The Damage Thread - Best Buy Demo, Now Thats More Like It!

[Devedander]

Devedander, what are you trying to achieve by stating that Famine is a fanboy? It doesn't effect you in anyway in this forum, or in the outside world.

What are any of us doing here talking about anything? Do you think we are going to get GT5 launched sooner with our "Guess what release date will be" threads? Or are we going to get more tracks?

What I am trying to achieve is answering a question that someone posed...

I have to ask, why are you so worried about who says what about famine?

 

[Devedander]

I think "Fanboy" is being thrown around here way too much right about now. We've got people who repeatidly point out flaws in GT5 in comparison to other games being called "fanboys" and we got people who would love GT5 to be a improved GT4 being called "fanboy" just because they don't feel as obligated to make a big fuss out those same flaws. Quite honestly, this feels more like a argument on whats the real definition of a "fanboy" them a thread partaining to the title subject.

Please note, famine asked if he was a fanboy. Throwing it around was just part of answering the question.

 

[sumbrownkid]

I'm not worried about Famine's status, what I'm worried is that some people, ahem like you, on this thread turned this thread from discussing damage, into fanboy slinging. He did ask a question, but it was more of a rhetorical one and didn't need someone to post a yes or a no.

 

[RACECAR]

Please note, famine asked if he was a fanboy. Throwing it around was just part of answering the question.

I'm talking about before Famine asked the Question. There was quite abit of "sounds like the typical Faboy" or "why must fanboys resort to this" going on in the other pages.

 

[Tenacious D]

Boy... I just don't know what to say about people like Devedander and Cobra.

Look, it's one thing to be a hypocrite. Like say hammering Forza on some issue while ignoring the same or similar issue in Gran Turismo, and vice versa. Another is to insist that Gran Turismo is just darn near perfect. The second one, oh well. The first one, I take issue with like many do.

But to repeat and harp and harf that we're all idiots unless we see things your way is just absurd. Look, the reason I don't have issues with Prologue's A.I. is because the bots drive very very similarly to the last few online races I've had against real live humins. However, I got tired of races with 3 to 5 people in them and went back to offline races. Wow, was it great to be in a field of 16 cars again! And not just 15 cars on a rail. They really do have a semblance of human behavior. Not perfect? I don't care, it's enough for me.

So of course, to you I'm some sort of brainless tard. Like... WTH Willis? What's with the PMS attitude?

I think getting any kind of damage in a preliminary build of GT5 is a huge step forward, but to you it's a complete waste. And of course once again I'm some sort of mindless fanboy. I'd hate to think what you'd be posting if the GC demo had zero damage.

It's one thing to say about an incomplete demo build of a game, "I hope they improve this." It's another thing to start slandering anyone and everyone who isn't as horrified as you are. And that's the problem. You and your attitude. It's bad enough that you have to post things that verge on flamebate on a game that isn't even out yet, but then you just seem hellbent on making sure we all have the same puking reaction and opinion.

You have your opinion? Fine. Say it and move along. But don't take it personally if we don't share it, get tired of you flinging it in our faces, and feel it would be better to just slap an ignore on you. You'll have a much better time here and be more persuasive if every time someone doesn't share your opinions, which is all they are, you act like we wee'd in your pool.

I think one thing we could all agree on is just to drop this silly argument on why we're all just a munch of mindless mice being hypnotized by Kazunori the Mad Piper, and get back to admiring and criticising the GC demo. But criticising properly.

 

[IsmokeGT]

I would rather argue with my 4 year old than you guys. At least he is funny.

from websters-
Main Entry: fan·boy
Pronunciation: \ˈfan-ˌbȯi\
Function: noun
Date: 1919
: a boy who is an enthusiastic devotee (as of comics or movies)

By this definition, call me a Fanboy. Apparently none of you over aggressive internet bullies know what a "fanboy" is. Quit trying to be right.

 

[Famine]

You said you run lans, when you run lans, you have no worry for how good or bad AI is. You have a work around that is about as good as it gets for bad AI: you don't need it.

Yes, I run LANs. I also play GT4. For some reason you've leapt to the conclusion that I never encounter the AI, despite me pointing out to you I've completed GT4 entirely in A-Spec.

Here is you rationlizing out things that aren't in the game (regardless of if they were promised -directly or indirectly- to be in the game)

Basically, you just excused the portions of the game that were lacking becuase you could live without them. Hey that's great... but some of us really want them and some of those things were supposed to be given to us. Can I live without them sure! But the expectation was set, so whether I can live without them or not isn't the point, it's whether they will be delivered or not.

*scratch*

It's not rationalising out things that aren't there - for a start no-one knows what's in GT5. It was an analysis of additional features that I don't believe are necessary for ME to enjoy GT5.

I'm sure other people think they're required for THEM to enjoy GT5. For ME it's not. That's not fanboyism - that's personal preference.

Sure! They do all the time! Fanboys try to claim something is not there as much as possible finding one off reasons why maybe some quirk is intentional and not really a bug or why it doesn't really happen. But if that's just not possible and it's black and white bad, then the next step of a fanboy is to rationlize or dismiss it entirely. Perhaps something like "Who cars if crash physics are unrealistic IF YOU WERE A GOOD DRIVER YOU WOULDN'T CRASH!"

Remember a fanboy only sees good and rationlizes out any bad so that they can keep their position of only seeing good.

Crash physics are an emergent property of a good physics model. Suffice to say that neither GT4/GT5P nor FM2 have it right yet.

Basically your logic says that games don't have to get better, they just have to get bigger and prettier.

My logic says nothing of the sort. You've interpreted it, for some reason.

I said that if GT4 has its flaws fixed, with a bunch of cars and tracks and nice graphics, I'll enjoy it more than I enjoyed GT4. I said nothing of any other game or games.

Point? If YOU are happy with more eye candy but lack of improvements in the meat of the game, then ok

And as I stated earlier, "the core of any game is things to do". Six-figure car/track combos is plenty of things to do and a substantial improvement in the meat of the game.

but I say that does not represent the majority of people.

As I said before, citing a "majority" opens you up to all kinds of problems.

Suffice it to say, it was basically the same for years but prettier. This got a LOT of people heated and for legitimate reason.

Like FIFA/PES then. They seem popular enough.

Actually you did excuse all of it (see above) one way or another.

And I've already pointed out that this isn't true.

Understeery physics. Apparently that is the only flaw in GT4? Apparently the AI wasn't flawed in GT4?

You missed the part earlier where we were already discussing that the AI in GT4 is flawed and how I pointed it out in my original post.

There were no other flaws in GT4 that could use addressing?

I don't like some of the "Are you sure" menu dialogues. Err...

So Bam right back atcha... fanboyism is a weird thing... it's like being drunk, when it's working right, it makes you blind to seeing that it's effecting you.

Yeah, except I've pointed out that GT4 has flaws that need addressing.

If it pleases the court, I don't like GT5P either.

Edit: Also, just for the fun of it, my rig:

 

[Devedander]

I'm not worried about Famine's status, what I'm worried is that some people, ahem like you, on this thread turned this thread from discussing damage, into fanboy slinging. He did ask a question, but it was more of a rhetorical one and didn't need someone to post a yes or a no.

Hey the threads gone where it's gone and I certainly was part of it but I didn't dance alone... you seem to be picking me out and worrying about famines good name more than you need to.

Rhetorical question or not, don't ask if you don't want an answer...

 

[sumbrownkid]

I didn't want to pick you out Devedander, you did that yourself, and I don't care about Famine's name or whatnot, but it was unfair to take his post that noted some problems of the game and then say bam backatcha fanboyism is a weird thing. Yeah he didn't note the AI, but he'll probably agree with you on that.

 

[IsmokeGT]

from websters-
Main Entry: fan·boy
Pronunciation: \ˈfan-ˌbȯi\
Function: noun
Date: 1919
: a boy who is an enthusiastic devotee (as of comics or movies)

You're wrong. Give it up already. Do I need to look up "enthusiastic" and "devotee" also?

Doesn't this all fall under the "wasting site bandwith" problem?

 

[Famine]

Actually, I did note it in the original post...

AI? AI may as well not be there in any racing game - they're either rolling roadblocks or uncatchable jackrabbits. I don't really care how smart or dumb they are (and, yes, they are pretty dumb in GT4) because I'm either fast enough to pass them or I'm not.

: a boy who is an enthusiastic devotee (as of comics or movies)

I'm not particularly enthusiastic or devoted to anything, save my fiancee. I'm also 31 years old (32 in 4 weeks), so "boy" is a bit of a stretch.

 

[sumbrownkid]

^fanman!

Off-topic (Well it's gone off-topic): Can any of you guys help me out with a DVD problem for my PS3? I made the topic in PS3 forum. Thanks.

 

[the Interceptor]

What it boils down to I suppose is whether you are discussing the personal preferences of a single person or a general review of game features. Famine is talking about his personal preferences, which, if one likes to, can be interpreted as dodging criticism of the game. I think it isn't though.

 

[RACECAR]

I'm not particularly enthusiastic or devoted to anything, save my fiancee. I'm also 31 years old (32 in 4 weeks), so "boy" is a bit of a stretch.

^fanman!

Hahahaha, I was just thinking that. Probably wouldn't cut it either but it does have potential for a new superhero.

 

[Devedander]

Yes, I run LANs. I also play GT4. For some reason you've leapt to the conclusion that I never encounter the AI, despite me pointing out to you I've completed GT4 entirely in A-Spec.

No, I conclude that you dismiss AI issues as not important regardless and that you have situations where you avoid the AI issues quite regularly. Is that statement accurate?

*scratch*

It's not rationalising out things that aren't there - for a start no-one knows what's in GT5. It was an analysis of additional features that I don't believe are necessary for ME to enjoy GT5.

I'm sure other people think they're required for THEM to enjoy GT5. For ME it's not. That's not fanboyism - that's personal preference.

We know what was said will be in GT5, and when an expectation is set, especially when it comes from the company making the game, then it becomes a failure when that expectation isn't met, regardless of your personal preference.

Crash physics are an emergent property of a good physics model. Suffice to say that neither GT4/GT5P nor FM2 have it right yet.

No one has it right yet, but some have it pretty close, and many are making obvious and decent attempts. It's the lack of anything significant to show in that department after this long that is of issue.

My logic says nothing of the sort. You've interpreted it, for some reason.

I said that if GT4 has its flaws fixed, with a bunch of cars and tracks and nice graphics, I'll enjoy it more than I enjoyed GT4. I said nothing of any other game of games.

I was referring to the part where you list your expectations of a next gen game. If all you want from each succession is more and prettier, then you should be happy with games from 10 years ago, just dressed up a bit.

And as I stated earlier, "the core of any game is things to do". Six-figure car/track combos is plenty of things to do and a substantial improvement in the meat of the game.

I beg to differ... the core of some games is things to do (GTA is a jack of all trades, master of none) but the core of some games (ie simulators) should be to simulate. That means doing one thing right. Once you can do that one thing right, do it in as many places as possible.

Remember you only get to do one thing in GT: Drive a car (or truck? Or jalopy maybe) you don't get to do a lot of things. You get to do that thing in different places with different cars, but it's still one thing. So if you are a jack of all but master of none, but your all is one thing, that's dissapointing. GT is a one trick pony, they need to get that trick right.

As I said before, citing a "majority" opens you up to all kinds of problems.

Like FIFA/PES then. They seem popular enough.

Yes like FIFA and PES... however for the most part, they have gotten their one trick right. When there isn't much more you can expect to get better, THEN it becomes excuseable to not make major improvements. You will see before I have said the like before.

And I've already pointed out that this isn't true.

You said that it isn't true however in the context, what's the point of saying it if you really mean it as a simple laundry list of things you like, and not as a supporting argument for your overall position?

You missed the part earlier where we were already discussing that the AI in GT4 is flawed and how I pointed it out in my original post.

No I saw that, and it looked like it was dismissed. Then you listed the flaws that needed fixing, and it wasn't included strengthening that evaluation. Did you make a mistake and mean to include it in your list of flaws that need fixing? Because it appears it wasn't fixed...

Either you dismissed it as not important (in which case there is your rationalization and dismissal) or it was a flaw that did need to be fixed in which case... well it should have made your second list but also be a legit gripe that it's not fixed.

I don't like some of the "Are you sure" menu dialogues. Err...

Yeah if only there were a graceful way around that one...

Yeah, except I've pointed out that GT4 has flaws that need addressing.

There it is again... keeping you from seeing what you are doing...

So first off we are talking about GT5 here... you can be a GT5 fanboy without being a GT4 fanboy, but that's not even what I am saying...

You have said as long as the flaws in GT4 were addressed you would be happy (now you only listed one flaw and it was fixed apparently, did you mean to list more flaws including ones that weren't meaning that GT5 DOES need more fixing, or are you saying their are not more flaws which contradicts what you are saying here?). You see you keep bouncing back and forth:

Sometimes the flaws from GT4 were addressed and hence GT5 is all it needs to be. But then in the next breath, there are other flaws in GT4 that need fixing... but wait... if they need fixing and aren't fixed, then isn't GT5 then in need of fixing?

See how you are playing both sides of the fence at once?

 

[IsmokeGT]

[I'm not particularly enthusiastic or devoted to anything, save my fiancee. I'm also 31 years old (32 in 4 weeks), so "boy" is a bit of a stretch.

Ok, now you are talking out of your arse.

You are a Mod on a GT website!

Give it up dude, you are the biggest GT Fanboy of them all! (by the websters definition) I was on your side, but now you turned into the dog in the corner. Chill out. Quit bickering. (this will get you all fired up) Act your age! lol 31, 32 in 4 weeks, and you have bickered for 2, or 3?, pages about the meaning of a word.

Obviously, that other guy is right. He will type his fingers off before he is wrong. Someone needs to shut up first, and it wont be dedoucher.

 

[Devedander]

I didn't want to pick you out Devedander, you did that yourself, and I don't care about Famine's name or whatnot, but it was unfair to take his post that noted some problems of the game and then say bam backatcha fanboyism is a weird thing. Yeah he didn't note the AI, but he'll probably agree with you on that.

I picked myself out? I am pretty sure you picked me out

that some people, ahem like you, on this thread

As for agreeing on the AI, see my long winded post above.'

AI? AI may as well not be there in any racing game - they're either rolling roadblocks or uncatchable jackrabbits. I don't really care how smart or dumb they are (and, yes, they are pretty dumb in GT4) because I'm either fast enough to pass them or I'm not.

BTW I have to disagreew ith you here famine... in some (and I would venture MANY) racing games the AI is an integral and very enjoyable part of the experience... it makes me wonder if perhaps your view comes from a lack of breadth in experience?

I keep saying it, but TOCA 2-3 had very fun AI to race. It felt like I expect racing to feel like, with opponents aware of myposition and who respect good racing etiquette (ie give up the line to someone a wheel up, avoid a crash if at all possible etc).

Maybe you have played it already, but if not, I strongly suggest you take Toca3 for a spin (I think it's on PS2 and support FFB even) it's much more arcadey than GT but on the harder difficulties with assists off, it's very passable and again the AI sells it.

Oh and how are you 30 and never played Pole Position? @_@

 

[sumbrownkid]

^I figured he'd be 24 or 25, but then that's pretty young for a mod.

 

[IsmokeGT]

About the damage...

The damage in the E3 trailer and the damage on the demo were totally different right?

 

[Devedander]

^I figured he'd be 24 or 25, but then that's pretty young for a mod.

I usually peg mods as much younger, usually teens. That's when I was modding forums. That's when I had the TIME to mod forums Once jobs and bills kicked in, I couldn't give up my time being essentially a free janitor for a forum anymore...

 

[Tenacious D]

Famine is talking about his personal preferences, which, if one likes to, can be interpreted as dodging criticism of the game. I think it isn't though.

And no, he's not dodging anything. Neither am I.

Take the A.I. issue. People complain about the bots in Prologue being as stupid as the bots in GT1. Many of us have pointed out things showing this isn't true. I've pointed out issues which, to me at least, indicate that other games aren't much better. And worse, Forza fans complain about being rammed in Prologue, while ignoring the fact that the bots in Forza games ram you as well.

How about damage? People complain about what they saw in an incomplete GC demo, ignoring the fact that it's an incomplete GC demo, and that we're getting damage at all. Forza fans make fun of it, while ignoring the fact that Forza games have always had a partial damage implementation, so even in sim mode, you hit a car or a wall at 50mph and keep on trucking, and maybe with almost no performance hit.

How about graphics? We have an incomplete GC demo which has even more polished visuals, with interiors of buildings modeled, and people gripe about that. And some of them ignore images in a certain other game which look less than flattering, or reveal cars improperly modeled.

Let's say that most GT Planet members don't care about any of the issues with Gran Turismo games at all. Like... so what? Does that really hurt your feelings that badly?

If the answer is yes, then the intranets are not for you, and you need to get offline for a while, take a breath, and do something else for a while. Just a thought, for the sake of your sanity.

 

[IsmokeGT]

About the damage...

The damage in the E3 trailer and the damage on the demo were totally different right?


The topic people!!! Go start a bickering thread!!

 

[sumbrownkid]

The damage is good for a basis, now what PD has to do is just refine and build on it as much as they can before release. And if they can, and have to, release patches to improve the damage modeling.

 

[Tenacious D]

I agree. I should just take my own advice and ignore Deve and Cobra, or anyone else who makes a wildly contrary post.

On topic: Kazunori himself said that the incomplete GC demo was just something of an example of how things have progressed past Prologue, and the final GT5 will be something much more. He even said he wanted our reactions as to how much more damage we want. Well, I think it's pretty clear that most of us want variable settings from zero to worse than real life.

 

[Famine]

No, I conclude that you dismiss AI issues as not important regardless and that you have situations where you avoid the AI issues quite regularly. Is that statement accurate?

No. Please refer to my original post.

We know what was said will be in GT5, and when an expectation is set, especially when it comes from the company making the game, then it becomes a failure when that expectation isn't met, regardless of your personal preference.

I don't know anything that was said to be in GT5. I've heard a bunch of rumours like everyone else but nothing more.

Ultimately, GT5 will have what it will have when it comes out. Until then, we know nothing.

I was referring to the part where you list your expectations of a next gen game.

I said nothing of the sort. I specifically said that if GT5 was GT4 with its problems fixed with more cars and tracks and pretty, I'd enjoy it.

GT5. Not "a next gen game". Specifically GT5. And not that's all it should be, but that I'd enjoy it if that's all it is.

If all you want from each succession is more and prettier, then you should be happy with games from 10 years ago, just dressed up a bit.

If it's a game I enjoyed as it was, why not? I still think Sensible World of Soccer is the best game ever made, and that's far older than 10.

Nevertheless, this conclusion stems from a false assumption.

I beg to differ... the core of some games is things to do (GTA is a jack of all trades, master of none) but the core of some games (ie simulators) should be to simulate. That means doing one thing right. Once you can do that one thing right, do it in as many places as possible.

Remember you only get to do one thing in GT: Drive a car (or truck? Or jalopy maybe) you don't get to do a lot of things. You get to do that thing in different places with different cars, but it's still one thing. So if you are a jack of all but master of none, but your all is one thing, that's dissapointing. GT is a one trick pony, they need to get that trick right.

So you beg to differ, but agree than the core of GT is driving a car on a track?

You said that it isn't true however in the context, what's the point of saying it if you really mean it as a simple laundry list of things you like, and not as a supporting argument for your overall position?

It was a supporting argument for my position.

I'll remind you again of that position.

If GT5 is GT4 with its problems fixed with more cars and tracks and pretty, I'd enjoy it. The extra things would, I'm sure, be lovely but they are just dressing for the core of the game - driving a car round a track.

No I saw that, and it looked like it was dismissed. Then you listed the flaws that needed fixing, and it wasn't included strengthening that evaluation. Did you make a mistake and mean to include it in your list of flaws that need fixing? Because it appears it wasn't fixed...

I deemed it unnecessary to repeat the point that the AI is dumb and instead noted the other flaw.

So first off we are talking about GT5 here... you can be a GT5 fanboy without being a GT4 fanboy, but that's not even what I am saying...

I'm sure you can. But GT5 isn't out yet and no-one has any idea what it consists of. It would be pointless.

You see you keep bouncing back and forth.

Sometimes the flaws from GT4 were addressed and hence GT5 is all it needs to be. But then in the next breath, there are other flaws in GT4 that need fixing... but wait... if they need fixing and aren't fixed, then isn't GT5 then in need of fixing?

See how you are playing both sides of the fence at once?

Not at all. However, let me once again simplify for you.

* GT4 was great but had a couple of flaws.
* If GT5 is GT4 with the flaws fixed and the natural expectations arising from increased space and processing power (more and better looking tracks and cars) I will enjoy it.
* If GT5 has more things on top of that, I will enjoy those too but they are not necessary for me to enjoy it.

It can't be so difficult, surely?

Ok, now you are talking out of your arse.

Cut it out or you're gone.

Disagree with people by all means. If you can't keep it civil, don't bother.

You are a Mod on a GT website!

And also a Forza website.

Give it up dude, you are the biggest GT Fanboy of them all! (by the websters definition)

Except that I don't fit any part of the definition you posted.

I was on your side, but now you turned into the dog in the corner.

See my avatar.

Chill out. Quit bickering.

If you have nothing to add to a discussion, feel free not to participate in it instead of posting flamebait.

(this will get you all fired up) Act your age! lol 31, 32 in 4 weeks, and you have bickered for 2, or 3?, pages about the meaning of a word.

Not even a single page. But then I have it set to 100ppp.

Act my age? I play video games for fun...

Obviously, that other guy is right. He will type his fingers off before he is wrong. Someone needs to shut up first, and it wont be dedoucher.

And if you ever address another member like that again, you're gone.

 

[Devedander]

Take the A.I. issue. People complain about the bots in Prologue being as stupid as the bots in GT1. Many of us have pointed out things showing this isn't true. I've pointed out issues which, to me at least, indicate that other games aren't much better. And worse, Forza fans complain about being rammed in Prologue, while ignoring the fact that the bots in Forza games ram you as well.

I guess I am one of the few who doesn't view it as a Forza GT battle, but rather as a what can GT do better battle.

Man the Forza AI did piss me off a lot though... the only reason I could forgive it was that it was an attempt at something better. When it worked it worked quite well, occasionally it was just stupid though. The difference between that and this though is that in GT, the AI has always seemed to be blind and dumb ALL the time (or the vast majority) to the point that when it does anything remotley smart it's cause for celebration.

AI in other games (I will just spread more of my love for TOCA) has far surpased that.

How about damage? People complain about what they saw in an incomplete GC demo, ignoring the fact that it's an incomplete GC demo, and that we're getting damage at all. Forza fans make fun of it, while ignoring the fact that Forza games have always had a partial damage implementation, so even in sim mode, you hit a car or a wall at 50mph and keep on trucking, and maybe with almost no performance hit.

Again... you could loose wheels in TOCA... you could loose wheels in Rallisport challenge (creeping the last 4 miles of a hillclimb with 2 wheels was hilarious!). For me it's not just a competition against Forza.

How about graphics? We have an incomplete GC demo which has even more polished visuals, with interiors of buildings modeled, and people gripe about that. And some of them ignore images in a certain other game which look less than flattering, or reveal cars improperly modeled.

I am actually surprised people are complaining about the graphics...

Let's say that most GT Planet members don't care about any of the issues with Gran Turismo games at all. Like... so what? Does that really hurt your feelings that badly?

Of course not! If you wanna be a fanboy (and I don't mean that in a bad way, but just saying someone who doesn't care about the flaws) then that's fine! I just ask you not try and invalidate other peoples positions and feelings becuase of it.

 

[IsmokeGT]

Ok, you BOTH are hopeless.

One of you uses words that you dont know what it means, the other ends a sentence with an adverb.

NEITHER are on topic!

I just want to know if the damage in the trailer and the damage in the demo were different!

 

[RACECAR]

The damage is good for a basis, now what PD has to do is just refine and build on it as much as they can before release. And if they can, and have to, release patches to improve the damage modeling.

Yep. I say they got a very good start with bumpers coming off, Scratches on the sides, The hood flying open(try to drive the in-car now ) and doors the fly off like a bat out of hell.

Well, I think it's pretty clear that most of us want variable settings from zero to worse than real life.

Or from "0" to "OMG, I'm so ******"

 

[Devedander]

No. Please refer to my original post.

I am obviously not getting it, I read your original post a few times and that's how I arrived at the conclusion I arrived it... maybe you can break it down more for me?

I don't know anything that was said to be in GT5. I've heard a bunch of rumours like everyone else but nothing more.

Ultimately, GT5 will have what it will have when it comes out. Until then, we know nothing.

No one knows, but we can make educated guesses and those educated guesses are not looking promising.

BTW when PD or KY say something will be in the game, even indirectly, I think that qualifies as more than rumor, so if and when that doens't materialize, it's more than just a rumor that turned out to not be true.


I said nothing of the sort. I specifically said that if GT5 was GT4 with its problems fixed with more cars and tracks and pretty, I'd enjoy it.

GT5. Not "a next gen game". Specifically GT5. And not that's all it should be, but that I'd enjoy it if that's all it is.

What I'd expect of the increased power and storage space of a new console and medium is more cars (check), more tracks (err... pick a translation) and improved visuals (big check).

If it's a game I enjoyed as it was, why not? I still think Sensible World of Soccer is the best game ever made, and that's far older than 10.

Nevertheless, this conclusion stems from a false assumption.

Unfortunately I can't comment on SWS, thats one I never played...

So you beg to differ, but agree than the core of GT is driving a car on a track?

Yes, GT is not about doing many things. It's about doing one thing and that is driving a car on a track. And that is why I think it's unexcuseable to not focus on that one thing.

If GT was doing many things (ie drive a car, fly a chopper, shoot people, go bowling) then it's much more excuseable that any and all of them are not as polished as any one could be on it's own.

It was a supporting argument for my position.

I'll remind you again of that position.

If GT5 is GT4 with its problems fixed with more cars and track
s and pretty, I'd enjoy it. The extra things would, I'm sure, be lovely but they are just dressing for the core of the game - driving a car round a track.

And I will remind you again that GT5 is GT4 with a few things touched up but some major glaring issues ignored.

I deemed it unnecessary to repeat the point that the AI is dumb and instead noted the other flaw.

OK well let's just simplifiy it then:

Is the AI flawed: You said yes.

Is the flaw fixed in GT5: _____

I'm sure you can. But GT5 isn't out yet and no-one has any idea what it consists of. It would be pointless.

Well then what's the point of having this forum?

Besides, as I said before, I have been around for a lot of game launches and pre release demos... no one outside PD knows for sure (and even they may not know) but based on the existing information, an educated conclusion can be reached. It might be wrong, but everything points to it very likely being right.

Not at all. However, let me once again simplify for you.

* GT4 was great but had a couple of flaws.
* If GT5 is GT4 with the flaws fixed and the natural expectations arising from increased space and processing power (more and better looking tracks and cars) I will enjoy it.
* If GT5 has more things on top of that, I will enjoy those too but they are not necessary for me to enjoy it.

It can't be so difficult, surely?

I agree! Fix what's wrong with GT4 and I would already be sold. Make it prettier and more of it, awesome... add features and modes? YES!!!!

But we are back at square one... they did't fix the flaws from GT4.

 

[Famine]

And I will remind you again that GT5 is GT4 with a few things touched up but some major glaring issues ignored.

...

But we are back at square one... they did't fix the flaws from GT4.

I have no reason to assume that.

I also have no reason to assume that they have fixed the flaws. So in many ways my hope that they have is an expectation.

OK well let's just simplifiy it then:

Is the AI flawed: You said yes.

Is the flaw fixed in GT5: _____

Don't know.

Well then what's the point of having this forum?

Discussion. News.

I agree! Fix what's wrong with GT4 and I would already be sold. Make it prettier and more of it, awesome... add features and modes? YES!!!!

The only difference between us then is that I don't care if they add some features and modes, as their presence or absence won't really affect if I enjoy it or not.

Like Drift Mode in GT5P. The fact its there doesn't really endear it to me any more - I don't like the game, pretty though it is.