Is this the end?

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?

This is basically the same post you posted in the about the course maker thread . It comes across as " We the mods know what you don't , and you lot still haven't guessed the reason " etc . From a statement of fact standpoint , to a you can't guess what it is standpoint is all well and good . However your opinion always leads me to suspect PD legal issues with it .

But seeing as the mod staff won't/can't tell then I will see the truth in what information is available at this current time . As like many others will until PD or GTP drop the secrecy regarding it . Anything else that is said , either by yourself or a user on the course maker is still open to debate , unless proved otherwise .

So it's not enough for me to have hints that something has happened . Proof speaks much louder 👍


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?

If what you state is true , then where' s the update from PD ? You are of the opinion that Kaz was telling the truth . Which is , all said and done , your opinion . Inference is still inference . And when you are inferring a feature is close to being ready , yet at a further point in the future it is inherently clear that it is not , then you either lied or you should communicate to your consumer that what you said wasn't accurate , but you believed said statement was a paramount truth at the time of publication .
 
or you should communicate to your consumer that what you said wasn't accurate , but you believed said statement was a paramount truth at the time of publication .

Whilst I'm not one of those needy people that thinks they have a right to constant dialogue with Dev's, after a delay of this length, I'd agree that this would be the appropriate course of action, but since PD is known for not communicating much, I'd still not take the lack of a statement as an indicator that what was said originally was a lie.

FWIW, my opinion, based on no facts, is that PD were either licensing technology/software/other IP to enable the Course maker, which for some reason suddenly became unavailable to them... or... they had developed their own technology/software/other IP to enable the Course maker, and in process of registering it and patenting it, came up against existing IP therefore blocking their own application... In either case. If it was nearly ready 18 months ago... and it's still not here.. to me that says 'Back to the drawing board' kind of delays... and my two guesses above would explain why that might have happened.
 
This is basically the same post you posted in the about the course maker thread . It comes across as " We the mods know what you don't , and you lot still haven't guessed the reason " etc.
Does it? Why?

Do I say anywhere in there that I am sufficiently well-informed to have all the facts and sufficiently intelligent to calculate all the possible outcomes without there being something I haven't thought of? Would I not then be guilty of doing the same thing I'm telling you that you shouldn't do?


For some reason you've interpreted the admonition that you shouldn't operate as if you have all the facts and should be careful about drawing such final conclusions without allowing for something you haven't thought of as "the mods" (since apparently I am all the staff now) knowing about GT6's current status and refusing to share it. You did this on the Spotlight post last week too (I assume you think T12 knows all about GT6's current status too, and obviously since that's two of the three editorial staff that apparently know this and Jordan is the third, so all three apparently know it, which means all of "the mods" do too... for some reason), but chucked in a frankly bizarre conclusion that GTPlanet is "afraid" of PD because they might stop giving us access... which is so untrue you can actually feel how untrue it is dripping off your skin. Again, you stated this as certainty, without allowing for things you don't know and haven't thought of.

So I repeat. 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 - and GTPlanet's entire staff being in cahoots either willingly or in fear (which would amuse William of Ockham). You are then presenting this opinion as a stated fact, which it isn't - it's opinion.
So it's not enough for me to have hints that something has happened . Proof speaks much louder 👍
Except you're stating outright what has happened without any proof of anything. You're wildly speculating and then posting it as fact on the forums and on the blog. I'm all for speculation but it has to be presented as speculation.

Worse still, you're calling Kazunori/PD liars and/or incompetent and GTP complicit in facilitating it, based on a statement that you think said the Course Maker would be in soon after day 1 of GT6 but actually says it would have been a close call to get it ready in time for day 1, and then the subsequent non-appearance of it to date, because for some reason you seem to believe that there is nothing you haven't thought of that might explain it despite several cautions from moderators to members not to act as if there is nothing they haven't thought of*.


This is just about as unacceptable as it gets. More than that, I have absolutely no idea why anyone would want to use this site if they believe that the people who actually bring them the news about Gran Turismo (and latterly other games) are not trustworthy. What do you expect to learn if what you're being told may be a lie?

Now I realise that I phrased this as a question last time, but it was in essence rhetorical. I shall rephrase it so that it is less ambiguous. I look forward to you changing your attitude from statements of fact to statements of opinion - because it cannot continue.

*Which is the literal definition of "moderator" - preventing a process (a discussion, in this case) from running away too far in one direction to be recovered.
 
In the real world people make estimates and predictions all the time in good faith, and for whatever reason they are not always correct.

To be fair, Kaz didn't present it as an estimate or prediction. This is the producer of the game saying that the feature would be in the game at or near release. That's a statement, and a pretty solid one by PD's standards.

It turned out to be wrong. Possibly at that point Kaz had every reason to think that the CM would be in game at or near release. Sometimes stuff just goes wrong. But let's not diminutize what happened, Kazunori made a pretty concrete statement about the game that has turned out to be incorrect on an enormous scale.

I don't agree with calling him a liar for that, as liar implies that he did it willfully. But nor do I think we should be making apologies for it. Someone in his position shouldn't be making 🤬-ups of that calibre.

The worst you could pin on Kaz and PD is a lie of omission for remaining silent on the subject for the last 12 months. I'm not a big fan of a company that knows that their product is missing a major feature and that it's significantly later than they led their customers to believe it would be, and yet says nothing.

They're choosing not to communicate, and that's not terribly acceptable. That is a willful decision, ensuring that the only information that your customers have access to is out of date and likely incorrect.
 
Does it? Why?

Do I say anywhere in there that I am sufficiently well-informed to have all the facts and sufficiently intelligent to calculate all the possible outcomes without there being something I haven't thought of? Would I not then be guilty of doing the same thing I'm telling you that you shouldn't do?


For some reason you've interpreted the admonition that you shouldn't operate as if you have all the facts and should be careful about drawing such final conclusions without allowing for something you haven't thought of as "the mods" (since apparently I am all the staff now) knowing about GT6's current status and refusing to share it. You did this on the Spotlight post last week too (I assume you think T12 knows all about GT6's current status too, and obviously since that's two of the three editorial staff that apparently know this and Jordan is the third, so all three apparently know it, which means all of "the mods" do too... for some reason), but chucked in a frankly bizarre conclusion that GTPlanet is "afraid" of PD because they might stop giving us access... which is so untrue you can actually feel how untrue it is dripping off your skin. Again, you stated this as certainty, without allowing for things you don't know and haven't thought of.

So I repeat. 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 - and GTPlanet's entire staff being in cahoots either willingly or in fear (which would amuse William of Ockham). You are then presenting this opinion as a stated fact, which it isn't - it's opinion.
Except you're stating outright what has happened without any proof of anything. You're wildly speculating and then posting it as fact on the forums and on the blog. I'm all for speculation but it has to be presented as speculation.

Worse still, you're calling Kazunori/PD liars and/or incompetent and GTP complicit in facilitating it, based on a statement that you think said the Course Maker would be in soon after day 1 of GT6 but actually says it would have been a close call to get it ready in time for day 1, and then the subsequent non-appearance of it to date, because for some reason you seem to believe that there is nothing you haven't thought of that might explain it despite several cautions from moderators to members not to act as if there is nothing they haven't thought of*.


This is just about as unacceptable as it gets. More than that, I have absolutely no idea why anyone would want to use this site if they believe that the people who actually bring them the news about Gran Turismo (and latterly other games) are not trustworthy. What do you expect to learn if what you're being told may be a lie?

Now I realise that I phrased this as a question last time, but it was in essence rhetorical. I shall rephrase it so that it is less ambiguous. I look forward to you changing your attitude from statements of fact to statements of opinion - because it cannot continue.

*Which is the literal definition of "moderator" - preventing a process (a discussion, in this case) from running away too far in one direction to be recovered.

I'm currently browsing on PS4 , so I can't chop parts of this to answer how I would like so instead i'll just have to write a few paragraphs as a summary . Does it say anywhere where you are sufficiently well informed and have all the facts ?

Well yes . In the course maker thread you say that you are aware of the reason and because of the reason you cannot state what the reason is , although yourself and Jordan both agree to an extent that you think it's a good reason . [ Page 28 , post 817 ]
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/so-about-that-course-creator.328427/page-28

T12 said in that editorial that -
" There are some details that won't be discussed here ... Details that have affected the way Gran Turismo has played out it's lifetime as such . What that means exactly is something that you'll have to discover for yourselves when the time comes because you'll never get a word out of me "

So I don't have to assume he knows the status of GT6 and is unwilling to share it as it's exactly what he says .

If you're not afraid of PD stopping giving access then why did you state in the course maker thread that GTP is non bound by NDAs but PD are , and it would be obvious where the leak came from if it was to appear on GTP ? [ Page 28 of course maker thread post 836 ]
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/so-about-that-course-creator.328427/page-28

Famine- ... The finger of suspicion would be at the people not bound by NDA's . That's pretty much only GT planet .The first solution to a leak is lessen a circle - and that would mean cutting GTP off from future information shares

I didn't realise that i'm not allowed to have a negative opinion of the whole PD , GT6 , Course Maker debacle . What's not incompetent about PD in this situation ? They have yet to deliver promised content , whether or not it it is still live on the website is irrelevant to the customers who bought this game early for this promised feature . Wouldn't you agree ?

I love GTP , I will in future take your point onboard regarding speculative versus fact . However my opinion on PDs handling on this situation remains the same . And i'm allowed to think that they have not delivered , because the fans are still waiting on their purchase being completed .
 
Does it say anywhere where you are sufficiently well informed and have all the facts ?

Well yes. In the course maker thread...
Which isn't what I asked. I asked where in there - in the post that apparently reminded you of the post in the Course Maker thread - I said that. However, that aside:
you say that you are aware of the reason and because of the reason you cannot state what the reason is , although yourself and Jordan both agree to an extent that you think it's a good reason . [ Page 28 , post 817 ]

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/so-about-that-course-creator.328427/page-28
And that's a fabrication. I said that if I know anything about GT6 you can assume that Jordan does too. Not only is he better informed than me, if I learn anything I tell him. At no point did I say that I knew the reason - I merely said that I was aware that there is a good reason and a good reason why it cannot be shared.

You've contorted that into me and Jordan knowing what it is. And you've contorted that subsequently into all of the site staff knowing what it is.
T12 said in that editorial that -

So I don't have to assume he knows the status of GT6 and is unwilling to share it as it's exactly what he says.
No, he's says there's details that won't be discussed there and you won't get it out of him. That's exactly what he says. He at no point says he knows anything about the status of GT6.

So that's another fabrication.
If you're not afraid of PD stopping giving access then why did you state in the course maker thread that GTP is non bound by NDAs but PD are , and it would be obvious where the leak came from if it was to appear on GTP ? [ Page 28 of course maker thread post 836 ]

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/so-about-that-course-creator.328427/page-28
I didn't. Read it again.

I said that if information is leaked outside a circle of people, the first finger of suspicion would be pointed at those not bound by NDAs. That doesn't mean that GTPlanet would be the source of the leak - nor does it mean that we get our information from PD, or would be particularly afraid of them ceasing to share information with us. After all, if it's information that can't be leaked, what's the benefit to us from having it?

I didn't realise that i'm not allowed to have a negative opinion of the whole PD , GT6 , Course Maker debacle.
You can have a negative opinion about anything you like. There is a colossal gulf between having an opinion that someone is incompetent and stating it as a fact.
What's not incompetent about PD in this situation ? They have yet to deliver promised content , whether or not it it is still live on the website is irrelevant to the customers who bought this game early for this promised feature . Wouldn't you agree ?
What does that have to do with competence, unless you make the massive leap of faith that it can only be to do with their abilities?

You're still not even coming close to entertaining the possibility that there's something you haven't thought of.
I love GTP , I will in future take your point onboard regarding speculative versus fact . However my opinion on PDs handling on this situation remains the same . And i'm allowed to think that they have not delivered , because the fans are still waiting on their purchase being completed .
I don't care what your opinion is, so long as you are not pretending that you and you alone have all the information and all the answers and everything is how you say it is.

Only that's exactly how you have been posting. And did again in that post, despite clearly just rabidly interpreting things however you feel like.
 
Which isn't what I asked. I asked where in there - in the post that apparently reminded you of the post in the Course Maker thread - I said that. However, that aside:And that's a fabrication. I said that if I know anything about GT6 you can assume that Jordan does too. Not only is he better informed than me, if I learn anything I tell him. At no point did I say that I knew the reason - I merely said that I was aware that there is a good reason and a good reason why it cannot be shared.

You've contorted that into me and Jordan knowing what it is. And you've contorted that subsequently into all of the site staff knowing what it is.No, he's says there's details that won't be discussed there and you won't get it out of him. That's exactly what he says. He at no point says he knows anything about the status of GT6.

So that's another fabrication.I didn't. Read it again.

I said that if information is leaked outside a circle of people, the first finger of suspicion would be pointed at those not bound by NDAs. That doesn't mean that GTPlanet would be the source of the leak - nor does it mean that we get our information from PD, or would be particularly afraid of them ceasing to share information with us. After all, if it's information that can't be leaked, what's the benefit to us from having it?
You can have a negative opinion about anything you like. There is a colossal gulf between having an opinion that someone is incompetent and stating it as a fact.What does that have to do with competence, unless you make the massive leap of faith that it can only be to do with their abilities?

You're still not even coming close to entertaining the possibility that there's something you haven't thought of.I don't care what your opinion is, so long as you are not pretending that you and you alone have all the information and all the answers and everything is how you say it is.

Only that's exactly how you have been posting. And did again in that post, despite clearly just rabidly interpreting things however you feel like.

I haven't fabricated anything in my post whatsoever . But the facts speak for themselves and users are free to make their minds up and cross check everything themselves . If there's something I haven't thought of , and you keep reiterating that point , then that's fine . When the truth comes out of PD we'll see for ourselves if the reason is acceptable or not .
 
Can I just say, for the record. The game would feel much more complete without the stockyard. The idea of having over 1200+ cars in the game, but only been able to stock 500 cars in the garage is just... boring. I would much rather get rid of the stockyard than to have Course maker in the game. Call me crazy, call me what you want but its just my opinion. I mean, the game feels like a demo kind of with the limiter. Use to love collecting the cars, and tuning all the different versions to compare. So, ignore what I previously said in this thread. If there was no stockyard, I reckon GT6 would feel much more complete and a longer game in general because you would be able to collect cars without hassle. And also maybe without the stockyard in my opinion, their wouldn't be an "end" as the name of this thread puts it because it would be fun collecting all the different cars, would give us something more to do. :boggled:
 
Can I just say, for the record. The game would feel much more complete without the stockyard. The idea of having over 1200+ cars in the game, but only been able to stock 500 cars in the garage is just... boring. I would much rather get rid of the stockyard than to have Course maker in the game. Call me crazy, call me what you want but its just my opinion. I mean, the game feels like a demo kind of with the limiter. Use to love collecting the cars, and tuning all the different versions to compare. So, ignore what I previously said in this thread. If there was no stockyard, I reckon GT6 would feel much more complete and a longer game in general because you would be able to collect cars without hassle. And also maybe without the stockyard in my opinion, their wouldn't be an "end" as the name of this thread puts it because it would be fun collecting all the different cars, would give us something more to do. :boggled:
Couldn't agree with you more.
Honestly, the stock yard is my most disliked thing about GT6.
 
I love a good ole GTP Course Maker meltdown.

1365755210792.gif
 
Can I just say, for the record. The game would feel much more complete without the stockyard. The idea of having over 1200+ cars in the game, but only been able to stock 500 cars in the garage is just... boring. I would much rather get rid of the stockyard than to have Course maker in the game. Call me crazy, call me what you want but its just my opinion. I mean, the game feels like a demo kind of with the limiter. Use to love collecting the cars, and tuning all the different versions to compare. So, ignore what I previously said in this thread. If there was no stockyard, I reckon GT6 would feel much more complete and a longer game in general because you would be able to collect cars without hassle. And also maybe without the stockyard in my opinion, their wouldn't be an "end" as the name of this thread puts it because it would be fun collecting all the different cars, would give us something more to do. :boggled:
This is what keeps me from buying all the cars.
I miss the fast 2000 cars garage in GT5 than an ultra fast 500 cars but ultra slow 10000 cars garage. Dont tell me why.
The worst part about it is the fact that it's slow regardless of how many cars are or aren't in it.
 
Can I just say, for the record. The game would feel much more complete without the stockyard. The idea of having over 1200+ cars in the game, but only been able to stock 500 cars in the garage is just... boring. I would much rather get rid of the stockyard than to have Course maker in the game. Call me crazy, call me what you want but its just my opinion. I mean, the game feels like a demo kind of with the limiter. Use to love collecting the cars, and tuning all the different versions to compare. So, ignore what I previously said in this thread. If there was no stockyard, I reckon GT6 would feel much more complete and a longer game in general because you would be able to collect cars without hassle. And also maybe without the stockyard in my opinion, their wouldn't be an "end" as the name of this thread puts it because it would be fun collecting all the different cars, would give us something more to do. :boggled:

The silly thing about this is that your garage limit is simply a setting in your save. I have had mine raised to 1,000 ages ago by someone with modding abilities and it works fine since. I currently have 700 cars in my garage and I don't experience slow saving or loading, it's nowhere near my bloated GT5 save in its late stages. I have no clue why PD don't allow to raise this limit in the options. It's like FoV settings, it's essential in my view and it's there, you just can't access it legitimately.
 
Last edited:
Can I just say, for the record. The game would feel much more complete without the stockyard. The idea of having over 1200+ cars in the game, but only been able to stock 500 cars in the garage is just... boring.
Not boring, incredibly frustrating!

I absolutely hate it to constantly move cars over to the stockyard, just so that I can get a new car. The insanely long loading times don't really help with this. Oh and there was the bug that erased your stockyard... awesome.

Luckily, it's extremely unlikely to see something like this is future games, the PS4 should be more than capable of quickly displaying a garage with a few thousands of cars.
However, if they decide to keep it for GT7...
 
I miss the fast 2000 cars garage in GT5 than an ultra fast 500 cars but ultra slow 10000 cars garage. Dont tell me why.
Raising the limit to 2000 would be perfect for me. I could have every car in game immediately accessible, and have room for multiple copies of certain cars (I did that a lot in GT5, because some cars I found looked brilliant in more than one color).

The silly thing about this is that your garage limit is simply a setting in your save. I have had mine raised to 1,000 ages ago by someone with modding abilities and it works fine since. I currently have 700 cars in my garage and I don't experience slow saving or loading, it's nowhere near my bloated GT5 save in its late stages. I have no clue why PD don't allow to raise this limit in the options. It's like FoV settings, it's essential in my view and it's there, you just can't access it legitimately.
I am...EXTREMELY jealous of you.
I would PAY someone to allow that kind of mod in my game, even though it's hardly a mod, or even a change at that matter.
Heck, even if PD gave the option to buy more garage space, I would do it for sure.
 
And that's a fabrication.



At no point did I say that I knew the reason - I merely said that I was aware that there is a good reason and a good reason why it cannot be shared.

You've contorted that into me and Jordan knowing what it is.
Eh... I don't think you can fairly call that a fabrication or contortion. For sure he's making some really huge assumptions (like how all of the site staff are privy to said internal PD struggles), and repeating them in thread after thread as fact for months, but I really don't understand how this:
Sure, it'd be nice to know what the hold up has been, but it doesn't affect the hold up - you could just take the fact that at least Jordan and I know what it is and think that it's a good reason (to a certain extent) and unfortunately something we can't directly share yet.
Can be interpreted as anything else other than exactly what he's saying you said. I (and I'm sure others did as well) absolutely took from the disaster that that thread devolved to to mean that "Famine and Jordan know what is going on, can assure the reason it is happening is valid, but are unable to comment further" which was why my worries about the Course Maker were completely placated; and I don't see how statements like the above or this one:
There is a good reason for the unexpected hold up and it is simply for the best that we don't share what that reason is until SCE share it
Should have been interpreted to mean something more like "Famine and Jordan know there is a reason and are led to believe it's good but couldn't say what it is even if they knew (which at least Famine doesn't)".
 
Last edited:
Eh... I don't think you can fairly call that a fabrication or contortion. For sure he's making some really huge assumptions (like how all of the site staff are privy to said internal PD struggles), and repeating them in thread after thread as fact for months, but I really don't understand how this:

Can be interpreted as anything else other than exactly what he's saying you said. I (and I'm sure others did as well) absolutely took from the disaster that that thread devolved to to mean that "Famine and Jordan know what is going on, can assure the reason it is happening is valid, but are unable to comment further" which was why my worries about the Course Maker were completely placated; and I don't see how statements like the above or this one:

Should have been interpreted to mean something more like "Famine and Jordan know there is a reason and are led to believe it's good but couldn't say what it is even if they knew (which at least Famine doesn't)".
The first quote is taken from a response where I point out that Jordan knows at least what information I know, so if you're assuming I know you must assume that Jordan knows - which leads one to the conclusion that if I know what the reason is, Jordan also does. If you're going to conclude that, you should take away the fact that if we both know and think it's a good reason that we aren't directly sharing yet, it's a good reason. That doesn't necessarily mean that I do know what the reason is - but if I do, Jordan will too.

The second quote, as you point out, only says that there's a good reason and not that I know what it is.

Again, I'm sure Jordan is better informed than I am, but he at the very least knows exactly what I know. I'm only privy to the information I need to run the blog - which is how it should be.
 
I haven't fabricated anything in my post whatsoever . But the facts speak for themselves and users are free to make their minds up and cross check everything themselves . If there's something I haven't thought of , and you keep reiterating that point , then that's fine . When the truth comes out of PD we'll see for ourselves if the reason is acceptable or not .
In the context of this thread, that's an amazing statement. Remind me not to put you on one of my juries.

If I weren't leaving to sail for the day, I'd reduce your statements to syllogisms and expose the plethora of logical fallacies.

SMH
 
In the context of this thread, that's an amazing statement. Remind me not to put you on one of my juries.

If I weren't leaving to sail for the day, I'd reduce your statements to syllogisms and expose the plethora of logical fallacies.

SMH

Then what's your reason for quoting me ?

Feel free to pick apart whatever you like . Doesn't guarantee you a reply on your return .

For a user who likes chucking around big words you sure don't seem to have read your AUP regarding textspeak . Maybe you should try that first before trying to look clever perhaps ? 👍

@Tornado - Yup . I was waiting for others to notice that .
 
The second quote, as you point out, only says that there's a good reason and not that I know what it is.

Eh?

...you could just take the fact that at least Jordan and I know what it is and think that it's a good reason...

How do you expect anyone to interpret that as you and Jordan not knowing what it is?

Frankly, I'm not entirely sure why you started going down the rabbit hole of attempting to share that there was a "good" reason but that you couldn't share specifics. But you did, and you were fairly clear about it at the time. I didn't and don't see much room for misinterpretation, because if there's one thing you're very good at it's making clear posts.

That you're now trying to back out and claim that maybe you don't know the reason is...puzzling.

Stick to your guns. If you know and can't tell, then so be it. If you think it was a mistake ever letting on that you knew the reason in the first place, say that. If you made repeated and very specific mis-posts in that other thread that led people to believe that you knew something you didn't, then say that.

If the reason has since changed and you now don't think it's a good reason...hell, I don't know. I already said that I thought you made a mistake getting into this. That's one of the reasons why.
 
How do you expect anyone to interpret that as you and Jordan not knowing what it is?
What I expect people to interpret and what they do are not necessarily on the same diagram - after all they interpreted Jordan's caution that GT7 wouldn't be at E3 as a comment that GT would be at E3 but not called GT7... That was amazing. But to reiterate:
The first quote is taken from a response where I point out that Jordan knows at least what information I know, so if you're assuming I know you must assume that Jordan knows - which leads one to the conclusion that if I know what the reason is, Jordan also does. If you're going to conclude that, you should take away the fact that if we both know and think it's a good reason that we aren't directly sharing yet, it's a good reason. That doesn't necessarily mean that I do know what the reason is - but if I do, Jordan will too.
One only has to look at the post in its original context - a rebuttal to someone who suggested that if I were anyone else, people would be calling on the staff to make me provide proof - to see that it's not a statement that I know any one specific thing, but to point out that if I know it, Jordan does too and one should take the fact that we both know as reassurance that it's true...

The fact that this is being interpreted as both Jordan and I knowing this reason is again indicative of what I mentioned above about E3/GT7.
Frankly, I'm not entirely sure why you started going down the rabbit hole of attempting to share that there was a "good" reason but that you couldn't share specifics.
This is the definition of "moderation" - preventing something from running away with itself uncontrolled in one direction.

Members were letting their overactive imaginations turn into pretty appalling statements of fact that could not be supported. There is a specific word for that and I have no intention of letting this site - one viewed habitually by the creators of the title itself - become a testbed for courts, but even notwithstanding that, the constant abuse levelled against various people (for no better reason than random conjecture) is so far beyond acceptable conduct that it's utterly unwelcome here. I don't wish to stifle debate and discussion, nor do I wish to ban people for what they think are opinions but they're stating as fact for their own protection.

Unfortunately, as we saw with Jordan's comment about E3, it seems that the more delusional members will absorb reassurance into their delusions and make it even worse. Have no fear though - we've learned our lesson. We cannot make specific, unequivocal statements on the forums, so we won't.
That you're now trying to back out and claim that maybe you don't know the reason is...puzzling.
I'm pointing out that being aware of a reason and being aware of what that reason is are two complete different things. That's not a reversal of position, but the same one...
 
Last edited:
I'm pointing out that being aware of a reason and being aware of what that reason is are two complete different things. That's not a reversal of position, but the same one...

I suppose, but it would be odd to say that you believed the reason would be one that most people would consider to be a "good" reason if you had no idea what it was.

I mean, I know nothing and yet I'm "aware" that there must be some reason for why the Course Maker isn't released. We live in a causal universe, everything has a reason even if it's only "Kaz sold the code to SMS in return for a GTR, a ton of smarties and a beach towel". I don't know what the reason is for the CM not being released, but stating that there simply is a reason is not really saying anything at all.

I don't really want to get into the quote mining game with you, but there are several occasions where you strongly imply that you know what the reason is. Most of them are strong enough that without evidence to the contrary it's a totally reasonable assumption that you know what the reason is, given that you're talking about things like "it's not ours to reveal" and so on.

If you don't know, then say so. Otherwise it's totally reasonable for ordinary readers to assume that you know the reason based on what you've already said. If you'd like to correct that assumption, then please do.

If people want to go back and read the posts in question they're easy to find: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/so-about-that-course-creator.328427/

That's the thread. Search for posts by Famine.


Personally, it makes no difference to me. Information in your head is no good to me, and while I trust that you have the welfare of the community at heart I have no trust that things won't change at PD between now and release, rendering any information you have moot. You could tell me what the reason was right now, and I would still be reserving judgement until I'm actually playing the CM on my own machine.

PD have :censored:ed around with this for too long for any information from any source to be worth anything to me. Including directly from PD and Sony. They do not manage the customer side of their information well.
 
I suppose, but it would be odd to say that you believed the reason would be one that most people would consider to be a "good" reason if you had no idea what it was.
Felt, not believed :D [/cross-forum gag]

Perhaps "trusted", maybe. After all, just as I'd expect that people who use GTPlanet trust us as a source, we also have sources that we trust. If one of those trusted sources tells me that X has happened for reason Y, but they can't tell me reason Y, I'll take that as good enough. I guess I'm just more trusting than I am trusted.
I don't really want to get into the quote mining game with you, but there are several occasions where you strongly imply that you know what the reason is. Most of them are strong enough that without evidence to the contrary it's a totally reasonable assumption that you know what the reason is, given that you're talking about things like "it's not ours to reveal" and so on.

If you don't know, then say so. Otherwise it's totally reasonable for ordinary readers to assume that you know the reason based on what you've already said. If you'd like to correct that assumption, then please do.
I've never said that I do know, nor have I ever said that I don't know. I've said that I'm aware that there is a reason, it's a good reason and that we can't share it.

I'm happy for people to assume that I do know - and thus Jordan also knows. I'm happy for people to assume that I don't know. I'm not happy for people to assume that the reason is what they just thought of and no other reason can possibly explain it and OMG PD ARE THE WORST AND LIARS AND STEALING OUR MONEY ON FALSE PRETENCES etc. etc. etc.

That being the point.
If people want to go back and read the posts in question they're easy to find: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/so-about-that-course-creator.328427/

That's the thread. Search for posts by Famine.
And if we're just going to be going right back to rehashing that thread and going over and over and over about who knows what and why, this thread will meet the same fate. There's no purpose to it, save for feeding the delusional - which is exactly what I want to avoid. Since we've now learned we can't do that with words, we'll have to do it with moderation tools - which is saddening to me.
Personally, it makes no difference to me. Information in your head is no good to me, and while I trust that you have the welfare of the community at heart I have no trust that things won't change at PD between now and release, rendering any information you have moot. You could tell me what the reason was right now, and I would still be reserving judgement until I'm actually playing the CM on my own machine.

PD have :censored:ed around with this for too long for any information from any source to be worth anything to me. Including directly from PD and Sony. They do not manage the customer side of their information well.
Not necessarily putting stock in even concrete information is a fairly sound mindset - after all, even absolutes in this industry can change at the last minute.
 
Felt, not believed :D [/cross-forum gag]

Lol, I should have seen that one coming. ;)

I guess I'm just more trusting than I am trusted.

I think it's more that you're damned by association, unfortunately. Ultimately, your information comes from PD, even though the rest of us don't know if it's directly or not. As I said, I wouldn't believe it if PD themselves told me it was coming out tomorrow, so unfortunately any information that you have is in much the same boat.

It's not so much about not trusting you, it's about not trusting where that information comes from.

I'm using myself as an example, but I think there are more than a few people who feel similarly.

Not necessarily putting stock in even concrete information is a fairly sound mindset - after all, even absolutes in this industry can change at the last minute.

I guess, but it's possible to take announcements from most companies reasonably seriously in that if things change significantly they'll tell you.

When Blizzard announces things, they're usually pretty solid about it and when things go wrong they make public retractions and explain to the extent that is reasonable. SMS gets all kind of crap for pCARS being buggy as all get out, and rightly so, but the customer hears about them trying to fix it. Kunos keeps people in the loop about the upcoming content that they've already announced. Rockstar kept pushing news releases to remind people that they hadn't forgotten about heists, even though there was never really any new information to give.

Polyphony is one of very few large modern developers that has such an inconsistent record of releasing information that it's really hard to put any credence in what they say before you actually have the product in your hands. Most big devs have it together enough that when things inevitably change, they're able to communicate that and manage the community reaction.

Polyphony's response when things go wrong seems to be radio silence. That's not good business.
 
Well, PD way of comunnication stayed roughly the same in the last 17 years.
They are one of the most closed game developing company I know (I'm sure some of you know more then I do).

PD way is not wrong or right, it's just diffrent (the "old" way).

Most game companies today are more open then PD. I don;t have any knolige about the gaming buisness but I don't think Sony help that with the communication thing.

I don't understand what T12 meant but for me it sounded like 'something went wrong with Gran Turismo and they can't say what (Probaly wrong, I'll be happy for any corrections [ I know they didn't said wrong and other things I wrote]).

But please, lets just leave the CM thing. It will come when it will be ready, just leave it.
 
TJC_69 Said
You are aware of the reason...
Famine Said
And that's a fabrication...At no point did I say I knew the reason
Famine Said
I'm only posting to say there's a good reason for the fact that the course makers schedule is not what people may have been expecting and it's neither because PD has overstretched itself and the tech nor because they're holding out on fans...
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/so-about-that-course-creator.328427/page-12

I'm not trying to play quote wars here either , and i'm not looking for another course maker thread to start . However , I do not fabricate anything in regards to what I post . In this quote you quite clearly state what the delay " isn't " due to . And you couldn't possibly state what the delay " isn't " due to , without having at least an understanding of what the reason for the delay " Is " due to .
I understand the reluctance to keep rehashing the topic , and I do not wish to continue it either 👍
 
In this quote you quite clearly state what the delay " isn't " due to . And you couldn't possibly state what the delay " isn't " due to , without having at least an understanding of what the reason for the delay " Is " due to .
Why not?

This is your problem.
 
Why not?

This is your problem.

Why not ? Quite simply as you couldn't know what it isn't without knowing what it is . You can't rule out any possibilities like technological restraints or feature withholding without prior information to convince you otherwise . You wouldn't post against the AUP in regards to correct information , let alone drop both reasons into the forum without having the confidence that your information on those 2 possible outcomes were not the reasons for the hold up .
 
Back