Your thoughts about "standard" vs. "premium"

[RedSuinit]

You missed the point of my post completely. What I was saying was that PD never advertised the game to have the 200 premium cars as the actual content and the 800 standard cars as a bonus. That's what the post you quoted was about: Whether they have been advertised as a bonus, or not.

Unless you find an official source that say somethig like "Gran Turismo 5 is going to feature 200 cars, pushing the PS3's cutting edge technology to its limits and, as a bonus, will give you an additional 800 cars, which have been carried over from past Gran Turismo games", I'm going to go with NO THEY HAVEN'T.

You are correct, I did indeed misunderstand your post, and I apologize Luminis. However I still stand behind my belief now, that we were never decieved by PD, and that back in August of 2009 when they announced the number of cars in the game, they also dropped a bomb on us that we didn't want to accpet, so we changed it in order to make it AWESOME. I believe that WE are responsible for what happened because we ignored the OBVIOUS meaning of what was in that announcement, and twisted it into something obscure. I firmly stand behind the fact that PD has never lied to us. For those of you who are going to throw around that whole, "But they never SHOWED us the standard cars until E3 2010!" Maybe they hadn't finished moving them over to GT5, did any of you ever think of that! Maybe they weren't ready to be shown! None of that, however, changes the fact that we were told, but we could not, and would not accept it. So I consider those 800 cars as a "Bonus" because we were always told that they were going to be there.

It depends on how easy it is to avoid the 3/4 of the burger's patty that you dislike. While you claimed that it's easy to do so already, to my knowledge, we don't know how easy it is to avoid that part of the patty - or whether it is possible to do it at all. Because, if you can't avoid the parts of the patty that you don't like, it doesn't matter how big the amount of beef, that you would like, is.

Sticking with that burger analogy is getting kind of tiresome, though

Agreed on both parts. Now this is JMO ATM, but I firmly believe that PD is smart enough to let us play the whole game without touching a standard car if we so desire. Just like they were smart enough to tell us from the beginning about the standard cars, we just didn't want to hear it.

I meant ridiculous as in it was so ridiculous the way the car behaved at the slightest loss of traction. FFB was weird and needs improvement especially when oversteer occurs. If the TT was a beta, I would say it was very buggy but I have high hopes that GT5 will be just right. TT 370z just had no progression to it, could of been tyre modelling, general physics, poor ffb feeding misleading information or a mixture of all three.

This is off-topic: Hmm, I thought that the 370z on the N3 tires had plenty of progression. It was a nice smooth transition into the oversteer, not just some massive break like the Tuned version on the R1 tires. Now I have a somewhat limited experience with "racing tires" specifically Hoosier A6's from driving at autocrosses and the like, but I have only driven on Hoosier's 15 or 16 times, totalling about 1 hour of seat time on top of them, and 3 of those times was even in a heavily modified 370z. The breakaway on the Hoosiers felt ver similar to the breakaway in the TT demo, but I only spun out 9-10 times in that 370z so I guess I don't have quiet enough experience to give a rock solid comparison between the breakaway physics. However I do feel like I have enough experience to say that the handling of the car was nearly spot on from what I have experienced. I can't say for a stock 370z though.

Turning it into on-topic: As long as the Standard cars get the GT5 physics system (which I am fairly confident they will) I will be using Standard cars a lot.

This is what they said:



Very few people at the time (a very important detail: at the time) considered this meant direct GT4 ports, and those were easily ignored and put down. Most of the people assumed these GT4 cars were reworked, improved. Shouldn't they, at the time, where all the footage shown until then was from premium cars? Nothing but a small sentence from a japanese webpage that was discredited after being removed from the website said otherwise. Should we have realized then this was a possibility so we weren't so shocked now? Sure, our mistake. However, suddenly a sneaky sentence from a sneaky webpage is enough to get PD off the hook? Please, obviously not. It was immoral PR from the very beginning. A webpage that was never supposed to become public won't change that unfortunately.

Lol, THAT sentence reads even MORE like they are just going to be ported from GT4, thanks for helping my cause! How was it discredited? Please inform me! Like I say below, we don't know why it got pulled, but CLEARLY it was right. Also, read JDMKING's post, PLENTY of people read it the way I am reading it now, plainly, simply, and without the addition of any "Translators".

Also, perhaps the GT4 cars weren't ready at the time? Did any of you who keep going on and on about how they weren't shown to us think of that? Perhaps they knew the time it would take, and waited until the last moment to pull resources from other areas in order to port them over? You don't. So they should have just shown us GT4 pics and said "this is GT5." right? I don't think so. You wait until they are actually ready in order to show them. This is just an opinion, it may be true, it may be false. So before anyone goes on saying "That's just an assumption!" I know it is, but it doesn't change the fact that we were indeed TOLD, even though we weren't shown, and for all we know there is a good reason why we weren't show, i.e. THEY WEREN'T READY (<Once again just an opinion, not a fact).

You and Dev have brough up that it was never supposed to be public, why do you keep saying that? It was released, and then pulled for who knows why, YOU sure don't! Does that mean it was NEVER supposed to go public? No. If we knew the reasons as to why is was pulled, then you could pull that card. Who knows, maybe there was another mistake on there that caused it to be pulled. Perhaps PD wanted it released and then SONY told them to pull it down because they put it up earlier than SONY wanted them to. That argument is very weak and is founded in the assumption that it was PD that did not want it posted, and then pulled it down for that reason. When in fact there is a palethra of reasons as to why it could of been pulled.

 

[RedSuinit]

Crap, did it again. Please delete, double post.

 

[kingcars]

But when you slice out that 1/4 a burger and it's STILL the size of all other burgers out there? What is your point?!

I still didn't get what I paid for or what was advertised to me...you really don't get it, do you? 👎

You're clearly saying that quantity > quality. It will be the downfall of the gaming industry if gamers follow that idea.

Lol, THAT sentence reads even MORE like they are just going to be ported from GT4, thanks for helping my cause! How was it discredited? Please inform me! Like I say below, we don't know why it got pulled, but CLEARLY it was right. Also, read JDMKING's post, PLENTY of people read it the way I am reading it now, plainly, simply, and without the addition of any "Translators".

Also, perhaps the GT4 cars weren't ready at the time? Did any of you who keep going on and on about how they weren't shown to us think of that? Perhaps they knew the time it would take, and waited until the last moment to pull resources from other areas in order to port them over? You don't. So they should have just shown us GT4 pics and said "this is GT5." right? I don't think so. You wait until they are actually ready in order to show them. This is just an opinion, it may be true, it may be false. So before anyone goes on saying "That's just an assumption!" I know it is, but it doesn't change the fact that we were indeed TOLD, even though we weren't shown, and for all we know there is a good reason why we weren't show, i.e. THEY WEREN'T READY (<Once again just an opinion, not a fact).

You and Dev have brough up that it was never supposed to be public, why do you keep saying that? It was released, and then pulled for who knows why, YOU sure don't! Does that mean it was NEVER supposed to go public? No. If we knew the reasons as to why is was pulled, then you could pull that card. Who knows, maybe there was another mistake on there that caused it to be pulled. Perhaps PD wanted it released and then SONY told them to pull it down because they put it up earlier than SONY wanted them to. That argument is very weak and is founded in the assumption that it was PD that did not want it posted, and then pulled it down for that reason. When in fact there is a palethra of reasons as to why it could of been pulled.

Wow, is PD your wife/gf or something? They surely have some of you guys wrapped around their finger. I'm glad that you're happy to be played with like a puppet, but I'm not. "OMG they had one ambiguous sentence on their site for like 1 day over the course of several years, that's more than enough proof for me even though what it meant at the time was completely unclear!" Nobody had any idea that GT4 assets were being used as standard cars. Nobody. As far as we were concerned, the idea had been scrapped since, what, 2005/2006 when the GT Vision video was shown? After that we had NO OTHER INDICATION of GT4 assets ever being in GT5 (and technically, they were never shown to be in GT5, only in "GT Vision"). WHY the sentence was pulled DOES NOT MATTER. What DOES matter is that it WAS pulled. You do realize that the majority of GT's customer base will never know about the few precious hours that they were "told" about this? Because it was NEVER OPENLY RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC, no matter how much you try to twist it. An OPEN release of the information would have been in a magazine article, E3/Gamescom/etc announcement, interview, etc. Not some idiotic quick release sentence that was promptly removed. You've gotta be kidding.

And BTW - they had those GT4 assets ported for a LOOOOOOOOONG time. Just look at the old GT Vision videos. There was definitely no time constraint.

 

[RedSuinit]

I still didn't get what I paid for or what was advertised to me...you really don't get it, do you? 👎

You're clearly saying that quantity > quality. It will be the downfall of the gaming industry if gamers follow that idea.

Wow, is PD your wife/gf or something? They surely have some of you guys wrapped around their finger. I'm glad that you're happy to be played with like a puppet, but I'm not. "OMG they had one ambiguous sentence on their site for like 1 day over the course of several years, that's more than enough proof for me even though what it meant at the time was completely unclear!" Nobody had any idea that GT4 assets were being used as standard cars. Nobody. As far as we were concerned, the idea had been scrapped since, what, 2005/2006 when the GT Vision video was shown? After that we had NO OTHER INDICATION of GT4 assets ever being in GT5. WHY the sentence was pulled DOES NOT MATTER. What DOES matter is that it WAS pulled. You do realize that the majority of GT's customer base will never know about the few precious hours that they were "told" about this? Because it was NEVER OPENLY RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC, no matter how much you try to twist it. An OPEN release of the information would have been in a magazine article, E3/Gamescom/etc announcement, interview, etc. Not some idiotic quick release sentence that was promptly removed. You've gotta be kidding.

And BTW - they had those GT4 assets ported for a LOOOOOOOOONG time. Just look at the old GT Vision videos. There was definitely no time constraint.

Holy crap, please tell me you're joking. We were told from the time the car number was announced what we would be getting. We ARE getting what we pay for, and we are getting what was advertised. Accept it, you were wrong and you're "FALSE ADVERTISING" argument has always been wrong.

Go back and read my posts over the course of this thread. If I am wrapped around their fingers then the fact that I agreed with Devedander on the stance that they advertised 1000 cars without giving us any hint at two teirs of cars is wrapped around their finger? I found new information. VERY SOLID INFORMATION, and I changed my mind based on the facts and evidence. Unlike you and Dev who base it on nothing but assumptions. Now you are calling it some "obscure sentence" when it reads pretty clearly to me, and appearently read that way to quite a few other people as well. Just read JDMKING's post, and the thread that he refers to and you will find that a LOT of people read that "obscure sentence" the same way I am now. Because everything that is put up on the OFFICIAL GT WEBSITE always shows up in magazines, and other such articles. It showed up in our GTP news didn't it? Which BTW is where most of the internet "Gaming news sites" get their info on GT. Like I said before we don't know why it was pulled or who pulled the plug, so once again, nice try.

Oh, you mean how they showed GT4 with NO OTHER ADDITIONAL ASSETS, running on a PS3? Yeah man, they had those cars ported into the GT5 engine and assets for a LONG time.

 

[kingcars]

Holy crap, please tell me you're joking. We were told from the time the car number was announced what we would be getting. We ARE getting what we pay for, and we are getting what was advertised. Accept it, you were wrong and you're "FALSE ADVERTISING" argument has always been wrong.

Right, because all of the screenshots, videos, and demos for the past 4 years CLEARLY represent the full game. Gotcha 👍

I found new information. VERY SOLID INFORMATION, and I changed my mind based on the facts and evidence.

VERY SOLID INFORMATION? You consider a SINGLE, TINY snippet that was never openly released to the public VERY SOLID INFORMATION? Please stop, this is just sad.

Lol, you mean when they showed GT4 on the PS3 and it wasn't even in HD?! Yeah man, a LOONG time.

Well obviously the standard cars would take a lot longer to develop than the premiums they've been gladly shoving down our throats for 4 years now....oh wait....I just used logic in a sarcastic manner. Whoops.

 

[RedSuinit]

Right, because all of the screenshots, videos, and demos for the past 4 years CLEARLY represent the full game. Gotcha 👍

The GT5 engine hasn't even been FINISHED until recently, and you have to port the cars over into THAT engine. So why would they waste time porting GT4 cars into every build of the engine? Oops, I just used logic, sorry.

VERY SOLID INFORMATION? You consider a SINGLE, TINY snippet that was never openly released to the public VERY SOLID INFORMATION? Please stop, this is just sad.

What do you have? Oh, wait, NOTHING. You have baseless assumptions and nothing more. Oh, and it WAS publicly released on the GT OFFICIAL WEBSITE. It got pulled, we just don't know why, and it could have been a very large number of reasons. Once again, another ASSUMPTION.

Well obviously the standard cars would take a lot longer to develop than the premiums they've been gladly shoving down our throats for 4 years now....oh wait....I just used logic. Whoops.

Read above.

Oh, and go re-read my previous post, I replied to the "additions" you made on your post.

 

[JDMKING13]

Holy crap, please tell me you're joking. We were told from the time the car number was announced what we would be getting. We ARE getting what we pay for, and we are getting what was advertised. Accept it, you were wrong and you're "FALSE ADVERTISING" argument has always been wrong.

Go back and read my posts over the course of this thread. If I am wrapped around their fingers then the fact that I agreed with Devedander on the stance that they advertised 1000 cars without giving us any hint at two teirs of cars is wrapped around their finger? I found new information. VERY SOLID INFORMATION, and I changed my mind based on the facts and evidence. Unlike you and Dev who base it on nothing but assumptions. Now you are calling it some "obscure sentence" when it reads pretty clearly to me, and appearently read that way to quite a few other people as well. Just read JDMKING's post, and the thread that he refers to and you will find that a LOT of people read that "obscure sentence" the same way I am now. Because everything that is put up on the OFFICIAL GT WEBSITE always shows up in magazines, and other such articles. It showed up in our GTP news didn't it? Which BTW is where most of the internet "Gaming news sites" get their info on GT. Like I said before we don't know why it was pulled or who pulled the plug, so once again, nice try.

Oh, you mean how they showed GT4 with NO OTHER ADDITIONAL ASSETS, running on a PS3? Yeah man, they had those cars ported into the GT5 engine and assets for a LONG time.

Red i wouldn't even waste your time with these folks man who cares let them cry and wine. Its a damn game, you got folks talking about PD got us wrapped around their finger because we don't cry for weeks when we here information we don't like PD is not forcing anyone to buy this game folks If you don't like it don't buy it its just that simple.

 

[kingcars]

The GT5 engine hasn't even been FINISHED until recently, and you have to port the cars over into THAT engine. So why would they waste time porting GT4 cars into every build of the engine? Oops, I just used logic, sorry.

The problem is, your logic fails in a few key ways:

- So if the engine has been changed so much, that means that they just kept porting around the premium cars and conveniently left out the standards? If the standards would have to be re-ported, so would the premiums. Game assets are all treated the same by the graphics engine, no matter how many polys they have.

- What developer in their right mind would develop assets for an engine that's so unfinished that they had to RE-PORT things? You do know that you can update and work on a graphics engine without having to re-introduce all of the assets, right?

What do you have? Oh, wait, NOTHING. You have baseless assumptions and nothing more. Oh, and it WAS publicly released on the GT OFFICIAL WEBSITE. It got pulled, we just don't know why, and it could have been a very large number of reasons. Once again, another ASSUMPTION.

So 4 years of screenshots, videos, and demos is considered baseless, while a single ambiguous (AT THE TIME) sentence that got promptly removed isn't?

 

[RedSuinit]

The problem is, your logic fails in a few key ways:

- So if the engine has been changed so much, that means that they just kept porting around the premium cars and conveniently left out the standards? If the standards would have to be re-ported, so would the premiums. Game assets are all treated the same by the graphics engine, no matter how many polys they have.

- What developer in their right mind would develop assets for an engine that's so unfinished that they had to RE-PORT things? You do know that you can update and work on a graphics engine without having to re-introduce all of the assets, right?

Because they would use up time to port those cars over before the engine is ready right? There is nothing wrong with my logic. But let me show youwere YOUR logic is VERY flawed. You are ASSUMING that they knew they were going to use GT4 assets all along, which neither of us know for sure if they did or didn't. You talk about all the screenshots and videos, but it doesn't change the fact that when we were ACTUALLY given a car number, we were told about standard and premium vehicles.

So 4 years of screenshots, videos, and demos is considered baseless, while a single ambiguous (AT THE TIME) sentence that got promptly removed isn't?

Read above.

So the fact that so many people read it the same way I am now means WHAT exactly?

 

[Spagetti69]

Is the subject about standard cars, being known to the public for the last four years.

If so, I personally wasn't aware four years ago.
Just my two penneth.

 

[toontoonizer]

The problem is, your logic fails in a few key ways:

- So if the engine has been changed so much, that means that they just kept porting around the premium cars and conveniently left out the standards? If the standards would have to be re-ported, so would the premiums. Game assets are all treated the same by the graphics engine, no matter how many polys they have.

- What developer in their right mind would develop assets for an engine that's so unfinished that they had to RE-PORT things? You do know that you can update and work on a graphics engine without having to re-introduce all of the assets, right?


So 4 years of screenshots, videos, and demos is considered baseless, while a single ambiguous (AT THE TIME) sentence that got promptly removed isn't?

I have some advice for you that i am sure will undoubtedly come in handy in life, as well as future discussions on this forum.

Go read a book. Maybe a few books, maybe a few academic articles, if that isn't too beyond you, so you can understand what logic is, and what it means. It is rather clear that your idea of "logic" is something that would make Plato turn in his grave.

 

[kingcars]

Because they would use up time to port those cars over before the engine is ready right?

Um...it doesn't make a darn bit of difference WHEN they ported them, because they should only have to be ported ONCE. Also, by your logic, that would mean that they shouldn't have developed the premium cars until the engine was ready. That makes no sense. Ideally, they should be ported and SHOWN TO THE PUBLIC AS A REPRESENTATION OF THE FINAL PRODUCT. And that means a bit EARLIER than 6 months before release, after 4 years of hiding them. There is NO WAY that it took them that long to realize "oops we're nowhere near our car amount goal, we need to port 800 cars from PS2 and PSP!"

There is nothing wrong with my logic.

If thats what helps you sleep at night.

But let me show youwere YOUR logic is VERY flawed. You are ASSUMING that they knew they were going to use GT4 assets all along, which neither of us know for sure if they did or didn't. You talk about all the screenshots and videos, but it doesn't change the fact that when we were ACTUALLY given a car number, we were told about standard and premium vehicles.

Were we told ABOUT standards? Yes. Were we told what they actually ARE and that what we had been SHOWN was absolutely not representative of the final product (in terms of cars)? Nope.

So the fact that so many people read it the same way I am now means WHAT exactly?

The fact that there were so many people in this thread arguing that the standards ARENT GT4 ports means WHAT exactly?

 

[Scaff]

I have some advice for you that i am sure will undoubtedly come in handy in life, as well as future discussions on this forum.

Go read a book. Maybe a few books, maybe a few academic articles, if that isn't too beyond you, so you can understand what logic is, and what it means. It is rather clear that your idea of "logic" is something that would make Plato turn in his grave.

I have some advice for you.

Don't attack other members, the AUP is quite clear about it and its simply not acceptable.

If you have an issue with the logic someone uses, then by all means rip the point they are making to shreds (if you can), but do not under any circumstances attack the member themselves.


Scaff

 

[Dravonic]

Lol, THAT sentence reads even MORE like they are just going to be ported from GT4, thanks for helping my cause! How was it discredited? Please inform me! Like I say below, we don't know why it got pulled, but CLEARLY it was right. Also, read JDMKING's post, PLENTY of people read it the way I am reading it now, plainly, simply, and without the addition of any "Translators".

Also, perhaps the GT4 cars weren't ready at the time? Did any of you who keep going on and on about how they weren't shown to us think of that? Perhaps they knew the time it would take, and waited until the last moment to pull resources from other areas in order to port them over? You don't. So they should have just shown us GT4 pics and said "this is GT5." right? I don't think so. You wait until they are actually ready in order to show them. This is just an opinion, it may be true, it may be false. So before anyone goes on saying "That's just an assumption!" I know it is, but it doesn't change the fact that we were indeed TOLD, even though we weren't shown, and for all we know there is a good reason why we weren't show, i.e. THEY WEREN'T READY (<Once again just an opinion, not a fact).

You and Dev have brough up that it was never supposed to be public, why do you keep saying that? It was released, and then pulled for who knows why, YOU sure don't! Does that mean it was NEVER supposed to go public? No. If we knew the reasons as to why is was pulled, then you could pull that card. Who knows, maybe there was another mistake on there that caused it to be pulled. Perhaps PD wanted it released and then SONY told them to pull it down because they put it up earlier than SONY wanted them to. That argument is very weak and is founded in the assumption that it was PD that did not want it posted, and then pulled it down for that reason. When in fact there is a palethra of reasons as to why it could of been pulled.

I guess I wasn't clear enough, so I apologize. My whole point is, that small sentence is not enough. If we are to say PD did come clean about the whole two-tier thing, that small sentence isn't enough to even scratch the surface.

It was released in japanese only, in the japanese website only and taken down a few hours latter. Most of us were confused by what it says. Forget what we know now and read it again. What does it mean? That the cars are exact GT4 ports? It sure isn't clear enough to affirm anything like that, especially considering it's a translation. Pair that with every demo, screenshot and trailer featuring premium cars and we have a confused person at best.

Basically what I mean is, if you want to drop such a bombshell, you have to elaborate or people won't understand. As much as I hate metaphors (just look at what Devedander's food metaphor made to this thread) if we lived in the year 1010 and you came along saying the Earth is round, you would need a lot more than that for people to believe you. Essentially that's what happened with the two-tier system. We have a small sentence saying the cars were taken from GT4 but at the time most people were led to believe by a sea of other misinformation that those GT4 cars were improved, reworked.

Our fault? To a certain extent, yes. We should be wary such a thing could happen after one interpretation of that sentence brought this possibility up. However, saying PD did come clean then? With a small sentence that barely says anything? That was released by accident to the japanese public only when it was never meant to? According to Kaz himself?

I mean really... PD did mention a two-tier system but merely hinted it's details... by accident. Then tried to cover it up removing the webpage and barely talking about it. Kaz's few words on the episode were something in the lines of "The information is accurate but we weren't supposed to release this now".

 

[RedSuinit]

Um...it doesn't make a darn bit of difference WHEN they ported them, because they should only have to be ported ONCE. Also, by your logic, that would mean that they shouldn't have developed the premium cars until the engine was ready. That makes no sense. Ideally, they should be ported and SHOWN TO THE PUBLIC AS A REPRESENTATION OF THE FINAL PRODUCT. And that means a bit EARLIER than 6 months before release, after 4 years of hiding them. There is NO WAY that it took them that long to realize "oops we're nowhere near our car amount goal, we need to port 800 cars from PS2 and PSP!"

Hiding them for 4 years huh? That's because YOU KNOW they planned on using GT4 assets all along right? How about the fact that cars in GT5p aren't even up to par with GT5 models? They upped their standards on the car details half way through, so how on earth can you reasonably say that there is no way they decided late on to add the GT4 models?

If thats what helps you sleep at night.

My wife does that.

Were we told ABOUT standards? Yes. Were we told what they actually ARE and that what we had been SHOWN was absolutely not representative of the final product (in terms of cars)? Nope.

Read above. So the reason as to why so many people read that sentence as "GT4 models in GT5" means what exactly? You still have not answered that question.

The fact that there were so many people in this thread arguing that the standards ARENT GT4 ports means WHAT exactly?

I have answered this question, and more than once now. We refused to accept the obvious meaning of the sentence, we obscured it, and changed it because we did not want to accept that there could be GT4 models in GT5. Even though it was pretty clear, and a LOT of people read it the way I am using it now. Now how about you answer MY question?

 

[kingcars]

Hiding them for 4 years huh? That's because YOU KNOW they planned on using GT4 assets all along right? How about the fact that cars in GT5p aren't even up to par with GT5 models? They upped their standards on the car details half way through, so how on earth can you reasonably say that there is no way they decided late on to add the GT4 models?

There's no way they decided that late in development that just a mere 80% of the game's main feature would be GT4 ports. It's a HUGE design decision which affects MANY aspects of the game, and is not one that is made late in development.

As for the GT5P cars, well I would hope that they have been improved over the past 2 and a half years! That's part of development. They got a small portion of the game to a point where they could release it as GT5P. In no way does that mean that they would stop development on those assets, it just means that they were in a releasable form.

My wife does that.

YEAH WELL my.............internet....does that

Read above. So the reason as to why so many people read that sentence as "GT4 models in GT5" means what exactly? You still have not answered that question.

I have answered this question, and more than once now. We refused to accept the obvious meaning of the sentence, we obscured it, and changed it because we did not want to accept that there could be GT4 models in GT5. Even though it was pretty clear, and a LOT of people read it the way I am using it now. Now how about you answer MY question?

Instead of typing a long winded response, I'll just be lazy and point to Dravonic's post. He elaborated my point better than I did.

 

[gtracedriver]

Which is the case with basically every game. Your point being?

I am going to have to call "don't understand what you are talking about" here again.

The way you say it isn't is actually pretty much how it is and what exactly do you mean by 'the engine'? All the parts of the game work together, the physics engine, the sound engine, the graphics engine... they are all intertwined and can and often are developed simultaneously.

Sorry... I think you think you know how it works but I don't think it works like you think it works.

First they had to develop the tech which powers GT5. All the gfx, physics and so on which they keep improving along. It takes lot of time to develop it and then keep on improving and optimizing it.

Codemasters is a good example. All their racing games in powered by EGO engine. All their games runs at 720P 30fps. Which was built by them for this gen PS3 and 360. Even before Toca3 was released they had already start developing the tech for next gen PS3,360. Because of the experience with colin mcrae games they were able to make their first game as Dirt in 2007 and the next year using the same engine with some changes like 12 cars on track they made Grid. They acquired F1 license before grid was released but still they are only releasing their first in September 2010. Why do you think they did not make in 2009 and it took them 2yrs to make a game. Even F1 is powered by their EGO engine but they had to make lots of changes to their engine. Like weather, 24 cars and proper physics.

It takes lot of time to develop the tech and then make a game as big and as good as GT5. Unfortunately standard cars had to come in. But I think this will pay off as it is future proof and their next GT game and probably even on PS4 they can improve their engine to add more things

Most people do not understand and it is easy to say what they were doing for 5yrs ? Well that question Sony will be asking to PD as they will have to report everything what they have been doing. People will say it was bad management poor decision and thing like that but I bet most have no clue about the development of this project

 

[RedSuinit]

There's no way they decided that late in development that just a mere 80% of the game's main feature would be GT4 ports. It's a HUGE design decision which affects MANY aspects of the game, and is not one that is made late in development.

Really? so you KNOW that the standard cars are not optional? How do you know? You don't and neither do I. That is my point. It's NOT a HUGE design decision that affects MANY aspects of the game unless you are FORCED to use them.

As for the GT5P cars, well I would hope that they have been improved over the past 2 and a half years! That's part of development. They got a small portion of the game to a point where they could release it as GT5P. In no way does that mean that they would stop development on those assets, it just means that they were in a releasable form.

Can you prove that? No you can't, and you have no evidence suggesting that GT5p cars weren't the level they were shooting for, and then decided later on to beef them up even more. Neither do I, once again, case in point.

YEAH WELL my.............internet....does that

That was a good one. 👍

Instead of typing a long winded response, I'll just be lazy and point to Dravonic's post. He elaborated my point better than I did.

I respoded to Dravonics post, and he raises the same flawed theory that you have. I am STILL waiting for one of you to ACTUALLY answer my question.

 

[Luminis]

You are correct, I did indeed misunderstand your post, and I apologize Luminis. However I still stand behind my belief now, that we were never decieved by PD, and that back in August of 2009 when they announced the number of cars in the game, they also dropped a bomb on us that we didn't want to accpet, so we changed it in order to make it AWESOME. I believe that WE are responsible for what happened because we ignored the OBVIOUS meaning of what was in that announcement, and twisted it into something obscure. I firmly stand behind the fact that PD has never lied to us. For those of you who are going to throw around that whole, "But they never SHOWED us the standard cars until E3 2010!" Maybe they hadn't finished moving them over to GT5, did any of you ever think of that! Maybe they weren't ready to be shown! None of that, however, changes the fact that we were told, but we could not, and would not accept it. So I consider those 800 cars as a "Bonus" because we were always told that they were going to be there.

I agree that a lot of the current disappointment stems from the assumptions that were made by a lot of GT fans rather than from what PD actually said. It's kinda still happening right now, with people clinging to the believe that there will be cockpit view for standard cars. Of course, that might still go either way, and I don't want to start a debate about it, but I guess it kinda proves your point.

Agreed on both parts. Now this is JMO ATM, but I firmly believe that PD is smart enough to let us play the whole game without touching a standard car if we so desire. Just like they were smart enough to tell us from the beginning about the standard cars, we just didn't want to hear it.

Well, I certainly do hope so. If that's the way it actually is, I think that accepting the standard cars as a bonus will be quite a lot easier. That's my primary reason why I don't so far. Maybe I'm just being pessimistic here, but from my point of view, that seems to be the best way to aproach all things GT.

First they had to develop the tech which powers GT5. All the gfx, physics and so on which they keep improving along. It takes lot of time to develop it and then keep on improving and optimizing it.

Sigh... The coders start their work on the 'engine'. Assuming that, by this, you mean the graphic engine which renders the game and the physics engine and the sound engine as well, keep in mind that the graphic engine, sound engine and physic engine, for example, can all be worked on at the very same time. Same with what one could refer to as content: While the engine of the game is being developed and worked on by the coders, the 3D artists can already get to work with modeling the wireframes for the cars and texturing them afterwards. You do not have to finish either to start working on the other.

It's like building a car: You can build the engine of the car before all the work on the chassis is done. You could do it simultaneously, as well.

So no, they didn't have to develop the 'tech' first. They were able to start work on the 'tech' and the content, read, tracks and cars, at the very same time, if they wanted to. Unless all of PD's employees are both coders and 3D artists (and, to a lesser extend, sound artists), which I highly doubt.

And, well, implementing the assets into the engine is the same for every game; the only difference between PD and some other developers is that they developed the graphic engine themselves. And that is something other developers do as well, just not all of them.

 

[evilfoxhound]

I'm still seeing people on other websites claiming that there will be cockpits on standard cars. They claim "There is no evidence of them not having cockpits yet".

What? Appart from the OFFICIAL GT website? *Facepalms*

Anyway, here is a quote from this month's Official Playstation magazine:

"'Face-tracking using the PS Eye works on the 200 cars with cockpits and lets you look around by tilting your face away fro the screen, but the early demo we played left us underwhelmed"

I guess people will still claim that there will be standard cockpits LOL

 

[gtracedriver]

I agree that a lot of the current disappointment stems from the assumptions that were made by a lot of GT fans rather than from what PD actually said. It's kinda still happening right now, with people clinging to the believe that there will be cockpit view for standard cars. Of course, that might still go either way, and I don't want to start a debate about it, but I guess it kinda proves your point.


Well, I certainly do hope so. If that's the way it actually is, I think that accepting the standard cars as a bonus will be quite a lot easier. That's my primary reason why I don't so far. Maybe I'm just being pessimistic here, but from my point of view, that seems to be the best way to aproach all things GT.


Sigh... The coders start their work on the 'engine'. Assuming that, by this, you mean the graphic engine which renders the game and the physics engine and the sound engine as well, keep in mind that the graphic engine, sound engine and physic engine, for example, can all be worked on at the very same time. Same with what one could refer to as content: While the engine of the game is being developed and worked on by the coders, the 3D artists can already get to work with modeling the wireframes for the cars and texturing them afterwards. You do not have to finish either to start working on the other.

It's like building a car: You can build the engine of the car before all the work on the chassis is done. You could do it simultaneously, as well.

So no, they didn't have to develop the 'tech' first. They were able to start work on the 'tech' and the content, read, tracks and cars, at the very same time, if they wanted to. Unless all of PD's employees are both coders and 3D artists (and, to a lesser extend, sound artists), which I highly doubt.

And, well, implementing the assets into the engine is the same for every game; the only difference between PD and some other developers is that they developed the graphic engine themselves. And that is something other developers do as well, just not all of them.

There is no way you can compare car engine with game engine

Game engine is the base what the game is capable of doing and it can be further improved in future. I can give you many more example like unreal engine used by several games. Unreal engine is owned by epic but used to make various games and by others as well. Because not everyone wants to make their own engine from scratch. They rather prefer that.

I think GT5 development and quality, content will be justified and will help in future GT games too. It already has got good reception from E3 previews. Only the standard cars or just actually the cockpit view is only little disappointing.

 

[Dravonic]

I respoded to Dravonics post, and he raises the same flawed theory that you have. I am STILL waiting for one of you to ACTUALLY answer my question.

You did not respond to this one:

I guess I wasn't clear enough, so I apologize. My whole point is, that small sentence is not enough. If we are to say PD did come clean about the whole two-tier thing, that small sentence isn't enough to even scratch the surface.

It was released in japanese only, in the japanese website only and taken down a few hours latter. Most of us were confused by what it says. Forget what we know now and read it again. What does it mean? That the cars are exact GT4 ports? It sure isn't clear enough to affirm anything like that, especially considering it's a translation. Pair that with every demo, screenshot and trailer featuring premium cars and we have a confused person at best.

Basically what I mean is, if you want to drop such a bombshell, you have to elaborate or people won't understand. As much as I hate metaphors (just look at what Devedander's food metaphor made to this thread) if we lived in the year 1010 and you came along saying the Earth is round, you would need a lot more than that for people to believe you. Essentially that's what happened with the two-tier system. We have a small sentence saying the cars were taken from GT4 but at the time most people were led to believe by a sea of other misinformation that those GT4 cars were improved, reworked.

Our fault? To a certain extent, yes. We should be wary such a thing could happen after one interpretation of that sentence brought this possibility up. However, saying PD did come clean then? With a small sentence that barely says anything? That was released by accident to the japanese public only when it was never meant to? According to Kaz himself?

I mean really... PD did mention a two-tier system but merely hinted it's details... by accident. Then tried to cover it up removing the webpage and barely talking about it. Kaz's few words on the episode were something in the lines of "The information is accurate but we weren't supposed to release this now".

As for your question, I think you mean this one:

Because they would use up time to port those cars over before the engine is ready right? There is nothing wrong with my logic. But let me show youwere YOUR logic is VERY flawed. You are ASSUMING that they knew they were going to use GT4 assets all along, which neither of us know for sure if they did or didn't. You talk about all the screenshots and videos, but it doesn't change the fact that when we were ACTUALLY given a car number, we were told about standard and premium vehicles.

Read above.

So the fact that so many people read it the same way I am now means WHAT exactly?

As Kingcars pointed out, this is the kind of decision you make before you start making a game. They certainly knew they would use GT4 assets all along.

 

[Luminis]

There is no way you can compare car engine with game engine

'Car engine'? What are you even talking about? The cars are rendered by the graphics engine, their handling is dictated by the physics engine, their sound is given out by the sound engine. Is that what you refer to as the 'car engine'? and why would I even have to compare them? They are part of the game engine, just like the interpretation of the users input, the network coding and so on and so forth.

The game engine is just a term that summarizes some stuff; it's compromised of the graphic engine, physic engine, sound engine, input management, network code, scripting and data management.

And my point still stands, no matter what kind of engine you are talking about, one can still easily start to work on the assets the engine will use before the engine itself is actually finished. That goes for the game engine as well. You can start working of the physics engine, for example, before implementing it into the game engine itself.

To present and/or test the game, the game engine would have to be finished to an extend, but not to start work on other parts of the game.

What would, for example, stop PD from digitally reworking and assembling the sounds they recorded while the engine is still being developed?

Game engine is the base what the game is capable of doing and it can be further improved in future. I can give you many more example like unreal engine used by several games. Unreal engine is owned by epic but used to make games and others as well. Because not everyone wants to make their own engine from scratch. They rather prefer that.

Yes, there are some that rely on the engines others developed. So what? Look at Crytek, for example. They released Crysis Warhead in 2008 and Crisis 2, which will be running on a newly developed engine, the Cryengine 3, is sceduled to be released in 2010. You can do the math how long it took them, for example, to develop their own engine. It's not like PD are in any way special because they don't use an engine developed by someone else.

 

[RedSuinit]

You did not respond to this one:


As for your question, I think you mean this one:


As Kingcars pointed out, this is the kind of decision you make before you start making a game. They certainly knew they would use GT4 assets all along.

No, it's isn't! So would damage! Or day to night transitions! Or weather! Or a track editor! But when you sift through the interveiws, the news posts, the data, it becomes CLEAR that half of these things were NOT planned from the beginning, like DAMAGE. So how can you say that this isn't possibly another one of those mid-project decisions? You can't. The only way you can is if you can't accept the fact that you could be WRONG. It's living in denial, just like the guys who refuse to accept that standard cars won't have cockpits.

Also, why ISN'T one sentence enough?! Clearly a video isn't enough because people are still saying that PD will improve them before the game releases. I guess the sentence on the official website now about standard cars not supporting interior veiws isn't enough either eh? People are still in denial about that. The argument that "People still thought it meant something else," is stupid because people are doing the SAME THING NOW with other sentences that people like you and devedander are using as ammo. So one sentence is enough for your case, but not mine? hypocrisy at its best. Also, that whole "It was taken down!" argument has the same flaws as the "They knew all along that they were going to use GT4 assets!" does, you don't know WHY it was taken down, or WHOM pulled the plug on it. You can say whatever you want, it doesn't change the fact that it was there, we saw it, it was transated by numerous japanese speaking sources (not just google translator) and even IGN had some news on it before it got taken down, and on some of the things that were said at the conference! WHO took it down? Why did they do so? WE DON'T KNOW. So the whole "We were never supposed to see it!" argument is fundamentally flawed. Which part were we not supposed to see? The part about standards and premiums or something else in the announcement? You don't KNOW. THAT IS MY POINT! We were told. You can't change the fact that it was put up, and that we all read it! You CAN'T!

 

[II IVORBIGUN II]

. They certainly knew they would use GT4 assets all along.

Absolute rubbish.

Many interviews/articles that I have seen and read suggest it was whilst PD were developing GT5 that they realised they wouldn't have enough time to model 1000 premium cars.

Sorry but their are far too many experts on this thread. I always find that know it all's tend to know sod all!

 

[JDMKING13]

No, it's isn't! So would damage! Or day to night transitions! Or weather! Or a track editor! But when you sift through the interveiws, the news posts, the data, it becomes CLEAR that half of these things were NOT planned from the beginning, like DAMAGE. So how can you say that this isn't possibly another one of those mid-project decisions? You can't. The only way you can is if you can't accept the fact that you could be WRONG. It's living in denial, just like the guys who refuse to accept that standard cars won't have cockpits.

Also, why ISN'T one sentence enough?! Clearly a video isn't enough because people are still saying that PD will improve them before the game releases. I guess the sentence on the official website now about standard cars not supporting interior veiws isn't enough either eh? People are still in denial about that. The argument that "People still thought it meant something else," is stupid because people are doing the SAME THING NOW with other sentences that people like you and devedander are using as ammo. So one sentence is enough for your case, but not mine? hypocrisy at its best. Also, that whole "It was taken down!" argument has the same flaws as the "They knew all along that they were going to use GT4 assets!" does, you don't know WHY it was taken down, or WHOM pulled the plug on it. You can say whatever you want, it doesn't change the fact that it was there, we saw it, it was transated by numerous japanese speaking sources (not just google translator) and even IGN had some news on it before it got taken down, and on some of the things that were said at the conference! WHO took it down? Why did they do so? WE DON'T KNOW. So the whole "We were never supposed to see it!" argument is fundamentally flawed. Which part were we not supposed to see? The part about standards and premiums or something else in the announcement? You don't KNOW. THAT IS MY POINT! We were told. You can't change the fact that it was put up, and that we all read it! You CAN'T!

100% agreed 👍, When i said I need more information about standard cars and that the little sentence is not going to make me think standards have no cockpits some people told me that, I'm in denial, the sentence is clear, im grabbing straws, ETC... But know because the Standard and premium isssue in 09 had this information

&#9632; models included
1,000 vehicles
170 Premium new models (full interior modeling, the interior corresponds to vehicle damage)
830 kinds of standard model (some are from Gran Turismo 4 that have been carried over to GT5) [Read: Cars we have seen in GT4 before]

Its not enough or the fact this is the same type of conversation we had in Amar thread not even a year ago doesn't matter.

Absolute rubbish.

Many interviews/articles that I have seen and read suggest it was whilst PD were developing GT5 that they realised they wouldn't have enough time to model 1000 premium cars.

Sorry but their are far too many experts on this thread. I always find that know it all's tend to know sod all!

👍

 

[Dravonic]

No, it's isn't! So would damage! Or day to night transitions! Or weather! Or a track editor! But when you sift through the interveiws, the news posts, the data, it becomes CLEAR that half of these things were NOT planned from the beginning, like DAMAGE. So how can you say that this isn't possibly another one of those mid-project decisions? You can't. The only way you can is if you can't accept the fact that you could be WRONG. It's living in denial, just like the guys who refuse to accept that standard cars won't have cockpits.

Also, why ISN'T one sentence enough?! Clearly a video isn't enough because people are still saying that PD will improve them before the game releases. I guess the sentence on the official website now about standard cars not supporting interior veiws isn't enough either eh? People are still in denial about that. The argument that "People still thought it meant something else," is stupid because people are doing the SAME THING NOW with other sentences that people like you and devedander are using as ammo. So one sentence is enough for your case, but not mine? hypocrisy at its best. Also, that whole "It was taken down!" argument has the same flaws as the "They knew all along that they were going to use GT4 assets!" does, you don't know WHY it was taken down, or WHOM pulled the plug on it. You can say whatever you want, it doesn't change the fact that it was there, we saw it, it was transated by numerous japanese speaking sources (not just google translator) and even IGN had some news on it before it got taken down, and on some of the things that were said at the conference! WHO took it down? Why did they do so? WE DON'T KNOW. So the whole "We were never supposed to see it!" argument is fundamentally flawed. Which part were we not supposed to see? The part about standards and premiums or something else in the announcement? You don't KNOW. THAT IS MY POINT! We were told. You can't change the fact that it was put up, and that we all read it! You CAN'T!

PD came along and said: "Hey people, there will be 2 types of cars in GT5. 170 are new with damage and interiors, 830 were taken from GT4". The forum exploded trying to understand what this meant. Are the GT4 cars taken directly from GT4? Or are they just cars that were in GT4 and are now improved in GT5? Or are they actually cars that won't have damage? Or they don't have interiors? Or what really? Then PD went on: "Oops... sorry, we take that back". What? Why? Is there anything wrong with it? "Nope, we just weren't supposed to tell you this now". Okay, but what do you meant to say before you took it back? "...".

This is in a nutshell what happened. Would you consider this coming clean about the two-tier system? I bet you remember what happened here, nobody could actually understand it. That's why that small sentence is obviously not enough.

Moving forward to what's happening now we, once again, have a small sentence that throws something in the air without elaborating and, once again, we have confusion. So what have I done here in this thread that you accuse me of hypocrisy? What I found out I should have done before. Take that damn sentence to the letter because as unbelievable as it may be, that's what it means. I'm trying to warn people not to fall in the same trap I did.

And again, it's not enough clarification on PD's part. There will be a lot of people pissed when the game launches, and rightfully so.

 

[RedSuinit]

PD came along and said: "Hey people, there will be 2 types of cars in GT5. 170 are new with damage and interiors, 830 were taken from GT4". The forum exploded trying to understand what this meant. Are the GT4 cars taken directly from GT4? Or are they just cars that were in GT4 and are now improved in GT5? Or are they actually cars that won't have damage? Or they don't have interiors? Or what really? Then PD went on: "Oops... sorry, we take that back". What? Why? Is there anything wrong with it? "Nope, we just weren't supposed to tell you this now". Okay, but what do you meant to say before you took it back? "...".

This is in a nutshell what happened. Would you consider this coming clean about the two-tier system? I bet you remember what happened here, nobody could actually understand it. That's why that small sentence is obviously not enough.

Moving forward to what's happening now we, once again, have a small sentence that throws something in the air without elaborating and, once again, we have confusion. So what have I done here in this thread that you accuse me of hypocrisy? What I found out I should have done before. Take that damn sentence to the letter because as unbelievable as it may be, that's what it means. I'm trying to warn people not to fall in the same trap I did.

And again, it's not enough clarification on PD's part. There will be a lot of people pissed when the game launches, and rightfully so.

That is such a LOAD OF GARBAGE, the ONLY reason there is "confusion" is because people don't want to accpet the OBVIOUS. That's not a miscommunication, that's DENIAL.

 

[Dravonic]

That is such a LOAD OF GARBAGE, the ONLY reason there is "confusion" is because people don't want to accpet the OBVIOUS. That's not a miscommunication, that's DENIAL.

I agree and said before that the people who read are partially to blame. Not fully however.

Anyway, now it's much more apparent. In 2009 we had what? A single sentence. A single sentence versus and incredible amount of information on premium cars that we didn't know were premiums. What do we have now? A webpage section that you will only fully understand if you scrutinize a video. Because, guess what, PD are still trying to fool people in it:

The massive lineup of cars from past Gran Turismo games has been beautifully recreated through the latest technology and the Playstation 3&#8217;s cutting-edge graphics.

Recreated through the latest technology? When there's proof they are direct GT4 ports. When themselves said before they are direct GT4 ports. Misinformation at it's best.

 

[the Interceptor]

That is such a LOAD OF GARBAGE, the ONLY reason there is "confusion" is because people don't want to accpet the OBVIOUS. That's not a miscommunication, that's DENIAL.

No it isn't, it's a good point actually. Independently of whether standard cars will have cockpits or not (no need to discuss that any further, is there?), PD is playing a confusing game of half-publishing information and being unclear. For example, the article with the detailed specs of GT5 has appeared on the German GT-website a few days ago. Now guess what's missing ... correct: the one sentence that has ruled this thread. But if this case is so clear, why do they make all this fuss with either leaving that very sentence out completely or hand it in weeks later (as on the US-GT-website)?

I've said it before, and I say it again: there is something fishy going on.