Use "imagination" and stop depending on the visual.

[DemonBlade]

I think GT Motion is making a fair point. I grew up on 'Attack of the mutant camels' and remember the feeling of WOW when playing it, so GT5 and most other games for that matter are about content and gameplay for me. Graphics are never going to be an issue!

 

[GT Motion]

Thsi is the epitome of a fanboy I hate to say. Youhave taken an obvious and glaring flaw that has no place in a modern title and simple excused it away with "imagine its all shiny".

If this is you answer, then why not fire up Indy 500 from 1992 and have at it?

The physics is spot on, the graphics just require a bit of "imagination" to live with.

Sorry chap, but this is not how you "live with" something that was touted and promoted and hyped.

The mere fact that the PROLOGUE had better handling of certain aspects of the display engine is all the proof that is needed to know the title was rushed to market.

I am definitely a fanboy of GT5, I am not going to lie, but it doesn't mean what I say isn't true. I even said in other posts that I feel the game should not have been released the way it is, but since it was we have no choice but to deal with it, and I was just sharing how I deal with it, and how I think others should try and deal with it since these are the cards we got dealt and to enjoy the experience we need to overlook the flaws until they are fixed. You know?

 

[MidianGTX]

Thsi is the epitome of a fanboy I hate to say. Youhave taken an obvious and glaring flaw that has no place in a modern title and simple excused it away with "imagine its all shiny".

I have no idea how you came to that conclusion. I thought it was one of the most reasonable posts on here. He clearly recognizes the game isn't perfect and said he'd welcome improvements, but that graphics aren't the be-all and end-all of Gran Turismo. You come across more as a fanboy of nitpicking in your insistence that the game is hideously flawed with issues that apparently have "no place in a modern title". You've seen other games right? Bad shadows are a fairly common problem.

 

[Anes]

I keep seeing threads nitpicking everything about the game, and if something isn't replicated to a T or up to par its under scrutiny from members here.

I remember playing racing games in the 90's and I never once thought they had bad graphics, because we were forced to use our imagination, everything was pixelated, but it still felt great and still gave me the great sensation of driving a car around a race track, it was so fun.

Now though, that graphics have been so "next gen" we expect things to look as realistic as possible, and when they don't, we bash the developers.

What ever happened to letting your imagination take over and solve the issues you see wrong with the graphics? Trust me, I am not happy at all about the shadow issue, I hate it when I see the dust pixel's everywhere during rally, and I am not big on the square trees. However, when I allow myself to get lost in the experience, that stuff really doesn't matter. The important things like sound, driving feel, frame rate, all move really well and if I let myself go and just have the game take me away I hardly notice any of the issues.

I do really hope they adjust the textures and up the shadows in an update, but really, the game runs so well and the experience is so awesome, anyone who isn't letting their imagination make up for the flaws is really missing out on a great experience.

6 years dev time. Your argument is invalid.

 

[MidianGTX]

6 years dev time. Your argument is invalid.

Off topic. Go straight to jail. Do no pass Go. Do not collect $200.

 

[Tornado]

He clearly recognizes the game isn't perfect and said he'd welcome improvements, but that graphics aren't the be-all and end-all of Gran Turismo.

Probably would help if PD and Sony stopped acting like they were, then.

6 years dev time. Your argument is invalid.

No. Actually more like a little over 3 years. Maybe 4, but probably not.

 

[Nightingale]

I think RC45's got it right. It's one thing to not freak out when a game doesn't meet certain expectations, and it's another thing to make excuses or to just say "well it doesn't bug me personally so it's not a real problem". Things can always, and should always be improved. You are not the bigger man for wanting less.

 

[Anes]

No. Actually more like a little over 3 years. Maybe 4, but probably not.

Prologue was 3 years ago? 80 of the 200 premiums are from that. Daytona looks identical to prologue. The 'ring was on prologue.

etc

 

[RC45]

I am definitely a fanboy of GT5, I am not going to lie, but it doesn't mean what I say isn't true. I even said in other posts that I feel the game should not have been released the way it is, but since it was we have no choice but to deal with it, and I was just sharing how I deal with it, and how I think others should try and deal with it since these are the cards we got dealt and to enjoy the experience we need to overlook the flaws until they are fixed. You know?

I am also a FanBoooieee!!! of the tallest order. I preordered the CE before it was announced - prepaid. I have the UK, JPN and US version of GT5P. GTHD, GT4 in about 7 flavours, The BMW version, the Toyota version, a launch GT3Aspec PS2 and the game - hell I have 2 PS2's and 2 PS3's just so we can play multiple users in the same house. Sucks to find no LAN capabilites in GT5 though .

I have Tourist Trophy and GT1 and 2 in a couple flavours.

This has not prevented me from seeing we where lied to and cheated this time round. I am not satisfied with GT5. They really could have released an expanded GTHD and kept all the featured of GT3 and GT4 and the extras in Tourist Trophy (not the bikes but the clever "best scene in replay" logic etc)

Then they could have worked on GT6 as a launch PS4 title with all the really heavy weight stuff being handled by the PS4, that obviously are overtaxing the PS3 and degrading Gt5.

All we asked for when GT4 arrived was better graphics, improved AI, improved replay managment, and more cars on track. The other ADDITIONS where proposed by KAz and co.

They over promised - but the mistake they made was showing us what was possible in GTHD and GT5P. Big mistake, because they have degraded the UI between GTHD/GT5P and GT5. You should go back and look how fluid smooth and intuitive many parts of the replay UI and other aspects of GTHD and GT5P are.

I have $100 here that says I am more of fanboy than you are --- this is why I am so upset with Kaz and co His terrible shadows are detracting from an otherwise cinimatographic quality hotlapping and race experience

 

[chromatic9]

We have PCs, PS3s, freaking steering wheels in our homes guys

 

[Tornado]

Prologue was 3 years ago? 80 of the 200 premiums are from that. Daytona looks identical to prologue. The 'ring was on prologue.

etc

I'm not sure what your point is. The first version of Prologue came out almost exactly 3 years ago, and was mostly made up of enhanced versions of content carried over from GT:HD. PD likely didn't start working on GT5 in earnest until GT:HD was officially dead in December of the previous year.

 

[Anes]

I'm not sure what your point is. The first version of Prologue came out almost exactly 3 years ago, and was mostly made up of enhanced versions of content carried over from the at-that-point recently-canceled GT:HD, with some additional stuff included.

pro·logue also pro·log*(prlôg, -lg

1. An introduction or preface, especially a poem recited to introduce a play.
2. An introduction or introductory chapter, as to a novel.
3. An introductory act, event, or period.


GT Prologue was a prologue to, amazingly, GT5. You can add any development time from Prologue to GT5 because be honest, there's hardly any new content since GT5p with the exception of 80% of the total car list being ported from GT4.

And yes, for a 6 year wait I expect to have decent shadows and reflections. I expect the car descriptions to be accurate. I expect this game to be almost perfect. It's still unfinished after 6 years and people have every right to complain about ultra obvious flaws.

 

[Tornado]

pro·logue also pro·log*(prlôg, -lg

1. An introduction or preface, especially a poem recited to introduce a play.
2. An introduction or introductory chapter, as to a novel.
3. An introductory act, event, or period.

Astounding. You can put all of this effort into such a failed attempt to look clever, but you can't come to the conclusion that 3 (the amount of time since Prologue first came out) + 1 (the amount of time that GT5 had probably been in development before Prologue first came out) = 4 (which is the number that I said in the first place).

GT Prologue was a prologue to, amazingly, GT5.

I am shocked, SHOCKED, at this surprising new development.

You can add any development time from Prologue to GT5 because be honest, there's hardly any new content since GT5p with the exception of 80% of the total car list being ported from GT4.

You can add GT5 development time to GT5, but the reasons you give for why are a complete load.

And yes, for a 6 year wait I expect to have decent shadows and reflections. I expect the car descriptions to be accurate. I expect this game to be almost perfect. It's still unfinished after 6 years and people have every right to complain about ultra obvious flaws.

They do have every right to complain, but the game was not in development for 6 years. Simple as.

 

[The Outlaw]

Bah...who cares how long the game was actually in "development" for.

More importantly, 6 years passed from the release of GT4 to GT5, and after that long of a wait we are still left with a rather unpolished/unfinished game (especially by PD standards) which leaves me scratching my head as how PD so poorly managed the development side.

 

[Anes]

Bah...who cares how long the game was actually in "development" for.

More importantly, 6 years passed from the release of GT4 to GT5.

That's what it comes down to. It's been 6 years and 80% of the content is from GT4 anyway. You'd expect the game to be perfection.

 

[Vanon]

They do have every right to complain, but the game was not in development for 6 years. Simple as.

Hmmm sorry but I still can't find a good reason for believing that, GT5 is completely based on the prologue, all the tracks and cars from it are in the final game, the engine (updated and tweaked) is the same, physics and AI have been improved but are still based on prologue and so on.... GT5 has a lot of new features and stuff but it's still based on the prologue IMHO!

Take for example GTA4 and red dead redemption: it's the same kind of game (I mean the core gameplay is the same), the engine (both graphics and physics) is the same and a lot of features are taken directly from GT4 (covering system and overall enemy's AI) but the changes between the 2 games are so deep and the work behind RDR has been so profound that hardly nobody can say that the 2 games are complementary.... think now about GT5 and his prologue!

 

[Tornado]

Hmmm sorry but I still can't find a good reason for believing that, GT5 is completely based on the prologue, all the tracks and cars from it are in the final game, the engine (updated and tweaked) is the same, physics and AI have been improved but are still based on prologue and so on.... GT5 has a lot of new features and stuff but it's still based on the prologue IMHO!

It is based directly on Prologue. That it was is largely irrelevant because Prologue was pretty obviously not in development for 3 years before it was first released.

Bah...who cares how long the game was actually in "development" for.

More importantly, 6 years passed from the release of GT4 to GT5, and after that long wait we are still left with rather unpolished game (especially by PD standards).

Because the wait time is completely irrelevant, and if you are going to bang on about how poor a game is when it has been in development for so long it would be nice to actually get the development time vaguely correct. Particularly when PD had been doing things not related to GT5 in that time span.

 

[The Outlaw]

Because the wait time is completely irrelevant, and if you are going to bang on about how poor a game is when it has been in development for so long it would be nice to actually get the development time vaguely correct. Particularly when PD had been doing things not related to GT5 in that time span.

I doubt you can truly quantify the amount of time GT5 has been in development (and to what extreme) to begin with - so that entire argument is rather pointless IMO. The customer/enthusiast doesn't care how long the game has been in development, nor do they care what excuse you use for putting a project/franchise on hold, or sitting on your ass for a couple of years. In the case of most GT enthusiasts, they just care about how much things have improved since the previous title and how long it has taken.

That's what it comes down to. It's been 6 years and 80% of the content is from GT4 anyway. You'd expect the game to be perfection.

I wasn't expecting perfection, but I sure wasn't expecting so many glaring flaws either. But at the end of the day, I still think GT5 is great in terms of the driving/racing experience (especially for a console system), and fortunately most of bugs don't bother me, but there are definitely a lot of lacking features (particularly online - qualifying, leaderboards, etc.) that really makes me question who is in charge of oversee'ing things and if they really have a clue.

 

[HurlingDervish]

We have PCs, PS3s, freaking steering wheels in our homes guys

He hit the nail on the head so hard that it shot through the figurative wood and into his foot.


Its too bad that the people that it refers to will either:

A. Completely ignore it and continue to ramble

B. Make up excuses in an angry quote of this post for acknowledging them ignoring it.

 

[RC45]

I doubt you can truly quantify the amount of time GT5 has been in development (and to what extreme) to begin with - so that entire argument is rather pointless IMO. The customer/enthusiast doesn't care how long the game has been in development, nor do they care what excuse you use for putting a project/franchise on hold, or sitting on your ass for a couple of years. In the case of most GT enthusiasts, they just care about how much things have improved since the previous title and how long it has taken.



I wasn't expecting perfection, but I sure wasn't expecting so many glaring flaws either. But at the end of the day, I still think GT5 is great in terms of the driving/racing experience (especially for a console system), and fortunately most of bugs don't bother me, but there are definitely a lot of lacking features (particularly online - qualifying, leaderboards, etc.) that really makes me question who is in charge of oversee'ing things and if they really have a clue.

Yep - not expecting perfection, just a little progression not regression.

Various previous editions of the GT game engine have incorporated the ability to turn off the HUD, fast forward, rewind and seemlessly change views during replays.

Why does the LATEST edition of the engine NOT include all these features by default?

It honestly seems as though over the years the PD team has been comprised of naive but brilliant pre-teen programmers that each have "discovered" the obvious features, implimented them in their own style then they went off to college and became accountants at Mistumi Heavy Industries never to program again and never pass their notes on tothe next class.

Seriously - the sheer lack of continuity and progression just in replay management alone from GT3 to GT4P to GT4 to Tourist Trophy to GTHD then GT5P and finally GT5 is ludicrous.

If only they would have incorporated all the GOOD features instead of improving the UI for a few versions then totally screwing it up again.

This is just one area that shows extremely poor management and control of the various projects. Now imagine the same level of chaos and poor leadership in the AI teams, the graphical teams, the modeling teams etc.

They say the product is a reflection of the creator - perhaps we are finally seeing Kaz as the flawed distracted genious he really is??

 

[mark wolf]

To be philosophical: The only problems that exist are ones we create ourselves.

 

[dhandeh]

The first time I loaded up a race on release day and saw the cars sat on the grid, then....., then I saw the tetris shadows, I thought 'what the ****'. Major disappointment for me.

 

[intake]

and the people who were complaining STILL plays the game...so who gives a crap lol

 

[Raitziger]

I think graphics are too good now because game can not hold 60fps in cockpitview.(likely the intese shadows do this)

 

[RC45]

and the people who were complaining STILL plays the game...so who gives a crap lol

Not as much as if all the cars where premium and the shadows where not so irritating.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

GT5's development cycle, graphical issues, and so on and so forth have all been covered elsewhere. Numerous times. We don't need another thread on the subject.