but is that a difference in the car model or the physics engine.....i'm not a programmer but I would imagine that you have one physics model that controls all the cars.....the cars themselves have a set of parameters that are fed into that model to give them their characteristics......the model is the same for all cars.....but the data for each car is different.
ok.......crap way to try to explain that sorry
Not really, I understand what you're saying.
What I'm saying is many GT4 "updated" cars still carry at least part of those physics over, if the general game physics are combined with individual car physics, you get 1+1 - 2. If a GT4 carry-over has 0.5+1 - 1.5. Totally different physics from a car compared to the rest.
It's not about exactly "how many" it's about the general half-assedness that
must come with simply taking 800 models of "different" cars, and just upscaling their images and saying "that's good enough".
Well it's not for me.
I dont say that all models are vastly different from each other....but even a small change from one model to the next is still a different model. It's 1031 different models even if some of those differences are very small.
So what's the difference between the "Euro" and "US" S200's in the UCD?
I don't expect even the number 1 game in a genre to have no mistakes.....the mistakes come from the complexity of the game not from who is the number 1. I dont expect Call of Duty to have no mistakes just because it's the number 1 shooter......nor do I expect GT5 to have no mistakes just because it is the number 1 racer.....on the contrary when you model 1031 cars I would be amazed if there were no mistakes.......nobody can make a project that complex and not introduce 1 single error....that would b an impossible task.
It's not about having zero mistakes made. It's about having
easily avoidable mistakes made.
Again the same example - Dodge Viper ACR '08 - Comes with fully adjustable downforce and suspension. "whoops, forgot that"? It's basically what distinguishes the ACR from the standard Viper. It's comparable to forgetting to put those things on a C5R, because the car is built to a racing league spec, period.
there's plenty more, this is just the one I find most intentional, yes I mean intentional, the only logical conclusion I can draw is they wanted to keep the car on par with other supercars in it's region. Because in GT, downforce always mean win.
Again the more complex the model and the longer it takes to work on it the more chance I would think there is to introduce an error......not less.
So the more detail you try to observe, the more you "forget" about a specific models obvious changes?
Yes you can say the exact same thing about b-spec. It doesn't change my argument at all since I am only talking about my opinion of what is important in the game. (as we all are).
I liked b-spec so I have no problem with them working on including it in the game.
I think a livery editor is a complete waste of time so I wouldn't want to see them waste their time making one.....
somebody else with different attitudes on what they want in a game will feel differently about different features.
Right, but you said:
However it's not as simple as saying if you dont want to use a livery editor don't use it.
After saying that exact phrase about B-Spec.
That's the real problem for PD. We all want GT5 to be something different based on our own individual preference for what we want out of the game. They cant possibly make a game that will make everybody happy. Nobody could.
That's an excuse. Yes, they tried to include to much, I think most agree with that, but it doesn't mean with smarter thinking and better implementation they couldn't have focused on areas more important to the higher percentage of customers.
GT5 has some features that other popular franchises are missing......just as those same franchises are missing features that GT5 has. However GT5 always seems to be held to a higher standard where it is expected to have every feature every other game has.
Name one feature GT5 has that over 50% of players can agree on is good, that no other game offers.
And no, the difference is, GT hasn't implemented a ground breaking feature in 10 years. Everything has pretty much stayed the same, so for those of us that have been playing, it's growing stale.
Each game goes like this: better graphics, more cars, more tracks (sort of) sometimes more races.
It's more, certainly, but nothing really new. B-Spec was new, but most don't care, and why would they? Sure, I've had some fun B-Specing, but it should never take place over actual game play.
They could have thrown money at anything........then the game would have every feature in the world and would have cost $5 billion to make and bankrupt both PD and Sony.........if you think this is a good idea please don't ever go into buisiness
And this shows you've missed the point entirely. I never once asked for "everything".
I asked for something fresh, over re-creations of things not important in the first place, things like better/more advanced/not skewed tuning, less cars all properly modeled, a deeper A-Spec system that doesn't require a million races to reach the highest level, but instead rewards skill over repetition.
Online play that is stable, the same physics in every aspect, not different when you go online, a proper penalty system that doesn't allow the few leader boards they make to be overrun by imbeciles cutting every corner and grass bit they can find, or diving through walls.
And my list of things that could have been scrapped is far longer, far, far, longer.
You have to admire the persistence of those looking to tear GT5 down on GTplanet.
Internet.
Serious Business.
And those to defend it's honor.
You posted, after all.
. In all honesty though, i'd prefer 800 standards avail Nov 2010 than 1031 premiums by Christmas 2015
