Forza will be in 3 figures by the time GT6 and S3 see the light of day.
Microsoft & Sony will have released a new console. The standard Xbox 45.6billion (they cant go 1, 2, cos doesnt sound superior to Sony's common-sense approach) version of which is just a cardboard retail box, you buy the contents additionally. DVD drive at £120, graphics card at £550, USB connections at £25 a peice for the controllers.
Sony will have played it safe, expanding upon the PS3s multi-purpose nature, the PS4 will have an alarm clock, food blender, microwave oven, shoe polisher, and power shower. It'll cost £5k, but the execs need to get into those markets and afterall, it only does everything.
5yrs later, just as the EU release of GT6 is on the horizon and S3 gets another meaningless update (accurately threaded wheel nuts, if you must know!) even though scawen hasnt realised nobody has played LFS for 18 months, Microsoft will announce they're going to retrospectively give customers the cables to connect all the overpriced junk they were forced to purchase, rather than continue selling something that they knew doesnt work when they had the idea 'i know, lets make a new XBox' back in 2007.
Due to the nature of the entry level xbox, designers will have to ensure every game can at least work on an etch-a-sketch, developers will be so lazy they wont even port games over to the PS4, they'll just get a marker pen and write PLAYSTATION FOOR GAME on the boxes.
Microsoft & Sony will have released a new console. The standard Xbox 45.6billion (they cant go 1, 2, cos doesnt sound superior to Sony's common-sense approach) version of which is just a cardboard retail box, you buy the contents additionally. DVD drive at £120, graphics card at £550, USB connections at £25 a peice for the controllers.
Sony will have played it safe, expanding upon the PS3s multi-purpose nature, the PS4 will have an alarm clock, food blender, microwave oven, shoe polisher, and power shower. It'll cost £5k, but the execs need to get into those markets and afterall, it only does everything.
5yrs later, just as the EU release of GT6 is on the horizon and S3 gets another meaningless update (accurately threaded wheel nuts, if you must know!) even though scawen hasnt realised nobody has played LFS for 18 months, Microsoft will announce they're going to retrospectively give customers the cables to connect all the overpriced junk they were forced to purchase, rather than continue selling something that they knew doesnt work when they had the idea 'i know, lets make a new XBox' back in 2007.
Due to the nature of the entry level xbox, designers will have to ensure every game can at least work on an etch-a-sketch, developers will be so lazy they wont even port games over to the PS4, they'll just get a marker pen and write PLAYSTATION FOOR GAME on the boxes.
'fullscreen' has that issue, ati included. It FS's to 1 monitor only. Dunno about above suggestion.
Also, try windowed only 2nd monitor. When i first went dual screen it would get upto 5fps, yet primary would be 150+. Not dual, just single. Very odd.
That was on an 1900xtx, but on nv8800gtx it doesnt drop single or dual span.
Dunno if thats ati vs nv differences, but i wasnt impressed with ati at that time.
Hopefully its not an ati thing as my next gfx will be ati i suspect.
Also, try windowed only 2nd monitor. When i first went dual screen it would get upto 5fps, yet primary would be 150+. Not dual, just single. Very odd.
That was on an 1900xtx, but on nv8800gtx it doesnt drop single or dual span.
Dunno if thats ati vs nv differences, but i wasnt impressed with ati at that time.
Hopefully its not an ati thing as my next gfx will be ati i suspect.
So only when making direct comparisons does that mean people are being Forza bitches?
So if i go in the Forza thread and say their game is shit, the cars dont drive properly, the graphics are dated, its bugged, laggy, filled with glitches etc... and its gay
. Thats fine, as long as i dont compare it to GT5? 
There are Forza bitches posting in here, and im not refering to the people who play forza and like it, but the people who play it, like it, and because they play Forza they pass judgement on other games in an identical bias way to how i just did above, with prejudice and possibly without even playing it and instead forming an opinion from other Forza bitches.
TBH with you Boris, i cant help but think a part of the bashing here is because of things you've said earlier. People are saying there are issues with the game physics, and you've been saying its amazing and people are just bitching because they've already made their mind up.
You've quantified your comment better since then, but people are still making comment to whats been said earlier too and dragging it all back up so were going round in circles (like a GT5 370z just over the edge
).
A lot of the game is very good, but an important aspect is still pretty poor. That aspect is what people are predominantly talking about, in between the little forza bitches who are only here to kick up a fuss (like apparently GT folk have in the Forza thread), and trying to understand opinons of people with some RL experience they can offer us to compare against.
Ignore the people who are only here to critisise in less than a sentance, their input is useless, and frankly stinks of alternative motives, but the actual conversation is not 'GT-bashing', its good for the most part, even if its critical. Better than everyone pretending its the best thing since sliced bread and refusing to acknowledge bugs/glitches like other camps have.
Theres definately a problem with it, and its not great that PD have released a demo which is of the game in its purest 'no help' settings, this is supposed to be simulated reality, and the reality of the demo is disappointing once you cross the slip angle on the tyres, because theres no opportunity to correct it or hold it and it insta-spins.
I mentioned before the release that 'pro mode' and no user assists could be a bad way to release a demo to the public, but that was mainly because people like spanks try it and expect to be able to drive it nice and smooth with a joypad (then seem to get their knickers in a bunch when being told this specific mode isnt really designed for them, but the full game with its other modes will catter to them). Seems its doing just that, and even highlighting a fairly important flaw in their engine.
GT Academy will have had a deadline for using this in order to get their 20 contestants to silverstone, before going with 2 drivers and training them up and getting them the experience to obtain the required racing licenses to compete at whichever big event they've picked this time (Dubai 24hr last time, which was iirc Feb '09) so i'd assume they have something planned for Feb '10, and they cant keep waiting. Im hoping that because of this real world deadline, PD pushed something out the door they werent 100% happy with, and its still a WIP. This code wont be current, it'll be at least a month old, so who knows what the latest code feels like. I just hope that Kaz & co know deep down this isnt acceptable as it stands. It'd be a shame if the only mode its playable in is a dumbed down version of reality where the car is more forgiving when going over its limits and trying to bring it back in.
ATM its the only thing bothering me i think, but its something that plays a large part in a simulation mode, and thats all we have to judge things on.
You've quantified your comment better since then, but people are still making comment to whats been said earlier too and dragging it all back up so were going round in circles (like a GT5 370z just over the edge
).A lot of the game is very good, but an important aspect is still pretty poor. That aspect is what people are predominantly talking about, in between the little forza bitches who are only here to kick up a fuss (like apparently GT folk have in the Forza thread), and trying to understand opinons of people with some RL experience they can offer us to compare against.
Ignore the people who are only here to critisise in less than a sentance, their input is useless, and frankly stinks of alternative motives, but the actual conversation is not 'GT-bashing', its good for the most part, even if its critical. Better than everyone pretending its the best thing since sliced bread and refusing to acknowledge bugs/glitches like other camps have.
Theres definately a problem with it, and its not great that PD have released a demo which is of the game in its purest 'no help' settings, this is supposed to be simulated reality, and the reality of the demo is disappointing once you cross the slip angle on the tyres, because theres no opportunity to correct it or hold it and it insta-spins.
I mentioned before the release that 'pro mode' and no user assists could be a bad way to release a demo to the public, but that was mainly because people like spanks try it and expect to be able to drive it nice and smooth with a joypad (then seem to get their knickers in a bunch when being told this specific mode isnt really designed for them, but the full game with its other modes will catter to them). Seems its doing just that, and even highlighting a fairly important flaw in their engine.
GT Academy will have had a deadline for using this in order to get their 20 contestants to silverstone, before going with 2 drivers and training them up and getting them the experience to obtain the required racing licenses to compete at whichever big event they've picked this time (Dubai 24hr last time, which was iirc Feb '09) so i'd assume they have something planned for Feb '10, and they cant keep waiting. Im hoping that because of this real world deadline, PD pushed something out the door they werent 100% happy with, and its still a WIP. This code wont be current, it'll be at least a month old, so who knows what the latest code feels like. I just hope that Kaz & co know deep down this isnt acceptable as it stands. It'd be a shame if the only mode its playable in is a dumbed down version of reality where the car is more forgiving when going over its limits and trying to bring it back in.
ATM its the only thing bothering me i think, but its something that plays a large part in a simulation mode, and thats all we have to judge things on.
spanks: Arent you forgetting the fact that this particular sample of GT5 is intended to be balls-out difficult, rather than comfort blanket settings which will be there for all the people who want to find it fulfilling to drive with a controller.
Anyone who's been around these forums knows i dont give a shit what people say, and I FTR I have no problem labelling myself a GT5 fanboy, i feel no shame in that in the slightest. If they release a game, i'll buy it, and i'll enjoy it for various different aspects.
I still dont find it particularly realistic to how *i'd imagine* it should feel in a track car. Theres something fundamentally unhappy about the way the car reacts at times. Theres no sign/feel of where the slip angle is on the tyres, you have 3 options:
Power down and the grip is there and away we go
Power down and the grip isnt there and off we go
tip-toe round the corner and arrive at the destination a week later.
Theres no middle ground, in LFS you can counter-steer your way out of smaller mistakes and take little loss, GT5 Demo currently spins you round at least 180 degrees.
Putting a number of fast (to your ability) laps together in LFS isnt that hard, but in this demo it does feel like you've got to be very lucky to complete a pushing lap without the car/tyres giving out on you and your lap is over.
I dont buy into Ferrari Challenge's physics being all that great either, ditto for Supercar Challenge, it might be better, but FC/SC lets you pretty much throw a car into corners and come out the other side quite well.
FC is easier to drive fast lap after lap, compared to GT5D in its full on sim mode, but FC was very arcadey and GT5 will feel completely different in its arcade and lesser difficulty settings.
Im loving the actual demo, but at the same time pulling my hair out at how often the car steps out of control and the second it gives that indication its lost traction you can kiss goodbye to the lap, and thats infuriating. Is it realistic? Beats me, i only have other sims as a comparison to know, and i guess different tyres act differently in terms of what they do at different slip angles (slicks im sure are near enough 100% then suddenly 0%, road tyres i would expect to be more forgiving), but it seems GT5 demo has 100% or 0% nothing in between, and im not getting any indication in FFB of losing traction like i do in LFS.
Pre-order very much in place, been there since June 06, and aint going anywhere. Im suprised that with people like Kaz who's obviously got real track experience under his belt, and Lucas who's a GT player who's done a season of FIA GT4 thanks to GTAcademy, someone could point out something doesnt feel right if it doesnt feel right. Kaz doesnt strike me as the kind of person to settle for something because its the easy option. So im quite confused by things.
Anyone who's been around these forums knows i dont give a shit what people say, and I FTR I have no problem labelling myself a GT5 fanboy, i feel no shame in that in the slightest. If they release a game, i'll buy it, and i'll enjoy it for various different aspects.
I still dont find it particularly realistic to how *i'd imagine* it should feel in a track car. Theres something fundamentally unhappy about the way the car reacts at times. Theres no sign/feel of where the slip angle is on the tyres, you have 3 options:
Power down and the grip is there and away we go
Power down and the grip isnt there and off we go
tip-toe round the corner and arrive at the destination a week later.
Theres no middle ground, in LFS you can counter-steer your way out of smaller mistakes and take little loss, GT5 Demo currently spins you round at least 180 degrees.
Putting a number of fast (to your ability) laps together in LFS isnt that hard, but in this demo it does feel like you've got to be very lucky to complete a pushing lap without the car/tyres giving out on you and your lap is over.
I dont buy into Ferrari Challenge's physics being all that great either, ditto for Supercar Challenge, it might be better, but FC/SC lets you pretty much throw a car into corners and come out the other side quite well.
FC is easier to drive fast lap after lap, compared to GT5D in its full on sim mode, but FC was very arcadey and GT5 will feel completely different in its arcade and lesser difficulty settings.
Im loving the actual demo, but at the same time pulling my hair out at how often the car steps out of control and the second it gives that indication its lost traction you can kiss goodbye to the lap, and thats infuriating. Is it realistic? Beats me, i only have other sims as a comparison to know, and i guess different tyres act differently in terms of what they do at different slip angles (slicks im sure are near enough 100% then suddenly 0%, road tyres i would expect to be more forgiving), but it seems GT5 demo has 100% or 0% nothing in between, and im not getting any indication in FFB of losing traction like i do in LFS.
Pre-order very much in place, been there since June 06, and aint going anywhere. Im suprised that with people like Kaz who's obviously got real track experience under his belt, and Lucas who's a GT player who's done a season of FIA GT4 thanks to GTAcademy, someone could point out something doesnt feel right if it doesnt feel right. Kaz doesnt strike me as the kind of person to settle for something because its the easy option. So im quite confused by things.
Tuned: 1'38.219
Stock: 1'50.747
3'28.966 overall
Edit:
Just done 4 laps with the Tuned car using a joypad (sixaxis, using L2 & R2 for brake & throttle) and its not as bad as i expected it to be. Its got + points and - points.
+ FAR easier to correct a mistake/slide (because you can opposite lock in a millisecond)
- FAR easier to lose proper control over it and get the wibble wobbles in easy sections just trying to find a suitable turning degree.
Best time was 1'41.036, however the following lap i was +1.004 down the backstraight and finished +0.2 (far closer the sector in the middle) so a sub 100sec lap is definately doable. Im sure i could have got there within 10 laps.
Though ive found my lines using a wheel, the trick now is getting on them and staying on them, but at times it feels like im getting away with things i'd never get away with with the wheel. Doubt its the case, probably the faster opposite lock reactions.
Stock: 1'50.747
3'28.966 overall
Edit:
Just done 4 laps with the Tuned car using a joypad (sixaxis, using L2 & R2 for brake & throttle) and its not as bad as i expected it to be. Its got + points and - points.
+ FAR easier to correct a mistake/slide (because you can opposite lock in a millisecond)
- FAR easier to lose proper control over it and get the wibble wobbles in easy sections just trying to find a suitable turning degree.
Best time was 1'41.036, however the following lap i was +1.004 down the backstraight and finished +0.2 (far closer the sector in the middle) so a sub 100sec lap is definately doable. Im sure i could have got there within 10 laps.
Though ive found my lines using a wheel, the trick now is getting on them and staying on them, but at times it feels like im getting away with things i'd never get away with with the wheel. Doubt its the case, probably the faster opposite lock reactions.
Last edited by PaulC2K, .
Didnt realise this would be out earlier in the day, kept trying to get back to sleep and didnt bother getting up till nearly 4pm 
Only managed a few laps in both cars. I havent played GT5P for a while, so cant make comparisons that are fair and honest in that respect (and anyone who has GT5P can make their own judgements anyway).
Visually, nothing special, but then it isnt a picturesque local anyway is it, had they gone with Spa THEN we'd see what its capable of.
Im happy with it, no more than i expected, no less. Im not overhyping what GT5 will be (seems everyone except PD are doing that, and people moan cos they expected more!) i just know i'll like it eitherway, deadly serious/realistic or fun... its always been enjoyable.
Only managed a few laps in both cars. I havent played GT5P for a while, so cant make comparisons that are fair and honest in that respect (and anyone who has GT5P can make their own judgements anyway).
Visually, nothing special, but then it isnt a picturesque local anyway is it, had they gone with Spa THEN we'd see what its capable of.
Im happy with it, no more than i expected, no less. Im not overhyping what GT5 will be (seems everyone except PD are doing that, and people moan cos they expected more!) i just know i'll like it eitherway, deadly serious/realistic or fun... its always been enjoyable.
Hey, im down with the crazy kids, listening to snoop doggy doggy on my EP3 player and busting caps into my arse. word!!
Im just a player, for real!
Yeah, i understand and fully support the reason for the more realistic mode being used for the competition, that much makes sense.
However, whether this is for the GT Academy or not, people are going to download it expecting this to be a GT5 Demo. If they're so n00b that they cant drive it like they can any car in their chosen Codemasters arcade racer then they're likely to pass on GT5 unless they have money to keep buying games.
Now i dont want n00b racers in there, its no appeal to me, but im surprised PD has left them out and potentially alienated the n00b quarters who could come to their own conclusion that GT5 isnt realistic cos they know whats real because NFS:Shift/Grid etc told them whats realistic.
Im just surprised n00b modes arent in there, but the comp only accepts pr0 laps.
Sweet, just how it should be!
However i think it would have been nice, and more (potential) customer friendly if they'd included assists and settings which would have made it easier, but inform them that they're times are excluded from the competition. If n00bs get hold of the game having played NFS:Shift & Grid under the belief that its a uber realistic sim, then they'll pass GT5 off as being like driving on ice and unrealistic.
If they make it extremely clear this is set up in its hardest settings, it might help, but when we all know deep down this is a sim trying to cover as broad a customer base as possible to get more sales, a game people cant drive like they're used to isnt a great marketting tool.
GT5 would be better without the n00bs who dont know how to drive littering the servers, same can be said for LFS, but it seems an odd decision to put out a demo which could easily alienate a chunk of GT's potential customers.
I love how people are only now getting worked up over something which was public knowledge about 2 weeks ago.
Its a demo, for the purpose of getting drivers in for the GT Academy, that is the sole reason for this coming out it would seem. Its not a free game with a dozen tracks and cars, its a DEMO and its free ffs.
If people are going to bitch about things, can they at least keep up to date on these things, because it'd be handy if all the whiney folk could congregate for 1 day, get it out of their system, and we can all quickly forget about you instead of every day having someone moan about things from weeks ago.
Its a demo, for the purpose of getting drivers in for the GT Academy, that is the sole reason for this coming out it would seem. Its not a free game with a dozen tracks and cars, its a DEMO and its free ffs.
If people are going to bitch about things, can they at least keep up to date on these things, because it'd be handy if all the whiney folk could congregate for 1 day, get it out of their system, and we can all quickly forget about you instead of every day having someone moan about things from weeks ago.
Smashing, how about an option that exists?
hmmm, so it does.
So whats happened to it forcing a fugly box :worried:
In-Game (ie sat in the car, anywhere but in Shift+U) the game will go to any ratio... hmmm, but it is screwed up. My money is firmly on the update for multiple monitors fecking things up and coming to its own conclusion that i must be using additional monitors to achieve that wide ratio.
If i go to around 1280x200 (from 1280x1024) i get a 'normal' result, but 800x200 puts the car out of center, the driver is to the right, and theres tons of space to the left.
It thinks its on multiple monitors, and its forcing its settings on the user.
I guess thats what its doing in Shift+U too, except it *thinks* that its only displaying it on 1 monitor, when the reality is that its faking it and only showing half, or 1/3 of the content because it thinks its on 2 or 3 monitors.
At least i was right with it being retarded
Guess i'll have to revert to an old version simply for screenshots. Typical the multi-monitor feature comes as my secondary monitors both die
yeah, that works, 'Z's exe renamed and dumped in the same folder, my screenshot exe. Now i just need Scawen to implement the 0.1 height in Z v0 hehe
So whats happened to it forcing a fugly box :worried:
In-Game (ie sat in the car, anywhere but in Shift+U) the game will go to any ratio... hmmm, but it is screwed up. My money is firmly on the update for multiple monitors fecking things up and coming to its own conclusion that i must be using additional monitors to achieve that wide ratio.
If i go to around 1280x200 (from 1280x1024) i get a 'normal' result, but 800x200 puts the car out of center, the driver is to the right, and theres tons of space to the left.
It thinks its on multiple monitors, and its forcing its settings on the user.
I guess thats what its doing in Shift+U too, except it *thinks* that its only displaying it on 1 monitor, when the reality is that its faking it and only showing half, or 1/3 of the content because it thinks its on 2 or 3 monitors.
At least i was right with it being retarded
Guess i'll have to revert to an old version simply for screenshots. Typical the multi-monitor feature comes as my secondary monitors both die
yeah, that works, 'Z's exe renamed and dumped in the same folder, my screenshot exe. Now i just need Scawen to implement the 0.1 height in Z v0 hehe
Last edited by PaulC2K, .
Any way to manually overwrite this?
It also removes a pretty handy ability to take screenshots at a specific resolution that you want, rather than fullscreen and then guess whether it'd fit into the area you want.
It used to be perfect for things like banners, where you've got say a 500x100 banner and a 1920x1080 resolution, previously you could just resize the LFS Window to a ratio around 5:1 (say 1500x300) and take the screenshot and use that, knowing that 99% of what was in the screenshot would be visable in the banner. Instead now your left guessing and continuously taking snaps and seeing how that looks until you have what you want.
I cant quite see what the benefit is of this though, what was the purpose of this modification? From the bit of messing ive just done, it seems rather retarded in how it works. Sometimes it central, sometimes it slams it to the right side... but who benefits from big black bands around the side of the screen?
Ironically, my only option now seems to be equally retarded, and thats to go with a 1:5 ratio and turn the camera to a 90' angle, and strain my neck in order to see how it actually looks.
I dont see why stupidly tall resolutions shouldnt be 'fixed', but stupidly wide ones are.
Im assuming theres an actual reason for this change, but at the moment im not seeing it, only the fact that its made life a PITA for one of the things i regularly did.
I'd be very surprised if it has changed in GT5P, i just hope something more accurate and fair has been coded in for GT5 because IMO it should never have made it to GT5P Beta, let alone ship like that.
And yeah, thats the biggest issue i had with it. Seeing people abuse this flaw and brake when they knew you were faster and about to pull out to overtake, its bad enough people having no racing etiquette and weaving and shoving to make/block a pass, but slamming on the brakes to initiate a speed penalty on someone else is disgraceful.
It needs private rooms, thats the only reason i ever really wanted to have Gran Turismo move online, being able to race with a mate over the wires rather than split screen.
And yeah, thats the biggest issue i had with it. Seeing people abuse this flaw and brake when they knew you were faster and about to pull out to overtake, its bad enough people having no racing etiquette and weaving and shoving to make/block a pass, but slamming on the brakes to initiate a speed penalty on someone else is disgraceful.
It needs private rooms, thats the only reason i ever really wanted to have Gran Turismo move online, being able to race with a mate over the wires rather than split screen.
I've been online in GT5P for all of about 45min on 1 day, a good year or so ago.
So unless your on the EU beta team (unlikely judging by your flag), i'd say nah-aah
Im really dreading what they'll come up with for GT5's online, cos they were told how stupid/ineffective their penalty system was, but they ran with it anyway. Hopefully the lobby side is better too, as it was frustraiting waiting to get a race only to be kicked out once the race had finished and then wait around to get into another one.
So unless your on the EU beta team (unlikely judging by your flag), i'd say nah-aah
Im really dreading what they'll come up with for GT5's online, cos they were told how stupid/ineffective their penalty system was, but they ran with it anyway. Hopefully the lobby side is better too, as it was frustraiting waiting to get a race only to be kicked out once the race had finished and then wait around to get into another one.
I had to google it to find which track that was your talking about, and tbh... i cant remember it at all. Dunno why, certainly bought the game but i dont recall it at all. :?
Its speculation which has pretty solid legs though to be fair.
The most likely scenario is that its Indy GP layout, with Spa being used for round 2 of the GT Acad.
The only thing that stands out in my mind is this snippet which is all thats known of the track:
“To enter the Academy racers will have to post their best overall leaderboard times negotiating a specially created section of a new Gran Turismo 5 circuit.”
Indy and Spa are both new to GT, but 'specially created' IMO doesnt really describe the GP layout. To me it implies a unique layout THEY have created, not a layout which exists in real life and F1 cars have been up and down (even if 60% of the grid only did 1 lap one year!).
Im sure we'll find out in the next few days though as its only 12 days away.
The most likely scenario is that its Indy GP layout, with Spa being used for round 2 of the GT Acad.
The only thing that stands out in my mind is this snippet which is all thats known of the track:
“To enter the Academy racers will have to post their best overall leaderboard times negotiating a specially created section of a new Gran Turismo 5 circuit.”
Indy and Spa are both new to GT, but 'specially created' IMO doesnt really describe the GP layout. To me it implies a unique layout THEY have created, not a layout which exists in real life and F1 cars have been up and down (even if 60% of the grid only did 1 lap one year!).
Im sure we'll find out in the next few days though as its only 12 days away.
Yeah, i completely agree, PD releasing a full game AND a half game over 5 years is way too much, the money grabbing whores!!
Meanwhile Forza manage to release 3 'full' titles in the same timeframe, Gotham Racing has done 4 titles with 2 year intervals also. We wont even go down the Simbin RACE route.
DAMN YOU PD, ALWAYS AFTER MY MONEY!!!!
'They dont make you buy it' is a pretty lame come-back to such comments, but i have to say that its pretty fair in circumstances like this. Some companies milk the customers for every cent, EA being experts at finding something they can charge you for. I can have sympathy for people who dont like DLC which kinda forces you to buy into it else you get left behind, but there are certain things which are worth paying for, some things which arent.
I've never had a problem buying a Prologue/Concept title simply because i know i'll get my moneys worth from it, and i need that fix.
I cant see the arguement in it at all to be honest, its not like they're doing it to milk their customers, its more like them caving to pressure i'd say, and as long as they're not charging full price for a half measure, i have no complaints (though GT5P is the only one ive not purchased, simply because i have a beta and no cash, i'd have found the cash otherwise).
wow, people really are clutching at straws when the GT5 car models are being critisized!
You look at a screenshot of a game which at best will run at 1920x1080, but they've produced a screenshot with the game running at 5760 x 3240, ie 9 Full HDTV's worth of detail, which you'd see 1/3rd of, and despite the fact that they're obviously stunning and make everything else on the market look like its come from a Commodore 64, theres still some who cant help but moan... and bizarrely they're the same people who've found something to complain about from everything.
If someone can point me in the direction of a game which has better modelling, then i'd love to see it! Especially when its scrutinised when its viewed at resolutions 3x what anyone is ever realistically going to see them.
If PD released the game free, with a PS3 & TV, and were to pay you $100 for each month you played it for 10hrs or more, there would still be people moaning at PD because they've got to pay the electricity bills. Meanwhile, their ticking timebomb console and GT wannabe is the greatest ever
You look at a screenshot of a game which at best will run at 1920x1080, but they've produced a screenshot with the game running at 5760 x 3240, ie 9 Full HDTV's worth of detail, which you'd see 1/3rd of, and despite the fact that they're obviously stunning and make everything else on the market look like its come from a Commodore 64, theres still some who cant help but moan... and bizarrely they're the same people who've found something to complain about from everything.
If someone can point me in the direction of a game which has better modelling, then i'd love to see it! Especially when its scrutinised when its viewed at resolutions 3x what anyone is ever realistically going to see them.
If PD released the game free, with a PS3 & TV, and were to pay you $100 for each month you played it for 10hrs or more, there would still be people moaning at PD because they've got to pay the electricity bills. Meanwhile, their ticking timebomb console and GT wannabe is the greatest ever
Considering its an entirely fresh build, in the roughly 5 years its expect it be from GT4 to GT5, thats a pretty reasonable timeframe for someone who doesnt rush things, and tries to do things properly.
In that time, they've probably taken a well deserved break from completing GT4, made a start on GT5 for the PS3 (GTHD as it originally was) on new hardware architecture they had to familiarise themselves with. GTHD turned to GT5 Prologue, and then GT5 proper where they started from scratch. They've also had GT PSP to f*ck about with too.
It'd be stupid to suggest that they've had 5 years where they've been working on the project because its completely false, they've done multiple things since then.
Said on a LFS Forum.
Unlike most cock developers, they also have the 'its done when its done' attitude. So is PD supposed to release an inferior product simply because they had a rough idea when they wanted it finished, but because they decided it wouldnt be good enough they rebuilt everything, because whiney people make bogus claims and demands of them?
You tell Scawen to screw being a smartarse trying to make the VWS feel like its real world counterpart, just release the damn thing now cos they ACTUALLY said it'd be out at the end of 08, screw it being inaccurate, whiney people want it NOW.
But its ok to do the same for a game built from scratch, on new hardware, for an entire game (not a peice of content for it) which they've never given any sure fire date for release until this summer.
In that time, they've probably taken a well deserved break from completing GT4, made a start on GT5 for the PS3 (GTHD as it originally was) on new hardware architecture they had to familiarise themselves with. GTHD turned to GT5 Prologue, and then GT5 proper where they started from scratch. They've also had GT PSP to f*ck about with too.
It'd be stupid to suggest that they've had 5 years where they've been working on the project because its completely false, they've done multiple things since then.
Said on a LFS Forum.
Unlike most cock developers, they also have the 'its done when its done' attitude. So is PD supposed to release an inferior product simply because they had a rough idea when they wanted it finished, but because they decided it wouldnt be good enough they rebuilt everything, because whiney people make bogus claims and demands of them?
You tell Scawen to screw being a smartarse trying to make the VWS feel like its real world counterpart, just release the damn thing now cos they ACTUALLY said it'd be out at the end of 08, screw it being inaccurate, whiney people want it NOW.
But its ok to do the same for a game built from scratch, on new hardware, for an entire game (not a peice of content for it) which they've never given any sure fire date for release until this summer.
I think you'll find he was probably commenting on the fact that his car was facing the wrong direction... i think.
Did i call it, or did i call it
Yeah, thats how i'd interpret the race start.
When we were made to attend the test round we had 3-4 cracks at the start because previous ones werent suitable, and if the first car over the line by a distance isnt the pole driver, then straight away we have an unsuitable start.
Part of the problem will always be the drivers trying to be careful and not get too close that they have to slam on the brakes if the car infront needs to, only to get hit from behind because of your sudden actions. So the field isnt going to be as bunched as it could be, and that start section isnt exactly ideal for getting people lined up as its so short and the chicane & hairpin dont help the side-by-side setup. It might be fine for the first 10-16 cars through, but by the time the leader is at the line theres still cars who arent into formation properly.
So I think its partly the first lap being run out of shape and still going green despite this, and partly the fact that the track doesnt really help matters.
It looked very bizarre on the Remote, but i got the feeling that it was more a case of him being on the throttle already when the race happened to go green, so he was able to go past everyone. I havent seen the replay to know if that even remotely accurate, but its what i thought had happened.
Doesnt excuse what happened when he got to T1 though.... again, from how it looked on the remote.
I nearly sh@t myself when that happened, on my end all of a sudden there was a car flying past me.... sideways
It was about the only thing i did avoid i think, seemed like i had spells of people making minor mistakes (either spinning or having to slow right down to catch the car) right infront of me and me ploughing into them. Half my own stupidity, half no time to react
There goes my protest then, i want my internet banned!
Wow, you agree with the things he did say, and still found the time to insult him for the things he didnt say but decided to jump to that conclusion anyway. Good job!
Im glad theres absolutely no sign of hypocrisy from you in all that bitterness and talk of mindless witchhunting from the comfort of your ivory tower
Staggered line-ups have been in place for as long as i can remember in MoE, which goes back to the S2-R2, i cant remember for the first season, and whether it was an official rule or an unwriten one, it was standard practice and a matter of sporting/gentlemanly agreement of how it was done. Back then the series was run by EU folk, with mostly EU drivers, and so I guess to a standard which was familiar to the EU's knowledge of the matter.
Lately its turned into ALMS/US rules because its under new influences, but in the early days it certainly wasnt acceptable to be as good as side by side with someone who was ahead of you on the grid, i guess 50/50 overlap would be the expected location to find them.
There probably wasnt the need to specificly write the rule in the rulebook, it was standard track etiquette to be like that. If some choose not to follow that, then it needs to be made clear to stop abuse or unfair tactics being used, and the start procedure made clear as to whats acceptable and what isnt.
As Scipy's pics show, the insim app, and even before then, you drove in staggered formation, the rules dont suggest that has changed, but then they dont specificly say thats the rule either. TECHNICALLY, the rules dont say you cant just drive flat out and drive off into the sunset, they dont specificly state you cant overtake or pass people or make mention of holding grid position throughout the rolling start... I dont recall anyone abusing those rules though. Infact, to my mind there isnt a rule which states theres a penalty for failing to use the appropriate GT1/GT2 class restrictions for the season, does that make it acceptable to ignore those settings?
Personally i wouldnt have thought everything needed to be in black & white to know what should be done, and i can understand why Scipy assumed that the rules were what they always (to my mind, and apparently many others) have been considered to be. If not, GT2 class might be keeping up with GT1 class at Westhill.
MoE had its acceptable starting proceedure made very clear a few years back, nobody has said its no longer the case either, whether its under new administration or otherwise, those people were around when that was clarified, they knew the rule then and havent said its changed since taking over. So its hardly surprising so many of the experienced front-running drivers expect other drivers to follow the instructions they've been told, and then get annoyed when others ignore and take advantage of it, and do so successfully because the new regime decided they didnt know the original rule and adopted their own understanding and expect others to know it.
I've said this in another last season, but in LFSPS i included a 'Common Sense' clause in the rules, which basically says if theres something which is missing from the rules, but common sense says its not sporting, then the admins have the right to penalise as they deem suitable (or words to that effect). Its not there to find new ways to punish people, but to prevent loop-holes which you know arent acceptable but arent strictly wrote in the rules as been unacceptable or punishable. It doesnt help on grey areas, but then this has never been a grey area before, we were told the rules, and until now stuck to them. Unfortunately the rule has been removed without anyone realising, and people have continued with the way MoE has always told them to.
Looking at any single MoE race line-up from the last 4 years would have clearly shown what the general understanding of this rule was, that speaks volumes IMO, as does the fact that people have been given direct instructions (even a number of practice runs) saying how MoE starts are to be conducted, and nothing has suggested that isnt the case. If its under new management, and they believe it shouldnt be done that way, they should say so, not ignore the instructions they too were given (as drivers) in favour of their understanding without telling others about it.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG