The GT7 "non-wish" list

  • Thread starter zzz_pt
  • 260 comments
  • 23,295 views
219
Italy
Italy
Ant_U_Meglio
There is no personal offence taken when someone points out flawed logic in a given list. That is a really weak argument to resort to whenever someone points out said flaws. No one is attacking anyone.

You cannot have certain Vision GTs in a game and claim to want to remove the entire concept of Vision GT. You cannot possibly expect to exclude most manufacturers from a collaborative effort.

You cannot reduce endurance races to 1 hour because you simply don't feel like doing them. Endurance races are called endurance races for a reason. A one hour endurance proves diddly squat.

I can keep going with this and pick apart most points in that original post.

From the point of view of my vision of Gran Turismo 7 those few VGTs that I like will then be renamed and put in dealerships as design or concept cars. There have been several collaborations that have been forgotten (Pikes Peak ... where are you ...) within Gran Turismo so I think they would not be a novelty that would happen with the Vision GT. If they should all remain there then they should be in their own group divided by classes in order of power.

As far as Endurance races are concerned, the duration of one hour is from my point of view perfect and would not ruin the experience for anyone. I have a lot of friends who don't have much time to devote to the game because they work or have other things to do, and many of them are happy that in Gran Turismo Sport the Endurance doesn't last more than an hour. But even from the point of view of fun, not everyone is a fan of total realism for the duration, as I wrote above I find it incredibly boring to race for hours on a track alone against an army of AI-driven drivers. The possibility of using the feauture of pausing the race as @o000o mentioned does not change for me that it is all time wasted. When I want to start the game I do it because I want to do something else, I don't wake up saying .. "WOW I can't wait to do another 6 hours on SPA without dynamic weather, without dynamic weather and against computer controlled racing drivers". .. where then at the end of the race ... you win ONLY 1 million (Since we certainly didn't drive cleanly so goodbye 50% more) and a prize car that surely if they use the Gran Turismo Sport method will be a Pace Car or a random GR.3 car. No, honestly it doesn't fit me. Instead, I could agree, if anything, the B-Spec mode would also be inserted where we can speed up the race time to immediately conclude the event, but here it depends whether the B-Spec will be able to drive or not. (In Gran Turismo 5 v1.0 he was famous for crashing into walls ...).

As for my 4 * point where I said to remove the cars that I consider stupid and useless, I would like to answer @o000o. Why consume useless slots for cars that few or almost no one would like to drive if they can be used for more interesting cars. What is better to have a Dodge Neon or a Ferrari SF90? What is more interesting a Lotus Elise GT1 or a Ford Ka? What is more legendary than a Ford GT40 LM '66 or a Red Bull X2010?

They've been adding uninteresting cars like the Pontiac Voltz lately, but wasn't it better to put a Daihatsu Sirion X4 that has a lot more fans and is a lot more fun? Where are the Nissan Laurel Medalist Club-S C33? NEVER INSERTED yet it is so popular in Japan and in Japanese video games. Where are the tuned cars and their tuners Mine's, Mugen, Nismo, TRD, Tom's, Gazoo, Mazdaspeed, Tommi Kaira?

I totally agree that Gran Turismo is a little encyclopedia about cars, but if the interesting cars stay at the image stage for museum mode it's not my fault.

For me you can be against every point of mine on the list but it will never change my idea about which features I don't want in Gran Turismo 7. I keep reiterating that if anything there will be all the things I don't like, I'm not going to take it badly or get angry like someone wrote above. I've played pretty much all the titles in the series and I'm aware of the evolution, but I'm not happy that I have to agree with everything that fits 90% of the community.
 
8,748
Canada
Ottawa
Automotive_Buff
@Overload_35 yes you bring up valid points but at the same time no one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to play those features.

You don't want to do an endurance race? Don't. Hell I've only done the 30min GT3 endurance races because I get bored chasing the rabbit. To alleviate that boredom every 10 laps or so I pull over and start from the back of the pack and overtake as cleanly and realistically as possible.

But that's it. I don't sit there thinking oh no I have to do an endurance race, because there is no incentive to do so. You don't win a rare car, you don't get a huge payout, and you just end up wasting your time, as you've said.




-Do they need to fix the economy and wealth distribution? Yes.

-Do they need to add dynamic weather and dynamic AI? Yes.

-Do they have to remove existing features because they didn't have those "fixes" before? No.




Also to rebut your point on useless cars directed at @o000o :

I would like all of them. I couldn't give two heaps for the Ferrari SF90, and would rather have the Dodge Neon, especially if it's an SRT4 because I could then make a drag racing build or a pikes peak build out of it.

Does that mean they should not include either of them? No.

Just because you don't find something interesting doesn't mean there isn't a market (of interest) for them.

One such market that died off in GTS because of the smaller roster is the Roleplay community. Might sound silly to roleplay traffic, cops and robbers, etc.but it was something fun the community came up with. It was big in GT5 and GT6. The addition of these uninteresting cars is fine by me because we get to have more traffic simulated in lobbies.

Another argument is, why not? The PS5 has a faster and larger capacity SSD out of the gate. This allows developers to tweak their games to the speeds that the SSD allows.

So why not make use of that speed and extra storage and push the boundaries of the next GT game by adding more cars? The hardware supports it without bottlenecking, so why not?

Those are just some arguments for useless cars that aren't subjective.


We're going back and forth here on opinions instead of discussing features or game mechanics that shouldn't return.


We've just about covered everything there is in the first 3 pages. Everything past that is either a rehash or a personal opinion that doesn't add anything of value and ends up turning into a circle jerk.

Not to say that your opinions aren't valued.



Now you're just being cheeky :lol:
 
Last edited:
614
Chile
Chile
cristobal458
I hope GT7 doesn't have the same issue from GT4, where certain cars were very difficult and tedious to get. Those cars are:

  1. Nissan GRAN TURISMO SKYLINE GT-R '01: (Not to be confused with the pace car variant) Attain all gold in National A Licenses.
  2. DOME ZERO '78: Attain all gold in International A Licenses. (it can be extremely tedious in the notorious License IA-15)
  3. Ford Model T Tourer '15: Attain all gold in Super Licenses (the most hardest car to obtain).
  4. Mercedes-Benz Sauber Mercedes C9 Race Car '89: Win the Formula GT World Championship (the event is too long and requires extreme luck to obtain. Only in the PAL and NTSC versions since in the NTSC-J versions the player receives the black version of the Formula Gran Turismo '04 and this car can be obtainable in the Grand Valley 300km instead).
  5. Jay Leno Tank Car '03: Completing the Driving Missions from 11-20 (Known completing all 3 Lap Battle missions. There are missions that are even more tougher than other missions such as the Driving Mission #12 3 Lap Battle Laguna Seca in where you drive a Ford GT LM Race Car Spec II '04 against supercars and american LM racing cars and the Driving Mission #14 3 Lap Battle Seattle Circuit in where you drive a Plymouth Superbird '70 against other muscle cars. The car suffers of a very wonky handling in which you will constantly crash onto the obstacles and receiving a penalty)
  6. Pagani Zonda LM Race Car '01: Completing the Driving Missions from 21-24 (Known completing all Slipstream missions. The notorious Driving Mission 23 the leader goes 13 second behind making the driving mission very difficult aside that the opponents catch to you).
  7. Toyota 7 Race Car '70: Completing the Driving Missions from 25-29 (Known completing the first part of 1-Lap Magic Missions. The easiest mission is the aforementioned Driving Mission #28 Celica Showdown while the hardest Driving Mission is the Driving Mission #26 Honda Showdown)
  8. Nissan R89C Race Car '89: Completing the Driving Missions from 30-34 (Known completing the second part of 1-Lap Magic Missions. This counts the infamous Driving Mission #34 Mercedes-Benz Showdown in where you overtake a 212HP Mercedes-Benz 300SL '54 using a Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren '03 that has gimped handling in the longest track of the game. Nürburgring Nordschleife).
  9. Opel/Vauxhall Calibra Touring Car '94: Winning the Speedster Trophy in the Opel one-make races. (Since the A-Spec points is always 200 no matter if you tune the car or not, this means considered one of the hardest one make races of the game due to the opponents has upgraded beyond to the humanity).
Text from: Gran Turismo 4 - Awesome Games Wiki (miraheze.org)
 
Last edited:
24,086
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
Mentioned this in another topic but having finally played the single player GTS stuff this week the main thing I don't want in GT7 is a game treating everyone as a beginner. Having to do stupidly easy tests telling you how to drive a car before you can do "intermediate" tests is stupid, not everyone is a beginner, don't treat us all as one. Don't make all the early events with beginner AI and no way to change it, let us race against the best AI from the start if we want, like all other games do.

It's not just veterans either, what about the actual intermediate people who know the basics but perhaps don't know advanced techniques like trail braking? Why force them to drive in a straight line first before they can actually learn something?
 

ScottPye20

Powered by Nulon
Premium
12,274
Australia
Melbourne
ScottPye20
I hope GT7 doesn't have the same issue from GT4, where certain cars were very difficult and tedious to get. Those cars are:
  1. Jay Leno Tank Car '03: Completing the Driving Missions from 11-20 (Known completing all 3 Lap Battle missions. There are missions that are even more tougher than other missions such as the Driving Mission #12 3 Lap Battle Laguna Seca in where you drive a Ford GT LM Race Car Spec II '04 against supercars and american LM racing cars and the Driving Mission #14 3 Lap Battle Seattle Circuit in where you drive a Plymouth Superbird '70 against other muscle cars. The car suffers of a very wonky handling in which you will constantly crash onto the obstacles and receiving a penalty)
  2. Pagani Zonda LM Race Car '01: Completing the Driving Missions from 21-24 (Known completing all Slipstream missions. The notorious Driving Mission 23 the leader goes 13 second behind making the driving mission very difficult aside that the opponents catch to you).
  3. Toyota 7 Race Car '70: Completing the Driving Missions from 25-29 (Known completing the first part of 1-Lap Magic Missions. The easiest mission is the aforementioned Driving Mission #28 Celica Showdown while the hardest Driving Mission is the Driving Mission #26 Honda Showdown)
  4. Nissan R89C Race Car '89: Completing the Driving Missions from 30-34 (Known completing the second part of 1-Lap Magic Missions. This counts the infamous Driving Mission #34 Mercedes-Benz Showdown in where you overtake a 212HP Mercedes-Benz 300SL '54 using a Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren '03 that has gimped handling in the longest track of the game. Nürburgring Nordschleife).
Text from: Gran Turismo 4 - Awesome Games Wiki (miraheze.org)
The missions (for the most part) weren't that tedious.
 
Last edited:
1,137
Portugal
Setubal, Portugal
Grimm66Jack
- No car roullete when we win a championship or a racing series. Make it like GT4-GT5-GT6 where we win a car according to what we have raced for, and also a car worthy of what we did, and not get a Catterham Fireblade after winning the Formula GT Championship or a McLaren 12C Road Car after winning the 24hr of Nurburgring.

- No tedious grinding. Grinding to level 50 in GT Sport was a nightmare, but even more so was grinding to level 40 in both A-Spec and B-Spec of Gran Turismo 5. Make it doable please.
And at this point, don't make us get levels just to do events. Make the Licenses be that way like the older Gran Turismo games. If you get all Licenses, you can do all events, or at least make it so that if you complete certain racing events, you unlock others. The levels can be just for the online aspect of it. For single player, IMO it's just pointless and they will never have the "grinding recipe" right for such a flawed design.

- Don't make the game easy just because begginers. Either they put the time and effort to get Gold in the challenges or they can just stay content with Bronze or Silver. I'm not asking for GT5 Red Bull X Challenges or GTS Hamilton Platinum times level of challenges, although having one such event would be really good for us more hardcore racing gamers, but at least the same difficulty as the licenses and driving missions we had in Gran Turismo 4, which were not easy, but not so impossibly difficult either.

- No credit cap. Imagine doing a championship when you have 19.990.000 credits and then you forgot to spend them and you have to cancel your championship or endurance midway just to spend the money so you don't lose out on the rewards because the cap is at 20.000.000 and instead of you winning 1.000.000 from the race/championship you win 10.000 because of the stupid cap.
GT4 and previous games didn't have caps, why make it from GT5 on? Not to mention that it's even harder to grind credits from GT5 on.

- Please... DON'T mix VGT cars in races unless it's all about VGT cars and nothing else, ergo, a VGT car event or championship.
Don't make those VGT cars race alongside Group C or LMP1 cars. It just feels stupid. They don't belong there. I'm fine with having them in the game but not replace actual existing cars on actual races.
 
585
Brazil
Brazil
wagnerFAM98
Please no more new original tracks. With GT7 being focused on the classic and traditional stuff (at least that's what Polyphony is selling), adding one more new original track will only take the spot of a classic one, and this is the last thing I want. The recent originals first featured on GT Sport are more than enough.

I hope GT7 won't have any brand new fictional circuit.
 
592
Croatia
Croatia
NekoPuffer_PPP
I wish to not have anymore sega rally style offroad tracks,i hope they design some proper point to point rally stages or rallycross tracks
Well, there's Dirt 2.0 for that...and it does it much better than GT ever did.

I actually enjoyed the rally race in the Nations Cup the other day. I expected carnage but it all went surprisingly smoothly.

Rallycross would be a perfect addition though.
 
614
Chile
Chile
cristobal458
I hope GT7 does not have "special cars" that cannot be used in races, like in GT4 or GT5. Some examples are the Nike One 2022, Autounion V16 Type C Streamline, Toyota Motor Triathlon Concept, Ferrari F2007 and Ferrari F10.

I think that in GT4 this restriction was justified because the "special cars" had drivers that were fully rendered, which means that the PS2 would have been unable to run all these models in the same race.

But in Gran Turismo 5, there is no justification for doing that. The worst of all is that we could not use the Ferrari F1s in career mode, but the Formula GT was allowed. I hope that PD gets rid of this in GT7
 
Last edited:

ScottPye20

Powered by Nulon
Premium
12,274
Australia
Melbourne
ScottPye20
But in Gran Turismo 5, there is no justification for doing that. The worst of all is that we could not use the Ferrari F1s in career mode, but the Formula GT was allowed. I hope that PD gets rid of this in GT7
I'm not sure if PD had a say in this unfortunately. Ferrari, as the rights holder, can stipulate certain conditions in a licensing agreement.
 

Dave A

TreVoR fan for life
Premium
28,939
United Kingdom
Cuddington, Cheshire
JDA1982
I'm not sure if PD had a say in this unfortunately. Ferrari, as the rights holder, can stipulate certain conditions in a licensing agreement.
I believe you are on the right track there, it appears to have been a licensesing matter. Interestingly some people have found the switch in the game that blocked these cars use in other races/events and how to turn that off.
 
Last edited:
729
United States
Maryland, USA
Well, there's Dirt 2.0 for that...and it does it much better than GT ever did.

I actually enjoyed the rally race in the Nations Cup the other day. I expected carnage but it all went surprisingly smoothly.

Rallycross would be a perfect addition though.
Only if the got rid of the silly fictional group B cars (like the mustang) in favor of some actual rallycross cars.
Martinsen_BMW3M3_4x4Turbo_-copy.jpg
 
298
Australia
Australia
cnlkurtz
2. Related to the first, please PD, let us sell our cars. You can implement a system where they go to a used, community market (if we want to sell a car with a nice, unique livery for example) or simply the old way, where we get credits for it.

I think there is a lot of potential for Polyphony to do something very special with this "Community Market" idea. Good suggestion.
 

RikkiGT-R

GT: IamValhalla
Premium
2,676
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
Rikki_GTR
IamValhalla
I'm tired of the license tests in their current iteration. See my comment about innovation. How can PD freshen up the license tests?

If they removed license tests I’d be devastated. Still to this day my favourite game “thing” is to erase my PS2 memory card and work through the GT4 license tests.

Granted, the tests in GT5 and 6 were dreadful.
 
24,086
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
If they removed license tests I’d be devastated. Still to this day my favourite game “thing” is to erase my PS2 memory card and work through the GT4 license tests.

Granted, the tests in GT5 and 6 were dreadful.
So you just want the same game over and over with no changes? Even if it is "dreadful"? That's preferable to complete change?
 
1,384
Indonesia
Indonesia
So you just want the same game over and over with no changes? Even if it is "dreadful"? That's preferable to complete change?
Both "it's the same it sucks" and "they changed it now it sucks" exist. It's not black and white that every similar things are always bad (actually, GT5/GT6 license being dreadful is because of dumbed down aspect of it, not because of it being the same) or every changes are always good, like change for the sake of changes.
 
Last edited:
24,086
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
Both "it's the same it sucks" and "they changed it now it sucks" exist. It's not black and white that every similar things are always bad (actually, GT5/GT6 license being dreadful is because of dumbed down aspect of it, not because of it being the same) or every changes are always good, like change for the sake of changes.
I didn't say that did I? Of course new ideas can suck. I just don't understand why people fear change at all so much in Gran Turismo, I see it here all the time, people are desperate to get Gran Turismo 1-4 again.

Those games with license tests will always exist, you can always go back and play them. Why expect and desire every subsequent game to be the same, or extremely similar? If they make some changes and you don't like them, you can go back to the old games. There doesn't have to be some given right that every game will suit you. Case in point, GTS didn't suit me at all, but I'm glad they tried something different.

Lots of game series have changed over time, some of them I've liked, some I haven't. But I'm glad they tried something new instead of cranking out clones for the rest of their days. You don't innovate and truly evolve your franchise making copies over and over.
 
Last edited:

RikkiGT-R

GT: IamValhalla
Premium
2,676
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
Rikki_GTR
IamValhalla
So you just want the same game over and over with no changes? Even if it is "dreadful"? That's preferable to complete change?

No, change is definitely good, but the license tests in GT have always been a hallmark and a huge part of my enjoyment of the series. At least until the (as said above) dumbed-down licenses in 5 and 6. I'm not too concerned if the entire game is totally revamped for GT7, so long as I have a proper set of licenses to work through.

As I type this I'm working through the GT4 license tests again, currently 48G, 32S, 0B... never tire of it. Apart from the slaloms :yuck:
 

Dave A

TreVoR fan for life
Premium
28,939
United Kingdom
Cuddington, Cheshire
JDA1982
I didn't say that did I? Of course new ideas can suck. I just don't understand why people fear change at all so much in Gran Turismo, I see it here all the time, people are desperate to get Gran Turismo 1-4 again.
It's in peoples nature, people are like that in all walks of life. You should see the look of terror and hatred I get from my Administrator at work when I tell her that I need something done another way from now on. Forget the why and if it's actually better, guarenteed she doesn't want the change.

Those games with license tests will always exist, you can always go back and play them. Why expect and desire every subsequent game to be the same, or extremely similar? If they make some changes and you don't like them, you can go back to the old games. There doesn't have to be some given right that every game will suit you. Case in point, GTS didn't suit me at all, but I'm glad they tried something different.
This is true, but those games will always be those games. When people talk about wanting something similar they aren't talking an exact recreation with the same cars, tracks and events, but a similar format with new cars, tracks and events. I can see the argument for that, but at the same time I want the game to evolve. I don't want revolution, I don't want the game to change completely, but I like the idea of it introducing new ideas, replacing older ideas that don't work that well or can be improved on with better ideas, but I actively enjoy the process of buying a cheap car and working my way up the events. So while some change is good, some change isn't (as you acknowledge below) and the same argument you made about GT1-4 can be made about people that want GT7 to become more like Assetto Corsa or Project Cars 2 etc. If that's what someone wants, they can go and play those. Personally I hope Gran Turismo evolves the formula, and does it well (i.e a lot. better than GT5 and 6).

Lots of game series have changed over time, some of them I've liked, some I haven't. But I'm glad they tried something new instead of cranking out clones for the rest of their days. You don't innovate and truly evolve your franchise making copies over and over.
Yes and no for me, some games try something new and I know straight away that's a bad call. Look at the change in Project Cars 3 from Project Cars 2, they really should have released that under a different name. Not a terrible game, but a terrible sequal to Project Cars 2 in a huge number of ways. GT5 introduced the driver levels, it was a big change that impacted the gameplay throughout, but it was terrible. So change for changes sake is a huge no, it has to be a good change that has been well thought out that is an improvement on whatever it is changing/impacting. I'm very much up for that, but change for the sake of change is just a bad idea.
 
Last edited:
1,384
Indonesia
Indonesia
I didn't say that did I? Of course new ideas can suck. I just don't understand why people fear change at all so much in Gran Turismo, I see it here all the time, people are desperate to get Gran Turismo 1-4 again.

Those games with license tests will always exist, you can always go back and play them. Why expect and desire every subsequent game to be the same, or extremely similar? If they make some changes and you don't like them, you can go back to the old games. There doesn't have to be some given right that every game will suit you. Case in point, GTS didn't suit me at all, but I'm glad they tried something different.

Lots of game series have changed over time, some of them I've liked, some I haven't. But I'm glad they tried something new instead of cranking out clones for the rest of their days. You don't innovate and truly evolve your franchise making copies over and over.
Fear of change happens in anything not only GT. I don't know if you'll clown me for using this as a source, but tons of examples here. Please don't be intolerant to people's way of thinking that is different to yours (though if they got it wrong they can be criticized like double standard nostalgia treatment). Well speaking for license, I of course wouldn't want for it to be exactly the same. I instead want it to be evolved with more varieties of what can be tested, rather than just merely time trial on corner types or full track time trial as final tests. As you said there evolve... not getting rid of it entirely, but adding new stuffs that can be added but also keeping the old ones there.

No, change is definitely good, but the license tests in GT have always been a hallmark and a huge part of my enjoyment of the series. At least until the (as said above) dumbed-down licenses in 5 and 6. I'm not too concerned if the entire game is totally revamped for GT7, so long as I have a proper set of licenses to work through.

As I type this I'm working through the GT4 license tests again, currently 48G, 32S, 0B... never tire of it. Apart from the slaloms :yuck:
Well people like to think of Licenses as merely tutorials for beginners, but GT has CaRPG aspects, and Licenses are more like the boss battles GT had.
 
Last edited:
1,079
Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe
Maybe it's just me but people wanting license tests to be frustratingly difficult just feels a little gatekeepy.

The main challenge of a racing game should be the racing. Not the extra side bits.
 
Last edited:

ScottPye20

Powered by Nulon
Premium
12,274
Australia
Melbourne
ScottPye20
Grinding through the licence tests in GT4 was particularly BORING and I didn't enjoy it one bit, even if it helped me improve my skills. Going through 5 halls with 16 tests each was complete overkill and it didn't teach you anything about racecraft. It's more important to learn the basics of racing; attacking, defending, braking, cornering, slipstreaming and etiquette.
 
42,620
Australia
Australia
Keep them optional. Not a requirement to advance. It works fine in GT Sport. If players want to be gifted cars, they have the option to do Circuit Experience, Driving School, Mission. challenges. Don't make it mandatory to enter any of the events and Sport Mode.

That's the main problem with licence tests.

As an option, the licence tests can act the way they do in Sport Mode, to advance your Level. There are players that jump straight into FIA without touching anything else. There's no need to, when two cars are loaned free, in Manu selection.
Players that want the rewards, can do licence tests and do all the leveling up as they please. That's fine.

It's going to depend on PD to up the AI challenge with some of those tests. Other than that, I think the start and stop in a box stuff can be deleted.

Missions Challenges work well, as long as ALL the AI are competitive. Not just the one in the field.
Some of the challenges, that test the players endurance, are good. Again, make the AI challenging.
 
Last edited:
16,777
United States
Maryland
GranTurismo0517
RandomCarGuy17
I just don't understand why people fear change at all so much in Gran Turismo, I see it here all the time, people are desperate to get Gran Turismo 1-4 again.
My take: I have seen change happen to other video franchises including racing game ones and the changes made often have ticked me off. So, I guess I'm just conditioned to immediately get aggravated at the idea of change.

There's that and I'm happy with the formula that Gran Turismo has, changing the overall gameplay formula of GT would just not feel right to me. Especially now that every other racing game out there except for Forza Motorsport has a different career mode style anyway. Aside from a few things you suggested such as fixing the license tests, I think more drastic changes would just flat out annoy me. The career mode style that you seem to be sick of is what I consider part of Gran Turismo's identity.

Lots of game series have changed over time, some of them I've liked, some I haven't. But I'm glad they tried something new instead of cranking out clones for the rest of their days. You don't innovate and truly evolve your franchise making copies over and over.
and this is where we differ. As I said before, multiple major changes to franchises have ticked me off to a point where they have become a pain. It's been a majority of the game changes I disliked more than liked. For example, Whenever a new Sonic game comes out, it's almost like Sega is trying to make them worse on purpose. Sometimes a new mechanic is added that makes the gameplay style more fun, but they mostly turned out terrible. Spyro the Dragon was another example, Insomniac leaves and the games following it are immediately less fun and 3 of them aren't even the same kind of game anymore. Then with Resident Evil, Capcom immediately went straight into aiming the series into being mostly action-oriented where it felt like something different, I didn't even bother with RE6 aside from a demo as it just looked like a flippin' mess (and according to every review I've watched, it completely was).
 
1,384
Indonesia
Indonesia
Grinding through the licence tests in GT4 was particularly BORING and I didn't enjoy it one bit, even if it helped me improve my skills. Going through 5 halls with 16 tests each was complete overkill and it didn't teach you anything about racecraft. It's more important to learn the basics of racing; attacking, defending, braking, cornering, slipstreaming and etiquette.
Well that's what I meant for not removing licenses altogether just because of it being done in previous games. The licenses teaching more thing than completing a section of a track like you said there, basics of racing. Actually braking and cornering are what licenses are mostlly about, unless you mean paired with other cars. GT5 was the one which had licenses with other cars present to pass. I guess I was wrong to talk about GT5's licenses being dumbed down.

And like I said above, removing licenses is like removing boss fights in RPG. They're likely serves the role as bosses in GT's CaRPG, though GT4 may be too many.

Keep them optional. Not a requirement to advance. It works fine in GT Sport. If players want to be gifted cars, they have the option to do Circuit Experience, Driving School, Mission. challenges. Don't make it mandatory to enter any of the events and Sport Mode.

That's the main problem with licence tests.

As an option, the licence tests can act the way they do in Sport Mode, to advance your Level. There are players that jump straight into FIA without touching anything else. There's no need to, when two cars are loaned free, in Manu selection.
Players that want the rewards, can do licence tests and do all the leveling up as they please. That's fine.

It's going to depend on PD to up the AI challenge with some of those tests. Other than that, I think the start and stop in a box stuff can be deleted.

Missions Challenges work well, as long as ALL the AI are competitive. Not just the one in the field.
Some of the challenges, that test the players endurance, are good. Again, make the AI challenging.
I feel like Licenses are more important in online racing, like if you want to prevent players which are dirty and rammers in your room then set the room to only allow players who have completed IB License for example, just like the GT Mode races in previous games. I know GT's AI is horrendous, but I would not like for people to blame Licenses or Career mode as a mode due to AI. It's AI's problem and well AI being problem would make overall gameplay not enjoyable yeah, but don't suggest "remove those modes because AI is bad".
 
Last edited:
42,620
Australia
Australia
Well that's what I meant for not removing licenses altogether just because of it being done in previous games. The licenses teaching more thing than completing a section of a track like you said there, basics of racing. Actually braking and cornering are what licenses are mostlly about, unless you mean paired with other cars. GT5 was the one which had licenses with other cars present to pass. I guess I was wrong to talk about GT5's licenses being dumbed down.

And like I said above, removing licenses is like removing boss fights in RPG. They're likely serves the role as bosses in GT's CaRPG, though GT4 may be too many.


I feel like Licenses are more important in online racing, like if you want to prevent players which are dirty and rammers in your room then set the room to only allow players who have completed IB License for example, just like the GT Mode races in previous games. I know GT's AI is horrendous, but I would not like for people to blame Licenses or Career mode as a mode due to AI. It's AI's problem and well AI being problem would make overall gameplay not enjoyable yeah, but don't suggest "remove those modes because AI is bad".
PD promoting racing is for everyone "7-77". Today, doing what GTs have done in the past, I-A licence to advance in a Career Mode is fine. However, having that govern the way things are now(a dirty player can stay in a D/S level forever, to wreak havoc on new players), in Online racing, it's not necessary . Lobbys have that function. PD do it for the Star Player registration.

I totally understand your view. You're preaching to the choir. Thing is, Gran Turismo, in general, is all inclusive for SPort mOde. I can't see PD changing that for Sport Mode type play. As I posted above, I can start a new game. Not even touch Campaign. Sign a Manufacturer Contract and go racing from E/B up to A+/S. If everyone had to touch licence testing to enter Sport Mode and move up levels, not sure it'd be a popular move. Might cause as much backlash as GT SPort not having GT League. Meaning, PD might have to rethink such a strategy.
 
1,079
Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe
And like I said above, removing licenses is like removing boss fights in RPG. They're likely serves the role as bosses in GT's CaRPG, though GT4 may be too many.

Do we really need "boss fights" in a racing game? IMO license tests should be nothing more than tutorials to prepare you for the actual meat of the game, which is the racing itself.
 
1,384
Indonesia
Indonesia
Do we really need "boss fights" in a racing game? IMO license tests should be nothing more than tutorials to prepare you for the actual meat of the game, which is the racing itself.
Why we have to prevent and cockblock anything that isn't related to racing because "it's the actual meat of the game"? GT is not solely focused on racing. It’s about car culture and automotive appreciation, anything revolving around cars. Photo mode, livery editor, car encyclopedia... they should explore further. Don't be a purist regarding that, there's no limit of what to add in the games. And people forget (or use the term Driving Sim as derogatory term) that GT described not as Racing Sim, but a Driving Sim (for those against something like drifting because "not actual racing"). Can have the best of both experiences without neglecting one.
 
1,079
Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe
Should the game then require photo taking or livery making test boss fights too to unlock functions in either?