There's a reason that game's initials are "DNF."
Let's just say, if that game ever comes out, it had better be the absoulte best game of all time! I don't get how there is still money to be spent on developing that game... who thinks they could possibly sell enough copies to turn a profit at this point?
The first is a pointless claim made by a developer. Of course they're going to say, "Our game is the definitive _____." Do you expect them to say, "Our game kinda sucks. Please buy it anyway."?
The second is a conclusion drawn from the sales data.
What they are and what circumstances they are used is not the point, the point is that they are ridiculous statements to make.
And the quote in question was "no one cares about forza"... sales data really? 2.7 million sales into the face of a behometh of the industry? I would say at least someone cares about Forza...
remember he said that it was a bold statement and likened it to T10's statement. The infered meaning was it was bold, brash and arrogantly pointless.
Let's put it this way, when T10 make announcements like that, it totally undermines their credibility and makes them look like they are wrapped up in themselves too much to be making legitimate statements and arguments. Same with "no one cares about damage" or "no one cares about forza".
Umm, I agree?
Was someone asserting that a lack of damage helped make GT a successful series?
No, it was not well worded on my part. I was gunning for:
The fact that GT has a large following AND that GT simultaneously doesn't have damage does not prove that people don't care about damage.
What you described was a correlation. Correlation does not equal causation, which means that while it's true that GT has a large following and that GT has no damage, one does not necessarily lead to the other.
or it proves that some Xbox owners want a semi-decent driving game, since they can't have GT.
Well I believe GT4 was available before Forza and as I think it's creditable to say that many if not most driving fans going to forza were GT fans already and coudl simply have had GT4 on PS2 but got Forza says soemthing. And the fact that there is an active community that toutes and enjoys Forzas damage modeling kind of proves it even further. I mean that is empiracle proof... that is the very thing we are talking about.
Regardless of how good Forzas damage modeling was, there was no shortage of people who were excited about it when Forza came out, the buzz is probably archived on the net in many places, I know, I was part of it.
I find it hard to believe that anyone really thinks, considering all the racing games in development today and how across the board, damage is being implimented and people are vocally being excited about it, that damage is not something people care significantly about.
GT is a phenomenon. GTA is a phenomenon. Halo is a phenomenon. Final Fantasy is a phenomenon. Call of Duty is a phenomenon. Wii Sports is a phenomenon. Forza is not a phenomenon. Not even close. It's just another game. A reasonably successful game, to be sure, but still just a game. It hasn't come close to dethroning GT in any way, shape, or form.
No... it's not... I don't think that was an argument at any time. GT is far and away the bigger franchise.
They seem to be a "vocal minority" more than anything. "Numerous people" buy GT, damage or no.
That's a two part statement... the first part... vocal minority... I wouldn't say that. Even here, in a group of people who have become accustomed to no damage due to the GT phenom not having it for generations, there is plenty of interest in damage. It comes up as something desired and worried about quite often from many people. I would think if people weren't so shut down for "whining" about damage it would be even more openly desired.
Outside of the GT forums it's even more widely talked about, it's even expected in most places now.
As for the second part, numerous people do buy GT, partially because it's a phenom and partially because even if it doesn't do damage or doesn't do it well, it still does some other things VERY well. But numerous people bught madden when 2k sports was cranking out the arguably better game. Numerous people buy windows when there are more secure stable OS's out there.
Numerous people do things for many different reasons. GT has only come in one flavor (no damage) so it wasn't really a choice since those many other things that GT does very well weren't readily available in other places.
Just becuase GT did a good job without damage, doesn't meant damage isn't important or that people don't want it. I mean GT sold a lot of copies even when the physics were pretty questionable... that doesn't mean physics aren't important.
I'm not saying that no one wants damage. In fact, I've said on more than one occasion that I would like to see damage in GT myself.
Want some proof that no one cares about damage?
I'm saying that a lack of damage doesn't seem to have held back the GT series in any significant way, even in this generation, even after Forza "showed us how it's done."
Well you have softened your stance their pretty heavily, but even that isn't much to say... there hasn't been a lot of GT this geenration (I know GT5p has sold a ton, but I do think a lot of that has a lot to do with being the only GT you can get on PS3 at the moment and the strong fan base who will take almost anything GT to hold them off until Gt5) and I think we already see how damage is shaping up to effect GT5.
It's hard to stop the momentum of a phenom like Gt5 so it doesn't surpise me that we haven't seen any evidence of it yet but I would venture GT5 is the last generation PD coudl get away without damage without being heavily criticized for it. We can't know since GT5 will have some kind of damage, but I think the reaction to the limited damage is already a good indicator of how things would have gone.
I actually see it more as GT had a forumla down, and if you see any changes in it, it's becuase PD is having their hand forced by competition. The fact that we see damage at all I think is indeed at least somewhat a result of having to deal with Forza and peoples desire for damage.
Some people do, yes. A lot more people don't.
That's a pretty hard one to nail down, I mean are we just taling GT fans, are we talking racing fans, are we talking everyone in the whole world?
I certainly can't disprove that, but again, looking around at people who have mentioned they want damage, who are dissapointed with the damage we saw and the amount of games putting damage in and getting praised and sales for it... I don't know if I could feel confident making that statement today. A few years ago I would think so, but today... I dunnoo about that.
Actually, it sorta is.
No.. it's not... it's proof that GT is able to do some thigns well enough that missing other thigns, whether you cared about them or not, is acceptable.
I know I really didn't like the lack of damage in GT4, but hell if that stopped me from enjoying the parts of it I did like! That's just me, but again, GTs sales numbers do not prove that people don't care about damage, it just proves that people DO care about things that GT does offer.
Sorry, but the evidence is against you on this.
Again, FM2 came out, and people saw what it had to offer. Several months later, GT5
came out, without "stepping up their game," and more people bought it, even though it was like less than 10% of a full game and only has about 75% of the user base.
So when you have 10% of a game outselling a full game, who exactly needs to step it up? And now that PD
have "stepped it up," would you care to predict how FM3 is going to fare against GT5?
You have a lot of factors, only one of which is damage and which is outweighed by a lot of other factors. A huge one of which is gorgeous eye candy on their new console and the need for a GT fix while waiting for GT5.
I think GT5P was widely accepted as what you got to tide you over until GT5 and again, the merits it had, outweighed what was missing even for those who cared about what was missing.
Regardless, the evidence you provide requires you to narrow it down and look at it one way only, there are a lot of other factors that contributed that you are ignoring and I would feel comfortable saying were significant factors.
One major factor is fan base. There is something to be said for being first and snatching up fans. It's hard to stop momentum and GT has a lot of it.
Ask this, GT has a great thing going, but they worked to change it... why would they if they weren't feeling the pressure to step up?
How will GT5 compare to Forza3? If you are talking sales numbers, I say it will completely clobber Forza3. But just like comparing PS3 console sales numbers to 360 sales numbers, or exclusive game to either system or anythign else like that, there are so many contributing factors that a lot has to be read into it.
For instance, what's more impressive, staying the bohemoth or making a dent against he bohemoth?
If a little league team played then Arizona Diamond backs and the diamond backs beat them badly 9 out of 10 games, the numbers say the diamond backs rocked it, but the reality is if a little league team can be the diamond backs once that's pretty impressive.
GT HAS it's fans and an interesting thing about having a fan base is moementum... once you have them, it's easier to get more. Being the new kid on the block and trying to break into anything is tough... I would say T10 is doing a good job considering what they are trying to accomplish.
What I read from it?
T10 is giiving us a great game which isn't easy to do, especially when you have to contend with something like GT5 already taking up most of the market out there. T10 is having to work very hard to keep from being drowned in the shadow of the giant.
GT is improving and stepping up it's game as a result and giving us things that were long overdue but better late than never and (hopefully) resulting in an even better GT than we have ever seen.
The result? Competition is good for everyone.
