*What mark does this game get?*

[TheCracker]

I'm sure it will get marked down for not moving the game on enough from previous versions especially since its been delayed for so long - but will that stop us fans from not buying it? - no, nothing will.

 

[rigdon]

I can't believe IGN gave GT3 a 9.8. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely LOVE the game but the appalling AI has got to knock at least 0.5 off the score - not to mention no damage, no flips etc. Considering its graphics, controls, GUI, physics and sound are all up there with the greatest of all time; I'm a sorely disappointed that PD didn't work harder on the AI. Back when I used to play GT2 I was so pumped going into every race because I knew I had to perform really well to beat the AI, and even the slightest mistake on a 5 lap race was almost irreparable. In GT3 I preview a race, note the AI's horsepower, find a car with 100hp less and still blow their doors off. If you’re in a ~500hp car then going toe to toe with the Zonda should be a real challenge but it’s not because the steaming pile of **** is castrated by its 250km/h gear ratio! I mean what a bloody basic mistake for PD to make - total and utter carelessness.

When I busted open GT3 I sooo wanted it to be GT2 with revamped graphics and analogue controls. After one session, I realised GT3 was not even half the game GT2 was. 9.8/10 for GT3 is, in my opinion, the biggest load of you know what I've ever seen come from a review.

/rant.

Back on topic, if GT4 has the same AI as its predecessor, then it deserves no more than a 9/10. If it has a good AI (GT2) then 9.9/10 will be right.

 

[Jedi2016]

Jedi, your talking utter crap, try telling the MILLIONS of online gamers that it isn't a big thing

Try telling the millions MORE that don't play games online that it is. The numbers don't lie.. fewer than 5% of PS2 owners have a network adapter.

 

[Dev_Zero]

I can't believe IGN gave GT3 a 9.8. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely LOVE the game but the appalling AI has got to knock at least 0.5 off the score - not to mention no damage, no flips etc. Considering its graphics, controls, GUI, physics and sound are all up there with the greatest of all time; I'm a sorely disappointed that PD didn't work harder on the AI. Back when I used to play GT2 I was so pumped going into every race because I knew I had to perform really well to beat the AI, and even the slightest mistake on a 5 lap race was almost irreparable. In GT3 I preview a race, note the AI's horsepower, find a car with 100hp less and still blow their doors off. If you’re in a ~500hp car then going toe to toe with the Zonda should be a real challenge but it’s not because the steaming pile of **** is castrated by its 250km/h gear ratio! I mean what a bloody basic mistake for PD to make - total and utter carelessness.

When I busted open GT3 I sooo wanted it to be GT2 with revamped graphics and analogue controls. After one session, I realised GT3 was not even half the game GT2 was. 9.8/10 for GT3 is, in my opinion, the biggest load of you know what I've ever seen come from a review.

/rant.

Back on topic, if GT4 has the same AI as its predecessor, then it deserves no more than a 9/10. If it has a good AI (GT2) then 9.9/10 will be right.

This is such BS. GT3 had the same AI as GT2, so there goes your statement. And stop complaining about no flipping and no damage, because the PS2 isn't capable of that. Plus that modelling damage models would delay the games much further. "Your disappointed PD didn't work harder on the AI". Well you try doing it.

 

[BAZZ]

I dont have a online adapter, but i am gonna get one for GT4. Im pretty sure im not the only one thats "waiting" for it like that.

 

[Jedi2016]

Seems a little odd to get a network adapter with GT4, since it doesn't support online....

There have been much bigger online games before this.. the people that are "waiting" won't make a big dent in the numbers. It might rise to a whopping 6%.

 

[code_kev]

Yeah but jedi, if sony pulled their finger out, and actually made some WORTHWHILE Online games, stuck the NW adaptor in, and provided a decent service, who knows, it could have taken off. I mean, you can't deny, having a 6 player race, with 6 of your friends on the nurb would be good.

GT2 Ai...comedy

 

[Jedi2016]

Very true. If that were the case, and I spent more time on the PS2, I might have the adapter. But I don't. And I only know a handful of people (aside from these boards) who play GT that I'm aware of.

 

[rigdon]

This is such BS. GT3 had the same AI as GT2, so there goes your statement

GT3's AI is pathetically easy where as GT2's was a challenge. YES of course they're the same! The AI hasn't changed one bit!................

And stop complaining about no flipping and no damage, because the PS2 isn't capable of that.

We're discussing the marks review sites and magasines are going to give GT4 and I was just looking for areas where reviewers might mark it down.

Plus that modelling damage models would delay the games much further. "Your disappointed PD didn't work harder on the AI". Well you try doing it.

Again I was just looking at areas where game reviewers may mark it down.


God what a fool.

 

[Dev_Zero]

Oh, right, this ME character must be someone else than you then... Don't try to dodge when you're already shot down.

Don't get me wrong,

 

[code_kev]

Can't we all just get along?

 

[hellnback]

My quick take on Damage...

Why should I have to pay for damage on my car caused by some idiot/AI not knowing where the breaking zone is and/or tries a 'use me as a brake' passing manoeuvre...

So with damage should come 'Insurance' or even better the computer should work out just who was in fault and they pay for the repairs on the other car...

 

[JohnBM01]

As said by Electronic Arts about either "Need for Speed 3" and/or "NFS: Hot Pursuit," the games featured pretty good crash damage due in part to close association between EA and the auto makes. So that means that if you wanted to completely beat down a Ferrari 550 Maranello like you were Mike Tyson or Muhammad Ali, you can. And it shows. The reason why I don't care much about car damage is because I don't really like crash damage. It doesn't matter if I finish the Grand Valley 300km by bashing into the wall and sliding off course with a generally screwed up Toyota GT-One or a Honda S2000 LM. Damage is a visual touch and a minimal element. I don't think Kazunori wanted to even implement this sort of thing. If he did, I'm pretty sure that you don't put on a one-size-fits-all damage model for each car. For example, "Grand Theft Auto: Vice City" kind of had a one-size-fits-all approach. Every stolen vechicle is suspect to damage. You can't rip off tires, but you can surely deflate tires with a well-aimed shot from a rifle or something. The way you damage your machine (remember, there are vechicles ranging from cars to motorcycles to boats to helicopters) will show and damage will affect your performance. And except for other tanks, you run into a tank at speed, you're going to get OWNED.

I don't think crash damage is going to happen. So if you want to hate GT4 because it isn't a clone of Project Gotham or Colin McRae Rally (which feature damage models), then go right ahead. Suit yourself. Prove you're a snake in the grass, a two-timer, a two-faced individual, you know... hate on GT4 for the sole purpose of starting a flame war that will eventually get us in trouble.

 

[rigdon]

Oh, right, this ME character must be someone else than you then... Don't try to dodge when you're already shot down.

Exactly where did you shoot me down?

 

[code_kev]

I give GT4 5%, and atari karts on the jaguar 99.9%.