How did I move the goal post the post originally implied that you normally defend GT through out the forum you construed it to this thread alone. now you're pushing it because it's easier to say this one time perhaps you weren't - though you are based on what you usually do- only to save face.
Point is this doesn't change the fact that rushed products are obviously going to produce negativity.
Well unless you have a B.A.S in psychology rather than a hunch to just have a hunch, I might be more inclined to believe you. However, my negativity toward GT is based on the nature of it over the course of the 8 games of the many PD have produced. So if you like assuming wrong about people based on a single concept (though it could be said you were generalizing and not directing it at anyone person), that is all you. It's also subjective to decide how negative or not criticism is but I'd say some of what is complained about here is ridiculous and other parts aren't.
Well unless you have a B.A.S in psychology rather than a hunch to just have a hunch, I might be more inclined to believe you. However, my negativity toward GT is based on the nature of it over the course of the 8 games of the many PD have produced. So if you like assuming wrong about people based on a single concept (though it could be said you were generalizing and not directing it at anyone person), that is all you. It's also subjective to decide how negative or not criticism is but I'd say some of what is complained about here is ridiculous and other parts aren't.
Yet again, for me it's based on the nature and not genetics, I also asked you to provide evidence since you seem to have some proof. Please do so.
Either way as I said, for me I've been a fan since the first game and played seven other games from PD (not including GT6) that have made me more critical. If you want to cast stones that's fine but many people have legitimate reasons for the critique of GT due to how it hasn't updated to modern times (same could be said for the MS game).
Nature vs nurture is often debated, there is no proof as such. I did not state it as fact, so proof is not required. But here is a related article to read if you really are interested in the context of nature I was referring to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_versus_nurture#Personality_traits
Nature vs nurture is often debated, there is no proof as such. I did not state it as fact, so proof is not required. But here is a related article to read if you really are interested in the context of nature I was referring to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_versus_nurture#Personality_traits
Thanks, I'll read it. Still if anyone has helped mold me this way it is PD and the expectations they've given the masses as the game that would grow and stay on top. Luckily GT6 is pushing it back toward a better place than it was, but when they pull things like this I can see why people are upset. When these were promoted many believed that the full detail would also be interior as well, not just a vague idea.
But @colj00 might be right, we already know the M4 interior will be an update so the AMG might also.
I'm pretty sure we're talking about GT6, and GT5 had all the open top cars with a non functioning interior for example the GT40 and so on. Then you bring in the cars that were their own design e.g. FGT, it's quite the cop out to say that the task to design an interior is too much for them. Considering the other things they've been able to design and what not outside of GT, and yet they can't make a single interior on their own. Hell I can do that with freakin auto cad in a a couple days and so could many other on here...it's a bit insulting to say it's too much to ask.
I know they can make a good interior, but no an interior like it has to be, like MB would like, or we would like. It has to have an special real design, that real design doesn't exist yet, and they need a real model to recreat it as good as possible. One think is creating a fictional interior, another a real interior, and like I said before, MB has their designers, and PD has their programmers.
I know they can make a good interior, but no an interior like it has to be, like MB would like, or we would like. It has to have an special real design, that real design doesn't exist yet, and they need a real model to recreat it as good as possible. One think is creating a fictional interior, another a real interior, and like I said before, MB has their designers, and PD has their programmers.
Actually the design does exist in drawing renderings for one, and probably further technical cad renderings that MB have for themselves. PD don't need to consult us on what the interior should look like, since they have something to base it off of. Also Citroen did the same thing and those cars have an interior. As I've already said and you missed the first time around your side is not correct and the other side isn't either because at the end of the day we don't know what the agreement was on this. We don't know if MB said wait or if GT just didn't have the time or need.
It's unlike a car company to come up with all the specs of the car the outer design and all the theoretical technical input and yet somehow not have an interior design (though they do).
How long have PD had to model the car and interior? I don't know.
If PD had finished modelling the VGT a while ago surely they would have had it on the disc rather than in the day 1 patch.
Has MB even finalized what their interior is to look like? Ask MB because I have no idea, do any of you?
The exterior of the M4 was complete and modeled in time to be put on the disc, but the interior is still to come. Perhaps PD are still modeling the VGT interior and have been nice enough to give us what they can, when they can.
