!Absolutely gotta have the rewind feature!

[irnbrutwinturbo]

I hate to say it Jenius, but I hope you are ready for a bunch of negativity and pushback from those who aren't as objective and open minded as you and may never even have tried the feature they are talking down about... it's just not popular around here as valuable as you and I may know it to be.

It's really too bad, but much like gay marriage, some people just won't accept it no matter what the logical arguments aruond it are.

Putting so many of those who don't agree with you into one big bucket isn't the best way to put forward your argument.

Anyway, your right, your opinions aren't widely accepted as something that we all should know, and seriously it's not even remotely linked to the gay marriage argument.

This thread needs to be locked just because it has been argued to death.

 

[Exorcet]

Putting so many of those who don't agree with you into one big bucket isn't the best way to put forward your argument.

Anyway, your right, your opinions aren't widely accepted as something that we all should know, and seriously it's not even remotely linked to the gay marriage argument.

This thread needs to be locked just because it has been argued to death.

I personally don't believe in unnecessary censorship. There is no reason to close the thread. Don't take part in it if you don't approve.

Now if the rules have some kind of argument limit, so be it. Aside from that, closing this or any thread because "it's been argued to death" is rather stupid.

 

[The Jenius]

You didn't read a single post did you? Rewind is what allows people to learn. It's what Jenius said. It's what Devedander has said, it's what I've said, it's what other people have said. Now there's direct proof on top of reasoning and theory.

As for this thread itself, can't say I'm surprised. It's pretty clear how much rewind can help a driver.


As for the "corner learning vs track learning" arguement, I'm sure it is something that doesn't exist, as rewind allows you to do both, as it's not forced upon a crash or mistake. But that's for Jenius to confirm if he wants.

Exactly I cannot possibly learn Suzuka anymore than I have after the hundreds possibly thousands of times I have ran it. But I have a great need to shave a second or 2 off my times and I would like to practice a few sections such as the hair pin and the double apex. I hate going the whole lap if I mess up because I know I am not doing it at its most efficient so I need to try different lines. But why should I not take advantage of using technology to make my practice more effective. I just don't understand it given people are in their living rooms talking about realism.

The thread is fine the discussion is of the values of having a rewind/defined practice section of a track to perfect a certain corner or string of corners, Thats it.

 

[sumbrownkid]

I just don't understand it given people are in their living rooms talking about realism.

That is a very good argument Jenius. +25 points and eBrownies for you!

So rewind does have its merits.

 

[Exorcet]

I just don't understand it given people are in their living rooms talking about realism.

Well, the argument usually goes that the game is as realistic as possible (even though it's not by their definition considering physics, damage, options, etc).

The other part is, rewind is too far "out there", even though things like racing lines and an entirely new universe of physics are not, and that rewind is something that a real driver could sensibly use while training in a sim.

It can also be said that they don't understand the meaning of sim, as some consider it to be something that only tries to 100% replicate reality. That is not necessary to lable something a simulator.

 

[The Jenius]

Well, the argument usually goes that the game is as realistic as possible (even though it's not by their definition considering physics, damage, options, etc).

The other part is, rewind is too far "out there", even though things like racing lines and an entirely new universe of physics are not, and that rewind is something that a real driver could sensibly use while training in a sim.

For me the Rewind/Practice Section is a type of visual racing aid or line, if you will, that allows building of muscle memory through repetition for that section of track, it falls in line with every form of practice that has ever existed. I think 888s description was very accurate as to how to impliment something like this. The value is undeniable in a practice setting where repetition is the name of the game, and more repetition allows for much more concentrated practice on problem sections.

If you have trouble with Heel,Toe going into the 1st corner on Suzuka why should we not use technology to our advantage and keep practicing over and over. Again, if foul-shooting is your problem, and you're only 50% then you need to practice that very small portion of the game because if your jumpshot is 80% then you don't really need to practice that as much, so save that till the end of practice.

 

[Kryz11]

Rewind feature will make you a lazy racer. Take it out.

 

[mrjoe]

ahem, too much arguing is going to be a Insult Bus The Lolly

 

[IsmokeGT]

His first entence in the OP is a complaint about the cars being "tail happy."

That one line negates everything he has said! I need not say any more.

 

[FLASH48]

Just another NO THANK YOU!

 

[CodeRedR51]

Just another NO THANK YOU!

+1.

👎

 

[ST-2]

Seone check his IP, sounds an aweful lot like Nomino... lol

 

[irnbrutwinturbo]

A fantastic aid to make the game easier is a thing invented along time ago. Its called cheating. If you like to cheat, PD isn't for you. It's not something, that i am aware of, that's ever been in GT, and is not wanted by many fans.

There is no proof that rewind can make you a better driver in GT5. Anyone who says otherwise without evidence must clearly accept they are lying.

Does rewind belong in some racing games? Yes, if thats what the developer wants.

Does rewind belong in GT? No. Until PD actually implement it into a GT game, it belongs in GT just as much as guns and petrol bombs.

Calling somebody illogical for not 'knowing' what is actually just your opinion, is not valid.

The argument of reality is quite simple. GT attempts to mimic real life, it may be in our living rooms, it may be in 2D, but nobody can say otherwise. PD are promoting GT as > real. No feature within the actual racing is either completely unreal, or deliberatly taking a step further away from reality.

Racing lines can exist.
Damage is evolving, its not real yet but its getting there.
Graphics are pretty close, again they evolve.
Physics, thats a very open argument, but they are defintely still trying to get it as close to reality as possible.

Time, going backwards during an actual race? Nope they'll not do that anytime soon. Why? Because its a step backwards, back to being super unrealistic.

 

[Devedander]

Ummm... Jenius said it has actually helped him do better already... I have seen rewind help people... there is the evidence.

Jenius has not been made lazy, I have not been made lazy, others I have seen use rewind have not been made lazy or worse. I would say there is no evidence of that outside people just saying and assuming it would be that way.

Do your rules apply both ways?

And I never said anyone was illogical for not knowing something, I said people were illogical for being illogical (ie lacking logic in their arguments).

 

[Comatosed]

The day GT has rewind is the day I give up on the game.

**** happens whilst racing, its part of the package. I see rewind as nothing more than a fail safe for noob drivers.

 

[sumbrownkid]

Since when did noob drivers became a term in GT? Where did all this elitism come from? It's just a game.

Albeit an awesome one.

 

[irnbrutwinturbo]

Ummm... Jenius said it has actually helped him do better already... I have seen rewind help people... there is the evidence.

Jenius has not been made lazy, I have not been made lazy, others I have seen use rewind have not been made lazy or worse. I would say there is no evidence of that outside people just saying and assuming it would be that way.

Do your rules apply both ways?

And I never said anyone was illogical for not knowing something, I said people were illogical for being illogical (ie lacking logic in their arguments).

I have seen really bad drivers win using rewind, and still continue to be bad drivers. In fact rewind probably made them worse. Would you class that as evidence? Is it correct, then it contradicts Excorcet.

Yes my rules apply both ways, as i said, if PD introduce rewind, then rewind belongs in GT. We both know it wont happen anytime soon, because although you may chose to ignore the fact, PD, by not including rewind, are indicating rewind doesnt belong in GT.

 

[IsmokeGT]

the cars seem a little tail happy, but so do GT's, so whatever.

Forgetting about the 4 grammatical errors in his one sentence, this makes no sense! He is a guy who slams the throttle wide open and says the cars are "tail happy."

He is not evidence.

 

[Devedander]

I have seen really bad drivers win using rewind, and still continue to be bad drivers. In fact rewind probably made them worse. Would you class that as evidence? Is it correct, then it contradicts Excorcet.

It's evidence that SOME people use rewind a certain way and that it MIGHT have made them worse... but is not evidence that it does make people lazy/worse (note that saying it makes peopel lazy/worse is a blanket statement.

Yes my rules apply both ways, as i said, if PD introduce rewind, then rewind belongs in GT. We both know it wont happen anytime soon, because although you may chose to ignore the fact, PD, by not including rewind, are indicating rewind doesnt belong in GT.

That's some circular logic right there... it doesn't belong because they don't, and it shoudln't be included because it doesn't belong...

I could list illogical arguments against all day (rewind means you won't ever learn and it just erases your mistakes?) but the proof is in the pudding.

Jenius DID benefit from rewind. Jenius was NOT harmed by rewind. So rewind can be positive. So no, no lies.

 

[Newdude]

Rewind?? Nope.

 

[Nam67]

A fantastic aid to make the game easier is a thing invented along time ago. Its called cheating. If you like to cheat, PD isn't for you. It's not something, that i am aware of, that's ever been in GT, and is not wanted by many fans.

There is no proof that rewind can make you a better driver in GT5. Anyone who says otherwise without evidence must clearly accept they are lying.

Does rewind belong in some racing games? Yes, if thats what the developer wants.

Does rewind belong in GT? No. Until PD actually implement it into a GT game, it belongs in GT just as much as guns and petrol bombs.

Calling somebody illogical for not 'knowing' what is actually just your opinion, is not valid.

The argument of reality is quite simple. GT attempts to mimic real life, it may be in our living rooms, it may be in 2D, but nobody can say otherwise. PD are promoting GT as > real. No feature within the actual racing is either completely unreal, or deliberatly taking a step further away from reality.

Racing lines can exist.
Damage is evolving, its not real yet but its getting there.
Graphics are pretty close, again they evolve.
Physics, thats a very open argument, but they are defintely still trying to get it as close to reality as possible.

Time, going backwards during an actual race? Nope they'll not do that anytime soon. Why? Because its a step backwards, back to being super unrealistic.

Gran Turismo: The real driving simulator is as the name applies a driving simulator. It is supposed to help you develop driving skills that could be used in real life. And let’s compare this to some of the world’s most realistic simulators. The flying simulators produced by aircraft companies like boeing/airbus. When you want to train your pilots for certain procedures they have to follow when a failure occurs, you want them to learn as many and in as little time as possible. So they do not simulate a real flight if they are training for failures or certain procedures.

Imagine this: You want to train in an engine #1 fire, then an engine #2 fire and then an APU fire. They could do this 100% true to real life but this would mean hours of paperwork ahead of the flight, starting up and programming the plane, getting it airborne trough maybe heavy traffic, then simulate engine #1 failure, emergency land the plane, overhaul it, and then repeat the whole process for engine #2 fire.

No, they want to simulate this certain failure, if not executed correct repeat it and when correct, reset and move on to the next one. This helps you be a better pilot in real life and is the use of a training mode.

 

[irnbrutwinturbo]

!Absolutely gotta have the hooker feature!

GTA4 had hookers you could beat to within an inch of thier life. It kept my mind busy looking for the next one that my driving was running perfect on autopilot.

I want hookers on every corner of Silverstone, it will make GT5 game soo much better.

I also want guns of the cars so i can kill 3 hookers at once.

Anyone who disagrees is probably being illogical.

In fact its just like gay marriage, maybe without the hookers.

 

[The Jenius]

Again I would like to say this is a PRACTICE tool not to be used in a race environment. It is the exact same as restarting a Hot Lap session which we all do except it shortens down the lenth of track you want to practice.

Please read a few of my comments. If anyone mentions RACE again then they haven't read any comment and can't expect their points to be have much validity outside of ignorance unless they argument is against Rewind in a Hot Lap environment and why this is not a good option to be able to test with, by yourself with no other drivers.

It is not making it easier it is allowing you to practice please read my and more notably 888 Tunings comments of how to properly impliment it.


NOT DURING RACING,NOT DURING RACING,NOT DURING RACING,NOT DURING RACING,!!!

I cannot be more clear the Rewind or Track Section Practice Tool is NOT USED DURING ANY RACE.

It is for Hot Lap Practice only, Hot Lap PRACTICE ONLY!

 

[sumbrownkid]

What do hookers and GT5 have in common besides a vehicle? Rewind has some relevance to GT5.

What you just said is illogical

(BTW illogical is the word of the day!)

 

[IsmokeGT]

Imagine if Pilot Sully had used rewind... there would have been several hundred dead people in the Hudson.

 

[The Jenius]

Forgetting about the 4 grammatical errors in his one sentence, this makes no sense! He is a guy who slams the throttle wide open and says the cars are "tail happy."

He is not evidence.

Sorry,maybe I put it a little too bluntly, but what I meant is I have a Bordeau Elise 111, IRL not GT. I have tracked it, and both games are a little, just a little over zealos with the back end stepping out versus my real world experience.

I am not sure what experience you have and I'm not sure if its that. But my point is that it takes a little more effort than I usually have to give when I drive my real Lotus vs the game Lotus.

 

[sumbrownkid]

^Or he could've rewinded all the way back to where he was about to take off and call if off.

 

[The Jenius]

Gran Turismo: The real driving simulator is as the name applies a driving simulator. It is supposed to help you develop driving skills that could be used in real life. And let’s compare this to some of the world’s most realistic simulators. The flying simulators produced by aircraft companies like boeing/airbus. When you want to train your pilots for certain procedures they have to follow when a failure occurs, you want them to learn as many and in as little time as possible. So they do not simulate a real flight if they are training for failures or certain procedures.

Imagine this: You want to train in an engine #1 fire, then an engine #2 fire and then an APU fire. They could do this 100% true to real life but this would mean hours of paperwork ahead of the flight, starting up and programming the plane, getting it airborne trough maybe heavy traffic, then simulate engine #1 failure, emergency land the plane, overhaul it, and then repeat the whole process for engine #2 fire.

No, they want to simulate this certain failure, if not executed correct repeat it and when correct, reset and move on to the next one. This helps you be a better pilot in real life and is the use of a training mode.

Good point!

^Or he could've rewinded all the way back to where he was about to take off and call if off.

Great point, lol but he is a little off meaning this is for NON RACE ONLY meaning there would have been nobody in the plane in the 1st place

 

[irnbrutwinturbo]

What do hookers and GT5 have in common besides a vehicle? Rewind has some relevance to GT5.

What you just said is illogical

(BTW illogical is the word of the day!)

What relevance does rewind have to GT5? What makes it a more important feature than hookers? Grid had rewind, grid had cars, GTA had hookers, GTA had cars.

Seems about as relevant as rewind to me.

 

[Exorcet]

A fantastic aid to make the game easier is a thing invented along time ago. Its called cheating. If you like to cheat, PD isn't for you. It's not something, that i am aware of, that's ever been in GT, and is not wanted by many fans.

I've made a thread where you can discuss this. Quite honestly, just saying something is cheating doesn't make it cheating.

There is no proof that rewind can make you a better driver in GT5. Anyone who says otherwise without evidence must clearly accept they are lying.

This thread

Does rewind belong in GT?

Most certainly, as GT serves to replicate reality and make reality more approachable for those who lack real experience.

No. Until PD actually implement it into a GT game

What does this even mean? That negates your argument, you say rewind does not belong, then say it's up to PD. If it's up to PD, you can't say it does not belong.

it belongs in GT just as much as guns and petrol bombs.

They don't help you get better. Rewind does.

Calling somebody illogical for not 'knowing' what is actually just your opinion, is not valid.

I would think this was aimed at my last post. I do not attack differing opinion. I come here seeking them. However, an argument can be illogical, whether the person presenting it can see it or not (and of course, this applies to me).

The argument of reality is quite simple. GT attempts to mimic real life, it may be in our living rooms, it may be in 2D, but nobody can say otherwise. PD are promoting GT as > real. No feature within the actual racing is either completely unreal, or deliberatly taking a step further away from reality.

Stnd physics, any transmission on any car, super vacuum (I mean when it was obviously wrong, GT5P Spec I), racing lines flashing on/off on a track. Lack of damage (pre GT5, remember damage was removed after GT2, a step backwards according to you)

Racing lines can exist.

They don't flash on/off of the track. Sims however, do exist and can easily feature rewind.

Damage is evolving, its not real yet but its getting there.

It was removed after GT2.

Physics, thats a very open argument, but they are defintely still trying to get it as close to reality as possible.

I doubt it looking at GT3/4, though it's more conjecture.

Time, going backwards during an actual race?

Can happen in a sim, yep it's real.

Because its a step backwards, back to being super unrealistic.

Rewind is very much a step forward, breaking away from the archaic rules that bound old "sims". If GT is going to become a true sim (which may or may not be its focus) that aims to help people understand cars, it should break away from "gamelike" ideas where there is a set of arbitrary rules to follow and a code of meaningless honor. Races have rules yes, but again, there is nothing restricting GT to only simulating a race. It's never attempted to do that. I'd wager that most people here would be against it too.

The idea that rewind is cheating or fake could only apply to a simulation derived purely for entertainment, ie the real life learning value is merely coincidental. It is only in a game like that where you will find 100% "realism" and the replication of unnecessary things.

In a training sim, flashy graphics, crowds in the stands, and the idea of "cheating" is tossed out. It's about learning. Use the sim to bring you tools not available in reality. Rewind goes here, with what are probably the most hardcore sims for someone who seriously wants to better himself in real life.

I have seen really bad drivers win using rewind, and still continue to be bad drivers. In fact rewind probably made them worse. Would you class that as evidence? Is it correct, then it contradicts Excorcet.

Indeed, there are probably people who don't understand rewind, or simply can't use it. But it doesn't really contradict me. If the overwhelming number of people turned out that way, maybe it would. But logically looking at it, rewind merely gives you the same things as lapping, only in a more efficient way. We have at least one person who's benefitted (assuming the thread is honest), so we know it can work. How effective is it overall? Admittedly theories are we have at this point. But just looking at things, I think the anti rewind setiment is overblown. At the very least, I have no trouble finding counter arguments.

Forgetting about the 4 grammatical errors in his one sentence, this makes no sense! He is a guy who slams the throttle wide open and says the cars are "tail happy."

He is not evidence.

No evidence supports this.