Your honest opinion about your expectations

[Man of Mister]

I can understant why they havent done 120 cars during Enduro races on GT4, but I was really hoping PD would implement this in GT5. I ask of the developers at PD, "Please put the same amount of drivers in the real enduro races, in the game."

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I'm not sure even a hypothetical PS4 could handle that amount, especially if we're free of the last-gen Standards. The amount of physics calculations alone, assuming an engine with a lot more variables to be calculated than GT5, would be immense.

As for graphics, admittedly you'd never see all 120 on screen at once, but I'm not sure how easy that'd be to achieve. I'd much rather them aim for a solid, locked 60fps instead of the stuttering sort we currently have.

Having 24-30 cars in an enduro on the 'Ring would be about enough in my mind; as long as the AI is actually decent, that'd make for enough to populate the track pretty evenly during a race.

 

[Nattefrost]

The number of cars on a circuit is limited to how many cars they can render on the screen at once without compromising the framerate. You can't rule out a situation where you'd see them all at once. In GT5, when you've got a standing start with 15 opponents in front of you, the engine visibly suffers. So I'm afraid 24-30 is already too much unless they can get the engine to perform significantly better (not impossible of course, but difficult).

The only way they could provide constant traffic on circuits like the Ring is by having traffic that only exists within the space that's directly visible from your car (rear view as well), and making sure it stays under a certain quota. It would have to be meaningless traffic though, not opponents, which would still be limited to 10-15 something. I guess that would be a decent enough way to solve it. But 20-30+ direct opponents isn't something we should expect from a Gran Turismo game in the near future.

 

[ShiftingGears]

I am not expecting much - it seems for GT5 they spent their development time trying to get the perfect car models for the photo shoot section, rather than focusing on the actual gameplay. B-Spec is a tedious chore, and yet I expect they will continue putting development time into it.

I don't have much faith that they will improve key gameplay aspects of GT5, such as having 80% of the cars copied and pasted from previous Gran Turismo games.

I think they will improve the rally section, making the randomly generated maps more interesting. However, I think it would be worth their while to have some permanent rally stages. If they had that, the course generator wouldn't be necessary. Some night races and wet weather is something that they are perfectly capable of including on lower level A-spec events also. Not much beyond that. Having so little new content after 5 years of development time makes my expectations quite low.

The number of cars on track was pretty good in GT5 I felt - but not for NASCAR.

 

[Tapey]

I expect GT6 to be released early in the PS4 lifecycle (the first year or two) and to be a scaled back game with less content than people expect. I'd hazard a guess at there being only about 300-400 premium cars, and maybe 10-15 tracks. However, I'd expect all cars and tracks to be of a very high quality, with the dynamic weather and time of day features integrated across all of them. The game will mainly focus on A-Spec and the online features.

Why do I expect this? Because Polyphony Digital simply tried to do too much with GT5, and the game unfortunately suffered because of it.

I have a lot of respect for PD, because they really tried to push the genre forward with GT5 and set a new standard for the industry with all that they integrated into the game (1080p, 16 cars, cockpit views, dynamic weather, dynamic time of day, track generator etc, the list is endless) starting with GT5rologue and evolving with the final release of GT5.

Therefore, I think that the poll is a bit unfair with criticizing their ability to meet the established standard, because I truly feel that this console generation, PD were the first to do many things and establish them as expected features for the racing genre. Unfortunately they tried to take on far too much work, but regardless I find it sad that they aren't credited for trying to give their customers so much.

Due to GT5 taking longer than expected to release however, and many of the features and content not being as fully fleshed-out as PD wanted, I suspect that Sony will reel them in and have them working in a similar way as Turn 10 with the Forza franchise. It's unfortunate because I've never seen a franchise of games get by on as little new content and features as the Forza Motorsport games, but I've no doubt that Sony will point out their ability to release a new game every two years to Polyphony Digital, and crack the whip a bit.

I also have no doubt that Sony will remember how important GT3 was to the launch of the PS2 and it's success, and expect a repeat performance with the PS4 and GT6. So that is essentially my expectations for the next Gran Turismo game, a scaled-back lighter release like GT3 (but not as light as GT5: Prologue) that's pushed out within the first year or two of the launch of the PS4.

 

[ShiftingGears]

The game will mainly focus on A-Spec and the online features.

Why do I expect this? Because Polyphony Digital simply tried to do too much with GT5, and the game unfortunately suffered because of it.

I have a lot of respect for PD, because they really tried to push the genre forward with GT5 and set a new standard for the industry with all that they integrated into the game (1080p, 16 cars, cockpit views, dynamic weather, dynamic time of day, track generator etc, the list is endless) starting with GT5rologue and evolving with the final release of GT5.

Therefore, I think that the poll is a bit unfair with criticizing their ability to meet the established standard, because I truly feel that this console generation, PD were the first to do many things and establish them as expected features for the racing genre. Unfortunately they tried to take on far too much work, but regardless I find it sad that they aren't credited for trying to give their customers so much.

Due to GT5 taking longer than expected to release however, and many of the features and content not being as fully fleshed-out as PD wanted, I suspect that Sony will reel them in and have them working in a similar way as Turn 10 with the Forza franchise. It's unfortunate because I've never seen a franchise of games get by on as little new content and features as the Forza Motorsport games, but I've no doubt that Sony will point out their ability to release a new game every two years to Polyphony Digital, and crack the whip a bit.

I also have no doubt that Sony will remember how important GT3 was to the launch of the PS2 and it's success, and expect a repeat performance with the PS4 and GT6. So that is essentially my expectations for the next Gran Turismo game, a scaled-back lighter release like GT3 (but not as light as GT5: Prologue) that's pushed out within the first year or two of the launch of the PS4.

I have to say I would not be pleased at that prospect as GT3 was one of the most disappointing games I've played. "Scaling back" for me meant they took out many features I enjoyed (many cars, racing modifications, second chase camera angle) in order for improved graphics, all whilst the AI remained quite weak. GT4 was a huge step up from GT3, as GT2 was from GT1.

If that's anything to go by, for GT6 to be a big step up from GT5, it should be on PS3. Besides some tracks feeling more bland than they did on previous games (SSR5 and High Speed Ring come to mind), I thought the graphics of the premium cars are good and would not recommend improvement. However whoever was responsible for the damage model shouldn't be feeling that proud right now. I have seen PS1 games with more convincing damage than on GT5, which looks like someone went nuts with the smudge tool on photoshop.

Maybe Polyphony Digital might be better off sorting their management out. I find the standard of GT5 overall after years of delays pretty unacceptable to be honest, because the flaws of previous Gran Turismos were still not corrected. The notion of standard vs premium cars sent the message of "cars we copy-pasted from GT4 and cars we will use to advertise GT5", in my opinion.

They also need to find someone willing to add more substance to A-spec mode, so they don't feel it necessary to add the waste of time and electricity that is B-spec.

 

[another_jakhole]

@ShiftingGears -
Now THAT is how you go about criticizing. 👍
I should add that I don't agree with all that you've said.

SimonK[/U];7797588]Sorry what are you trying to prove with an old article about an even older game? That because Sony told him that Motor Toon was done enough that means they did the same with GT5?

Although that article does have a funny quote

and I talked myself into thinking this was good enough and it went to release. But all the things I thought were not enough yet, the users said the exact same thing when the game came out.

“That was something I regretted very much when that happened because I knew it was coming. And that happened at the beginning of my career, and it was something I vowed would never happen again.”

So how did that vow work out? Because it did happen again with GT5.

Hmm, I missed/ignored this post when I was sorta/kinda ignorantly replying to SlipZtrEm.


First of all, old game = no revisions after it's finalized. Kaz would have preferred to NOT spend/waste time after his long development time games are released.

By Johnny Minkley Published Thursday, 25 November 2010

Despite spending over five years making it, Gran Turismo creator Kazunori Yamauchi still isn't happy with his latest creation. But it is finally here and at the official launch for the game last night in Madrid, Yamauchi turned up with a garage-load of supercars and a wide grin of relief.

After telling us "today is only the beginning" for the game, Eurogamer grabbed some time with Mr GT to find out what this means, and what's next.

____________________________________​

1. Eurogamer: What's not perfect? You said on stage you're going to be upgrading every week, every month – what specifically do you want to work on?
   
   
   Kazunori Yamauchi: That's sort of a surprise we're keeping for the future. Once games go online it's no longer the type of thing where you just make it, hand it over to the players and they go out and play it. Games will keep evolving.
   
   Now it's released we're going to have several million people who'll become citizens of Gran Turismo. From here on we have to listen to their voice and see what they want and change the game accordingly to match their needs. So Gran Turismo really is just at the starting point, it's really the beginning and we're just going to evolve from here.
   
   
   ____________________________________​
   
   
2. Eurogamer: You've been working on the game for over five years. How hard was it to say 'we've done enough'? Would you have liked more time?
   
   Kazunori Yamauchi: Of course that's true and it would have been nice to have more time, but at one point we have to release the game because my imagination alone is not enough to make the game evolve to where we want it to go. We really need to listen to the voice of our citizens and see what they want out of the experience and evolve with that.
   
   
   ____________________________________​
   
   
3. Eurogamer: Looking ahead, Gran Turismo 6: will that be on PlayStation 3 or the next console?
   
   Kazunori Yamauchi: 10 years ago it was easier to predict what would happen three years in future. Nowadays no-one knows what happens in the future. In three years, we don't know what will happen.
   
   
   ____________________________________​
   
   
4. Eurogamer: So you're not sure that it'll be a PS3 game?
   
   Kazunori Yamauchi: [Laughs and shrugs]
   
   
   ____________________________________​
   
   
5. Journalist: What feedback have you had from the online community so far?
   
   Kazunori Yamauchi: Yesterday the online service was kind of in a critical state. The data centre was set up to handle 500,000 connections but the number of connections we received greatly exceeded that amount and there was a high chance of experiencing problems as a result.
   
   The design of the GT game really integrates the online and offline parts. So the problems online actually affected the offline play as well. Right now we've changed the number of simultaneous connections that are possible to one million, doubling the number, and we're trying to gauge what will happen, but we don't know at this point in time.
   
   We also received a lot of demands for having more regulations placed on the online play. We're going to perform an update on the 27th that will include things like max power restrictions and weight restrictions. It's like a living creature, dynamically growing as we speak.
   
   
   
   ____________________________________​
   
   
6. Journalist: Why did it take so long? And what is yet to come to perfect the game?
   
   Kazunori Yamauchi
   : All the parts of GT are very difficult to develop and there's quite a gap between just completing something and perfecting it. In the process there's a lot of work involved between and sometimes that means getting rid of what you already have and starting afresh. That's what took the longest.
   
   As I mentioned, we're already doing an update on the 27th to refine the usability of the game to make it a better experience. I think it's going to be hard to find an end to that process.
   
   
   ____________________________________​
   
   
7. Journalist: Are you keeping track of the racing genre? What do you think of competitors?
   
   Kazunori Yamauchi: Back in 1997 we had an isolated existence in the market but now there's a lot of racing games out there. It's very good for the genre I believe.

So, King Ignoramus, the final straw has been drawn. From here on out, you're nothing but another jackhole to this man who tried his darnedest to hold no grudge; I've done it for a couple other members, so I'm not delusional in saying that I've tried to be reasonable with you.

You're usually arrogant/stubborn and somehow it's nearly impossible for you to be impartial using honest reasoning whilst having a discussion/argument/debate/chat or simply making observations. Time and time again, there are a few of you who post in the ONLY sections of this forum (and the news article comments) in which I post like you're out to tarnish the reputation or status of something that YOU'RE NOT IN FAVOR OF.

Constructive criticism, criticism, distasteful comments, inappropriate racist/xenophobic/prejudicial/downright filthy thoughts that SOME of you share to us. You people's comments are simple to distinguish between "right and wrong". Any person who has a thought of, "Practice What You Preach, jakhole", needs to SIMPLY think realistically. Why treat such undignified people with respect after them being told thousands of times to tone "it" down. I have to make it clear that this ONE, seemingly harmless comment that SimonGay decided to share isn't the sole reason for this post I'm making. (Bugatti Geyron, the Real GT-R Simulator, all sounds in GT5 suck, the Real Bumper Car Simulator, "For Kaz, By Kaz" - get the picture?)

ALWAYS with the negative energy and always with the smart aleck choice of behavior. If you handful of reprehensible "people" didn't have such ginormous egos, you'd see that it's not Us, the majority, who are the "problem" with GT5 not being the game you need it to be, saying something SHOULD have been a certain way; a lot of the time you're correct, but almost always you're unjust in the way you present it. There's always constructive criticism being made regardless of what you try to make Us believe; you people are boisterous enough to make it seem as if you're the only members to point out the faults in GT5.

Saying that Kaz is thee problem for GT5's shortcomings is the biggest crock of crap; that goes back to when I mentioned how your egos get in the way of this place being enjoyable Enough for the great majority of us whom you feel "are the problem". If it weren't for people like you, this place would be boring. Sounds stupid, right? "People" always end up dumping their loved one for someone more exciting who usually ends up being toxic and a waste of half a decade. Stop being the abusive spouse and let Us forget you exist.

I'll private message this post to you with it being the last time that I acknowledge you. Whether you want to understand or brush aside my "rant", makes no difference to me. Have a great time continually and routinely acting like jackholes on thee Fan(boy) Forum of the Gran Turismo series and probably on the whole of the internet world.

SomeOne had to do it.

XOXOXO

👍

 

[Tapey]

I have to say I would not be pleased at that prospect as GT3 was one of the most disappointing games I've played. "Scaling back" for me meant they took out many features I enjoyed (many cars, racing modifications, second chase camera angle) in order for improved graphics, all whilst the AI remained quite weak. GT4 was a huge step up from GT3, as GT2 was from GT1.

If that's anything to go by, for GT6 to be a big step up from GT5, it should be on PS3. Besides some tracks feeling more bland than they did on previous games (SSR5 and High Speed Ring come to mind), I thought the graphics of the premium cars are good and would not recommend improvement. However whoever was responsible for the damage model shouldn't be feeling that proud right now. I have seen PS1 games with more convincing damage than on GT5, which looks like someone went nuts with the smudge tool on photoshop.

Maybe Polyphony Digital might be better off sorting their management out. I find the standard of GT5 overall after years of delays pretty unacceptable to be honest, because the flaws of previous Gran Turismos were still not corrected. The notion of standard vs premium cars sent the message of "cars we copy-pasted from GT4 and cars we will use to advertise GT5", in my opinion.

They also need to find someone willing to add more substance to A-spec mode, so they don't feel it necessary to add the waste of time and electricity that is B-spec.

Not that this excuses personal disappointment with the game obviously, but I'd like to point out that being released rather quickly after the launch of the PS2 resulted in Gran Turismo 3 not only being the best selling game in the franchise, but one of the best selling video games in history as well. I think Sony would be eager to replicate that success, not only for the money it would generate, but also the sales of the PS4 that it would no doubt generate as well.

Regarding the damage model in GT5, I share your disappointment. I share your disappointment not only for what it was however, but also for what it could have been. I was rather frustrated to see that they had actually significantly downgraded and scaled back the damage system in GT5 before the game launched. Did you get a chance to see any early gameplay footage from demo stations before GT5 was released? The game had an absolutely incredible damage system, where cars got completely and utterly mangled.

I've no idea why they downgraded the damage system when the game released, but there were actually playable demos of GT5 where the damage was some of the best I've seen in a video game, with cars showing much more impressive damage than any other games that spring to mind to be honest. I recall some particularly great footage of a Ferrari 458 Italia in particular being smashed to bits, which had everybody here very excited for the damage in the full game.

Unfortunately though, something must have happened prior to release for them to scale it back so much, to the point of it being a rather useless addition to the game. I can only hope that we see it return in GT6.

 

[another_jakhole]

Regarding the damage model in GT5, I share your disappointment. I share your disappointment not only for what it was however, but also for what it could have been.

The physics weren't built overnight. What's with this "it could have been better"? Everything could and should have been better, it isn't as if it's impossible to gradually improve something.

 

[Tapey]

The physics weren't built overnight. What's with this "it could have been better"? Everything could and should have been better, it isn't as if it's impossible to gradually improve something.

Well if you read what I wrote after the part of my post that you quoted, you'll see that I talked about how the damage system (no idea why you mentioned physics) was much better before GT5 was released. Therefore, the damage system could have been better in GT5, because we know that they had something vastly superior prior to the launch of the game which was scrapped for unknown reasons.

 

[another_jakhole]

The physics weren't built overnight. What's with this "it could have been better"? Everything could and should have been better, it isn't as if it's impossible to gradually improve something.

Well if you read what I wrote after the part of my post that you quoted, you'll see that I talked about how the damage system (no idea why you mentioned physics) was much better before GT5 was released. Therefore, the damage system could have been better in GT5, because we know that they had something vastly superior prior to the launch of the game which was scrapped for unknown reasons.

The Damage/(Physics) couldn't have been excellent from the get-go. You're saying it was better before? I don't know what you mean.


WAIT...

You're talking about that melted looking damage? Oh come on, man. Thank goodness that it isn't like that. I was referring to the Mechanical Damage in the first place. I do apologize for any confusion.

I'm really not the one to be discussing Why the damage shouldn't have stayed that way. It'll start getting technical. Do you understand video games from the programming side of it?


Edit-

I think you're not aware that the damage for all of the production cars is scaled back for obvious reasons. The sensitivity is scaled back on all cars for some obvious and some questionable reasons. Some tuner cars and the WRC rally cars have pretty damn good damage for a first go around. Compared to a Ferrari, the rally cars are amazing in the quality of their visual damage.

 

[nascarfn]

voted for option 3

 

[t_w_a_h]

Based on the GT5 journey I can see PD making some relative improvements in the game but I can't see them re-defining the genre like previous iterations have.

Don't get me wrong I had a lot of fun with the game for longer than pretty much any other AAA PS3 title but this was almost entirely due to the sandbox nature of the multiplayer side and my own perseverance and dedication in maintaining a friends list of good racers.

I find it incredible that the general level of incompetence surrounding the post launch IP development is tolerated (even encouraged) by fans, corporate management and shareholders alike. PD/Sony have had so many great opportunities and have wasted/squandered pretty much all of them. I don't understand how such a supposedly dedicated team can make so little from so much (with such an incredible budget and lengthy development cycle), regardless of the noted peculiarities of the system.

The latest iteration of GT has always been a guaranteed day one purchase in my household even if this has meant a whole new console but this won't be the case with the next one.

 

[symustafa1996]

Ahhh, I remember when this thread first started out. Good to see people having high expectations for GT6. But it's this high expectations that will make GT6 a disappointment for those people if GT6 ever turned out to be filled with a few problems to the dislike of fans.

GT5 is a good game. Great game, even. But because after 5 years, first real, full, GT game on the PS3, expectations were exceptionally high. The expectations killed the game for the fans. But then, of course, we all look forward to GT6. But because we think "They should have known better with GT5, so I expect them to have this, that......" it goes to the point where the wishlist is ridiculous, beyond the industry standard. There has to be a limit, but people never seems to think much about PD's limit for GT6.

This is why I originally voted for option 4, because there's bound to be something that will disappoint us fans, no matter what, it's unavoidable. All because it's not what we expect, so we overlook what GT6 have, and complain about what it lacks.

 

[Scaff]

But because after 5 years, first real, full, GT game on the PS3, expectations were exceptionally high. The expectations killed the game for the fans.

You are aware that PD themselves set a lot of those expectations, a number of which either still have not been delivered or were delivered a significant time after launch.

After all I don't think being able to adjust gear ratios was what could be called an unrealistic expectation of a racing title, yet we were not able to do just that for months after launch.

Their are unrealistic expectations and then just failing to do the basics.

But then, of course, we all look forward to GT6. But because we think "They should have known better with GT5, so I expect them to have this, that......" it goes to the point where the wishlist is ridiculous, beyond the industry standard. There has to be a limit, but people never seems to think much about PD's limit for GT6.

To be honest if PD manage to simply hit the basic industry standards for GT6 it will exceed my expectations.

This is why I originally voted for option 4, because there's bound to be something that will disappoint us fans, no matter what, it's unavoidable. All because it's not what we expect, so we overlook what GT6 have, and complain about what it lacks.

That applies to just about every major title ever released in a game series, you could apply the same to the Battlefield series or Uncharted.

Some parts will always disappoint some people, but with GT5 PD seriously dropped the ball and for a good number the basic expectations are actually now set rather low for GT6.

 

[Samus]

You are aware that PD themselves set a lot of those expectations, a number of which either still have not been delivered or were delivered a significant time after launch.

Quite.

It was PD that set my expectation for a livery editor, number plate editor, team builder etc. They failed to deliver.

 

[Driving Park]

I did not like GT5 at all. I felt very disappointed after having to wait 6 years or whatever it was and getting a game as unfulfilling as GT5 ended up being. Yeah, I bought into the hype, because I wanted it to be the greatest game of all time. And it just wasn't (at least for me).

However, I still have high expectations for GT6. I have very high hopes, too, but that's not what this thread is about. I still think PD can turn it around and produce a great Gran Turismo title that can hang with the first four. If PD fails to deliver again though, that might be the last new GT game I play. I'm still having lots of fun on GT4, so I don't see why that would necessarily be a bad thing.

 

[ch3ng]

You are aware that PD themselves set a lot of those expectations

This. Sony talked to much about the game. For example :They said the game will have 1,000 cars, but didn't mentioned the 800 standard cars. That changed months later. It was to late.

It was PD that set my expectation for a livery editor, number plate editor, team builder etc. They failed to deliver.

This

 

[vigi147]

Just wondering if by "todays standards" you mean we get a game with half it's content removed and a day 1 DLC with further DLC's each month that more and more resemble a subscription plan.. If so, i hope with all my heart they screw it up again.

 

[ch3ng]

I think we can say it'll be a PS4 game now My expections are high, because GT5 dissapointed me a little bit. PD has to proof that they can deliver a better racing game. I think they can.

They need to fix the old problems AI, sound, tyre physics and add new stuff + premium cars only, night racing on every track and so on.

 

[counter345]

My expectations remain non-existent. I'm disappointed up to the point where I'm not going to expect the game to be anything until it comes out, and then I will state my opinion.

 

[Yardang]

PD has to proof that they can deliver a better racing game. I think they can.

I'm sure PD can improve upon what they've done with GT5, but I'm not sure if they can meet current standards in GT6. From GT4 to GT5 it seems PD was in some sort of time freeze while the rest of the world kept advancing and moving along. Now it seems like they're in too deep of a hole and--I'll stop there since my low expectations are showing.

If PD's able to catch up with the gang, or at least add all the things Kaz was displaying in that presentation, they would exceed my expectations and more.

 

[CorvetteConquer]

PD proved that they can produce wonderful features such as:

1. Dynamic weather (snow and rain)

2. Dynamic time change (sunrise to sunset)

3. Pristine graphics and car detail


But they fail to implement many of the features well. There is little to no use of weather or time change in A-spec. Not to mention, A-spec is very tired and boring. It still feels like we're playing a 1998 title with 2010 graphics.

The problem begins and ends with KY. As do the successes. I wouldn't mind a change in authority at PD, but it will never happen as long as GT sells well.

 

[Shoe67]

Are you saying you don't think Kaz has what it takes to be a good leader?

 

[C_Raccoon23]

Are you saying you don't think Kaz has what it takes to be a good leader?

I'd say his thinking has changed between GT4 and GT5. But we'll see what GT6 is like to know for sure.

 

[CorvetteConquer]

Are you saying you don't think Kaz has what it takes to be a good leader?

I think he's done a "good" job over the years, but I absolutely would not mind it if a new leader were appointed.

The chances of that are likely non-existent, at least for the next consoles, but we'll see as he ages.

So, what I am saying is yes, at times, he can be a poor leader.

 

[Foxiol]

"Bad leader" or "good leader"...well this is out of topic but if I was the man in charge of this game I would not release the game as it was presented.

I never saw a title more unfinished than this one. (have in mind that I really like the series as a fan and I also liked the game at first being a Signature Edition owner also -first time I pre-ordered a game in my life-)

2 Years and counting and to me the game feels like it is a Beta with some testing and unfinished features, some missing content.

I mean think twice about the "Standard" cars and "Premium" cars, why "divide" the content if you didn´t have the content that you really wanted to deliver?..I mean THE CARS (New game always comes with new modelled cars and most if that game changes from low quality resolutions for a High Quality. Put both things at the same time is a huge mistake and If I was in charge of this decision "standard cars" will be in the place that they belong...GT4.
Total shame for me, judging by the mere aesthetic point of view. (you can make them look good in motion but remember those car never had a modelled interior + add the horrific black simplified interiors)

Despite and no despite the technical issues (blocky shadows, etc) of the game which has to do with the hardware. (also because Kaz wanted to make a photo-realistic game in a CONSOLE with just 512MB of RAM...)

I mean this game had TONS of bad decisions and it feels not only unfinished but mostly feels unpolished. We had major updates, even the tyre model changed, "online and Arcade" physics felt different in the same game...
They separated what in a normal situation everything will be one single thing.

Examples: Physics (should be unique for every single mode because it is the base of the simulation), Vehicles (need to say more?), Paint system (is it normal the way this works in a GAME?-I have a collection of useless paints, WHY?- Let me pay with "cr" for the colour I want, not unlock it first or getting it by buying a car which has that colour, TVR´s anyone?, and I loose it after paying for use it? ), Track editor (no simulator has this but I did 2 tracks in 2 years and never played them...Why? Because I can´t do what I really wanted with it, my track, my layout, MY DESIGN), Tracks (the same as cars but "less" noticeable and why not include all if you put like 70% of the old ones?)...some know me from the Sound thread so I don´t need to say much about it just this: having photo-realistic looking cars with unrealistic/out of tone/missed effects engines sounds is the same as say "cars without a SOUL".

We all talked about this since first day (some played the game for a year to "notice" how the game "really was presented or delivered" like me) and we all know the problems and defects, issues...but the thing is that the game as a whole felt like a mere Beta or like a huge TEST like say "hey let´s put all this together and see how it works and then we should keep adding things"...which at the end is a total mess.

Some people is happy with the game, I WAS and I AM because I played during 2 years with it but I literally stopped and I really wanted to play it more. But after all this time the game needed more things, a solid base of things that can keep me playing as I still play other simulators. (like rFactor just because of the proper simulation physics and yes mostly thanks to mods, but that solid base keeps me wanting to play it once a day since the day it launched a long time ago)

PD and Kaz need to FOCUS in one idea and make it right and SOLID with the upcoming title.
This game should have its "pillars" as every other game has. Keep progressing and adding stuff once they have the proper idea as polished as they want.
But not put "everything" like trying to show what you have in mind but not doing it right for the costumer.

Those "pillars"...we all know what we want...Kaz knows? That´s the question.


(sorry for long post and don´t take me wrong since I want the best for the future of this game, but we should do a little critique and why not "auto-critic" -see what I did there?- and hopefully wait and see if our words did something...)

THIS IS OUT OF SUPER TOPIC:

Just to put a simple example of how market works.
In Thailand people use to hunt birds alive (just regular ones) to sell them on the streets for like 5 bucks because some people believes that if they buy those birds and then release them (they actually buy them and then release the birds in the act) they will bring good luck.

Now the funny thing is that those poor little birds (first hunted and then released) become hunted again so sellers can sell them again to those people...So at the end of the day those birds are not free at all, people keeps buying them and sellers keeps making money out of it.

The solution to those poor birds will be as simple as stop buying them so hunters will stop hunting them to sell.

As happens with everything, no real need = no interest = no buy = birds happy and free.


My point is that People keeps buying things despite the real need of it (an iPhone every single year) and in this case the overall quality of the product...It means that GT5 keeps selling copies despite the issues, some "hate" and its sounds...

Will this help us to get what we really want if we keep buying the game like a religion?

My question is for Kazunori Yamauchi not for you guys.

 

[ShiftingGears]

Are you saying you don't think Kaz has what it takes to be a good leader?

The buck stops with him.

 

[thelvynau]

The buck stops with him.

Now this is very true the leader is the one who takes responsibility for their success or failure.

He makes the choices he manages the overall project then he is answerable if things arent done right.

 

[Samus]

Be careful criticising Kaz guys, his friend another jakhole will smell it out and go on the defensive again.