I Bought GT6 --- ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tooma
  • 34 comments
  • 3,073 views
The problem with this comparison, when people pay for a movie they know they're getting the whole movie, unless they leave early. They don't get halfway through it and have parts missing, or have the movie advertised at 190 minutes and it ends at 150 minutes. And movies aren't advertised as "parts of the movie to come at a later date" and then don't come.

Really? hmm, well we knew what we were getting with GT6 as well. They clearly stated that some features would be added later via updates over the next year so I don't see your comparison as valid.

That said I saw Lord of the Rings, right when it started to get interesting they scrolled the credits, Had to wait another year to see the next part and longer to see it all. They did not even have a disclaimer telling us that it was part 1 of 3. At least the folks at PD did tell us that some features would come later.

That also is beside the point, the game as shipped worked and I played it for many many hours, I got my moneys worth before you count any updates.
 
Really? hmm, well we knew what we were getting with GT6 as well. They clearly stated that some features would be added later via updates over the next year so I don't see your comparison as valid.
This.
 
Having unrealistic expectations is bad, obviously. But people have unrealistic expectations in the first place because they don't know what to expect.

If you have no information, your options are either to expect nothing, or come up with your own expectations. Those will almost certainly be unrealistic, no matter how hard you try.

There's a subtle difference between unrealistic and uninformed. You mean the latter; I certainly don't expect the game to make me a cup of tea just because nobody's told me any different. That's ridiculous. I could expect a few new cars, that certainly wouldn't be unrealistic - however, uninformed as I am, I don't know that there will be any, or what kinds of cars there could be (e.g. Porsche is only unrealistic given the information regarding the licensing), or any reasons why that might not be possible at this time.

The fact that I personally do not know is my own responsibility. If I speed on public roads because my speedo is badly calibrated, I'd be prosecuted, and rightly so. The consequences of one's own ignorance ought to be kept under control, then.

Some will be more unrealistic than others. Expecting 1000 premium cars in GT5 was unrealistic, there wasn't really any conceivable way for that amount of work to get done. Expecting the DLC promises in GT6 to be followed through is hardly unrealistic. I would have said that seeing at least one of the feature updates within the first three months would be fairly realistic as well.

Unrealistic expectations can only be formed when there's insufficient or inaccurate information, and so there's a definite option for the company to minimise any misunderstanding. The consumer can be somewhat sensible about it and not expect things that are plainly impossible, but it also works the other way when expecting stuff that appears to be plainly reasonable.
No, unrealistic expectations are formed by people without a grasp on reality. Uninformed expectations are equally dangerous, but are avoidable. You said it yourself: the only way to be sure is to expect nothing. That's actually a really nice way to live life in general, as long as you're not negative about it (which is fun from time-to-time, granted).

Yeah, and it'd be great if they'd tell us what it was instead of setting us up and then going quiet.

Communication. If plans change, they need to communicate that. Sometimes it's uncomfortable, and they're going to catch some backlash. But the zero communication policy isn't making them any friends either. Better to be straight up.

Yeah, it'd be nice, but unrealistic interpretations of what is communicated will abound - it's great food for forum debate, of course. I don't know that this is really that important. If it's bugging you (people in general), or the game isn't fun any more, put it down, come back to it when it's ready, or don't. If you felt like this from the start, why buy it in the first place? Again, marketing is designed to take advantage of impulse purchasing urges; do yourselves a favour and wise up, gen up and put up with a small delay (post launch) whilst you collect the information you need.

We all took the risk in buying a game with no dates attached to any of the upcoming features, and in many cases with knowledge of how many things haven't moved on from GT5. That was our own personal gamble.
Announcing dates is the last thing they should do, because they've shown that they can't meet dates.

What they should be doing is keeping consumers in the loop. That, or simply not announcing stuff before it's actually ready.

But then, how many fewer copies of GT6 would have sold if they didn't make all those promises?

No idea. How many people read the website before buying? How many people only went by the TV ads and such? How many people actually give a crap about the future updates they're entirely oblivious to? PD / Sony are quiet about this game across the board - maybe they're fed up with being goaded into an arms race by "fans". Time will tell.

The sounds is actually one of the few things that I think they've more or less handled right. It's still a travesty that the sound are awful, but they were pretty clear that while they're working on it, we shouldn't really expect the update to be in GT6. It might be, but probably not.

People are getting their hopes up that it will be, and that's a somewhat unrealistic expectation.

And yet ironically, all the other features yet to be included were announced in the same way - there is no use in saying "online update isn't ready yet", because we can see that for ourselves - it is implicit. Has it occurred to anyone that maybe all these updates are linked in some way? Is DLC delayed whilst they clobber together a sample set or three because they thought they'd have the sounds working by now?

Does it even matter that we know this, the exact technical cause (translated in some well-meaning but ultimately obscure way), when in reality we don't actually comprehend the situation outright, for the most part? They're just excuses, though at the end of the day, aren't they? All they'll say is, effectively, "keep waiting" (and do a bit of reassuring pandering to egos), because they can't set a date, can they? So what difference is it to say to oneself: "keep waiting"?

The sounds are in the game in part already. So the sounds exist, it's clearly a technical hurdle - this is what I mean about the updates being intrinsically linked, and about perhaps educating oneself about a medium one supposedly cares about.


Incidentally, the sounds and Ronda's free roam elements would make this game for me. For now, the physics are keeping me entertained enough. I appreciate also that I speak as someone who is most comfortable when the world is open-ended, who genuinely enjoys (frivolous) "uncertainty", so I can understand it if some people prefer to be informed about everything, even if lied to or patronised or whatever.

Delays are understandable and expected, certainly. I totally agree.

I don't agree the the communication is implicit. If there's a delay or a change to plans that the company has explicitly expressed, I think that the onus is then on them to convey the change. If the DLC for GT6 is going to be delayed, they should say so. If the features are being difficult and they're not going to be out for a while, they should say so.

It's perfectly acceptable for a company to say "Look, we thought we were going to be able to have the online community features out in January, but a bunch of killer bugs cropped up. We're not releasing until we're happy you'll have a great experience. I can't tell you when that'll be, but even if it's not ready next month we'll have another update for you".

I don't see what's so difficult about that, and I don't see why that shouldn't be expected from a major company that has promised that there are more features to come on it's product. It's not like it costs them a huge amount of time or money to knock together a press release once a month, and it's hardly taking time away from the people that would actually be working on the game.

Just because something is a game, doesn't mean that it's not important to interface with your customers.

Surely that's all Sony's responsibility. If it really were that important to them, they'd be hounding PD for some kind of progress report, or making stuff up to placate us all (because that's all that really matters, right?). Why aren't they?
 
And yet ironically, all the other features yet to be included were announced in the same way...

No they weren't.

It was made clear that the sounds may not ever make it into GT6.

It was made clear that GT6 will contain online community features, B Spec, course creator, and so on.

They can not update the sounds without violating any of their own promises. The same cannot be said of the other "promised" features.

Does it even matter that we know this, the exact technical cause (translated in some well-meaning but ultimately obscure way), when in reality we don't actually comprehend the situation outright, for the most part? They're just excuses, though at the end of the day, aren't they? All they'll say is, effectively, "keep waiting" (and do a bit of reassuring pandering to egos), because they can't set a date, can they? So what difference is it to say to oneself: "keep waiting"?

Because it's courteous.

When you step on someone foot, do you apologise? Or do you assume that they know that it was a mistake, that you're sorry and just move on?

Stating the obvious is sometimes important, especially in relationships, which is where this started.

Surely that's all Sony's responsibility. If it really were that important to them, they'd be hounding PD for some kind of progress report, or making stuff up to placate us all (because that's all that really matters, right?). Why aren't they?

What makes you think it's Sony's responsibility? It's PD's game, they manage the marketing, they manage the information, unless you've got information otherwise.

I don't see Sony getting on Naughty Dog's back for anything, why should they be responsible for PD's cock ups?


Incidentally, the sounds and Ronda's free roam elements would make this game for me. For now, the physics are keeping me entertained enough. I appreciate also that I speak as someone who is most comfortable when the world is open-ended, who genuinely enjoys (frivolous) "uncertainty", so I can understand it if some people prefer to be informed about everything, even if lied to or patronised or whatever.

Decent sounds and a reasonable course maker would be enough for me too, and the other stuff would be a bonus.

Ultimately, it's about PD giving a ****.

You seem happy enough with what you've got, and if the other stuff comes then that's cool. You're not the sort of consumer that announcements would be targeted at.

Me, I happened to get a cheap deal early on and knew I was going to get the game eventually for GT Academy. I knew more or less that I wouldn't be satisfied with the game as it was at released, but there was fairly good evidence that it was being updated quite frequently, both in what PD was saying their plans were at release and in that the first four patches were pushed out with decent regularity.

But post 1.04 they've gone stone quiet. Maybe I'm the only one, but I was happy enough knowing that they were working on pushing the game forward even though it currently doesn't even really live up to the final patch edition of GT5 feature-wise. But the lack of even a word saying "we're still working on it, don't worry" is not promising. This is not a company that is thinking about it's customers.

Ultimately, I don't trust PD to follow through even on what they've said they would. They've done it before. I'm not the only one, and it'd be nice if PD was in touch enough to be aware that there are people thinking this. The people like you are always going to be there for them. The way they increase their sales and fanbase is by pulling in people like me who are on the fence. They're not really trying, they're just relying on the strength of their name and the big numbers on the box.
 
No they weren't.

It was made clear that the sounds may not ever make it into GT6.

It was made clear that GT6 will contain online community features, B Spec, course creator, and so on.

They can not update the sounds without violating any of their own promises. The same cannot be said of the other "promised" features.

Sort of. It wasn't actually made clear it might not be in the game at all if it missed launch, unlike, say, the course maker (around the time of the 1000 x 1000 debate). All we got was that it might be possible to update the game if sounds didn't make it day one. Which is one of those annoying state-the-obvious things. But that's what people want; wastes of breath, wastes of effort, wastes of energy (damn you entropy!).

Because it's courteous.

When you step on someone foot, do you apologise? Or do you assume that they know that it was a mistake, that you're sorry and just move on?

Stating the obvious is sometimes important, especially in relationships, which is where this started.

Actually, the whole relationship thing was a stab at absurdism intended to bring comic relief. I am not in a relationship with PD, not one of any gravity at least - to insist otherwise is to deny what games are, again. My point is with expectations, and the one thing that expectations do in any real human relationship is change, accommodate; either that or they break the relationship - communication is worthless if it's not acted upon, however subtly.

The supposed lack of communication doesn't bother me, because the game speaks for itself - if it's not saying what you want it to, that's fine, don't buy it. But you said communication (which includes listening and understanding, crucially) is important, and at that point, why would you hang around knowing it's not for you? What's at stake, compared with a "real" relationship?

Communication is more than just spoken and written words, or the rote-learned, empty apologies recited more out of fear than any real sense of remorse. "Communication" does not even require the intention of the producer, it only requires that someone is paying attention - that's how monkeys know when other monkeys are hiding food from them (which you'll notice we humans are also remarkably good at).

What makes you think it's Sony's responsibility? It's PD's game, they manage the marketing, they manage the information, unless you've got information otherwise.

I don't see Sony getting on Naughty Dog's back for anything, why should they be responsible for PD's cock ups?

No, Sony does - go check their official forums for proof. Where is PD's official channel? The website and game servers are nothing to do with PD, either - check the credits (outsourcing! Prayers: answered! Sanctimony: success!).

Sony pays the bills at the end of the day, so it's only logical that the impetus would come from them, regardless of where the PR office actually is. Maybe they prefer to let game development take its course, rather than play things (too) heavy-handedly. Sounds like a recipe for risk taking, which is a recipe for fun games. Again, you knew the gamble.

Decent sounds and a reasonable course maker would be enough for me too, and the other stuff would be a bonus.

Ultimately, it's about PD giving a ****.

You seem happy enough with what you've got, and if the other stuff comes then that's cool. You're not the sort of consumer that announcements would be targeted at.

The course maker and the AI update, and the likely physics tweaks that'll come with it all (and possibly a tuning overhaul, but don't hold your breath), plus the improved online stuff, even B-Spec (AI update) are all things I look forward to, and have done since I started playing video games with cars in them. So yes, these announcements are for me.

I am far from "happy" with "what I've got", I'm human. But I also have many of the same frustrations as any other long-time GT player. Again, the game speaks for itself.

Me, I happened to get a cheap deal early on and knew I was going to get the game eventually for GT Academy. I knew more or less that I wouldn't be satisfied with the game as it was at released, but there was fairly good evidence that it was being updated quite frequently, both in what PD was saying their plans were at release and in that the first four patches were pushed out with decent regularity.

But post 1.04 they've gone stone quiet. Maybe I'm the only one, but I was happy enough knowing that they were working on pushing the game forward even though it currently doesn't even really live up to the final patch edition of GT5 feature-wise. But the lack of even a word saying "we're still working on it, don't worry" is not promising. This is not a company that is thinking about it's customers.

So you actually fear their having stopped work altogether? Interesting. It'd take a bit more for that to hit home with me, I think - unless that's what the price cut was about (ooh, you know it's true!). There's supposed to be a track this month. That's most likely a course creator preset, which they said we'd get before the actual tool itself. If so, things are progressing in order, just not at the pace initially hoped for, perhaps. A month is hardly long enough to start declaring vapourware, though, really, is it?

Ultimately, I don't trust PD to follow through even on what they've said they would. They've done it before. I'm not the only one, and it'd be nice if PD was in touch enough to be aware that there are people thinking this. The people like you are always going to be there for them. The way they increase their sales and fanbase is by pulling in people like me who are on the fence. They're not really trying, they're just relying on the strength of their name and the big numbers on the box.

You don't have to trust anything they say or do, and anything they say or do won't change that. That's why it's entirely arbitrary in my mind what banal nonsense they feed us to keep us hooked on the line. I'd rather swim off for a bit if I want to (which surely doesn't make me "people like you", unless you just mean "patient" or "easily distracted"), and don't see the harm in coming back for another bite if things get tasty again.

Surely if they're "trying" to draw people like you into the game, they'll do so once they actually know for sure what they have at their disposal? You know, rather than make false promises (can't win). PD sure rely on that cachet to give them the freedom to make the game according to their own ideas, which to be frank has never ever been different, and nowhere have they said "we're making the game people want to play". You get the odd concession, like damage, which of course wasn't up to people's expectations, because they want it to be like other games (PD tend to attack things from a fresh perspective, which is more work, but worth it in the long run - sounds will be the exemplar on that front; it does cripple them for the relative short term, sadly).

Your mistake is possibly in assuming that your tastes are at all representative of the target audience, beyond the "gravity well" of the "name" - if not, of course they're "not trying", just the same as SOE "aren't trying" to make a game for CoD players with Planetside 2 (lot of parallels to be drawn there, released incomplete, ran poorly, updates "promised", came later than anticipated, little communication until stuff was done), or that BF4 isn't for BF2 players, even, much as that still pains them.
 
Back