Gran Turismo HD for PS3 Impressions

fistfullast33l writes "On Christmas Eve, Sony released the Gran Turismo HD demo to the U.S. and Japan Playstation 3s. The downloadable demo is about 650mb in size and I let it download while I was at church for Christmas. The following are my own impressions.

Visually, the game is by far one of the best for the PS3. The graphics really are top notch including some extremely visually impressive effects like the sky reflecting off the roof of your car. The crowds are a little static, but look alive enough to be believable. There are no weather effects, but the shine of the sun off the road is realistic as well. All in all, this is arguably the pinnacle of graphics on the console at this moment, and it sets the standard pretty high." Read on for the rest of this concise review -- and chime in below with comments on any other games of this season that you'd like to praise or pan. "The game is integrated right into the Playstation network, but sadly does not allow you to race against other drivers. Instead, you are limited to time and draft attack trials. However, the gameplay will keep you busy. You are allowed to save your replays and upload your times to the network, but only the top 10 or so are viewable from the track portion of the game. On the main menu there is an option to view where you rank per car. Not surprisingly, the U.S. version definitely had some large gaps between times as of December 25th so if you're really competitive there are some great opportunities to make a name for yourself. I think I was ranked as low as 4000 on some of the tracks as I was just trying to unlock the cars, so there are a lot of competitors out there.

There are 10 cars in all. The IGN article above links to the list if you're interested. You start with the Suzuki Cappuccino and work your way up by beating goal times for each car on the given track. There is only one track, but it's challenging enough that it might take you a few tries initially to beat the times. IGN says it took them about half an hour to unlock the cars, but I turned off a lot of the driving aids such as stability control and automatic shifting so it took me closer to a few hours. Plus, I'm a horrible driver.

From a control standpoint, the game is pretty standard in that you use the buttons to accelerate and brake and the L1 and R1 buttons to shift. The left analog allows you to steer. Contrast this with the F1 Championship Edition demo which uses the Left analog to steer and the Right analog to accelerate and decelerate. I actually prefer the F1 method better as it gives you a little more control over the pace of acceleration, similar to a gas pedal in a real car.

Overall, the game is a lot of fun when you've played out the launch titles and want something that you can show off to your friends. It might not be the most exciting title but it's definitely a challenge for casual gamers and experts alike, and the ability to record your times online adds a bit of fun to the title. Hopefully it will satiate those who need a GT5 fix and there is a rumor that more content will be released later on.

As a side note, my parents wanted to try out the PS3 so I let them play the F1 Championship Edition, Motorstorm, and GT HD demos, and they preferred F1 because it was easier to drive. GT was second hardest and Motorstorm totally confused them as the tracks aren't well defined." Thanks to fistfullast33l for this review.

Comments

Blat!

[Anonymous Coward]

Blat!

Re:Blat!

[Anonymous Coward]

o rly?

Re:Blat!

[Anonymous Coward]

ya rly.

Re:Blat!

[Anonymous Coward]

Bacon, lettuce, avocado and tomato?

I don't get it?!?

On control schemes

[drinkypoo]

From a control standpoint, the game is pretty standard in that you use the buttons to accelerate and brake and the L1 and R1 buttons to shift. The left analog allows you to steer. Contrast this with the F1 Championship Edition demo which uses the Left analog to steer and the Right analog to accelerate and decelerate. I actually prefer the F1 method better as it gives you a little more control over the pace of acceleration, similar to a gas pedal in a real car.

The reason the default changed, which IIRC happened with Gran Turismo 3, is that having accel and brake at opposite ends of an axis precludes heel-toe braking, which is a necessary technique out in the real world, and thus useful to get the best possible times in gran turismo.

I can't heel-toe in the real world (feet too big, legs too long) and I can't drive worth a fuck in computer racing games (no buttometer makes it much harder - I need the ass dyno for assistance) so I've never employed it myself. I find that preloading is usually enough. But it does make sense.

Re:On control schemes

[goarilla]

what is heel-toe braking
it sounds like a texas two-step dance move or something

Re:On control schemes

[Anonymous Coward]

Google it you lazy ass... I mean your sitting right in front of a computer...

Re:On control schemes

[MoriaOrc]

With respect to the submitter's complaint about "precise control," I was under the impression that the PS3 controllers had replaced the bottom two shoulder buttons with some sort of analog "trigger" instead of just a button. The triggers on the XBox controller work great for gas and break because they have a long enough range from "fully pressed" to "not pressed" that you have fairly precise control over how much gas/break to give the car. I'd assume (if I heard correctly about the controller) that something similar would work very well on a PS3 controller, as far as control schemes go.

In fact, one of my bigger issues with GT has always been that I pretty much have to go all or nothing on the gas and breaks because the analog range from off to full on the face buttons (and all the buttons on the PS2 except the sticks, really) is something on the order of less than a pound of force, and my motor skills aren't good enough to use them for partial gas/breaking (though some of my friends have gotten pretty good at it).

Re:On control schemes

[Bastian]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but I thought heel-toe braking was a technique for downshifting while braking where you brake with your heel, take the car out gear, tap the gas a little bit (while braking) to get the engine speed matched with the wheel speed, and downshift. (It allows a smooth downshift so drivers can keep better control of the car.) Given that Gran Turismo doesn't do anything like simulating a clutch pedal, how could it possibly give you a way to do heel-toe braking in the game?

My guess on why they wouldn't have analog control for the gas/brake is that it simplifies the controls for players, and if you're going for the best times then ideally your only three "speed settings" should be full brake (before turn), nothing (in the turn), and full gas (the rest of the time), so analog control isn't really necessary. That and with the analog buttons on the PS2 (and, I assume, PS3) controllers, one doesn't really lose the ability to fine-tune gas and brake without the analog stick.

Re:On control schemes

[Heir Of The Mess]

I don't see what use it would be in a computer game as it's more to do with the mechanics of downshifting at speed. From wikipedia:

Heel-and-toe is a driving technique used in performance driving. It involves operating the throttle and brake pedals simultaneously with the right foot, while facilitating normal activation of the clutch with the left foot. It is used when braking and downshifting simultaneously (like when going around a turn), and allows the driver to "blip" the throttle to raise the engine speed and smoothly engage the lower gear.

Heel-and-toe is used before entry into a turn while a vehicle is under braking, preparing the transmission to be in the optimal gear to accelerate out of the turn. One benefit of downshifting before entering a turn is a jolt to the drivetrain, or any other unwanted dynamics, will not upset the vehicle as badly when going in a straight line; the same jolt while turning may upset the vehicle enough to cause loss of control if it occurs after the turn is begun. Another benefit is "heel-and-toeing" allows you to downshift at the last moment before entering the turn, after you have started braking and the car has slowed, so the engine speed when the lower gear is engaged will not be too high.

Performance vehicles are usually modified (if necessary) so that the heights of the brake and accelerator pedals are closely matched to permit easy use of heel-and-toe, and that the pedals are not too far apart.

The name, stemming from earlier automotive designs where the accelerator pedal was on the left and could be actuated with the heel while the brake pedal was actuated with the toe, is misleading regarding how the technique is carried out in modern cars, i.e., operating the brake with the left edge of the foot, while rocking it down and to the right to operate the throttle. With practice, it becomes possible to smoothly and independently operate both pedals with one foot. The technique is common in all forms of motorsport, especially rallying.

Heel and toe braking has the following steps:

Brake with the ball (left edge) of your right foot while the car is in gear
Disengage (press) the clutch once the car has slowed down significantly (if double clutching, shift to the neutral position and engage the clutch)
Blip the throttle to match the engine rpm to the rpm needed for the selected gear using either the heel or the right edge of your right foot
Shift the gear lever to correct gear (disengage the clutch first if double clutching)
Engage the clutch, release the brake and roll your foot onto the accelerator

Re:On control schemes

[Anonymous Coward]

actually, heel-toe is used for downshifting under braking. Your left foot is dedicated to clutch operation, and your right foot has to handle both brake and gas. The heel is used for braking, while the toe is ready to blip the throttle, to match engine speed to transmission speed, at the moment of downshift.

Since GT handles matching engine speed to transmission speed for you, there is no need to attempt heel-toe techniques in the game.

The technique you meant, perhaps, is left-foot-braking. In a non-shifting situation, your left foot is free to operate the brake, potentially while your right foot is on the gas. This can be useful in trail-braking situations, at the entry of a turn, after any shifting has already taken place under straight-line braking.

Basically, a small amount of brake applied at corner entry can help get the car turned, or pointed, toward the apex of the corner. It is choppy and slow to try to use your right foot entirely for the maneuver. Additionally, you want to keep your right foot on the gas, at least minimally, to avoid driveline lash from the sudden appearance of engine braking if the throttle is completely closed.

Thus, it can be useful to have both gas and brake applied simultaneously, but only for around 1% of the time taken to complete a lap.

Re:On control schemes

[drinkypoo]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but I thought heel-toe braking was a technique for downshifting while braking where you brake with your heel, take the car out gear, tap the gas a little bit (while braking) to get the engine speed matched with the wheel speed, and downshift.

You just described heel-toe shifting. You can match RPMs without heel-toe, I do it all the time. Or at least I did when I had a car with a stick; right now I'm driving an auto (yecch.) Heel-toe braking is where you brake into the turn and then as you let up on the brake with your heel, you begin to press on the gas pedal with your toe.

This is the superior form of suspension preloading, in which case you brake into a turn in order to compress the suspension on the side of the car in the outside of the turn, then release the brake, and while the car is still heeled over because you're in a turn, you begin accelerating.

Re:On control schemes

[ReKleSS]

I was kind of annoyed when I found that GT4 didn't allow me to configure the right analog for throttle... but then I found out that was the default setting and couldn't be changed anyway. GT HD might well be the same... anyone want to find out?

Also, it would be nice to know if my Driving Force will still work.

Re:On control schemes

[Anonymous Coward]

Google it you lazy ass... I mean your sitting right in front of a computer...

There are also plenty of dictionaries online where you can look up the meaning of the word "your".

Re:On control schemes

[scolen2]

Uhm... no need to heal toe in a video game. And, I'm 6"tall and drive a R32 and heal toe by rolling my foot, have for 12 years with no issues.

Re:On control schemes

[drinkypoo]

Uhm... no need to heal toe in a video game. And, I'm 6"tall and drive a R32 and heal toe by rolling my foot, have for 12 years with no issues.

1. You don't need to heal your toe unless you damage it.
2. I'm 6'7" and have size 16 feet. You are puny and uninteresting.

By the way, you are obviously confusing heel-toe shifting with heel-toe braking, which is not the same thing and which is especially sad since I already explained the difference to someone else before you even left this comment. Heel-toe shifting is used for rev matching. Heel-toe braking is a trail braking technique, and is the correct way to shift from braking to accelerating in a turn.

Re:On control schemes

[Anonymous Coward]

Well... it's not a game, it's a simulation. Your entire dissertation EXPLAINS EXACTLY WHY YOU NEED IT in the "game".

You act as if there's no gears or shifting in the GT series which is renown for it's realism. Keeps making it friggin harder each version, they add more things it keeps track of.

Re:On control schemes

[scolen2]

I'm sure glad you know the differnce, cuase little ol' me sure wouldn't even though I have in the SpecMiata racing scene for years. Thanks for setting me stright on something I do in fact know more about then you do. BTW, here's a mind blower... Heel Toe shifting is the same as Heel toe brakeing. Oh and here's a BONUS for your ass... I also left foot brake doing it. Figure that one out smart ass.

Re:On control schemes

[Bastian]

The entire explanation he provided actually explains exactly why you don't need it in the game. Have you ever had a poorly-executed downshift in the middle of a turn throw your car out of control while playing GT?

It's not that there's no gears or shifting in the GT series. It's that there's no clutch, or any of the interface complexity that comes with operating a real manual transmission. Not only is the phenomenon that heel-and-toe is designed to handle not simulated in the game, but one of the key controls necessary for executing it (namely, a clutch pedal) is also absent.

Re:On control schemes

[drinkypoo]

It's not the same, because in one you shift, and in the other you do not. In other words there are reasons to do it that have nothing to do with shifting. Thanks for your input though.

It's interesting, I'm constantly getting more and more discouraged from joining some kind of racing series by the fact that nearly every time I have some kind of conversation with someone who races on a regular basis, they turn out to be some kind of uneducated fucking moron. I have to figure out if I really want to hang out with a bunch of mental midgets.

I do know some counterexamples, of course - but you're not one of them.

Interestingly most miata owners especially seem to be little bitches. I used to think it was because they had a small penis, but now I'm deciding that they just feel like they have a small penis since everyone is teasing them about their cars all day (which are actually quite good if you're tiny - I don't really fit in them in either seat.)

Re:On control schemes

[scolen2]

LOL... Well, if you keep up your smart ass attitude, its no wonder you're hated by anyone who knows what they are talking about. Have fun tring to learn when you're a dick, see you on the track.

Re:On control schemes

[Criterion]

I'm just guessing that you are completely unaware that heel/toe driving is only necessary if one also actually has a clutch? By asserting that heel/toe is useful in GT would then by default assert that you have a clutch in GT which you do not. Therefore I can conclude that you are, indeed, talking about something which you do not understand.

Re:On control schemes

[Criterion]

Please don't tell me you brake with your *heel*. >

Just in case you are serious.. before you break your ankle.. you are supposed to brake with your toes, and have your heel on the gas.

Re:On control schemes

[Criterion]

Bzzzzzt. Sorry, try again. Where in the world did you hear that load of hogwash? Heel/toe, by whatever other name you want to call it, is, and always has been, a process of downshifting. What you describe is a form of suspension control, a commonly used technique for weight shifting. One might wonder how long you have been driving to think it is something new and "superior".. much less think it is what is universally known as heel/toe (driving, shifting, braking.. it's all the same thing).

Re:On control schemes

[Anonymous Coward]

Okay, you are right about not wanting the brake and accelarator on the same axis, but wrong about the reason. It's not for heel-toeing. It's not for trail braking either, which is braking well into the turn, which allows you to progressively tighten your radius so that you can use an extended radius while you are accelarating once you get to a certain part of the curve.

What you want to be talking about is using the brake while still under throttle, this has the effect of throwing the weight forward more violently and upsetting the back. When used in a turn, it is a cheap way of going into a drift. Not a real track racing technique because brakes are a precious commodity, and doing something like this is just asking for brake fade. But useful in shorter racing formats like rally or drift exhibitions. It's pretty similar to handbrake, but more useful for RWD cars.

Ummm... I'm not a coward... My name is Shuvo... Not that it matters...

Re:On control schemes

[Criterion]

Your problem with racers seems to me to stem from the fact that you try to talk like you know what you're talking about without actually KNOWING what you're talking about. Previous posters are correct, heel/toe.. as known by the terminology of heel/toe (or heel-toe.. or whatever combination of syntax you care to use) is a shifting technique. And yes, I *have* been on a few tracks in my days. I also know many racers and not ONE of them would refer to what you do as heel/toe. That would be called trail braking, which you do to shift the weight of the vehicle.

Wannabees are notorious for talking the talk without knowing the walk. This applies to many areas of expertise.

Re:On control schemes

[inca34]

There is plenty of complexity in racecraft to keep people interested without the clutch. Granted, as an autocrosser I understand that messing up a shift can hurt a lot, but in the whole scheme of things it doesn't really affect the pros that much. They either don't mess up enough to make it an issue or it's done for them (e.g. F1).

They had this control scheme available in GT4, so I would imagine that they'll eventually have it for GT HD. Also, don't forget that the X/SQUARE/etc buttons are pressure sensitive, so keep an eye on the HUD for throttle and braking levels.

The comparison between F1 and GT needs to be done with all the assistance off in F1, which makes it on par with GT in terms of difficulty. To illustrate my point, if you leave all the assistances on, you can mash the gas on completely and roughly follow the rubber tracks and it'll brake and steer for you. =)

Re:On control schemes

[Bastian]

I'm thinking what you're talking about is a misnomer. There's left-foot braking, where you use your left foot to work the brake and your right foot to work the gas. This is a fairly common thing in racing, for the reasons you mentioned. I can't really imagine many people, even seasoned drivers, are good enough to manipulate the full range of the brake and gas pedal consistently (and safeily) with one foot while going around a turn. (This isn't really an issue with heel-toe because you're really just giving a little tap to the gas pedal while braking, so it doesn't require nearly as much coordination.)

Also, I'm wondering how you match RPMs without something like heel-toe. Do you push the gas pedal with a broom handle or something?

Re:On control schemes

[ssayler]

True. Games simulate full sequential transmissions, wherein clutch pedals aren't used. Car computers control the precise amount of gas needed during the downshift to smooth everything out. Many sport sedans with auto transmissions allow the driver to switch into sequential at any time. The Manual transmission option in games has more in common with a Real Life automatic than a Real Life manual. To further complicate things, some racing sequential transmissions (997 GT3 Cup) also have clutches. This clutch is only used in downshifts.

Re:On control schemes

[ZERO1ZERO]

Not heel and toe, you mean Left foot braking. To see this in action check out this impressive video : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=on-IRTFam4I

Re:On control schemes

[samkass]

The real point of heel-toe is not the possible loss of control, it's having the engine at the top of the power curve at all times. (Most gasoline engines have a fairly narrow range of RPMs where they produce the most horsepower and torque. Diesel doesn't really have this issue, which is one reason why some drivers hate them.) Anyway, since you're braking into a turn you're slowing down (and also giving the front tires more traction), so to keep the engine in the power band you have to downshift. Which means using all three pedals at once.

In most modern cars, at the speeds and conditions on most public roads, you could probably just downshift without matching RPMs and let the synchros pick up all the slack. But for real control at top performance through a turn in a car with a standard clutch and shifter, you need to toe-heel. (My old Alfa Romeo roadster basically had no synchros, and any time you downshifted you essentially had to match RPMs carefully, so it was a great car to practice on.)

Incidentally, most production cars' gearboxes are such that to do the first downshift, just press the clutch without lifting your foot from the gas... the resulting RPM jump should be just about right to go one gear lower.

Re:On control schemes

[zero_offset]

Bullshit. I spend about 60 days a year on-track and I guarantee you that everyone has a slightly different position. Some guys point their feet one way, and some guys the other. Some people I know use the edges of their foot on both pedals. I use my heel on the brake and the outer edge of my foot on the gas. Has a lot to do with pedal placement in your vehicle of choice, too -- the position you describe was more comfortable for me in the Rustang-based Panoz GTR-A's that I learned in quite a few years back.

Whatever works and is comfortable is what you use and what is "right".

And that fact comes from the professionals who taught me, because I asked that very question...

Re:On control schemes

[Anonymous Coward]

Bollocks - Diesels have terribly narrow powerbands, much worse than petrol engines. They make up for this somewhat by having lots of early torque.

Re:On control schemes

[zero_offset]

It's a pretty poor "simulator" that doesn't have a clutch, eh?

I sure hope Simbin's GTR retains the full simulation mode for the Xbox 360 that is available in the PC version...

Re:On control schemes

[smash]

Heel+toe is not used in the GT series yet.

However, being able to apply the brakes AND accelerator at the same time is good for burnouts, which can be done in GT4 :)

Re:On control schemes

[smash]

The real point of heel-toe is not the possible loss of control, it's having the engine at the top of the power curve at all times.

Incorrect. It's about keeping the car under control. If you're turning slightly while braking and don't heel+toe when you downshift, depending on how aggressive your clutch is, you can unsettle the rear wheels and cause the car to spin (in a rear wheel drive car at least).

To obtain your level 3 CAMS license in Australia (not sure what the equivalents are over seas), you need to be able to heel+toe for this reason.

If you are in teh correct gear for the speed you're doing, your RPM will be in the torque band regardless of *how* you put it into that gear :D

Re:On control schemes

[Criterion]

Indeed using the ball and side of your foot is a common way to do it, but I was taught from an early age (started driving at 12.. egads.. driving for 30 years now) to always use the upper part of your foot for braking as you have more control over modulation that way.. not to mention I've been in many cars, but none with the pedal placement to allow reaching the gas while your heel is on the brake. I've only run 4 cars on track, so you've seen many more setups than I, but I've never known anybody that said they used their heel.. then again it was never a huge topic of conversation.

Re:On control schemes

[Criterion]

Hmmm.. one would think so, but how many others do simulate clutch usage? I know SRS has a clutch button, but I think it's more for popping into a drift than actually being used as a clutch.. and I also would not consider labeling it a simulator as it's a rather average arcade racer.

I can state that I would take PGR or Forza (or TOCA, Collin McRae, Rallisport, SegaGT etc) over GT any day (and do hehe).

Re:On control schemes

[zero_offset]

It's a lot easier to understand when you're talking about cars with adjustments for each pedal. Also a lot of it depends on where the gas pedal actually moves -- most gas pedals sort of rotate quite a lot around the linkage that actually moves. On quite a few cars the position of the linkage just happens to be better-suited to being depressed by the upper portion of the foot.

As I said, it really tends to be a combination of the vehicle and personal preference. I mostly run a Viper, and my three closest Viper-driving friends all do it differently. One used to be a very successful professional racer and he brakes Vipers with the heel.

Re:On control schemes

[zero_offset]

I used to rate PGR over GT until I put force-feedback wheels on GT. PGR can't touch it. But Forza is generally better all-around, even if the original Xbox lacked FF wheels. I have high hopes for Forza 2 even though I'm not too terribly impressed with the 360's FF wheel (rather weak force level, otherwise it's ok).

Simbin is the real-deal though. On the PC side the game outputs performance data which can actually be run through the real-world Motec analysis software -- that's saying quite a lot in terms of simulation realism. The owner of Simbin actually runs a Viper GTS-R in Europe. I think the biggest shortcoming of Simbin's GTR is the lack of realistic control options to support the software. That's a fairly rare state of affairs in a world where software typically lags hardware by a serious margin.

Re:On control schemes

[stewbacca]

Have you ever had a poorly-executed downshift in the middle of a turn throw your car out of control while playing GT?

This is the problem with every racing game I've ever played with the exception of two (and I've been playing racing games since arcade consoles in the 80s. Arcade racers have ruined the genre, with the ever increasing need for prettier cars. You can blame consoles is you like, but the PC games are equally bad. Nearly every developer has abandoned physics simulations for visuals and official licensing. The only two racing games I've played that have realistic effects of bad shiffting are no longer created: Nascar Racing 2003 and Grand Prix Legends. Both were made by Papyrus who is out of business because EA Sports (and their ilk) have thrown money to NASCAR and the FIA so we can have pretty cars that handle well with control pads, instead of steering wheels. Yeah, I know, it is a marketing issue, and more casual players want to just ram into other cars and fly around corners at impossible speeds, but there must be a market of 37-year-old gear-heads like me who like racing and simulation. And by gear-heads, I don't mean your average 18-year old who has memorized the specs of every not-sold-in-the-USA Japanese super-car. I'd pay $100 or more for a realistic racing game if anyone is listening.

Re:On control schemes

[iainl]

I'm plain not good enough at simulation games to know, and I can't afford the equipment for a setup more fancy than my basic Logitech Driving Force, but my gear-head friends have good things to say about Simbin's GT-R games and Live For Speed. All of Simbin's games (I liked GT Legends the most) and LFS too have fairly generous demos available, so give them a try.

Re:On control schemes

[Anonymous Coward]

I knew I was forgetting one of the uses of left foot braking, which is funny because I have a turbo car:

Rohrl used left foot braking to get the turbo spooled so as not to have the upsetting effect of turbo lag while turning. Sure, S1 had an anti-lag system but left foot braking also helped. When you have a 600hp beast that snap oversteers like crazy and you are going on gravel, you want the least upsetting forces possible.

Ummm... I'm not a coward... My name is Shuvo... Not that it matters...

Re:On control schemes

[macshome]

Grand Prix Legends will let you use a three pedal setup for an analog clutch. Combined with the crashbox patch and you have a game that makes you match revs on every shift.

Act Labs makes a full line of GPL specific gear from three pedal setups to shifters with interchangeable gates to match the cars in GPL. http://www.act-labs.com/products/race1.htm

Re:On control schemes

[Ender Ryan]

I'm just curious, how do you shift badly in these games you're talking about? Do you have full clutch/gas/brake foot pedals for playing?

Re:On control schemes

[Ender Ryan]

Bigger feet should actually make it easier to execute a heel-and-toe shift if you use the side of your foot on the gas instead of actually using your heel to blip the gas.

Re:On control schemes

[Sketch]

I think the reason the default changed with GT3 was to make use of (show off) the pressure senstiive control pad buttons on the PS2 controller. GT1 & 2 were made for the PS1 which did not have pressure sensitive control pad buttons. Presumably the PS3 does, so using them for gas/brake control is still valid.

BTW, as other commenters have noted, there is no reason to heal and toe with GT. Thanks to paddle shifters, you don't have to operate a clutch in the game. This means you have at most two pedals to worry about. You have two feet, so there is no need for heel and toe. (Or virtual heel and toe, if you are playing with a PS2 controller instead of a steering wheel controller.)

Re:On control schemes

[stewbacca]

By bad shifting, I simply mean shifting at the wrong time and over-revving the engine, or downshifting too early, causing excessive engine braking and causing the rear end to swing around, even when you are going in a straight line. There are pedals with clutches, or you can use a thumb button, but I prefer to leave auto-clutch on; I was merely talking about games not taking into account engine rpm's in general.

Re:On control schemes

[Criterion]

Hmm. Might have to spring for a ff wheel and check it out then. I did try other wheels, just didn't have the patience to get used to it after so many years at the analog sticks. Then again, I may not, 'cause Forza 2 is upcoming =D. As far as PGR goes.. I've kinda fallen in love with it's drifting style.. addicted to the Kudos hehe. PGR is not really a sim so I know I'm comparing apples to carrots, but it is smooth as butter, just too much freakin fun.

I have GT Legends. I need to look into getting more of Simbin's software.

Out of curiosity.. if you read this reply, what are your thoughts on SCGT(pc)?

Re:On control schemes

[Criterion]

Correction.. I have Gran Prix Legends.. not GT Legends. Looks like I will have to look into getting my FIRST piece of Simbin's software hehe. Was looking on their home page and thought.. "I have that" then hit submit and realized.. "no I don't". Brain glitch.

Re:On control schemes

[Criterion]

Interesting. Will have to look into that. I have GPL already.

Re:On control schemes

[palmpunk]

Breaking shifts the weight of the car to the front. Sometimes you want this weight transfer to happen without letting off the gas.

Re:On control schemes

[drinkypoo]

The problem is the overall lack of space in the vehicle. If you have long legs and a long torso you are pretty much fucked - the only vehicle I've ever been fully comfortable in was a 1980 Nissan 280ZX 2+2. Even in that car I was not able to maintain a proper posture, but it felt pretty good. You are meant to be sitting upright and your arms should be well bent. I actually have to shift my seating position just to set the windshield wipers to high because the lever conflicts with my leg. There is simply no room for me to twist my leg around in that fashion, and the angle at which my leg must enter the footwell because of the lack of room means that I could press on the gas with the right side of my foot, but I wouldn't have much control over the proportion between gas and brake because I don't have room to move my leg.

People are simply not used to people of my size and they have no ability to reckon what the logistics of someone of my size is. Unfortunately the automotive engineers responsible for ergonomics also are not familiar with these issues, or the automotive industry feels that there is no market for a vehicle which is ergonomically correct for someone of my size.

Re:On control schemes

[Lolzownz]

Try GTR2, came out a few months ago. its a "realistic" racing game, i personaly think it isnt very fun but thats the price you pay for realism i guess. A guy at work that likes to race in real life enjoys it alot. Oh and if you don't have a steering wheel for your pc i wouldn't even try it.

Church?

[Anonymous Coward]

I let it download while I was at church for Christmas this is relevant how?

Re:Church?

[Lost Engineer]

I think he's saying that he doesn't know how long it took to download.

Re:Church?

[aristotle-dude]

Do you have a problem with that?

Re:Church?

[nate nice]

I guess I'd assume he's saying the download took about the time it takes to go to church for Christmas.

Are you scared that someone went to church? Does it bother you someone mentioned church?

I find it perfectly relevant as it gave me a range of time it took to download the file, but then I can think in the abstract.

Re:Church?

[CowboyBob500]

Yeah, I do. God botherers can do what they like in private. Shoving it down my throat is not appreciated. This is a case of the latter with regards to mentioning it completely out of context just to get it in. It instantly put me off reading the rest of the review.

Bob

Re:Church?

[CowboyBob500]

Yeah, mod me down as a troll. That's what all you believers do isn't it? La la la, I can't hear you...

Bob

Re:Church?

[UbuntuDupe]

I guess I'd assume he's saying the download took about the time it takes to go to church for Christmas.

Yes, and, more importantly, that you can't do anything else with a PS3 while it's downloading, unlike the Xbox 360, which will download non-disruptively in the background while you play games or something.

Re:Church?

[Samus]

So mentioning that he went to church is shoving it down your throat? Would you rather he lied? I think he was just providing context for the story. Why should he have to hide what he did? Really if he would have mentioned that he went to temple or went to his local mosque or to the new Rocky movie it wouldn't have made me feel any different. I guess I'm just not as sensitive to people mentioning religious activities as you.

Re:Church?

[davebo357]

If anyone is interested in download time, i hooked the ps3 up via ethernet to 15mbps fios and it took about 10 minutes to download. Which means it wasn't getting maximum speed, but i assume a lot of other people were downloading it on x-mas afternoon. And this is after two wretchedly slow and failed attempts at downloading the firmware update via wi-fi on the same connection, then downloading the firmware to a usb drive that when put in the ps3, recognized the drive but no updates on it. Why is the firmware the ps3 shipped with not capable of even browsing the playstation network? Ah well, I just hope it's not something we're all having to update every other week. And for the record i really wanted a Wii.

Re:Church?

[TubeSteak]

I guess I'd assume he's saying the download took about the time it takes to go to church for Christmas.

Are you scared that someone went to church? Does it bother you someone mentioned church?

You've made one fatal assumption, that everyone reading this knows how long a christmass mass is.

Not everyone goes to church for christmas. Some christians don't go to church at all! And surprise of surprises, some people aren't even christian and have never even been in a church!

He might as well have said "by the time I finished churning one quarter of a hogshead's worth of butter, the download finished"

That's why the GP asked why it was relevant.

Re:Church?

[CowboyBob500]

I think he was just providing context for the story.

The story is about the new Gran Turismo game. How is mentioning going to church the context of the story? I don't advocate that he lies. I just don't see how mentioning it has anything at all to do with the story. On the contrary, it is the fact that as a believer he obviously thinks that he has to slip it into every conversation or anything that he writes. I don't want to read that crap. By all means believe in private. Do not believe in public. It is not warranted.

Bob

Re:Church?

[jrockway]

> Yeah, mod me down as a troll. That's what all you believers do isn't it? La la la, I can't hear you...

To be fair, I don't have any ties to organized (or disorganized) religion, and I would have modded you down. Your entire post seems to have been a rant about how you're better than everyone because you don't believe in God. That's great, but as you say -- keep it to yourself. Nobody cares. (i.e. keep your non-believing in private. believers and non-believers are equally annoying).

As for the troll mod, it was the best substitute for -1 STFU or -1 You're An Idiot.

Re:Church?

[Basehart]

Even if sinners who are condemned to eternal damnation knew how long church lasts these days, how do they know much time to add on for travel? The poster could have driven for three hours to get to his church to drop off some dry cleaning, and then stopped off on the way back home to help a friend resurface their driveway for another hour or two. Or maybe the church is right next door, in which case it only took a few moments to download two thirds of a gig, which is pretty damn impressive if you ask this goat lover!

Re:Church?

[letxa2000]

Shoving it down my throat is not appreciated.

Saying the word "church" is NOT shoving it down your throat. You definitely need to take a chill pill and recognize that your right to not believe in God doesn't mean you'll never hear something that mentions religion. Sheesh.

Re:Church?

[letxa2000]

My guess is that he mentioned that he went to church so that people here don't think he's some loser that has nothing better to do than wait for some hundred-MB download to complete. That's what I personally got out of the comment.

Do not believe in public. It is not warranted.

Nor is not-believing in public. You're a hypocrite--you realize that, right?

Re:Church?

[bigNuns]

i think he mentions church because it is actually written by a PR person at sony... By saying he was at church now all the readers know he is a church going man with the fear of god in him. Clearly a man of good faith would not tell lies... then he proceeds to inform us how good it is.

also, the commenter you have replied to is not being a hypocrite at all, for all you and I know he is a good christian just annoyed by people feeling the need to spread the word publicly. to be a hypocrite he would have had to say something more like... So, I didn't go to church because god doesn't exist on xmas, and instead downloaded a demo for...

luckily i have not said anything about the original poster needing to stop doing it publicly... so... uh, yeah, dude, god doesnt exist, it has nothing to do with this game demo, leave it out of the review.

Re:Church?

[marcello_dl]

My guess is that he mentioned that he went to church so that people here don't think he's some loser that has nothing better to do than wait for some hundred-MB download to complete. Especially on Christmas Eve. Of course we all know he didn't recite his prayers but mumbled some arcane sounding countdown of megabytes instead :)

Re:Church?

[dabadab]

You have apparently totally missed the - completely off-topic - parody of typical homophobic speech.

Re:Church?

[Samus]

I don't think you would have complained so loudly if he said that after kicking of the download he popped a frozen pizza in the oven and sat in front of the tube for an hour and a half. Really, he could just be one of those guys that goes to church on Christmas and Easter and only really went this time because his girlfriend drug him along. You seem to believe that because he went to church on Christmas Eve and mentions it as part of the chronology leading up to his review that he is some kind of bible thumper shoving religion down your throat. If he would have said that he went to church so that he could save his immortal soul from burning in hell and that you should too then I would be able to see your point. Otherwise it is just a casual mention of something that many Americans do on Christmas and I think you are over reacting to it.

P.S. You mention that he has to slip in a reference to his beliefs in everything he writes. Well take a look for yourself.

Re:Church?

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking as an atheist: shut the hell up dude, you're making us look crazy.

Re:Church?

[fistfullast33l]

I originally had written that I downloaded it overnight but realized that it actually was the F1 demo that downloaded overnight and the GT demo that downloaded while I went to church. I really was actually trying to give some context for how long the demo took to download, but decided that explaining the whole situation wasn't really necessary. Instead, it gives people the idea that it took about an hour to two to download over a standard cable connection using the wireless card in the PS3 and an 802.11g router. Happy?

Re:Church?

[nate nice]

It's relevant to people who know. Just like how it would be relevant if he indeed did mention it took as long as finishing churning one quarter of a hogshead's worth of butter. If you don't know what the writer means, then it's your responsibility to figure it out, or ignore it all together.

If you don't know what this is and it's important to you then look it up. I don't go to Christian church (or any "Church" for that matter) but I've driven by 1000910291290 churches in my life and have seen the times masses are and it seems like it's about an hour or an hour and a half. If I really cared I query for the average time of Christmas masses or something to that effect. I think Baptists go for hours actually as I remember someone telling me that when I worked in a restaurant when I was a kid and on Sunday you would get a large group around 3:00 of people dressed nicely and referred to as the "Baptists" (not in a negative manner either) by some employees. I then learned that they often go to church for 3 or more hours. But the average Christian is around 1-1.5 hours from what I've learned

But then, I'm curious of the world around me and not just self absorbed. I like to know about things I don't know about because I was born with a curious mind, which you've eluded to you have not. I guess I feel bad for you that you need direct exposure to something to feel like you know anything about it. I guess with my apparent unique ability to think in the abstract, I also have a natural curiosity that lends itself to discovery and knowledge about non-sequitor things.

But back on topic, this isn't why the parent made the comment he did. I know this and you know this.

He did it because he's intolerant of anything "God" related and believes he has a certain right to not be exposed to the ideas or print of this God. He's intolerant much like some people on the other side of the coin are intolerant.

Re:Church?

[Heir Of The Mess]

Like the guy who always finds a way to say that he doesn't own a tv http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28694. It probably would have been better if the guy stated the time period is terms that more of us can relate to rather than something sensitive like religion.

Re:Church?

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny, upon first reading I immediately imagined the writer to be a mid-30's white, male with 1.5 kids. Income level 40-80,000 (household). Type of consumer: early adopter, +2 Loyalty/Faith/OldSkool

(wake me when the gameplay is described as "organic")

Re:Church?

[Anonymous Coward]

Surely believers + non-believers = everybody? So you're annoyed by everybody?

Re:Church?

[TubeSteak]

In replying to me, you've made an awful lot of assumptions:

1. That you know anything about my religious affiliation, or lack thereof
2. That I'm self absorbed and/or lack curiousity
3. That you somehow know the motivations of an AC based on four words

Try using you "apparent unique ability to think in the abstract" to help you not take things so personally in the future. And try not to insult people, it is rude.

cheers

Re:Church?

[aristotle-dude]

Yeah, I do. God botherers can do what they like in private. Shoving it down my throat is not appreciated. This is a case of the latter with regards to mentioning it completely out of context just to get it in. It instantly put me off reading the rest of the review.

Bob No, he is not shoving anything down your throat. You are just intolerant of people with views/lifestyles that differ from your own. Grow up for crying out loud. When you live in a pluralistic society you should be prepared to encounter people from all walks of life. You should not feel any different whether he had gone to church or the corner store during the download.

Re:Church?

[ZX3 Junglist]

Shhh!! Don't say the "C" word, Bob's here!

Re:Church?

[Overly Critical Guy]

Xbox 360, which will download non-disruptively in the background while you play games or something.

That wasn't true until recently.

Re:Church?

[Overly Critical Guy]

Welcome to why most Americans hate liberals and think they're condescending pricks who want a big, expensive nanny state to regulate everything that might offend them. You don't have the right to not be offended, kiddo.

Re:Church?

[nate nice]

I made the assumptions because you and the AC painted them clear as day.

Cheers!

Re:Church?

[dangitman]

he could just be one of those guys that goes to church on Christmas and Easter and only really went this time because his girlfriend drug him along.

They drug people to make them go to church now? Jeez, I thought most churches were anti-drugs.

Re:Church?

[dangitman]

that you can't do anything else with a PS3 while it's downloading,

Holy fuck! I don't care if I can't use it before it's downloaded. I just think it's amazing that you can download a PS3. Beats the hell out of going to the store and paying for one. Link please?

Re:Church?

[dangitman]

You've made one fatal assumption, that everyone reading this knows how long a christmass mass is

Is it a massive Christ who weighs even more than the typical massive Christl?

Re:Church?

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"This is a case of the latter with regards to mentioning it completely out of context just to get it in. It instantly put me off reading the rest of the review."

Ah... so you didn't like part of the message so you ignored the whole thing. So.. um... isn't that the general complaint about religious people with extreme views?

Re:Church?

[Panzergheist]

That just about sums it up, yes.

(Thank you, I'll be here all week.)

Re:Church?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh em gee! What am I going to do; my PS3 is temporarily occupied!

Go outside and throw rocks at passing cars. Or something. A few hours of PS3 non-use won't kill you.

Re:Church?

[CowboyBob500]

Actually, you're the only one who seems to have gotten the irony in my posts. I don't normally post anti-religious stuff, but over the past few weeks I've been bombarded with Christian religious propaganda from all sides. It seems it can be dished out but not taken. My point being that the majority of the people in the world are not Christian, yet we in Europe/America are forced to listen to Christian rhetoric wherever we go around the end of December/beginning of January. Yet any dissenting voices are told that they are "scrooges" or should "get into the Christmas spirit". Why?

Imagine if at election time someone stood outside your house with a bullhorn shouting for your to vote Republican and at the same time cold calling you with the same message just to emphasise the point. On top of that, all your neighbours have 8 foot high inflatable effigies of George Bush and cover their houses with bright flashing lights that keep you awake at night. Then you turn on the TV/radio and every interlude/ad-break has a trailer with Dick Cheney talking up the Republican party policies, and even when get to the programmes they all have a Republican theme, etc etc etc. I'd suggest that any non-party affiliated person would be getting slightly annoyed...

Bob

Re:Church?

[iainl]

Personally, I think he's saying that he doesn't know how long it takes to download from a random member of the public's connection, rather than across the Sony office network. But I'm a cynic.

Re:Church?

[grolschie]

I let it download while I was at church for Christmas

this is relevant how?

Intolerant, much? Maybe that PC brigade would have preferred that he said:

"I let it download while I was at some place (that I cannot mention for fear of offending someone) to celebrate some festival (that I also cannot mention by name for fear of offending someone)."

Re:Church?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a moot point, as you can not dl GTHD on Xbox - background downloading or not.

Re:Church?

[thatguywhoiam]

Yes, and, more importantly, that you can't do anything else with a PS3 while it's downloading, unlike the Xbox 360, which will download non-disruptively in the background while you play games or something.

Yep. Just like the Xbox360 when it lau - sorry, we are being emphatic I see - just like the xbox360 when it launched. Sony announced that the bg downloading ability will be added with the March update.

There are excellent things to rightly pick on with the PS3; this ain't one of 'em.

Re:Church?

[UbuntuDupe]

Yeah, good point, we should handicap systems when deciding which to buy.

"well, the xbox is superior, but the PS3 hasn't had a fair chance. Guess I'll wait."

(I actually won't be buying either a 360 or PS3, but I've got to admit at least the 360 has its act together.)

Re:Church?

[twosmokes]

at least the 360 has its act together

A year after it's release, yes the 360 has its act together. And if you're not buying either, why do you care how the downloader behaves?

Re:Church?

[UbuntuDupe]

A year after it's release, yes the 360 has its act together.

Yes, right when people are considering buying one.

And if you're not buying either, why do you care how the downloader behaves?

Because I care about the truth, maybe?

Look at how the post got modded -- certainly some people found that information useful since they hadn't known that before.

If you want, I'll only comment on the Wii when talking about consoles, even if I have truthful information about the others.

Re:Church?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well... another stupid condescending right wing bigot... see it's easy to trow senseless insults around without knowing much about your target... I'm not american, but I could watch CNN/Fox from canada and frankly I see that in spite what you say democrats won the last election (they would be too much on the right to be considered near center here or in most countries outside the USA... anyhow I think your reply is useless and you should learn that not wanting someone to mention he went to church has nothing to do with being left or right wing lenient but it makes the person an anal retentive idiot either way it's not good... but you're certainly no better!!

Re:Church?

[Overly Critical Guy]

I'm not american, but I could watch CNN/Fox from canada and frankly I see that in spite what you say democrats won the last election

Actually, conservative pro-gun, anti-abortion Democrats won the last election. The wealthy, condescending liberals like Ned Lamont are the ones who lost!

Re:Church?

[Saint_Waldo]

A year after it's release, yes the 360 has its act together.
Yes, right when people are considering buying one.

You are right, downloader behavior is an A-Prime Top-Of-The-List consideration for my console purchases, and always has been. The compatible games on my shelf, the improvement over my current model, the accrued investment in interface familiarity and any personal brand loyalty all take a back seat to that one, crucial, console defining feature.

And if you're not buying either, why do you care how the downloader behaves? Because I care about the truth, maybe?

You understand that even when being truthful, one can obfuscate to the point of being an asshole. Well, maybe you don't

Download while I was at church for Christmas

[Anonymous Coward]

You must be a Unitarian. Fucking Catholics have no wireless access and the powerstrip situation is abysmal.

Re:Download while I was at church for Christmas

[billster0808]

What about Catholics who abstain?

Re:Download while I was at church for Christmas

[Reality Master 101]

Beats my Amish brethren, where we stare at a block of wood with a painted road scene, while thine other players make "clomp clomp" noises to simulate the horse and buggy racing.

Re:Download while I was at church for Christmas

[MiniMax333]

Kinda puts the Pope's speech on technology into perspective.

Re:Download while I was at church for Christmas

[dangitman]

When your womenfolk cook dinner, does one of your brothers paint a sign that says "Cooking..." and a progress bar underneath it?

Re:Download while I was at church for Christmas

[wheresdrew]

Jesus fuck! Where are my mod points?!? ^.^

PS-> I'd have give you doubleplus mod points had you said "brethren" instead of "brothers."

Re:Download while I was at church for Christmas

[Lumpy]

sit closer to the cardinals office in the left side front row.

I usually get wireless access on my Nikoa 770 there and the passphrase for the accesspoint named "cardinal phang" is "naughtyboys"

creeps me out though.

Realisitic

[dj961]

When someone tells me a game looks realistic, it makes me think they don't go out all that often. Honestly the screenshots don't look bad as long as you only look at the thumbnails, still I'm sure plenty of people will buy this title 'cause the graphics look "realistic." Woe to the gamer that desires gameplay.

Re:Realisitic

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't have to buy it. It's free.

Re:Realisitic

[DrEldarion]

I can't believe you're bashing, of all games, Gran Tuismo for lack of gameplay.

Re:Realisitic

[jsheedy]

That is always the opinion of a particular time period. I remember playing the first Leaderboard on the C64 and people would talk about how realistic it is. During that time, I guess that was.

Re:Realisitic

[Anonymous Coward]

Even when they get the graphics to resemble real life it will still be 2D and there will be no g-force etc.

It's the whole game play vs graphics argument that has always been running. Just like the whole special fx vs plot argument in films.

I don't wish to pay £50 for a game which is just a re-hash of the last one with nicer imagery.

Re:Realisitic

[gorfie]

While not perfect the graphics are the best I've seen for a racing game thus far. The trees and grass could use alot of work and the cars themselves, while fantastic relative to other games, still show signs of being rendered. The graphics are still impressive and it is enough to make most gamers (including myself) want to try the game out. And if the gameplay is good (I wouldn't know) then all those gamers trying it out will likely shell out some cash to own it.

Re:Realisitic

[HappySqurriel]

Well, it depends on whether you want your "Realistic Racing Simulation" to have realistic racing simulated well ...

Gran Turismo is a game where there is a massive ammount of attention to detail in practically every portion of the Graphics and Sound but when it comes to the actual racing simulation it lacks a lot of realism that SNES/Genesis games had. The fact is that there is no damage, or consequences, for getting into a collision with another driver; remember a valid strategy in GT has been to bank off of other cars to get ahead of them.

I'm not a racing game fan, but from what I understand GT is not a game that is above reproach when it comes to gameplay.

Re:Realisitic

[miyako]

I'm not sure that you can completely pin this problem with the game designers though. As I understand it, most car companies will only license out the rights to use their cars in games under the condition that the car is basically shown only in pristine, un-wrecked condition.
I've never been a fan of the GT games, but I think that for a lot of people one of the biggest appeals is the wide variety of cars to choose from, so it's not like the designers can really just say "well screw you car companies" and go with fewer cars, or made up cars, since having the wide selection of real cars is what gets a lot of people to buy the game in the first place.

Re:Realisitic

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do people automatically assume that because a game has amazing graphics that the gameplay is immediately questionable?

And when a game has lousy graphics, many people automatically assume it's got fantastic gameplay to compensate.

I think some folks need to learn that a game can look great AND play great, and that a poor looking game can also play like crap. There's no rules here that says it has to be one or the other.

Re:Realisitic

[smash]

For a lot of people, gt4 is a "toy" as opposed to a game. sure you need to win races to earn money/cars, but that lasts a couple of months - once you've got a decent money supply, GT is more about tweaking cars and playing time-attack, drifting, racing your friends, and otherwise using the game as a sort of "simulator", for lack of a better word.

There's reasons for the lack of car damage - to be honest, it doesn't phase me. The "consequences" of crashing are that you screw up your lap time, screw up your cool drifting video, etc.

My 2c.

Re:Realisitic

[stewbacca]

Why do people automatically assume that because a game has amazing graphics that the gameplay is immediately questionable?

Because I have 12 years of sim racing experience as data collection proving this very correlation? Or perhaps it is the simple rule of software design trade-offs. Budgets and deadlines don't allow for every aspect of the game to be the best, so the developer has to make a decision regarding the which aspect his particular game will emphasize. Lately, it seems 99% of the games have taken the graphics-over-realism mode, since that obviously moves more product.

There are too many examples to cite, so just stick with the original assumption that if it looks great, the driving sucks and vice-versa, because it is true. Sadly, the best driving game STILL is Grand Prix Legends which is nearing 10-years old now. Just look at the online community supporting it with various add-ons and visual upgrades. I think it is time for someone to be "brave" and just remake the game with modern graphic capabilities. I would pay $100 or more for Grand Prix Legends II, as long as EA "Sports" isn't involved.

Re:Realisitic

[iainl]

Substitute "most car companies" with "Honda" and you'll find the actual case. Polyphony consider them to be too important in their native Japanese market to leave out, so everyone else gets pristine equipment, too.

You'll notice how most other manufacturers you'd want in a racing game (Ferrari, Lamborghini, Lotus, Ford, RUF (as the standard Porsche cheat), Aston Martin, Jaguar, Pagani and so on and so forth) get the merry crap beaten out of them in the Project Gotham Racing series.

Re:Realisitic

[meringuoid]

You'll notice how most other manufacturers you'd want in a racing game (Ferrari, Lamborghini, Lotus, Ford, RUF (as the standard Porsche cheat), Aston Martin, Jaguar, Pagani and so on and so forth) get the merry crap beaten out of them in the Project Gotham Racing series.

Indeed, Aston Martin in particular probably don't mind seeing their cars wrecked. Their top bit of product placement has always been James Bond, and 007 has never been an especially careful driver...

It's official!

[Anonymous Coward]

"On Christmas Eve, Sony released the Gran Turismo HD demo to the U.S. and Japan Playstation 3s. [...] I let it download while I was at church for Christmas. And there you have it - we have a new & improved Santa Claus. It is called the Internet, and it encourages you to go to church.

Re:It's official!

[Anonymous Coward]

It is called the Internet, and it encourages you to go to church.

Well, everything has *some* side effects.

Other than that it's a great drug, though.

Re:It's official!

[Anonymous Coward]

It is called the Internet, and it encourages you to go to church

Nonsense! The time could just as easily have been spent watching porn instead.

Re:It's official!

[Anonymous Coward]

It is called the Internet, and it encourages you to go to church Nonsense! The time could just as easily have been spent watching porn instead. That's what he said. You're being redundant. Get with the lingo.

It's good to know...

[heartless_]

I wonder what a car crash looks like in HD? Guess we'll still be waiting to find out! And isn't it funny that there isn't any weather effects. Any console can make pretty, but static environments. Let me know when "fake" backgrounds become something more than a pretty painting that you get to look at.

Re:It's good to know...

[KingNaught]

No crash effects in this game, I rammed my car into a railing at top speed and it just came to a stop.

Re:It's good to know...

[Bobzibub]

no car crashes... You just bump into a static fence.
But I really really suck at driving. Especially with the traction control and the stability control off.

Nobody lend me your car! = )

Re:It's good to know...

[imasu]

This is a Gran Turismo game, after all. None of them have ever had crashes as far as I know.

Re:It's good to know...

[Grand]

while every version was in its development stage, they would always say that it was going to include damage. Then when it was released, of course it didnt. This is my biggest problem with the game.

Re:It's good to know...

[oGMo]

You're whining there aren't weather effects in a 10-car, 2-track demo game? And that the ... backgrounds are fake? You should be asking about how the cars handle, how good the physics are, and similar. Gran Turismo leans far more toward simulation racing.

If you want spectacular HD wrecks and destructible tracks and all that, get Full Auto 2... it's got all that and more.

Re:It's good to know...

[heartless_]

Last time I watched a race any car that bumped into the wall or another car didn't win the race... in every GT game it has never been about sim racing unless you put it on time trials. It is a joke of a racing game and the only thing it has ever gotten right was it's licensing deal to include real car brands. Let me know when I don't just pick the fastest car and bounce off the AI drivers and fake walls to get around every corner.

Re:It's good to know...

[Osty]

Last time I watched a race any car that bumped into the wall or another car didn't win the race... in every GT game it has never been about sim racing unless you put it on time trials. It is a joke of a racing game and the only thing it has ever gotten right was it's licensing deal to include real car brands. Let me know when I don't just pick the fastest car and bounce off the AI drivers and fake walls to get around every corner.

For the reasons you mentioned, Gran Turismo has never been a sim racer. It's a collect-em-all game with cars with a bit of piss-poor racing tossed in to facilitate collection (just like Pokemon is a collect-em-all game with a bit of piss-poor RPG tossed in to facilitate collection). If you want a simulation racer, the best you're going to get on a Playstation is the TOCA or Colin McRae series. Forza on Xbox (and soon, Forza 2 on Xbox 360) blows away Gran Turismo in terms of racing realism and fun. GTR2 on the PC (and supposedly soon on Xbox 360) is currently the pinnacle of racing simulation.

Pick up Gran Turismo if you just absolutely have to see a Model T in a video game. Pick up Forza if you want to play a simulation racer on a console. Pick up GTR 2 if you're hardcore.

Re:It's good to know...

[LuisAnaya]

I thought that I was going to see blood from the spectators after a crash. :) (then the ambulance siren... the medivac... :) ).

Re:It's good to know...

[Anonymous Coward]

Pick up GTR 2 if you're hardcore.

Or give "Live for Speed" a try.

Re:It's good to know...

[Aqua OS X]

Yup. I don't care how pretty the cars are, the fact that they're indestructible is incredibly lame.

Re:It's good to know...

[m-wielgo]

I used to be in the same boat, until I began racing NASCAR (Racing Season 2002/2003) online a couple years back. Going 100 laps (with good times and great track position) and then getting spun out into the wall sucks... a lot! You're out of the race, and it completely takes the fun out of it. Granted, I love just messing around in practice laps and seeing how many crashes I can cause, but when it comes down to actually racing, I either turned it off or put on minimal damage.

Re:It's good to know...

[donaldm]

GT games have never shown crash damage.

Whenever I purchased a racing game for my kids I always made sure the game showed crash damage otherwise my kids and their friends would not play it. Still they mainly played racing games just to crash the cars so games like Twisted Metal and Destruction Derby (there are many others) where the most popular. I do have friends who rave about GT but they are not interested in crashing the car so crash damage is not important and in many ways it would detract from the game.

Re:It's good to know...

[chicagotypewriter]

I've followed GT games from the beginning and was always let down by this, but one explanation I have read (for probably each version of the game) was that certain car manufacturers didn't want their cars to be damaged...probably the rare or smaller manufacturers, or the custom tuners. Since they couldn't get all cars damaged, they wouldn't make only some cars take damage.

Re:It's good to know...

[jallen02]

Oblivion has pretty good weather and environmental effects. There are times when I am playing it that if it starts raining I actually feel my mood shift slightly more somber and I actually will use the games "wait" command to avoid playing in the rain, so I think there are some games out there that get the environment aspects of the game.

Availability for other systems

[RiotXIX]

Are there any plans to release this for other hardware and OSs? Speaking as an Amiga OS 4 user it's one of my concerns.

Shill?

[forgotten_my_nick]

The whole piece reads like one of those shill adverts you get from some marketing drone.

The OP doesn't work for Zipatoni by any chance?

Looks beatiful but plays like crap

[KingNaught]

It looks fantastic very detailed and relistic rendering, but the gameplay and response are crap, the controls just felt realy slugish Maybe I'm just used to more arcade style mechanics but I realy didn't like the demo that much.

Re:Looks beatiful but plays like crap

[Brett Buck]

It drives a lot like a real car. Hate to break it to anyone, but a Suzuki Cappicino IS really sluggish on the steering and a turd overall. The GT series is not nearly as game so much as it is a simulator. I have had two kissin' cousins of the cars in the, uh, game (GT4), and they drove very much like the real thing. To the point that when I was driving around Infineon, my (simulated) Lotus Turbo HC wanted to get sideways right before the carousel in exactly the same place as my (real life) Lotus Esprit S1 got sideways when I drove the track in 1990. I still can't see why it did it there, but, it was simulating a REAL effect.

    The fact of the matter is that driving around in street cars in races can get tedious pretty quickly and you soon discover that your "super hot rod" passenger car has all sorts of bad things about it when you start pushing it to the limit. You either like it, or you get bored with it. But don't blame the simulation for having the same characteristics.

            Brett

Fake review

[Anonymous Coward]

From the time I read this:

As a side note, my parents wanted to try out the PS3 so I let them play the F1 Championship Edition, Motorstorm, and GT HD demos, and they preferred F1 because it was easier to drive. GT was second hardest and Motorstorm totally confused them as the tracks aren't well defined."

I realized that it was a fake review only trying to boost the PS3 image against the popularity of the Wii and how older non-gamers are getting into it.

Contradictory

[Tx]

Visually, the game is by far one of the best for the PS3.

No. It's either "one of the best", or it's "by far the best", it can't be both. Make up your mind and get back to us.

Re:Contradictory

[Anonymous Coward]

The best is definitely one of the best. Why wouldn't #1 be in the top 10?

Re:Contradictory

[Anonymous Coward]

Say there are 100 games. 10 have score 9 and the rest have score 3, higher is better. Then a game that scores 9 is "by far one of the best" (one of the ten, and has a large - "by far" - margin of 6 points).

Yeah, contrived. But I had to disprove!

Wow So Next Gen OMG

[Anonymous Coward]

some extremely visually impressive effects like the sky reflecting off the roof of your car.

Haha, well I guess we shouldn't mention that the sky has been reflecting off cars' roofs ever since Gran Turismo on the PSX? Ahh, hype, gotta love it.

Re:Wow So Next Gen OMG

[Surt]

But cmon, this is an HD sky reflecting off an HD roof!

Re:Wow So Next Gen OMG

[ozbird]

Haha, well I guess we shouldn't mention that the sky has been reflecting off cars' roofs ever since Gran Turismo on the PSX?

I wouldn't know - like in the real world, I prefer to drive from the driver's seat (1st person), not hanging off an invisible trailer towed behind the car.
Like another poster mentioned, the lack of G-force feedback on your body takes away some of the driving experience, but you can compensate a little by leaning into corners...

Re:Wow So Next Gen OMG

[syle]

He didn't say it's new, he said it's impressive.

Re:Wow So Next Gen OMG

[JFMulder]

Sony exec was quoted saying :
The sky doesn't reflect on a car roof until we say it does!

Re:Wow So Next Gen OMG

[Anonymous Coward]

Try not to kid yourself too much.

Re:Wow So Next Gen OMG

[ZERO1ZERO]

Actually the sky in GT on the PSX did not reflect off the roof, it only /looked/ like it did. It's was basically another semi transparent texture layer on top of the cars that moved relative to the cars velocity. A smart way to cut down on the GFX processing required. Whether this same trick is used in GT HD or it is indeed a real reflection I don't know. But who cares about details anyway?

Re:Wow So Next Gen OMG

[stewbacca]

We can just drop the whole HD moniker any day now. I mean, I stopped hyping my Quadraphonic records about 5 years ago. Sometimes you just gotta let go.

Same ol' GT

[Nfinit]

I love GT, GT4 is the reason I finally broke down and picked up a Slimline PS2, but until a working car damage system is implemented-- something Sega GT on the Dreamcast holds to this day over the Gran Turismo games-- it's really hard to take GT HD seriously anymore. And that's not even getting into other advancements made such as driving lines, more than six cars on the track and working driver AI.

Re:Same ol' GT

[Anonymous Coward]

It's my understanding there is no damage system, as the car manufacturers are not interested in you seeing their cars all mashed up... and the large selection of real cars is one of the things that makes GT special. This is why racing games with serious collision damage systems usually have fictional cars... like the Sparrowhawk... which looks kinda like a Pantera... but not.

Re:Same ol' GT

[Nfinit]

PGR2 featured car damage, as did Forza Motorsport. So did the Rallisport Challenge games, and I'm pretty sure you could flip a Ferrari in Outrun 2. Even games like Sega GT and Test Drive Unlimited feature gameplay-related consequences for reckless driving, something Gran Tourismo doesn't bother with. That's not even getting into the PC stuff like GTR. It's not a matter of the car makers not wanting car damage. It's a matter of Polyphony Digital being content with the gradual tweaking of GT1 for the past 10 years.

Re:Same ol' GT

[Criterion]

There will be no damage system in GT until the car manufacturers allow their cars to be shown all broke'd up.

Re:Same ol' GT

[Criterion]

I think it's more an issue of how many cars are in each game, and the licensing of each model. It may be more cost efficient to pay for the luxury of busting up a few dozen models than for several hundred. I do not know the specific legalities of this, or if there have been updates in their stance on this, but I have run a reasonable well known GT forum for 5+ years and this is the commonly stated thing about damage, even from the game devs years ago on the official Sony forums (the old, now defunct ones).

Re:Same ol' GT

[Bastian]

I don't know about the car libraries in all those games, but I do know that Gran Turismo features a whole lot of cars from a *lot* of manufacturers, far more than I've seen in any other game that features real cars. And for GT to include a damage model, they'd have to get all of those manufacturers to agree to it. It might not be a big deal for some of the smaller or less popular manufacturers, but if it's Honda or Toyota that's digging in their heels on the subject, I can see where that would easily be enough to keep Polyphony from including a damage model.

Re:Same ol' GT

[tompaulco]

Damage also requires more processing power to render the car looking differently. I always wondered why they didn't just go ahead and let the cars look pristine, but to at leat make the damage affect the cars, aerodynamics, suspension, and so forth. If the cars performance would at least take damage then it would force people to drive the simulation more responsibly. But I bet there are plenty of people that would complain because they are just trying to whip through the game and get as many cars as possible.

Re:Same ol' GT

[Criterion]

It might well require more processing power to render the cars differently.. but this has been no hurdle to games which do indeed show car damage.

I really wish it would penalize people who do things like utilize "rolling guardrails" to get around corners, as it is there have to be way too many checks and balances for online competitions (which does seem strange for a game that has historically had no online head to head ability, but which I can assure you does happen on a regular basis). So many rules.. 2 tires on track at all times, no touching other cars or guardrails, replays required for verification, etc.. etc. Makes for a WHOLE lot of work for the people manning the events.

Re:Same ol' GT

[I'll Provide The War]

Microsoft received permission for Forza which was released almost 2 years ago and included 42 manufacturers. http://www.forzastudios.com/features/cars/

Impressions

[oGMo]

A few impressions ... GT:HD is decent, but I don't know if I'd call it the best-looking game the PS3 has to offer, but I can't comment too much on this as I'm still sadly playing in standard def. However, people previously commenting on how this was a high-res GT4 need to take a closer look. Any criticism directed toward it is rather silly, though; it's free, it's fun, and it looks good. You may want more, but come on, it's free.

That said, Resistance has been my main focus. I don't even like first-person shooters, normally. The polygon count is nice, but since I'm playing this in SD it's not really of primary concern; a really solid Insomniac shooter is. If you've ever played Ratchet and Clank, you know how Insomniac can put together a level and pace things: though far different than R&C, their style and skill is very evident. They toss lots of things to shoot at you, and give you lots of stuff to shoot with, which are the two fundamental things a shooter needs; they did this in R&C, and they did it again in Resistance. It's not some fundamentally different, revolutionary game; but it is a very fun FPS that has kept even me, who gets bored after minutes of play with other FPS's, interested enough to keep playing. I guess it gets a lot of the little things right.

The other game I have at the moment is Full Auto 2. This is a blast, too, pun not entirely unintended. To summarize, the game is basically the bastard child of Need for Speed and Twisted Metal. The races can feel intensely fast-paced, and the battle arenas play out much the same way as TM. The story is ignorable; I have. The one noticeable annoyance is what seems to be stuttery audio/video ... but strangely, this only occurs during menu sequences and cutscenes. If it's an intentional effect, it's not a good one. Fortunately it's not a nuisance when you actually play the game.

Re:Impressions

[Xterrajamie]

Your first paragraph sums it up quite nicely, ITS FREE. I read a bit of the responses to this article before heading to work, and was somewhat miffed at all the folks out there who constantly complain about this and that concerning any particular game. I, for one, have really enjoyed the GT series, and have been playing them since GT3. When I downloaded GT: HD, my eyes literally watered when the opening trailer started. (I purchased a 46" DLP prior to the x360 launch last year, so, in HD, it truly is an amazing-looking simulation.) Your statement on some saying GT:HD is a high-res GT4 made me think that those stating said statement are full of smelly excrement. I've played GT4 in the 1080i setting on my DLP, and GT:HD is at least 3-5 times better-looking. (Frankly, I think the differences are night and day, based on pixelation, frame rate, and detail.) My only 'complaint' is the GT Force feedback wheel (for GT4) works well, except the 'force-feedback' isn't, um, forceful at all. (Probably will be patched soon.) I too, have R:FOM, and think that game is quite nice. Sure, let the Gears of War guys laugh and laugh- I'm waiting for what's available on the PS3 after it's been out as long as the 360 (at this point), and developers have had time to 'settle in' with the technology (then we'll see who's laughing). One of the best things about Resistance is the fact that frame rates never drop. Period. When I was in the latter stages of the game, I found myself wasting all the enemies, and then just wandering around, and looking around at the wonderfully detailed world I was playing in. FPS's have been pretty much played-out in any scenario one can think of, but, like you, Resistance kept (and is still keeping) me coming back for more. Haven't tried Full-Auto, a few reviews were horrible, and, at $60/pop, I'd prefer to wait for something like Rainbow 6: Vegas (I live there, matter-of-factly), or Motorstorm. On a side note, my PS3 gamertag is the same as the one I use here, so feel free to add me, but let me know who you are...

How do the visuals compare with 360 games?

[the computer guy nex]

The launch PS3 titles are comparable with the Xbox 360 launch titles, but cannot touch recent releases such as Gears of War/NFSC. How does this game stack up?

Re:How do the visuals compare with 360 games?

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you really need to ask? I mean come on, it's got "HD" in it's name! You can make anything better just by adding "HD." Gran Turismo HD, HD-DVD, HDTV, Pringles HD...

US Army Wants YOU!

[FFFish]

Did you get the US Army advertisement when you clicked for videos?

What a nice touch of Christmas there. "Son, you've changed." Well, yah, having one's left leg blown off by an IED can do that to a person.

Did I see it right?

[SharpFang]

There are no weather effects
does not allow you to race against other drivers
There are 10 cars in all. You start with the Suzuki Cappuccino and work your way up by beating goal times for each car on the given track. There is only one track

ONE track, ONE car to choose from on startup (plus unlockable 9), single-player only, driving against time.

Is it more fun than Lotus Esprit Turbo Challenge series for Amiga 500? (playable for 4 players in real time - 2 split screens, about 10 tracks to choose from plus unlockables, 2 cars, weather effects affecting driving experience, including snowfall making the road almost invisible, 20 opponents sometimes displaying unfriendly behaviour, various sceneries and good music)

Re:Did I see it right?

[Kirin Fenrir]

Gran Turismo HD is a FREE product to show off the GT5 engine; considering that, "10 cars/single player only" isn't too shabby.

Re:Did I see it right?

[imsabbel]

What part of "DEMO" didnt get into your tiny, preoccupied with "back then games were better", mind?

Re:Did I see it right?

[SlashDev]

I think the poster assumed that the downloadable demo will have to be burned and played on his PS3.

To be honest, I did as well. What's the point of a graphic demo if you're going to play it on your PC?

Blurfest

[Handlarn]

What's the point of having in-game videos available for download for a game called Gran Turismo HD when the video resolution is so far from HD quality that it isn't even funny? Seriously, how is anyone able to determine if the game looks good from those videos?

Re:Blurfest

[dangitman]

Maybe because resolution is not the only factor in visual quality, and far from the only important quality in choosing a game?

Re:Blurfest

[Handlarn]

Yeah, maybe?

Seriously, the game is called Gran Turismo HD, and the videos are what? 320*180 resolution? I want video games that are HDTV because otherwise I've spent a lot of cash on my TV for nothing... Otherwise I could just get a PS2 or Xbox instead. I want to see the DIFFERENCE, get it?

Re:Blurfest

[Saint_Waldo]

You don't post "videos". You post the race data. Then the data is downloaded and the simulator plays the data in the game-engine. So they play back at whatever game resolution you are playing the game in. Please do some research before you post. It would also help if you actually played the FREE DEMO before commenting, lest you reveal an agenda that differs from real appreciation or honest criticism. You don't like PS3? Fine, play your system, and be happy, I heartily support whatever choice you made as right for you. Allow that some purchasers of the PS3 feel the same; you don't see me pissing all over Geometry Wars, now, do you? BTW, it's really cool to see the line some 13-year-old from Wisconsin squeezed out of that little Cappucino.

I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It Well

[Anonymous Coward]

I heard someone talking about the guys from Bizarre(Project Gotham Racing) got their first look at the demo and are despondent. Not really surprising when an early demo comes out and your own fans are going nuts over the driving model and graphics.

They had to run PGR3 in low rez(1024x600) just to get the game to run at 30fps and now GT is running at 1080p and 60fps and graphically blows it away. That's over three times the resolution for GT.

It is scary to think what PS3 games are going to look like a year from now.

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[Nfinit]

Yeah, I'm sure the guys at Bizarre are heartbroken thier launch day arcade racer released a year ago isn't getting the same attention as a free edition of the GT series. No, wait-- if the guys who make the PGR games are racing game fans (and logic dictates they must be)-- what they're really dispondent over is that after 10 years, all Polyphony Digital has really been able to do is put better reflective surfaces onto thier cars than Bizarre.

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[HappySqurriel]

I heard someone talking about the guys from Bizarre(Project Gotham Racing) got their first look at the demo and are despondent. Not really surprising when an early demo comes out and your own fans are going nuts over the driving model and graphics.

I simply don't believe you ...
As a general rule, anything an Anonymous Coward says on Slashdot which doesn't have a source is a lie.

They had to run PGR3 in low rez(1024x600) just to get the game to run at 30fps and now GT is running at 1080p and 60fps and graphically blows it away. That's over three times the resolution for GT.

I don't know too much about PGR3 specifically, but I do remember that up until the final month before the XBox 360's launch most developers were still using their "Alpha Dev-kits" (PowerPC 970MP dual core and Radeon based GPU) which would compile the same code but were very different in performance than the XBox 360; being that PGR 3 was a launch game it wouldn't surprise me to find out they didn't have the opportunity to optimize the engine to the system before it was released (meaning it underperformed by quite a bit).

It is scary to think what PS3 games are going to look like a year from now.

We have hit a point of diminishing returns in graphics, even if you had a system that was 4 times as powerful as the PS3 you probably would not notice a dramatic improvement in the graphics of games being released for it. The PS3 and XBox 360 will have games which look (basically) identical on both systems because neither system is that much more powerful than the other.

Fanboyism

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, gotta say that from reading this, the wii and 360 fanboys need to just shut the hell up. Its a DEMO you cant expect to see everything the game offers effect-wise in a 650meg download.

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[Anonymous Coward]

PGR3 was plagued with framerate issues until just before it launched. I have to imagine lowering the resolution to 1024x600 was a last minute desperation move to get the game to 30fps. I can imagine it is disheartening to see a new racing game on vastly more powerful hardware come along, 1920x1080 at 60fps with graphics that have never seen before is amazing for what is essentially code running right near launch for the PS3. I would assume that the PGR3 guys are seriously looking at making games for the PS3. Being stuck working on the weaker 360 hardware is probably more depressing to the Bizarre guys than any single game demo.

The crowds are a little static

[SnarfQuest]

The crowds are a little static, but look alive enough to be believable

What's with that? Last time I watched a race, they had this gorilla throwing barrels down a series of ramps, and all the fans had to climb ladders or jump over the barrels on the ramps. When a fan reached the top, the ramps rearranged themselves, and it all started over again. What's with these lasy fans nowadays?

Church?! Church?!

[Anonymous Coward]

"I let it download while I was at church for Christmas."
This is Slashdot!
Who let the Christ-lover in here?

Why don't you go off and talk to your imaginary friend in the sky, Christ-lover?
We are all reasonable, morally superior, open-minded, non-bigoted Democrats here. No need for your Jew-loving, Christ-loving homo-hating Republican ass here, or your buddy The Jew Puppet Bu$Hitler Chimpy McHaliburten.

F'ing, Christ-lover.

So, when will they stop?

[Warbringer87]

You can keep making the shinier graphics, but eventually (like whats happening these years) it really, really, REALLY, doesn't really matter much, in comparison to games with poorer graphics.

Re:So, when will they stop?

[Nasarius]

And eventually you reach the uncanny valley, though I suppose that's not quite as applicable to a racing game. IMO, we reached "good enough" about seven years ago with Quake 3. Anything beyond that serves no functional purpose. Fun with serviceable graphics beats flashy and shallow any day.

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[powerlord]

We have hit a point of diminishing returns in graphics, even if you had a system that was 4 times as powerful as the PS3 you probably would not notice a dramatic improvement in the graphics of games being released for it. The PS3 and XBox 360 will have games which look (basically) identical on both systems because neither system is that much more powerful than the other.

This may (or may not) be true in terms of what the graphics card/chip can deliver, however the larger Disk capacity might mean more variation in pre-rendered assets that can be loaded on the fly to create a more visually diverse scene.

Slashdot ....

[Culture]

... church and Christmas? Obviously astroturfing by Sony PR Flacks. This could not be an actual slashdot participant.

Know what slashdot?

[Anonymous Coward]

A lot of you are pretty fucking dumb.

Re:Know what slashdot?

[Anonymous Coward]

No shit.
News-fucking-flash: 99% of all human beings are fucking morons.
On /. only 98% are dumb idiots. So we're doing pretty good here...

GT series is a driving simulator

[jimminy_cricket]

I've seen several comments on here mentioning the lack of weather effects, the single player mode, and the apparent slowness of the game. I think the point that is being missed is that the GT is series is a driving simulator first and a racing game second. Of all the racing games I've ever played, none is as close to how a car really behaves as the GT series of games. The focus is not on cool explosions or stunts like most other racing games, but on becoming a better driver. The challenge and fun part to me is finding that perfect line and the perfect braking point. Almost everything else is a distraction.

The game is also absolutely gorgeous. The details in just the asphalt are amazing. And these kinds of details are much appreciated as every visual clue helps me understand the characteristics of the road which better enables me to drive a quicker lap.

Re:GT series is a driving simulator

[imbaczek]

Looks like you've never tried LFS or rFactor.

Re:GT series is a driving simulator

[Jeremy Erwin]

The game is also absolutely gorgeous. The details in just the asphalt are amazing. And these kinds of details are much appreciated as every visual clue helps me understand the characteristics of the road which better enables me to drive a quicker lap.

Assuming that the physics model reflects the eye candy, yes...

Re:GT series is a driving simulator

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the point that is being missed is that the GT is series is a driving simulator first and a racing game second.

More like car showroom first, contest second and a driving _simulator_ last.

Re:GT series is a driving simulator

[Dibblah]

Uhuh.

If you think GT? is a simulator and you have a PC and wheel (yes, your Driving Force Pro works with the PC), try out Live For Speed

It really is worth it. The only thing you'll be wanting is a motion platform, which is something that LFS can output to :)

Re:GT series is a driving simulator

[Anonymous Coward]

And when you get to be 16, you can drive real car!

Re:GT series is a driving simulator

[smash]

Whilst live for speed is good (yes, I have it, and yes I have a wheel), the GT series still "feels" more like a real car the way it handles. And yes, I have a Nissan 180sx to compare it to :D

Re:GT series is a driving simulator

[iainl]

LFS is good, but I'd much rather play GTR-2 myself - I think the guys have done wonderful things in their little team with LFS, but it's significantly worse if you look at it as a game, rather than its core job of being an online simulation for hardcore nerds. As someone who isn't the greatest online racer, it's off-putting to the point that I just gave up.

Re:GT series is a driving simulator

[stewbacca]

I would suggest you need to play more games, if you think GT is the pinnacle of racing realism. And for the love of God, I hope you at least bought pedals and a wheel. Your intentions are good though, in that you have fun driving for fast lap times. If there were only more people like us, there would be more racers and less arcade games.

You got it righ in saying that, "everything else is a distraction". Any person who claims he won't play the game because it doesn't have car damage obviously isn't playing for "realism" reasons. The last time I checked, being a successful driver meant NOT getting car damage and getting fast lap times. The whole point of a simulation is to take the danger and costs out of real world training events and to improve productivity. A side benefit is the fun-factor (read my thesis if you really want to be bored to tears).

Maybe I can make a "realistic" racing game that puts these wreck-happy fools in the hospital for 3 months every time they refuse to lift (most likely their thumb off a button, snicker) for a corner and ram into the wall at 120 mph.

Downloadable demo

[pajeromanco]

I don't know you, but this is the first time I hear about a downloadable demo for a console. I guess the PS3 doesn't have some of the copy protection mechanisms the PS2 has, at least for CDs. If this is true, is the PS3 able to play PS2 backups as well? Some light on this might be interesting.

Re:Downloadable demo

[nekura]

What?

You download the demo via your PS3 over a little thing called the internet. How'd you jump from downloadable demo to lack of copy protection mechanism?

Re:Downloadable demo

[derrickh]

The Xbox360 says 'Hi'.

D

Re:Downloadable demo

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know you, but this is the first time I hear about a downloadable demo for a console.

Someone mod this guy (-1: Ignorant) or (-1: lived in a cave for the last year)

Sixaxis

[Dennis_123]

The left analog allows you to steer. What about the gyros in the Sixaxis? You have that new next generation controller but can not use it in full effect? Looks like only Nintendo got it right: http://youtube.com/watch?v=AdEZ6rnr1f8 The video demonstrates a Wii racing game with the Wiimote.

Re:Sixaxis

[Deadguy2322]

Polyphony would rather make a realistically-handling game with tight controls than a baby-sitting, handholding tardfest for 5-year-olds. Fuck Nintendo, and FUCK YOU.

Re:Sixaxis

[Anonymous Coward]

Motorstorm will let you race with the motion sensing abilities of the controller just like Wii's remote. With the truck you use the sixaxis just like a steering wheel. With the motorbike you control which way you lean (useful in the air and for pulling wheelies!)

Sony got it right too.. just it isn't their only selling point. :)

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[Anonymous Coward]

I doubt it. Any assets used in a scene would still have to be loaded into ram and since both units have similar amounts of ram I doubt one will support a greater variety of textures in a single scene than another.

Insane?

[Anonymous Coward]

So, were you born insane, or did it just happen as you got older, or did you do a lot of drinking, or what?

I guess you probably don't know the answer, being completely nuts and everything.

Are you kidding me??

[Mizled]

My cousin brought over his PS3 the other day so I could check it out. All in all I wasn't impressed with the system. COD3 looks pretty good (and gameplay was good) and Resistance is alright but not that great. He also showed me the Gran Turismo Demo this article is referring to. It looks like CRAP. I mean this looks like regular Playstation graphics...the only thing that looks decent is the the replay mode but normal game play sucks. $650 for a Next Gen console? Please, my P4 gaming comp I built 4 years ago looks better than this thing. PC gaming FTW IMO.

Re:Are you kidding me??

[fistfullast33l]

$650 for a Next Gen console? Please, my P4 gaming comp I built 4 years ago looks better than this thing. PC gaming FTW IMO.

Ironically, I too have a P4 3ghz that I built about 3 years ago with a Radeon 9800 that I had to buy from Asia because the 256MB cards were so new they weren't being sold here yet. Now, I haven't upgraded a single piece of that machine since I built it. Perhaps I can get a game that would look as nice as this (FarCry wasn't too bad) but it runs slow as spit and definitely not at 1920x1080. More like 1280x1024 barely. Maybe you upgraded your PC a little bit to make it run faster, but the PS3 definitely has nicer graphics than mine, that's for sure.

Oh, and 1997 called. It wants its PC-fanboy back.

Re:Are you kidding me??

[ClamIAm]

I mean this looks like regular Playstation graphics

I didn't realize the PS3 was some kind of non-regular Playstation. Does that make it irregular?

Re:Are you kidding me??

[Tourney3p0]

Are you sure your TV doesn't just suck?

Re:Are you kidding me??

[Saint_Waldo]

So, tell me about this game your PC played where every spectator was a full 3D model that reacted to its environment? You know, the one that included things like tire-siping and door-locks on the model? The one that reflected absolutely everything in the game-environment correctly on every refelctive surface, including the cars 3 mirrors, not to mention the doors, wheels and windows? Yeah, that one where you could stare at a freeze-frame from your replay for about 15 minutes before you found any edge aliasing in the model, and even then it's only the dimple in the door for the door handle, and stuff like the tires and steering-wheel are completely edge-alias free? Yeah, the one that had the driver modeled (TWO in the rally car) during the entire simulation, including hand and head movements fitting to the actions of the players inputs? Yeah, I remember that game. Well, it wasn't really a game: it was actually a still rendered in about 3 hours by my buddy's pirated version of 3DStudio Max, but, hey, it blew me away and just because Sony and Advanced Simulations figured out how to do it in real time doesn't mean they deserve to exist and give this crap away for free.

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[Anonymous Coward]

What?

The PS3 isn't an x86 pc where you effectively have to dump all your level/working set of textures over a slow bus that is under control of a third party driver writer.

Modern graphics systems like the PS3 are constantly streaming lookup tables into both the RSX and Cell side of the system in a just in time manner. (Unless you are pc developer porting your DirectX code to the PS3 of course...)

Texture working set on consoles is roughly equivalent to RAM x effective bandwidth. The PS3 has a massive advantage thanks to the very developer friendly architecture.

Driving Experience

[Pikoro]

I have owned a Suzuki Cappuccino for the last 8 years and I can say first hand, the one in the game handles very close to the real thing. Only problem is the one in GT:HD doesn't accelerate nearly as quickly as my real one and the engine sounds are totally different.

The graphics for this game are excellent in my opinion, even though I am still in standard def.

Need to get one of those force feedback steering wheel thingies and give it a try.

Oh, BTW, the right analog stick CAN be used for gas and brakes.

Re:Driving Experience

[Saint_Waldo]

Historically, in all the GT games, the first car I worked to get was the car i own IRL, a subaru Legacy Wagon. Yes, it drives just like the real thing. Yes, you can "feel" that wagon compartment dragging in a turn just like real life. This is the attraction to the GT series: driving realism. Not "crash-realism", not "sky-realism", not even "race-adrenaline-realism", but the most real-feeling _driving_ simulation to date, period. And every one of their titles has delivered IMHO, even if you can't flip your car or watch your driver careen through the windshield. So, your experience is actually what I feel the developers of GT have always been attempting to create. And they've done an increasingly good job over the history of the series.

Not cool enough for me.

[suv4x4]

You know, it looks fine in 320x240 trailers, but in HD screenshots you can see it looks like any other game.

It's not good enough for me you guys! I don't wanna see stretched textures and low-polygon models anymore! I mean, it's next gen!

COME ON! And on top of that half the scenery is precomputed and static. For example, going into a tunnel of course drops shadows on your car since otherwise it'd be too jarring. But when outside and crossing the shadow of a tree on the street, the shadow magically remains below your car, as if it's a piece of black paper versus a FRIGGIN SHADOW.

Am I being a negative bastard? Are my expectations way too high? Do I want the impossible?

Well, forgive me for being hyped up by sony for years and years about how amazing PS3 gaming will be.

Re:Not cool enough for me.

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, I agree, the screenshots are underwhemling at best.
The buildings look worse than ones in TFC.
The mountains look pretty but plenty of maps out there have had nice Terragen'd backgrounds for years.

Flatout for the PC looks nicer than those screenshots does, IMO.

GTR2, not GT!

[Anonymous Coward]

Why play Gran Turismo when you could play GTR2? It's ten times the simulation that GT is.

GT HD demo alone worth a PS3

[webdev]

This is by far the best driving game I've ever seen or experienced. If you live for driving games and have an HD display the free demo is worth the cost of a ps3. Nothing comes close. Keep up the good work Sony!

Re:GT HD demo alone worth a PS3

[Slashcrap]

This is by far the best driving game I've ever seen or experienced. If you live for driving games and have an HD display the free demo is worth the cost of a ps3. Nothing comes close. Keep up the good work Sony!

While you're here, do you have any tips on how I can get my parents to buy me a PSP?

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[Anonymous Coward]

The PS3 has a massive advantage thanks to the very developer friendly architecture.

Oh, that's amusing. Very amusing. Where I work, we're all rolling our eyes at the PS3 architecture because unless we do a whole pile of custom work for it (like redesigning most of the engine we've licensed), our game will run on PS3 at about 1/3rd the speed of XBOX 360.

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait, let me get this straight...

A bunch of DirectX hacks are crying over the fact that you can't dump your shitty code onto the PS3...

I'm shocked! And to think of all that kewl code you've scavenged from NVidia's site and leaked Valve code to make things 'shiny' with 'teh shaders'!

Please, stick with the dying PC and flouring Xbox platforms, the PS3 isn't interested in another crappy FPS or RTS.

I need my GT fix :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

I bought a PS2 just for GT4. I will buy a PS3 for GT5... I may even buy one juste to play this demo :-)

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[AbRASiON]

This does not negate the fact that the PS3's "amazing blu ray optical disc!" at 50gb is effectively useless because the machine has 256/256mb of ram to work with, so all that extra storage space is BUNK unless the disc / drive is terrifyingly fast (it's not) and streams like GTA3 OR if the machine has / had more ram (it doesn't)

The PS3 may or may not be cool in some other areas but from a game perspective, unless you're talking FMV, the huge optical drive is abso-freaking-loutely useless.

Why?

[pupstah]

Why do people feel the need to tell us they "downloaded while at church" and other irrelevent data. In fact, in this case, it may make us think less of the person writing. ;)

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[Simon Garlick]

I heard someone talking about the guys from The Rest Of The World, and they don't care about whether or not the sunlight reflects off the roof of each car. They're too busy having fun, playing Nintendo.

The Interesting Subtext For The Game Industry

[EXTomar]

The history behind this game was that it was more or less Gran Turismo 4 on the PS3. Of course it was drawn out trying to figure out what else they could do with GT4 plus some more bells and whistles when someone realized that this was a dumb idea. Instead of putting more time into this game which would just be recycling, they stopped work on the game at this demo level and proceeded forward on a completely redesigned stuff that will be Gran Turismo 5.

The subtext in all of this is that "concepts" like this which are "stillborn" are often just squirreled away into servers and backup and never see the light of day. This stuff however was just quickly turned around into a great little demo that not only shows off the PS3 but gives a taste of what the future holds for GT5. The fact that it is *free* also goes a ways to generating good will. A win-win for all.

do visual effects make the game better?

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when is a game rated by its reflections off shiny surfaces? Or the dynamic generation of lifelike crowds on a race track?

While it is all nice and good to have more lifelike characters and scenery, is that now a way to rate a game? Sure, it is a way to rate its technical ability. But I remember when a game was judged for its diverse characters, weapons and levels, etc.

I guess Pac-Man would be a better game if they were in 3d and had shadows rendered beneath them. Or if the wind affected pigeons thrown in Duck Hunt, it would be a more entertaining game.

Not quite right.

[Warlock7]

...Contrast this with the F1 Championship Edition demo which uses the Left analog to steer and the Right analog to accelerate and decelerate.

In GTHD, you can also use the right analog to accelerate and decelerate in addition to being able to use the buttons.

GTR 2 Realisitic

[Anonymous Coward]

GTR 2 doesn't have that problem.

New experiences with the PS3

[MrJynxx]

I own both the 360/ps3 (and the wii, I know, stupid :)

I had an older style hdtv I picked up about 4 years ago. So I got the ps3 a few weeks back, hooked it up and was really not impressed with the ps3(no upscaling which really screwed me). Then gran turismo came out, i downloaded it, again. Bleh, not impressed at all.

So, today I decided to pick the Sony SXRD 50" LCD Projection TV, and after hours of dealing with boxing day lines I finally got it home, unpacked and set up (many hours later).

All I have to say is WOW! Gran Turismo looks amazing, I can really tell the difference now. At first I thought PGR3 looked better but now it's a totally different story. And when it comes to 1080p at first I was not a believer, but from what I've seen so far that's changed significantly. Damn, it's been mind boggling, hell even Rainbow 6 for the 360 looks way better.

So that got me thinking, the ps3 isn't so bad if you have a new tv, it's only bad when you have older style tv's(dont' like that personally) but now I'm not so pissed at the ps3(I like the 360 controller better though :)

And Gran Turismo is free and it does have a few things to do even if it's the same track over and over again..

MrJynx

The Gran Tusimo franchise

[h3]

Coincidentally, I'm in the midst of playing GT4 right now on the PS2. I'm trying to complete the 24hr Nurburgring event and for those of you not familiar with the series, this really means 24 hours. You can't save and come back to it later. You *can* pause the game, so it's not like you have to sit there for 24 hours, but still. My PS2 has been on for 3 days straight and I'm only 12:32:28:250 in.

Which illustrates, I think, where the GT franchise has gone wrong. I've been a huge fan of the series since the first edition, on PSX. It's made a wannabe riceboy out of me, in particular my fascination with the beast of a car called the Skyline. I even own one now, albeit the North American domestic market version. I don't play games as much as I used to and really, my PlayStations have become Gran Turismo machines. I bought my PS2 only after GT3 came out; I bought GT4 shortly after release more than a year and half ago.

And as I sit there, circling Nurburgring over and over and over (on lap 102 now), it's clear to me that this isn't fun anymore. Polyphony Digital lost sight of the "fun" aspect in GT3, I think. Endurance races existed before then, but in GT3, they got ludicrous and now, it's just completely insane. 24 hours??? For a single race??? And this is not the only one- there's another 24h hour one, plus a bunch of 8 hours. 2-4 hours was bad enough in the earlier versions.

I enjoy the technical aspects of the game - finding the line, the brake points, the differences between cars. But I can't also help think about all the things I don't like about the game while mindless doing this event. Like the utter shit AI in computer controlled cars. They drive like you don't exist, ramming you from behind as if you were invisible. And they make the same mistakes over and over. The lack of balance in the races - very few are actually challenging when you take a LM Fairlady against tuned production cars, or as in this case, a Minolota Toyota race car against LM cars. You could argue that I should pick cars that are more competitive and sometimes I do, but they don't make it easy to figure out what you are up against and with the potential "penalty" to have to do another 24 fucking hours if I lose, no, I'm not going to pick a competitive car.

Polyphony's strength, obviously, is their graphics wizardry- each new version takes your breath away. But they really need to rethink gameplay. Lose the ridiculous endurance races. Pare down the total number of events - it's ungodly and without the sense of satisifaction of "completing" a game, I feel less anticipation for the next one. Do something to make races more competitive - perhaps chose the opposing field based on the car the player brings in. Make the computer controlled cars mercy to the same physics as the player. Create bigger penalties for crashing (much has been said about how the auto manufacturers won't allow damage to appear on their cars, but there are other ways). And so on.

Buying the next GT edition has always been an automatic for me, but after this, I'm not so sure. When a game is more work than fun, what's the point?

Re:The Gran Tusimo franchise

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't like having to drive for 24 hours, then the next time you pit, switch to B-spec and let it race for you. Walk away from it. Go outside. Or don't, whatever. It doesn't care, it will still race either way.

Re:The Gran Tusimo franchise

[Brett Buck]

>And as I sit there, circling Nurburgring over and over and
>over (on lap 102 now), it's clear to me that this isn't fun
>anymore. Polyphony Digital lost sight of the "fun" aspect
>in GT3, I think. Endurance races existed before then, but
>in GT3, they got ludicrous and now, it's just completely
>insane. 24 hours??? For a single race??? And this is not
>the only one- there's another 24h hour one, plus a bunch of
>8 hours. 2-4 hours was bad enough in the earlier versions.

      Uh, you do know you can switch to B-Spec at the pitstops. right?

        Brett

Re:The Gran Tusimo franchise

[h3]

Uh, you do know you can switch to B-Spec at the pitstops. right?

No I didn't - thanks for the tip.

I haven't messed with B-spec mode much and had completely forgotten about it. For those not familiar: B-Spec is a "coaching" mode where you give guidance about when how hard to push it ("go slow", "push", etc), when to pass (umm... ALWAYS?), when to pit, etc. A feature until just this moment I found utterly unredeeming.

It's interesting - I have it on "push" and the driver is clocking in just a tad slower than my usual lap times, so it doesn't look like I'd lose my lead. I'll try letting it run for a bit by itself, which does dull some of the pain, but (and this is not directed at you), what does it say about gameplay when the best course of action is to walk away and just leave the computer drive itself? Even worse, I have to come back every two laps (12-13 minutes) to tell it to pit, so it's not like I can let it run over night while I sleep.

Re:The Gran Tusimo franchise

[h3]

Check that - it appears to know when to pit. Still not gonna let it go while I sleep though :p

Re:The Gran Tusimo franchise

[HorsePunchKid]

The thing that took the fun out of Gran Turismo for me, when GT4 came out, was that unlike in GT3, it was very difficult to set up a race that was close in GT4 without getting completely blown away. My favorite race series in GT3 was the Polyphony Digital Cup, in which you had to race a completely stock car against other stock cars. It took an awfully long time to complete (though nothing compared to this 24-hour stuff), but allowed you to hone your racing line for 20 laps on 10 different tracks against closely-matched opponents.

There's no point in me even keeping track of all these silly stats anymore, without that. You'd think the points system (distinct from the money system) they introduced in GT4 would have helped in this regard, but the fact that you can't determine the number of points the race is worth without actually beginning the race makes it all but worthless.

*sigh*... Here's hoping for a return to "fun" in GT5.

(P.S. Last time I tried the 24 Hours of Nurburgring, my power went out at 14.5 hours. I won't try again until I can get a UPS for my system.)

Re:The Gran Tusimo franchise

[ZagNuts]

You can put the game in coaching mode or whatever it's called and then run it at like 8x the normal speed. IIRC you can freely switch between driving and coaching mode if you select the right thing before the race. That way you can drive the first few laps, then switch to coaching mode, up the speed to 8x and just tell your car to pit every now and then. This obviously doesn't take much skill but then neither does getting the best car and the game and crushing all the other cars on the track (but as you said it's the only way to be safe in such a long race).

Re:The Gran Tusimo franchise

[Sinical]

Uhm, hey. You should let the PS2 play it for you. I didn't figure this out myself until after driving a damn Miata (MX-5) around and around. You can do this either at the beginning of the race, or at a pit stop. You want to switch to "B-Spec". This makes you more of a manager, and changes the points you get or whatever, if you care. In this mode, you can accelerate the flow of time up to 3x, and thus finish in only (!) 8 hours. However, time reverts back to 1x afer every pit stop, and I think I usually got about 3-4 laps per set of tires in the Nurburgring, so that's about once every 6-10 minutes (remember, 3x) you have to come back and nudge things. Or just wander away and the PS2 will run things at 1x all the way through.

However, as you know driver intelligence is miserable, so you may have to be careful. Usually I build up a big lead in the first few laps, or choose the most inequitable car matching I can, and only then hand over my machine to the computer retard.

Now you know. And knowing is half the battle.

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[king-manic]

This does not negate the fact that the PS3's "amazing blu ray optical disc!" at 50gb is effectively useless because the machine has 256/256mb of ram to work with, so all that extra storage space is BUNK unless the disc / drive is terrifyingly fast (it's not) and streams like GTA3 OR if the machine has / had more ram (it doesn't)

The PS3 may or may not be cool in some other areas but from a game perspective, unless you're talking FMV, the huge optical drive is abso-freaking-loutely useless.

The 360 has a similiar limitation of 512 megs of system ram shared between CPU/GPU. The 360 has 700 mhz GDDR3 ram, while the Ps3 has 256 of 700 GDDR3 RAM and 256 of XDR DRAM. It's split betewwn GPU and CPU but the GPU can access the XDR ram. The HD will basically make your argument useless as the slow optical speeds would be offset byt the universal availability of of an HD. The blu ray just make multi disc games less likely. With dialogue being a major part of most RPGS and Adventures games we may see a lot more of the space on a DVD taken up by that, and perhaps HD textures. Although a you sort of pointed out the low memory size would require either sophisticated texture caching.

I think this community is a bit hard ont he machine. It will be a bitch to program for well. But it does have a slight apparent lead over the 360 with a bigger distinction possible if they can work out what to use those 6 available SPU's for.

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait, let me get this straight...

A bunch of DirectX hacks are crying over the fact that you can't dump your shitty code onto the PS3...

I'm shocked! And to think of all that kewl code you've scavenged from NVidia's site and leaked Valve code to make things 'shiny' with 'teh shaders'!

Please, stick with the dying PC and flouring Xbox platforms, the PS3 isn't interested in another crappy FPS or RTS.

Funny... we primarily developed for PS2 last console cycle, so you really don't know what you're talking about. It also doesn't help that the PS3 compiler (based on egcc) takes about an hour and half to compile what takes 30 minutes for XBOX/PC. Not exactly developer friendly.

The Drive of Your Life!

[aaronmarks]

Gran Turismo HD has provided me with HOURS OF ENTERTAINMENT already. This game is going to be fantastic when it is released, but for now, even though the graphics are spectacular, I still expect more from Polyphony Digital when this game is released. The game is missing good tire tracks, smoke effects, and shadowing could be improved. The car models are incredible, and the lighting on the cars is great. I really wish that there was a way for Anti-aliasing to be used, but with the 1920x1080 resolution at 60fps, I assume that using any form of Anti-aliasing would likely be asking too much from the RSX GPU.

This game is once again going to be the benchmark for racing simulators, and will be reason enough for many to purchase a PS3 (it was why I bought one, along with the Bluray drive).

Re:The Drive of Your Life!

[Anonymous Coward]

yea, wake me when they actually have cars that take damage.. and have an online component as slick as forza does..

prolly have to wait for the ps4 for that tho..

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[Anonymous Coward]

"we primarily developed for PS2 last console cycle"

Bullllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllshit.

Funny how all the other real console developers are kicking ass with the PS3 devtools...

Go back to the pc and xbox directx ghetto retards.

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[iainl]

As good as Gotham 4 will when it turns up around the same time, perhaps? Bizarre are getting a LOT more out of the 360 now they've had some more time with actual units; the resolution drop was a last-minute fudge to get the game out of the door for launch, and won't be needed for 4.

Not that it looks anything less than completely gorgeous anyway, if you ask me.

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny how all the other real console developers are kicking ass with the PS3 devtools...

Really? Coulda fooled me. Do they have some kind of super secret Sony dev tools that we didn't get or something? Because Sony's are buggy, slow and shite.

you can do it

[Ender Ryan]

My feet are too big to actually blip the gas with my heel, so I just slide my foot to the right a bit and blip the gas with the right side of my foot. You can also buy pedals that extend further to the side to help facilitate heel-and-toeing.

In GT4 you can use the right analog for accel/brake. I don't think heel-and-toeing applies to GT at all, as there's no clutch to control and the game provides smooth shifts whether on the gas or braking. I could certainly be wrong, as I'm not quite that into the game, but I've never heard anyone really good at it mention it either.

I love the endurance races

[DG]

Endurance races really exist you know, in the real world. Playing them on the game is a great way to practice.

In the real world, you get 3-4 drivers and take turns. Do you have any friends?

DG

rollover heel toe method

[ProfBooty]

in most cars nowadays you don't need to actually heel/toe. with proper pedal placement, or by installing pedal covers, you slide the foot halfway between both pedals and simply just rollover the foot.

the mechanics are simple, its rev matching which is far more difficult, otherwise you strain your syncrhos and you get that lurching motion.

Woohoo, eye candy! And what else?

[Bohnanza]

Sorry, I need more than "AWSUM GRAFIX!!!!" to have fun. The "review" here mentions little else.

I hope its good for the sake of these people!

[gavinpquinn]

I hope its good for the sake of these people.

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[powerlord]

Oh, that's amusing. Very amusing. Where I work, we're all rolling our eyes at the PS3 architecture because unless we do a whole pile of custom work for it (like redesigning most of the engine we've licensed), our game will run on PS3 at about 1/3rd the speed of XBOX 360.

Not to discount your experience, but you're complaining that an engine your company licensed for the XBox 360 (I assume previously licensed), will not run on a new platform.

It sounds like your engine was not designed to run on the PS3, or does not run "as advertised" on a PS3.

Did the engine claim it would run on the PS3?

If so, then I think your complaints should be taken up with whoever designed the engine. Perhaps they hadn't optimized for the platform, or perhaps they have a new release with a better support. In either case the problem is with the engine maker.

If not, then I think your complaints are misplaced. Trying to run software on a platform it wasn't designed to work on is always risky. It may run, but there is no guarantee.

Can you elaborate on which engine and version (or the release date of the engine) your having problems with?

Re:I Hear The Guys From Bizarre Aren't Taking It W

[Anonymous Coward]

"We have hit a point of diminishing returns in graphics..."

I really don't believe you. Certainly, doubling the clockspeeds on your components doesn't give you graphics that are "twice as good", because our perception of "good" isn't linear. It's always been that way.
But if you don't think more power doesn't mean noticably better graphics, you're insane. Have you seen Gears of War? Dark Messiah? Do you really think they're comparable to the best-looking PC games of 2003 (on 2003 hardware)? Four times the power is a big improvement - I don't know what you consider "dramatic" but both the games I mentioned definitely had me spending some time sightseeing instead of just playing them.

Oblig: yes, I prefer gameplay to graphics and still play stuff like NES roms. But having both is nice too.

Wow

[rz22g]

I really hope this is not the best the PS3 has to offer in regards to driving simulations. Looks great and does have a fun factor but I have played $20 PC sims that are more realisic. I was actually having fun trying to set records against others online until I watched some of the 1st place replays. Its bad enough that there is no damage to the cars are surroundings but to see a 1st place record set by using the indestructable wooden stake/ribbon barriers during their run kind of kills it for me. At the very least a touch on the barrier should result in an instant time penalty. Guess consoles sims will never change.