package basically.

I've got about 35+ standards and about 10+ premiums (most for seasonal events). You dealt with it in GT4, GT3, GT2 and GT1, why not now?

 

[linoleum]

You dealt with it in GT4, GT3, GT2 and GT1, why not now?

Personally, I bought a PS3 just for GT5. The expectation, for me, was that GT5 would be step forward for the car modeling and visuals. And as far as what we received, the good is GREAT, the bad is, well...bad.

I was a driver in the first half of the series, but since GT3... and hybriding fun there... I enjoyed collecting/customizing all the cars. GT4 that continued. GT5.. I just don't see it lasting as long with the smaller crop of premiums and inability to change rims/wings on the standards. I'd bet a large percentage of players now feel the same way. In this respect, for me, its a let down. Sure I'll deal with it, but the standards are a waste of time for the collector, and that's how I play.

 

[IncredibleMind]

I was wondering where the heck you went

I share pretty much the same view. Have I changed my mind about Standards? Nope. They're still resolutely last-gen models. Are some of them fun to drive? Yep. Is that "all that matters"? Nope, not for me anyways. It plays an important part, but given the times we're playing GT5 in now, I want a bit more than what Standards can offer. Even the Premiums are behind the curve when it comes to other games (model detail aside), so Standards definitely don't cut it once you look past the physics... again, for me.

The Caterham, the Prowler, the Tank Car... fun to actually pitch against competitors now. And my workhorse M3 is finally great to drive. But I still can't admire it from anything than a huge distance away (unlike the '07 model), and I can't sit inside it as I drive. So I hardly touch it.

What I want to know is after all the talk about how much effort has been put into the interiors of Premiums... why do we have to resort to glitching to get the camera inside? Another perfectly rational decision from PD...

And yes! Bring back B-Spec how it was in GT4... make it optional, not mandatory as a poor excuse for lack of actual series in the game!

IncredibleMind - Labeling those who don't share your personal opinion on the game as trolls simply for expressing criticisms isn't a wise choice. Many of the users I've seen who are critical of Standards are people who have been around the boards, and playing various iterations of GT, for years. As has been mentioned a few times over the course of this thread (though, really, nobody should be expected to read the whole thing ), we criticize precisely because we do like the series, and want to see it get better .

You basically just paraphrased the gist of my message. Did you even read my message?

I'm only calling people trolls who have an obvious agenda. I can quite easily point them out individually but it'll make me even more of a troll than they themselves. Just as an example, there are some people here who are so hellbent that I felt inclined to check some of their old posts. Lo and behold, they were bashing and trolling the game before it was even released.

See, the people who I'm referring to were not going to be pleased by GT5 no matter what. No matter what improvements they make in the future, they will always focus on some negative aspect of the game. Those are the people I'm calling trolls.

I'll give you a clue, if you hear a reference to the 6 year nonsense or 'Forza'comparisons, you have more than likely uncovered yourself a troll.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

You basically just paraphrased the gist of my message. Did you even read my message?

If I didn't, how would I respond?

I'm only calling people trolls who have an obvious agenda. I can quite easily point them out individually but it'll make me even more of a troll than they themselves. Just as an example, there are some people here who are so hellbent that I felt inclined to check some of their old posts. Lo and behold, they were bashing and trolling the game before it was even released.

I have the sneaking suspicion that "bashing" and "trolling" are synonyms for you in this situation. I may be wrong. But in this thread, specifically... yes, some members have had the exact same viewpoint since it first became clear exactly what the two tiers meant. Whether it's critical or supportive of Standards, both sides have had some pretty opinionated supporters.

See, the people who I'm referring to were not going to be pleased by GT5 no matter what. No matter what improvements they make in the future, they will always focus on some negative aspect of the game. Those are the people I'm calling trolls.

First, that is a huge assumption. Though the general tone of negativity and criticism about GT5 since release begs the question; why? I take it as a sign that, while technically and in many ways, GT5 is the best in the series, comparing the games on the basis of when they were released brings into focus how odd GT5 is. GT4 in 2004 was received far better than GT5 in 2010, is my point. A lot of complaints in here are perfectly valid when you look at them in relation to GT4; we've had numerous steps back, things we really didn't expect to have to deal with. A simplified tuning menu, no individual gear fiddling, no rim swaps on Standards (though they can be painted now), a B-Spec mode that is now forced, not optional, and is just a copy of the normal career we have to play ourselves, just more laps for most events. The game's career is much, much smaller than GT4 too, and events are not one of the time-intensive things in a game like this. But... I'm sort of getting off-topic, and you probably get my point.

Veering back on-topic, I don't think it was unreasonable to want at least some sort of update to the 800 or so cars we enjoyed back in GT4. There isn't any. I'm not saying I expected them all to be to the levels of quality of some of the better Premiums, because time-wise, that just wasn't possible, but perhaps some kind of compromise between the two levels of quality could've meant quicker model design. Who knows.

I'll give you a clue, if you hear a reference to the 6 year nonsense or 'Forza'comparisons, you have more than likely uncovered yourself a troll.[/QUOTE]

I think you're mis-reading the mentions of 6 years. It's been 6 years since GT4's release, which is what people usually reference: the gap. Vision GT was first shown in 2005 though, and while that was "cancelled", the basic premise obviously still survived, it just morphed into what we now know as the Standards in GT5. So, it's been quite a lot of time.

I'll agree with one thing, for certain; the updates, so numerous and quick after release, do tell us something 👍

 

[bowenac]

I think the whole standard thing is pathetic to be honest... I think they had plenty of development time to make all cars premium... what really took them so long is what I want to know. Look at games like Forza they did it in what 2-3 years. Now they are working on Forza 4. And Forza 3 has a lot of content as well. I just don't understand this whole standard and premium thing...

 

[Spagetti69]

Yeah, I'm gonna need a bigger bloody hard drive. Lol.

 

[Devedander]

See, the people who I'm referring to were not going to be pleased by GT5 no matter what. No matter what improvements they make in the future, they will always focus on some negative aspect of the game. Those are the people I'm calling trolls.

I'll give you a clue, if you hear a reference to the 6 year nonsense or 'Forza'comparisons, you have more than likely uncovered yourself a troll.

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.

 

[IncredibleMind]

If I didn't, how would I respond?



I have the sneaking suspicion that "bashing" and "trolling" are synonyms for you in this situation. I may be wrong. But in this thread, specifically... yes, some members have had the exact same viewpoint since it first became clear exactly what the two tiers meant. Whether it's critical or supportive of Standards, both sides have had some pretty opinionated supporters.



First, that is a huge assumption. Though the general tone of negativity and criticism about GT5 since release begs the question; why? I take it as a sign that, while technically and in many ways, GT5 is the best in the series, comparing the games on the basis of when they were released brings into focus how odd GT5 is. GT4 in 2004 was received far better than GT5 in 2010, is my point. A lot of complaints in here are perfectly valid when you look at them in relation to GT4; we've had numerous steps back, things we really didn't expect to have to deal with. A simplified tuning menu, no individual gear fiddling, no rim swaps on Standards (though they can be painted now), a B-Spec mode that is now forced, not optional, and is just a copy of the normal career we have to play ourselves, just more laps for most events. The game's career is much, much smaller than GT4 too, and events are not one of the time-intensive things in a game like this. But... I'm sort of getting off-topic, and you probably get my point.

Veering back on-topic, I don't think it was unreasonable to want at least some sort of update to the 800 or so cars we enjoyed back in GT4. There isn't any. I'm not saying I expected them all to be to the levels of quality of some of the better Premiums, because time-wise, that just wasn't possible, but perhaps some kind of compromise between the two levels of quality could've meant quicker model design. Who knows.

I'll give you a clue, if you hear a reference to the 6 year nonsense or 'Forza'comparisons, you have more than likely uncovered yourself a troll.

I think you're mis-reading the mentions of 6 years. It's been 6 years since GT4's release, which is what people usually reference: the gap. Vision GT was first shown in 2005 though, and while that was "cancelled", the basic premise obviously still survived, it just morphed into what we now know as the Standards in GT5. So, it's been quite a lot of time.

I'll agree with one thing, for certain; the updates, so numerous and quick after release, do tell us something 👍[/QUOTE]

I know you read at least some of what I said, but I don't think you read the entire thing. I clearly stated people without an agenda are entitled to complain. Those people are not the trolls I speak of.

Also, just to be clear I wasn't necessarily referring to only the "standards" complaints, I'm talking about these fanboys who absolutely will not be pleased with GT no matter what improvements are made. There are so many on this site that it's borderline comedy.

I'm not misunderstanding the six year comments. I think you are. The people who continually mention it are not saying 6 years since GT4, they are clearly saying it took 6 years to make the game, as in 6 year development cycle. Otherwise, Prologue was released not long ago and it would be more rational to use that as a reference point in time, unless you have an...agenda!

In short, you simply are not the guy (troll/basher) I'm taking about which is why I think you're having trouble comprehending my argument.

On a side note, as you have acknowledged, it has been mentioned that at least some of the standards will be updated. Also, if the game is updated monthly, it's plenty of opportunity for improvement.

 

[robbo6]

One thing that those who are pro standards are missing is this. From reading this thread I get the jist that those who have no issues with the standards and using them do not like using the cockpit view. So indeed for them the issue is pretty much irrelevant. But for those who fully enjoy a cockpit view the issue of the standards is much more relevant. For me personally the cockpit add a level of immersion that previous GTs lacked. I don't think you get many in the flight sim community playing without the cockpit. Same for the PC sim community.

 

[Luminis]

I know you read at least some of what I said, but I don't think you read the entire thing. I clearly stated people without an agenda are entitled to complain. Those people are not the trolls I speak of.

What do you mean by this 'agenda' thing you keep bringing up, though? People planning to turn GTPlanet into a mess? Ruining your experience around here?
If you're talking about just fanboyism, than there's just as many pro-GT guys who'd be guilty of having an agenda as well.

I'm not misunderstanding the six year comments. I think you are. The people who continually mention it are not saying 6 years since GT4, they are clearly saying it took 6 years to make the game, as in 6 year development cycle. Otherwise, Prologue was released not long ago and it would be more rational to use that as a reference point in time, unless you have an...agenda!

Six years between GT4 and GT5 are six years, period. Whether they were used as development time entirely doesn't play into the whole matter. There was a gap of six years between GT4 and GT5 and, no matter how that time was used and it would've been plenty to do loads of stuff. Not necessarily everything people would like to be done in that time, of course. But, like it or not, it's still six years. PD may have only spend five or even four years on GT5's development, but that does not equal only having four or five years to get the game done.

Them not using that time isn't exactly making things better anyways, if you're asking me.

And, really, some people just expected GT5 to be more polished after that gap between GT4 and 5. Is that unreasonable? I don't think so, especially since PD are not pushing loads of other games out, like other developers.
That doesn't even mean those people don't like the game. They might just be thinking that it lacks the polishment that made the previous installments of the GT franchise the games they were. That's the case for me, at the very least.

 

[IncredibleMind]

What do you mean by this 'agenda' thing you keep bringing up, though? People planning to turn GTPlanet into a mess? Ruining your experience around here?
If you're talking about just fanboyism, than there's just as many pro-GT guys who'd be guilty of having an agenda as well.


Six years between GT4 and GT5 are six years, period. Whether they were used as development time entirely doesn't play into the whole matter. There was a gap of six years between GT4 and GT5 and, no matter how that time was used and it would've been plenty to do loads of stuff. Not necessarily everything people would like to be done in that time, of course. But, like it or not, it's still six years. PD may have only spend five or even four years on GT5's development, but that does not equal only having four or five years to get the game done.

Them not using that time isn't exactly making things better anyways, if you're asking me.

And, really, some people just expected GT5 to be more polished after that gap between GT4 and 5. Is that unreasonable? I don't think so, especially since PD are not pushing loads of other games out, like other developers.
That doesn't even mean those people don't like the game. They might just be thinking that it lacks the polishment that made the previous installments of the GT franchise the games they were. That's the case for me, at the very least.

Yes Luminous, I'm talking about fanboys. More specifically the rabid Forza fanboys. Also, I'm sure theres lots out there but the GT fanboys are nowhere near as ravenous as the Forza fanboys who I've discussed the game with, only to realize that a great deal of them have never even played the game.

All you need to do is look at some of the YouTube vids to know. Often times this comes down to them even playing it and not being able to enjoy a game on another system due to nothing more than brand loyalty. Sometimes they'll nitpick the competition's products in any way they can while completely ignoring the glaring flaws of their preferred system.

The 6 year comments as I've said is a qualification they use as an excuse to bash the game. 6 years "to make" and 6 years "in between" are two different things no matter how you spin it, especially as I've already explained that you already had GT5p which is essentially the spiritual successor of GT4.

As for you complaining about the game it's whatever. This is literally the third time I'm going to say it in this post, if you don't have an agenda, I was never referring to you.

 

[JuiceMcGoose]

Ah, well, I don't really care so much about how a car looks on the outside as I can't see it when I'm driving. I use the view with the big rear view mirror on top so that doesn't matter. I would like to see more tracks, more non-endurance races for A spec, and the stealth cars be DLC. Basically you can't buy stealth cars for the US on Ebay other than the NSX and McLaren F1. If they want to make new races and race cars paid DLC I'm good with that.

 

[Luminis]

Yes Luminis, I'm talking about fanboys. More specifically the rabid Forza fanboys. Also, I'm sure theres lots out there but the GT fanboys are nowhere near as ravenous as the Forza fanboys who I've discussed the game with, only to realize that a great deal of them have never even played the game.

Well, there's one who's defending GT5 pretty heavily in this very thread, only a page or so off Anyways, you've been browsing people's post history in your hunt for trolls, I'd like you to doo something similar and just look at this thread, around the time before GT5 wa released. You'll get a decent idea off why I'm thinking both sides are equally guilty of fanboyism.

All you need to do is look at some of the YouTube vids to know. Often times this comes down to them even playing it and not being able to enjoy a game on another system due to nothing more than brand loyalty. Sometimes they'll nitpick the competition's products in any way they can while completely ignoring the glaring flaws of their preferred system.

Not that the same couldn't be said about GT fanboys. Calling out Forza for breeding a ricer mentality with its livery editor and beetter visual customisation to defend GT's lack thereof, for example. I read stuff like that countless times around here. Thing is, GT fanboys had a better position to look down upon everything and everyone when GT5 wasn't released yet and they could pretend it was going to be the perfect game.

The 6 year comments as I've said is a qualification they use as an excuse to bash the game. 6 years "to make" and 6 years "in between" are two different things no matter how you spin it, especially as I've already explained that you already had GT5p which is essentially the spiritual successor of GT4.

First off, GT5 Prologue is, as the name suggests, the prolugue to GT5. A demo of GT5, if you will. It's no full GT game, period. It wouldn't be named GT5 Prologue otherwise.
Second, they did have six years to make GT5. They just didn't use all of that. If you were right and they only had, say, four years to make GT5 (which is still an awful lot of time, mind you), what did they do in those other two years between GT4 and 5? Vision GT which was scrapped? Well, bad for them, stuff like that screams bad project management. Same with Prologue, by the way. If you look at GT4P, they just gave it out as a demo of existing assets they had during the development of GT4. If they did anything else in GT5P, that's a plain waste of time. SAme with keeping GTPSP inhouse, when it could've been farmed out to a different company. That's called a bad decision.
So, unless PD were stuck in some strange wormhole that altered the flow of time for them, they did indeed have six years for GT5, whether they used them properly or not. Unless of course you can explain to me how 2010 - 2004 equals anything but six years.

Again, the time they had has nothing to do with the development time that went into GT5, which was most likely way less than six years.
I know there are a few people who'd love to discuss those six years away, but the matter of the fact remains the same:
Six years between GT4 and GT5 and we're stuck with a game that lacks polishment. Whether they spend six years on it and failed to polish it or didn't use the six years they could've used and failed to polish the game for tthat reason doesn't change a darn thing about it.

As for you complaining about the game it's whatever. This is literally the third time I'm going to say it in this post, if you don't have an agenda, I was never referring to you.

Even if you're not reffering to me, I can (and do) still disagree with your point, so yeah...

 

[aylk]

The least that they could've done is use high resolution textures and keep low polygon count models from GT4. That's not too much to ask, just redraw or properly scale a bunch of 10 year old flat images to this decade's tv standard; 1080. No new creative needed, no new specs needed. Then standards would be good looking high resolution textures, low polygon count models without interiors. And premiums stay as they are now, and at least the game wouldn't be as horribly inconsistent as it is now.

And let's not talk about the shadows, more than once time friends have asked me what's that flickery glitch on the cars when watching previews... when shadows are not visually recognizable as shadows you still have a lot of polishing to do...

 

[IncredibleMind]

Well, there's one who's defending GT5 pretty heavily in this very thread, only a page or so off Anyways, you've been browsing people's post history in your hunt for trolls, I'd like you to doo something similar and just look at this thread, around the time before GT5 wa released. You'll get a decent idea off why I'm thinking both sides are equally guilty of fanboyism.


Not that the same couldn't be said about GT fanboys. Calling out Forza for breeding a ricer mentality with its livery editor and beetter visual customisation to defend GT's lack thereof, for example. I read stuff like that countless times around here. Thing is, GT fanboys had a better position to look down upon everything and everyone when GT5 wasn't released yet and they could pretend it was going to be the perfect game.


First off, GT5 Prologue is, as the name suggests, the prolugue to GT5. A demo of GT5, if you will. It's no full GT game, period. It wouldn't be named GT5 Prologue otherwise.
Second, they did have six years to make GT5. They just didn't use all of that. If you were right and they only had, say, four years to make GT5 (which is still an awful lot of time, mind you), what did they do in those other two years between GT4 and 5? Vision GT which was scrapped? Well, bad for them, stuff like that screams bad project management. Same with Prologue, by the way. If you look at GT4P, they just gave it out as a demo of existing assets they had during the development of GT4. If they did anything else in GT5P, that's a plain waste of time. SAme with keeping GTPSP inhouse, when it could've been farmed out to a different company. That's called a bad decision.
So, unless PD were stuck in some strange wormhole that altered the flow of time for them, they did indeed have six years for GT5, whether they used them properly or not. Unless of course you can explain to me how 2010 - 2004 equals anything but six years.

Again, the time they had has nothing to do with the development time that went into GT5, which was most likely way less than six years.
I know there are a few people who'd love to discuss those six years away, but the matter of the fact remains the same:
Six years between GT4 and GT5 and we're stuck with a game that lacks polishment. Whether they spend six years on it and failed to polish it or didn't use the six years they could've used and failed to polish the game for tthat reason doesn't change a darn thing about it.


Even if you're not reffering to me, I can (and do) still disagree with your point, so yeah...

Lol! I see I'm simply going to be repeating points I've already made. The difference between GT5p and GT5 isn't so miniscule that you can simply pretend that it was a demo and nothing more. At a bare minimum you knew exactly where they were in the game's development at that point in time.

The point is that you have sequels that have sold for the full retail price that have very little difference in between them and no one is saying that it took the combined sum in years of those sequels to make the last released game. Just look at the Call of Duty series, pretty much the same game ad infinitum. 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.

You got a great idea of what GT5 would be in Prologue and if you thought it was going to be some earth shattering/life altering event then that's your problem.

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.

Maybe it was due to the attitude that Forza would completely die out upon GT5's release that got them so worked up, but nevertheless that's my observation. If you don't see it that way I'm not trying to change that. However to focus on this aspect of my argument is really a moot point because we're speaking in the context of posting at THIS forum.

But I'm going to call you out on something. You're not "stuck" with anything. They've already sent out 4 updates and the game hasn't even been out for two months. It's mind boggling that people continue to moan and cry as if the game is completely finsished when they've clealry demonstrated they're working on improving the game.

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.

 

[opladener]

It's mind boggling that people continue to moan and cry as if the game is completely finsished when they've clealry demonstrated they're working on improving the game.

Is it too much to expect a finished game for my 75€ ?
The game is missing so many features, even some that were included in previous editions, like decent replay controls, changing driver in b-spec etc.

Heck, you can't even save more than one setup, how is that possible in 2010/11, when 500GB HD's are like 60€ ?

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

Is it too much to expect a finished game for my 75€ ?
The game is missing so many features, even some that were included in previous editions, like decent replay controls, changing driver in b-spec etc.

Heck, you can't even save more than one setup, how is that possible in 2010/11, when 500GB HD's are like 60€ ?

I am with you this. What boggles my mind is the amount of people that defend how unfinished this game is. That is just unbelievable. It would be one thing if 80% of the cars were premium. But when only 20% of the cars are premium after 6 years, come on you have some serious wool pulled over your eyes to not realize how unfinished this game is. How can anyone defend a simulation game that doesnt even have an interior view and no ability to change wheels.

If you think updates or patches will turn all the cars from standard to premium then you are beyond gullible. There is no way this game will ever be complete and there is no way all the 800 (80%) of the cars will magically become premium. It took 6 years to make 200+ premium cars. Do the math on how long it will take to make 800 cars premium.

If any other racing game in the world did this it would have been crucified by this community. But its ok since its GT5. Just rediculous. And this is coming from someone that has been a GT fan for a very very very long time. But this series is going downhill.

 

[Luminis]

Lol! I see I'm simply going to be repeating points I've already made. The difference between GT5p and GT5 isn't so miniscule that you can simply pretend that it was a demo and nothing more. At a bare minimum you knew exactly where they were in the game's development at that point in time.

The point is that you have sequels that have sold for the full retail price that have very little difference in between them and no one is saying that it took the combined sum in years of those sequels to make the last released game. Just look at the Call of Duty series, pretty much the same game ad infinitum. 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.

You got a great idea of what GT5 would be in Prologue and if you thought it was going to be some earth shattering/life altering event then that's your problem.

With all of the games you've listed, there's one big difference, though. Their developers don't lable them as 'Prologues'. So consider Prologue to be what you want to, PD pretty clearly wrote Gran Turismo 5 Prologue on their game. Besides, if you consider GT5P a full release in the Gran Turismo franchise, a game with, what, 78 cars, I guess I can't help but laugh at that sentiment. Prologue features a few bits of GT5 and its content, not at the same level as the final build of GT5, but that's exactly what a demo version usually does.

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.

Maybe it was due to the attitude that Forza would completely die out upon GT5's release that got them so worked up, but nevertheless that's my observation. If you don't see it that way I'm not trying to change that. However to focus on this aspect of my argument is really a moot point because we're speaking in the context of posting at THIS forum.

As I said, the GT fanboys around here can get pretty nasty as well. You usually don't see them do it on here a lot because, simply put, there's nobody around to bash. So yeah, it's indeed a moot point to discuss what's happening on GTPlanet in that regard, but since you brought up YouTube, I might as well drag other places into the discussion. Like the official Forza forums. I can't even count how many times people came to tthose boards just to boast about how GT5 would completely kill of Forza and its community once it's released.

But I'm going to call you out on something. You're not "stuck" with anything. They've already sent out 4 updates and the game hasn't even been out for two months. It's mind boggling that people continue to moan and cry as if the game is completely finsished when they've clealry demonstrated they're working on improving the game.

Does that change the status quo? Don't think so. It's nice to see them working on it for sure, I never said it wasn't. Doesn't change the fact that there's loads of stuff still wrong with the game. And, as it seems, pointing that stuff out helps to get it fixed. Whether you like the attitude of it or not, 'reminding' them of what's left to fix isn't going to make the game worse, quite the opposite.

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.

Meh, trolls are everywhere on the internet, I guess... And, to be quite honest, GTPlanet is probably one of the places with the least amount of trolling I've been visiting lately.
That mighht be a reason why I don't get why you're getting all fired up about some supposed trolls.

If any other racing game in the world did this it would have been crucified by this community. But its ok since its GT5. Just rediculous. And this is coming from someone that has been a GT fan for a very very very long time. But this series is going downhill.

Agreed. One more reason why I think that GT fanboys are no better than the Forza ones that turn up around here every now and then.

 

[IncredibleMind]

Is it too much to expect a finished game for my 75€ ?
The game is missing so many features, even some that were included in previous editions, like decent replay controls, changing driver in b-spec etc.

Heck, you can't even save more than one setup, how is that possible in 2010/11, when 500GB HD's are like 60€ ?

No, it's not too much to ask but as they've clearly demonstrated they are working towards improving things.

So you have a logical choice. You can complain and get upset about the fact that it wasn't perfect upon arrival OR you can simply be happy that they actually are working towards improving it.

It makes absolutely no sense to act like you were ripped off because the game wasn't polished AND to be mad that they actually have to improve the game via updates.

 

[Biggamehit]

The only thing I want is the ability to swap wheels on standard cars. I could careless about the rest. I drive more standard cars than premium anyway.

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

No, it's not too much to ask but as they've clearly demonstrated they are working towards improving things.

So you have a logical choice. You can complain and get upset about the fact that it wasn't perfect upon arrival OR you can simply be happy that they actually are working towards improving it.

It makes absolutely no sense to act like you were ripped off because the game wasn't polished AND to be mad that they actually have to improve the game via updates.

What? Game wasnt polished? The game didnt even get past the primer stage. Like we said, its one thing if the game had 80% premium cars, thats at least in the painted stage entering polish. But 6 years and only 20% premium. Come on you cant be for real. I think its best I take a break from this thread for today.

 

[Luminis]

So you have a logical choice. You can complain and get upset about the fact that it wasn't perfect upon arrival OR you can simply be happy that they actually are working towards improving it.

How about option three? Acknowledging that they are working on the game (without hailing them as gods for it because, after all, they're fixing mistakes with their game and adding stuff that was advertised on the back of the box), but still keep reminding them on what they still have to do without getting overly worked up.

Which seems to be what's happening on here most of the time.

 

[the Interceptor]

In my opinion, the main gripe is this: 80-90% of the faults this game has can be disclosed by an average GT player within two or three days of continuous gaming. These faults, even if numerous, are mainly minor and could easily be fixed within a week by the programmers and designers. And they are seriously trying to tell me that they were completely unable to do this?

As for pushing out several patches within weeks, they are merely keeping on doing the work they should have done before. I wouldn't call that "demonstrating they are working towards improving things.", they keep fixing and improving an unfinished product on the fly.

 

[IncredibleMind]

What? Game wasnt polished? The game didnt even get past the primer stage. Like we said, its one thing if the game had 80% premium cars, thats at least in the painted stage entering polish. But 6 years and only 20% premium. Come on you cant be for real. I think its best I take a break from this thread for today.

This train of thought is the exact type of exaggerated wreckage I was referring to. If I never played the game and read this trollish message of yours I'd think for certain the game was absolutely unplayable.

You can play the percentage card with someone else because the truth of the matter is that GT5 has more than 200% more premiums than most racers.

 

[IncredibleMind]

How about option three? Acknowledging that they are working on the game (without hailing them as gods for it because, after all, they're fixing mistakes with their game and adding stuff that was advertised on the back of the box), but still keep reminding them on what they still have to do without getting overly worked up.

Which seems to be what's happening on here most of the time.

Odd, this goes back to my original point. You're creating a disagreement with me in your own mind. It really doesn't exist.Nevertheless, CAMAROBOY69 provided the perfect example of what I was referring with what I refer to as trolling.

 

[IncredibleMind]

Dp

 

[red piramyd k]

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!!:

 

[Luminis]

Odd, this goes back to my original point. You're creating a disgeement with me in your own mind. It really doesn't exist.Nevertheless, CAMAROBOY69 provided the perfect example of what I was referring with what I refer to as trolling.

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'd 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.