Practice Tracks in Sections in GT5 thread of apples being orange rewindists

[Exorcet]

And a baseball T is almost useless in training someone how to hit a moving ball thrown by a pitcher in real time. Its just like rewind. Sure, if they make a mistake trying to pass a car they can rewind and do it right, but thats only one of millions of possible mistakes. The best way to learn how to hit a ball is to start taking real pitches. The best way to learn how to not make a mistake in a driving simulator is to practice practice practice, learn the limits of your car and your own driving, because your going to make alot and I mean alot of different individual mistakes and the best way to fix these is not to rewind but to learn how to avoid them all together.

A T is a sure good way to learn how to swing and to work on your accuracy. You get to eliminate every single variable related to the pitch. When you've mastered the swing, take what you've learned and apply it to the moving ball.

The question people who make mistakes should be asking themselves is why did I make the mistake in the first place?

If they ran into a car going into a corner they may just say "I braked too late." and then they rewind, and brake earlier.

Was braking too late the only mistake? Thats what rewind teaches them. The truth is he most likely was also over aggressive. He was probably careless too by getting into the corner so deep, risking contact and damage. But rewind teaches him that he just braked too late. Now that he can instantly rewind and just brake a little earlier he does not learn patience nor is he punished. He faces no consequences.

A driver won't base his experience in one single event. He will crash into multiple cars multiple times over a period of time. Each time he'll rewind, and doing this long enough, patterns will emerge. The driver will use they patterns to identify and rectify a problem.

Alot of people were wreckless in previous Gran Turismos because of no damage. Adding damage, in the long run, will make better drivers. Rewind, in the long run, does not make a better driver.

There are huge numbers of GT5P players that I've run into who can drive. GT5P didn't have damage. No old GT had damage save GT2, I eventually learned to drive without hitting cars or walls. I learned to drive to avoid contact at all cost even though there was no penalty. Damage is not guaranteed to make better/worse drivers. It may. Rewind is not guaranteed to make better/worse drivers. It may. Looking at it logically, it seems to me the outcome of rewind will lean more toward the positive.

As a learning tool its about as helpful as training wheels. Lets get past the kiddie stage and get into big boy racing. No baby-sitting here. The master thinks differently then Dan Greenawalt. Greenawalt designs his games so that people who have no real interest in learning how to drive the cars properly can still find some enjoyment in Forza.

As a hardcore sim player, I enjoy Forza and will buy Forza 3. I've seen nothing indicating that it is inferior to Gran Turismo.

My take on rewind, as a learning tool it's about as helpful as full telemetry. It allows to you gain experience faster than just about anything else by increasing the repetition rate.

The master is different. He wants people to learn about cars and how to drive them correctly. His views do not reflect your own.

OK, rewind fits his views.

Again, the master wants people to learn how to driver properly. There is no room in Gran Turismo for a casual gimmicky professional feature that may very well benefit all skill levels like rewind. That is his choice (maybe) and [not as I modified this quote] the majority of Gran Turismo only GTP fans, who think in line with the master agree their own way.

As you gave an opinion, I give my own.

Thats true. The master wants EVERYONE to take their driving serious all the time. He wants EVERYONE to learn how to race properly. Rewind is saying you don't have to stands to help you get better, unlike stnd physics. Again, the master and the majority of Gran Turismo only GTPfans think just like the master.

Strike 1 - Arcade physics, no damage

It shows human nature. They kept screwing around causing large crashes and caution flags because they knew they wouldn't tear up any cars. Alot of people, if they know they can get away with it, will do alot of things.

And just as many will use rewind for practice. Of course I don't need to back this up, as you didn't back the above up.

Let's say you're right though. Let's say tons of people use rewind to blow stuff up. I'll list the consequences that will negatively effect "upstanding GT'ers":

*nothing*

Gran Turismo championship races do not have restarts. Obviously the master thinks you should pay and learn from your mistakes. If the master does not allow you to restart in championship races, would something like rewind, which lets you rewind any mistake you have fall in line with his thinking? No. It doesnt fall in line with the thinking of the majority of GT fans as well as shown by the polls.

GT races allow you to enter cars that automatically guarantee victory, and in GT4, you didn't even have to drive them. GT 1 - GT 4 all rewarded wall riding. Obviously, the master wanted you to grind metal against concrete.

Which is why rewind is useless. It's like training wheels. After a few days the rider will realize how useless they are in learning how to ride a bike and they will ditch the wheels. Same thing will happen with rewind, so why include a useless feature that the majority an unknown percentage of people outside of GTP do not want?

Rewind isn't useless, so long as you cannot take the perfect line in a corner, it's not useless. It gives you the most possible freedom in practicing your technique and takes away nothing from those who do not want it.

It doesn't stop mistakes, no. That's the problem. Practicing and learning the hardway is a better another way to learn how to not make the mistake in the first place, not rewind. To someone very near sighted rewind may sound like a great feature gimmick. But to those who see it for what it truly is and it's long term effects do not like it know it would be a great addition.

Rewind let's you practice an infinite number of ways to recover from a mistake an to avoid it. The other better-in-no-way-at-all way gives you one shot.

The master and me are worried about the long term welfare of new drivers. Rewind does little tons for the long term, may induce good/bad driving habits, and does not impede learning discipline so therefore is not to be underestimated

Pretty self explanatory. You're using the internet is evil argument. Should the internet, the greatest source of communication in the history of humanity be shut down because someone bought an illegal song? Thing about the consequences.

Look at this man. Do you think he thinks rewind is a good tool for Gran Turismo?

That is a picture of a person that give no information at all besides his physical appearance. But look at his work instead. Do you really think he would be willing to sacrifice the good of future enthusiasts just because people misunderstand would be a great benefit for everyone? If he's as wise as you claim, he would rise to that challenge and not bandwagon with the wrong side.

Standard physics is a compromise, and a big enough of a compromise. It makes it easier to drive but is in no way comparable to rewind.

Darn right. Stnd has nothing to do with driving whatsoever. At least with rewind, you learn how to control a car.

Rewind = Training wheels on a bicycle. the ability to download the knowledge of Lance Armstrong directly into your mind.
Standard physics = wider tires on a bicycle peeling a potato (has nothing to do with bikes).

Its a simulation. It's not OK to screw around.

Says who?

Learning how to ride a bike without training wheels may be the hard way but its the right way and will help you learn faster and better then rewind or training wheels ever will.

Prove this.

Then looks like they don't have the natural talent. Should there be different rules in football We can call these stnd rules for those who are too slow, or who cant catch, or cant throw? Maybe give them 6 downs instead of 4, or say you only need 5 yards for a first down instead of 10 or a line on the road that tells them where to go in the race and a car that can't be damage so they don't have to worry about hitting stuff? Rules are the same for everyone Excluding stnd physics. If you can't keep up then its not the right thing for you But if you just need a little extra help, you're more than entitled. You being someone who probably believes in "survival of the fittest" I find it odd that you care so much about the 'weak' and lesser of us.

Sounds to me like contradiction.

I dont think they have rewind, but rather "sector trainers", or in the case of my time spent with Flight Simulator '98, 2002, and 2004 you get to have missions, or in GT's case "license tests", that start you on approach to an airport and you get to keep trying until you get it right. There is no rewind to back up 10 or 15 seconds before landing. You mess up you restart 5 miles out from the airport or in a holding pattern around the airport.

I think they do have rewind with my time spent looking at Forza 3. You press a button and get to practice a track all over again.

And to add to that, you're saying progress can't happen. What if Team Forza were the revolutionaries that said "hey, this is big. How did the world go on without this?" They might not have invented it, but they're the ones who realized what it was good for and promoted it.

Did you know that the jet engine was written off as useless back in the thirties? How many non jet fights have you seen recently?

We know how he thinks because we can see his inner workings through his child, Gran Turismo. know nothing at all in all honesty and are appealing to myths and emotion over reason

If you have seen and played Gran Turismo, you have seen the master his income check.

There is the audience who loves Burnout and doesnt care crap about driving properly or anything like that.

Should GT try and reach out to them? Some people are just hopeless. You think the master should add whacked out features to try and appeal to every single person. Most, including the master will disagree.

Who said anything about reaching burnout fans? Looking at things logically, it would seem the people that some pro-rewinders are targeting are car enthusiasts who can't figure out how to hold that sixaxis exactly right. They have just as much, or perhaps more passion than you or I, but they weren't born into Gran Turismo.

You're really not making sense here. It seems like you want to dig a trench right where you last took a step. You're in, you don't need a helping hand, and all those who were where you used to be, toss them to the sharks.

I think we've proven rewind is about as beneficial as auto brake.

You haven't, and you are coming any closer. You're not even putting forth an argument despite all the words here. You're assuming a lot it seems, and aren't opinion to other opinions. This is what I've read so far sounds like to me, in very simple terms:

"Rewind is bad. Why? Because it's bad, isn't it obvious!"

It's a tool, or assist, but when it comes down to the nitty gritty it becomes more harmful then helpful.

Not really, seems the opposite.

I agree. However if your merely slapped on the hand for every error will you really learn? Will you really be sure not to do that next time?

Rewind doesn't go for hand slapping. It says "you're going to be stuck here until you get it right"

My question to you. Do you think rewind will help someone learn a track better then a sector trainer like the one in GTR2? I'm talking about proper racing line, braking points, everything.

It wasn't to me (I don't think, it's hard sorting all this lol) but:

No, rewind doesn't teach you tracks. It teaches you corners and it helps you out in niche situations. So pitting rewind against sector trainer (which doesn't teach a track either) is pointless. They are partners, they work side by side, hand in hand.

Reasons why drivers make mistakes:

- Driver is not familiar with a course or corner
- Driver is not familiar with overtaking opportunities on a scourse or corner
- Driver is not familiar with the limits of his car
- Driver does /does not display discipline and/but unknowingly over drives car or tries a risky move * I guess what's bold here falls under point 3 though

How do you try and fix these mistakes? Practice such as rewind.

You say fix them by rewinding. The problem is there are millions and millions of situations that may present themselves and rewinding them all will simply not fix the problem over time will make everything better. A new driver will eventually stop using rewind because he will find out that he keeps making mistakes because he simply does not know why he makes them rewind led him to discover the cause of all his mistakes

HUGE, GIANT misunderstanding. Why do you have no faith in human intellect. You seem to think people will outright refuse to use rewind for practicing. But did you ever think people would like to get better? In a way, it seems like you feel that everyone needs to have their hands held (or tied) to do anything the right way. Where does this come from?

In short, there are too many ways a driver can make a mistake and too many variables in order for rewind to be effective.

It's the opposite. Rewind let's them reduce variables and gives them a chance to deal with each specific mistake if they choose. They will not get overwhelmed. How can I say this? Because at that point they'll put down the game and take a break. People can reason. Give them a tool and they'll figure it out. We've had nukes for a while now, the Earth is still here. It's not a coincidence.

Those who don't want rewind are more concerned about the advancement of other drivers then aren't taking reason to heart and are willing to toss those aside those who need a helping hand. Quite honestly, this one of the most astonishing thing's you've said. Before you to newcomers "get with it or get out" now you say you're welcoming them. This is unlike those who want rewind.

Really now, you couldn't say that in any case because one's opinion can be independent of their intentions.

Don't worry though, I know what you're trying to say (I think). Though it doesn't hold much weight.

A sector trainer is more precise, less tacky, and more user friendly then rewind.

Wrong on all counts.

Precise - rewind lets you go anywhere. You can't be more precise. Or maybe you can, sectors + rewind.

Tacky - opinion

user friendly - Dev's presented the ease of use of rewind many times over. It's a draw at worst.

Not elitest. A realist who understands that not everything is for everyone and far sighted enough to know rewind is a dead end.

Me, on myself and those who share some of my opinions:

Not elitest. A realist who understands that not everything is for everyone and far sighted enough to know rewind is great.


This amuses me though:

understands that not everything is for everyone

It kills your argument dead. Not everyone is going to go for your sector trainer over rewind. Might as well do what's right and add both.

Should the master have to cater to those who do not want to do better? It's his choice and I believe he won't. The majority of GTPlanet users agree that there is no need to cater to these people as well. The polls have spoken.

You're right, no need to cater to people who don't want to improve. Don't know why you'd mention it. It has nothing to do with rewind, that's targeted right for those who want to do better.

Again, if what you say is true, any assistance is evil. We might as well outlaw schools, people are taking 1000's of years worth of shortcuts.

They have to do the licenses. It's the only way to progress in Gran Turismo. Can't run in the more advanced races using faster better cars if you dont have your A license. If they're not motivated to get better to waste time for no reason, as progressing GT mode has nothing to do with skill then I suggest they go get a gameshark and get 10,000,000,000 credits and unlock the licenses and cars. Don't ask for the sim to have a baby-sit feature like rewind stnd physics and race line in a race.

Rewind doesn't babysit. There is no reason to justify the statment that one should have to earn entry into a GT race, not is there any way to justify the beliefe that unlocking cars is better than gameshark.

But that's not the issue. Rewind as a game completion tool is just an added bonus that is totally independent of it's training purpose.

More like giving out a fisher price tool set to flunkies and telling them to build a house with no directions. That's what rewind does to and tells newcomers.

Rewind lets them go to a computer, try building a house, watching said house fall apart, build it again, see it stand strong, but go build again and make it better even though it was right the first time.

That is rewind.

The point remains, there already is a fix for those who don't know when to brake.

The point remains, they can be helped in other ways.
The point remains, having only one way is a limit.
The point remains, that not everyone learns the same, this is according to you.

I've had first hand experience with a sector trainer myself, I can't see why rewind would help considering GTR2 broke the track up into sectors usually no longer then 20 seconds.

OK, add rewind anyway because not everyone is the same, and because it won't take a single thing away from sector mode.

Oh, and with rewind you can go back beyond the starting point of a sector and link two sections together, talk about rythm and other such things.

Actually, its not specific. There are thousands if not millions of ways to crash on your own or into another car. Rewinding one crash and you'll end up just crashing slightly differently the next time.

The key is to teach yourself discipline and to practice the course and understand the limits of your car and those around you whether they be AI or real people.

It is specific. You're driving at 100 mph at an angle of 20 degrees with 3 good tires, one bad, 64.92938982347% of a fuel tank with two cars 4.22785875 feet behind you. Sounds specific to me.

But again, this is a communication error. I know what you're trying to say, it's stll not applicable.

There are lots of ways to mess up, but there are lots of chances to rewind. No one is saying that pressing the rewind buttom will make person A Michael Shcumacher the Second. It will take time and practice and use of rewind over and over to get better.

And look at what you're saying:

Actually, its not specific. There are thousands if not millions of ways to crash on your own or into another car. Rewinding one crash and you'll end up just crashing slightly differently the next time.

Unfortunately, it looks like license and sector practice are uselss. They just can't cover it all. Learn one trick, remain ignorant of the rest.

I'm simply saying a racing line is a far better solution then rewind. A racing line says "this is where you need to brake or accelerate". Rewind says "do what you want"

I'm simply saying rewind will help on top of everything else. Going with your example, A racing line says "this is where you need to brake or accelerate". Rewind says "now that you've got that down, wouldn't you like to move to the next level and do it like the pros who don't need a line telling them when? I can help. And you'll only be depending on yourself. Not crutch to falsely raise your hopes"


Now I'm sure you will say "Ha, rewind is a crutch". To that I say, only if the driver does not want to learn.

Says the sim racing industry which hasn't had any new revolutionizing assists come along that I know of.

That you know of. Seems it's still up in the air if they think it's valuable or not.








Disclaimer: I'm sure I made an error trying to organize this, I appolgize in advance.

You know it's true when the game has auto-brake.

On a more mature note, Greenawalt has said over and over again that he want's to make a game that a 6 year-old and a hardcore sim fan can enjoy. A hardcore sim fan can use rewind as a learning tool but he's past the training wheels long ago. We all know rewind is there because of the 6 year-olds.

I wouldn't make assumptions. Show me how someone can get 100% beyond rewind.

 

[pricey2003]

Wow!

You guys need to get some sort of help. Seriously.

👎

 

[Earth]

For those who don't want to read through this I will summarize.

The argument of those who want rewind has dwindled down to the point now where they're simply saying "why not"

Those against rewind have stood firm against the feature, rightfully calling it not needed and a hindrance to driver progression.

I didn't say perfect simulator, in fact I alluded to existing simulators.

You tried to play down the realism of Gran Turismo in order to make a feature like rewind seem more acceptable. It was quite obvious what you were doing.

If baseball Ts are useless, then why are they so ubiquitously used?

Alot of useless things are used in the world.

Useless in teaching them how to hit a ball thrown by a pitcher. When I play with my 7 year old nephew I toss him the ball. I dont set it on top of a T. That wasn't the only useless assist he skipped, he also skipped training wheels when learning how to ride a bike. Training wheels would have just slowed down and stunted his learning.

And I beg to differ that they don't help, they help with the first step which is contacting a stationary target, when you are confident with that you apply that skill to a moving target.

And who besides six year olds need to learn how to hit a stationary object? As Dravonic said is Gran Turismo being made for six year olds? The polls have spoken. We don't need features that for six year olds in Gran Turismo. It gets to a point where you can't please everyone, and rewind is hardly doing anything good for noobs and what not.

Because the process is a multipart one, every part can be imporatnt and rewind addresses one of those parts. Learning to spell doesn't make you a nvelist, but it's sure an important step.

The process of teaching a driver how to race cars does not need to include rewind.

The same way teaching someone how to ride a bike does not need to include having them ride on training wheels.

The example of using rewind was simplified because it woudl be pages to type up every possible thing you could think of to try differently.

The idea that you can type pages and pages of examples in which someone would use rewind shows that it's fighting a hopeless, losing cause.

All the things you say can be contributing factors, and trial and error will teach you how to avoid these errors, rewind just is the most efficient way to focus your trial on your trouble areas.

This is why rewind is not a learning tool but an erase my mistake tool.

If a driver does not understand why he made the mistake rewinding will never ever help him get better. It's not as simple as saying "I just braked too late". It is rarely if ever that simple.

I can remember a demo of Dan Greenawalt racing at Lemans in Forza 3. He made a mistake, and then decided to rewind. He let the game play out. He crashed again.

Oops.

So he rewinded again.

This time he made the corner but made heavy contact with other cars and went off course a bit.

How much did he really learn by rewinding? Little if anything.

Those are assumptions. There are some people who will not improve becuase of damage (they will either turn it off, or just bash into stuff or give up from frustration). People who took it seriously were driving clean without damage before also.

You can call them assumptions, but according to my experience they are fact. Sure, they can turn off damage and drive any way they want to, but I'm talking as if they have damage turned on.

Yes, people who took racing seriously drove carefully without damage in previous Gran Turismo titles. However now drivers can turn it on and force themselves to driver properly, which is the exact opposite of rewind, which does not force you to do anything properly.

And you are right that rewind does not make a better driver.

So why should Polyphony Digital spend one second of their time implementing a feature that does not help drivers become better?

Just like a calculator does not make a smarter math student and having open practice at the track does not make better drivers.

Bad analogy. A calculator does everything for you and does not help you get better. Practicing race car driving on a track helps you get better and requires much more effort then pushing in keys on a calculator.

But having it will allow those who are interested in using it to improve, especially those who the existing set of tools didn't work well for or left gaps for.

What gaps are left? The possibility of a mistake should not be a gap that a simulator should accommodate for. As I've brought out many many times, mistakes can be helpful in learning and becoming a better driver. Learning the hard way is not always the best way, but sometimes some of us have to learn the hard way.

No one is saying rewind WILL make a person better, we are saying it has the potential to be a postitive learning tool and that it has uses in GT that aren't already covered.

It's funny in the damage thread a lot of people said they didn't want damage because they never crash anyway, apparently not having damage made them perfect drivers

The polls have spoken. The majority does not see it as possibly a positive learning tool. Why do you insist that your view point, which is in the extreme minority, is the right one? You're not even too confident in it yourself as you continually use words like "potential" when discussing whether or not rewind will help drivers.

That's your opinion, and it may well be KYs and PD's too, but taht's an opinion about a certain cirumcstance, it says nothign about the logical arguments about why rewind has positive potential.

Positive potential for who? Who will rewind help in the long run? Nobody.

Well I would say how GTPSP is designed shows that KY has at least some inerest in making a game more user friendly. And again, what you say is assumption, not fact.

Yes that was made obvious by including standard physics in GT5P.

Making something more friendly does not mean they have to go down into the gutter and borrow the latest fad feature from a bunch of B list games like rewind.

I don't know how you can know his views...

Again, if you have played Gran Turismo you have a very good idea of what his views are like.

..and ironically I want peopel to learn how to drive correctly, that's why I think having all the tools available is best.

And is rewind up there with a colored racing line, TC, ASM, etc? No. It's a gimmicky feature there just for the 'wow' factor that doesn't try to help anybody in the long run.

It's you who does not want to bother with the kiddie stages and baby sitting, despite the fact that those stages are a very legitimate part of the learning process.

This kiddie stage can be skipped and do not have to be part of the learning process of the majority.

Terms like gimicky are just opinion and mean nothing other than to express how you feel about it personally. And again, you speak as if you are psychic and inside KY's head.

Not psychic at all. I'm no different then a profiler who can walk inside someone's room and tell you their life story.

I have explained how rewind does not say that and at best it says that to you and it's an assumption that it says that to others.

Its no different then how no damage and bad collision physics says to some bounce off walls and use other cars as cushions all you like.

Again, it says that to some but not to others. So therefore Polyphony Digital adds damage and says no to that thinking.

The master thing is getting a bit creepy and if you by GT fans you mean here at GTP, then yes, but if you mean anyone who likes or might like GT in the whole world, I don't think you can speak to that. Remember casuals far outnumber hardcore.

And in the end is Gran Turismo geared to the hardcore or casual?

It's geared to the hardcore, of course. True, there are some features that are there for casuals, but Gran Turismo is all about helping casuals go to that next level. Polyphony Digital does not want to stunt their growth with a rewind feature.

Sure, some or even a lot will. And in the short term especially. But that says nothing about the long term. Despite not having damage in GT, we have developed racers who are very careful about racing clean all the same.

OK, so what's the point of rewind when it doesn't exactly encourage the cleanest driving?

Again, the polls show what GTP thinks, we are the minority when it comes to overall GT players. Again, hardcore is by definition outnumbered by the casual.

And who does Polyphony Digital cater to the most? The hardcore or casual? Obviously the hardcore.

And you talk as if casuals by and far want rewind. Is that really true? You should make a poll. The results will be surprising to you.

Actually you just made my point for me... just like training wheel after using them for a while they will ditch them and move on. Exactly what I have always said and contrary to the popular negative argument.

Why will they ditch rewind? Because they became better drivers and outgrew it, or because they realized it was of no use?

And training wheels are not useless BTW in learning to ride a bike. They let you focus in more comfort and with less frustration.

I disagree strongly.

Everyone in my family learned how to ride a bike rather quickly. I learned how to by being given big pushes in the back yard for 30 minutes. After that I only needed help to get going for a couple of days and I was fine.

Those on training wheels, on the other hand, were most likely still plodding around learning nothing while I excelled.

Practicing and learning are how to stop making mistakes. The hard way is not always the best way. That's where the term work harder not smarter comes from. Rewind is the smarter way to practice by focusing on the trouble areas only.

Trouble areas. Even some of the more advanced drivers have numerous trouble areas. This renders rewind virtually useless as it cannot account for every scenario.

I would actually say to someone very near sighted rewind would seem like a bad feature, but whe you look past the obvious initial fears of how it might be abused and examine the overall learning process, you see in the big picture it's a valuable tool for one step of the learning process.

Sorry, dont see it, and neither does the vast majority of the largest Gran Turismo website on the internet.

It's a valuable tool to stunt someone's growth and hinder their ability to become proper, professional drivers.

Really you are getting creepy here...

BTW it's "The master and I".

Thanks for the English lesson.

I honestly have no way to make such a judgement based on a picture... you are really starting to come across as slightly unbalanced here.

Just as I'm sure you think a profiler can't make a judgement on someone by looking at their car on bedroom.

I welcome you to look up pictures of Kazunori Yamauchi. You will see his personality and demenor comes through quite easily.

Where I have said Anti God and Anti Bible? I said God complex, that's not anti God.

Nice job trying to assume the innocent bystander role. Spare me.

Big enough is subjective, you cannot state that unequivacably and it is not a fact. How one effects the game is apples to oranges compared to the other.

It's big enough because the biggest racing sims out there don't have rewind but only the assists Gran Turismo features. (Sorry but DiRT and Grid do not count as 'big' sims. Forza is 'big' in terms of its sales, but its only including rewind because it's creators bite onto the latest fads)

I think they are both training wheels on a bicycle as I look at them both as a handicap to take the frustration out, let you learn the basics and then graduate out of.

No, they're not both like training wheels on a bicycle. Standard physics can be compared to using a larger bat at first to hit a pitch, rewind can be compared to having the ball attached to the sweet spot of the bat by a string that sends the ball straight to the barrel every time.

Yes I did. And I didn't say anything to the contrary there, I just said it doesn't tell them to do it. You can simultaneously say it's fine if you want to while not encouraging it.

And how does rewind not encourage it?

I might give someone a birthday present and if they want to tear it to pieces, it's theirs, they are welcome to. But I am not telling them to do it.

Well I dont think many will share your view on that. Gran Turismo is Kaz's child and I doubt he likes to see it made a fool of. That's why you don't see large over the top crashes and such in trailers for GT like you do in Forza. Kaz has class.

It's a game, it's a purchase and who are you to say what's ok and not? This is another issue... why do people think they have any right to tell others how to use what they own?

For the 100th time, its not a game. It's a driving simulator. You are suppose to simulate driving. Doing anything else is not in harmony with the simulator's pupose.

I brought that up as the point it made carries over to the conversation at hand regardless of the thread title.

Practice sectors > rewind, again.

It's the right way? How did you get to be the one who decides what the right way is?

Person experience How do you get off telling me I'm wrong? Unless you have personal experience to back it up?

At best this is your opinion, not a fact. And I would say evidence is that training wheels are quite a good way to learn to ride a bike.

Enlighten me with evidence, please.

During the learning process absolutely, this is why football is broken down into age groups with numerous changes to rules and play made to accomodate the players abilities and help them learn by taking away the frustration of things that are beyond their skill level.

Minor changes yes, but do they overhaul the entire system? No. The closest thing I know of changing football is small schools who play 7 on 7 because they don't have enough kids.

I absoultely agree that if a game does not offer an enjoyable experience it is not the place for you. But where we differe is I realize that making a game accomdate a wider audience isn't a bad thing as long as it doesn't damage anyone in the process.

For the 101st time, it's not a game.

It's a simulator and by default it cannot accommodate everyone. Some will be left unhappy. That's life.

This is even more so from a marketing standpoint (and again I point to GTPSP to show PD is aware of that as they have acted on it already).

PD understood that there is little hope of GTPSP being for the hardcore because most can't use a wheel with it, so why bother going all out? They tuned it for the casuals who race on the PSP.

Actually we have had people here who actually train on commercial simulators state that they have exactly that. You can go back to a point in time to practice from there. They probably don't have a cool looking flashy rewind sequence and eye candy, but the feature to go back to a specific time midway through whatever you were doing is indeed there and is indeed a learnign tool.

Are they going back right before a mistake? Highly doubtful.

Dude, super creepy. And remember, what he has done in the past does not garauntee anything about the future.

Maybe not a guarantee, but you can sure get a good idea of what he will do.

Reach out to them? I don't know, but accomodate those who would like to change over? Why not?

Why are they tring to change over? Because they want to simulate racing or because they like the bling of the graphics? If they're in for the bling they have nobody to blame but themselves when they find it too difficult and are unwilling to put in the time to get better.

I don't know how you can speak for most, or who this is most of and I don't know how you can speak for Kaz.

The polls have spoken.

Kaz has spoken through Gran Turismo.

I have heard.

You have not.

And I have, and I am sure others have as well... what's your point? Not everyone is the same you know?

Your more then welcome to make a poll.

There has been no such proof, in fact it's proven (and we can actually prove this as it's in action) that it doesn't do anything for you (you still have to do it yourself unlike things like bspec) and that it isn't more harmful than helpful as it certainly hasn't ruined any of the games it's already in. It's funny the one thing there is actual evidence of becuase it is already out there being used is the thing you choose to discredit while simultaneously trying to use all your assumptions as fact.

Anyone whos seen youtube videos of Forza 3 has seen rewind being abused. There is no learning going on there.

No.

Really?

Well auto brake actually does part of the job for you, rewind just lets you keep trying until you become good enough to do it yourself.

Keep trying? All they will do differently is brake earlier or turn just a bit differently. That does not fix the heart of the problem.

How did people learn before? By trial and error... isn't going off the corner, slamming into a wall or generally loosing exactly what motivated you to get better? Rewind doesn't change any of that, it just lets you focus on improving the areas that are in need of it so you can stop havig those problems.

Rewind does not teach your rhythm, consequences, or discipline.

Trial and error without rewind makes you think about your mistakes more then rewind which simplifies errors.

Some people yes, some people no. It depends on the person, how they think, what works for them and what doesn't. Learning is not a one size fits all tool, different people respond to different things.

Lets put up a poll so we can see 90% of GT5P vote for a sector trainer.

Exactly, and rewind lets you practice the parts that you have difficulty with. Why is this point so hard to get across?

By far the best way to remedy these problems is by practice and trial and error. Not rewind.

I never said fix them by rewinding... I think you have such a preset idea that you can't see what I am really saying...

Scaff said it very clearly in the othe thread https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=3599200#post3599200

He's praising rewind for it's few good uses and ignoring the problems it creates, namely spoiling new drivers.

Its' the same learning by reptition that exists without rewind. When you don't use rewind, you have a bad corner, you come around the next lap, do you just do the same thing again forever and never learn? No, you try something new and you keep trying new things until you figure out what works.

Which is why you have a sector trainer.

I think you guys must have a missimpression of how rewind works or something... do you think you make a mitake, rewind and then you are suddenly magically past the trouble spot? You do realize you have to keep trying the corner until you do it right don't you? You know... learn to do it right?

Yes, that's pretty much how it works.

Dan Greenawalt himself took several rewinds before he got through a corner halfway cleanly.

Of course rewind did not teach him that because he did not know the limits of his racecar he shouldn't have been following the other cars so closely coming up on a braking zone. He should have displayed patience by waiting for the next long straightaway before attempting to pass somebody. He rewinded, got through the corner half way decently and thought he made rewind look great after his 3rd rewind but instead made it look like the pitiful feature that it is.

Actually that is exactly why rewind is effective, you can apply it in EVERY situation you get into. Sector practice is canned scenarios, at best you can set them up a bit.

It's really ironic that the arguments against rewind you keep using turn out to be exactly why rewind is better.

Doesn't matter because every scenario that happens on the racing track is almost always different. You may have rewinded and learned from one, but there will be another one slightly different that will catch you out if you do not understand and are competent with the fundamentals.

From your post it sounds like you are more concerned with keeping bad drivers out of the game than helping them get better. You keep saying things like if they aren't good enough GT is not where they should be.

And after reading posts of those promoting rewind, like yourself, it seems like you guys don't care if they never learn what it really takes to drive.

Here we go with tacky again... that's completely opinion and what does that have to do with anything? I think a purple and black Skyline ACR is tacky... that has nothing to do with how it performs. And I say again, no it's not more user friendly... rewind you literally have at the tip of your figners whenever you want and just get where you want to be, how is something you have to leave your race to go into and then setup or at choose a similar practice section to where you are having problems. It's like saying that exiting the race and going into the tuning sectino is more user friendly that simply pausing and accessing tuning directly from the menu is more user friendly... makes no sense.

Again your promoting the slow, lazy, growth stunting way of learning the art of racecar driving called rewind.

Rewind is not more user friendly because it's not precise and it can become annoying as it ruins rhythm.

No, an elitest who says that those who arne't good enough dont' belong and someone who relies on assumption and faulty logic to project a failure in the face of evidence that such a function will not fail (remember, rewind is already in use in games and doesn't ruin them).

Rewind is a dead end. You've even said so yourself. People will ditch it like they ditched useless training wheels.

However will they keep using useful features like the racing line and traction control? yes.

I don't know what he shoudl or shouldn't have to do, or what he will or won't do. I am not even saying what he should or shouldn't do. I am merely saying that arguments against rewind so far have been flawed.

Again your back to the "why not" argument. I think it's time you gave up and realize when you have to resort to that argument the feature is probably pretty lame.

And saying the majority of GTP users have spoke is like saying the majority of competitors at a BMX competition have spoken, that hardly respresents the whole bike riding world.

It doesn't represent the whole biking crows, but it represents it's audience well. What they say won't vary far from what everyone else says.

Yes you do have to do licenses, and the proof that liceneses are not the end all to learning tools is that we still have bad drivers in GT even after completing the licenses.

Are they better drivers then before they completed the license tests? yes.

Even more so, we have licenses that frustrate some users into just quitting. Rewind might be the stepping stone these users need to get good enough to work their way up through the licenses.

If they quit then they do not have what it takes to be a driver in a racing sim. They are the weakest links, good-bye.

And why do you suggest a game shark which totally does nothing to help someone learn instead of rewind which at least as the potential to help people learn?

I'm suggesting it because I'd rather them use it then force PD to flood Gran Turismo with useless trashy features.

Again, your assumptions about how rewind works is flawed. I suggest you see Scaffs post I linked to above for clarification.

His post is flawed because he only sees the positives, not the negatives.

You are taking the analogy a bit far, but in this case, just because you don't do well in structured learning environment doesn't mean you can't do well with other learning envirnments like hands on training.

I know plenty of people who flunked out of high school or college but can rebuild an engine in their sleep or put a brand new roof on a house.

See this perfectly illustrates the problem with your short sightedness... you make a judgement, then build up evidence for it, rathe than look at the big picture and then openmindedly draw a conclusion.

You assume a flunkout can't do well, when in fact real world evidence says plenty can and many times it's eaxctly becuase the learning tools that would have worked for them were not available to them.

A flunkie can do well in what he is passionate about. For whatever reason he wasn't passionate about school. Should schools give him the ability to take tests over and over again until he passes (rewind) or should they tell him he should study more (sector practice)?

Sorry earth, you are completely off, just like all the vehimently anti rewind people before you... the irony is the correct statement here would be "hello... earth to... earth... anybody home?"

So far all I have seen from the anti rewind crowd is stating how they feel as fact and stating the fears that make them feel that way as more fact when in reality, it's all opinon and pretty flawed reasoning at that.

I think I just set a record for longest WOT!

Sorry, but the rewind crowd only points out the small benefits but ignores the enormous repercussions of such a feature.

A T is a sure good way to learn how to swing and to work on your accuracy. You get to eliminate every single variable related to the pitch. When you've mastered the swing, take what you've learned and apply it to the moving ball.

Your comparing apples and oranges. The training wheels analogy is better.

A driver won't base his experience in one single event. He will crash into multiple cars multiple times over a period of time. Each time he'll rewind, and doing this long enough, patterns will emerge. The driver will use they patterns to identify and rectify a problem.

I think thats a possibility, but a small possibility. Learning to avoid crashes can be accomplished without rewind.

There are huge numbers of GT5P players that I've run into who can drive. GT5P didn't have damage. No old GT had damage save GT2, I eventually learned to drive without hitting cars or walls. I learned to drive to avoid contact at all cost even though there was no penalty. Damage is not guaranteed to make better/worse drivers. It may. Rewind is not guaranteed to make better/worse drivers. It may. Looking at it logically, it seems to me the outcome of rewind will lean more toward the positive.

I can drive, however I was at times wreckless in previous GTs because of no damage.

From simple observation of youtube videos it's obvious to me that rewind will abused in the same way lack of damage in previous GTs was abused.

As a hardcore sim player, I enjoy Forza and will buy Forza 3. I've seen nothing indicating that it is inferior to Gran Turismo.

My take on rewind, as a learning tool it's about as helpful as full telemetry. It allows to you gain experience faster than just about anything else by increasing the repetition rate.

Repetition is useless if you don't understand the fundamentals.

As you gave an opinion, I give my own.

I disagree with your opinion

A poll at GTP is the best it's going to get

And just as many will use rewind for practice. Of course I don't need to back this up, as you didn't back the above up.

Let's say you're right though. Let's say tons of people use rewind to blow stuff up. I'll list the consequences that will negatively effect "upstanding GT'ers":

And just as many will have their growth as drivers stunted.

GT races allow you to enter cars that automatically guarantee victory, and in GT4, you didn't even have to drive them. GT 1 - GT 4 all rewarded wall riding. Obviously, the master wanted you to grind metal against concrete.

But was there restarting or anything that remotely resembles rewind? No.

Rewind isn't useless, so long as you cannot take the perfect line in a corner, it's not useless. It gives you the most possible freedom in practicing your technique and takes away nothing from those who do not want it.

Rewind let's you practice an infinite number of ways to recover from a mistake an to avoid it. The other better-in-no-way-at-all way gives you one shot.

Maybe useless is too strong of a word. Many here, including myself, think rewind will do more harm then good and that there are better alternatives.

Pretty self explanatory. You're using the internet is evil argument. Should the internet, the greatest source of communication in the history of humanity be shut down because someone bought an illegal song? Thing about the consequences.

Your blowing things out of proportion. Rewind will stunt the growth of many drivers...rewindists know this yet only talk about the minimal benefits of the feature.

That is a picture of a person that give no information at all besides his physical appearance. But look at his work instead. Do you really think he would be willing to sacrifice the good of future enthusiasts just because people misunderstand would be a great benefit for everyone? If he's as wise as you claim, he would rise to that challenge and not bandwagon with the wrong side.

If a FBI profiler looked at that picture and could tell if he was married or not, his line of work and other things would you doubt him?

He's not the only one ignoring rewind. All the die hard PC sims ignore rewind, only B List racing games have it.

Darn right. Stnd has nothing to do with driving whatsoever. At least with rewind, you learn how to control a car.

But you dont have to worry about the consequences of bad driving.

It wasn't to me (I don't think, it's hard sorting all this lol) but:

No, rewind doesn't teach you tracks. It teaches you corners and it helps you out in niche situations. So pitting rewind against sector trainer (which doesn't teach a track either) is pointless. They are partners, they work side by side, hand in hand.

No they're not equal. A sector trainer is superior in almost every way. Rewind is not precise.

....

To be continued...

 

[Exorcet]

Your comparing apples and oranges. The training wheels analogy is better.

There is quite a difference between saying something and saying something while backing it up. The above is saying something.

The training wheels analogy is better to you because you've completely shut out the reality of things. You insist people will either become dependent on rewind or use it to do things not relating to racing. Fact is, this would go on without rewind. Rewind does nothing to make people "evil". It's there to help, some will use it to help themselves, other will not. You're not familiar with rewind, so you ignore the good. The fact that it will be as used/abused as every other feature in GT means nothing to you, because you are comfortable with other features.

Steps in learning GT:
1. Lap some tracks, learn basics
2. Basics covered, now find where you have specific difficulties. Blind corners, changing radius turns, etc. Go to them, rewind and sector practice until proficient
3. Take lessons from rewind to races, see how it works
4. If refinement is needed, go back to 2.
5. Repeat
6. Once you've improved enough, put rewind away as a basic training tool. Rewind becomes a "perfection" tool, it will allow you to experiment much better than traditional methods, and will be even better when combined with things like sectors.

I think thats a possibility, but a small possibility. Learning to avoid crashes can be accomplished without rewind.

And I think it's a big possibility. The second sentence is no surprise, it also doesn't contribute.

I can pretty much say "X can be learned without Y" about anything. What you said makes it OK to remove every from GT except a start race button where you only get a random race. You can still learn that way.

If you intend to say that the additional features GT has helps one learn better than random races, you've negated the quote above.

Now the question become, does rewind help. As you insist that practice makes perfect, and rewind is essentially practice, it does help.

I can drive, however I was at times wreckless in previous GTs because of no damage.

OK, I can drive and I learned to avoid being reckless despite the lack of damage. So, evil is not a predetermined outcome. Just because you couldn't control yourself does not mean others should lose out. Think about other people.

Besides, now that you are enlightened, you stand as proof that people can change and overcome temptation. It's another point against your argument. Even if people abuse rewind, they can come around. Everyone on GTP (I'd assume) has overcome the lack of damage. Yet more evidence for rewind. To top it off, you seem content to consider GTP a large population, so if only GTP uses rewind correctly, it should be good enough for you.

From simple observation of youtube videos it's obvious to me that rewind will abused in the same way lack of damage in previous GTs was abused.

Go prove that what's on youtube is 100% of rewind. Prove that it's even 50%. I'll agree 100% that someone will "abuse" it, but I believe 100% that it will be use to practice. I also believe 100% that abuse of the feature will not cause negative effects. Reasoning:

Those abusing it are those who are not into GT to get better. Lack of rewind won't change anything.

Repetition is useless if you don't understand the fundamentals.

So go learn the fundamentals else where. BTW, I learned these fundamentals via repetition. I'd guess you learned them in licenses or races. In other words, repetition.

I disagree with your opinion

A poll at GTP is the best it's going to get

A poll covering a large % of GT consumers is far better than a GTP poll.

And just as many will have their growth as drivers stunted.

But they're the ones who wouldn't learn if rewind was not there. How many people don't learn in GT as is? They exist independent of rewind. And all the aids that are at their disposal don't change their minds. Maybe they aren't so adequate after all. Maybe rewind is the one that will get them interested in learning to drive.

But was there restarting or anything that remotely resembles rewind? No.

That doesn't even matter. Why would it matter? You're own rules were broken before you took part in this argument. You basically were saying The Master projected his will through what was in the game. Wall riding was in the game, could have been easily fixed, was not. Going by your logic, The Master approved of non realistic, not helpful wall riding.

Maybe useless is too strong of a word. Many here, including myself, think rewind will do more harm then good and that there are better alternatives.

I think the opposite.

Your blowing things out of proportion. Rewind will stunt the growth of many drivers...rewindists know this yet only talk about the minimal benefits of the feature.

If this was true, I'd be against rewind. Again, you're just saying stuff. Where is your back up. If there is none I can copy and redirect your words on to infinity like this:

Your blowing things out of proportion. Rewind will increase the growth of many drivers...nonrewindists know this yet only talk about the minimal downsides of the feature.

Now I know here and there you give your side, you evidence, but stand statements like that don't do much. Beyond that, you've accused me of lying, which is ridiculous, and leaves open the question of whether or not you are actually going against what you know to be true just for the sake of tradition.

If a FBI profiler looked at that picture and could tell if he was married or not, his line of work and other things would you doubt him?

I have no FBI badge. His face won't help. His words would help, his works could help (and his works seem 100% consistent with rewind to me), meeting him will help. His face will not.

He's not the only one ignoring rewind. All the die hard PC sims ignore rewind, only B List racing games have it.

Forza has it. Why do you dislike one of the greatest racing games of our time?

But you dont have to worry about the consequences of bad driving.

This doesn't make sense. The only way to progress with rewind is to drive well.

No they're not equal. A sector trainer is superior in almost every way. Rewind is not precise.

Yes, they are equal. Rewind is perfectly precise. You can divide a section of track into infinitely many starting points. What you can't do it select an arbitrary exact start position and arbitrary exact start condition. But that's OK, add track sections to rewind, and then you can.

 

[Devedander]

For those who don't want to read through this I will summarize.

The argument of those who want rewind has dwindled down to the point now where they're simply saying "why not"

Those against rewind have stood firm against the feature, rightfully calling it not needed and a hindrance to driver progression.

I think you must be counting on no one wanting to read through all this to see you are completely off base here...

What you are hearing isn't "why not" you are hearing "You STILL don't have any logical and rational reasons that rewind doesnt' have positive potential?" seeing as how everything put forth against so far is either emotion and assumption, just plain flawed, or both (or I guess you reading KY's mind).

The against arguments have indeed stood firm... in the face of being thoroughly picked apart with detailed reasons why and logical explanations.

Again, Scaff said it quite well here:

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showpost.php?p=3599200&postcount=1278

One could argue (and as I teach for a living I would) that being able to step back from a situation, look at it and figure out what you did wrong, and then try again, in a short space of time is a rather valuable learning tool.

Disliking a rewind feature because you would not use it is fine, but to claim that its no good for allowing people to learn from mistakes is a flawed argument.

For the record I have used such features before (recently in DiRT 2), and it certainly helped when getting to grips with the handling model of the game, allowing me to learn exactly what it would or would not let me do.

As someone who has taught driving skills, the ability in the real world let someone know why they messed up a corner and let them try again straight away would be such a valuable tool its beyond belief.

 

[vaioleto]

I finally kicked devedander out and someone had to give him an excuse to come back. Some of you really do need help.

 

[Bogie 19th]

You know it's true when the game has auto-brake.

Yup, just like restart race and bumpers cars.

 

[Dravonic]

Why don't we go to the heart of the matter here? No endless bickering about every single detail with endless walls of text that are probably causing the moderators to go bald.

Devedander has a valid point about rewind being a good learning tool. I don't think this can be arguable. If it's necessary may be arguable since GT already has many learning tools that are quite good actually but that's not where we should focus.

The main problem with rewind is that it is prone to abuse. We all know how many holes GT have that allow many forms of abuse and discredit GT as a simulator. Adding yet another giant hole is not the way to go. So I believe rewind is better of limited to practice runs, arcade mode and the sort.

Yup, just like restart race and bumpers cars.

I guess it was too much to expect the more mature note also.

 

[Exorcet]

Why don't we go to the heart of the matter here? No endless bickering about every single detail with endless walls of text that are probably causing the moderators to go bald.

Devedander has a valid point about rewind being a good learning tool. I don't think this can be arguable. If it's necessary may be arguable since GT already has many learning tools that are quite good actually but that's not where we should focus.

The main problem with rewind is that it is prone to abuse. We all know how many holes GT have that allow many forms of abuse and discredit GT as a simulator. Adding yet another giant hole is not the way to go. So I believe rewind is better of limited to practice runs, arcade mode and the sort.

If the heart of the problem is abuse, then there isn't really a problem. For one, single player is for the individual to do what ever. Give me a reason why I should be able to tell you how to play.

There is no proper way to play a game/sim. Even if GT was a perfect sim, anyone could make Burnout out of it. Go to test course with some P1 cars. Let the AI go off, player turns around. 30 seconds later, GT crash mode. And he'll have photo mode to record the whole thing. And then he'd upload his replay to youtube straight from the game.

You can't stop it. But more importantly, there is absolutely no reason to stop it. The guy doing that is not doing anything wrong. If he takes it online, it's a problem. But if he just messes around with game, it's not something anyone else should worry about.

As for rewind as a form of abuse, B-Spec combined with lax race entry rules is the primary way to avoid playing the game. Sure it can be race manager mode, but it can also be abused and become autowin or auto-quick money. Why does no one want to take it out? No one loses anything because of the B-Spec abuse. If you took out B-Spec to punish the abusers, you punish the die hard race manager fans.

If you take out rewind to punish the abusers, you let all who would rely on it suffer.

People playing GT in a way that is unsimlike does not discredit GT as a sim. GT has the physics, it now has the damage, it has the accurate car/track models. Just because some guy is making a crash montage, or grinding his way around a track with damage off doesn't mean GT will lose anything. All the sim elements are still there.

It's as has been said. GT lacked damage for a long time. Did everyone play bumper cars? Obviously not. Some did, and what did the cautious drivers lose because of it? Nothing.

Earth is claiming damage will elevate GT to a new level because it will force people to drive better. It also means they can have massive crashes for show. Or go online to not only ram you, but to destroy you. He's conveniently ignoring the truth. The truth is, rewind's abuse factor is no more than other features.

So I believe rewind is better of limited to practice runs, arcade mode and the sort.

For the reasons above, I challenge "better", everything else makes perfect sense. Remember, there is nothing wrong with people using GT to make fancy explosions, just like there is nothing wrong with putting neon and hydraulics on a Ferrari. It's the owners choice, your opinion is not superior to his, and this is certainly true regarding his (ie not your) property.

If GT5 has some way to get everything from the get go, fine, leave rewind out of career mode (except practice sections, or allow it in race but void the race in case an interesting situation comes up mid race that would be hard to replicate in practice modes). If not, those who could care less about offline GT shouldn't be forced to play the way someone else does. So there really isn't a way to justify the limitation of rewind.

 

[Dravonic]

If the heart of the problem is abuse, then there isn't really a problem. For one, single player is for the individual to do what ever. Give me a reason why I should be able to tell you how to play.

There is no proper way to play a game/sim. Even if GT was a perfect sim, anyone could make Burnout out of it. Go to test course with some P1 cars. Let the AI go off, player turns around. 30 seconds later, GT crash mode. And he'll have photo mode to record the whole thing. And then he'd upload his replay to youtube straight from the game.

You can't stop it. But more importantly, there is absolutely no reason to stop it. The guy doing that is not doing anything wrong. If he takes it online, it's a problem. But if he just messes around with game, it's not something anyone else should worry about.

As for rewind as a form of abuse, B-Spec combined with lax race entry rules is the primary way to avoid playing the game. Sure it can be race manager mode, but it can also be abused and become autowin or auto-quick money. Why does no one want to take it out? No one loses anything because of the B-Spec abuse. If you took out B-Spec to punish the abusers, you punish the die hard race manager fans.

If you take out rewind to punish the abusers, you let all who would rely on it suffer.

People playing GT in a way that is unsimlike does not discredit GT as a sim. GT has the physics, it now has the damage, it has the accurate car/track models. Just because some guy is making a crash montage, or grinding his way around a track with damage off doesn't mean GT will lose anything. All the sim elements are still there.

It's as has been said. GT lacked damage for a long time. Did everyone play bumper cars? Obviously not. Some did, and what did the cautious drivers lose because of it? Nothing.

Earth is claiming damage will elevate GT to a new level because it will force people to drive better. It also means they can have massive crashes for show. Or go online to not only ram you, but to destroy you. He's conveniently ignoring the truth. The truth is, rewind's abuse factor is no more than other features.


For the reasons above, I challenge "better", everything else makes perfect sense. Remember, there is nothing wrong with people using GT to make fancy explosions, just like there is nothing wrong with putting neon and hydraulics on a Ferrari. It's the owners choice, your opinion is not superior to his, and this is certainly true regarding his (ie not your) property.

If GT5 has some way to get everything from the get go, fine, leave rewind out of career mode (except practice sections, or allow it in race but void the race in case an interesting situation comes up mid race that would be hard to replicate in practice modes). If not, those who could care less about offline GT shouldn't be forced to play the way someone else does. So there really isn't a way to justify the limitation of rewind.

I agree, but your main argument to include rewind everywhere is "I shouldn't force other people to play the way I want them to". But it's not me, it's PD. They include limitations in GT, not me. To talk about allowing rewind everywhere, is to talk about opening all the game's limitations. That would change the whole game, as allowing rewind everywhere would change the whole game.

GT is limited. It replicate real life races that are limited. I won't be surprised if they include races where you're forced to play with full damage on. I think they are right when they do that sort of thing. You may think otherwise, but I'm accepting the game for what it is, you're trying to change it.

 

[vaioleto]

Yup, just like restart race and bumpers cars.

Stop trying.

If the heart of the problem is abuse, then there isn't really a problem. For one, single player is for the individual to do what ever. Give me a reason why I should be able to tell you how to play.

There is no proper way to play a game/sim. Even if GT was a perfect sim, anyone could make Burnout out of it. Go to test course with some P1 cars. Let the AI go off, player turns around. 30 seconds later, GT crash mode. And he'll have photo mode to record the whole thing. And then he'd upload his replay to youtube straight from the game.

You can't stop it. But more importantly, there is absolutely no reason to stop it. The guy doing that is not doing anything wrong. If he takes it online, it's a problem. But if he just messes around with game, it's not something anyone else should worry about.

As for rewind as a form of abuse, B-Spec combined with lax race entry rules is the primary way to avoid playing the game. Sure it can be race manager mode, but it can also be abused and become autowin or auto-quick money. Why does no one want to take it out? No one loses anything because of the B-Spec abuse. If you took out B-Spec to punish the abusers, you punish the die hard race manager fans.

If you take out rewind to punish the abusers, you let all who would rely on it suffer.

People playing GT in a way that is unsimlike does not discredit GT as a sim. GT has the physics, it now has the damage, it has the accurate car/track models. Just because some guy is making a crash montage, or grinding his way around a track with damage off doesn't mean GT will lose anything. All the sim elements are still there.

It's as has been said. GT lacked damage for a long time. Did everyone play bumper cars? Obviously not. Some did, and what did the cautious drivers lose because of it? Nothing.

Earth is claiming damage will elevate GT to a new level because it will force people to drive better. It also means they can have massive crashes for show. Or go online to not only ram you, but to destroy you. He's conveniently ignoring the truth. The truth is, rewind's abuse factor is no more than other features.


For the reasons above, I challenge "better", everything else makes perfect sense. Remember, there is nothing wrong with people using GT to make fancy explosions, just like there is nothing wrong with putting neon and hydraulics on a Ferrari. It's the owners choice, your opinion is not superior to his, and this is certainly true regarding his (ie not your) property.

If GT5 has some way to get everything from the get go, fine, leave rewind out of career mode (except practice sections, or allow it in race but void the race in case an interesting situation comes up mid race that would be hard to replicate in practice modes). If not, those who could care less about offline GT shouldn't be forced to play the way someone else does. So there really isn't a way to justify the limitation of rewind.

The feature to not have rewind should be in GT5. If people won't buy a real driving simulator without rewind in it, then so be it. PD isn't a charity.

 

[Famine]

Stop trying.

Stop abusing the Report button.

 

[vaioleto]

Stop abusing the Report button.

You haven't been able to restart a race since GT4, GT5 has damage. Isn't that what the report button is for.

 

[Famine]

The Report button is for reporting posts which do not meet the standards of the AUP. It is not for reporting people who don't agree with you four times a day.

Every time you Report a message, an alert is e-mailed to all the moderators on the site. The next time I get an alert because you don't like what the bad man said, you're getting an Infraction. The next time after that, you're getting banned.

 

[vaioleto]

The Report button is for reporting posts which do not meet the standards of the AUP. It is not for reporting people who don't agree with you four times a day.

Every time you Report a message, an alert is e-mailed to all the moderators on the site. The next time I get an alert because you don't like what the bad man said, you're getting an Infraction. The next time after that, you're getting banned.

lol, is that how it works? You guys must have been pulling your hair out from those. XD

 

[Devedander]

I agree, but your main argument to include rewind everywhere is "I shouldn't force other people to play the way I want them to". But it's not me, it's PD. They include limitations in GT, not me. To talk about allowing rewind everywhere, is to talk about opening all the game's limitations. That would change the whole game, as allowing rewind everywhere would change the whole game.

GT is limited. It replicate real life races that are limited. I won't be surprised if they include races where you're forced to play with full damage on. I think they are right when they do that sort of thing. You may think otherwise, but I'm accepting the game for what it is, you're trying to change it.

I think we have a bit of confusion here... when I am arguing these points, I am not arguing them with PD, I am arguing them with users of this forum and in the abstract. Certainly PD can do what they like and why they like, but as far as who I am talking (typing) to I am only concered with those in this thread.

So when I say "Just because you don't want it isn't a legitimate reason to keep it from other people" that literally means you. Of coures a decision of what to do with the game from PDs side is up to them. They may also do it for reasons which are not logically sound but that's a whole differen argument. I am only talking about you and I as who we are, consumers.

And as for whether you feel forced damage races are ok or not, that's all good and fine. We all have opinions. I didn't think Bspec was particularly good and I don't like a gagillion skylines. But I can't just represent that "Bspec is bad becuaes I don't like it" or "A game should only have 1 model of any car becuase I don't like wading through so many" because there is no logical reason behind those, just my feelings.

So again, if you don't like rewind, if you feel rewind is in poor taste, that's all good. But if you are going to start arguing factual points (like does it have the potential for being a learning tool, do real simulators have rewind in them etc) then you move out of the protected opinion zone and into the logical argument zone, which again if I take up will be with you and not with PD.

 

[vaioleto]

I think we have a bit of confusion here... when I am arguing these points, I am not arguing them with PD, I am arguing them with users of this forum and in the abstract. Certainly PD can do what they like and why they like, but as far as who I am talking (typing) to I am only concered with those in this thread.

So when I say "Just because you don't want it isn't a legitimate reason to keep it from other people" that literally means you. Of coures a decision of what to do with the game from PDs side is up to them. They may also do it for reasons which are not logically sound but that's a whole differen argument. I am only talking about you and I as who we are, consumers.

And as I for whether you feel forced damage races are ok or not, that's all good and fine. We all have opinions. I didn't think Bspec was particularly good and I don't like a gagillion skylines. But I can't just represent that "Bspec is bad becuaes I don't like it" or "A game should only have 1 model of any car becuase I don't like wading through so many" because there is no logical reason behind those, just my feelings.

So again, if you don't like rewind, if you feel rewind is in poor taste, that's all good. But if you are going to start arguing factual points (like does it have the potential for being a learning tool, do real simulators have rewind in them etc) then you move out of the protected opinion zone and into the logical argument zone, which again if I take up will be with you and not with PD.

rewind is unrealistic. Practicing in sections is. Time flow forward. Gran Turismo is real driving simulator. Fact

 

[Devedander]

rewind is unrealistic. Practicing in sections is. Time flow forward. Gran Turismo is real driving simulator. Fact

Yes that has all been addressed already:

Unrealisitic things are already in GT, unrealistic does not equal not valuable.

Time does not only flow forward in GT considering you can go back to the start of race you area already half way through.

Real simulators often do have rewind for educational purposes.

Please actually read what others say instead of just trying to make what you say true by repitition.

 

[IsmokeGT]

And as I for whether you

I read that several times, and laughed harder each time!

Rewind is dumb, no factual information to back it up, and I still said it.

 

[Devedander]

I read that several times, and laughed harder each time!

Rewind is dumb, no factual information to back it up, and I still said it.

Amazing how much 1 letter can screw up a sentance... I fixed it

And that's fine, you have your opinion. It's not a legitimate argument why rewind is/isnt valuable or has positive potential, but you are certainly welcome to have an opinion.

 

[vaioleto]

Yes that has all been addressed already:

Unrealisitic things are already in GT, unrealistic does not equal not valuable.

Time does not only flow forward in GT considering you can go back to the start of race you area already half way through.

Real simulators often do have rewind for educational purposes.

Please actually read what others say instead of just trying to make what you say true by repitition.

Exiting out of a race and re-entering =/= rewinding. GT not being 100% realistic =/= an excuse to make it even less realistic. Flight simulator =/= driving simulator. Apple =/= Oranges.

 

[FLASH48]

And somebody got another thread, so they can harp on rewind!!

 

[Dravonic]

I think we have a bit of confusion here... when I am arguing these points, I am not arguing them with PD, I am arguing them with users of this forum and in the abstract. Certainly PD can do what they like and why they like, but as far as who I am talking (typing) to I am only concered with those in this thread.

So when I say "Just because you don't want it isn't a legitimate reason to keep it from other people" that literally means you. Of coures a decision of what to do with the game from PDs side is up to them. They may also do it for reasons which are not logically sound but that's a whole differen argument. I am only talking about you and I as who we are, consumers.

And as for whether you feel forced damage races are ok or not, that's all good and fine. We all have opinions. I didn't think Bspec was particularly good and I don't like a gagillion skylines. But I can't just represent that "Bspec is bad becuaes I don't like it" or "A game should only have 1 model of any car becuase I don't like wading through so many" because there is no logical reason behind those, just my feelings.

So again, if you don't like rewind, if you feel rewind is in poor taste, that's all good. But if you are going to start arguing factual points (like does it have the potential for being a learning tool, do real simulators have rewind in them etc) then you move out of the protected opinion zone and into the logical argument zone, which again if I take up will be with you and not with PD.

I am stating facts. PD limits races. If they ever include rewind, it's more than likely it will be limited because it must be limited to comply with all they've done until now.

I'm using the game's characteristics to determine if rewind makes sense in the game. It's a valid point. Free rewind as the likes of Forza doesn't fit with Gran Turismo. Limited rewind does.

In that quote I was just telling him that I'm not the one imposing limitations, PD is. I'm just using that characteristic to show why rewind has to be limited, not because I want to, but because it must be limited to fit with the game PD already has.

We are not only philosophizing about rewind here. We are talking about including it in Gran Turismo. So you must take Gran Turismo into account.

GT not being 100% realistic =/= an excuse to make it even less realistic.

I must say this make sense.

 

[Devedander]

I am stating facts. PD limits races. If they ever include rewind, it's more than likely it will be limited because it must be limited to comply with all they've done until now.

I'm using the game's characteristics to determine if rewind makes sense in the game. It's a valid point. Free rewind as the likes of Forza doesn't fit with Gran Turismo. Limited rewind does.

In that quote I was just telling him that I'm not the one imposing limitations, PD is. I'm just using that characteristic to show why rewind has to be limited, not because I want to, but because it must be limited to fit with the game PD already has.

We are not only philosophizing about rewind here. We are talking about including it in Gran Turismo. So you must take Gran Turismo into account.

I agreed it should be limited and there are times when it should not be availble. Either way, the potential positives as a learning tool are what I have been saying this whole time, GT or not, just in general.

BTW you will notice Forza and GT differ in some areas and what modes are available is one, so while it works in Forza pretty much across the single player board, that is in large part due to the fact Forza doesn't have some of the modes that it doesn't work for that GT does have.

I must say this make sense.

While that makes sense, it doesn't address the point he was trying to rebut.

The reason to have rewind is not that GT already has unrealistic things, it's becuase it's got positive potiential. One does not rebut the other.

The only reason I brought up unrealistic things is to say that saying it's not realistic as a reason to keep it OUT of a game that already has unrealistic things is flawed.

Analogy:

Not being a virgin anymore is no reason to be more slutty. (GT having unrealistic things in it is not a reason to have more unrealistic things - I never used such an argument)

Not being a virgin anymore means you can't argue not to do something to protect your purity becuase you already crossed that line. (Because GT already has unrealistic things in it, saying something else is unrealistic and so doesn't belong is flawed... unrealistic things already exist in GT thus being unrealistic doesn't mean it can't be in GT - this is what I am saying at that point)

I never said GT should have more unrealistic things in it becuase it already has some unreaslistic things in it, I said said you can't defend GT's purity when it's in fact already got that type of thing already.

There is a difference and that's why the argument is flawed.

 

[vaioleto]

I agreed it should be limited and there are times when it should not be availble. Either way, the potential positives as a learning tool are what I have been saying this whole time, GT or not, just in general.

BTW you will notice Forza and GT differ in some areas and what modes are available is one, so while it works in Forza pretty much across the single player board, that is in large part due to the fact Forza doesn't have some of the modes that it doesn't work for that GT does have.




While that makes sense, it doesn't address the point he was trying to rebut.

The reason to have rewind is not that GT already has unrealistic things, it's becuase it's got positive potiential. One does not rebut the other.

The only reason I brought up unrealistic things is to say that saying it's not realistic as a reason to keep it OUT of a game that already has unrealistic things is flawed.

Analogy:

Not being a virgin anymore is no reason to be more slutty. (GT having unrealistic things in it is not a reason to have more unrealistic things - I never used such an argument)

Not being a virgin anymore means you can't argue not to do something to protect your purity becuase you already crossed that line. (Because GT already has unrealistic things in it, saying something else is unrealistic and so doesn't belong is flawed... unrealistic things already exist in GT thus being unrealistic doesn't mean it can't be in GT - this is what I am saying at that point)

I never said GT should have more unrealistic things in it becuase it already has some unreaslistic things in it, I said said you can't defend GT's purity when it's in fact already got that type of thing already.

There is a difference and that's why the argument is flawed.

Thank you for destroying your own argument. 👍 How convenient.

 

[Devedander]

Thank you for destroying your own argument. 👍 How convenient.

I think this comment only goes to show how little you coprehend of what's being said being as how it's just a detailed destruction of your argument 💡

Or is this another case of you hoping that saying it will be enough to make it true?

I am not asking this in an insulting way, honest, but after seeing your behavior so far... are you actually 12? Again I am not trying to insult you, you actually come across as a 12 year old....

 

[vaioleto]

I think this comment only goes to show how little you coprehend of what's being said 💡

Sure, if believing that helps you sleep at night.

 

[Tornado]

rewind is unrealistic. Practicing in sections is. Time flow forward. Gran Turismo is real driving simulator. Fact

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AcceptableBreaksFromReality

 

[vaioleto]

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AcceptableBreaksFromReality

Thx, perfectly described restart.

 

[Devedander]

Sure, if believing that helps you sleep at night.

I will leave the believing up to you as you seem to be quite good at it... I will stick to knowing and logically explaining. 👍