Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Gran Turismo Sport' started by AJFast12, Jul 8, 2017.
GT Sport online requires the plus membership. Just checked it in PS Store.
I dont think so mate but we have to wait and see about that.
I very much doubt it, Sony haven't done it with any other title and I don't see any reason why they would want to change it just for GTS. After all PS+ makes a good income for them, why change that?
You'll see the 4 symbols.
PS Plus for online.
The beta was essentially "free to play".
Maybe because GTS is up to some stiff competition and it may win over a few more players?
I don't think Sony break the rules for online gaming for one game. If they want to win more players, they should do the game better.
If this is the only way to win over other titles then...lol
I think the revenue stream for PS+ almost certainly would outweigh the extra few GTS copy that it might sell.
Fair enough guys
Re-the car list. If PD's information are accurate then all cars modeled should be future proofed when HDR becomes the norm. Other titles will need to re-work this. So from that end, they'll have an advantage there.
Forza 7 is already native 4K/60, HDR and PBR.
It is a well-known fact that Milestone creates products that are trash. Also, that product does not have street-legal vehicles.
Dirt Rally does not have any street-legal vehicles either. Also, in one of your recent posts, in this thread, you mentioned Driveclub. That is arcade too.
I do not understand the question.
We cannot adjust tire pressures yet.
That was addressed to Johnnypenso.
We want PD's driving simulators to simulate everything as faithfully as possible. If there is a "hand of god" in GT, it must be slapped and it must be removed.
According to the Gran Turismo Sport webpage, we can disable or enable any of the assist features.
We will see.
Not being able to do something in a driving simulator that we can do in the physical reality does not mean that the driving simulator is a low-fidelity one. In the physical reality we can take a hammer and break the windshield of our vehicle. The fact that we cannot do that in the driving simulator does not mean that it is an inferior driving simulator. They simulate the driving of vehicles, not the smashing of vehicles to pieces.
If we look at the competition, than it's easy to see that in comparison, it is not as high-fidelity driving simulator as others. It definitely has high-fidelity graphics and visuals, though. It is a competent enough driving simulator, but not as high-fidelity as what we have available to us.
What in the world does this have to do with anything?
It might support HDR but they haven't gone into detail about their implementation. PD's HDR surpasses the color range that even movies use. In their own words -- it's future proofed for next gen. Then again, we've been here before
No that's not a fact. Its your opinion, now using objective facts explain what is wrong with SLRE.
Which would not matter at all. Now you are also wrong as well, the only ones in it that are not road legal are the Pikes Peak cars, the rest are all 100% road legal, your not going to get very far in a rally if the cars not.
GT has vehicles that are not even real, powered by made-up forms of power generation.
Which once again doesn't matter and its once again incorrect.
A point that in terms of that area of fidelity is irrelevant.
A typo on my part, it should read 'you can't tune each corner'
Which means the tyre model is of a lower fidelity than those titles in which you can.
Its not an if.
Not on the beta.
It makes it a lower fidelity than those in which you can.
That a very poor straw-man argument, if that's the best rebuttal you have then I think you are on rather thin ice.
We do not know the differences, but we do know that they aren't the only one doing this.
Actually they are. They're the only studio in the world that is supporting HDR to that extent. The TVs that will take full advantage of that aren't even out yet.
Like I said, we do not know what differences there will be, but your claim of them being the only ones supporting HDR and future proofing their vehicles is not entirely true. We can make comparisons when they come out, but as it sits, they aren't the only one supporting HDR.
As I see it, it sounds like another statement much like "Super-Premiums." What exactly is a super premium in comparison to the old?
And GTS isn't native 4K and more than likely won't have a locked 60 fps on the standard PS4. How far would you like to move those goalposts? As a consumer if I'm choosing between maxing out the hardware that already exists vs. support for hardware that doesn't yet exist, I know which of the two seems the more sensible approach.
What does resolution and framerate have to do with future proofing cars?
They're the only studio (in all of gaming IIRC) that has that level of future proofing. My point is, in the future they should have an upper hand.
And what is the difference between what they're doing and what Forza is doing? Do we know that? We know they have great marketing terms for sure, but how extensively different are these products going to be? Your point was that they have an advantage because they're taking advantage of HDR, yet we know Forza is also supporting HDR. You then back that up by using their marketing talk, but what exactly is different?
Like I asked, whats the difference between the way they approach super-premiums, and the highest quality premiums of the past? To me, it sounds like another way to fluff up a feature/process that others are doing, just to make it stand out in name. I can't tell massive differences between what I'm seeing between the two.
What we actually know is that they aren't the only ones supporting this feature.
I want to be wrong but Poly has lost the plot since the HD era... I love their art style and the vibe that only GT has in my eyes (menus, music, color palette, actual car description...). For the rest, I see many bad signs.
My main problem with this is that one of the things i always enjoyed about Gran Turismo is the different types of cars available. From more everyday cars like Honda Accord Coupe, Civic and Prelude and even things like Toyota Yaris or Prius
to more sporty version of hatchbacks and Coupes like the Clio and DC5 Type R
Then there's some some old classic 'murican rumbles...
And Tuner cars
And JGTC Race Cars...
All the way to Full on Insane Le Man Prototypes from the 90's:
And even old important pieces of automotive history:
All these different eras and such...
With cars i never heard of before playing Gran Turismo
In fact, what Kaz said at one point from an old Gran Turismo 2 Interview sums up what i'm trying to say:
The whole Gran Turismo Career type of thing, while it's outdated, is something i really loved about. I don't want 1000+ cars, i just want more variety and different types of cars. I just don't want to focus on e Sport too much especially since plenty of people and gamers i know doesn't care about it really nor could afford paying PS+ every year. I mean, sure the GT6 Career Mode sucked but at least give us something to do outside of online mode. I like the different type of cars even thought it's way too Japanese focused.
While i enjoyed GT Sport beta, i hope they don't simply focus on GT3 and VGT cars and open up the list more.
Let's not pretend it's the act of comparison alone that bothers you. It seems to bothers you if your preferred title isn't always compared in a favourable light. I don't see you rushing into the thread that compares GT Sport screenshots to other games to tell people to quit it.
Comparisons happen: that's life. We do it multiple times throughout the day, even down to something as simple as picking our lunch for the day. People compare either subjectively (I like pasta, but I love pizza) or objectively (this slice of pizza has less pepperoni than that slice).
When some folks are fans of games, they want to see them improve. Usually, the best place to get an idea of how that improvement can happen is to look at the competition. Competition breeds excellence, after all.
It's relevant to the experience on the system you're actually playing the game on.
Being told that assets will be suitable for some point in the future may satisfy some folks. That doesn't improve the existing experience, and it only may improve the future one. We're one step away from the "GT5 is just a base game, it's GT6 that'll really show what PD can achieve on PS3" line of defence that popped up around here years ago.
"Premium cars are more suited for the PS4."
The idea of future-proofing is a precarious one. Nobody knows the future. Look at how that Premium situation turned out, actually: we're now four years into PS4's life, with 150 cars, while the competition has as much as 700. Of those 150, only a handful seem to have roots in the PS3-era models (VGTs, R18, Evora, etc).
A feature that no players will even be able to utilize for another half-decade isn't a great selling point. It's impressive from a technical standpoint — and I can't stress enough how PD is full of technical wizards IMO — but the benefits on the consumer side are very small.
@ToyGTone, good point. I also enjoy racing with street legal production cars the most (especially 90ies Japanese sports cars), and that's something where GT always delivered. GTS, however, seems to have focused more on race-spec cars. I guess for the sake of having a balanced car selection in each category, some upgrades or penalties are needed for some cars, so they're not going to be 100% production spec.
Every time I see this, I'm reminded that I should've parked the cars a little further apart, especially the R92CP.
Wait is that your image? That interesting to know.
I wonder if you used LAN and four PS2's to do that?
Sorry for offtopic.
It is. And probably my most enduring Photomode image out of the thousands I've taken.
Neither. I took four shots and merged them via Photoshop.
For years and years, i thought you did something like this...
Never thought it was a Photoshop at all but now knowing it, it doesn't feel the same anymore.
Anyways, i hope more road cars are coming in GT Sport.
What is the upper hand? How much more future proof are they compared to Forza? Can't other studios just do the same work PD has done, if and when it's necessary? How much extra work was required to make the cars future proof and what else could have been accomplished with those resources if they were put into what is currently available? If the tech changes and something else makes their future proofing redundant, wouldn't that make it a gigantic waste of resources? (see: future proofed premium PS3 cars).
I don't see any advantage to doing work today that is unnecessary, in response to guesswork about where tech is going in the future.