Fairly disappointing...

[kdryan]

Honestly, this just feels like a redressed GT5. Except this time the fanboys are just accepting the 'to be released' nonsense as the way it should be. Just like with GT5, Kaz seems to have released an unfinished product, though I will admit there doesn't seem to be as many bugs. I would attribute that to having solved them all with GT5. It feels like they may have tweaked the physics, but it's the same old super powerful player car vs. the slow, stupid AI cars.

The same lame starting in last nonsense...
No car trading?
No B-Spec (yeah, I know... Later date)
Unrealistic damage models...

These are my impressions after a few hours of playing. I'll be the first to admit I am wrong if my mind changes, but I don't see it happening.

Sorry, fanboys. GT5 in different clothing.

BTW, a personal gripe: The vintage Mustangs still got screwed. That idiotic 71 Mach 1 is still there, but no Boss 302/429? No 428 Cobra Jet? What about a 65 K Code? No Fox bodies at all?!?

 

[MeanElf]

Starting last was for the Seasonals only in GT5 - you usually started mid-pack in the career mode...as for the rest, that's your opinion, fair enough but I disagree.

What were your expecations for this game though and where are you finding games better than this on the old gen consoles?

 

[GTracer98]

Idiotic Mach 1????? How dare you day that?? 👎

 

[kdryan]

Here is what I would have done. Instead of the same lame-ass starting in last with a rolling start, how about this. Require the player to qualify for a race, then base the cars in the race on the performance level of the player's car, say +/- 15 PP. That would negate the natural super powerful car advantage the player always seems to have and give the race a more natural feel.

To be honest, I just feel like I'm playing GT5 again when the race starts...

 

[kdryan]

Idiotic Mach 1????? How dare you day that?? 👎

1st Generation Mustangs ended in 1970. After that they basically became boats with wheels.

 

[solidboss07]

I am sorry you feel dissapointed, as I can't wait to play it later on when everybody is asleep. I didn't play the death out of GT5 so maybe that's why I am happy with GT6. You make valid points, but an improved GT5 really is good enough for me to get forget the A.I, and look forwards to human competitors taking advantage of the games improvements.

Chin up.

 

[Odnomre]

I agree with the post above me. And if you really dislike it so much, you can always return the game to the store if you want. Unless you bought it digitally over PSN, then you're screwed.

 

[dragonitti]

Unrealistic damage models...

I actually find the damage modeling to be more realistic than anything out there thus far. The damage model has increased as I've noticed. A small bump will crinkle the hood. In other games, freaking body parts would explode and go flying. That IS unrealistic. When you watch stuff like the LeMans or Pirelli World Challenge races, when they bump and nudge cars and trade a little paint, it's not body parts galore. Only cars that ever do something like lose a panel are the ProtoType cars, because they are made from a different composite such as carbon fiber. My only gripe thus far has been that the AI is not aggressive enough. I'm running a 200 PP car LESS than what the race calls for, and I'm able to still beat them.

 

[Kurei]

I'm with you @kdryan , my copy of GT6 is currently sitting in a drawer for the next month or so, as more bugs/issues are found, while PD 'sits on their laurels' not listening to consumer feedback while holding-out on desired content. I'm not going to waste time with GT65.5 when GT5 runs & plays better at this time.

I strongly agree with it being GT5.5, and that the fanboys are quick to put their BS-blockers on, and slow to come to grips with another botched-launch, I'm giving it one last chance with the upcoming Dec./Jan. updates, but if that still leaves things unfinished, then things really won't look good for GT or PD.

 

[Odnomre]

...I'm giving it one last chance with the upcoming Dec./Jan. updates, but if that still leaves things unfinished, then things really won't look good for GT or PD.

So in short. "I'm giving them one more month to fix the game, and if they don't... I might just give their next game a shot if they promise something good." Fanboys eh?

 

[Kurei]

So in short. "I'm giving them one more month to fix the game, and if they don't... I might just give their next game a shot if they promise something good." Fanboys eh?

No, if GT6 continues to be a disappointment in content, and, exercise in teasing promised content, I'll be trading it in for cash, and I'll switch focus from 'driving-sims in the winter', to 'upgrades for track-car in spring', like I did with GT5.

Only reason I got back into GT was the GT5 XL release for $20 a year or so ago and having online access, which I did not have at GT5's release.

 

[MeanElf]

...while PD 'sits on their laurels' not listening to consumer feedback while holding-out on desired content...

Seriously...the game is two days out, well three if you count from the Asia launch. It takes a bit more time than that to gear up, identify and then patch any issues. 'Sitting on their laurels'...sheesh.

 

[kdryan]

I'm not giving up on it, but when GT 5 came out, I was totally hooked. I played it for days on end and probably have thousands of hours playing until this point. I'm just not feeling it with GT6...

 

[Jason115]

Complaining about every single detail isn't gonna make GT6 better. Try ignoring the things you don't like and enjoy the game!

 

[Kurei]

Seriously...the game is two days out, well three if you count from the Asia launch. It takes a bit more time than that to gear up, identify and then patch any issues. 'Sitting on their laurels'...sheesh.

How about the 'features' (KW 7-post rig for example) that were announced a while ago ?, it didn't take too long for PD to add the C7 Corvette to GT5, so the speed is there to add/release content, they just don't seem to be putting it to use imo.

Rockstar was quicker to respond (respond, not repair) when GTAV had issues, and even though PD is significantly a smaller team than RS, they could at least put some effort into directly addressing end-user complaints with a "we know of problem X, we will work on it", rather than continuing the "Hey!, look at this thing that won't be in GT6 for a year!" nonsense.

Edit* @Jason115, so ignoring quality & playability post-release - pre-patches is the new standard ? , what happened to expecting good product for hard-earned money ?

 

[TA462]

The farther into the game you will see you don't start last. I bought the game Friday and have played now for around 12 hours total. At first I thought the game was way to easy but the farther into it I feel the better it is. I've owned every GT game since the beginning and kind of miss the way you could qualify for races like the first few GT games. I need to get 2 more licences and then I can race the cars I want to. One big surprise that I really liked was they added a 78 Trans Am to the game. Sure its nothing like a Ferrari or a Lambo but I own one. Kind of cool building and racing a car you actually own.

 

[MeanElf]

How about the 'features' (KW 7-post rig for example) that were announced a while ago ?, it didn't take too long for PD to add the C7 Corvette to GT5, so the speed is there to add/release content, they just don't seem to be putting it to use imo.

Rockstar was quicker to respond (respond, not repair) when GTAV had issues, and even though PD is significantly a smaller team than RS, they could at least put some effort into directly addressing end-user complaints with a "we know of problem X, we will work on it", rather than continuing the "Hey!, look at this thing that won't be in GT6 for a year!" nonsense.

Edit* @Jason115, so ignoring quality & playability post-release - pre-patches is the new standard ? , what happened to expecting good product for hard-earned money ?

It's still just two days - what do you expect in such a timeframe, miracles? How do you know the length of time it took to add the C7. I must have missed the posts on that as I'm sure no timeframe was mentioned.

 

[Kurei]

It's still just two days - what do you expect in such a timeframe, miracles? How do you know the length of time it took to add the C7. I must have missed the posts on that as I'm sure no timeframe was mentioned.

A response from the developer addressing the launch issues/concerns.

Many other developers have been quick to address community concerns, but PD being PD, it'll most likely be while.

Edit* Hey, looks like I quoted more than your post shows, remove something ?
(As for the C7's announcement, it came about around the initial unveiling of the concept, and from what I recall it was a very quick process of announce-plan date-patch in. The speed was most likely a result of pressure from GM to meet a deadline)

 

[Tornado]

It's still just two days - what do you expect in such a timeframe, miracles? How do you know the length of time it took to add the C7. I must have missed the posts on that as I'm sure no timeframe was mentioned.

Seriously...the game is two days out, well three if you count from the Asia launch. It takes a bit more time than that to gear up, identify and then patch any issues. 'Sitting on their laurels'...sheesh.

The game is 1108 days out from when GT5 came out, and it still has an awful lot of the exact same niggling problems (that GT5 continued to have throughout the entirety of its life that they never bother to fix) to simply assume that waiting for them to fix them will result in them being fixed for GT6. My expectations were lower than probably anyone else's on this entire forum, but even I didn't expect a lot of the things I see that (once again) suggest no one actually played this game in detail before releasing it.

 

[mister dog]

I actually find the damage modeling to be more realistic than anything out there thus far.

WTF

 

[Lucas]

Internet and the urge for money making is what prevents GT from making a great game such as GT4. Most of the issues I currently read in the forums can only be explained that way, as I seriously doubt anyone in their right mind would commit such stupid "mistakes" when making a GT game.

And if it really wasn't intentional, by all means, take me you with PD, along with many users in this forum, and we will let you know what you have to do to make this a great game. None of that "crappy standards", "bad sounds" issues. I'm talking REAL gameplay problems that are unacceptable for a game of Gran Turismo's tradition.

 

[archie_aileron]

Honestly, this just feels like a redressed GT5. Except this time the fanboys are just accepting the 'to be released' nonsense as the way it should be. Just like with GT5, Kaz seems to have released an unfinished product, though I will admit there doesn't seem to be as many bugs. I would attribute that to having solved them all with GT5. It feels like they may have tweaked the physics, but it's the same old super powerful player car vs. the slow, stupid AI cars.

The same lame starting in last nonsense...
No car trading?
No B-Spec (yeah, I know... Later date)
Unrealistic damage models...

These are my impressions after a few hours of playing. I'll be the first to admit I am wrong if my mind changes, but I don't see it happening.

Sorry, fanboys. GT5 in different clothing.

BTW, a personal gripe: The vintage Mustangs still got screwed. That idiotic 71 Mach 1 is still there, but no Boss 302/429? No 428 Cobra Jet? What about a 65 K Code? No Fox bodies at all?!?

You are nit picking, the game is a vast improvement over GT5.

 

[f_zamataki]

I for one am super satisfied with most things.
The tweaked physics engine is awesome and the tire physics are the best yet. Sports soft tires actually grip and the cornering speeds feel higher. Last night i tried racing softs for the first time on bathurst and i ran like 30 laps cus it was soo much fun. The only complaint i have is the tuning layout when online,
In gt5 when you adjust power limiter you can see the pp change at the same time. In gt6 u have to guess which is a bit annoying.
Also when tuning the fully adjustable trans theres no top speed readout seperate from the selected top speed, so when you change final drive the top speed change is not displayed, making it a bit harder to properly tune the ratios. I hope those two things will be addressed soon

 

[FMH0077]

I have to admit to be a bit disappointed, I guess my expectations where a to high for GT6. Instead they made changes to the features that I really enjoyed, and replaced them with ones that really don't make more senesce.

 

[kdryan]

You are nit picking, the game is a vast improvement over GT5.

No, it's not and I am not the only one saying that. The lack of entire aspects of the game that were present before and are 'promised' for a later date is not nit-picking. When GT-5 was launched it was a mess, though you may not have been around long enough to remember it. Go look at your packaging for it and on the back you'll see it promises leaderboards. If you can direct me to the leaderboards in GT5, I would appreciate that.

Kaz has a history of making promises then changing his mind. He also has a history of taking things people enjoy about the game and either eliminating them or totally reworking them according to his whim. Remember when you could trade whatever car you wanted to any number of times?

 

[MeanElf]

...Edit* Hey, looks like I quoted more than your post shows, remove something ?

Nope - those are the same words in my post as your quote...

The game is 1108 days out from when GT5 came out, and it still has an awful lot of the exact same niggling problems (that GT5 continued to have throughout the entirety of its life that they never bother to fix) to simply assume that waiting for them to fix them will result in them being fixed for GT6. My expectations were lower than probably anyone else's on this entire forum, but even I didn't expect a lot of the things I see that (once again) suggest no one actually played this game in detail before releasing it.

Are you somehow forgetting the statements of intent to address sounds? As far as I remember, other things too will be worked on hence the update patch system. If your expectations were so low, I don't understand why you should add the qualifier that even you aren't expecting a lot of things...

 

[Kurei]

Nope - those are the same words in my post as your quote...

The bit with the C7 was missing at that time, it's been added back, but either way-

...forgetting the statements of intent to address sounds? As far as I remember, other things too will be worked on hence the update patch system

And that's all it is currently, intention, not execution. They (PD) also "intended" to 'update' many of the standards in GT5 to premiums with the same mindset, but how many did GT5 see ?

1. The Jaguar XJR Le Mans Racer. Other than that one car, I don't think any cars saw the 'update'

Some have seen the 'update' going to GT6, but the quality varies apparently - some good, some bad - for example, the Sauber C9 is now a premium visually, but have they fixed the engine/exhaust note for it ? (serious question, I haven't see anything yet that it's been fixed, or ever will be at this point, given PD's history thus-far)

 

[MeanElf]

...Some have seen the 'update' going to GT6, but the quality varies apparently - some good, some bad - for example, the Sauber C9 is now a premium visually, but have they fixed the engine/exhaust note for it ? (serious question, I haven't see anything yet that it's been fixed, or ever will be at this point, given PD's history thus-far)

Seems like you have forgotten the statement about sounds being worked on, but they'd not necessarily be ready by launch...

I don't seem to recall any comment about updating the standards in GT5 - I do remember various updates happening, from the interior view to minor improvements throughout, but no direct statement saying that any would be updated.

 

[Kurei]

Seems like you have forgotten the statement about sounds being worked on, but they'd not necessarily be ready by launch...

I don't seem to recall any comment about updating the standards in GT5 - I do remember various updates happening, from the interior view to minor improvements throughout, but no direct statement saying that any would be updated.

Seems you left out my part about intention, not execution

I haven't forgotten, but I'm also not seeing any concrete proof/guarantee the sound update will make GT6, they keep saying things like "schedules are tight" and "new way to record sounds" and "things we still can't talk about" (like what for 🤬-sake ?)

At the most I've seen that one trailer with dubbed-over sounds, and that's about it.

But on the matter of updating standards, there should be quite a few GT5-interviews that bring it up many times somewhere (like course-maker questions for GT6), I'm not going to go digging through the interwebs for it, but other members here should remember it.

 

[MeanElf]

Seems you left out my part about intention, not execution

I haven't forgotten, but I'm also not seeing any concrete proof/guarantee the sound update will make GT6, they keep saying things like "schedules are tight" and "new way to record sounds" and "things we still can't talk about" (like what for 🤬-sake ?)

At the most I've seen that one trailer with dubbed-over sounds, and that's about it.

But on the matter of updating standards, there should be quite a few GT5-interviews that bring it up many times somewhere (like course-maker questions for GT6), I'm not going to go digging through the interwebs for it, but other members here should remember it.

I didn't mention the execution on purpose, because they still don't know when it will happen, or indeed if it will even make GT6. The intention however is still in place and is after all far better than not saying anything at all, wouldn't you agree?

The things they can't talk about I'd say are new features, simple as that - not necessarily any nefarious skulduggery.