Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Gran Turismo 6' started by Earth, Aug 10, 2012.
GT isn't a real time strategy game. In case that wasn't plainly obvious.
In an rts it's part of the strategic element to the game, choosing which tech path to go down. It's not a pure time sink, because removing the time element would change the strategy of the game massively.
Having oil changes or not doesn't change anything in the racing. It just makes it take longer to get from race to race. If that's the intention, you might as well just have a race cool down timer, wait five minutes before you can race again.
That has to change. Cars should get dirty in GT6
I'd rather a fee subtracted after race and maybe a little animation of the work being done
Read what I said again and try to be constructive. Thanks.
GT also wasn't some half-assed photo game to start, but it added that element.
My real point was GT clearly is adding RPG and strategy elements. Most of it didn't succeed. But some COULD succeed if done well. So I pointed out other games that have lengthy waiting elements that could be seen as time-wasting because you literally have to wait for them and they borderline on being too real because, after all it's "just a game."
Imari, I appreciate the intelligent response. I'm just playing devil's advocate anyway.
What if you lose that car for those five minutes, but strategy-wise, it forces you to use another car or to have a second car ready to go? Probably overkill, but like I said, it depends on how it's implemented.
I'll also admit I wouldn't mind if in the game I wreck my car that it's no longer usable and I have to buy another one or wait to get it repaired, but I'm nutty hardcore like that so I don't expect GT to go that route.
"Could" = not certain = you are not sure = you don't believe in your idea.
In the end maintenance in car games/sims is just a waste of time and energy. While people are stuck in menus or pressing random buttons what they are not doing is playing the game. With that said, I'd remove maintenance entirely: no restoration, no oil change, nothing, and I don't get how can anyone ask for more annoyances.
Also, GT6 badly needs to improve the car buying system. There's absolutely no need to farm for months just to try one car. Everything is so tedious in GT5, whereas in most other games it's just a matter of going into arcade mode (98% of content available) or buying the car separately in one second (not in 10 minutes like gt5).
edit: already posted on this thread lol. Now that it's been months since then I'll reply to this post once again, with a different answer:
Before I said I'll only buy the best console of the next gen, which will probably be the new xbox so if it comes to the ps4 = not buying gt6.
What I now think is there are tons of alternatives on plenty of hardware, so if GT6 comes to the ps3 but is underwhelming (like gt5 was) then I'll simply not buy it no matter the low cost in comparison to the ps4, because right now I can play better games than gt5 and for practically free considering the hardware I already have. Maintenance, menu system, car buying and all that will play a major part.
I'm pretty sure that's not what could means in the context of these ideas, but OK.
The Maintenance that's there now is a "cool" holdover feature but really useless. If you're going to have maintenance, build game mechanic into it.
If you drive like crap and crash, or thrash your motor and tires, that is what should need maintenance. Have the tire wear be more realistic so that a tire can last mutliple sessions but eventually needs replacement. Motors need rebuilds if you are constantly driving on the rev limiter.
Reward better driving by having repercussions for poor driving. Tie it to a better damage model, because the one in their now blows. If I wreck, the car needs body repair and such.
If it's just "replace stuff over time" then just pull it because it's more of an annoyance than anything.
And there goes any possible feelings of individual car ownership the GT series tried to convey.
Whats your definition of best console? All the specification rumors (which have been proven accurate so far) point to the PS4 being 20-30% more powerful then the Xbox Durango.
Where can you play games for practically free? I notice alot of PC gamers saying that recently. How can any console compete with free torrents.
Tech trees are very different from what's in GT and they're fundamentally linked to the gameplay itself. Even if GT were to have some in depth maintenance feature, it would still have nothing to do with the gameplay and would be competing with your time.
Racing and car maintenance are two different things, and most people only want to do the first thing. The whole RPG thing just won't work in my opinion. I'm fine with RPG's, but anything they'll add from them into GT is likely going to be a waste of time.
Has GT ever succeeded? GT Auto has made me feel nothing but disappointment. If you want ownership, why not visualization and customized performance. That not only sounds a lot more effective, but also would actually add to gameplay.
Free on PC basically means you get the entire game, minus some specific stuff. You then pay for that specific stuff if you want it. Basically, super demos. Digital Combat Simulator works this way - you get the entire map, can make missions, play online, and use player created content for free. You get the Su-25T (a specific plane). If you want other vehicles, you need to pay for them.
As it's currently implemented, I agree it doesn't affect gameplay. It's tedious oil changes, chassis maintenance and engine rebuilds that take too long, but that's because the interface stinks and is too slow. So much of that stuff should be notified to you while you are on the garage screen, rather than going all the way to GT Auto.
I don't think tech tree/car maintenance is as different as you do. To me, having to park your car for a few game days while they slap on a turbo and completely gut the car to put in a roll cage isn't much different from waiting for new combat units to be developed. Risk/reward plus a noticeable delay (wait 5 minutes, 5 game days, whatever), which was my original point. Now that I think about it, the game days don't even mean anything in GT, so that's a waste.
It could be interesting, but they need a real career mode where your choices matter. If they stick to the same gameplay they've done for the past 16 years, then sure it's tedious and wouldn't be fun.
I suppose it's a difference of opinion regarding gameplay. I see it that as being racing. If you consider building up a car garage as part of gameplay, then the 5 day wait would mean something to you.
This is exactly what I want to avoid. I don't want a career mode, I just want racing, tuning, painting.
If it's optional fine. If GT adds a mandatory, true career mode that puts as much focus on managing cars and what not as it does driving, I would consider the game completely dead.
No, it hasnt fully succeeded yet. But its like B-Spec. It has promise but the proper execution hasn't been there, leaving both modes/functions feeling somewhat wasteful and needlessly time consuming. I dont think its time to cut both yet. If PD cant get it right on the 3rd go around, then they never will, and the modes/functions then need to be cut.
Sounds like a microtransaction nightmare, where you end up spending way more then a normal priced game. PD mentioned the possibility of something similar way back around GTHD and the reaction was so negative the idea was never heard of again.
So a straight up question, where does the enjoyment come from with the proposed advanced maintenance?
If somebody has to tell you then you'll never enjoy it.
I'll never enjoy it no, I'm asking what people who would find enjoyable about it. It's a simple question.
Real racing teams replace brake pads and rotors, sometimes even mid-race, they rebuild engines after each race, they change clutches (which burn out quickly on most high performance cars or if you arent careful) etc etc
Its about giving you a real race experience. Not just the driving, but experiencing all facets of racing.
Its like how the F1 games have you start in the pit garage with the monitor in front of you instead of out on the track. It helps pull you into that world better
I also want my Gran Turismo car to be different then someone else's. While paint jobs are a start, maintenance pushes it further. If the driver across from you is in the same car as you, a Ford GT, what separates them? Just a paint job? I think it would be better if one of the cars was dirtier then the other, or you could hear the brakes squealing on one and not the other.
Personally, I would prefer aftermarket tuning parts with varying levels of performance to give each car character and individuality instead of maintenance, such as different tire brands or turbos with varying levels of performance (less lag vs more lag and more power), but thats probably unlikely. So maintenance is a necessary evil.
I think B-Spec is (or was since GT4 did it much better) fine. For one thing it's optional. Secondly, it's kind of needed when you've got 24 hour races.
On the other hand, I don't see maintenance amounting to anything. I don't really see potential in it at all, it just takes time from things I'd rather do. If I can ignore it then it's fine, but if I have to deal with it, it just takes away from the game.
Going back to the ownership thing, it just doesn't work. No matter what they try it won't. It's not a real car, you're not actually doing anything with the car, and I've only really felt ownership through owning something.
It depends, I've only ever actually spent money on one series that does this. It's $40 for content, buying all the planned content between now and ~2016-2020 could cost $1000-$2000. But I feel that the price is worth it since each module is basically equivalent to a standout game by itself.
PD's idea was shot down because it was basically a way to charge you more money for the same amount of content you would get in a normal game. Maybe if racing games with hundreds of cars were unheard of back then, it might have worked, but they were trying to sell GT4 with slightly better graphics for twice the price. Free to play gives you a fully working game for nothing, but then for added cost, you get a bit more. What's important is how much added cost you need to pay and what it's paying for.
Well, you might just have someone else do this for you.
Why not have them be mechanically different? My Ford GT might have a rear wing I designed myself. Yours maybe has reworked suspension geometry or a custom engine.
I don't think so. PD could do some very simple things to give us loads of customization.
They do, yes. The same people that do that don't usually drive the car as well though.
See above. The real race experience for a driver doesn't involve maintenance or washing the car.
Yes I agree, for the driver.
As Exorcet says, plenty can divide them. THe pure mechanical side of them for a start, unless it's a spec race you probably haven't built your car up the same as someone else, so you might have more power and weight, the other guy might be less power and less weight. Then there is the visual, different paintjob, different aero parts could be possible. When I'm racing I'm really not going to notice if the other car has some dirt or has squealing brakes. Well maybe the latter and I wouldn't mind seeing that appear in longer races, I just don't want to have to do the repairing side of things myself.
Yes, so would I, and I don't see why it's more unlikely than the advanced maintenance ideas that have been mentioned.
Wouldn't you agree that people that only wanted racing have arcade mode? Remember how GT2 even separated the two modes by discs? If you wanted straight up racing, pop in the arcade mode disc. If you wanted the in-depth RPG-esque qualities, you went simulation mode, so it was more than just racing. It was buying, tuning, maintenance (though limited for the time), race modifications, etc. I think GT served both crowds.
I always thought they would keep expanding simulation mode, but it sorta fell short once PD went nuts with making the graphics super detailed and adding stuff like photo mode (not knocking it, but it's definitely nothing to do with racing.) Career-modes and detailed maintenance felt like the next logical step to me. A-spec is already a bland, hollow career mode in a way.
I'm getting away from the idea of how far car maintenance should go, but I really think the idea of it has been a part of GT since the beginning. It just never went anywhere. Some care, a lot don't apparently. Oh well.
If it was fixed, then yes. This would be ideal.
As it is now no.
This is not ideal. Arcade mode did not have all the cars, you still had to go to simulation mode to get them. You also could not set up races with any degree of control. In GT2 in particular, forget racing race cars. The AI would only use road cars.
Arcade mode should be replaced with a mode based on those used by high end simulators. Remove all the game elements (unlocking, "challenges", story, etc) and just leave cars, tuning, tracks.
I don't think anything can be justified with tradition. Yes, GT has always tried it. Doesn't change my mind, it's still worthless and it should be dropped.
Still, as you say, some care. So make it optional.
Maintenance should only apply if you tick Simulation Level 10(or whatever). Damage on, if a bumper comes off or a mirror or headlight, etc. a trip to GTAuto after the race sees the little yellow shirt guys animate replacing your missing/damaged parts. If it was a short race and bent steering/chassis was not performed in a pitstop it happens in GTAuto. I doubt we'll see animations beyond oil and tyre changes. The maintenance side of things may get too complicated for the NEXT GEN GT gamer. We can't increase displacement any longer and RM conversions are done behind closed doors. If brake wear and overheating is incorporated in GT6 great for us but, I think photos and vehicle count appeal more to PD in terms of THE LOOK, rather than THE FEEL of the franchise.
I know your post wasn't fully fleshed out, but a "sim level" needs to be avoided. There is no reason why heavy damage needs to be tied to maintenance, for example. Just list all the options and put an on/off box next to them.
I agree. I'm for keeping things as they are. I'm all about watching my replays when I'm not watching real racing. GRAN TURISMO has already gone above and beyond making dreams of my drawings coming to life. I really don't see an in-depth maintenance featuring in a GT game. I feel for Kaz to do maintenance, he would want it to be a Community thing(Avatars meeting at a host garage or lock up and replacing stock suspension springs with some bought from the ASM online market- I don't know) or during a hot lap at Tsukuba blowing a piston at Mini Trackday, the race starts in 37 seconds and it takes 35 seconds to repair your car and you need to borrow a friends Mini that is set up to race at Le Mans. Stuff like that.
I think it's pointless. I know it's "The Real Driving Simulator", but it's just a waste of money, in my honest opinion. Just putting it out there...
You know what would be good?
An option where when you need to do .. for example a chassis rebuild, someone (GTAuto guys) do it automatically for you .. and charges you to make it fair for people who wants to actually do the maintenance.
If you get tired of gong to GTAuto and doing your general maintenace you just go to settings and tick a box, and viceversa.