Gran Turismo 5 Prologue

[Killing Moon]

Ha. The demo and the final game are two different things. Way way different things. My brother tried drifting in GTHD and the first thing he noticed is that it didn't drift right. He was complaing about that. BUT, that has been fixed in GT5:Prologue, as confirmed by a professional Japanese drifter in one of those video demo with the developers. Don't have the link right now.

*sigh* "As confirmed by..."---a marketing testimony, simply put.

Dude, there were "professionals" claiming that Forza 1 had super accurate physics also and I think we know where that credibility fell. A focus test onto one or two aspects is setup to make the game look better. It doesn't mean that it's accurate.

GT4 had the Falken Skyline team "vouch" for their title also with a test on Nurburgring. However personal experience with certain vehicles in GT4 and in reality show that many of the vehicles are FAR from being accurate to their real life counterparts.

[Killing Moon]

But sounds to me like you want a Need For Speed Underground game and not a GT5 game.

People, stop running to this cop out.

Tuning is an integral part of automotive culture, so grow up and read a book already. It's in Gran Turismo and as inaccurate as it's portrayed, it's a staple of the series.
Again, tuning is and has been an integral part of automotive culture since...forever.

Accept it.

[Red_Eyes]

*sigh* "As confirmed by..."---a marketing testimony, simply put.

Dude, there were "professionals" claiming that Forza 1 had super accurate physics also and I think we know where that credibility fell. A focus test onto one or two aspects is setup to make the game look better. It doesn't mean that it's accurate.

GT4 had the Falken Skyline team "vouch" for their title also with a test on Nurburgring. However personal experience with certain vehicles in GT4 and in reality show that many of the vehicles are FAR from being accurate to their real life counterparts.
BUT, how can it be purely a marking thing when other Japanese peoples (you know, peoples who actually went to the TGS 2007 and played the new build of GT5) can drift correctly at TGS 2007?

[Red_Eyes]

People, stop running to this cop out.

Tuning is an integral part of automotive culture, so grow up and read a book already. It's in Gran Turismo and as inaccurate as it's portrayed, it's a staple of the series.
Again, tuning is and has been an integral part of automotive culture since...forever.

Accept it.
And you need to stop trying to downplay GT5. Far as automotive culture is concern, GT5 is the closest thing to real life driving. (Maybe not real life crashing). And tuning. I haven't check out what other games have done with realistic car tuning.

[Killing Moon]

BUT, how can it be purely a marking thing when other Japanese peoples (you know, peoples who actually went to the TGS 2007 and played the new build of GT5) can drift correctly at TGS 2007?

They were drifting correctly? Support this claim, por favor.

And you need to stop trying to downplay GT5. Far as automotive culture is concern, GT5 is the closest thing to real life driving. (Maybe not real life crashing).

Are you SURE of that?
Have you played every racing sim to support that claim? Or are you simply aping Polyphony's bargain marketing slogan?

[Red_Eyes]

They were drifting correctly? Support this claim, por favor.



Are you SURE of that?
Have you played every racing sim to support that claim? Or are you simply aping Polyphony's bargain marketing slogan?No, but I have driven a real car before. Have you?

What other racing sim is there other than beside PGR and Forza? Other racing sim that people actually care about.

[Red_Eyes]

They were drifting correctly? Support this claim, por favor.
There were demos everywhere at TGS. If you don't believe me, then you should have been to TGS and tested it. But then again, you don't drift, so you can't tell. But all those crazy japanese gamers can. If you don't know, us Asians (including those Japanese gamers who plays GT) tends to drift illegally in real life with our cars. Heck, that's why some of us get GT in the first place.

[Nameless]

Killing Moon,
Red Eyes speaks the truth regarding drifting physics in GT.
There's tons of hardcore GT players that drift in real life and say the game is a great simulator for drifters.

Check out this thread:
http://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=90559

[Smokey]

What other racing sim is there other than beside PGR and Forza? Other racing sim that people actually care about.
toca/V8s/race driver one baby

[Segitz]

People, stop running to this cop out.

Tuning is an integral part of automotive culture, so grow up and read a book already. It's in Gran Turismo and as inaccurate as it's portrayed, it's a staple of the series.
Again, tuning is and has been an integral part of automotive culture since...forever.

Accept it.

We had this discussion already... And I am still not conviced...

Tuning is integral yes, but "visuals" are something completely different to tuning... What's being done in all NFS games is ... well a cheap joke tbh. "Man, that looks cool" stuff comes to mind. I mean, who in his right mind puts aerodynamic kits on a Porsche Carrera GT or a Lamborghini Murcielago? Really...

Super Car tuning is mainly done for one purpose only... To give rich asses an opportunity to make themselves different for a buttload of cash (I had some experience with this, at my time at Tech Art).

Being a soon-to-be automotive engineer myself, I really prefer performance tuning... Seing as most idiots around here "tune" their cars only visually, but still having the 75PS 1.2i engine is just plain embarrassing. I know, there are different people who do this right, but they are the minority, you can't argue that.

[CARTIER90]

I wish that GT5 had perhaps only 25/30 cars in it with perhaps 100 total including different ages/engine sizes. Then PD could have really gone to town in getting EXACT physics for each car and making sure they reflect there real life counterpart.

If we want a new car then perhaps one could microtransaction and build there garage that way . Not only would we actually by cars we really liked (as they would cost real money) but the extra income generated would ensure that PD could afford to labour over each car.

Perhaps a low buy in tournament structure that cost real money to enter would be a way of pitting your skills online against a field with maybe the top 4 ouf of 16 (say) competitors gettting credits to buy extra cars.

I do like the recent interview speaking of a 'professional' mode for harder physics - surely this allays some ppl's fears here?

[Killing Moon]

We had this discussion already... And I am still not conviced...

Tuning is integral yes, but "visuals" are something completely different to tuning... What's being done in all NFS games is ... well a cheap joke tbh. "Man, that looks cool" stuff comes to mind. I mean, who in his right mind puts aerodynamic kits on a Porsche Carrera GT or a Lamborghini Murcielago? Really...

Super Car tuning is mainly done for one purpose only... To give rich asses an opportunity to make themselves different for a buttload of cash (I had some experience with this, at my time at Tech Art).

Being a soon-to-be automotive engineer myself, I really prefer performance tuning... Seing as most idiots around here "tune" their cars only visually, but still having the 75PS 1.2i engine is just plain embarrassing. I know, there are different people who do this right, but they are the minority, you can't argue that.

Please, check out the tuning aspects to Pro Street. NFS has gotten past the "ricer" image already and from what's been shown, they're aero aspects are more technical than anything on the market.

Secondly, why does "tuning" always make you people run to bash NFS in the first place? That's a bit juvenile, man. I didn't even bring it up to begin with, so it makes one wonder if half of you even KNOW WTF I'm talking about when the subject comes up.

And again, what the hell, man. I"m talking about Tuning, not ricer shit. How many times do I have to run into this brick wall with you guys? LMAO
Performance tuning external and internal doesn't have a damn thing to do w/ NFS.

[Segitz]

Please, check out the tuning aspects to Pro Street. NFS has gotten past the "ricer" image already and from what's been shown, they're aero aspects are more technical than anything on the market.

Secondly, why does "tuning" always make you people run to bash NFS in the first place? That's a bit juvenile, man. I didn't even bring it up to begin with, so it makes one wonder if half of you even KNOW WTF I'm talking about when the subject comes up.

And again, what the hell, man. I"m talking about Tuning, not ricer shit. How many times do I have to run into this brick wall with you guys? LMAO
Performance tuning external and internal doesn't have a damn thing to do w/ NFS.


Huh... (three bolds mean three answers)

1) No it did not... Although, they changed the car selection quite a lot, it still has the "The Fast and the Furious" ambition. This, noone can argue. It is a 100% mainstream "cool" game. Yeah, it is an arcade racer, but that is not the problem. My problem is, that it is plain stupid... It takes out every interesting part out of tuning and makes it accessible even to women (no sexism intended here, just stating that women are less likely to be interested in car customization). Ok, the last NFS I really played (I mean, finished the story mode) was Most Wanted... I played the Demo of Carbon and it... well it sucked^^. Well, the last guy in NFS:MW drove an M3 or M5 iirc... My Carrera GT fully tuned had trouble racing him... What kind of tuning did he get?

2) Partially answered in 1). I mean, wth? NFSs tuning options are plain moronic. The big names of tuning are being thrown into the dirt by being featured in this game imho. As I said, what EA has done out of tuning in NFS is to streamline it, that everybody understands it... There's 3 options for motortuning, and the most important one is NOS... What the heck is that?? If you want real NOS tuning, inject it fluidly (the Nazis did this with their Attackplanes, interesting storys btw), not gaseous, because, though it fscks up the engine, it gives the twice the power... And that's what's needed, isn't it?

3) I am not saying, you talk ricer shit... We already talked about that, and we were in agreement... As I said twice now, NFSs tuning is not real tuning... You aren't buying 3 disc clutches (^^ dunno if this is translated right) or lighter flywheels. You are buying "engine option 1" and "transmission option 2". This is LAME and this is what makes NFS so moronic. They could just pop everything into one group and make 5 levels of it, that would be exactly the same. And the visual tuning... don't get me started on it... "cold light cathodes" (again, bad translation perhaps) do not make a car go faster, racing cars do not feature such stuff and by no means does the "underground racing league" usually have these attached to their real racing cars (watch Getaway in Stockholm 4 or 5 (cannot remember which), where they test the Saab, that is REAL street car tuning there^^).



But then again, I am surely the wrong client for NFS being targeted at me... Every since Underground was released, NFS died for me a very silent and fast death. NFS used to be one of the BEST arcade racers ever made (especially NFS1, I have gone to an expo just to get it before German launch, I was 12 or so that day). They featured great cars, great tracks and it was a FAIR game (no fscking rumberbanding... I loathe rubberbanding, I really do!). EA basically destroyed a once great game by making it a yearly release (Ever since Underground again...)

[curryking1]

Nothing exactly to add here....

But NFS3 is the best arcade racing game ever made :)

[Viano]

Am I the only one feeling funny when seeing the critiques toward Gran Turismo? Nothing unrespectful, just intersting LOLOLXXXOLOL

[julps31]

Killing Moon is THE resident GT crtic lol. So no suprise there...

[Killing Moon]

Huh... (three bolds mean three answers)

1) No it did not...

Completely and utterly irrelevant from the point.
NFS wasn't that important to be elaborated on, so let it go. If you want any info on Pro Street, then make an effort to check it out (my main reference on the NFS detour beforehand).

Extensive tuning in GT5 is the point, among other problems.

[VG Aficionado]

Am I the only one feeling funny when seeing the critiques toward Gran Turismo? Nothing unrespectful, just intersting LOLOLXXXOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOL

If at least it wasn't always the same guy with the same old complaints...

[Killing Moon]

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

If at least it wasn't always the same guy with the same old complaints...

LOLOLOLOLOL
If it wasn't the same old game with the same old stagnant flaws.
LOLOLOLOL

On a note of hypocrisy, how is the redundant sucking of the visuals on this game with every screen shot any different on noting that the gameplay is as stale for 10yrs.? I'm sorry, but in order to be a legitimate game in this genre, you simply can't get away with looking good and claiming to have realistic physics for only 30% of your inflated roster of vehicles. Not anymore; GT only got away with this because there wasn't any competition on console. Things have changed, time to evolve.

You've got your "same old" and so do I. Difference is, I don't allow my "same old" to be blinded by zealot fandom. A true "fan" of a series would admit that it's fucking up, not delude themselves into believing that things are all hunky-dory.

[Red_Eyes]

LOLOLOLOLOL
If it wasn't the same old game with the same old stagnant flaws.
LOLOLOLOL

On a note of hypocrisy, how is the redundant sucking of the visuals on this game with every screen shot any different on noting that the gameplay is as stale for 10yrs.? Because in those 10 years, real life physics has remain the same? A game based on real physics can't change if real phyiscs doesn't change either. I mean, if cars can transform into a robot in real life, then sure, they should add in such feature into GT5. But GT5 is about being realistic. And in real life, with tuning, you can't just take out the engine of a Viper and put it into a Toyota and somehow, it'll magically work and the Toyota is suddenly faster, like in those games with fake tuning.

You've got your "same old" and so do I. Difference is, I don't allow my "same old" to be blinded by zealot fandom. A true "fan" of a series would admit that it's fucking up, not delude themselves into believing that things are all hunky-dory.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Look at Halo1,2, and 3. Has Halo change at all? Has Halo even evolve? No. Even Halo 3 is the same as Halo 1. Same old game. Just a little bit better graphics. Do you see people complaining? No. I mean, what is there to improve? Change the pace of the game to extremely fast and add in the ability to do ridicilous jump tricks? That would just turn Halo 3 into a game called Unreal Tournament. Make the pace slower and add in a cover system and change the graphics to to darker mood? That would be call Gears of War and not Halo anymore. GT5 is what it is. If you start changing it, then it'll just turn into a completely different game. It won't be GT anymore. And people want GT to be like GT, just like people want Halo to be like Halo.

[Viano]

GT5 is exciting after all. ♪

[VG Aficionado]

GT5 rocks \(^o^)/

[GTAce]

GT5 rocks \(^o^)/

<('.'<)(>'.')><('.'<)(>'.')><('.'<)(>'.')><('.'<)(>'.')>^('.')^

[Segitz]

Completely and utterly irrelevant from the point.
NFS wasn't that important to be elaborated on, so let it go. If you want any info on Pro Street, then make an effort to check it out (my main reference on the NFS detour beforehand).

Extensive tuning in GT5 is the point, among other problems.

Yeah, and I stand by my opinion that tuning first and foremost is a performance thing and not a visual thing... And NFS is the complete opposite in this regard since Underground.

I don't even bother to look at NFS games anymore, they are utter shite (wrong demographic here too) imho.

GT has nice tuning (i.e. motortuning with extensive options). I'd prefer it to be even more, but I could live with it that way. Aerokits... well that is a different story, but not altogether. Thing is, what NFS has done with tuning is just ugly... No race car driver in his right mind would do this to his car. NO one. Ok, I am talking amateur racers like Porsche Supercup and such, but you get what I mean. And this is, what GT is about... Gran Turismo, not TFTF.


But since I am not able to change your opinion, I will leave it at that...

You are not one who wants GT to be a GT game. You want it to evolve into GT:Underground, and I really disagree with you in that regard.

[Red_Eyes]

You are not one who wants GT to be a GT game. You want it to evolve into GT:Underground, and I really disagree with you in that regard.
If people want it bad enough, they might might consider making a GT spinoff just for those kind of peoples: GT5 - Underground. But just a spin off, because we still want the real GT.

[Insane Metal]

Guys, this thread is GIGANTIC now, so I wanted to ask you something: can any good friend here make a selection of the best screens and videos from GT5Prologue and post them again?

I wanna see the inside car view without the enduro rear view mirror :lol:

[GTAce]

Is this a serious question?
I would make it. :hugegrin:

[curryking1]

This demo on Oct 24th is going to make me do this....

Take my PS3, and go hunting for a wireless hotspot in my building with a TV. That's how much I want this demo.

XD

While I'm there, I think I will get the R&C demo as well hehehe

[GTAce]

The demo comes on Oct 20.
http://www.gran-turismo.com/en/

[VG Aficionado]

Wow, only six days left =-o

[GTAce]

Wow, only six days left =-o
Yep.
Im going to make a Japanese PSN acc tomorrow just to be sure that i will get this DEMO.
Damn a demo and im so hyped for it, crazy.

[curryking1]

Wtf?! It's Oct 20th now!?!? That's sooo much better for me :):):)

That's amazing! God I hope I can connect to PSN somewhere here, there better be a damn hotspot!!

[Shogun042]

^^ wouldn't surprise me to see curryking at a starbucks with his PS3 on a table downloading the demo.

[curryking1]

I would like a blueberry frappuchino to go along with my Gran Turismo download please....

[Red_Eyes]

Hahaha.
GTHD is the demo of this GT5:Prologue Demo, which is the demo of the real GT5:Prologue, which is the demo of the real GT5.

[GTAce]

GTHD is the demo of this GT5:Prologue Demo, which is the demo of the real GT5:Prologue, which is the demo of the real GT5.
Wrong. :-p

[curryking1]

Woot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm typing from my PS3!!!!! Got connected to PSN and everything!!!! This is so pwnage!!!!!!!!!!

D/ling the R&C demo right now, and can't wait for the sexy GT5P demo!!!!!!

Is there a way to open pdf files with it the PS3?

[Segitz]

Is there a way to open pdf files with it the PS3?

Only through Linux

[Sephiroth_VII]

Congrats curry! Now get a proper broadband connection at home and add me to PSN, capiche?

[Killing Moon]

Because in those 10 years, real life physics has remain the same? A game based on real physics can't change if real phyiscs doesn't change either. I mean, if cars can transform into a robot in real life, then sure, they should add in such feature into GT5. But GT5 is about being realistic. And in real life, with tuning, you can't just take out the engine of a Viper and put it into a Toyota and somehow, it'll magically work and the Toyota is suddenly faster, like in those games with fake tuning.

In real life, if you crash against a wall at a racing speed, your car crumples.
In real life, if you shift incorrectly, you’ll damage your transmission.
In real life, we have turbo/charger and engine failures.
In real life, we have rules for people who side swipe others, the wall and run off the track (they’re called penalty Flags).
In real life, worn tires burst on the track, leaving you sliding on your brake pads.
In real life, weather temperature plays a part in tire and engine dynamics.

Don’t try to take one point of GT being “realistic”, yet ignore everything else that goes hand in hand with the sport it’s trying to emulate.
Gran Turismo is FAR from real life. It only realistically emulates the suspension for cars…and only SOME of them, at that.


If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Look at Halo1,2, and 3. Has Halo change at all? Has Halo even evolve? .

No, and despite its sales, Halo 3 is HEAVILY criticized for being just that. Nothing more than a 1.5 upgrade of its previous version (high sales doesn’t mean high quality, as we all well know). It’s nice that you referenced Microsoft’s game the way you did, because in this thread, I’ve used Halo as an example of what GT is doing just as soundly. Except you’re making it seem that becoming stagnated and stale is a GOOD thing.

Zone of Enders was released in the PS2’s first generation and executed a good formula for an arcadey style Mech game. It had a strong foundation and a good basic story to build from. Flash forward to years later, ZOE2 takes that original formula and built on it tremendously. A whole new weapon system was added, the control was improved significantly and new useful abilities to Jehuty’s arsenal were added. It became SO good that not only did ZOE2 completely make the original obsolete in all gameplay aspects, but it made just about every other Mech game on the market (‘cept Amored Core) appear outdated.

This example is what Gran Turismo should have done with the series a long time ago. Take your initial foundation and build on it to make it better. Don’t simply rewrite the same code and features over and over, improving on little to nothing in the process (other than visuals).
No one says that you have to drastically change anything, but EVOLVE from your foundation. This isn’t a hard concept to grasp, and I wish I knew why some of you people keep making this out to be more complicated than it really is.

Yeah, and I stand by my opinion that tuning first and foremost is a performance thing and not a visual thing... And NFS is the complete opposite in this regard since Underground.

I don't even bother to look at NFS games anymore, they are utter shite (wrong demographic here too) imho.

GT has nice tuning (i.e. motortuning with extensive options). I'd prefer it to be even more, but I could live with it that way. Aerokits... well that is a different story, but not altogether. Thing is, what NFS has done with tuning is just ugly... No race car driver in his right mind would do this to his car. NO one. Ok, I am talking amateur racers like Porsche Supercup and such, but you get what I mean. And this is, what GT is about... Gran Turismo, not TFTF.


But since I am not able to change your opinion, I will leave it at that...

You are not one who wants GT to be a GT game. You want it to evolve into GT:Underground, and I really disagree with you in that regard.

Is it me, or did I JUST say to check out Pro Street already? Pro Street is a SIMULATION, FYI.
Why do you guys keep bringing up the same old examples of NFS and ricer kits? I mean really…WTF?!!

Did I once say that Gran Turismo should be like NFS: Underground? So why do you keep running to that series as an example when not only did I give comparable examples, but didn’t use Underground ONCE as a reference?!!

[GTAce]

Pro Street is a SIMULATION, FYI.
You disqualified yourself AGAIN.
Pro Street is not a simulation.
Sure, it has races on closed tracks, without traffic or police etc. but the handling is for sure not realistic (k i didnt played it for myself but its easy to see in the videos how the cars react).
And why dont you wait for Gran Turismo 5 (not Prologue) before judging how the game is compared to the old titles?

[curryking1]

Only through Linux

Do I absolutely need a USB keyboard for the installation of Linux? Is it required to type stuff during install I guess?

Seph, what's your handle I need to add?

[Segitz]

Do I absolutely need a USB keyboard for the installation of Linux? Is it required to type stuff during install I guess?

Seph, what's your handle I need to add?

Yes, you need a USB keyboard and (though not strictly required, but recommended) a mouse

[Segitz]

In real life, if you crash against a wall at a racing speed, your car crumples.
In real life, if you shift incorrectly, you’ll damage your transmission.
In real life, we have turbo/charger and engine failures.
In real life, we have rules for people who side swipe others, the wall and run off the track (they’re called penalty Flags).
In real life, worn tires burst on the track, leaving you sliding on your brake pads.
In real life, weather temperature plays a part in tire and engine dynamics.

Booyah, now it gets interesting. I have only once in my life destroid a transmission :D A good transmission does not let you shift wrong (sync rings forbid it et al... transmissions are REALLY complicated, but I passed my class in there already). But that's up for discussion... You cannot shift wrong in games, usually (except Test Drive 1 and 2)

Yeah, and there are turbos and compressors in GT too... Even in GT1^^

Flags are not in GT, and I think, I know why. It makes races too regulated. I find it to be too restricting. But thats just me.

In GT, there's no weather options (yet), so we cannot tell yet, if it affects us at all (there was a water testtrack in GT3 or 4). Well... temperature in GT cars is less of an issue, as these engines aren't as souped-up as in let's say F1 one or Indy.



Don’t try to take one point of GT being “realistic”, yet ignore everything else that goes hand in hand with the sport it’s trying to emulate.
Gran Turismo is FAR from real life. It only realistically emulates the suspension for cars…and only SOME of them, at that.


I think, you *want* GT to be bad somehow. That what GT does, they do realistically, nothing else. The driving is pretty good and fun (that's what I want, and that's why I don't play F1 sims).

No, and despite its sales, Halo 3 is HEAVILY criticized for being just that. Nothing more than a 1.5 upgrade of its previous version (high sales doesn’t mean high quality, as we all well know). It’s nice that you referenced Microsoft’s game the way you did, because in this thread, I’ve used Halo as an example of what GT is doing just as soundly. Except you’re making it seem that becoming stagnated and stale is a GOOD thing.

Compare the reviews of GT3 and GT4... GT3 got MUCH better reviews and sold MUCH better than 4... No shitting, it got reviewed fair. There's not that much hype about this game.


Zone of Enders was released in the PS2’s first generation and executed a good formula for an arcadey style Mech game. It had a strong foundation and a good basic story to build from. Flash forward to years later, ZOE2 takes that original formula and built on it tremendously. A whole new weapon system was added, the control was improved significantly and new useful abilities to Jehuty’s arsenal were added. It became SO good that not only did ZOE2 completely make the original obsolete in all gameplay aspects, but it made just about every other Mech game on the market (‘cept Amored Core) appear outdated.


Yeah, and Postal 2 is completely different than Postal 1... (Isometric vs FPS). What's your point? In GT, it makes no sense to add weapons to cars or somesuch. GTs formula is GREAT. It is one of the best driving games out there (see what I did here, "one of the"... not "the").

This example is what Gran Turismo should have done with the series a long time ago. Take your initial foundation and build on it to make it better. Don’t simply rewrite the same code and features over and over, improving on little to nothing in the process (other than visuals).
No one says that you have to drastically change anything, but EVOLVE from your foundation. This isn’t a hard concept to grasp, and I wish I knew why some of you people keep making this out to be more complicated than it really is.


Hmm, yes and no. Adding stuff like weather and such, I do agree. But the PS2 was just not able to do so... And now, you cannot even remotely tell, how GT5 will be like. Don't get me started on GT5P. This is a budged game, not a full priced title. We simply still don't know, what GT5 will be like, it is about a year off (judging by last generations timing, GT4P was released ~1 year before GT4 hit).

Is it me, or did I JUST say to check out Pro Street already? Pro Street is a SIMULATION, FYI.
Why do you guys keep bringing up the same old examples of NFS and ricer kits? I mean really…WTF?!!

Hell yeah... You just disqualified yourself from this discussion. You seem to REALLY know what you are talking about... NFS NEVER EVER EVER (not even Porsche, but it came the closest) a sim and never tried to be. It is as mainstream as it gets.

And NFS + Ricer kits... I am not merely talking about ricer kits. I am talking about visual tuning as a whole. What NFS did, was merely taking ricer tuning to its max (just like TFTF did). Yes, the kits are professional stuff and such, but still, they are not for performance, they are just for the looks of it, nothing else... The visual tuning in NFS gives you no performance boost whatsoever!


Did I once say that Gran Turismo should be like NFS: Underground? So why do you keep running to that series as an example when not only did I give comparable examples, but didn’t use Underground ONCE as a reference?!!

No, you did not, but you sound like you want it to be. You constant craving for NFS-Like tuning is just that. I brought up the NFS reference (iirc). Tuning is all nice and well, but don't try and be a NFS in that regard... This will kill the game (imho) as it is. They can release a spinoff for that (like GT:Underground^^).

[Killing Moon]

You disqualified yourself AGAIN.
Pro Street is not a simulation.
Sure, it has races on closed tracks, without traffic or police etc. but the handling is for sure not realistic (k i didnt played it for myself but its easy to see in the videos how the cars react).
And why dont you wait for Gran Turismo 5 (not Prologue) before judging how the game is compared to the old titles?

Hmmn…you DIDN’T play Pro Street, yet you claim that it’s not something that it’s aiming to be. However, all of the recent information on the title gives off the features of a racing simulation. Especially the tuning aspects.

I see….*smells fanboy gibberish*
So how the hell would you know if the game plays realistic if you’ve:

A- never played it before
B- most likely have never driven half of the cars on the game’s roster in reality

Oh, we will see what’s in GT5. And much like the previous versions of yesteryear, as predicted by those who didn’t have their heads up Polyphony’s asses, I can see already that by all details presented thus far, this will be yet another minor tweak from before. With the POSSIBILITY of damage modeling, of course.

No, you did not, but you sound like you want it to be. You constant craving for NFS-Like tuning is just that. I brought up the NFS reference (iirc). Tuning is all nice and well, but don't try and be a NFS in that regard... This will kill the game (imho) as it is. They can release a spinoff for that (like GT:Underground^^).

Case in point of common stupidity on this subject:
External tuning (racing mods) were in GT1 and GT2. Internal Tuning was in every GT to date (albeit, poor-to-moderate, depending on which sequel).

Saying that Polyphony needs to juice things up regarding tuning for the series doesn’t have a single thing to do with NFS:Underground. It MEANS that they need to upgrade and expand the formula that they’ve already set in motion. I could care less if they let you add a single decal to the car’s body. EXPAND ON THE FORMULA and quit remaining stagnant and regressing instead.

If you’re going to be a racing simulation like you say you are, whatever it is that you’re implementing within the game can’t continuously be half-assed. If you add ECU’s, then implement them properly. You add aero tuning, then do this right (not just T-wings and invisible front spoilers). If you add Forced Induction, implement them properly as well. Stop making the series continue to behave like a lowly PSOne game and grow-the-fuck-up already.

Why choose to have a “thorough” philosophy for one element within an entire game, yet with everything else that is equally (if not more) important, you drag your feet.

[curryking1]

Can't wait for demo can't wait for demo can't wait for demo can't wait for demo!!!!!

:drool: :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool:

[Sephiroth_VII]

Do I absolutely need a USB keyboard for the installation of Linux? Is it required to type stuff during install I guess?

Seph, what's your handle I need to add?

Sephiroth_VII ;)

Also, you NEED a keyboard, obviously. You'll want to be able to write, especially with linux.

[GTAce]

Can't wait for demo can't wait for demo can't wait for demo can't wait for demo!!!!!

:drool: :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool:

5 days...... 5 fucking days....... ZOMFG!!!11

[Passive]

way to much reading on this page lol yay for demo in 5 days :D wonder what cars we will get

[Leedogg]

:cry2: :cry2: :cry2: no... no.... I'll be away from my PS3 on Saturday. And won't be able to play until Sunday Afternoon. Just my luck....

One question though

1. Will it be released on all the PS Stores on the 20th? Or just the Japan one? Hopefully the demo will be in English, but either way I'm getting it.

[GTAce]

The japanese store is the only one with a banner for the demo.
I hope we get at least an english demo because a japanese menu could be a bit annoying at the beginning.^^
But who knows maybe it will change the language to your system default.

[VG Aficionado]

I think it will include English menus anyway.

[GTAce]

Youre right.
http://www.gran-turismo.com/jp/binary/images/1179/p25a.jpg
The TGS '07 demo had mixed menu languages too.

[curryking1]

Omg.... looks too sexy....

And it tells you the weather! And the date! Holy crap look at the clock that is soo sex..... that's just too awesome....

Slickest GT menu by faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrr.

I can't believe they are even trying to have TV and stuff.... it'd be crazy if that dealer thing was able to go to real car dealer sites :O

[GTAce]

Omg.... looks too sexy....
Pr0n site (http://www.gran-turismo.com/en/gt5p/screen/)

[cliffbo]

how the hell can anyone complain about this game? simply fantastic!

[curryking1]

Pr0n site (http://www.gran-turismo.com/en/gt5p/screen/)

Mmmmmmm... car pr0n.....

[Killing Moon]

Youre right.
http://www.gran-turismo.com/jp/binary/images/1179/p25a.jpg
The TGS '07 demo had mixed menu languages too.

Wow, very nice UI. Color me impressed.

[Nameless]

^ I told you the UI was slick...

[Segitz]

The demo at IAA was in English iirc... So it is likely to be multilanguage!

[GTAce]

Lol those pics are from the TGS.
Where have you been KM?
Oh let me guess, you havent seen them because you were complaining somewhere?

[Killing Moon]

^ I told you the UI was slick...

Y'know what, I'd like to see Polyphony add more shortcuts to their UI system.

They always tend to have really slick looking UI's, but it becomes a bit of a chore constantly pressing /\ to back out to the previous menus. Especially when upgrading your vehicle. Maybe some shortcuts for the other buttons on the joypad would fair better to make things move along smoother with the interaction.

I do like the way this looks though.

Lol those pics are from the TGS.
Where have you been KM?
Oh let me guess, you havent seen them because you were complaining somewhere?

Awww, har har, nice attempt there at a witty 'dozen'.
I was paying too much attention to the gameplay potential than in the inevitable presentation improvements.

Sorry.

[rob the slob]

Awww, har har, nice attempt there at a witty 'dozen'.
I was paying too much attention to the gameplay potential than in the inevitable presentation improvements.

Sorry.
It seems to me that GT fanatics are graphics whores first, simulation fans second.

Im very much looking forward to this game but I have to agree with you that I expected way more than just great graphics from this game. I was expecting Burnout caliber crashes, where the cars deform based on where youre hit. Maybe they will get it all in for GT5. Here's hoping.

[cliffbo]

It seems to me that GT fanatics are graphics whores first, simulation fans second.

Im very much looking forward to this game but I have to agree with you that I expected way more than just great graphics from this game. I was expecting Burnout caliber crashes, where the cars deform based on where youre hit. Maybe they will get it all in for GT5. Here's hoping.

i expected ramps too... it would be great to be able to jump through a building and take poll position. another feature they could have added is that when there is a near miss a meter builds up and for a few seconds you can boost past the opposition... now that would be a next gen GT!

[GTAce]

:lol:

[Raijin]

It seems to me that GT fanatics are graphics whores first, simulation fans second.

Im very much looking forward to this game but I have to agree with you that I expected way more than just great graphics from this game. I was expecting Burnout caliber crashes, where the cars deform based on where youre hit. Maybe they will get it all in for GT5. Here's hoping.

Burnout caliber crashes???

Goddamn, take Burnout and not GT5!!!! In case you didnt notice yet, GT =/ Burnout.

How people can be so pigheaded is out of my mind...

Oh and do you think car manufacturers will let their cars crash like in a Burnout game? Wishful thinking... finally, may I remind to some people here we're dealing with a prologue version?

[cliffbo]

but i wanted ramps :shrug: what's wrong with that? and perhaps an open city to race in, i'm getting bored with real courses

[Killing Moon]

i expected ramps too... it would be great to be able to jump through a building and take poll position. another feature they could have added is that when there is a near miss a meter builds up and for a few seconds you can boost past the opposition... now that would be a next gen GT!

Hmmn, I’m not sure if you’re intentionally trying to be an ass, or if you’re serious (I’ll go with the former) LOL. But I believe he gave the Burnout example because it’s the most realized crash system for an automotive game out there.

Arcade or otherwise.

He doesn’t mean that GT should turn into Burnout. He means that the crashes should be just as intricate and dynamic, which truthfully, they SHOULD. I mean, last I checked, the more technical of a simulation the game strives to be, the damage work should be just as in depth. Not one or the other [anymore].

(okay, maybe without the dramatic, cinematic explosions, of course).



Oh and do you think car manufacturers will let their cars crash like in a Burnout game? Wishful thinking... finally, may I remind to some people here we're dealing with a prologue version?

Dead issue, and a common myth among GT zealots. OEM manufacturers don’t necessarily object to their models being damaged. If they don’t for film (and the cars ACTUALLY get destroyed), why would they object in a virtual space?

Doesn’t make any sense. It’s marketing BS Polyphony fed as an additional excuse for them not implementing the feature(s).

[B Dizzle]

how the hell can anyone complain about this game? simply fantastic!

Its easy, just look out the window every once in a while and see how the rest of the world has moved on.:wave:

Just hooked up a Japanese account and the juices are flowing.:)

[Killing Moon]

Its easy, just look out the window every once in a while and see how the rest of the world has moved on.:wave:

Just hooked up a Japanese account and the juices are flowing.:)

Um…ouch!?

[Segitz]

Hmmn, I’m not sure if you’re intentionally trying to be an ass, or if you’re serious (I’ll go with the former) LOL. But I believe he gave the Burnout example because it’s the most realized crash system for an automotive game out there.
Arcade or otherwise.


No to be an ass, but I found ALL Burnout games to be graphically "boring". Not in terms of graphics or such, but the crashes always look bad. I mean, the chassis deformation was just ... I dunno, than less than realistically... It is like the cars are empty inside, like they have no engine (the bending hoods and such make me believe this).

Viper Racing on the PC did a good job at crashing cars back in... dunno 1996 or so. But now, I want to see bending metal with parts underneath it.

[Killing Moon]

No to be an ass, but I found ALL Burnout games to be graphically "boring". Not in terms of graphics or such, but the crashes always look bad. I mean, the chassis deformation was just ... I dunno, than less than realistically... It is like the cars are empty inside, like they have no engine (the bending hoods and such make me believe this).

Viper Racing on the PC did a good job at crashing cars back in... dunno 1996 or so. But now, I want to see bending metal with parts underneath it.

LOL okay, well in that technical description, I’d have to agree. I mean, if we’re going for super realistic and dynamic crashes for console games, then I’d point out the Driver games, FlatOut and Stunt Man (PS2). However, for those games the crash dynamics were the strongest, if not main concentration to go with the physics package. So it’s only understandable why it was done so well.

I agree, for crash dynamics within these current titles, I’d like for it to be beyond the simple foundations realized already. Unfortunately for the subject at hand, they haven’t even caught up to those basics as of yet.

[GTAce]

Stunt Man
Good example.
Even the engine could pop out of the car, was impressive for a PS2 game.

[Killing Moon]

Good example.
Even the engine could pop out of the car, was impressive for a PS2 game.

Yep, Reflections and Bugbear were always great at capturing a vehicle’s entire physics really damn well. It’s sad, because they weren’t even racing games, but presented all of the proper physics dynamics to be so.

With the exception of one.
Proper, spot-on control response.

For the physics though, I researched it heavily about a year ago. Bugbear used a HUGE portion of Havok’s physics for nearly every dynamic expressed within the game for the vehicles. Which is crazy, because their engine, in this respect, was INCREDIBLY realistic as far as weight dynamics, suspension, speed, crash physics and so on.

Which further supports my point that even the stock package of Havok 3.0 accomplishes what Polyphony keeps re-writing their engine to do from the ground up (or so they always claim in every game). It’s like attempting to reinvent the wheel over and over again, only to end up with a Goodyear tire circa 1998.

[curryking1]

I'm glad it was pointed out that crashes in previous games and even the upcoming Burnout game are very unrealistic, especially chassis deformation and also which games have done it well in the past.

Good calls with Stuntman.

If there is in fact a damage model Polyphony is shooting for, it'll be far more advanced than some arcadey and cartoony if flashy damage system a la Burnout.

[Killing Moon]

I'm glad it was pointed out that crashes in previous games and even the upcoming Burnout game are very unrealistic, especially chassis deformation and also which games have done it well in the past.

Good calls with Stuntman.

If there is in fact a damage model Polyphony is shooting for, it'll be far more advanced than some arcadey and cartoony if flashy damage system a la Burnout.

Well, I understand that they're "shooting" for it [verbally], but whether it's actually advanced remains to be seen.

[curryking1]

Well, I understand that they're "shooting" for it [verbally], but whether it's actually advanced remains to be seen.

Well yes... that would go without saying.

[Red_Eyes]

Well, I understand that they're "shooting" for it [verbally], but whether it's actually advanced remains to be seen.
Which is why they may not do it, because it won't not be advance enough.
Even the PS3 can not handle that kind of physics. The millions of pieces of broken glass, the millions of pieces of particles, the number of polygons required to bend the metal realistically... All too advance.

And I don't want Driver 1 crash physics just for the sake of having crash physics.

The kind of real crash physics you guys demand can never be achieve in a game. The only thing that's powerful enough to do real crash physics realistically is this thing that's not a console, and it's called the real World.

[curryking1]

Who knows though, maybe Polyphony might decide they can achieve something realistic and convincing enough that will satisfy themselves. But I also highly doubt that.

[Sephiroth_VII]

Which is why they may not do it, because it won't not be advance enough.
Even the PS3 can not handle that kind of physics. The millions of pieces of broken glass, the millions of pieces of particles, the number of polygons required to bend the metal realistically... All too advance.

And I don't want Driver 1 crash physics just for the sake of having crash physics.

The kind of real crash physics you guys demand can never be achieve in a game. The only thing that's powerful enough to do real crash physics realistically is this thing that's not a console, and it's called the real World.

No, it will definitely be possible some day. Just look at how much computers have evolved over my lifetime, from the Atari 2600 to the PS3. Real-life pysics calculations on that scale will be possible some day. Maybe not this gen, but some day.

[Killing Moon]

Which is why they may not do it, because it won't not be advance enough.
Even the PS3 can not handle that kind of physics. The millions of pieces of broken glass, the millions of pieces of particles, the number of polygons required to bend the metal realistically... All too advance.

And I don't want Driver 1 crash physics just for the sake of having crash physics.

The kind of real crash physics you guys demand can never be achieve in a game. The only thing that's powerful enough to do real crash physics realistically is this thing that's not a console, and it's called the real World.

Ooookay, I don't think I'm asking for anything unrealistically intricate here now, lol. Honestly, if Polyphony went the TOCA3 route, but improved upon that formula, that'd be more than enough to build upon.

Understandably, every developer has to have a limit due to time constraints, budget, talent and the technology available to them. So I can't realistically say that their crash dynamics should be on the same level as 100% reality. That's just bonkers!

HOWEVER, they can use previous examples of successful crash dynamics on the market and attempt to improve upon them as best they can. So long as you make notable attempts at improving upon previous successful formulas, no one can really fault you for that.

[curryking1]

Killing Moon, you must realise there is a difference between from what you are asking of Polyphony from their game and what Polyphony is asking of themselves for their own game.

I'm not saying it's a bad thing by you, but it's a quality control call by them and not much more.

I think that's something you've been not connecting for a very, very long time. It is bad that they haven't added it for so long, but that's just what they seem to want to do, only do it when they feel it is properly fitting.

It has always been clear they don't want to do it until it's quite retardedly realistic, they have made that clear for many years. Their quality control and own business ethic and their own philosophy for their game is to not add it until they deem it satisfyingly good.

Obviously something simply improved over piss poor damage models (in terms of realism) from countless games that have passed is not something that aligns with their philosophy.

P.S. Seph, I sent you a friend invite on the PS3 XD

I won't be able to do much though as I have to use the internet on the PC and to switch it's a process that takes like 10 minutes every time and I can't afford the time to do it very often lol.

[Sephiroth_VII]

The problem is that Kazunori will not accept anything less than perfect when it comes to physics.

[GTAce]

I dont think its possible to make a damage system like that one from ToCA3 on cars with such a high polycount, but who knows.
I would love to see damage modeling but i dont want something like in Forza, it would just destroy the GT atmosphere.

[Insane Metal]

GTAce I´m waiting for that (http://forums.e-mpire.com/showpost.php?p=1712919&postcount=1276) post :hugegrin:

[GTAce]

Oh yeah, give me some minutes. :-p

[Killing Moon]

Killing Moon, you must realise there is a difference between from what you are asking of Polyphony from their game and what Polyphony is asking of themselves for their own game.

I'm not saying it's a bad thing by you, but it's a quality control call by them and not much more.

I think that's something you've been not connecting for a very, very long time. It is bad that they haven't added it for so long, but that's just what they seem to want to do, only do it when they feel it is properly fitting.

It has always been clear they don't want to do it until it's quite retardedly realistic, they have made that clear for many years.

Man, the damage modeling is probably one of many problems that the series presents. And honestly, every new potential addition comes with new potential problems. So really, the cycle will never end on what needs to be fixed. But I digress...

Unfortunately, much like Japanese culture of old, there comes a time where you need to quit isolating yourself and realize that there is an outside world out there. Especially when they're the ones supporting the product and pipelining your paycheck.
Case in point, the explanation you gave about what Polyphony is asking of themselves. I don't know if they realize it or not, but they are severely lagging behind the curve within this genre right now. And for all their efforts, they don't seem to be picking up any speed either.

You know, it's all fine and dandy that they abide by their own standards and all. But seriously, who the hell really cares in the end if their "standards" are precisely what is holding them back from evolving?

Other than zealot supporters, of course.

I give Polyphony all the credit in the world for helping innovate the genre on consoles, for their graphical achievements and for having one of the most realistic virtual suspension systems on the market.
However, my praise only goes but so far. When after awhile, you are not only noticeably falling short of installed consumer expectations, but are behind the competition in almost every front available other than visuals.


The problem is that Kazunori will not accept anything less than perfect when it comes to physics.

This is a dead end statement, my friend.
Dead. End.

[Killing Moon]

I dont think its possible to make a damage system like that one from ToCA3 on cars with such a high polycount, but who knows.
I would love to see damage modeling but i dont want something like in Forza, it would just destroy the GT atmosphere.

Poly count has nothing to do with that whatsoever.
Last gen, Evolution Studios continually produced WRC and each game had the highest poly counts in the market for vehicle models. Yet they also continuously produced intricate damage modeling just as well.

Flash forward to today, GT5 will have the highest currently. Not only am I sure that it's possible (especially working with artists on a daily basis), but I can more than guarantee that another developer will create even higher poly models and produce more advanced results on the subject.

Sorry, but that's reaching at bit.

[curryking1]

Killing Moon, you're missing the point, again! I never said it's wrong for you to criticize the game for it, and go ahead that's perfectly fine.

You are asking for it and saying that it is a problem that there is no damage, even if it isn't uber realistic, which is not wrong because it's totally fine to criticize the game for it.

But what you are again missing is that something that isn't up to Polyphony's standard (current styles of damage or even something Polyphony could do with current hardware better than others) is simply inconsistent with their philosophy and their own wants with their game.

Your demands with Gran Turismo and GT's damage modelling and Polyphony's demands with Gran Turismo
and GT's damage modelling are inconsistent? That's as best as it can be spelled out.

It isn't that either is wrong, or that you are wrong to crticize, it's that what you both value is fundamentally different.

This is a dead end statement, my friend.
Dead. End.

No, no it isn't. Perfection here is not meant literally as literal perfection is absolutely impossible. Also, perfection is subjective, as Polyphony's vision of perfection of physics may be a different level or degree of perfection than someone else's.

Secondly, perfection in one point of realism (driving) would not be 100% directly correlated to how realistic the crashing is. That is falsely associating two very independent variables.

[GTAce]

GTAce I´m waiting for that (http://forums.e-mpire.com/showpost.php?p=1712919&postcount=1276) post :hugegrin:

http://forums.e-mpire.com/showthread.php?p=1714895#post1714895
New thread, something like this hasnt much sense here. lol

[Killing Moon]

But what you are again missing is that something that isn't up to Polyphony's standard (current styles of damage or even something Polyphony could do with current hardware better than others) is simply inconsistent with their philosophy and their own wants with their game.

This doesn't make any sense at all here, LOL

Your demands with Gran Turismo and GT's damage modelling and Polyphony's demands with Gran Turismo
and GT's damage modelling are inconsistent? That's as best as it can be spelled out.

...but this does.

Now as far as what PD's standards are with damage modeling, who the fuck knows? Considering that they don't have any of it executed, how the HELL can they have standards for it?

That's like a virgin saying, "Well, I only prefer this grade of ass", yet he's never had sex before. LOL

Crude example, but easy enough to get.

You can't have a standard, or even a point of comparison of execution/experience on something when you've never done it before.

So when I hear that they want it to be ultra realistic, then I have to ask, "ultra realistic compare to WHAT?!". They don't even have a base to build off of to begin with.

[curryking1]

Actually, the first one clearly does make sense. Read it again.

A) Something that is not up to Polyphony's standard --> B) something they will not put in the game --> C) because something that is not up to Polyphony's standard is something inconsistent with their quality control and design philosophy.


That's like a virgin saying, "Well, I only prefer this grade of ass", yet he's never had sex before. LOL

That's another assumption by you. You are saying that they haven't even approached to 'trying' or even 'experimenting' with damage modelling on past hardware. But that's even more than what's needed to shoot down this analogy.

It's also a bad analogy because in the case of videogames it's easy to see how much others can do and extrapolate or guess how much you will be able to do on the same generation of hardware.

[Killing Moon]

That's another assumption by you. You are saying that they haven't even approached to 'trying' or even 'experimenting' with damage modelling on past hardware. But that's even more than what's needed to shoot down this analogy.

It's also a bad analogy because in the case of videogames it's easy to see how much others can do and extrapolate or guess how much you will be able to do on the same generation of hardware.

Dude, I'm not in the business of speculating. I'm in the business of proving.
PROVE that your standard is the highest before claiming anything.

They can't criticize anything anyone else has done when they haven't even gone through the motions on their own end.

Dry swimmers have no right to tell scuba divers how to perform.

[curryking1]

I am not saying any standard is higher, I am saying a standard and philosophy and design choice is different.

Dry swimmers have no right to tell scuba divers how to perform.

Polyphony isn't telling others by not putting in damage that they are failures or losers, they are simply saying they don't want to have that sort of damage for their own game.

It's not even relevant what others are doing because Polyphony has made this decision independent of other's choices in game development.

It's is purely Polyphony's own conclusion that they feel that it's not possible for themselves to do damage the way they would like to achieve it.

[Killing Moon]

Polyphony isn't telling others by not putting in damage that they are failures or losers, they are simply saying they don't want to have that sort of damage for their own game..

And just what would “…that sort of damage” be exactly?

[curryking1]

And just what would “…that sort of damage” be exactly?

What Polyphony feels the hardware is capable of now. Which is nothing close to any sort of realism.

You're going in a circle with this question like you have been every time you've talked about this subject concerning GT. It has been mentioned every time that Polyphony feels they can't do a damage model 'good enough' for their own taste with current hardware.

That damage model would be the same weak chassis-less deformation with only less than 100 different parts (and that's being optimistic), 120 km directly into a wall where the car should deform into a finely packed crumbling of metal where it would not.

[Epix]

Gran Turismo TV Revealed:

http://drive.gtchannel.com/?c=165&a=1312


By now you've already read our news on GT 5 Prologue Release Date and Free Demo. Just as we expected, more and more information the new Gran Turismo for PS3 is slowly leaving Sony HQ. We've learned even more about the upcoming downloadable demo, but more importantly, what will make it into the final game.

Sony's production team has been making the rounds at different automakers, that's nothing too earth-shaking, but the big news is that Gran Turismo 5 will finally inject some personality into the series. We confirmed that the team is hitting carmakers and interviewing key individuals at Ford, Audi, Nissan and other firms for on-camera footage. These interviews will be used in Gran Turismo 5 as bonus footage about the world of cars. Think of it like Special Features or Deleted Scenes you'd find in a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray disc. This is without-a-doubt, what Sony has been touting as Gran Turismo TV.

How do we know this? We caught 2007 Formula D Champion, Tanner Foust, being interviewed on-camera by a production crew with Gran Turismo 5, in HD, running in attract mode. It's a bit strange seeing the GT camp breaking out of its shell and diving into a more tuner-ish world, but we're positive that this isn't the last drifter Sony plans on interviewing. From the sounds of it, Sony is busy breaking out of the stale mold and taking it to the next level.

GT Channel was also able to squeeze a little more information and confirm that the downloadable demo coming soon is actually something different than what was shown at Tokyo Game Show. Our source wouldn't tell us what, but it will have some features that weren't shown back at TGS.

Again, Tokyo Motor Show is a week away and Sony has big plans on the 24th. We'll be on-hand at the show to catch a glimpse of exactly what's going on.

[GTAce]

Shit cant rep you. 8(
Sounds pretty good.

[Killing Moon]

What Polyphony feels the hardware is capable of now. Which is nothing close to any sort of realism.

You're going in a circle with this question like you have been every time you've talked about this subject concerning GT. It has been mentioned every time that Polyphony feels they can't do a damage model 'good enough' for their own taste with current hardware.

That damage model would be the same weak chassis-less deformation with only less than 100 different parts (and that's being optimistic), 120 km directly into a wall where the car should deform into a finely packed crumbling of metal where it would not.

That's back on the PS2 where they made that excuse.

Which by all accounts appeared even dumber taking into account that there were about 6 other driving/racing games that accomplished very competent damage modeling for the hardware they were based on.

So...let's see what the new excuse will be now (if they miss it again).
Which can and will be worse now considering that damage and the physics associated with it are practically one of the main staples of current consoles.





So again....we'll see.

[LaLiLuLeLo]

I think the problem is damage modeling even now is only so convincing, once they put the current standard of damage modeling on their hyper realistic looking cars, it's jarring to the eye and doesn't look as believable anymore.

[VG Aficionado]

Wow. GT5 is going to be huge.

[Leedogg]

Wow. GT5 is going to be huge.

50GB huge I'm thinking, I'm pretty sure it will be one of the first dual layered PS3 games out.

[rob the slob]

That's back on the PS2 where they made that excuse.

Which by all accounts appeared even dumber taking into account that there were about 6 other driving/racing games that accomplished very competent damage modeling for the hardware they were based on.

So...let's see what the new excuse will be now (if they miss it again).
Which can and will be worse now considering that damage and the physics associated with it are practically one of the main staples of current consoles.





So again....we'll see.
Dirt's damage model is freaking excellent. I wish PD would just do this.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/22955.html?type=mov

No need to attack me, GT fans, just my opinion. Its not like GT drives like a real car anyway. And to be honest, GT:HD felt a little to familiar. It was pretty boring to be honest.

[GTAce]

And to be honest, GT:HD felt a little to familiar. It was pretty boring to be honest.
http://xs220.xs.to/xs220/07423/FAILRep.gif
Sorry but thats really just your opinion.
DiRT damage is nice but for sure not what Polyphony wants.

[Killing Moon]

http://xs220.xs.to/xs220/07423/FAILRep.gif
Sorry but thats really just your opinion.
DiRT damage is nice but for sure not what Polyphony wants.

Rep lowered because he's not agreeing with you? A bit fanboyish, ain't that? LOL And it's not JUST his opinion, it's the opinion of quite a huge group of people; GTHD was boring as hell. But to be fair, it was a tech demo.

And the high-horse standard of what Polyphony wants for damage modeling is a bit dumb at the moment. Considering that they don't HAVE ONE to base off of.

[GTAce]

Rep lowered because he's not agreeing with you?
Nope he got that red bobble way before the GT discussion.

[curryking1]

That's back on the PS2 where they made that excuse.

Which by all accounts appeared even dumber taking into account that there were about 6 other driving/racing games that accomplished very competent damage modeling for the hardware they were based on.

Yet again, missing the point.

Competent, satisfying enough to them, competent satisfying enough to you.

Not competent or satisfying enough to Polyphony. The fact that it has been said for the past GT's is arbitrary, even if it may cryptically seem like it should have a foundation in the discussion.

What is being done now is they feel for their particular game, there is no combination of resources available to have both the essence of Gran Turismo and a damage modelling that is 'competent' to Polyphony.

You are showing a serious deficiency in post-formal operational thought and severe lack in ability to understand that one person and another can have two very different directions and opinions on a subject, and that is what a competent enough damage modelling system is for Gran Turismo.

You may have one opinion of what is good enough, and they clearly have another. Understand that absolutely simple concept.

When you can appreciate that fact that Polyphony and yourself have different opinions on what is an appropriate level of damage modelling and car deformation, then you should reply.

Polyphony's technical prowess easily shows they can definitely take out a few 200K polygon cars (out of 16 currently) for a Colin McCrae Dirt Rally level of damage. However, they don't want that level of deformation and are conciously choosing not to do that. Appreciate that fact.

DiRT damage is nice but for sure not what Polyphony wants.

[cliffbo]

Killing i was just pointing out that GT is GT... it was a joke! do you really have to put 'sarcasm' or J/K for posters to get the point? some people just want to moan about everything... hell i wasn't happy about Lair, but my concerns were verified.

[Killing Moon]

Yet again, missing the point.

Competent, satisfying enough to them, competent satisfying enough to you.

Not competent or satisfying enough to Polyphony. The fact that it has been said for the past GT's is arbitrary, even if it may cryptically seem like it should have a foundation in the discussion.

What is being done now is they feel for their particular game, there is no combination of resources available to have both the essence of Gran Turismo and a damage modelling that is 'competent' to Polyphony.

You are showing a serious deficiency in post-formal operational thought and severe lack in ability to understand that one person and another can have two very different directions and opinions on a subject, and that is what a competent enough damage modelling system is for Gran Turismo.

You may have one opinion of what is good enough, and they clearly have another. Understand that absolutely simple concept.

When you can appreciate that fact that Polyphony and yourself have different opinions on what is an appropriate level of damage modelling and car deformation, then you should reply.

Polyphony's technical prowess easily shows they can definitely take out a few 200K polygon cars (out of 16 currently) for a Colin McCrae Dirt Rally level of damage. However, they don't want that level of deformation and are conciously choosing not to do that. Appreciate that fact.

You keep throwing this out there; saying that I’m missing the point when no point is missed at all.

Polyphony does NOT HAVE a standard for damage modeling or any other feature if they don’t have a foundation to base one off of in the first place. Standards are built with progression, last I checked. Trying to say otherwise is cop out excuse bullshit that holds no water whatsoever and continuously makes them look even more inadequate with every “revision” that they produce.

What you’re trying to feed here is that they have this so-called high standard of executing a specific feature, yet haven’t completed it once within the entire span of their collective career. That’s like trying to run before you can even crawl.

That’s great; they have a supposed standard for realizing damage modeling. Awesome, now can we F’ing see it? You’re 7 years behind the curve already.

You cannot have a high standard of executing something that you DON’T have.

[GTAce]

According to Polyphony (which IS the only source you can take) they ARE experimenting with damage modeling and theyve done that with GT4 also BUT Yamauchi said that the stuff they wanted wasnt possible anymore on the PS2.
So... actually i dont give a fuck because i will have fun with the game even without damage.

[Killing Moon]

According to Polyphony (which IS the only source you can take) they ARE experimenting with damage modeling and theyve done that with GT4 also BUT Yamauchi said that the stuff they wanted wasnt possible anymore on the PS2.
So... actually i dont give a fuck because i will have fun with the game even without damage.

Which is my point exactly.
According to what they SAY they have been doing, not what they’ve actually accomplished.

Polyphony said that there was going to be a drag race mode in GT2.
Polyphony said damage modeling would be in GT3.
Polyphony said they were going to implement aero kits in GT4.
Polyphony said they were creating a GT4 online version.
Polyphony said there was going to be a Gran Turismo Mobile (with faked GT4 footage)
Polyphony said weather, damage modeling and AI improvements would be in GT4.
Polyphony said vehicle damage couldn’t be accomplished because of OEM’s interfering
Polyphony said vehicle damage couldn’t be accomplished because of hardware limitations; or up to their “standard”.
Polyphony said, Polyphony said, Polyphony said…a bunch of rubbish.

What they say and what they DO are two completely different things.
At this point it’s fairly easy to see that whatever they SAY they’re going to do to improve the gameplay can be taken with a grain of salt. Very low credibility.

[GTAce]

Polyphony said that there was going to be a drag race mode in GT2.
No idea i was 9 or 10 at this time
Polyphony said damage modeling would be in GT3.
They said they want implement it
Polyphony said they were going to implement aero kits in GT4.
You can make a heckspoiler on the cars with an unfortunatly invisible front spoiler
Polyphony said they were creating a GT4 online version.
They did it but it didnt came in the final game, i will search a video for you later
Polyphony said there was going to be a Gran Turismo Mobile (with faked GT4 footage)
According to them its still in developement
Polyphony said weather, damage modeling and AI improvements would be in GT4.
Damage same like with GT3, agree with weather and AI that WAS rubbish


EDIT: DP_hmMMmbdo
That should be the video, not sure because there are a lot of Xlink videos.

[VG Aficionado]

Can you put an end to that crap? Some of us want a slightly more same-old-complaints-free board :unsure:

[GTAce]

Sorry VG youre right.

[Red_Eyes]

Which is my point exactly.
According to what they SAY they have been doing, not what they’ve actually accomplished.

Polyphony said that there was going to be a drag race mode in GT2.
Polyphony said damage modeling would be in GT3.
Polyphony said they were going to implement aero kits in GT4.
Polyphony said they were creating a GT4 online version.
Polyphony said there was going to be a Gran Turismo Mobile (with faked GT4 footage)
Polyphony said weather, damage modeling and AI improvements would be in GT4.
Polyphony said vehicle damage couldn’t be accomplished because of OEM’s interfering
Polyphony said vehicle damage couldn’t be accomplished because of hardware limitations; or up to their “standard”.
Polyphony said, Polyphony said, Polyphony said…a bunch of rubbish.

What they say and what they DO are two completely different things.
At this point it’s fairly easy to see that whatever they SAY they’re going to do to improve the gameplay can be taken with a grain of salt. Very low credibility.
If you hate GT5 that much, then don't play it. We're tired of you complaining. Polyphony said they're trying to do damage. What do you want them to do? Say they're trying to do damage and magically, get damage working 5 seconds later? Impossible. Things like this takes time. Especially if it's going to be very realistic and not half ass like other games like Burn Out.

You want a perfect game, with tons features, tons of cars, tons of customizable, all perfect, and out in one year only. Impossible.

You need to stop focusing on the negative and start focusing on the positive. All games, even the best game out there, still has their flaws.

[Killing Moon]

You want a perfect game, with tons features, tons of cars, tons of customizable, all perfect, and out in one year only. Impossible.



When did I say that?
Reaching, are we?

[B Dizzle]

If you hate GT5 that much, then don't play it. We're tired of you complaining. Polyphony said they're trying to do damage. What do you want them to do?

You need to stop focusing on the negative and start focusing on the positive. All games, even the best game out there, still has their flaws.

Killing Moon and myself do go on a bit but, its because of a love and passion for a game thats got shinier in every subsequent edition without moving the gameplay on forward.

The rest of you sound like the Iraqi information minister, "everything's peachy", as US tanks rolled past behind him. You keep on saying, "yeah but, look how great it looks!", with absolutely no regard for the fact that the gameplay itself has barely moved on in ten years.

Once again, I bring up the point that GT4 was the worst selling but best looking of all the GT games. Why? Simple, because it was that same gameplay mechanic of GT2, a game released nearly 8 years earlier.

No one element can bring this game up to date but, PD's inability to even recognise that that the introduction of damage and a truly competitive AI(ala TOCA, even Demolition Derby on the PS1 for fuck's sake) has hurt the franchise.

Rarely has a franchise rested so lazily on its (deserved)laurels other than Madden or Fifa.

And please, I beg of you, implore you, stop this nonsense about realism, and perfection. Its a GAME. Are you seriously trying to tell me they fitted that lovely lighting, and car model from the previous games with a real life physics model into 32MB.

Put your hands behind your heads, interlock your fingers and step away from the crack pipe.

I'm not asking for real-life crashes, which in actuality with modern day car safety design are quite tame. All I'm asking for(and I think Killing Moon too) is that they at least make an attempt to implement a damage model.

Kazanouri-san has been giving us the same old waffle about maybe we'll do this and we're thinking about implementing that depending on what the manufacturers say, for over half a decade now. Isn't it about time he actually delivered?

Meanwhile, other titles with cars from these same manufacturers have actually been delivering the goods! Once again, not perfectly but, they are games after all.

If all you want is shinier cars, great, I'm happy for you but, don't piss on those of us that expect more.

As I said earlier in this thread, its about time PD and Sony in general, rolled down their tinted windows,stuck their heads out and checked out how the world has moved on since GT2.

I certainly don't expect super-computer style deformation models and Kasparov type AI but, at least put some fucking effort it.

[Red_Eyes]

But when they do put effort into it and ended up not perfect (like the so call bad gameplay), you guys call them lazy and the effort half ass. You guys kept saying better gameplay, but it's already the best, so how much better can it get? Beside crash physics, what is there to improve on?

[B Dizzle]

But when they do put effort into it and ended up not perfect (like the so call bad gameplay), you guys call them lazy and the effort half ass. You guys kept saying better gameplay, but it's already the best, so how much better can it get? Beside crash physics, what is there to improve on?

Show me where and when they've made an effort to even investigate damage modelling. Show me where and when they've produced an AI model that comes anywhere near TOCA 2(where the AI model is like playing against other humans).

Your post shows a disturbing lack of ambition! You're not interested in the game being the best it can be, you're basically saying, "PD just make it shinier and it'll be alright".

Total BS.

[cliffbo]

Show me where and when they've made an effort to even investigate damage modelling. Show me where and when they've produced an AI model that comes anywhere near TOCA 2(where the AI model is like playing against other humans).

Your post shows a disturbing lack of ambition! You're not interested in the game being the best it can be, you're basically saying, "PD just make it shinier and it'll be alright".

Total BS.

the reason GT had more cars than any other game out there was because of their care in reproducing the cars in a realistic way. one of the reasons they never put damage into the games was that some car manufacturers wouldn't allow them to. if only one car manufacturer says no, that effectively means that they can't implement it because then other manufacturers would be up in arms. when they say they want damage to be perfect before they include it, they mean different damage for different cars, so that it reflects exactly on the quality of the actual vehicle... can you imagine how difficult that will be to pull off?! Burnout has the same deformation tech for every car. please bare that in mind when talking about damage

[Killing Moon]

the reason GT had more cars than any other game out there was because of their care in reproducing the cars in a realistic way. one of the reasons they never put damage into the games was that some car manufacturers wouldn't allow them to. if only one car manufacturer says no, that effectively means that they can't implement it because then other manufacturers would be up in arms. when they say they want damage to be perfect before they include it, they mean different damage for different cars, so that it reflects exactly on the quality of the actual vehicle... can you imagine how difficult that will be to pull off?! Burnout has the same deformation tech for every car. please bare that in mind when talking about damage

Well maybe it’s my own fault for coming off so aggressively in general, so I’ll try to be as even keeled as possible.

What you’re doing is assuming what Polyphony means and in no way have they ever broken down exactly what they mean to do. As usual, they were as vague as possible with what they were aiming for in regards to this subject. Ultimately, they’ve shown zero evidence of their work or studies on damage work, just the same rhetoric over and over.

The manufacturer point is a myth; I just wish most of you would let that crutch go already.

As far as what was said earlier, had Polyphony evolved the game and brought on a new bucket of problems, at least it was due to progression. There will always be problems technologically and gameplay wise. However, if they’re attempting to make strides within improvement beyond shinier visuals, then they wouldn’t be so ridiculed overall.

If you ask me: cut down on this ridiculously inflated vehicle roster and work from the ground up on gameplay improvements. Hell, if they wanted, I(!) could give them a host of design improvement from my own blueprints. Lol
Really, we don’t need Pokemon for cars.

No one is saying that other titles like TOCA and GTR don’t provide their own host of problems. But they’re pushing forward and evolving from their base formulas, which is what counts at the end of the day.

BTW, that “tinted window” analogy used earlier was well placed.

[cliffbo]

Well maybe it’s my own fault for coming off so aggressively in general, so I’ll try to be as even keeled as possible.

What you’re doing is assuming what Polyphony means and in no way have they ever broken down exactly what they mean to do. As usual, they were as vague as possible with what they were aiming for in regards to this subject. Ultimately, they’ve shown zero evidence of their work or studies on damage work, just the same rhetoric over and over.

The manufacturer point is a myth; I just wish most of you would let that crutch go already.

As far as what was said earlier, had Polyphony evolved the game and brought on a new bucket of problems, at least it was due to progression. There will always be problems technologically and gameplay wise. However, if they’re attempting to make strides within improvement beyond shinier visuals, then they wouldn’t be so ridiculed overall.

If you ask me: cut down on this ridiculously inflated vehicle roster and work from the ground up on gameplay improvements. Hell, if they wanted, I(!) could give them a host of design improvement from my own blueprints. Lol
Really, we don’t need Pokemon for cars.

No one is saying that other titles like TOCA and GTR don’t provide their own host of problems. But they’re pushing forward and evolving from their base formulas, which is what counts at the end of the day.

BTW, that “tinted window” analogy used earlier was well placed.

nothing is ever perfect Killing... i don't disagree with you entirely, it is frustrating when devs avoid certain questions, but we simply 'don't know' what the fully fledged game will play like, so to me it's a little pointless moaning about it (YET) of course if your concerns are verified, i'll be the first to point out that you were right. :)

[Killing Moon]

In an effort to give an example of what I mean here's this:
I did a ton of research on racing game development and design for about 2yrs. This was one of MANY posts from Automotiveforums.com, the hugest site for gearheads and car buffs in the world.

"How about the ability to do a decent burnout? Taking a 1,000 hp race car out and only hazing the tires...yeah....right. I could do a better burnout in my 85 Toyota Tercel wagon that only ran on 3 cylinders. Sometimes after a long race I want to relax and due a huge, smokey, tire shredding burnout. Btw, it would also be nice to see the rubber or "black lines" on the ground.

More realism in the tuning section.

1. A proper port and polish job on a v8 will net you a lot more then 10 hp. A 10hp port and polish job could be performed by a drunk monkey.

2. Displacement up??? Is that some sort of joke? I have about 400 cars in my garage and have only been able to do this on one so far. Is PD saying that you can only increase the displacement on a dodge viper? This option should be available on every car, and in different sizes. ever heard of a stoker motor....apparently PD hasn’t.

3. Nitrous, while it is fun it is so wrong its not funny. I don’t understand how or why the "shot" sizes are the way they are. Only 50hp on a GTO, yet its 100hp on a Subaru? That doesn’t make sense. It should be the other way around. Normally the bigger the engine is the bigger the shot can be. The average nitrous kit on the market today for a GTO, Mustang, or other American v8 is 50hp to 150hp for the import cars the shot sizes are smaller, generally up to 75hp. Like I have said, these are general...drag racers are running huge shot sizes, upwards of 500hp..some times multiple shots of the size. If they want to offer Nitrous Oxide they should at least make it semi realistic.

4. Superchargers, come on PD, do some research. They do work wonders to boost the low end but they don’t die on the upper end like the ones in GT4 do. In my experience the roots type make more horsepower the higher the rpms go. Look at top fuel drag racing...they use the roots type of supercharger and make power at way higher rpms then the superchargers in the game.

5. Engine Swaps....DUH!!!! This is a very overlooked option. Tons of hot rodders have done changed out engines. Lots of people take out a smaller engine and place a larger one in there. The old saying, "there is no replacement for displacement" hasn’t been around for decades for no reason.

6. Tuning the Transmission, was this meant a joke? Final drive ratio, maybe its just me, but I thought the combination of what ever gear you are in and the gears in the differential equal the final drive ratio. Possibly that option was meant as the differential gear? If so, still wrong. I will admit this concept is a little confusing, but here it goes. Numerically lower gears, ie 2.50 are meant for high speed. Numerically higher gears, ie 4.56 are meant for acceleration. Now here is where it gets tricky, numerically lower gears are commonly referred to a "high gears" and numerically higher gears are referred to a "low gears". Don’t ask me why I’m not the one who made that up.

7. Wheels. So many options for color and style, but no option for size. How about an option for height and width?

Different tracks.

1. Since a lot of people are into seeing how fast their cars can go, what their top speed is...how about a track based on the salt flats? It could be a 3 or 4 mile straight track with cones as a boundary...it would be fairly simple to create.

2. Drag racing...I love this track! Too bad it isnt an option in arcade. That would have been an incredible idea. PD missed the boat on that one. It could increase the fun level tremendously if you were able to run this track in 2 player mode.

Track Editor. I know this one would be tricky, if it would be any easier make it available in arcade mode only without ai. It would be awesome to take advantage of a few of the cars like the 1970 Chapparal 2j, or the Saleen s7 that can actually drive upside down. I don’t know if it is possible, but it would kick ass. "

And a bit on Cars:
"Cars.

1. I know that the game is designed in Japan, but how about some cars that aren’t Japanese? I have nothing against Subaru, Nissan, or Honda yet I see no reason to have 5 NSX race cars that all have the same power levels. If you are going to put that many different versions of the same car...make them all noticeably different.

2. Varity. Again variety. We don’t need 500 plus cars if 50 of them are Subaru's and 50 of them are Honda's you get the point. How about more cars that are less known or from a different country. I liked the availability of more American and European cars...but is there any way that this can be increased? Instead of a bunch of Camaros and Corvettes, how about an El Camino, or a Nova? Instead of all the mustangs how about a falcon, galaxy of Torino?

3. Race cars. Ahh yea...the cars everyone wants. I am happy with most of the race cars, with exception to the 28,000 Supras and skylines. If inspiration is lacking how about some vintage Nascars, or trans am cars? I love the 1963 Corvette race car...lets have some cars to race it against. Also, would it be possible to have a NASCAR or a truck from the NASCAR Crafstman Truck Series they race on road courses too."

Keep in mind, most of PD's sales COME FROM AUTOMOTIVE fans.
I used this list and a HUGE amount of other data to blueprint my own work, BTW.

[GTAce]

Polyphony Digital nennt Gran Turismo 5 Prologue-Fahrplan

18.10.07 - Polyphony Digital gibt bekannt, dass man das Rennspiel Gran Turismo 5 Prologue ~Free Trial Version~ in der Zeit vom 20.10.07 bis 11.11.07 zum kostenlosen Herunterladen im japanischen PlayStation Store anbieten wird.

Polyphony Digital announced that the GT5P demo will be available for free from the 10/20/07 till the 11/11/07 in the Japanese PlayStation Store

Es gibt sieben Fahrzeuge (Lexus IS-F, Nissan GT-R, Mazda Motor Atenza, Subaru Impreza WRX STi, Mitsubishi Lanza Evolution X GSR, Daihatsu Motor OFC-1 und BMW 135i Coupé sowie 1 Strecke (Suzuka).

7 cars: Lexus IS-F, Nissan GT-R, Mazda Motor Atenza, Subaru Impreza WRX STi, Mitsubishi Lancer Evo X GSR, Daihatsu Motor OFC-1 & BMW 135i Coupe, 1 track (Suzuka)

Ein Einzelspieler-Modus ist vorhanden, an dem insgesamt 16 Fahrzeuge teilnehmen; ein Online-Modus fehlt. Parallel zur 40. Tokyo Motor Show (23.10.07 - 25.10.07) werden dort enthüllte Autos gleichzeitig auch im Spiel freigeschaltet.

A single player mode with totally 16 cars in a race, no online mode.
There going to be cars that get unveiled on the 40th Tokyo Motor Show (10/23/07-10/25/07) and those are going to be available parallel in the GT5P demo

Über 'Gran Turismo TV' sollen via Internet verschiedene Sendungen und Videos abrufbar sein, darunter Beiträge zur obigen Automesse. Dazu kommen Text-Nachrichten rund um den Motorsport.

GT.TV is available in the demo, with the possibility to watch several shows and videos from the TMS plus text news about motorsport in general


www.gamefront.de

:worthy:

[VG Aficionado]

Wow, the demo rocks. Make sure to get it while it lasts!

[Red_Eyes]

Show me where and when they've made an effort to even investigate damage modelling.
How do you know they're not making any effort? Just because you don't live with PD and don't see them trying doesn't mean they're not trying.
Show me where and when they've produced an AI model that comes anywhere near TOCA 2(where the AI model is like playing against other humans).
Where: GT5. When: 2008.

Your post shows a disturbing lack of ambition! You're not interested in the game being the best it can be, you're basically saying, "PD just make it shinier and it'll be alright".

Total BS
Lack of ambition would have result in a GT5 game looking like GT1 and coming out in 2010 with 10 cars only and no AI at all.

Complain when you can make a game better than GT5. For now, PD is trying their hardest so stop whinning. It's not like PD sit around drinking beer and doing shit.

[GTAce]

Concentrate on the news please!
lol Sorry but its a bit.. just a bit annoying. lol

(im nervous as hell btw i really i shiver on the whole body... its GT time.. a new GT (okay a demo...) )

[Killing Moon]

How do you know they're not making any effort? Just because you don't live with PD and don't see them trying doesn't mean they're not trying.
Where: GT5. When: 2008.
I’ve seen a bunch of videos so far and yet to witness the supposed AI improvements. Even in the older GT’s, a few cars would veer off every so often. But what he’s described as AI dynamics from TOCA2 or even Le Mans 24 Hrs. has yet to be realized on their part.

Lack of ambition would have result in a GT5 game looking like GT1 and coming out in 2010 with 10 cars only and no AI at all.

That’s a dirt poor analogy and a really cushiony way to approach what he’s saying. Looks and number of cars on screen have nothing to do with ambition. That’s JUST graphics, not much else. I believe he and I both addressed that point already; making things shinier isn’t ambitious at all. Everyone does that.

[Segitz]

In an effort to give an example of what I mean here's this:
I did a ton of research on racing game development and design for about 2yrs. This was one of MANY posts from Automotiveforums.com, the hugest site for gearheads and car buffs in the world.

"How about the ability to do a decent burnout? Taking a 1,000 hp race car out and only hazing the tires...yeah....right. I could do a better burnout in my 85 Toyota Tercel wagon that only ran on 3 cylinders. Sometimes after a long race I want to relax and due a huge, smokey, tire shredding burnout. Btw, it would also be nice to see the rubber or "black lines" on the ground.

More realism in the tuning section.

1. A proper port and polish job on a v8 will net you a lot more then 10 hp. A 10hp port and polish job could be performed by a drunk monkey.

Correct

2. Displacement up??? Is that some sort of joke? I have about 400 cars in my garage and have only been able to do this on one so far. Is PD saying that you can only increase the displacement on a dodge viper? This option should be available on every car, and in different sizes. ever heard of a stoker motor....apparently PD hasn’t.

Correct

3. Nitrous, while it is fun it is so wrong its not funny. I don’t understand how or why the "shot" sizes are the way they are. Only 50hp on a GTO, yet its 100hp on a Subaru? That doesn’t make sense. It should be the other way around. Normally the bigger the engine is the bigger the shot can be. The average nitrous kit on the market today for a GTO, Mustang, or other American v8 is 50hp to 150hp for the import cars the shot sizes are smaller, generally up to 75hp. Like I have said, these are general...drag racers are running huge shot sizes, upwards of 500hp..some times multiple shots of the size. If they want to offer Nitrous Oxide they should at least make it semi realistic.

Well, this is a moot point. NOS being mostly idiotic and illegal in nearly every racing league so far, it also damages the engines quite a bit. The more you inject NOS the faster your engine dies. This is also why noone in his right mind would do it to his street car (in germany it being TOTALLY illegal, mostly because of illegal transportation of gaseous materials in a car without permission). Thing is, usually NOS injectors are setup to counter the low torque in lower revs. But my "expertise" in this matter is slim at best

4. Superchargers, come on PD, do some research. They do work wonders to boost the low end but they don’t die on the upper end like the ones in GT4 do. In my experience the roots type make more horsepower the higher the rpms go. Look at top fuel drag racing...they use the roots type of supercharger and make power at way higher rpms then the superchargers in the game.

This is only dependant on how rev-happy your car is and how much more pressure the engine can take. In normal cars, the input pressure usually is at 1 to 1.5 bar. Racing cars can usually take in more, but again, depending on how long you want your engine to run.

5. Engine Swaps....DUH!!!! This is a very overlooked option. Tons of hot rodders have done changed out engines. Lots of people take out a smaller engine and place a larger one in there. The old saying, "there is no replacement for displacement" hasn’t been around for decades for no reason.

Well^^ Often, there are different engine versions of different cars. In Germany, changing engines is a huge magisterial act. A friend of mine put a G40 Polo III engine into a Polo I... To officially drive this car on a street, he must do a complete hardness test of his car, which costs up to 20000€ (for a 2000€ car^^). I don't know if this is really viable. Checking which engines do work on which chassis would be a HUGE act :D

6. Tuning the Transmission, was this meant a joke? Final drive ratio, maybe its just me, but I thought the combination of what ever gear you are in and the gears in the differential equal the final drive ratio. Possibly that option was meant as the differential gear? If so, still wrong. I will admit this concept is a little confusing, but here it goes. Numerically lower gears, ie 2.50 are meant for high speed. Numerically higher gears, ie 4.56 are meant for acceleration. Now here is where it gets tricky, numerically lower gears are commonly referred to a "high gears" and numerically higher gears are referred to a "low gears". Don’t ask me why I’m not the one who made that up.

Well, transmissions are very complex beings. The final drive ratio is not dependant on the others ratios... Think of it as an extra gear at the end of the transmission.

Transmissions are calculated like this... The higher the divisor (1:1 till 1:10), the lower the endresult is... I.e. if you have a 1:1 ratio, the engine turns at 800RPM, so the gears turn 800RPM... At 1:10, the gears do 80RPM when the engine runs at 800RPM. At least, that is how I learned transmissions at University, which was last semester^^

7. Wheels. So many options for color and style, but no option for size. How about an option for height and width?

This, I completely agree with you :D

Different tracks.

Track Editor. I know this one would be tricky, if it would be any easier make it available in arcade mode only without ai. It would be awesome to take advantage of a few of the cars like the 1970 Chapparal 2j, or the Saleen s7 that can actually drive upside down. I don’t know if it is possible, but it would kick ass. "

I'd love to see a track editor too, but mostly, these are so limited, that it is just a gimmicky feature, that's just no fun.

And a bit on Cars:
"Cars.

1. I know that the game is designed in Japan, but how about some cars that aren’t Japanese? I have nothing against Subaru, Nissan, or Honda yet I see no reason to have 5 NSX race cars that all have the same power levels. If you are going to put that many different versions of the same car...make them all noticeably different.

Well, if they are like this in reality, they cannot just change them. But seeing as there often are 10 versions of a single japanese car but only one of the Germans, I find it a bit sad... I mean, German car culture is... great :D

2. Varity. Again variety. We don’t need 500 plus cars if 50 of them are Subaru's and 50 of them are Honda's you get the point. How about more cars that are less known or from a different country. I liked the availability of more American and European cars...but is there any way that this can be increased? Instead of a bunch of Camaros and Corvettes, how about an El Camino, or a Nova? Instead of all the mustangs how about a falcon, galaxy of Torino?

I completely agree. Where are the not so known European car makers like Isdera or Ariel?

3. Race cars. Ahh yea...the cars everyone wants. I am happy with most of the race cars, with exception to the 28,000 Supras and skylines. If inspiration is lacking how about some vintage Nascars, or trans am cars? I love the 1963 Corvette race car...lets have some cars to race it against. Also, would it be possible to have a NASCAR or a truck from the NASCAR Crafstman Truck Series they race on road courses too."

Well... There are some DTM cars and some other smaller series... The problem might be purely legal. PD surely needs to licence this stuff (the old DTM died some years ago, so noone to sue^^). But to a certain degree I agree. BUT, this is still GT and not Race Driver, keep that in mind.

[Viano]

I guess sometimes you have to live with it if you can't change the world.

[Pimpwerx]

A lot of assumptions being made from videos. Wait to play it. It looks incredible right now. Can't wait for the demo this weekend. If you can't convince someone of your pov after the first two replies, then give it up. PEACE.

[VG Aficionado]

Yes, GT5 will be awesome!

*tries to get back to topic*

[GTAce]

Polyphony Digital nennt Gran Turismo 5 Prologue-Fahrplan

18.10.07 - Polyphony Digital gibt bekannt, dass man das Rennspiel Gran Turismo 5 Prologue ~Free Trial Version~ in der Zeit vom 20.10.07 bis 11.11.07 zum kostenlosen Herunterladen im japanischen PlayStation Store anbieten wird.

Polyphony Digital announced that the GT5P demo will be available for free from the 10/20/07 till the 11/11/07 in the Japanese PlayStation Store

Es gibt sieben Fahrzeuge (Lexus IS-F, Nissan GT-R, Mazda Motor Atenza, Subaru Impreza WRX STi, Mitsubishi Lanza Evolution X GSR, Daihatsu Motor OFC-1 und BMW 135i Coupé sowie 1 Strecke (Suzuka).

7 cars: Lexus IS-F, Nissan GT-R, Mazda Motor Atenza, Subaru Impreza WRX STi, Mitsubishi Lancer Evo X GSR, Daihatsu Motor OFC-1 & BMW 135i Coupe, 1 track (Suzuka)

Ein Einzelspieler-Modus ist vorhanden, an dem insgesamt 16 Fahrzeuge teilnehmen; ein Online-Modus fehlt. Parallel zur 40. Tokyo Motor Show (23.10.07 - 25.10.07) werden dort enthüllte Autos gleichzeitig auch im Spiel freigeschaltet.

A single player mode with totally 16 cars in a race, no online mode.
There going to be cars that get unveiled on the 40th Tokyo Motor Show (10/23/07-10/25/07) and those are going to be available parallel in the GT5P demo

Über 'Gran Turismo TV' sollen via Internet verschiedene Sendungen und Videos abrufbar sein, darunter Beiträge zur obigen Automesse. Dazu kommen Text-Nachrichten rund um den Motorsport.

GT.TV is available in the demo, with the possibility to watch several shows and videos from the TMS plus text news about motorsport in general

www.gamefront.de

:worthy:

Maybe this will help to go back to topic.

[Killing Moon]

A lot of assumptions being made from videos. Wait to play it. It looks incredible right now. Can't wait for the demo this weekend. If you can't convince someone of your pov after the first two replies, then give it up. PEACE.