Kaz interview on Eurogamer - Standards are here to stay! Poll added

Discussion in 'Gran Turismo Sport' started by Johnnypenso, Jun 27, 2014.

?

Kaz says the standards are going to be in GT7. Is this a deal breaker for you?

  1. If standards are in GT7, I'm out.

    171 vote(s)
    19.5%
  2. I will buy GT7 regardless.

    498 vote(s)
    56.9%
  3. On the fence, I'll wait for the reviews and then decide.

    206 vote(s)
    23.5%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Luminis

    Luminis

    Messages:
    9,294
    Location:
    Germany
    It's almost ironic that their attempt to create assets they wouldn't have to remake for the PS4 ultimately led to them having PS2-era assets on the PS4.

    1.: We could go into the moral side of outsourcing, seeking cheaper labor and all that. That'd end up being a huge debate in and off itself, though, and I most certainly wouldn't start it with the outsourcing of video game assets, but with the production of the hardware. Which, to my knowledge, is causing far more harm than the 3D modeling.
    2.: Even the higher quality models will eventually stop being relevant. Even the premium cars aren't perfect recreations of reality. They're arguably going to stay in use for longer - but, then again, more ressources went into them, necessitating a prolonged use to make the higher investment worthwhile. I'd be inclined to believe that creating the car models twice to a lesser level of detail might even consume less ressources overall than PD's attempt to be way ahead of the time while producing the assets for the first time, but that's just an assumption.

    Which I'd support - if I was convinced there was a tangible benefit to it. Which I'm not, for reasons stated previously.

    What you're discribing sounds more like what Slightly Mad Studio's got going on with Project CARS than what PD's doing with the GT franchise. The assumption that the premium car models are fit for a life-long project is questionable, to me. They're going to be outdated, sooner or later. Might be they'll look very good throughout the PS4's life cycle, but afterwards?

    The only models that will serve for such a life-long project would be ones that are almost perfect recreations of real life, including compatiblity with stuff like damage modeling, upgrade systems and whatever else. As impressive as the premium cars are (and they're very impressive), they're not there yet, I'd say. I mean, Project CARS one-ups them already, imho. And yeah, I do realise that that's a bit of an unfair comparison. I'm just making a point, though.
     
    Zuku and Fat Tyre like this.
  2. Fat Tyre

    Fat Tyre

    Messages:
    1,334
    Location:
    Australia
    A guitar will do what you want it to do only if you have the skills and talent of a Steve Vai or a John Williams, etc. That's why quality is important, you get less surprises and more control...

    Going back to sims, yes all games compromise somewhere. You just said it and proved my point once again, GT compromised quality in favor of quantity whereas other games such as PCars or Forza have been reluctant to do so. Their only compromise was...quantity*! With Forza honestly I thought I would miss some cars but the car list has proven to be much more varied in my opinion. In GT6 you can't drive a Ford Sierra or a 1950s or 60s Formula 1 car for instance. So you lose some, win some. Plus although you have "only" around 300 cars you can do engine swaps, drive train swaps, etc. Another plus is that there are no duplicates, you get the feeling that every car put in there is special.

    If you would watch that video you would see that Darin actually did like the game, he only had reservations with how poor it was in some areas, especially sound and A.I.

    Another point as to why visual quality is important in these games is that we don't have cars. We only get 3d models that coupled with sound samples and physics fool our brain into thinking or believing we are driving them. The better these are the more we can immerse ourselves into the game, that is why I'm dying for the final Oculus Rift to come out. I also never realized how important sounds were until I played Forza at home (I had seen youtube videos but it is a whole different thing once you try it).

    To sum it up GT is very comprehensive while other games are smaller in terms of content but surpass GT in terms of quality which was the only point I was making.

    *To be fair Forza also made a compromise when deciding not to introduce Weather/Time variations but they did it so as to maintain 1080P/60FPS because that would have a serious impact on the driving experience and sense of speed.

    Great point. :)
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2014
    Zuku likes this.
  3. Speedster911

    Speedster911

    Messages:
    4,170
    Good point that last one. I'd pick steady 60 fps driving over night and weather any day.
     
    Zuku and Fat Tyre like this.
  4. Zuku

    Zuku

    Messages:
    1,063
    Location:
    United States
    That in bold is what I've been trying to get at. People want quatity we also want quanlity, but if there is none behind it doesn't matter. Actually GT needs to be a well-rounded product it hasn't been since GT4.

    GT5 I didn't know what direction they wanted to go seemed like they wanted to do everything ran out of time. GT6 till this day I still don't know the direction at all. Except heavy heavy focus on quality of cars with nothing to surround it.

    I still remember taking one of the premium cars think an NSX around Ascari Track I think that's what it was called, and just being dumbfounded in the fact it was a new track and it practically was boring/lifeless.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2014
    Fat Tyre likes this.
  5. Griffith500

    Griffith500

    Messages:
    8,532
    That in bold is not quality, it's quantity. Hence compromise.
     
  6. Luminis

    Luminis

    Messages:
    9,294
    Location:
    Germany
    The swaps are more of a quality thing, though.
     
    Fat Tyre and Zuku like this.
  7. Zuku

    Zuku

    Messages:
    1,063
    Location:
    United States
    No it's quality just because you might not agree doesn't make it so. You want quantity that's your definition of quality as far as GT we get that, but the rest of us out here that know better, and seen GT for what it could be GT1-4 we want quality the F1 series right now at least 2012 as it's the only one I've played has more quality in it's game alone compared to GT5-6 combined by a mile.

    Just booted it up again not long ago, and still amazed at the atmosphere in that game. The only thing about F1 games is just that no variety, and that's understandable because that's just what it is.

    Edit: Another thing I made a typo in the last post I'd rather someone tell me the typo them be a smart*** about it though. :rolleyes:

    My point still remains beyond Physics what else is really good about GT6 as a game right now? I'll give you the Premium Cars, Certain Tracks, even Photomode, but after that you start losing it.
     
    Fat Tyre likes this.
  8. Griffith500

    Griffith500

    Messages:
    8,532
    Not as far as making the game is concerned, it isn't. That's the whole issue, is it not?
     
  9. Fat Tyre

    Fat Tyre

    Messages:
    1,334
    Location:
    Australia
    The compromise was quantity sure. You get around 200 cars out of the box plus I don't know around 90 more with DLCs. But what I am saying is that although it has fewer cars once once you start customizing them you end up with thousands of different cars so you never feel like the game is short on them. Plus you can get roll cages and body kits, you can take a normal Peugeot 205 and end up having a Pikes Peak version. If it would have been PD they would have presented the customized 205 as a different car and increased the car count.
     
    Last edited: Sep 6, 2014
    SimTourist and Zuku like this.
  10. Griffith500

    Griffith500

    Messages:
    8,532
    Yes. Because they spent time to allow different things to do with the cars instead of making other cars. It's quantity (of man hours spent) spread differently.

    I'm quite shocked that "quality" has been abused to this extent in discussions.
     
    Tenacious D likes this.
  11. Fat Tyre

    Fat Tyre

    Messages:
    1,334
    Location:
    Australia
    And it payed off. They were able to release a full next-gen game without compromising quality on launch day. So hats off to their time management. With PD you will have to wait to probably 2016 to see GT7 and it will be a last/current/next gen game.

    It is amusing how you are so easily shocked but things like PD's constant delays, unfinished games, broken promises, poor quality assets, etc. don't seem to bother you at all. gt.png
     
  12. Speedster911

    Speedster911

    Messages:
    4,170
    JUST noticed this:

    "My dream is to influence car companies to make their cars sound like vacuum cleaners, I am obsessed with them. One day it will come true." Kazunori Yamauchi

    :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
     
    Zuku and Fat Tyre like this.
  13. Griffith500

    Griffith500

    Messages:
    8,532
    It's got nothing to do with time management. It's about paying the least for the most work, getting more man hours for less money. In a race to the bottom, what happens to quality?

    And anyway, who says the problems with the game don't bother me? I just don't believe that your naïve and shortsighted "ideas" are actually the right thing to do, in the long run. Why not run two experiments: one short term, the other long term, and see what happens? I'm genuinely curious.


    Now, can you actually answer my question: how does modeling more custom parts equal better quality? Surely that's quantity.
     
    hall90 likes this.
  14. Zuku

    Zuku

    Messages:
    1,063
    Location:
    United States
    It's almost over for me just bought Dirt 3 and GRID WOW! The problems I have with GT6 at least for Dirt 3 I feel as though it's not there at least so far.

    Still though this is what has become of GT I've learned through the PS3 generation to go out and find new companies to support. Cause the ones during PS2 era became full of themselves which is why we got what we have. Also blame Wall-street lol I don't know if it's the case, but have this feeling investors putting there hands in some of these gaming companies pockets that never bodes too well.
     
    Speedster911 likes this.
  15. Fat Tyre

    Fat Tyre

    Messages:
    1,334
    Location:
    Australia
    Are you really that thick? It had everything to do with it. They re-worked the entire game to bring it up to "next-gen standards". Time management is about setting short, mid and long term goals. It has to do with setting realistic, achievable targets as well for that matter, unless you want to keep your consumers waiting for years (Hey Kaz, How's that 100 x 100km course maker going?). It is about setting priorities, managing your resources in a smart way, etc. The did a tremendous job at it. Yes they outsourced the modeling, (Or parts of it, I don't care. As a consumer I look at the end product) but those 3D models do not make the whole game. Outsourcing was a time saving strategy, not only a financial one. It allowed them to focus on developing and having a solid game by release date, great! They simply didn't waste time with stupid, useless features such as "knock cones on the moon", "perfect sky", etc.

    Now please don't forget that they were also able to release DLCs (both payed and free) like clockwork. They had huge projects such as re-doing the Nurb (30 artists/ 13,000 man hours) and yet there were no delays.


    I don't know, ask PD. They sure know about it.

    So what is the the right thing to do in the long run? Is it to keep shoving jaggy standard cars in their games until 2030 until they can finally convert all cars to semi premiums? Never fix the granny A.I? Have their fans pay full price for games that re-use most of their assets?

    Now where do you get from that Kaz's game is a long term project and all the others aren't? If it is, it is a bad example of one. It is old, yes, but it hasn't stood the test of time. It has been patched here and there but they have never sorted out the game's biggest problems. Take sound for instance, since they did such a crappy work to begin with now they will have go and re record everything. They could go and buy existing samples from other companies but no, PD is too proud. They rather have vacuum cleaner sounds than outsourcing some of their work.

    Turn 10 Studios made sure to get the sounds right from the start and looks like SMS with PCars will have no problems with them in the future as well. Regarding graphics SMS can now output their game to 12k resolution, How's that for future proofing? Same goes for other areas and if they are start stinking they fix them, they don't let them sit and rot. T10 had a partnership with Pirelli for years, that helped develop their tyre models (you can change your tyre pressure in the game, it is awesome!) and now they have one now with McLaren to learn about and use data regarding aerodynamics. Do you think they would go those lengths if it would not be a long term project?


    If you would have Forza 5 you would understand. You see, there are nearly 300 cars. T10 didn't bother simulating anything more than this. Most of those (haven't used them all yet) cars have different body kits. Now all of these cars and their body kits have been modeled to the same high standards, this ensures quality (no "PD standard car" equivalent in the game). These combinations provide quantity while maintaining visual consistency. Also liveries are developed by the community, this also saves time. In short there is quantity + quality.

    One question for you. Since you say you "like cars, end of" why don't you buy Forza 5 as well and play both? They are pretty similar, after all Forza is clearly based around GT. You will get awesome physics as well as cars and tracks you will not find in GT. Plus you will get to enjoy a next-gen (actually we should call it current-gen now since they've been out for over a year :) ) game now and it will make the wait for GT7 shorter.

    I don't know who is to blame. I also had a similar experience, many of the game franchises I loved are now dead. Silent Hill went down the crapper, same happened to Tekken, etc. Nowadays I only have time and patience for racing games. I wasn't that excited about PCars but now I'm dying to try it. I'm also considering buying a gaming PC and saying bye bye to consoles, so that would make my XBone the last console I ever buy. That's pretty weird considering I thought I would never get an Xbox and would only buy PS and GT.

    pag.jpg
     
  16. Speedster911

    Speedster911

    Messages:
    4,170
    I had big expectations from Silent Hill and Tekken as well. I still haven't finished SH. I suppose better games came around. Alone in the Dark anyone? I used to love and I mean TRULY LOVE playing Tekken; inviting my buddies over only to have their rears handed to them! Ahh... good times! Law, B.Fury and Eddy were among my top favs. Anyway, those are dead now. It would be interesting to see a photo-realistic version of Tekken with more realistic physics and fight moves. But I know that's just wishful thinking, ain't never happening. Silent Hill's atmosphere was top-notch. They really should make another game.

    Gaming PC eh? Man, I say go for it. I can't afford any for the moment! If only I could, I'd get an X1 just for the Forza games and keep a PS4 to enjoy the multi-plats and exclusives. Okay.. I'd stick to the X1 for the exclusives too! Anyway, grateful I still got my 2010 X360 purring away like a kitten. Got a major backlog to get through anyway.

    BTW, I must say I admire T10's approach to evolving the Forza franchise. Focus on audio and physics from the very start was a super-wise move! What's more is they built fresh assets for current gen. I get so over-anxious sometimes when I think about what could be possible with FM6!

    Here's hoping I save enough for a current gen console.
     
    Fat Tyre likes this.
  17. TeamCZRRacing

    TeamCZRRacing

    Messages:
    1,936
    Location:
    United States
    I wouldn't expect so much for pCARS. Trust me, it's a good game, but the physics are in a state compared to GT. If you're willing to give up physics and car count for good sound and graphics, go ahead. Otherwise, stay away.

    I think you'll like this video quit a lot, then. :)

     
  18. Luminis

    Luminis

    Messages:
    9,294
    Location:
    Germany
    If you want to define quantity as the amount of man hours that goes into a game, everything is quantity. Doesn't matter whether the games utter crap, like Alien: Colonial Marines and the man hours went into deceiving potential buyers into believing it's a decent game, whether the time's spent on creating premium cars, fixing bugs or cutting content from a game to sell it as DLC later on.

    Spending your time on 10,000 diferent cars with PS1-level 3D models would be equally considered an act of quantity as creating 5 absoultely perfect, life-like cars that can have every single nut and bolt swapped, every body panel modified and where even the door cards will display physically accurate crumbling upon being T-boned.

    In the context of this discussion:
    Quantity: Adding as many cars as possible by whatever means necessary.
    Quality: Achieving a certain level of quality for all assets of the game.

    PD's dead set keeping the standard cars to have a 'variet' and 'more complete' car list, so they're adding PS2-era models to meet that goal. Clearly a focus on quantity.

    Slightly Mad Studios is dead set on having the highest possible level of quality on all cars in Project CARS, so they're only adding about 70 for launch. Clearly a focus on quality.

    Quality is a result of how the available man hours are spent. How much you're paying per man hour has little to do with what they're assigned to.

    Ensuring that your cars are compatible with one of the game's overarching features (in this case, customization of the exterior) can very well be considered a matter of quality.
    ISR seemed to like the physics well enough.



    "I really think that this... Project CARS will give everything on the market a run for its money."
    "Physics feel really, really good. You can realy tell what the car's doing."

    That's quite something to say about a game that's still in heavy development. So... Trust someone who's been posting nowehere but the GT forums on here for months over guys who're reviewing racing simulators for a living? Eh... ;)

    So, yeah. "If you're willing to give up car count for good physics, sound and graphics, go ahead. Otherwise, stay away." Sounds more like it, from what I've seen and heard.
     
  19. Speedster911

    Speedster911

    Messages:
    4,170
    I can't view the vid unfortunately due to my location. What's it about? Can you post the youtube link? Maybe I can get it working that way.
     
  20. Luminis

    Luminis

    Messages:
    9,294
    Location:
    Germany
    @Speedster911
    Here's the link.

    It's about a demo to a "game" called P.T. (which stands for "playable teaser", go figure). After beating the demo, it turns out to be a new entry in the Silent Hill franchise, called "Silent Hills". Here's the link to the game's page on IGN.
     
    Fat Tyre likes this.
  21. Griffith500

    Griffith500

    Messages:
    8,532
    No, time management is managing your time to meet goals. You've only described having different goals. I love how you call me thick when you're conflating the choice of development strategy with the competency to carry out that strategy.

    The way you put it (by saying "time management", specifically), it's like you think PD made use of the same resources, tried to reach the same goals and achieved less, all because they forgot to schedule, or something. In reality, they chose to ignore those resources and set different goals for themselves.

    You don't like that, fine; it doesn't make them bad at time management, it just means they're not making a game for you. Just like any number of other developers; why single PD out?

    I meant in terms of development costs. PD don't outsource to developing nations (as prolifically, at least), so their development costs per man hour are inevitably higher. What happens when everyone tries to do the most work for as little cost as possible ("race to the bottom")? We'll be getting a lesson soon enough, I'm sure.

    PD can choose to make the AI better, or not - that's one thing. How they choose to actually achieve that is open to interpretation - that's quite another thing. Try not to conflate those two, either.

    They could target a long-term goal, perhaps a difficult refactoring to achieve something new that's sitting provocatively out on the horizon, or they can continue to fiddle with small changes and keep the same architecture, gradually adorning it with bells and whistles until they can't put off the big change any more (which they wouldn't have even started working on yet). Which is better? Who knows? Let the experiment run, I say! Those shiny things on the horizon won't get here if we don't go out and fetch them! Interestingly, physics is the only thing that has consistently improved with each and every GT game; and lo and behold, it's got about all the bells and whistles it can handle: it needs something entirely new to improve substantially (PS4 might be a good opportunity, if PD are ready).

    Also, people paid full-price for a game with more current-gen cars in than GT3 (the previous "first game on a new system") had, which was also full-price. If the Standards are so bad as you say, then they aren't even acting as a selling point (except through the whole car-count thing, which is naughty), and so they are not technically generating any revenue (assuming you're right). The bulk of the costs that revenue has to cover are due to the new assets only, and so the price itself (return on / recovery of cost) has nothing to do with the Standards anyway - it reflects more the work that PD did on the Premiums (which they budgeted for). Ironically, if PD had made 1000 cars to Premium quality, they'd need more sales (or a higher price) to break even (because making more cars at the same quality costs more) - is it guaranteed that a game like GT (that sells essentially because it has a picture of a car on the case) would sell as much more (i.e. "enough") with so many more cars? Of course, if PD outsourced, you'd be demanding the price be lowered, then, too?

    You have no clue what you are talking about! :lol:
    Out of everything you could have mentioned, you chose sound: big mistake. The sound is the epitome of PD's long term approach. They could have easily reused the recordings they had and made samples appropriate for PS3; it turns out they've been aiming for something different (there is evidence in the games, regardless of whether Kaz had announced it), and as someone who dabbles in this kind of thing, that makes me very happy indeed. But, it's taken them longer to achieve that, because it's harder to do.

    A "project", or game series can be long term (or not), but very few games are made with long term plans, because publishers focus on the next installment, next year (or the year after, now they've learned to relax a bit). So individual installments of a long-running series will tend to have short term goals because of the short term targets, and because of the heavy handedness of publishers with targets, emphasis is on those short term goals rather than long term. Flagship titles like GT or FM are a little different, sure, but GT is so in the extreme (which I think is justified just because it's interesting).

    PD got the sounds right from the start, too. For their era. The sounds in GT6 are (mostly) older than those in the original Forza game. Again, PD aren't doing the same thing as everyone else (i.e. Forza is actually a very different game, and always has been, despite how it came to be), because they have their sights set on something bigger. I think we can afford one game that luxury; you can guarantee that if PD get it right, other developers will take notice and consider whether it's appropriate for their own game.

    That about resolution is nonsense, by the way; it's as though you know nothing about real-time graphics rendering, either. PD demonstrated "4k" (multi-display) versions of GT4, remember. That wasn't future proofing (except that the multi-monitor tech carried over to GT5), because a framebuffer is transient; content is not. T10 may well be practising their own future-proofing; however, "future-proofing" to me implies not having to do work again in the future; "long term planning" does not imply the same.

    I'm sure PD could have put tyre pressure adjustments in the game and come up with a fudge in the physics (you know, with Yokohama's "help") so that people who have no idea about anything will be impressed. But the game is full of such fudges already, much as any game is, so I think we can do better than that - that'll take time, though. Neither game's tyre model is exactly stellar; I'd rather PD worked on getting the fundamentals right before adding extraneous features to a flawed system (but then, the physics are more important to me).

    OK, so the body kits have a "quality", that's an obvious thing to say. But body kits themselves are content; they are quantity from a development standpoint (which I know you don't know much about, but hang in there). All content has a "quality", but more content at the same objective quality takes more time: more man hours. Consistency is also separate; it is not in itself a measure of quality, but instead a property (in this context). If what you mean is that you don't like the inconsistency between the quality of the Standards and the quality of the Premiums, then fine; but some people aren't bothered by that, and that's regardless of what they might prefer.

    Following from GT4, PD chose to apply a certain number of people to the task of making new cars for the new game (budgeting). They focused on quality (including using their own staff, trained to make the meshes exactly to the unusual spec), rather than quantity; that's why they only managed 200 of them for GT5's launch, and why the quantity of visual mods was so low (their quality was invariably the same as the cars themselves). If they had more people or more time (or both), they could have made a higher quantity of cars at that quality, and / or more (quantity of) modifications. They spent their time (which they will have managed in some way) making those few cars only. Compromise.

    Probably fearful of a backlash like that they received with GT3 not having enough cars, PD decided to put GT4's cars into GT5 as well (Sony was already getting twitchy about the wait for GT5, so GT:HD - i.e. paid-for direct recycling of GT4 on PS3 - was conceived and subsequently canned; just like GT6 PS4-edition). They needn't have done this if they'd focused more on quantity with the Premiums; i.e. with the resources PD had, if they had decided to make more cars at a lower quality, they might have felt they didn't need to carry the Standards over. So include the Standards in an appraisal of the quality and consistency of the cars in the game by all means, but exclude them in an appraisal of the work PD actually did - i.e. how PD actually spent the bulk of their time, which was making high-quality work.

    The other choice they had at this point was to drastically grow the team (logistical nightmare) or outsource (logistical and creative imprecision and general inefficiency); PD decided instead to gradually grow its own team, probably mainly to avoid quality issues. Remember it was said that the mesh quality of PD's cars is necessary for tessellation (yet more quality!), which was not being used in the mainstream (so contractors would be practically useless without retraining / buying in talent themselves)? Long term plan.


    So, what you're effectively saying is that, when people say "quality not quantity", what they really mean is "I want both, reality be damned". I think it'll be interesting to see where this goes for the mainstream games industry as a whole, because we've been here before. On the other hand, perhaps what you're really saying is "I want quantity of the things that matter to me, and then I'll call it quality".

    I'm not going to buy a new console yet. I'm a PC gamer, first and foremost, anyway, and I have plenty to go at (which is why I think games should be allowed to be different). ;)
     
  22. Luminis

    Luminis

    Messages:
    9,294
    Location:
    Germany
    Okay, not bothering with the rest of the post (wasn't directet towards myself, anyway), but: What backlash?!

    GT3 is the second-highest rated game in the GT franchise, getting a 95 on Metacritic (compared to the original GT's 96). It sold a whopping 14,980,000 copies. That's more than any other game in the franchise. GT4 comes second with 11,730,000 copies and GT1 in third place, managing 10,850,000 sales. That's 27% more than the second best selling entry in the franchise. It should be in the top 50 best selling games of all time, too, if I'm not mistaken and the only game that sold more copies on the PS2 is GTA: San Andreas.

    Yeah, backlash...

    Seeing how GT3 was so well received, how it went on to be the best selling game in the franchise - makes it seem like starting over for a new generation of consoles and building something from the ground up - with a consistently high level of quality - wasn't exactly a bad idea.

    Wonder whether GT3 would've achieved all that had PD added GT2's cars to the game.
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2014
    Fat Tyre likes this.
  23. Speedster911

    Speedster911

    Messages:
    4,170
    Hey thanks for those links, appreciate it! :D

    Looks interesting. I almost thought the guy was CGI! PS4/X1 line up is going to be interesting to see how it unfolds over the next 2 years.

    Edit: Love the blonde girl from IGN..she is SO fine man! Kinda like the girl next door fine, ya know? ;)
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2014
    Luminis likes this.
  24. Griffith500

    Griffith500

    Messages:
    8,532
    No, I was talking about modeling only. One person can make one car, or several body kits. Which do you prefer? That is a content (quantity) choice. The quality of that modeling work is a separate thing.

    Aliens CM was "crap" because of three different, disjointed management periods. Man hours were spent reversing previous development decisions, not just making a scripted demo.

    I think that's obvious in the case of "every body panel modified", and the physically accurate damage is either an extra feature, or is a pre-modeled state (which is quantity in either case). The quality of either of those could be variable, again.

    Except that, in this discussion, "quality" seems to be focused more on features, which is quantity (e.g. things to do).
    And the whole "by any means necessary" just shows the bias inherent in the discussion, as you see it. Quantity is simply the amount of things to see or do; the content.

    "Variety" and "more complete" are qualities, being subjective things. To some, the quality of variety (more accurately: specific model coverage) is more important than the quality of the mesh.

    Actually, they're features: modelled car parts beneath the body panels are interesting things to look at; they're generally great quality, too, which is nice. The act of looking at those things conveys a quality of enjoyment, but only so long as that kind of thing actually appeals to you.

    But how much you pay has an effect on how the man hours are spent. :idea:

    So a car like the 250 GTO is "lower quality" because it has no parts available? Or is it that there is no content made for that car in respect of that particular feature?

    pCARS is very different. Buy it if you like it. I did; but it doesn't scratch all of my itches (I doubt it will when finished, either, but that's not actually an issue to me).

    So by that reckoning far fewer people complained about GT5 than FM4? OK.

    Diablo III sold over 20 million copies, and there was a huge backlash with that game. Similarly with SimCity. Maybe sales and metacritic scores have nothing much to do with what I was talking about.

    There were discussions here that the step back from 650 cars to 180 was disastrous; people were asking for GT2's cars to be carried over as "legacy" assets, something that used to be common once upon a time.
     
  25. TeamCZRRacing

    TeamCZRRacing

    Messages:
    1,936
    Location:
    United States
    Here you go. :)

    Silent Hill P.T. Demo
     
    Speedster911 likes this.
  26. Zuku

    Zuku

    Messages:
    1,063
    Location:
    United States
    Never was a fan of the Horror games, but know that no offense the company behind them got really stupid. I've learned now for awhile it was after GT5 and some other bad game experiences. You're just better off venturing forth and finding what might be out there cause at this rate. At least the rate I'm going I'll get a PS4, and Wii U, but that might be it then onto PC where honestly it seems this type of stuff doesn't happen.

    I've only been playing PC Games on and off, and now for the first time more On, but the more I dive into realize it's vastly different from console world lol.


    I'm in agreeance with what you said near the top of your post PD basically tried to cram it all in instead of as I've said a billion times just break it down. I'll take the hit of only having 300 premium cars for GT5 if it means I get a complete game. I'll even take a hit on the number of tracks that weren't premium like people mentioned Trial Mountain just to get a complete product instead of hey when's this coming. Once you get into that loop it's hard to get out because at least speaking for myself my mind set becomes is this game ever complete?

    In fact just to generalized that's the bad part about PS3/360 era introducing the patches sadly this is the future though.


    Actually just play Dirt 3 again on my laptop(know that's not the best place to play PC games, but...) Fooled around with certain settings and one thing that jumped out to me was when I messed with the trees. Put it between Low and Ultra and at least on my laptop the low setting looked like GT6 on certain tracks which kinda made it worse at least for me. Another thing I will say is Interior View in Dirt 3 is something I want GT7 if they ever do it to have. It didn't feel narrow, close, or feel like just barely fitting. Another thing is the game has the little things like windshield wipers being used.
     
    Fat Tyre likes this.
  27. Speedster911

    Speedster911

    Messages:
    4,170
    Dirt 3 does a lot of "cool" things to deliver the really experience to gamers. I am over-the-top anxious to see what they're bringing to the table with D4.

    BTW, a lot of horror games ain't what they used to be, granted. I remember how the original RE on the PS1 would make me jump off my seat in the dark. This game's worth checking out though: Alan Wake. It's not what you'd categorize as a horror game, but it has it's thrills and chills. You might enjoy it. Good story.
     
  28. glassjaw

    glassjaw Contributing Writer

    Messages:
    1,453
    Location:
    United States
    Fair enough, but that all depends on your definition of what constitutes a complete game. For me, complete means content that is all equal in value - cars that can all be modified in the same way, that all have the same level of rich detail and treatment by the developers. Project Cars will launch with less than a tenth of the amount of cars of GT6, and I'd still argue it'll probably be a more complete game than any Gran Turismo since GT4 (can't say for sure until I actually get my hands on it). Partially because of car detail, but also because it seems like SMS isn't holding off most of the features in post-launch updates.
     
    Fat Tyre and Zuku like this.
  29. Zuku

    Zuku

    Messages:
    1,063
    Location:
    United States
    That's what complete means for me as well $60 game give me $60 worth of content.

    Having the Course Creator would help, and just a robust career mode with livery editor as everyone has been screaming about since GT4 lol.

    This is what people wanted instead what we got is $60 worth of crap that should have been marked down to $20 or even $10 dollars. I mean I just paid $7 for DiRT 3(was on sale), and at least early on I feel like I'm drawn into the game, but that's an early reaction got to wait awhile before I give a better verdict on that game.
     
    Fat Tyre likes this.
  30. Speedster911

    Speedster911

    Messages:
    4,170
    Hey man, you'll love Dirt 3. Personally, I didn't enjoy all the distractions and 'getaways' from rallying like gymkhana, trailblazer, or any event that requires showing off fancy driving skills, instead of actual rallying.

    You might like it though. Wish all Codies racing games were locked at 60 fps. They could do that this generation, who knows.
     
    Fat Tyre likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.