Quatre47

Fuwa Fuwa Time!!
Aug 9, 2001
21,125
4,191
Oklahoma
Maybe PD should have just let the servers go live and eat all the save data instead.
Perhaps they should test things before trying to implement them.
Perhaps a largely single player game shouldn't be always online.
Perhaps they should give fair payouts in games, with fair in game car prices instead of trying to get people to give them more money for credits.
 

geomil21

No Longer a Noob
Mar 10, 2005
5,540
37
Lower cheese, upper corn
yeah online only playability in single player makes me sad. It just tells me that I won't be able to play the game I paid for once they decide to shut down the servers in the distant future. I hope they change that before the time comes.
 

geomil21

No Longer a Noob
Mar 10, 2005
5,540
37
Lower cheese, upper corn
thats just a little over 180 bucks through microtransactions lol. I should get back to licenses but lately just been messing with suspension stuff on a couple old skylines and my civic and then going into meets at trial mountain. I love that track. I just need to find a nice groove through the first turn. Since they dont void a lap in time trial for going off track, I find myself cutting corners and I hate myself for it. I know its bad but it feels so good.
 

-stubzi-

Prolific poster
Sep 10, 2008
42,152
21,266
thats just a little over 180 bucks through microtransactions lol. I should get back to licenses but lately just been messing with suspension stuff on a couple old skylines and my civic and then going into meets at trial mountain. I love that track. I just need to find a nice groove through the first turn. Since they dont void a lap in time trial for going off track, I find myself cutting corners and I hate myself for it. I know its bad but it feels so good.

The R32 Trial Mountain test bought back memories of I think it was GT2 which had the same section for a test and I really struggled for a long time back then to get gold on it. Have always liked Trial Mountain.
 

geomil21

No Longer a Noob
Mar 10, 2005
5,540
37
Lower cheese, upper corn
Oh man, I was bored and happened to notice there was a very sexy Silvia Spec-R Aero (S15) Touring Car in brand central for 350k. I did a few races for funds and bought it. I figured it would be pretty quick but probably squirrelly coming out of turns. Turns out, bone stock, this thing feels like its glued to the ground. It has so much grip on just hard racing tires, I still have no idea where the braking point is for the hairpin at the end of the big back straight on trial mountain. I always think I am too late but then find I had way more room to go.
 

woody938

The Irresponsible Captain Typo
Apr 23, 2007
25,201
10,664
Black Lizard Planet
Learned a new braking skill in the license tests to beat all you guys, then used that skill to win that Gr.3 race in the same RX-Vision GT3, just grabbed 1st place in the last few corners.
 

geomil21

No Longer a Noob
Mar 10, 2005
5,540
37
Lower cheese, upper corn
Ok, so following this update, I went to do a custom race. My touring Civic (660pp) vs a gr. 4 car, one lap on Nurb. paid out to 20.5k, not bad. I did that and then a new one, same conditions just switched to my S15 touring car (695pp) and the payout was a little less, as expected. But what I didn't expect was initially for the race, before even selecting any option in the custom race setup page, the payout was already significantly lower from my Civic to the S15. I am drawn to only one conclusion; when left on default opponents of "random", it is random to the point that it has a pre-selected list of cars to choose from and only adjusts the choices to a certain degree. I haven't tested out "random" opponents with an actual racing car, perhaps it gives you racing car opponents. I suppose the limited randomness is fine but I was hoping that it would provide me with opponents relatively similar in pp. Its kind of silly when you have a beefed up sports car that can run with gr. 3 cars to be racing stock mini coopers up to fancy pants jaguars or whatever.

It is what it is, I am just happy to hear they are preparing to add new tracks, I am really curious what tracks. There are a few relics from past GT's but I am really hoping something similar to a mountain pass for touge, and I would love to try my hand at an updated version of complex strings haha. Complex strings has always been foremost on my mind when it came to speculating and hoping for additional tracks to a gt game. I always knew it was unlikely but, one can hope.
 

-stubzi-

Prolific poster
Sep 10, 2008
42,152
21,266
Wish I could play, got surgery on my wrist so will be a while. Did claim my $1M tho. Happy they added 1 hour enduros, that's what I've been wanting.
 
D

deleted-1115527

Guest
Original poster
I just won the GT Formula 1 car for all golds on the Gone with the Wind driving mission. I've always enjoyed GT's pseudo-fictional take on licensed F1 cars
 

woody938

The Irresponsible Captain Typo
Apr 23, 2007
25,201
10,664
Black Lizard Planet
Now that I've got the funds to get a Carrera GT it's saiyan I need an invitation.

//wonders if he needs to buy a bunch of Porsches first
 

ZaXoFF7

No Longer a Noob
Jan 20, 2009
2,620
513
Behind you...
Now that I've got the funds to get a Carrera GT it's saiyan I need an invitation.

//wonders if he needs to buy a bunch of Porsches first

The invitation thing is a bit jank. You effectively get invitations to buy those select few models in Brand Central, by landing on them in the Roulette Tickets. You also get one in the career itself, maybe around... halfway through? Mine was for the Pagani Huayra. And then I got one for the Carrera GT from a Roulette Ticket. I think they only appear in 4 Star and above tickets (might be 5 Star), and they last for a month now (previously lasted for two weeks). You can tell it's an invitation in the Roulette Ticket, because it'll be a black shiny square thing with a manufacturer's logo on it.
 

ZaXoFF7

No Longer a Noob
Jan 20, 2009
2,620
513
Behind you...
That's part of the fun for the people like myself, who enjoy not just having everything handed to them in the game. There's reward to be found in finding a car you've been hoping for in the used dealership, or in the meantime, having to compromise and try a car you normally wouldn't in a race, because your preferred option hasn't come onto the market yet.

Also, both GT6 and Sport did 'just let you buy cars'. That means it's been nearly a decade since the last time they limited you in pretty much any way.

Not to say invitations are a great choice. They could be good, but they need tweaking, clearly. Especially since there are only a handful of invitation cars. It makes sense as a concept, since you can't just buy a lot of hypercars, just because you're rich in real life. You have to be invited. I think it's interesting that they're trying to channel that for a handful of vehicles. It's mostly kinda meh, because of the way Roulette Tickets work, and the fact that that's the only (normal) way to obtain invitations. But as far as things like used markets go? I much prefer the chance involved in them, than just having a giant Brand Central shelf full of everything.

I think having a Forza style auction house would be a great option to help find a middle-ground though.
 
Last edited:

Quatre47

Fuwa Fuwa Time!!
Aug 9, 2001
21,125
4,191
Oklahoma
That's part of the fun for the people like myself, who enjoy not just having everything handed to them in the game. There's reward to be found in finding a car you've been hoping for in the used dealership, or in the meantime, having to compromise and try a car you normally wouldn't in a race, because your preferred option hasn't come onto the market yet.

Also, both GT6 and Sport did 'just let you buy cars'. That means it's been nearly a decade since the last time they limited you in pretty much any way.

Not to say invitations are a great choice. They could be good, but they need tweaking, clearly. Especially since there are only a handful of invitation cars. It makes sense as a concept, since you can't just buy a lot of hypercars, just because you're rich in real life. You have to be invited. I think it's interesting that they're trying to channel that for a handful of vehicles. It's mostly kinda meh, because of the way Roulette Tickets work, and the fact that that's the only (normal) way to obtain invitations. But as far as things like used markets go? I much prefer the chance involved in them, than just having a giant Brand Central shelf full of everything.

I think having a Forza style auction house would be a great option to help find a middle-ground though.
I'd disagree with part of that, if you've earned the credits, it's not being handed to you by being available to buy. You still had to earn it. Having luck isn't earning.
I could almost settle on an auction house though.
 

ZaXoFF7

No Longer a Noob
Jan 20, 2009
2,620
513
Behind you...
With how liberally games like Forza give players cars and credits, I'd say you're definitely not earning 99% of them there. The reason buying an expensive car in GT has always felt like earning it, is precisely because they've never given you so much money that you can just buy whatever you want at all times... unless you did every Seasonal in GT5 and 6.

And I'd say that paying close attention to the used dealerships and such is effort that can be akin to 'earning' the vehicle. It's a similar time investment ratio to earning enough credits, because if you're racing primarily or purely for the credits, you're doing it wrong. You race to enjoy the racing, and you earn the credits in the meantime.

Regardless, there's nothing wrong with random chance either. But I think there are two necessary ingredients that go along with that.

1. Since it's a game, your chance should be pretty high of running into the cars you want. GT7's initially small Legends and Used dealerships had a problem with this for sure (more so the Used dealership, since there aren't actually that many cars in the Legends dealership). Again, that's kind of the issue with Invitations as well, is that you can only get one Roulette Ticket a day without cheating and doing tons and tons of miles. But it may be 30+ tickets before you get one invitation. It fits with the relative few amount of cars that require invitations. But if you, say, just really want a Veyron, then that's a looooong wait.

2. It shouldn't be one shiny, golden token in a sea of junk. At least for someone like me, what I liked about GT5's used dealership, and what I enjoy about GT7's, is that while I wanted to find a 22-B, I was also delighted with most of the cars that cycled through in the meantime, and was happy to grab them. There wasn't only one car there that had value to me. This heightens that feeling of 'earning' the car as well, because especially if you know it's going to be a more expensive car, you take a risk every time you spend enough credits to put you below the cost of the car you really want.

I think offering some sort of alternative that has higher secondary costs is a good option. Again, like an auction house, where you're usually gonna pay much more for the vehicle than in the standard shop. Or things like earning the car from completing a really tough mission race or something; in that case, trading the luck and/or credits requirement for skill.
 

Quatre47

Fuwa Fuwa Time!!
Aug 9, 2001
21,125
4,191
Oklahoma
With how liberally games like Forza give players cars and credits, I'd say you're definitely not earning 99% of them there. The reason buying an expensive car in GT has always felt like earning it, is precisely because they've never given you so much money that you can just buy whatever you want at all times... unless you did every Seasonal in GT5 and 6.

And I'd say that paying close attention to the used dealerships and such is effort that can be akin to 'earning' the vehicle. It's a similar time investment ratio to earning enough credits, because if you're racing primarily or purely for the credits, you're doing it wrong. You race to enjoy the racing, and you earn the credits in the meantime.

Regardless, there's nothing wrong with random chance either. But I think there are two necessary ingredients that go along with that.

1. Since it's a game, your chance should be pretty high of running into the cars you want. GT7's initially small Legends and Used dealerships had a problem with this for sure (more so the Used dealership, since there aren't actually that many cars in the Legends dealership). Again, that's kind of the issue with Invitations as well, is that you can only get one Roulette Ticket a day without cheating and doing tons and tons of miles. But it may be 30+ tickets before you get one invitation. It fits with the relative few amount of cars that require invitations. But if you, say, just really want a Veyron, then that's a looooong wait.

2. It shouldn't be one shiny, golden token in a sea of junk. At least for someone like me, what I liked about GT5's used dealership, and what I enjoy about GT7's, is that while I wanted to find a 22-B, I was also delighted with most of the cars that cycled through in the meantime, and was happy to grab them. There wasn't only one car there that had value to me. This heightens that feeling of 'earning' the car as well, because especially if you know it's going to be a more expensive car, you take a risk every time you spend enough credits to put you below the cost of the car you really want.

I think offering some sort of alternative that has higher secondary costs is a good option. Again, like an auction house, where you're usually gonna pay much more for the vehicle than in the standard shop. Or things like earning the car from completing a really tough mission race or something; in that case, trading the luck and/or credits requirement for skill.
I buy the vast majority of cars I've had in forza motorsports.... also gt7 gives you a lot of cars... the difference is forza allows me to buy a car I want to race when I've earned the credits to do afford it..... as opposed to random chance of an invitation....
You seem to have an odd bias towards GT....
 

ZaXoFF7

No Longer a Noob
Jan 20, 2009
2,620
513
Behind you...
I buy the vast majority of cars I've had in forza motorsports.... also gt7 gives you a lot of cars... the difference is forza allows me to buy a car I want to race when I've earned the credits to do afford it..... as opposed to random chance of an invitation....
You seem to have an odd bias towards GT....
Lololol, of course it has to be bias. I literally suggest that they should adopt the auction house concept from Forza, because it's a great option, but I'm still biased toward GT. Have you ever thought that maybe the problem is that you base your opinions purely on gut feelings, rather than using facts to back them up?

Regardless, you misunderstood the point I was making. Simply buying a car isn't what makes it feel like it's earned. When the latest update came out in GT7, and it gave me so much money that I was able to buy every road car, and a good chunk of the race cars in brand central, and still have like 25,000,000 credits left over, I didn't feel in any way like I'd 'earned' that. I'd definitely earned more money than I'd initially received from doing all of the Circuit Experiences... but not nearly the 50,000,000 credits I was given, in a game with half the amount of cars as GT5 had, let alone GT6. That brought me up over 60% of the total cars in the game obtained, a month after release. GT has always been designed to be a slower burn; a game where you accrue cars over the years of support it has. Not a game you burn through in two months. The cars are not supposed to be throwaway. It's a difference in design ethos, and one I happen to appreciate. Doesn't mean that I can't appreciate other design intentions.

My point with Forza is likewise, similar. They got such backlash with how they handled Forza 5's atrocious economy at launch, that every game since than has focused more, and more, and more on shoving mountains of rewards down your throat, to steer far away from that backlash. Sometimes these rewards are cars outright, sure. But they also drown you in such a sea of currency, that you're rarely at a loss to buy a car when you want it. That's not to say that a player cannot value such a loose economy, where more money than you'll ever need is thrown your way. But applying the concept of 'earning' the things you purchase with that currency, to such an economy... is difficult. It's hardly 'earning' an Aventador (or insert other expensive car here), when you obtain 5 Wheelspins in 20 minutes or whatever, and get well more than the price of the car, all but immediately.

That experience is still valuable. Particularly in the Horizon games, where the sea of constant rewards is most extreme, it makes a lot of sense. They throw stuff at you in Horizon, because the cars themselves are intended to -in a way- be meaningless. The cars aren't treated as valuable art or pieces of history with unique characteristics. They're treated as a means to an end, that you pick because 'that's my favorite car', and then proceed to turn it into an unrecognizable monster with 10 gears and 1500 horsepower, lol. It's not bad design. But that's because it works in the context of a festival, where it's basically just a bunch of rich cartoon characters who throw money at everything with wheels they can get a hold of, and then snort some cocaine and drive through the jungle at 250 miles an hour in a Pagani, before taking it off of a jump that sends them flying a mile through the air, and landing like nothing happened, lol.

And to be clear, I never said that GT7 (nor any previous GT) doesn't hand you a lot of cars. But it doesn't do it in quite the same way, and the economy is balanced in such a way that being at a credits deficit has always meant working back up to the things you want to buy, to some degree. GT usually hands you cars in a scripted fashion, where everyone gets the same reward for the same accomplishment. That way they can hand tailor them, to better control the pacing at which your collection grows, and in which directions it grows. You don't get lucky after beating the Sunday Cup, and unlock the Tomahawk at random, or enough money to buy it. You unlock a Miata or whatever, lol. Harder or longer challenges generally see you landing rarer or more special vehicles by contrast. And that does afford players shortcuts to faster options if you're skilled, like by getting golds on all of the licenses right away. But it (intentionally) doesn't give you complete freedom to just go ham buying whatever cars you wish, whenever you wish.

I guess I'd kind of compare them like this:

In GT, you do not have infinite money. You spend money, and then you have less money, and it can take time and effort to build funds back up, particularly if you bought something rather expensive. You have to work for your money here.

In Forza (particularly in Horizon), you effectively do have infinite money. But it's kind of like you have a 'cooldown' for that money in a sense, where you're absolutely filthy rich in fits and spurts, thanks to how quick and easy it is to grow your wealth again. You don't have to work for your money here, so much as you just spend the prerequisite amount of time, constantly getting lucky handouts and giant payouts. If you just play, no matter how well you do, you'll eventually win big a plethora of times, and be wealthy again.

Neither way of design is bad, if balanced well. And people are free to prefer one way, or the other. Or they're free to prefer what games like Assetto Corsa do, and literally eschew the idea of car ownership entirely, just letting you use whatever cars, whenever. But one design ethos between GT and Forza definitely puts a lot more emphasis on actually earning vehicles, as opposed to """earning""" them.
 
Last edited:

Quatre47

Fuwa Fuwa Time!!
Aug 9, 2001
21,125
4,191
Oklahoma
Lololol, of course it has to be bias. I literally suggest that they should adopt the auction house concept from Forza, because it's a great option, but I'm still biased toward GT. Have you ever thought that maybe the problem is that you base your opinions purely on gut feelings, rather than using facts to back them up?

Regardless, you misunderstood the point I was making. Simply buying a car isn't what makes it feel like it's earned. When the latest update came out in GT7, and it gave me so much money that I was able to buy every road car, and a good chunk of the race cars in brand central, and still have like 25,000,000 credits left over, I didn't feel in any way like I'd 'earned' that. I'd definitely earned more money than I'd initially received from doing all of the Circuit Experiences... but not nearly the 50,000,000 credits I was given, in a game with half the amount of cars as GT5 had, let alone GT6. That brought me up over 60% of the total cars in the game obtained, a month after release. GT has always been designed to be a slower burn; a game where you accrue cars over the years of support it has. Not a game you burn through in two months. The cars are not supposed to be throwaway. It's a difference in design ethos, and one I happen to appreciate. Doesn't mean that I can't appreciate other design intentions.

My point with Forza is likewise, similar. They got such backlash with how they handled Forza 5's atrocious economy at launch, that every game since than has focused more, and more, and more on shoving mountains of rewards down your throat, to steer far away from that backlash. Sometimes these rewards are cars outright, sure. But they also drown you in such a sea of currency, that you're rarely at a loss to buy a car when you want it. That's not to say that a player cannot value such a loose economy, where more money than you'll ever need is thrown your way. But applying the concept of 'earning' the things you purchase with that currency, to such an economy... is difficult. It's hardly 'earning' an Aventador (or insert other expensive car here), when you obtain 5 Wheelspins in 20 minutes or whatever, and get well more than the price of the car, all but immediately.

That experience is still valuable. Particularly in the Horizon games, where the sea of constant rewards is most extreme, it makes a lot of sense. They throw stuff at you in Horizon, because the cars themselves are intended to -in a way- be meaningless. The cars aren't treated as valuable art or pieces of history with unique characteristics. They're treated as a means to an end, that you pick because 'that's my favorite car', and then proceed to turn it into an unrecognizable monster with 10 gears and 1500 horsepower, lol. It's not bad design. But that's because it works in the context of a festival, where it's basically just a bunch of rich cartoon characters who throw money at everything with wheels they can get a hold of, and then snort some cocaine and drive through the jungle at 250 miles an hour in a Pagani, before taking it off of a jump that sends them flying a mile through the air, and landing like nothing happened, lol.

And to be clear, I never said that GT7 (nor any previous GT) doesn't hand you a lot of cars. But it doesn't do it in quite the same way, and the economy is balanced in such a way that being at a credits deficit has always meant working back up to the things you want to buy, to some degree. GT usually hands you cars in a scripted fashion, where everyone gets the same reward for the same accomplishment. That way they can hand tailor them, to better control the pacing at which your collection grows, and in which directions it grows. You don't get lucky after beating the Sunday Cup, and unlock the Tomahawk at random, or enough money to buy it. You unlock a Miata or whatever, lol. Harder or longer challenges generally see you landing rarer or more special vehicles by contrast. And that does afford players shortcuts to faster options if you're skilled, like by getting golds on all of the licenses right away. But it (intentionally) doesn't give you complete freedom to just go ham buying whatever cars you wish, whenever you wish.

I guess I'd kind of compare them like this:

In GT, you do not have infinite money. You spend money, and then you have less money, and it can take time and effort to build funds back up, particularly if you bought something rather expensive. You have to work for your money here.

In Forza (particularly in Horizon), you effectively do have infinite money. But it's kind of like you have a 'cooldown' for that money in a sense, where you're absolutely filthy rich in fits and spurts, thanks to how quick and easy it is to grow your wealth again. You don't have to work for your money here, so much as you just spend the prerequisite amount of time, constantly getting lucky handouts and giant payouts. If you just play, no matter how well you do, you'll eventually win big a plethora of times, and be wealthy again.

Neither way of design is bad, if balanced well. And people are free to prefer one way, or the other. Or they're free to prefer what games like Assetto Corsa do, and literally eschew the idea of car ownership entirely, just letting you use whatever cars, whenever. But one design ethos between GT and Forza definitely puts a lot more emphasis on actually earning vehicles, as opposed to """earning""" them.
The biggest problem is comparing gt to horizon. Horizon isn't designed to be a Sim.
The proper game to compare with would be motorsports. Motorsports doesn't throw money at you the way horizon does, it also doesn't throw cars at you, other than your starter. Gt7 literally throws cars at you in the Cafe for 3rd place finishes though....

Also, I said you seem bias as you tend to defend everything GT does...
Random roulette invitation isn't earning, by the way, it's luck.
 

ZaXoFF7

No Longer a Noob
Jan 20, 2009
2,620
513
Behind you...
The biggest problem is comparing gt to horizon. Horizon isn't designed to be a Sim.
The proper game to compare with would be motorsports. Motorsports doesn't throw money at you the way horizon does, it also doesn't throw cars at you, other than your starter. Gt7 literally throws cars at you in the Cafe for 3rd place finishes though....

Also, I said you seem bias as you tend to defend everything GT does...
Random roulette invitation isn't earning, by the way, it's luck.
Motorsport very much does throw money at you. Not to quite the same degree, but it's still certainly an extreme amount. But sure, ignore everything I said about the difference in pacing, and how these systems are structured.

"Also, I said you seem bias as you tend to defend everything GT does..."

No, I really don't. But you're clearly not paying enough attention to notice. The big difference between us seems to be that I attempt to take developer choices in good faith, and ask why they might have been made, so I can better criticize them. You just seem to want to turn everything into black and white so you can complain a lot.

"Random roulette invitation isn't earning, by the way, it's luck."

I didn't say it was. But you transitioned to discussing how you liked to earn your cars instead of have them be randomized, so I transitioned along with you. Nobody ever said it wasn't luck. In fact, I said the opposite several times. I simply specified that such systems and design can also have value if balanced well. There's a reason that a loooooot of people have wanted the used dealerships to return. Sorry you don't seem to take anyone else's preferences into account before you proclaim something as trash, I guess? Don't know what to tell you. *shrug*
 

Quatre47

Fuwa Fuwa Time!!
Aug 9, 2001
21,125
4,191
Oklahoma
Motorsport very much does throw money at you. Not to quite the same degree, but it's still certainly an extreme amount. But sure, ignore everything I said about the difference in pacing, and how these systems are structured.

"Also, I said you seem bias as you tend to defend everything GT does..."

No, I really don't. But you're clearly not paying enough attention to notice. The big difference between us seems to be that I attempt to take developer choices in good faith, and ask why they might have been made, so I can better criticize them. You just seem to want to turn everything into black and white so you can complain a lot.

"Random roulette invitation isn't earning, by the way, it's luck."

I didn't say it was. But you transitioned to discussing how you liked to earn your cars instead of have them be randomized, so I transitioned along with you. Nobody ever said it wasn't luck. In fact, I said the opposite several times. I simply specified that such systems and design can also have value if balanced well. There's a reason that a loooooot of people have wanted the used dealerships to return. Sorry you don't seem to take anyone else's preferences into account before you proclaim something as trash, I guess? Don't know what to tell you. *shrug*
I don't have to take someone else's opinion into account to know what my opinion is. I think it's a bad system that drags things out longer than needed. If the benefit of a system is waiting for something to maybe randomly show up, while having the check virtually every day, it's not a fun system, especially for those who can't check a game every day.

I've also payed plenty of attention, in any discussion I've seen on here your defensive of what ever GT is doing, as far as I can see.
I've only complained about things I've seen done better, by several other racing Sims. I'm dropping money to play the games, therefore I have a right to complain about what seems like bad or out dated concepts.
 

ZaXoFF7

No Longer a Noob
Jan 20, 2009
2,620
513
Behind you...
"Don't like" and "bad" are two completely different things. And "fun" is subjective. If you don't find it fun, cool. But I'm also free to explain to you why others do find it fun, and that's no less valid. Particularly when a lot of these decisions run parallel to the core design GT has always offered. These aren't giant shifts. You're free to have your opinions. But a line is crossed when you make assumptions about the character of the people involved in the development, their intentions, and try to make sweeping statements about quality that would apply to other players in some way.

As for your assertion that I've only been defensive of what GT is doing, I've literally criticized them in this very conversation, in reference to how the Invitation system -while a fair enough idea- doesn't really work particularly well. Not to mention pointing out that the Roulette Ticket system is currently borked because it rarely ever gives you anything but the lowest tier rewards, and putting things like Invitations in them makes it needlessly long-winded to earn such rewards because of that (since you earn tickets so infrequently). I also have complained about the rubber banding, the obsession with rolling starts, etc. Honestly dude, do you even hear yourself? Just because I'm not up in arms ranting like a child, as if every problem in this game ruined my life, doesn't mean I'm not criticizing them. I'm soooooo sorry that you only notice critique, if someone is in total agreement with the subject and ferocity of your specific complaints.

" I've only complained about things I've seen done better, by several other racing Sims. "

Nah, you've more or less just complained in general.
 
Last edited:

Quatre47

Fuwa Fuwa Time!!
Aug 9, 2001
21,125
4,191
Oklahoma
"Don't like" and "bad" are two completely different things. And "fun" is subjective. If you don't find it fun, cool. But I'm also free to explain to you why others do find it fun, and that's no less valid. Particularly when a lot of these decisions run parallel to the core design GT has always offered. These aren't giant shifts. You're free to have your opinions. But a line is crossed when you make assumptions about the character of the people involved in the development, their intentions, and try to make sweeping statements about quality that would apply to other players in some way.

As for your assertion that I've only been defensive of what GT is doing, I've literally criticized them in this very conversation, in reference to how the Invitation system -while a fair enough idea- doesn't really work particularly well. Not to mention pointing out that the Roulette Ticket system is currently borked because it rarely ever gives you anything but the lowest tier rewards, and putting things like Invitations in them makes it needlessly long-winded to earn such rewards because of that (since you earn tickets so infrequently). I also have complained about the rubber banding, the obsession with rolling starts, etc. Honestly dude, do you even hear yourself? Just because I'm not up in arms ranting like a child, as if every problem in this game ruined my life, doesn't mean I'm not criticizing them. I'm soooooo sorry that you only notice critique, if someone is in total agreement with the subject and ferocity of your specific complaints.

" I've only complained about things I've seen done better, by several other racing Sims. "

Nah, you've more or less just complained in general.
Ranting like a child? I'm done here.
Learn to talk with out insults.
 

ZaXoFF7

No Longer a Noob
Jan 20, 2009
2,620
513
Behind you...
Ranting like a child? I'm done here.
Learn to talk with out insults.
That's literally all you've done, is make passive aggressive insults toward the devs, and the intelligence and taste of those that disagree with you, etc., while acting like the sky is falling in terms of the quality of the game. But go on.

EDIT: And for the record, I wasn't saying you were ranting like a child. It was hyperbole related to the fact that I have criticized a multitude of things about the game, and yet you claimed that I haven't done anything but defend it. The idea being "What do I have to do for my criticisms to be valid to you? Cry and scream like a child?".

Even though I do think you've been very rude in a lot of the presentation of your criticisms, it's the black and white, all or nothing nature of them, and the constant questioning of others intentions and taste while propping your own up as 'the valid option', that was criticizing.
 
Last edited:

Quatre47

Fuwa Fuwa Time!!
Aug 9, 2001
21,125
4,191
Oklahoma
That's literally all you've done, is make passive aggressive insults toward the devs, and the intelligence and taste of those that disagree with you, etc., while acting like the sky is falling in terms of the quality of the game. But go on.

EDIT: And for the record, I wasn't saying you were ranting like a child. It was hyperbole related to the fact that I have criticized a multitude of things about the game, and yet you claimed that I haven't done anything but defend it. The idea being "What do I have to do for my criticisms to be valid to you? Cry and scream like a child?".

Even though I do think you've been very rude in a lot of the presentation of your criticisms, it's the black and white, all or nothing nature of them, and the constant questioning of others intentions and taste while propping your own up as 'the valid option', that was criticizing.
All I've stated is my opinion about the game, I've also stated I still like the game.
Nothing I've said has been rude, just my opinions.
I haven't insulted the devs, just questioned their choices, and why they didn't go a different route.
I also said all I've seen is you defending, I don't read every thing posted on these boards.
 

ZaXoFF7

No Longer a Noob
Jan 20, 2009
2,620
513
Behind you...
Apologies for the long response. But I'm gonna take this honestly, and at face value when addressing it. I don't like arguing and frustration in conversation. But I'm also not just gonna roll over either, you know?

Anyway, even just your comment at the top of this page suggests incompetence and malice on the part of the devs, lol. What else does "Perhaps they should test things before trying to implement them." and "Perhaps they should give fair payouts in games, with fair in game car prices instead of trying to get people to give them more money for credits." even mean, if not riding some combination of direct implications that they're rushing, are lazy, don't care about the consumer's experience, lack skill/competence, and/or are genuinely looking to scam, manipulate, and mistreat their players? Like c'mon, either you knew that's what you were implying/saying, or you have no regard for respecting the people you're talking about when you say stuff like that.

Feel free to enlighten me as to what else you could be suggesting there. Because questioning their choices -while you might posit potential reasons for them, including things like incompetence or ill intentions- does not start with a foregone conclusion. Questioning why they make their choices would look like "It's possible they didn't get the chance to test the update enough, in which case I wonder why that is?", instead of "Perhaps they should test things before trying to implement them.". The latter undeniably is passive aggressive, and treats these professionals, many of which have decades of individual experience, as lazy or incompetent, with no proof. Which is extra frustrating, considering knowledge of how easily these sorts of issues can crop up, how big of a difference millions of players VS a few dozen or hundred QA testers can make, and how absolutely nonsensical these types of issues can be at times in terms of why they occur, should lead more toward sympathy than the accusation you implied. The problems you passively condemned them for, are so common in the industry that it's astonishing. And it has nothing to do with the structural problems of said industry or incompetence 99% of the time; it's that games are (and have been for a long time) incredibly, incredibly complicated.

As just one (rather fun) example, just two weeks before Little Big Planet was set to go gold, one of their QA testers in Japan noticed that they were able to replicate a crash consistently, by leaving the game on overnight. The devs were scrambling to find out what the problem was in case it would effect millions of players at launch. They were looking through every line of code, doing all the troubleshooting they could, trying to figure out what the consistent factors were, and why they couldn't replicate the issue in the main dev studio.

Turns out, this specific tester had an Eye Toy camera plugged into the console, and every night around the same time, a janitor would vacuum the room. The frequency of the vacuum's noise was being picked up by the camera in such a way, that it was causing a small amount of memory to leak in the Eye Toy's audio compression code, which would cause the game to crash after the system ran out of resources. Once they realized the problem, it was fixed in just a few minutes. But had they not, it could've made it to launch, could've effected a not-insignificant amount of people, and could've been a nightmare to fix, through no real fault of anyone.

While that's a particularly weird example, games regularly find (or don't find) these sorts of crazy, major bugs right up to the end of development, and shortly afterwards, since optimization and bug fixing is the last leg of development (for hopefully obvious reasons), and also the first leg of post-launch support. It has nothing to do with laziness, or rushing, or anything like that 99% of the time. Instead, it has to do with the fact that they're created by massive teams with multiple departments all trying to work together, while also needing to function individually... teams whose work is then being tested by a sample size that is immediately dwarfed by the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of players that will be poking and prodding at it... day one. These things happen. And in reality Polyphony handled it about as well as a development studio could, had it fixed extremely quickly, and are now trying their best to work with anyone who did lose their saves, to try and rectify the issue. So I'm sorry, but again... I fail to see how your comment on that (which is mirrored in extremity by many of your other comments) is anything but intentionally or ignorantly hostile and disrespectful of the time and effort put in by the devs. What does it imply, other than that they specifically did something worth criticizing and reprimanding, that caused the issue? ... ... ... I.E. What are you doing there, other than blatantly insulting the expertise or work ethic of the devs? Same with the balance of the game's economy.

And the same also goes for your claims of bias in me and such, despite me having disproven your reasoning in the very conversation where you argue I'm biased. All I'm asking you to do is think about how you say something, and why you're saying it, before you say it. Maybe think about actually asking questions first instead, and taking conversations you have in good faith.
 

woody938

The Irresponsible Captain Typo
Apr 23, 2007
25,201
10,664
Black Lizard Planet
Finally reached the final license test seeing how I have everything else dominated. It took me 2 hours to finish a lap, and then it's 10s off gold.

//on goes TC to the max, this looks even harder than S-6
 

ZaXoFF7

No Longer a Noob
Jan 20, 2009
2,620
513
Behind you...
Finally reached the final license test seeing how I have everything else dominated. It took me 2 hours to finish a lap, and then it's 10s off gold.

//on goes TC to the max, this looks even harder than S-6
This may be a stupid question, but what camera do you usually use? Because for this specific one, the view where you can only see the front of the vehicle (I also just call it hood view) helped me a lot during that test. I got a much better sense of minor rotations there.
 

woody938

The Irresponsible Captain Typo
Apr 23, 2007
25,201
10,664
Black Lizard Planet
I use hood cam. Dunno how I'm going to make up those 10s yet, I thought that lap wasn't that bad. The biggest difference is probably gonna come from exiting the the complex before the last higher speed section, it was hard to balance steering and throttle there.
 

ZaXoFF7

No Longer a Noob
Jan 20, 2009
2,620
513
Behind you...
I use hood cam. Dunno how I'm going to make up those 10s yet, I thought that lap wasn't that bad. The biggest difference is probably gonna come from exiting the the complex before the last higher speed section, it was hard to balance steering and throttle there.
I think that's where I ended up having to make up the last bit of time, for sure. It was the most challenging spot to maintain high speeds, because just dipping part of a tire in the wet ended in disaster. I did drive with TCS on for a while (I think at 2?), but I ended up taking it off for the final lap where I got it I believe. Sort of a placebo effect thing, where if I drove with TCS off for too long, I'd start pushing the car too recklessly hard. But if I drove with TCS on for a while, when I turned it off, my brain was tuned to pushing the car, but freshly aware of how volatile it is without TCS, so I'd be more careful. I did the same thing on the Nurburgring Circuit Experience.

I wish I had more specific or meaningful advice, lol. But there weren't any particular tricks I used, other than just making sure to stay out of the water, which is obvious because it's the entire gimmick, lol.
 

-stubzi-

Prolific poster
Sep 10, 2008
42,152
21,266
Finally can play again as I got a sleek new cast for my wrist.

Some of these driving challenges are very tricky to get gold on!
 
Last edited:

-stubzi-

Prolific poster
Sep 10, 2008
42,152
21,266
Absolutely! Any particular ones you've been having trouble with?

I didn't try for too long and turned my attention to license tests but I was struggling to get gold on the one where you drive a Mecedes SLR McLaren on the beginning section of Nur, can't past the last car but was getting close.
 

ZaXoFF7

No Longer a Noob
Jan 20, 2009
2,620
513
Behind you...
Oof, yeah that one's not easy. I think I had to come back to it a bit later as well, because the McLaren has awful brakes, and can't keep itself straight. I really had to rely on staying over the kerbs, pretty far into the grass to get it, particularly with how narrow the track is. They definitely channeled not just the One Lap Magic Nurburgring race in GT4 in the McLaren with that one, but the brutality of it especially.
 

-stubzi-

Prolific poster
Sep 10, 2008
42,152
21,266
Yeah I don't have issues with the licenses, have gotten gold on everything but the S licenses now. Some driivng missions can be tricky though.

I'm wondering what car to choose for this 30 laps in the wet on Tsukuba mission ha
 

ZaXoFF7

No Longer a Noob
Jan 20, 2009
2,620
513
Behind you...
Yeah I don't have issues with the licenses, have gotten gold on everything but the S licenses now. Some driivng missions can be tricky though.

I'm wondering what car to choose for this 30 laps in the wet on Tsukuba mission ha
I can't remember what I used for that... I think it was an R-32 Skyline, since that has tended to be my best option for 600 and 700pp road car races.
 

woody938

The Irresponsible Captain Typo
Apr 23, 2007
25,201
10,664
Black Lizard Planet
Finally got Gold for S-10, I'm also top ranked on my friends list for every license test. Missions next.

This happened at the top of Eau Rouge... twice

[
1656926055581.png


//yup, he's that crazy
 

ZaXoFF7

No Longer a Noob
Jan 20, 2009
2,620
513
Behind you...
Nice! Glad you finally got that done! I haven't gotten much chance to play lately, since I'm trying to tackle two massive J-RPGs for my channel at once, and also decided to finally go through Breath of the Wild.
 

ZaXoFF7

No Longer a Noob
Jan 20, 2009
2,620
513
Behind you...
I FINALLY got the chance to use a decent wheel for an extended period of time. Spent a few days at my brother's place, and he'd found a basically brand new Driving Force GT for PS3 at the thrift store he works at, for $10 after his discount. And so I probably spent like 8 hours using it whenever he was at work, and it was gloriously fun. I really, really want one now, as expected, lol.