Does GT5 have an identity crisis?

Is that why the Gallardo (Italian) and the R8 (German) share many of the same parts?



Um, yeah it pretty much has all of the GT500 class ones in regards to the 2008-2010 season.

If I am not mistaken, all it's missing is the new Honda HSV that was used in the 2010 season.
Super GT starts from 2005, and even limit the range from 08-10 we still lack of Zent Cerumo, Kraft, Kondo, ... and I'm sure you know the lacking of GT300 class vehicles. A race without the slower GT300 vehicles is not Super GT, drivers often utilise those slower cars to overtake/defend.
 
I never said all of the seasons and was specifically referring to the GT500 class incase you missed where I just said that in what you quoted.
 
What we have here for example is a game with almost every Super GT car in it, but no real Super GT racing series.

I'm sorry but isn't that what you've said? I then argued we don't have "almost every Super GT car". You then zoom the range of discussion to 08-10's GT500 class. And I did say even just looking at 08-10 GT500 seasons and exclude the HSV-010 we still have several left out. Then I added it's invalid argument as without the participation of GT300 vehicles, GT500 cars themselves cannot make a Super GT race.
 
I'm sorry but isn't that what you've said? I then argued we don't have "almost every Super GT car". You then zoom the range of discussion to 08-10's GT500 class. And I did say even just looking at 08-10 GT500 seasons and exclude the HSV-010 we still have several left out. Then I added it's invalid argument as without the participation of GT300 vehicles, GT500 cars themselves cannot make a Super GT race.

So you agree that GT5's version of the Super GT in the extreme series is very flawed, which is what my original post you just quoted again was referencing. There is no proper Super GT series, but the game does indeed have a very large chunk of Super GT cars if you ignore Porsche, even some of the GT300 ones.
 
GT5 is a game.

As any game out there, it needs two things: 1- fun and 2-goals. Basic formula is that you're going to have fun meeting the goals the game sets for you. If anything in there fails, the game is simply not fun, not interesting, and you'll forget about it in no time. To give you an example, think about some RPGs where you just grind to be able to fight the next boss, so that developers can write 100+ hours of gameplay in the box.

But, GT5 is a game with a simulation aspect. I wouldn't call it a real simulator, as those are few and not really fun. Picture Flight Simulator, for instance. Very good simulation, and as fun as piloting a commercial airplane from London to Tokyo. So, GT5 makes some compromises with reality, and I believe everyone is well aware of this.

In it's evolution, the GT series grew considerably. Better graphics, better physics, more cars, etc. But it seems it has lost itself in the way. Not that GT should copy Forza, Shift, iRacing, TDU or anything, but as a gaming series, one would expect GT to improve. And that hasn't happened in the whole meaning of the word.

Simple things such as qualifying, leaderboards, A & B Specs together (as we could use Bob in GT4 during endurance races, for example), etc. are missing from GT5. Others, such as some tracks, are missing, even the ones that were present in past games.

This gives me the feeling that GT5 has a lot of content, but not much of a goal. And getting to this goal isn't exactly fun. I'll make some examples so you can get the idea.

1- Racing is way too easy. If I'm racing, let's say, among Ferraris and Lambos, I should be able to bring one to the race and find a good fight, instead of resorting to a lower car so that the AI can keep up.

2- I can't save endurances while mid race, but I also can't alternate the driving with my Bobs. So, I have a whole B-Spec mode that feels a bit pointless. Remove the rewards and there's nothing else to bring us there. It's a game we want to play, not a video we want to watch.

3- So, if we remove the rewards of races, and the need to reach certain experience levels, what is the incentive to come back? How many memorable races did you have in GT5? This is somewhat frustrating, for sure. And shows that the basic game formula is flawed. The goal is to level and collect cars, not the races per se. And to achieve such a goal, one has to do the same few races over and over, or struggle to find good online matches.

I'm not sure how the development of GT5 was conducted, but I can see a clear lack of focus in the whole process. A conclusion that stroke me when I began to really see beneath the surface of the game. Remove all the eye candy, the new features, and GT5 is GT4. You enter a race and it feels like a time trial, unless you bring a lower car. The same formula. Same thing. And this is sad.

That's why I think GT series should focus more on the racing aspect. To have a good racing game, you need racing realities. Good AI, mechanical damage, racing rules, etc. The driving aspect they have already nailed in most cases.

p.s.: Sorry if it was confusing, I'm a bit tired.
p.s.2: Please, don't come with arguments like "If you don't like it, don't play it". This is a forum, meant for a debate among the community. If you can't debate, then just don't.

Peace
 
While billed as "The Real Driving Simulater", I think this is a byline for maybe the best descriptive of the game.

But like the name "Gran Turismo" implies, its a combinaton of many things car related.

Part driver, racer, car collector, car economy, car history, car buff and motorsports in general.

To me it's idendity has been in the sum of its parts and not any one thing, although the driving is foremost among them.

GT5, unlike previous games, does seem to waver heavily in this regaurd.
Its such a disjointed, encumbered, hodepodge, structure it strikes me as very unsure of what its trying to be.
My impression is for what ever reason, it became a graphical and physics upgrade with little else to solidify the game itself.
Again, very uncharacteristic of previous games, particularly GT3 and GT4.

I think GT5 does have an identity crisis.
In sort of a state of limbo you might say.

Possibly the reason for this is a complete shifting to an "racing online identity". and/or as mentioned by others a "pure racing sim identity".

I do not wish to see it go either one or both of these ways.
If so, IMO its a huge disappointment and mistake on PD's part.

I guess time will tell.
 
The thing that grinds my gears is that most of what the 'racing sim' players want could VERY easily be added as OPTIONS, so the kids still get a game they can play easily.
Exactly.
 
Seems people have pigeon-holed GT5 into just a 'racing game', and if you're of the mindset that GT5 isn't meant for anything different, then you'll try and force PD into doing things the way you interpret a 'racing game' has to be. Well, it doesn't have to be any particular way, and I totally enjoy the differences, the way we like Porsches and Ferraris as different cars.

In fact [edit: should read, in my opinion], a game will get an identity crisis if the creators get forced into turning it into something it's not.

I'll agree with that, but please don't tell me that PD weren't trying to make a racing game. NASCAR, JGTC, F1, WRC, damage, all of these things point towards a racing game.

If they were purely trying to make a driving game like Test Drive Unlimited, they wouldn't bother with all of the licenced series and would have given us more road and street courses. Let's face it, GT5 is supposed to be a racing game but PD didn't pull it off.

I'm beginning to wonder whether there is any point looking for a descent racing game in these sort of games, or whether I am better off sticking with standalone games like F1 2010 and NASCAR. All I know is I'm back playing F1 and haven't had this much fun since GT5 was released...
 
1- Racing is way too easy. If I'm racing, let's say, among Ferraris and Lambos, I should be able to bring one to the race and find a good fight, instead of resorting to a lower car so that the AI can keep up.


The tragedy here is they already had the perfect tool in GT4 to implement the cure for this and they didn't use it. :confused:
The A-spec points system.
Revised and consistently applied you can have as easy or hard a race as you choose.

Unbelievable.
 
If racing were pulled off successfully, virtually NO-ONE would be the least bit interested in 'driving'. The trouble is, they haven't managed it, so making flimsy excuses and calling it a 'driving' game (despite no REAL 'driving' in the game) is all that's left to make themselves feel better about their purchase.

It is primarily the racing aspects of GT4 that got dropped. But darn few 'driving' aspects got added.
 
^ I agree, and what racing they tried to implement they did very poorly. Does anyone else remember getting really exciting seeing trailers like this?



It seems PD put more effort into the marketing than they did actually implementing the features in-game. The NASCAR, JGTC and WRC licences were purely a marketing stunt.

And what's going on at 1:44, is that a drag race on the TG Test Track?
 
Thank God, Destinkeys and CarreraGT -- you have finally convinced me. I HATE this game. I never knew why I shouldn't be enjoying it as much as I have until you guys explained it to me. Thank you!

My 200+ hours of gameplay have been a total waste, and I never would have known it if you guys hadn't explained it to me, in thorough detail, with every single post you guys make. Thank you, thank you, thank you! 👍

So really, you two -- how many hours do you both have in the game, if you can make an estimate? For such an awful, miserable experience, I can't imagine you'd have spent more than 30 minutes on it, right?
 
Well, if something is as truly bad and repetitive as you guys say, why would you spend 20-30 hours on it?

Do you also rent movies you hate, and watch them 10 or 20 times just to make sure you really hate them?

Or is the reality that you like the game, but maybe it's not the kind of game you expected it to be?

It's just that when I read really negative posts, I find the same guys' names on them over and over (and over and over) again, in a variety of threads. I don't know if you're as relentlessly negative as Destinkeys -- that might be hard to do.
 
Before you sing the praises of the Racing in GT4. Its A-spec was easier than GT5, and most of it could be done with B-spec. It shared the same problems


You can complain all you want about why GT5 isnt as good as your other favourite games, but at the end of the day most of you are just like me in that you have spent countless hours enjoying yourself driving around on it. Looking at sales figures, how on PD's end can they get the impression that they have done a bad job?


Sure there are many issues with the game, and sure as a sim racer i am accustomed to far faster and more challenging competition, but its still a damn fine racing/driving game. The special events in the game are fantastic and provide a lot of challenge.
 
Or is the reality that you like the game, but maybe it's not the kind of game you expected it to be?

Spot on 👍 Believe it or not, I do like GT5, I was just discussing the topic. As I've said in many a post, I love the physics and I love the Nordschleife but the racing is not good.

PD were clearly trying to push GT5 in the racing direction (evident by the inclusion of NASCAR, JGTC, WRC etc.) but didn't pull it off, hence why I think the game has an identity crisis.
 
Interesting, thanks for the response. :)

It does seem like the negative responses come from an expectation of what this game 'should have been'. I wonder if Prologue created that expectation, which doesn't seem to match the final product.
 
Take note PD: How a NASCAR game should look



👍


A NASCAR game should have points awarded for drafting and some sort of boost meter thing? I was (as a non-NASCAR fan) mildly interested in the game until I saw that video.
 
Interesting, thanks for the response. :)

It does seem like the negative responses come from an expectation of what this game 'should have been'. I wonder if Prologue created that expectation, which doesn't seem to match the final product.

I would say that has a lot to do with it. Personally, I was blown away by Prologue when it was released. Overall, I'd say it was a much more polished game than GT5, even it only had a only a small percentage of the content. Although maybe that's the point...?
 
A NASCAR game should have points awarded for drafting and some sort of boost meter thing? I was (as a non-NASCAR fan) mildly interested in the game until I saw that video.

Considering drafting is a huge part of NASCAR, I think it makes sense to get points for drafting (although I'm sure it's something you can turn off).

As for the boost meter thing, it looks as though it's just to help you gauge your speed relative to the car in front of you. Again, it seems like the sort of thing that would be available during challenges etc. but I'd say you could turn it off
 
CarreraGT
I would say that has a lot to do with it. Personally, I was blown away by Prologue when it was released. Overall, I'd say it was a much more polished game than GT5, even it only had a only a small percentage of the content. Although maybe that's the point...?

Well, the less the content, the more you can focus. Maybe that is one of GT's problems with it's identity: it tries to be so much.
 
Well, the less the content, the more you can focus. Maybe that is one of GT's problems with it's identity: it tries to be so much.

You're absolutely right. Personally, I would rather they didn't bother trying to implement NASCAR, F1, WRC etc. because a standalone game is always going to do it better.

GT5 tried to be a racing game but forgot about qualifying and everything else that makes a good racing game. PD needed to either put a lot more work into the racing aspect or just leave it out all together
 
GT5 attempts to be a racing game & a car collecting game and a car library... but it fails at all 3. :scared:

So many visual flaws, combined with an epic fail of game design, an already outdated car lineup, underdeveloped online features... well... the list is huge... :yuck:

I've said it tons of times... THIS GAME COULD HAVE BEEN LEGENDARY... but Kaz and it's team DON'T WANT IT to be that... shame on them... 👎
 
Before you sing the praises of the Racing in GT4. Its A-spec was easier than GT5, and most of it could be done with B-spec. It shared the same problems


You can complain all you want about why GT5 isnt as good as your other favourite games, but at the end of the day most of you are just like me in that you have spent countless hours enjoying yourself driving around on it. Looking at sales figures, how on PD's end can they get the impression that they have done a bad job?


Sure there are many issues with the game, and sure as a sim racer i am accustomed to far faster and more challenging competition, but its still a damn fine racing/driving game. The special events in the game are fantastic and provide a lot of challenge.

Pretty well said, despite all its flaws, its still a mightily good game. That being said, as a consumer, I can't help but be pissed off. 5+ year development cycle? The fact that 80% of the game has been recycled from GT4, GTPSP and GT5P doesn't sit well with me. The car list is over all very out dated, probably due to the long development cycle. They promote over a thousand cars, but what they don't tell you is that 80% of them are essentially PS2 ports. Until the game came out, the only proof of standards we had was one trailer.

And then there are the feature inconsistencies. They boost about weather and day/night cycle, both of which are severely limited in which tracks they can be used on. They tease you about the great interior racing experience, which is only available on 200 cars. The exterior car customization is a joke compared to what racing games have been doing for years now.

At the end of the day, GT5 is basically one big tease. Its a great show for what game's can look like, but apart from that, it feels incomplete. It was well show cased up until launch, with its various licenses, beautiful cars, gorgeous locations, but they only ended up showing you 20% of the game. The rest is just crap shoot.
 
I've said it tons of times... THIS GAME COULD HAVE BEEN LEGENDARY... but Kaz and it's team DON'T WANT IT to be that... shame on them... 👎
Really? Kaz and team didn't want the game to be good? You mean they tried to make a poor game?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, because what I'm hearing is a ridiculous assertion.
 
Kaz isn't hung up on this whole 'completion' thing...
 
Back