POLL: Will you be disappointed in GT6 if they removed B-Spec?

[Stigsblkcousin]

That was only one reason that I gave why GT5 endurance races bear no resemblance to real ones, I could go on but I'm sure you already know most yourself. Point is if they make it as realistic as possible then an unrealistic save can be argued against quite strongly. As the 24hr races in GT5 are unrealistic then there's no real justification for leaving out mid-race saves, because to put it simply, it's not really making it any more unrealistic than it already is.

Or another thought is if someone wants to do the race without saving the game, by all means they can do it that way and stop worrying about how other people choose to play it because it really won't affect them at all.

So because they left out a few realistic details, throw out all of them??

 

[Shinzah]

<snip>
Besides, a bit of healthy banter never hurt anyone 👎 Gives me something to do at work all day

Isn't that a little lazy?

By the way, if the now 53.62% of people didn't raid threads to complain about B-Spec (Or pretty much everything else, right down to one thread detailing low polygon background people in photomode.) the other 46.35% of us wouldn't have to be baited into these pointless flamewars.

You may be sick of hearing it, but majority rules and as you have so kindly pointed out, the majority "hate" B-Spec.

The majority is sick of hearing about people who like B-Spec.

I hardly call a 53/46 spread a "Majority". More like a "Slight Margin."

 

[Stigsblkcousin]

You may be sick of hearing it, but majority rules and as you have so kindly pointed out, the majority "hate" B-Spec.

The majority is sick of hearing about people who like B-Spec.

Being in the majority doesn't justify anything. I'd rather be right by myself, than wrong with a group.

 

[Villain]

It's a pretty simple concept... Are you saying you don't understand how B-spec required time and resources to develop?

No, I'm saying that there's no way that you can definitively say that resources were taken from one part of the development process to make room for B-Spec. Kaz Yam, or any other person who knows the inner workings of the GT5 development process, can say this. You can not. You can only assume.

No insight is required, it's very simple

You're right, any moron can assume anything.


--------------

Yes, I do understand how the allocation of resources works. But you have no facts. Such as: the size of the development team or the breakdown of the division of team resources (time, money, labor, capital, etc.) to different areas of the game. We can only guess as to the give-and-take that occurred during the development process. I, for one, do not like to speculate or assume anything, because that's the fast track to putting your foot in your mouth.

Now, if you want to research all of this stuff to prove me wrong, be my guest. Otherwise, you're just posting nonsense assumptions while simultaneously :censored:ing and moaning.

Get off it.

 

[Stephen220378]

So because they left out a few realistic details, throw out all of them??

A few? How about almost everything a real endurance race is all about.

Another fairly major point: How about the term "endurance"? Surely you can't do an endurance race with an indestructable car that nothing can go wrong with? Isn't that defeating the purpose of the term endurance?

 

[CarreraGT]

No, I'm saying that there's no way that you can definitively say that resources were taken from one part of the development process to make room for B-Spec. Kaz Yam, or any other person who knows the inner workings of the GT5 development process, can say this. You can not. You can only assume.



You're right, any moron can assume anything.


--------------

Yes, I do understand how the allocation of resources works. But you have no facts. Such as: the size of the development team or the breakdown of the division of team resources (time, money, labor, capital, etc.) to different areas of the game. We can only guess as to the give-and-take that occurred during the development process. I, for one, do not like to speculate or assume anything, because that's the fast track to putting your foot in your mouth.

Now, if you want to research all of this stuff to prove me wrong, be my guest. Otherwise, you're just posting nonsense assumptions while simultaneously :censored:ing and moaning.

Get off it.

Wow, you are dumber than I thought

 

[panjandrum]

I had to answer "not disappointed" because I think GT5 is a clear example that PD needs to really concentrate on getting back to what they used to do best: Numerous fantastic tracks, excellent physics, a full-on single-player career mode, etc. And then add world-class multi-player on top of it. I don't have anything against B-Spec. I don't enjoy it much, but I don't mind it being there. What I do mind is that at some level it must be taking away from the development time that so obviously needs to be spent elsewhere. I see some argument here about that, but even if they only spent a total of 1% of their man-hours working on B-Spec mode, GT5 clearly shows that that 1% could have been better spent...

(Personally, I would trade the entire B-Spec experience just for a Premium Yellowbird and Citta di Arria back...)

 

[habanosbooie]

No, I'm saying that there's no way that you can definitively say that resources were taken from one part of the development process to make room for B-Spec. Kaz Yam, or any other person who knows the inner workings of the GT5 development process, can say this. You can not. You can only assume.

This is a horrible forum full of crazy people.

 

[cicua]

Now, if you want to research all of this stuff to prove me wrong, be my guest. Otherwise, you're just posting nonsense assumptions while simultaneously :censored:ing and moaning.

Get off it.

So what is your claim? Are you saying that the entire B-spec mode, driver setup, aging/strength/mood algorithms, different balance of xp/cr rewards, trophies, testing, etc, just came into being; invented itself with zero man-time involved?

If not, you have to agree that is must have taken some resources. Logic fail for you.

 

[White & Nerdy]

I wouldn't mind at all.

 

[Louielouie3]

I'd be dissapointed if B-Spec was removed, but if the A-Spec Endurance Races can't be run with both A and B-Spec drivers in GT6, they might as well remove B-Spec.

 

[Villain]

So what is your claim? Are you saying that the entire B-spec mode, driver setup, aging/strength/mood algorithms, different balance of xp/cr rewards, trophies, testing, etc, just came into being; invented itself with zero man-time involved?

If not, you have to agree that is must have taken some resources. Logic fail for you.

Wrong, I'm saying we don't know the extent of the resources taken and the effect that had on other aspects of the game. Please read more closely.

 

[Villain]

Wow, you are dumber than I thought

It's so nice to see that you returned with some facts. 👎

 

[CarreraGT]

Isn't that a little lazy?

Lazy? Yeah probably

By the way, if the now 53.62% of people didn't raid threads to complain about B-Spec (Or pretty much everything else, right down to one thread detailing low polygon background people in photomode.) the other 46.35% of us wouldn't have to be baited into these pointless flamewars.

And no one is forcing you into flamewars. If someone disagrees with your comment, chances are they will reply. That's just the nature of the forum.

Maybe if there were no threads about B-spec, people wouldn't have a reason to complain in the first place. Kidding, just trying to stir the pot

I don't particularly like hearing people whinge about the speedo in the Miata being out by 15% or trivial things like that so I just go to another thread. Luckily there are plenty to choose from

 

[Stephen220378]

Wrong, I'm saying we don't know the extent of the resources taken and the effect that had on other aspects of the game. Please read more closely.

We really don't need to see the GT5 development diary for proof do we? I mean some things in life are just plain obvious, this B-Spec taking up time and resources that could and should have been applied to something more important is one of those things.

 

[machschnel]

I hardly call a 53/46 spread a "Majority". More like a "Slight Margin."

Actually, that's the definition of majority.

Being in the majority doesn't justify anything. I'd rather be right by myself, than wrong with a group.

I see what your'e saying. Maybe you have advice for the democracies of the world? All their elected-by-majority governments are not "justified".

 

[Shinzah]

Lazy? Yeah probably

Productive members of society must love you. I'm presently out of work, and would enjoy working all day long (omg! work!) perhaps if you told me where you were employed, I could work out a deal where you can sit here all day and not have to do that whole tedious go-someplace else to forum surf thing!

I don't particularly like hearing people whinge about the speedo in the Miata being out by 15% or trivial things like that so I just go to another thread. Luckily there are plenty to choose from

Plenty of threads complaining about SOMETHING, that is. All of it is trivial.

 

[Shinzah]

Actually, that's the definition of majority.

This is not a democracy or a company where you can justify a "Majority" by a poll with over 50% stake. A majority on a forum, or anywhere practical for that matter, has to be justified by a more then 60/40 margin, otherwise your just pandering that because two or three people more on one side care more about something on the other side that makes them the bespoke majority, that's not the case when there's nearly equal stakes.

 

[Villain]

We really don't need to see the GT5 development diary for proof do we? I mean some things in life are just plain obvious, this B-Spec taking up time and resources that could and should have been applied to something more important is one of those things.

I really don't see a point in arguing my point further. Personally, I'm happy with the game. I don't mind B-Spec at all. The game isn't perfect, but then, I've never seen a perfect game. I am, however, encouraged by how PD have shown iniative to patch and update the game. The game may have released sooner than they would've absolutely desired, but at least they have put out 1.05 with the promise of continuing updates.

I also don't see a point in airing out coulda/shoulda/woulda scenarios. It's a moot point and you can't change the past. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[CarreraGT]

Productive members of society must love you. I'm presently out of work, and would enjoy working all day long (omg! work!) perhaps if you told me where you were employed, I could work out a deal where you can sit here all day and not have to do that whole tedious go-someplace else to forum surf thing!.

It's a slow day, it happens. You might want to be a little bit careful when measuring people's "productivity" to society when you yourself are out of a job.

Plenty of threads complaining about SOMETHING, that is. All of it is trivial.

That's what I mean. No point complaining about people complaining because it's all trivial

 

[machschnel]

This is not a democracy or a company where you can justify a "Majority" by a poll with over 50% stake. A majority on a forum, or anywhere practical for that matter, has to be justified by a more then 60/40 margin, otherwise your just pandering that because two or three people more on one side care more about something on the other side that makes them the bespoke majority, that's not the case when there's nearly equal stakes.

Ok, I'll allow you to change the definition of the word to suit you, but when/if the ratio does reach a 60/40 level, would you stop chastising the "Anti B-Spec Brigade"?

 

[Predwolf]

Yes.

 

[Shinzah]

It's a slow day, it happens. You might want to be a little bit careful when measuring people's "productivity" to society when you yourself are out of a job.

I'm out of a job, because when the american auto industry outsources to mexico because of a high canadian dollar, our factories tend to DIE laying off thousands of tradesmen.

That's what I mean. No point complaining about people complaining because it's all trivial

Heres another point though, Theres no sense in people complaining about complaining about people complaining and then complaining some more about something so unremarkably childish as a feature in a videogame.

I'm defending the mode because I like it. I'm defending the whole GAME because I like it. Liking something and being part of the community of forums for that something jusitifies my personal role. Hating something and sticking around to complain about it on a forum thats probably ment to facilitate a positive community, doesn't.

I'm guessing this poll should say "Who Bought GT5 to come to GTP and air every dirty laundry that PD has ever produced for excruciatingly low gain.

 

[Villain]

Besides, a bit of healthy banter never hurt anyone 👍 Gives me something to do at work all day

I missed this one. Ha! I'm at work, too.

I'm still getting work done, but my ADHD won't let me sit and do one thing at a time. Gotta love these forums!

 

[gl3nb0ts]

I really wouldn't miss it. I got up to endurance races in A-Spec and am starting B-Spec out of sheer boredom. Just telling my guy, speed up, slow down, etc., just really really boring.

 

[Jamezy10]

i would love to see them go.

 

[TheToad263]

I would be happy if they doubled the A-spec and got rid of b spec, all b spec is is a way for people to grind for cash but without getting a-spec experience points... i don't get how people can be so lazy that they want a racing game that actually does all of the driving for them... stupid to me...

all that being said, i voted meh, when is the next patch coming, im bored with gt5 right now. I want more a-spec...and or special events.

 

[LarqueFausse]

Would I be disappointed? No.

However, I'd rather that they make improvements to B-spec to make it a little less monotonous. Continuously pressing the same button for 24 hours straight is not fun at all which completely defeats the point of even playing video games. Like many of you, I'm guilty of simply equipping bob with a far superior car than the other AI drivers and leaving the PS3 on all day while I use the TV for watching movies or playing xbox.

B-spec in GT4 was better if only because you didn't have to press the same button every 8 seconds. And it gets even better because it was possible to speed up time which helped a lot for the longer races (Le Mans could be done in 8-9hours).

If B-spec was all about taking on the role of a race director, then it should include mroe than just when to go fast or slow. I for one would like to see stuff like weather reports and the ability to cut re-fueling short.

Also, a general improvement to the AI would be a godsend. I know that the Historic race has frustrated many of us and I know my bob has missed numerous passing opportunities elsewhere.

 

[Stephen220378]

I really don't see a point in arguing my point further. Personally, I'm happy with the game. I don't mind B-Spec at all. The game isn't perfect, but then, I've never seen a perfect game. I am, however, encouraged by how PD have shown iniative to patch and update the game. The game may have released sooner than they would've absolutely desired, but at least they have put out 1.05 with the promise of continuing updates.

I also don't see a point in airing out coulda/shoulda/woulda scenarios. It's a moot point and you can't change the past. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I'm not saying your point is wrong, in a literal sense it's correct. However forums seem to be the one place in life where common sense is unacceptable and cold hard evidence must be produced to back up every claim and prove it's validity, when in reality the claim is so obvious that it's unneccessary.

 

[Crumpet]

I wouldn't mind B-Spec if it didn't affect the game completion. I don't want to play it, yet have to..