I would like to see you so it faster...
So everyone here who say's something bad about a game needs to be able to program a game faster and better themselves?
Right... solid logic there.
No I can't do it faster... you got me! Oh nos!!!!
Ummm... but wait... other companies (who apparently can do it faser) have been cranking out some pretty impressive improvements in less time... and 5 years? Really? That's pretty long in any game dev's book.
And before you say it, yes I know other games have come along during that time perid, but if you think PD wasn't already thinking about GT5 while launching GT4 and the whole time in between you are delusional.
While I like the Toca series, and have been vocal in asking Codies to kill of GRID and get back to TRD, Toca cuts a LOT of corners. For instance, the only car that makes any sound is yours and the car next to you in race. Just watch any replay. In those, the only car that makes any sound is yours. And it also appears that the only vehicles which have any A.I. and physics properties are in your vicinity. That certainly frees up resources for the game, but I'm not sure those were the right choices.
Really? I honestly never noticed that... I have a pretty decent surround sound system and it never occured to me that sound was missing from other cars. I will have to check that out as I am surprised I didn't notice!
Also not sure what you mean by physics and AI but I assume you mean cars not near you are just kind of dumb drive the line guys? Again I didn't notice...
But I would say the fact that I played the crap out of that game and never noticed these problems are signs that they cut corners in the right place and yet more proof that you can do things well enough to make the experience excellent without having to do it perfectly every single place...
I mean realistically sound only of your car and those around you is the only sound you will really hear and the only sound that really matters. And AI only around you is where it counts. Better to have it everywhere sure, but if it's only in the area's it effects me, that's where it really counts. After all, in the end who does what beyond where I can see is basically down to a math equation, if it plays out in detail or just the results come from it, it's not too big a difference to the experience.
That's what I am saying with GT... get it right across the board so the experience is good, don't leave big chunks out becaues you could only do it some places if you wanted to do it absolutely perfectly.
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.
Actually you do have reasons to assume that. I have detailed them before in lenght but suffice it to say they boil down to how close we are, how long it takes to make major changes and how likely it is that the recent video is actually a reasonable current build.
Well if the fact the game is out means that you can't assume anything about it, how can there be news or discussion? News is useless because the game hasn't come out so you can't know it's true and discussion is useless because anything could change before release so there is no point in disucssing something which has no solidity.
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.
Probably not the only things, but quite possibly a good call all the same...
But what Famine is asking for is more than GT4 and not just in sheer content. He mentioend more cars, more tracks, better graphics and better physics. Doesn't that cover the meat of the game pretty much. Anything else is great, but for a racing game the main ingredients are the cars, tracks, physics and graphics. You take away one of thoes and you haven't got a racing game (car racing game anyway).
No... I think damage is a big part of the meat of the game... I mean damage is the thing that can cause you to fight the last 4 laps of a race becauase you were too agressive and gambled to get up a position.
Damage is the kind of thing that can drastically change the outcome of a race. Unless you can really race without ever touching another car or any barriers, not having damage means you miss out on something.
I mean every time I run a race in GT and clip someone early on, then win the race I have to wonder "you know if my steering was pulling left the whole race because of that would I have really won?"
Damage is a huge part of the experience. No damage is like a shooting game that doesn't require to you reload... Basically probably a good 90% of the races you play would have turned out significantly different if damage was accounted for (I am talking placing differently). Something that effects the outcome that dramatically that often is significant to leave out of a simulation.
I mean why bother with things like fuel consumption when you are cutting corners on damage?
I see what Famine is asking for, and I suppose my response is "Good for you to have a low expectation, because you will be happy" but I don't think the fact that he has such low expectations is a legit reason to suggest that issues he doesn't care about should be trivialized.
