Mods are a complete different story.
Course maker are PD created. So anything that offends license owner due to the CM can make the owner puts blame to PD.
Is this the end?
- Thread starter Il_Conte_Sky
- 354 comments
- 26,664 views
Mods are a complete different story.
Course maker are PD created. So anything that offends license owner due to the CM can make the owner puts blame to PD.
- 844
- Indiana
- DSkywalker01
No... the course maker is essentially a PD sanctioned modding tool... kind of like FM's Livery Editor.
When someone makes a Marlboro livery on Forza... Turn 10 does not owe Phillip Morris a red cent... because it was user created and no real money changed hands in the creation and distribution of the livery.
This is the same for the course maker. PD isn't responsible for what the users create using their tool... and they don't owe anybody anything for what the users make.
Unless PD's lawyers are complete pushovers no real-world track has ANY legal standing with users modding in Sebring or any other track.
- 16,433
- United Kingdom
I don't think that's how it works. PD can provide a tool (i.e. the Course maker) without anyone being able to complain. If an individual recreates Sebring, I don't think anyone can complain. If an individual creates Sebring and PD allow that to be shared in the game... that would be where the issue might lay.
- 13,739
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Except that there's a very easy solution: if the asset owner complains then PD blocks sharing that track. Basically, DMCA notices for their content.
Seems simple to me, especially given that it's just a variation of the reporting systems that other games already have in place for inappropriate content made by players. As long as PD makes a legitimate effort to remove the content then they're probably legally safe.
You can do illegal things with a pencil and paper, but it's not generally considered the fault of the pencil company unless they're knowingly assisting you.
- 1,239
- Italy
It's been 1 year, 7 months, 25 days since GT6 launch. That's 602 days
The last big "where the hell is this thing advertised in the launch trailers" - GTA Heists were patched into the game after
1 year, 5 months, 25 days or 543 days.
Gotta be a record for GT6 then - at least among the AAA titles.
The last big "where the hell is this thing advertised in the launch trailers" - GTA Heists were patched into the game after
1 year, 5 months, 25 days or 543 days.
Gotta be a record for GT6 then - at least among the AAA titles.
- 16,433
- United Kingdom
You're obsessed, move on... it's for your own good.
- 21,262
- United States
- 7,524
- Cincinnati, Ohio, United States of America
- BlackRose_Atomic
"Is this the end?" No. Why should it be? Because a new sim came out on PS4 to mixed reviews and because the world is full of impatient people? GT is the biggest staple of racing games. Everyone knows it, whether or not they even have the console to play it. GT6, despite it's short comings, still attracts a lot of people. I have a PS3, PS4, and PC, and I still find myself playing GT6 more than PCars, rFactor, or NR2003 combined. Gran Turismo is still the best selling game PlayStation has. Millions are waiting for GT7. It isn't going away because you are bored of 1200+ cars on 70+ track layouts. GT6 is a sign of the series at it's worst, which is still in ways better than some of the sims at their peak. I can't wait for GT8 either, but GT6 isn't close to dead or dried up yet for me.
- 28,471
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
The problem is, the things that GT is bad at are the things that give games like this longevity like the AI and the offline career. If that's what appeals to someone and you're a halfway decent driver, I can't see how the career mode in GT could appeal to you. I also don't see why it's so hard for some of you to understand that it doesn't matter how good you think the overall package is, how many cars or tracks a game has, how cheap the game is, free DLC etc., if the one thing that's most important to you is flawed in a game, the entire game will soon become unappealing.
- 7,524
- Cincinnati, Ohio, United States of America
- BlackRose_Atomic
Not saying it isn't. I'm just saying it's still active from an online perspective.
- 4,722
- United Kingdom
I like the overall package & still love playing the game but what you're saying is true. Some large parts of the game are pretty much useless (to many people, maybe not to others) in terms of longevity.
Many of us have found our longevity in the game & will continue to do so, whether that be through online activity (until it becomes unavailable) or continued use of the offline facilities (which I, personally, left behind long ago).
For most people, there will be an end.
Is "this" the end? Well we still haven't really defined what "this" is.
Yes.An entire game for 14 years before it came out is worse than a feature not being released for a year and a half?
A game that is atleast just anticipated, then forgotten and become a joke (see Half Life 3 for this up to eleven). But at least we can pay attention to other games and we cant really invested in that game considering we didnt bought it already let alone own.
This..... We already bought the game. PD promises it. And look where we are. Even LONGER than the Heist for GTA5.
Congratulations PD! You just cut off the Shuffle racing and then this scheznigans. It may not the longest game release holdups on history of games. But it seems it is the longest feature to be released holdups in games and the latter is more punch in the face than the former.
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
Nah it's not frustration , just sheer disbelief in that some of the community willfully accept being ignored by PD and gladly accept what little half finished product they receive . See Zlorks post for typical '' gladly accept whatever i'm given then i'll go back for more'' mentality
You should know that the mentality you speak of also applies to other games/dev as some games/dev have their own avid followers, no matter how much bugs or issues the game has ( often also defend the game or attack other games like drones, not here, but on another forum
)
- 28,471
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
- 1,632
- UK
- YT__TJCGAMING
Yup . Which was obviously a bold face lie by Kaz . The truth of it is now abundantly clear that it's touch and go whether it even appears at all .
- 13,739
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Meh.
I think Kaz really believes these things that he tells us, at the time that he says them. I just think that maybe he doesn't have a full appreciation of the amount of things that could get in the way of that becoming a reality.
For example, he almost certainly thought that the course maker would be in the game at release or soon after. But for whatever reason that didn't happen. If he wants to make statements like that, he's expected to be pretty sure that what he's saying is going to be true.
I suspect that instead he's the sort of boss that says it and then expects his employees to make it happen. We had some old news back in the GT5 days about him talking with his engineers about 60fps and 1080p, and they were telling him that it really wasn't going to be possible. He ignored them and said "make it happen", and we ended up with GT5 and GT6. I could be misremembering this, but I think that was the gist of it.
Kaz probably means well, but there's a disconnect between what he says and what is really going on in PD. And I think he tries to overcome that in part by announcing stuff so that his staff then either have to make it happen or make him a liar.
I don't think highly of this style of management, if that's what he's doing. It's in some ways abusive.
- 1,632
- UK
- YT__TJCGAMING
I'm a fan of the truth . That's the truth as I see it . Unless PD come out and state otherwise .
Either way you can view it simply . Kaz stated/implied the course maker would make it into the game just shortly after release . This is currently over 1.5 years after release . So doesn't that corroborate the fact that what was stated was an untruth ?
Or to put it another way - If I told you I was coming over to fix your garden fence , then for a year and a half I didn't say much about it to you , what I did say was just cryptic , but there you are still waiting to get your fence mended .
Would you think I was telling the truth ?
Last edited:
- 16,433
- United Kingdom
- 1,632
- UK
- YT__TJCGAMING
https://www.gtplanet.net/kazunori-yamauchi-tamir-moscovici-interview-jff-2013/
If it was " cutting it close to be available on release " , but here we are this far along afterwards , then it can be concluded he either lied about how far along it was , or is not in control of his own words . His wording here suggests it was almost ready to be included . And from this you can logically assume it would be available shortly after release .
Last edited:
- 16,433
- United Kingdom
Oh, you just meant this...
"Yes. In regards to the course maker, it is cutting it really close as to whether or not it will make it in time for day one or not for GT6. It’s definitely going to be there, but whether or not it will be available from day one I’m just not really sure right now."
hmmm...
hmmm...
Seems to me you're more of a fan of incorrectly paraphrasing.
- 28,471
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
It's a reasonable inference that if the feature is touch and go for release, that it should easily be available not long after release.
- 1,632
- UK
- YT__TJCGAMING
So you don't think he lied when he said it was cutting it close to day one release ?
I'd suggest you're a fan of inaccurately understanding of what the phrase " Cutting it close " means .
- 84,447
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Those two sentences mean different things. One is what is actually true and one is what you think is true. You habitually conflate the two as if only what you think is true is true - that there can be nothing you have not thought of...
Aside from the fact that your statement of his statement is itself untrue, it would only be an untrue statement at the time it was made if you believe that the observed result matches the expected or intended result - which it seems that you do.
What we know of features like the Course Maker is that they were listed on the official site as features that would come in future updates - which instantly kicks any concept of it being intended for day 1 into touch, but that's sort of beside the point at this juncture.
If the intent was to get it in at a known area in the near future and the statement was that it would arrive in the near future, it is not an untrue statement. If the intent was not to release it for 18 months and the statement was that it would arrive in the near future, it is an untrue statement.
You are assuming that because there was a statement that a feature was in a sufficiently late stage of development and the feature has not arrived yet, either the statement was a lie or the PD team are so inept (or badly managed) that they haven't yet finished the feature.
You are not allowing for the possibility that something beyond anyone's reasonable control has occurred and are heading straight for Kazunori and the PD team being liars and/or incompetent. You are then presenting this opinion as a stated fact, which it isn't.
Do you believe that you are sufficiently well-informed to have all the information and sufficiently intelligent to calculate all of the possible outcomes without the need to allow for something you haven't thought of?
Or can I look forward to you changing your attitude from statements of fact to statements of opinion?
- 16,433
- United Kingdom
Very much so, but it was not "stated" as TJC said. Makes a pretty big difference if you're claiming to be a fan of the truth.
and I think you need to better understand what Lie means. I know exactly what cutting it close means, but that doesn't mean to say that I agree he "lied". In the real world people make estimates and predictions all the time in good faith, and for whatever reason they are not always correct. This is different to stating something you know to be False.... Do I think he did the latter? No I don't. If we do take the reasonable inference that it was due shortly after release, you've still got no evidence either way to say whether Kaz knew it wouldn't or not... so your claim that it was "obviously a bold face lie" is based on what exactly?
Did you know Kaz didn't actually state "The course maker would make it into the game just shortly after release" when you claimed he did... were you just telling a bold face lie? did you just make it up? or did you think it said something different?
- 1,239
- Italy
The 🤬 is that hyperbolic nonsense ? Just posting some numbers from time to time - I find them interesting.
Don't you find them interesting ?
Guess not
