GT4 review.

[GB33]

Re: GT4 review.

He may not be a racing god but it's fair to say he knows a little bit about racing. Let's just say he works for the Indy Racing League and he had input to several racing games. I'm not stroking the dude but let's just say he knows a thing or two about real racing.

Oh dear God, I hope he didn't have "input" on the IRL games themselves. Talk about potential but having so many flaws. This year was better, but it still takes insane unrealistic car adjustments to even compete. Rookie level is too easy, next level is better, but sim level is impossible, and takes all fun away.

[GB33]

Re: GT4 review.

He may not be a racing god but it's fair to say he knows a little bit about racing. Let's just say he works for the Indy Racing League and he had input to several racing games. I'm not stroking the dude but let's just say he knows a thing or two about real racing.

Oh dear God, I hope he didn't have "input" on the IRL games themselves. Talk about potential but having so many flaws. This year was better, but it still takes insane unrealistic car adjustments to even compete. Rookie level is too easy, next level is better, but sim level is impossible, and takes all fun away.

[pk500]

Re: GT4 review.

I don't feel I need to waste my time and give you of all people my opinion on the game. Why so you can turn around and say what you have been repeating 1000X already? Its a waste of time telling you anything about this game you have already formed your opinion.

Well, if someone gave me specifics that refuted my opinion, I'd be happy to change it. But no one has provided any specifics, including you.

Its sad because its clear what you're trying to do. Its killing you inside that people like this game that you hate so much. Your mind is going crazy and you just have to ask why. Its just so hard for you to accept that people like the game even though it doesn't have the features you have been crying about. Get over your self not everyone shares you opinion.

Tee-hee. I could care less. It shouldn't kill me, and it doesn't, as I'm a fan of the GT series, at least the first two versions. As I said in this or another thread, I have more than 100 hours of play between the first three versions combined.

But you're right, in an odd way: It's sad to see this franchise wilt and atrophy when it could be so much better. The series has made ZERO improvements in AI and lacks online racing and a damage model. It doesn't kill me, but I'm always sad to see gamers get ripped off by a rehashed, prettier expansion pack disguised as a sequel.

Yeah I'll enjoy my eye candy, enjoy your crying all over these boards about a game you don't even interest in.

If I didn't care about GT, I wouldn't be posting here. I have plenty of other things to occupy my time.

But as I said, I'm sad that a great franchise is being dragged down by repetitive mediocrity and lack of evolution, and I do get a few laughs because no one can provide a single specific detail of the gameplay evolution of GT 4.

The OS Forum usually is a good source of intelligent, detailed discussion of games' plusses and minuses, including dissection of various aspects of gameplay. I guess the GT threads are an exception.

Not surprising, since the GT name has such marquee value and equity that gamers would buy a plate of steaming cow dung if it has the Polyphony and GT labels on them. Again, very similar to Tomb Raider.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying the GT series is bad. It was revolutionary for its time, especially with GT and GT 2 on the PSX. It also does very well what it tries to do -- pretty graphics, car collecting and hot-lapping.

But it's being outrun, and in some cases, lapped, as a RACING game by some of its competitors.

GT is a damn good series. But it could be SO much better and be the most comprehensive, beautiful and dominating racing game of all time. It's not that and a bag of chips right now.

Take care,
PK

[pk500]

Re: GT4 review.

I don't feel I need to waste my time and give you of all people my opinion on the game. Why so you can turn around and say what you have been repeating 1000X already? Its a waste of time telling you anything about this game you have already formed your opinion.

Well, if someone gave me specifics that refuted my opinion, I'd be happy to change it. But no one has provided any specifics, including you.

Its sad because its clear what you're trying to do. Its killing you inside that people like this game that you hate so much. Your mind is going crazy and you just have to ask why. Its just so hard for you to accept that people like the game even though it doesn't have the features you have been crying about. Get over your self not everyone shares you opinion.

Tee-hee. I could care less. It shouldn't kill me, and it doesn't, as I'm a fan of the GT series, at least the first two versions. As I said in this or another thread, I have more than 100 hours of play between the first three versions combined.

But you're right, in an odd way: It's sad to see this franchise wilt and atrophy when it could be so much better. The series has made ZERO improvements in AI and lacks online racing and a damage model. It doesn't kill me, but I'm always sad to see gamers get ripped off by a rehashed, prettier expansion pack disguised as a sequel.

Yeah I'll enjoy my eye candy, enjoy your crying all over these boards about a game you don't even interest in.

If I didn't care about GT, I wouldn't be posting here. I have plenty of other things to occupy my time.

But as I said, I'm sad that a great franchise is being dragged down by repetitive mediocrity and lack of evolution, and I do get a few laughs because no one can provide a single specific detail of the gameplay evolution of GT 4.

The OS Forum usually is a good source of intelligent, detailed discussion of games' plusses and minuses, including dissection of various aspects of gameplay. I guess the GT threads are an exception.

Not surprising, since the GT name has such marquee value and equity that gamers would buy a plate of steaming cow dung if it has the Polyphony and GT labels on them. Again, very similar to Tomb Raider.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying the GT series is bad. It was revolutionary for its time, especially with GT and GT 2 on the PSX. It also does very well what it tries to do -- pretty graphics, car collecting and hot-lapping.

But it's being outrun, and in some cases, lapped, as a RACING game by some of its competitors.

GT is a damn good series. But it could be SO much better and be the most comprehensive, beautiful and dominating racing game of all time. It's not that and a bag of chips right now.

Take care,
PK

[pk500]

Re: GT4 review.

Oh dear God, I hope he didn't have "input" on the IRL games themselves. Talk about potential but having so many flaws. This year was better, but it still takes insane unrealistic car adjustments to even compete. Rookie level is too easy, next level is better, but sim level is impossible, and takes all fun away.

Then let me be direct: Either you must prefer arcade driving games or have little skill with setups or driving with sims. The Pro (top) level is the only level on which IndyCar Series 2005 is even remotely competitive and fun. It's the level on which the game was designed to be played.

IndyCar Series 2005 has plenty of flaws, but gameplay, driving model and racing model aren't among them. It's not a game for drivers who need training wheels.

Take care,
PK

[pk500]

Re: GT4 review.

Oh dear God, I hope he didn't have "input" on the IRL games themselves. Talk about potential but having so many flaws. This year was better, but it still takes insane unrealistic car adjustments to even compete. Rookie level is too easy, next level is better, but sim level is impossible, and takes all fun away.

Then let me be direct: Either you must prefer arcade driving games or have little skill with setups or driving with sims. The Pro (top) level is the only level on which IndyCar Series 2005 is even remotely competitive and fun. It's the level on which the game was designed to be played.

IndyCar Series 2005 has plenty of flaws, but gameplay, driving model and racing model aren't among them. It's not a game for drivers who need training wheels.

Take care,
PK

[fossen]

Re: GT4 review.

Indeed. Weak AI and no online, but the gameplay still rates 9.5.

How? This is supposed to be the Real Driving Simulator, but it has weak AI yet rates 9.5 for gameplay.

Well ... it's not a Racing Simulator, after all.

PK, I think you're attacking this game for not being something that it isn't trying to be. This is a car game, not a racing game. This is test driving vehicles you'll never own, and having 700 of them in the garage. Even looking at the back-of-the-box blurb, racing doesn't get mentioned until #5, after the freakin' photo modes.

This is a game about cars and driving. If PD could get away with having no other cars on the track, I think they would. Just let you drive around. But they need a hook for the game, so there's racing. I just don't think that racing's the point.

I think slamming GT for not having good racing AI is like slamming Burnout for not having realistic physics.

[fossen]

Re: GT4 review.

Indeed. Weak AI and no online, but the gameplay still rates 9.5.

How? This is supposed to be the Real Driving Simulator, but it has weak AI yet rates 9.5 for gameplay.

Well ... it's not a Racing Simulator, after all.

PK, I think you're attacking this game for not being something that it isn't trying to be. This is a car game, not a racing game. This is test driving vehicles you'll never own, and having 700 of them in the garage. Even looking at the back-of-the-box blurb, racing doesn't get mentioned until #5, after the freakin' photo modes.

This is a game about cars and driving. If PD could get away with having no other cars on the track, I think they would. Just let you drive around. But they need a hook for the game, so there's racing. I just don't think that racing's the point.

I think slamming GT for not having good racing AI is like slamming Burnout for not having realistic physics.

[ps2king]

Re: GT4 review.

Well ... it's not a Racing Simulator, after all.

PK, I think you're attacking this game for not being something that it isn't trying to be. This is a car game, not a racing game. This is test driving vehicles you'll never own, and having 700 of them in the garage. Even looking at the back-of-the-box blurb, racing doesn't get mentioned until #5, after the freakin' photo modes.

This is a game about cars and driving. If PD could get away with having no other cars on the track, I think they would. Just let you drive around. But they need a hook for the game, so there's racing. I just don't think that racing's the point.

I think slamming GT for not having good racing AI is like slamming Burnout for not having realistic physics.

We have a winner

Anyway I really want to be done with this whole silly debate, we're just going in circles and this is cutting into my playing time.

The game doesn't revolutionize the gen, thats obvious. But it's still a great game with tons of things to do and will keep the fans of the game playing for 100+ to come.

People seem to be hung up on breaking new ground and revolutionizing gaming as we know it. Forget about what it should be, and focus on what it is. I like the features added and the few that they tweaked, the physics are much better, there are more cars and tracks really thats good enough for me, sorry if it doesn't meet certain peoples standards. It's a racing game for god sakes. If I wanted total realism I would hop in my car and drive down the highway at 90mph.

[ps2king]

Re: GT4 review.

Well ... it's not a Racing Simulator, after all.

PK, I think you're attacking this game for not being something that it isn't trying to be. This is a car game, not a racing game. This is test driving vehicles you'll never own, and having 700 of them in the garage. Even looking at the back-of-the-box blurb, racing doesn't get mentioned until #5, after the freakin' photo modes.

This is a game about cars and driving. If PD could get away with having no other cars on the track, I think they would. Just let you drive around. But they need a hook for the game, so there's racing. I just don't think that racing's the point.

I think slamming GT for not having good racing AI is like slamming Burnout for not having realistic physics.

We have a winner

Anyway I really want to be done with this whole silly debate, we're just going in circles and this is cutting into my playing time.

The game doesn't revolutionize the gen, thats obvious. But it's still a great game with tons of things to do and will keep the fans of the game playing for 100+ to come.

People seem to be hung up on breaking new ground and revolutionizing gaming as we know it. Forget about what it should be, and focus on what it is. I like the features added and the few that they tweaked, the physics are much better, there are more cars and tracks really thats good enough for me, sorry if it doesn't meet certain peoples standards. It's a racing game for god sakes. If I wanted total realism I would hop in my car and drive down the highway at 90mph.

[pk500]

Re: GT4 review.

Well ... it's not a Racing Simulator, after all.

PK, I think you're attacking this game for not being something that it isn't trying to be. This is a car game, not a racing game. This is test driving vehicles you'll never own, and having 700 of them in the garage. Even looking at the back-of-the-box blurb, racing doesn't get mentioned until #5, after the freakin' photo modes.

This is a game about cars and driving. If PD could get away with having no other cars on the track, I think they would. Just let you drive around. But they need a hook for the game, so there's racing. I just don't think that racing's the point.

I think slamming GT for not having good racing AI is like slamming Burnout for not having realistic physics.

Fair enough, Foss. Very good points.

GT is a driving series, not a racing series. You're absolutely right about that. I just wish some of the gaming media and gamers knew the difference between a racing game and a driving game, but that's too much to ask and probably is a hair-splitting exercise. But you know me: Racing games matter as much to me as football games do to most guys, as I love racing and work in the industry.

I think GT is misnamed: It should be called Test Drive, but that name already is taken!

Take care,
PK

[pk500]

Re: GT4 review.

Well ... it's not a Racing Simulator, after all.

PK, I think you're attacking this game for not being something that it isn't trying to be. This is a car game, not a racing game. This is test driving vehicles you'll never own, and having 700 of them in the garage. Even looking at the back-of-the-box blurb, racing doesn't get mentioned until #5, after the freakin' photo modes.

This is a game about cars and driving. If PD could get away with having no other cars on the track, I think they would. Just let you drive around. But they need a hook for the game, so there's racing. I just don't think that racing's the point.

I think slamming GT for not having good racing AI is like slamming Burnout for not having realistic physics.

Fair enough, Foss. Very good points.

GT is a driving series, not a racing series. You're absolutely right about that. I just wish some of the gaming media and gamers knew the difference between a racing game and a driving game, but that's too much to ask and probably is a hair-splitting exercise. But you know me: Racing games matter as much to me as football games do to most guys, as I love racing and work in the industry.

I think GT is misnamed: It should be called Test Drive, but that name already is taken!

Take care,
PK

[DW Rutledge]

Re: GT4 review.

by now it should be clear. pk doesn't like gran turismo, and if anyone in this forum says anything positive about it he's going to post with a condescending attitude and then sign:

take care,
pk

i have no clue what his problem is.

i mean, i don't like a lot of games that others like-NBA 2k5, College Hoops, Halo, but I don't go into those topics and denigrate those games and demand that people tell me what's so great about them and then counter with the game's shortcomings. jesus get off it already. just go away and let people enjoy a game.

the game sucks, okay, we all think it sucks. it's the worst racing game ever. will you go away now so we can enjoy it???

[DW Rutledge]

Re: GT4 review.

by now it should be clear. pk doesn't like gran turismo, and if anyone in this forum says anything positive about it he's going to post with a condescending attitude and then sign:

take care,
pk

i have no clue what his problem is.

i mean, i don't like a lot of games that others like-NBA 2k5, College Hoops, Halo, but I don't go into those topics and denigrate those games and demand that people tell me what's so great about them and then counter with the game's shortcomings. jesus get off it already. just go away and let people enjoy a game.

the game sucks, okay, we all think it sucks. it's the worst racing game ever. will you go away now so we can enjoy it???

[grunt]

Re: GT4 review.

Well ... it's not a Racing Simulator, after all.

PK, I think you're attacking this game for not being something that it isn't trying to be. This is a car game, not a racing game. This is test driving vehicles you'll never own, and having 700 of them in the garage. Even looking at the back-of-the-box blurb, racing doesn't get mentioned until #5, after the freakin' photo modes.

This is a game about cars and driving. If PD could get away with having no other cars on the track, I think they would. Just let you drive around. But they need a hook for the game, so there's racing. I just don't think that racing's the point.

I think slamming GT for not having good racing AI is like slamming Burnout for not having realistic physics.

Good point but why cant they improve on the racing AI? Still no excuse for not having online play. I purchased GT, GT2, and GT3 on the first day. This time I will wait until the price goes down.

Peace