Demo - Too much simulation, not enough game

  • Thread starter jcmc
  • 117 comments
  • 8,383 views
I'm amused how so many people know how GT5 is going to be. According to them all things we've seen so far and not liked WILL be fixed. GT5 has become a magic wand granting wishes.
 
snoopybg
According to them all things we've seen so far and not liked WILL be fixed.
Click to expand...

You've got ONE track, two cars. No silly tuning/modding/setting up play.

It's a pure, hardcore, driver's demo. Get out on the fricking track and go for the top spot. The best driver shall win.

You don't get more hardcore than that.

Not happy happy? Wait till the game hits the shelves and rent that bloody thing and then make up your mind.

Really, that whole thing gets seriously on my nerves.

There's a very small margin between voicing one's opinion and just being deliberately narrow minded.

Who thinks he has the authority to impose his view on the others by repeating the same arguments over and over and over again?

Is it some kind of group dynamic process?

Win the bloody competition, then come back and tell me how rubbish it is and THEN I will not doubt your word. PROVE to me that you actually know what you are talking about!

Seriously, that's like listening to some broken record by now. Why bother, really.

The OP has made a very good, logical and reasonable statement.
 
Kaz has said that he was surprised how popular Gran Turismo was. Design-wise, I'm not sure whether GT has ever changed in this regard. Kaz acknowledges the mass market potential (standard physics and 'Gran Turismo for Boys'), but I feel his priority is more driving simulation and that it is likely to be Sony who are pushing for the design changes to suit the mass market. I think developers just want to create an incredible piece of software and typically the publisher wants it out on the shelves, selling. Sony will be more flexible with PD due to their past track record.

Even though the demo's motive is clear to me, I do agree that with regard to marketing the first publically playable demo of GT5 to the general public, it is a screw up. However, I suspect that PD and Sony are quietly confident with the full version and will release a demo that better represents the finished game closer to release.

If a new demo is released, people will check it out. If the game is good, it will sell. Simples :)
 
OP, accoring to your logic PD should've never released the time trial challenge publicly. how do you suggest they should've proceeded with GT accademy then? on a subscription basis?

also, if PD were aiming for the broades market they'd be doing mario kart. since they're not doing mario kart, maybe they're not aiming for the broades-possible market audience in the first place?
 
I have to agree with the opinion of the OP as the way GT is right now which is freaking awesome for me and all the sim lovers, it's probably going to turn many off especially the mid teen crowd, who were expecting Forza3 or GT4 sim/arcade like physics where it's almost real but does not require the precision and throttle control to post decent lap times.
 
OP, accoring to your logic PD should've never released the time trial challenge publicly. how do you suggest they should've proceeded with GT accademy then? on a subscription basis?

I didn't say anything of the sort. If you read my posts what I did say was that the Academy should not have been the FIRST GT5 related demo to be released. There's no reason it has to be now anyway, they can run something like that anytime, it;s a pretty niche thing.



also, if PD were aiming for the broades market they'd be doing mario kart. since they're not doing mario kart, maybe they're not aiming for the broades-possible market audience in the first place?

That's not much of an argument. A cursory glance at the car gaming market out there throws up big selling titles like Burnout and Need for Speed which are wholly mass market titles. Even so called simulations like Forza are pretty arcadey and accessible. Don't you think that market research has told all these publishers why their games have to appeal in some form to the mass market, when your dev costs are so steep you cannot afford to make niche games these days or you won't be making anymore subsequently.
 
I dont think it matters its in the "demo" section with all the other demos.

Its clearly labeled as GT Academy and not GT5 Demo. I really don't know how anyone could misunderstand that when its labeled plain as day.

Edit:

To further emphasize my point I just read this on the news page.

With that said, someone with access to the demo also received an email from Sony that wanted to emphasize this is not a demo of Gran Turismo 5, and is only being released for GT Academy.
Click to expand...
and
clearly stating the demo was “specifically designed for this competition to showcase the realism of the brand-new physics engine” and nothing more
Click to expand...

Source:https://www.gtplanet.net/gran-turismo-5-time-trial-demo-screenshots-video/
 
Last edited:
jcmc
Having spent 5 or so frustrating days slipping and sliding around the demo tracks in 2 different but equally hard to master cars, as impressed as I am by many under the bonnet elements of this demo I can't help feeling that this is a very poor marketing move to make this the first broadly available public demo of the game.

With the huge wait and enormous expectation for the game, first sight of it breaking cover was going to be so important for Polyphony & Sony to get strategically right. I think they've made a serious error of judgement.

GT brands itself as the real driving simulator and boy have they gone to town in proving this in the demo. The question is, do most people play with pro-physics - no, it may be real and all but for a great number of people - and GT needs to be a game that pitches itself to the wider masses rather than just a hardcore audience - it's bloody hard work and a pretty frustrating experience. Do race tuned cars slide about at 50mph coming out of a corner on racing tyres like bambi on ice ? They may well do but that reality does not pander to likely perceived expectation that they shouldn't.

A first playable demo should an inclusive thing - about fast, chuckable cars running high speed laps at 60fps on beautiful looking tracks designed to make people go wow. There's some hardcore wow for people admiring the complex physics, but come on, a single lowish speed, slippery car on a bland, non-descript track like Indianapolis. To do any justice to it you need a wheel peripheral which the majority of potential customers don't have. How inclusive and welcoming is that ?

Everyone on this site like myself will buy GT5 anyway, but what about the floating gamers who try out the demo to see it it draws them in. It's one of the least accessible and punishing game demos I have ever played, I think it will turn a lot of people off if they think that is symbolic of the games approach which is a shame.

Of course there is a time and a place for such demos as this one, I just think that time and place should have been later when at least most people would come to it knowing that GT5 will also be fun rather than the bone dry simulation replica that this demo suggests.
Click to expand...

BLAH BLAH bla blahhhhh blahh blahhh blahhh hahaha ha ha ha!!

If they have downloaded the demo and indeed playing GT for the first time...then I say get used to it become a pro and bobs your uncle :boggled:

If you dont play with Pro Physics.....then I say get used to it....suck it up and become a Pro and bobs your uncle :boggled:

If you cant get used to it then sorry for ya!! Try someting thats not GT.

:cheers:
 
I agree with the OP about it being a very weird move as a demo. The Demo to 90% of the people who play it, is a demo and not a TT. It is a very bland looking track, with the hardest physics I have ever played.

I also admire PD and sony for doing what they have done. It makes me love GT even more. There is no way that turn 10 or microsoft would have the guts to release a demo like this. They put out the fanciest looking track and some of the more tame cars to drive. It really shows what direction PD is going with GT5. It looks to be by far the best sim ever released on any console, and maybe just the best period.

All in all though, I really don't think that this demo or any demo they release will effect the sales of the game very much. Anyone who is going to buy GT5 has already decided to buy it, and this demo probably won't stop very many of them. Maybe a few will be scared away by the unforgiving cars, but if they are I really don't think that PD cares. This looks to be the game that they have always wanted to make, and hopefully they support it for years to come, because the next GT game could be another 5 or 6 years away.
 
GT5 is well from release, i don't think this is the last "demo" we will see before release. I'm not sure why so many people jump the gun, and even criticize Sony's marketing when the game is so far from release.
 
I have played the demo and I love it but I'm playing with a wheel. So I decided to give it a try with a controller, which the casual gamer has and it is far less enjoyable with a pad. TCS is stuck to 7 and for my part it was pretty much unplayable. They could atleast gave people the option to switch the physics to standard but when you switch to standard your times are on a separate leaderboard.

But anyway I'll get back to the demo time trial or whatever you call it . As bevo said above, I like the way that PD is going maybe it'll scare some casuals, but I don't think that will have a huge impact on sales. The main goal of this demo is to find a future race car driver not to sell and to show Gran Turismo 5.
 
Am i the only one happy about this thread? "To much simulation" Thats an extremely good thing in my eyes.

I mark this day down in my calender where some one has said GT has to much simulation.

A good day indeed, cary on.
 
TorqueHappenS08
Am i the only one happy about this thread? "To much simulation" Thats an extremely good thing in my eyes.

I mark this day down in my calender where some one has said GT has to much simulation.

A good day indeed, cary on.
Click to expand...

I'm with you!!
 
TorqueHappenS08
Am i the only one happy about this thread? "To much simulation" Thats an extremely good thing in my eyes.

I mark this day down in my calender where some one has said GT has to much simulation.

A good day indeed, cary on.
Click to expand...

The whole point is to be a sim, the hardware is allowing them to fulfil there goals more so amen :)

this driving experience with the tuning/customisation of the past games... ahh driving heaven
 
Mason__666
The whole point is to be a sim, the hardware is allowing them to fulfil there goals more so amen :)

this driving experience with the tuning/customisation of the past games... ahh driving heaven
Click to expand...


👍 All the way.
 
After days of trying to the demo, professional physics seems so basic. Keep playing this till GT5 comes out and standard physics will seem like a joke. And professional physics won't be a surprise.
 
Hey, let's go to town on simulation shall we. Run wide on the first corner into the sand and your stuck in it wheels turning uselessly. Race over. Allow the user to get back on track, no, that's not realistic for this track.

A rookie driver prangs into the back of you in Online mode, hey it's a simulation so we can't have ghost cars anymore. We have to simulate damage properly, so buckled wheels and aerodynamics shot. You have to limp back at 40mph to the pits for repairs but hey, it's the Nurburgring so it's going to take you 10 miles and 20 mins to do. But it's realistic.

Simulation is a horribly misused word in gaming. Too many people slavishly hold it to mean utter realism in every possible facet which is patently daft. It can of course aim to be broadly realistic but at the end of the day it's a game and it has to be fun first and foremost. That's why GT has rubber banding AI, ghost cars in corners to lessen crashes, catch up, sympathetic barrier collisions, camera views which are game views and not car ones etc. etc.

Once upon a time I did rally games on a well known licensed series. We had the hard core rally fanatics who wanted it to be a total sim and would complain that our rallies were not realistic because we did not map out the public roads between stages and let the drivers drive them among conventional traffic. Christ on a bike....
 
Just tried the demo today, and I absolutely LOVE the new physics! :crazy: :drool: 👍

Now I'm definitely looking forward to the full game!
 
just a thought on the topic title, surely it can be a game AND a sim not a game OR a sim
It's both and for those who 'get' what this games about it is the best in the series and the best on a console :)
 
I also agree with the OP to some extent. When I first played the demo I was extremely frustrated because I was losing control all the time. But after short while I got to grips with the cars and was driving a lot more smoothly.
 
I love the updated physics of this demo as well. Good improvement over Prologue. (Graphically/visually, it's different story).

That being said, to those people who say this is *not* the demo of GT5.. you're *probably* right. However, you guys are making a groundless statement.

To be clear, when you start up this GT5 Time Trial Demo.. it says..
"Welcome to Gran Turismo 5 Time Trial Challenge.
This is the demo version of the upcoming Gran Turismo 5, due for release in 2010."
Click to expand...
It's the latest official words from Polyphony. How more official could it be? So, until PD updates us further, this demo is a good indication of what is coming. This should be regarded as THE demo of GT5 for time being.
 
I agree with the OP in that it is a strange move to release this TT as the first "demo" of the game. It would have made much more sense to release the TGS demo first, then the TT demo.

I'm not gonna argue the semantics of whether this is or is not a demo, just as I didn't see the point in arguing whether or not prologue was a demo or game or a prologue. Fact is it looks like a demo, it smells like a demo, its released like a demo and sony have called it a demo. What you decide to call it is really up to you.

Fact is you might enjoy GT for its sim-ness, I might enjoy GT for its sim-ness, most people on GTP might enjoy it for its sim-ness... however I'd suggest the majority of people who are potential buyers of the game enjoy GT for its accessibility to what they feel is a fun racing game in cars they like in real life.
 
jcmc
Hey, let's go to town on simulation shall we. Run wide on the first corner into the sand and your stuck in it wheels turning uselessly. Race over. Allow the user to get back on track, no, that's not realistic for this track.

A rookie driver prangs into the back of you in Online mode, hey it's a simulation so we can't have ghost cars anymore. We have to simulate damage properly, so buckled wheels and aerodynamics shot. You have to limp back at 40mph to the pits for repairs but hey, it's the Nurburgring so it's going to take you 10 miles and 20 mins to do. But it's realistic.

Simulation is a horribly misused word in gaming. Too many people slavishly hold it to mean utter realism in every possible facet which is patently daft. It can of course aim to be broadly realistic but at the end of the day it's a game and it has to be fun first and foremost. That's why GT has rubber banding AI, ghost cars in corners to lessen crashes, catch up, sympathetic barrier collisions, camera views which are game views and not car ones etc. etc.

Once upon a time I did rally games on a well known licensed series. We had the hard core rally fanatics who wanted it to be a total sim and would complain that our rallies were not realistic because we did not map out the public roads between stages and let the drivers drive them among conventional traffic. Christ on a bike....
Click to expand...

Great post.

Just wanted to add I don't get all this fuzz about such a demand the level of detail on damage. If you have a small accident you gonna limp in at last postition. A huge crash might be cool to watch once or twice, but race is over anyways and you not gonna enjoy sit and watch a wrecked car for 5-10 minutes waiting for other's to finish. Single player you just quit the race. The amount of work to get it to look and be realistic must be huge. Why not keep it simple as light, mild and severe. The last two means your race is over anyways and light might keep you from getting last. I see no point on going overboard on the realism when it comes to damage?

I guess this was a question to you "jcmc" :)

"The real driving simulator" is a marketing thing. They will say one way or another that it's like driving a car no matter how realistic it is. I'm happy console games are mowing towards more sim when it comes to the driving experience because that's the most important thing.
 

Latest Posts

Back