Presented, and then Scrapped (Or not?)

[Stumps_GTI]

Do you have any proof to substantiate that claim? I'm guessing you don't, beyond the footage appearing in trailers and not featuring in the game. The problem with the post is that you're basically accusing somebody of wrongdoing without any kind of evidence to back up what you say. The truth is that neither you nor I nor anybody else on this forum can say with any degree of certainty what the original intentions were. This is a problem, because it could very well prove to be libellous. I'd suggest you refrain from making these claims in the future, unless you have solid evidence to back up your accusations. If you don't, I'll delete any of your posts on sight, and further moderator action may be required. I'm not trying to stamp out your opinion here, but make you aware that if you're going to say something like this, you'd better be willing to back it up without using adverb ridden-qualifiers to avoid committing yourself to the truth of what your are saying.

Fine. That was, as I said, my personal opinion only.
I just think it's wrong that these companies can advertise one thing, and deliver something different.

I apologise for overstepping the bounds of what's right or wrong. I was getting quite heated writing that.

It just erks me when people bring a topic up, containing anything that might be harmful to the game, or missing from the game, get shot down by all the do gooders defending the game.
Then get told to get over it.

Greg

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I'm not telling you to get over it. I'm telling you to be mind ful of what you say before you say something that cannot be taken back.

 

[CoolColJ]

In the old GT Academy Specator mode vids/pics, there were more options for how the replay showed. I wonder why they were dropped....?
You could have it focus on a driver/car, race position, the course, or the race as a whole

Jump to 3:40 . Notice how everything seems more refined than what we got in GT5...
A big save replay button among other things


If they spent all that time and effort in coding the above features, why didn't we get anything similar in GT5 - seems like a lot of wasted dev time.

 

[DrTrouserPlank]

I'm still fairly convinced that a fair bit of content was ripped out of this game at the eleventh hour at the behest of Sony so that it could be sold on later as DLC.

The in-game damage that is nowhere near as good or extensive as that seen in the demos that were available in-store is a disappointment. I'm not a fan of damage, but the pitiful compromised damage we have in game would be better off not being there at all, as most of the time it looks like someone has rubbed some cigarette ash on the car rather than anything else.

I love the driving in this game, but it does seem strange that of all the features we saw in trailers and demos that virtually none of them made it into the final game. Features that would account for some of this development time that is often seen as being too long for what we ended up with. I fail to believe that these features and tracks were removed because of problems with them. I think they'll show up at a cost, but I also think they were planned to be included when the game shipped.

 

[CoolColJ]

The Apex book also reveals features that were not included in GT5 for some reason.

Point to Point mode for the Course Generator, the Windtunnel and Hangar photo mode locations for example.

 

[Khoin]

Do you have any proof to substantiate that claim? I'm guessing you don't, beyond the footage appearing in trailers and not featuring in the game. The problem with the post is that you're basically accusing somebody of wrongdoing without any kind of evidence to back up what you say. The truth is that neither you nor I nor anybody else on this forum can say with any degree of certainty what the original intentions were. This is a problem, because it could very well prove to be libellous. I'd suggest you refrain from making these claims in the future, unless you have solid evidence to back up your accusations. If you don't, I'll delete any of your posts on sight, and further moderator action may be required. I'm not trying to stamp out your opinion here, but make you aware that if you're going to say something like this, you'd better be willing to back it up without using adverb ridden-qualifiers to avoid committing yourself to the truth of what your are saying.

I'm not one to step into a debate with a moderator, but isn't this a bit strong? The OP clearly states that it's his opinion. For it to be libellous, he'd at least have to claim it as a fact, rather than an opinion I'd say.

Btw, I know discussing moderator action should preferably be done in PM's, but since you're discussing this in the thread yourself, I assume it's ok. My apologies if it's not.

In regards to the actual issue the OP raises: It does seem like a lot was scrapped, for whatever reason. Of course, during development, things change, which will account for a lot. But some of the things missing seem odd. We'll have to wait and see whether some of it will come in the form of DLC (free or paid) or in GT6.

 

[Shrimp]

It certainly explains how they're able to get such substantial patches out so fast. They probably have a ton of half-done bits which just need a bit of polishing before they can release them.....

 

[Vincent Vega]

Personally I found the original post very interesting and it's a shame that all of the advertised features didn't make it into the final game. I'm still having a wonderful time playing GT5 but it doesn't prevent me from feeling let down that all of the advertised features didn't make the final cut.

Reading through the entire thread I find it amazing that some people are so close minded and immature that they don't feel any entitlement to what has been advertised or promised! In my opinion GT5 is still a fantastic game, but if PD are happy to stoke interest by providing us with their concepts of the final game, then why shouldn't they be held accountable when the game does not quite live up to those standards?

Once again, before I get flamed for this, I love GT5, I've owned every GT game since the PS1 and I want my Gran Turismo experience to be the best it can possibly be precisely because I love the game so much.

 

[Stephen220378]

Fine. That was, as I said, my personal opinion only.
I just think it's wrong that these companies can advertise one thing, and deliver something different.

I apologise for overstepping the bounds of what's right or wrong. I was getting quite heated writing that.

It just erks me when people bring a topic up, containing anything that might be harmful to the game, or missing from the game, get shot down by all the do gooders defending the game.
Then get told to get over it.

Greg

I can assure you I'm far from a "do gooder" that defends GT5. If you care to have a quick look through my posts on other topics you'll see I've gave PD and GT5 a really hard time since the day it was released on it's numerous faults and flaws, in fact I'd go as far as saying I've been overly harsh on both developer and game on a few occasions out of the same sort of frustration you showed earlier.

The fact is though I cannot critisize PD for things that were omitted from the final game that were shown in promotional trailers from 1, 2 and 3 years ago. If PD, for example, specifically said these features, tracks etc would definitely be in the final product then any critisism would be justifiable. As it is they were just trailers made to represent Gran Turismo 5 as a game, not a literal indication of what was to be included. I'll point you back to the making of Heavy Rain video where the developers explain in detail why certain things don't make it into the final build of a game and again stress the point that it's not only GT games that these things happen.

 

[Shrimp]

If PD, for example, specifically said these features, tracks etc would definitely be in the final product then any critisism would be justifiable.

Like remote B-Spec? It is still listed as a feature on the game's website - although I see they've added some asterisks now, so that makes it all fine and dandy and no longer false advertising.

 

[Vincent Vega]

My wife will be much happier when the remote B-Spec finally makes it in. I'm driving her mad having the PS3 constantly running in the background and flicking over to the channel every 10 minutes or so to check on my racing muppet.

 

[Soopafly]

Brilliant thread and well done putting all the videos together. I wish PD saw this thread to see all that they essentially tricked us into believing we were going to get.

 

[Stephen220378]

Like remote B-Spec? It is still listed as a feature on the game's website - although I see they've added some asterisks now, so that makes it all fine and dandy and no longer false advertising.

True, but is it a case of false advertising or just a case of it wasn't ready when Sony pushed PD to have the game out before christmas?

 

[fafat]

I've also notice that that mini is not in the final game (livery editor?)

 

[witham]

I have a theory along this lines I think that the seasonal events are A spec events that couldn't be put into the final game as It is full up. The thing that gives this away is the pre race screen It says the original prize money which is more like 125000 rather than the 1 million you get, which would make it an extreme event that has been cut out.

 

[NOS Waster]

I've also notice that that mini is not in the final game (livery editor?)
pic snip

That looks like a Race Mod for the Mini (somewhat)
Either that or a Livery Editor was in the works.

 

[African Kat]

Whatever happened to cars getting dirty?

Or did they mean the cars get dirty only while rallying?

 

[Stephen220378]

Whatever happened to cars getting dirty?

Or did they mean the cars get dirty only while rallying?

Do the cars even get dirty when rallying? I've honestly never noticed.

 

[brambos]

Whatever happened to cars getting dirty?

Or did they mean the cars get dirty only while rallying?

Better question: what happened to the dirt, snow and ice tracks? Even GT PSP and GT Concept 2002 Tokyo-Geneva had plenty of dirt races to make your car dirty.

Now I have a bunch of rally cars in my garage that I can only use on a very limited number of special events (which only pay out once).

 

[Stumps_GTI]

I'm not telling you to get over it. I'm telling you to be mind ful of what you say before you say something that cannot be taken back.

That was a "generalisation"...I know you haven't told ME to get over it. (< the eye rolling is meant to be a friendly joke, please take it that way. )
BUT, it would appear, every time "someone" starts a thread bagging GT, someone else gets upset, and hence, the term, "get over it" always crops up.
And yes, I'll be very mindful of what I say and comment on from now on.

I do apologise to everyone who has been hurt by my outburst.
I'll just kick back and enjoy my racing, cause I DO still love GT5, I just WISH they didn't leave soooo much out.

 

[P3nT4gR4m]

I have a theory along this lines I think that the seasonal events are A spec events that couldn't be put into the final game as It is full up. The thing that gives this away is the pre race screen It says the original prize money which is more like 125000 rather than the 1 million you get, which would make it an extreme event that has been cut out.

I'm not so sure. The seasonals are way too good compared to a-spec which was unadulterated pants. I think they're releasing the seasonals to make up for a-spec's failfest which is a good thing in itself.

The main thing that bugs me, marketing-wise, is a quote from Kaz (which I can't remember verbatim) along the lines of "GT5 will take tuning to a new level." the new level being - more basic than any other title in the series?

I too love the GT series but the latest edition feels more like hobson's choice, compared to previous titles. There's too much missing/half done. They included all the gt4 cars but never went the full hog and included all the gt4 tracks too?

I've said it before - sony really ought to put someone in charge of that studio who's actually capable of managing a software project as opposed to someone whos main talent seems to be acting all enigmatic and talking about perfection.

Lets just drop the "perfectionist" bull now, eh? GT5 is as far from perfect as any other title in the franchise has ever been!

 

[shirakawaa]

- Daytona and Suzuka at sunset in the GT5 Prologue US opening video (would make sense, since endurances are run there)
- Daytona at sunrise in the GT5P spec III op video
- The indoor parking lot race cutscene in GT5 Prologue (don't remember where exactly)
- The trailers location
In general GT5P showed or hinted in videos many things that didn't make it in GT5.

 

[BWX]

I can assure you I'm far from a "do gooder" that defends GT5. If you care to have a quick look through my posts on other topics you'll see I've gave PD and GT5 a really hard time since the day it was released on it's numerous faults and flaws, in fact I'd go as far as saying I've been overly harsh on both developer and game on a few occasions out of the same sort of frustration you showed earlier.

The fact is though I cannot critisize PD for things that were omitted from the final game that were shown in promotional trailers from 1, 2 and 3 years ago. If PD, for example, specifically said these features, tracks etc would definitely be in the final product then any critisism would be justifiable. As it is they were just trailers made to represent Gran Turismo 5 as a game, not a literal indication of what was to be included. I'll point you back to the making of Heavy Rain video where the developers explain in detail why certain things don't make it into the final build of a game and again stress the point that it's not only GT games that these things happen.

In an interview with simracingtonight a PD/Sony representative said we'd get 70 or more point to point rally stages as well as unlimited point to point generated stages. This was just last summer. I guess my criticism is justifiable. The thing is I don't really care because dirt and snow physics are very poor in GT5 compared to the track physics. PD could learn a thing or two about dirt and snow physics from the devs of Richard Burns Rally who nailed it.

I'm more bummed about WAY too few A-Spec events which they never promised but I assumed would be bigger and better because it's Gran Turismo. Oh well.. I won't get GT6 release day. Well, I probably will.. that's why PD think they can get away with crap like that I guess, because they can.


BTW to OP- My Ferrari has a roof.. just go to the GT Auto and put a wing on it.. there's an option for a roof in there.

 

[ScouserInExile]

Reading this thread, I'm most surprised by the fact that people are in any way shocked by this or find it something unusual. Does anyone remember when "Not actual in-game footage" started appearing on adverts? It came about because EA always used to try to pass off redered sequences as the actual game and Trading Standards got a load of complaints about it (it was for one of the FIA titles, or maybe one of the Harry Potter games, iirc).

There is also the issue of how long ago these clips come from. I worked in the games industry for years and saw games change greatly from version to version, as features were tried out and removed, workarounds were implemented to bugs and the game was tweaked for playability. The most simple explanation for these "deceptions" is that they were features that were origionally intended to be included, but were removed due to them being too difficult to implement correctly or simply "not working" in terms of gameplay.

It's annoying if there's a feature in a previous video that you really liked the look of, but I doubt there's a great conspiracy afoot here.

 

[BWX]

I think the real reason the overall content is so limited in GT5 compared to earlier GTs is because Kaz went from a guy who was really passionate about making great racing games to a guy that is more interested in real racing and talking about his racing game. I can't blame the guy, but GT5 has suffered because of it. If he would have actually sat down and played through GT5 we would not have the same game now.

 

[ruf-ctr2]

Ok, I haven't read the whole thread but this is a very disturbing yet fascinating topic...

As a game developer for nearly 18 years this appears like a game that never had any serious intention of shipping but was rather enjoying its regal status and having LOTS of fun with R&D... I don't mean to be brash but I have seen games where they spent as much time pulling incomplete and broken "could have been cool features" out as they did building the core game...

There is a lot more in those videos you didn't even call out like texture quality and track surface quality, etc. And I remember that car coming off the truck video and thought that was going to be for every car!!! :/ But it does appear clear like this was an "open source" project... Kaz's personal toy and lacked any sort of formal management (always an issue when VP and up dable in day to day dev, often lacking the understanding of the ramifications of their "idea" and what it means to an actual worker in ear shot...)

This looks like the last six months where pulling stuff out and then stitching it back together... and even I knew not to follow this project until it was closer to an actual release... but still... this like GT 2 and GT 4 is a .5 version... at least its a predictable trend...

GT6 will be better... it has to, they have rested on their larals for too long and others are finally knocking at the door...

This brings it to the point - GT5 seems as it had absolutely no "overall" management.

KAZ did design (premium) cars much much more than would be needed for the final game (most of it was done for photomode only - you never see that much of the interiour while driving)
Also some of the track they but too much afford in.
But it really seems as if nobody at PD hat in mind how the whole game should be like. - This feeling I have all the time playing it. - Finishing licences gives a message that "you can now participate in new races" (just as in previous GTs) - but that's not true as it depends only on the "level". Also at the message at b-spec level 30 says "you can now BY the X1 at the dealership" - but that's false as it only APPEARS there and you can by it at level 40 - two signs that the level system was put in afterwards.
- About A-spec I thing enough was said already (event GT1 was better in this aspect)


But now to "Marketing":

Yes, it is true that marketing and especially commercials show the "best side of the product" and hide the "bad ones" ore "not so good ones". So it is usual that gametrailers and other products most of the time look better than in reality.
But making a product look good - and pretending it is something completely different is an other thing. And showing content in trailers that are not in the game (and talking a lot in interviews) refers to the second.

To make my point clear I will give an comparison:
As we all now products at fast food restaurant look better in commercials than in real live. But if the burger in the advertisement has eg. meat, salad, tomatoes and cucumber in it - the real thing must have it too. - and not leaving half of it out.

These GT trailers with all the content that is not in the "final" game is like making an commercial that shows a whole set meal containing of "a big burger, a big softdrink, a big package of French fries and a nice dessert." - but the final game is like " a small burger that lacks half of the ingredients, a small package of a drink that tastes more of water, a few cold fries and no dessert."

Actually I found a "advertisement" / "reality" comparison that is much like GT5:

This picture is from http://lifestyle.excite.de/bilder/fast-food-der-unterschied-zwischen-werbung-und-realitat-P11798-3-ads-fake-real-3.html

 

[brainfade]

Haha my name is not Gary Lineker , But I have to admit the OP does have a point I mean why show something that looks like its in the game if its not like the however many cars in a photo at the TGTT ?

THATS what GT5 needs! Gary Linekar!

 

[Stephen220378]

This brings it to the point - GT5 seems as it had absolutely no "overall" management.

KAZ did design (premium) cars much much more than would be needed for the final game (most of it was done for photomode only - you never see that much of the interiour while driving)
Also some of the track they but too much afford in.
But it really seems as if nobody at PD hat in mind how the whole game should be like. - This feeling I have all the time playing it. - Finishing licences gives a message that "you can now participate in new races" (just as in previous GTs) - but that's not true as it depends only on the "level". Also at the message at b-spec level 30 says "you can now BY the X1 at the dealership" - but that's false as it only APPEARS there and you can by it at level 40 - two signs that the level system was put in afterwards.
- About A-spec I thing enough was said already (event GT1 was better in this aspect)


But now to "Marketing":

Yes, it is true that marketing and especially commercials show the "best side of the product" and hide the "bad ones" ore "not so good ones". So it is usual that gametrailers and other products most of the time look better than in reality.
But making a product look good - and pretending it is something completely different is an other thing. And showing content in trailers that are not in the game (and talking a lot in interviews) refers to the second.

To make my point clear I will give an comparison:
As we all now products at fast food restaurant look better in commercials than in real live. But if the burger in the advertisement has eg. meat, salad, tomatoes and cucumber in it - the real thing must have it too. - and not leaving half of it out.

These GT trailers with all the content that is not in the "final" game is like making an commercial that shows a whole set meal containing of "a big burger, a big softdrink, a big package of French fries and a nice dessert." - but the final game is like " a small burger that lacks half of the ingredients, a small package of a drink that tastes more of water, a few cold fries and no dessert."

Actually I found a "advertisement" / "reality" comparison that is much like GT5:

This picture is from http://lifestyle.excite.de/bilder/fast-food-der-unterschied-zwischen-werbung-und-realitat-P11798-3-ads-fake-real-3.html

The thing is that they're not advertising contents of the game, they're advertising GT5 as the next installment in the GT series. If there was text on screen in these trailers saying for example "GT5 including El Capitan", then that would be advertising game content. Trailers are made to showcase what a game is all about i.e in GT's case, driving cars and racing, not actual specifics of what the game includes. If however the trailer states "actual game footage" then it becomes a different matter altogether.

 

[P3nT4gR4m]

Game trailers are BS. Anyone remember the Motorstorm/Killzone trailers form E3? Where everyone was all like "ZOMG this PS3 looks like it will be the awesome, as opposed to just another underpowered console whose dedicated architecture might have given it the edge on PC's for like a week or so, if it'd come out last year"

 

[BWX]

Game trailers are BS. Anyone remember the Motorstorm/Killzone trailers form E3? Where everyone was all like "ZOMG this PS3 looks like it will be the awesome, as opposed to just another underpowered console whose dedicated architecture might have given it the edge on PC's for like a week or so, if it'd come out last year"

Pointing to someone else's bad behavior does not justify or excuse your own bad behavior.