GT5 Latest News & Discussion

  • Thread starter Thread starter gamelle71
  • 76,879 comments
  • 10,793,796 views
I'm sure its been discussed to hell about 3 years ago but after watching the "Vision Gran Turismo" trailer on youtube, a certain scene caught my eye.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_k0CGmhb88&feature=related

At 0:50 in the video, if only they could give us this view for the standards, its more than GTPSP yet less than GT5:P. I'd be happy with it :)

I wouldn't mind that as a cockpit for standards. Rallisport Challenge had the same view.
 
That's how "premium" started, someone pointed out that the Lancer Evo and the RX-7 were the only premium cars at that time, some pages back somebody posted a screen of GTHD where it featured a "low" poly Ferrari cockpit, but that doesn't prove that PD is going to work on less detailed cockpits for standard cars.

They would be worthless for the next GT game, therefore IMO it's a total waste of time and resources (yeah yeah yadda yadda yadda something something about PD placing the standard cars in the game anyway, well, it's one thing or the other, not both! :P)

Now, how would something like the Suzuki GSX-R/4 (or the Caterham) work in this case?

They both had detailed (up to where the PS2 could push at least) interiors on the showroom\garage, but even with that I think they will be limited to the roof\bonnet\chase\bumper cam.

I would mention the Cobra too, but it already got the GT5 treatment, so yeah, forget it >_>
 
Last edited:
I think I have done my homework good enough, at school at least. :dopey:

With "you" I meant the game developers, sorry for that. And eat your vegetables! ;)

Timppaq
To prevent GT falling into the category you described above it needs to have the "easy play" elements to it. Having the plug & play feel and mainstream take on things keeps the cash flowing in. This is what the flight sims missed. It can't be too anal and polished for extreme realism as a standard.

Having been a big fan of flight sims myself, as I grew up I realised there wasn't really anything to do between take-offs and landing approaches. Other than lay out a flight route and to clock fuel consumption vs. distance travelled at a certain speed and work out if I would make it from Calais to Heathrow and if I got a second go at landing approach in my F16.

The graphics, user interface have evolved, not the gameplay.

Timppaq
So maybe also those games would have needed the optionality???

Well, they tried to keep "me" from wandering off and playing in the yard while I set my plane to auto-pilot by optional random mechanical failures. Couldn't say it worked.

Timppaq
What we indeed need now is the OPTION to turn the game into a HC sim if we like to do so.
So the only option left (no pun intended) is to have an option to change the game for our own liking. Makes sense?

I know what you're thinking of, but options are not the solution. They try to masque the fact that, in this context, a video game was badly designed.

You don't cook a meal and in the end say "Oh, I don't know how it should taste - go figure it out yourself."

Let me give you another example: I like tea. I ordered a cup of Darjeeling the other day. What I got was a hot cup of water and a tea bag.

Sure, you could say: I have the option to make my tea stronger or weaker, all power to the tea drinker by giving him options.

But that's not what I wanted. Take a bit of common sense - I ordered Darjeeling for a reason. What tine of day was it? It was in the afternoon. So, by common sense, there's a very good possibility I ordered the tea for its stimulating effect rather than something hot to calm me down before bed-time. They were either too lazy to time my cup of tea correctly themselves and/or ignorant how to make a proper cup of tea in the first place. So they served me something I didn't order (a cup of hot water and a tea bag) and let me do all the work.

I feel the same towards some racing games: PD builds games (I assume, after Gamescom I will have seen it by myself) the way cars were built 30 or 40 years ago. A Horch or Ferrari were tailor made for the patriarch, that was it. If you have seen footage of Kaz racing in real life and showcasing GT, it's hard to tell the difference. It's quite another story if you watch some "we're gonna break the record on the Nordschleife" footage.

Now don't get me wrong, I love the GT franchise for what it is and Kaz is a very glamourous figure and a well educated, witty and all around nice guy.

I'm very much looking forward to karting, maybe even some hilarious, light-hearted TopGear challenges.

But, spiced up production cars on a race track is a bit of a flaw - it's one big track day all over again. Thus I'm more eager to try out SuperGT or DTM cars again.

"Standard" and "professional" physics are, in my book, by now an outdated concept. They could offer realistic driving aids, modelled exactly to their real life counterparts (which they won't) or professional setup cars in-game (which I fear they won't do). To me experience, all it takes is a bit of effort if the ride is set up well. I showed it to some of my friends, they tackled the Nordschleife just fine when I gave them my ASL Garaiya and some basic instructions.

GT educated me in the same way that my old teacher told me Tai Chi - just by example, and some preparing talk, and that was it. For a European, it can't get more complicated because it requires skills foreign to most of us: being aware of errors while being about to make them.

Sorry for the far too many words, I guess it's because I dived into the forums and discovered, with some "new" footage and info at hand, the discussion still remains how "sim" GT is going to be, how many glitches there are to be found and if Porsche is essential to the car list or not.

I hoped dedicated fans would demand more than the basics (it's 2010 after all) and had gone beyond the basic stuff.

Anyway, back to the music I guess.
 
Using the tea argument, when you serve dozens of people, it's a great idea to let the consumer tailor it to their liking.


Edit: (Actually I'm not really sure what point your trying to make ItsHim, but if the above post made sense then great ;))
 
Using the tea argument, when you serve dozens of people, it's a great idea to let the consumer tailor it to their liking.

The same goes for beer, you can actually get into a discussion just because beer A is better than beer B in your modest opinion, given that both contenders are already drunk the argumentation is even more poor, the same goes on when analyzing realism of a racing game, many people love to play Prologue in STD physics and assisted by all aids, that doesn't make them less valuable customers to Sony.

Considering the usual noob as the biggest audience in racing games, PD did a smart move making two modes apart for the physics, they just need to keep the STD easy as it is, and give the Pro mode some more options to make the simulation the most realistic as it is possible while keeping the assists here to save your skin whenever things get tough. This ensures attendance to a wider audience and hence, fatter profits.

As for rFactor and GTR, I quite like both and I never drove a full fledged racing car to determine which one is more realistic, but GTR will get my vote, rFactor modding quality is questionable as many people already stated and the overall feel at the wheel is better at GTR to me, I still need some spare time to test IRacing though, but regardless, I still have more fun driving an '98 Merc SL500 on N3 around the 'ring in GT4, and that's what's really important in a game to me. ;)
 
Do people expect servers to know if people want milk in their Tea as well?
 
This lack of news is making people silly argument,better gamescom came up with something good
 
This lack of news is making people silly argument,better gamescom came up with something good

Yeah like a chocolate biscuit for this tea.

Seriously though I'm getting excited for this, I don't think it will reveal everything we want. But when we take a step back after it we will realise we have an awesome game waiting for us in November.👍
 
People take their beverages seriously :D

But there's no news. I'm dying with how slow this is. Once the game releases the site will flood worse than Noah's Ark.
 
If the most extreme flight sim would have had the option to make it as a fun & entertaining (= well selling) game, would that have made the game in question live better and therefore giving the developers funds to carry on and invest more also to the realistic side of the game? So maybe also those games would have needed the optionality???

They did, MS Flight Simulator X added a mission stucture (red bull races, other exciting things) and full support of xbox controllers and the result is FSX is one of if not the highest selling PC game from MS's studios ever and since it's release in 2006 is still selling well at a reduced price.

Did they remove any realism? No not at all, but it never was huge on aircraft realism anyway, flight sim enthusists buy mods for that but it is understadable considering the extreme complexity of aircrafts systems. It still a huge following and many many studios making payware mods which do sell.

As a note MS didn't put the flight sim series on hold due to sales but rather because they wanted to focus thier assets into the xbox division.
 
I don't know where the standard/premium tracks idea came from (Apparently there is a source that shows it, I haven't seen it).

But if you think about it, it makes sense. Earlier demo builds had a ported version of GT4s Nurburgring, and it looked fine. If they were to carry over all of GT4s tracks (That haven't been reproduced for GT5) in this way it would be brilliant. Sure people will complain about it... But it's more tracks, I mean why not? They're doing it with the cars, why not the tracks? There is no major downside like there is with the cars (Lack of cockpit view).

Even the latest Circuit De La Sarthe build we've seen appears to have been ported from GT4, with a few minor improvements here and there. Yet in the new graphics engine it looks awesome, and certainly worthy of this gen. The gravel at the edge of the track around Dunlop Curve and the Esses is a dead giveaway, it's still polygon shaped, whereas the gravel there in real life is rounded off in the same shape as the track. If they had done it to the standards of the Nurburgring, Fuji, Madrid, Rome, Tokyo etc. it wouldn't be like that.

In the demo shown at some events I think De La Sarthe was labeled as premium. However, I do no think premium/standard track exists in GT5. There is no such news regarding it anywhere.
 
In the demo shown at some events I think De La Sarthe was labeled as premium. However, I do no think premium/standard track exists in GT5. There is no such news regarding it anywhere.

If standard/premium tracks don't exist, why bother putting the PREMIUM tag on any of them? Why not just leave it out all together since there is no difference in quality?
 
If standard/premium tracks don't exist, why bother putting the PREMIUM tag on any of them? Why not just leave it out all together since there is no difference in quality?

I think the tag is there to differentiate which class of cars is racing there.

I would be surprised if we will see mixed standard/premium races, enter a premium car and its a full premium race.

But that is just a guess though.
 
^^ Interesting thought.
We have confermation of a 32 party lobby.
Maybe 16 premium cars online together.
Maybe an increase in car count if all standards are used.

Just speculation on my part though.
 
I think the tag is there to differentiate which class of cars is racing there.

I would be surprised if we will see mixed standard/premium races, enter a premium car and its a full premium race.

But that is just a guess though.

That's a Standard opinion, I only accept Premium ones!
 
I wish i can go into hibernation like a Bear until November 2nd, Giggity the urge Giggity.
 
I think the tag is there to differentiate which class of cars is racing there.

I would be surprised if we will see mixed standard/premium races, enter a premium car and its a full premium race.

But that is just a guess though.

So we MAYBE can't mix premium/standard cars?
 
To me right now, GT5 looks far too complex. The main reasons for this are the online and the track editor. The online pictures look far too complicated and how events are organised seem rather a bit complicated too. The custom games that will be organised by others just look like they'll get out of hand if they can't place certain restrictions. Then the track editor. Who knows how many options there'll be, and if there's too many options my brain might explode.

One thing I do want, if it hasn't been mentioned yet, are live updates via the Playstation menu like Modern Warfare 2 and Need for Speed Shift have. If they're already coming, you'll have to excuse me as I haven't heard about them.
 
The track editior (assuming there is one) is not something you need to even look at if you don't want to. Online aswell, if you don't like other peoples setting make the host your own with your own settings. Or you can join a public race setup by Sony which most casual racers will probably join.
 
It would be nice if you can turn on "tinted" windows for premium cars, just so you can up the player count on races.
 
Back