Topic: GT4 & San Andreas - Revolutionary, Evolutionary or Neither?

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

GT or Madden?

Drink or Beverage?

[Shift Key]

Quote
Atleast I dont start pointless threads about it.

"Ok, this thread continues on from here" Huh?

Quote
Do you see sports games drastically altering their gameplay every single installment

Why I rarely buy sports games...

Quote
Also if you utilize the new G-force meter in GT4 that changes the gameplay even further... I wouldn't be surprised to see such a feature in a real racecar because it would help you race better.

LOL. I haven't seen how this meter is implemented in the game yet, but YOU CAN FEEL THE G-FORCES in real life, which kinda makes it redundant. The meter simulates it in GT4 to tell you how the car is responding because its a game.

Quote
So the new Zelda is not a new installment of the franchise because it uses the Windwaker engine?

You compare screenshots. They use the same engine, yes, but the implementation of the engine separates the games by much more.  
I think most people wouldn't notice that the change from pseudo-3D, cel-shading cartoon to a full 3D visual style was made from the same graphics engine.

Quote
"The Unreal Engine has been instrumental in bringing dozens of titles to market on multiple platforms with fast, clean, and polished production value."

Well the Unreal engine is popular, because it is highly customisable platform for gaming development. Its also one of the oldest ones around (development started in 1995). Unreal and Quake are two of the major engines for PC games at the moment, so its no wonder there have been hits made with them. It comes down more to what they put in the games that makes them worthwhile.

Quote
You have to atleast respect how much work they do just for a game. It's no surprise they will have only released 2 games within the last 5+ years.

This reminded me of Rare, and seeing their output after they moved to MGS doesn't make me miss them at all. Luckily these guys have Sony's full backing with this game, so they can afford to throw all the detail they can amass into it.

I have that interview sitting on the computer now and wi'll comment on that as soon as I get around to watching it.

[The Omen]

I think GTS:SA sounds cool.  And like somebody else said, the NAACP will be up in arms with this.  Rightfully so, IMO.  Anyway, just because a game changes,even for the better, It doesn't mean its revolutionary.  Some people need to look up Revolutionary in the dictionary.

[boggy b]

Ah good, so you're not a sold-out Nintendo whore (or at least, you can keep a level head).

Quote
1. They are headline franchises - of course they are going to be creatively limited by what they can do.

The GT series and GTA are also headline franchises.

Quote
2. Remember last years E3? The outcry from the connectivity focus (THAT'S CREATIVITY) probably pushed Nintendo to focus on these games because it was what that fans want.

Why can't Rockstar and Polyphony do the same? GTA:VC is the best selling PS2 game to date, and people were still complaining that some bits weren't as good as they should be. Ultra-hardcore GT supporters complained that GT3 wasn't actually as good as GT2. GT4 is giving them what they want.

Don't fall into the trap of thinking that some developers are in it for the fun of making games whereas some aren't. They're ALL in it for making money.

Quote
3. There are games on other systems which are pushing the creativity (Four Swords, MP: Hunters).

I wouldn't really call either of those games vastly creative (sure, they've got some quirks) but that's a different matter.

[DrZoidberg]

Quote
Originally posted by: akdaman1
Joeamis - You really have impressed me. You went all out. Theres noway anyone can argue with you now.

I can

[joeamis]

First thing, that first quote is not mine so I don't know why you included it with all my quotes.  The fact that you rarely buy sports games personally doesn't change the fact that GT is a sports game.  The G-force meter could help drivers in real life because they would know how hard they're actually pushing the car without spinning or wiping out, and push the car harder than they would otherwise because they wouldn't have to worry about pushing too many G's and not knowing it.  You could argue that a speedometer isn't needed or a tachometer then too, because many racecar drivers can tell what speeds they're around and they can tell when to shift by the engine sounds (you can even tell when to shift by the engine sounds in videogames...).  But the gauges tell them the exact speed and rpm's something that the G-force meter would do... tell them the exact G's they're pulling.  

It doesn't matter if everyday gamers can tell if a game uses the same engine or not, how many everyday gamers could tell that Super Mario 64 and Super Mario Kart 64 used the same engine?  Your comments about the Zelda game engine uses actually strengthen my point.  I agree it comes down to more of what they put into the games.  That's why people shouldn't say how can the game be any different if it uses the same engine.  And that doesn't change the fact that different successful game franchises actually use the same game engine as eachother.  Yes it reminds me of Rare too (both the old Rare on N64 and the new Rare).  Luckily Rare also has full backing on their games from Microsoft, I mean MS does own Rare afterall.  

Note I never said GTA:SA is revolutionary in terms of games for the industry.  I said GTA:SA will revolutionize the GTA series of games based on what I've read.  I could be wrong about that because the final product is 6 months away, anything could happen, they could screw up things or not include the things they said or not do them as good as the impressions they gave.  And I never said that GT4 is revolutionary.  EDIT: Another game mag/site has called GTA:SA the next installment of the series as well, heres the quote from IGN, "The Grand Theft Auto series is, of course, still very much alive, with the next chapter now in development."  Read my earlier post for clarification (chapter is a synonym for installment).

[Termin8Anakin]

I just can't get into racing sims. They are nothing like real life (except the graphics i guess). You say that Polyphony live and breathe cars, that they are going all out to make sure that every car handles like it would in real life? Ok.

But how do YOU know it's like that?
Have YOU ever driven the brand new 2004 Ford GT? Do you know what it feels like to floor one on a designated race course or on a windy mountain road in scenic Italy? Then how do you know it's 'realistic'? Cause Polyphony said so?
A G-Force meter is nothing innovative nor special. Sure it might say 2 Gs, but do you feel it? There's nothing quite like going at such a high speed - the adrenalin rush is totally awesome, and bloody hell, this is only at 130km/h+ in my friend's car on the freeway.

But I've never felt it at 2Gs in real life. Thats why I go for super-fast racers like F-Zero X/GX or Extreme G. Sure I might not be good at it, but I play them anyway. The thing about 'real life' racing sims is that going at 300km/h at Bathurst in V8 Supercars just doesn't feel like that at all in the game. To me, it looks like you're going at 60kms, with only the speedo telling you its 300. Thats why i prefer going at '2000km/h' in F-Zero GX, cause it feels faster and more tense. So, F-Zero is more 'realistic' to me than GT.
I also prefer 'arcade' handling to 'realistic' handling, cause having to brake when turning sucks ass.

ANYWAY, what I'm saying is that all manner of trying to make it as realistic as possible won't do it much difference, cause there's NOTHING like actually doing it. And if games are meant to be an 'escape from reality', then perhaps this is the wrong way to do it. But then games are also something where you can do things that you couldn't normally do, so I guess this will just have to do.

[Uncle Rich AiAi]

I have to say joeamis got everyone with his second-to-last post.  I remember reading the part about Polyphony Digital taking 30,000 photos per track (can't remember where), and it really impressed me.

Kudos dude!

[BigHit30]

I say not evolutionary or revolutionary.  It is the same only instead of being in Miami FL with Italian mobsters, it is set in LA with black gangsters (which will get the NAACP and Lieberman angry).  Sadly, though, casual gamers will eat this up so much that games better on all platforms, like the new LOTR for PC, Half Life 2, Halo 2, MP 2, or MGS 3 will get ignored because so many casual gamers will get this.  I know there are a lot of people that like GTA, but it gets old and tiring.

[thecubedcanuck]

"It is the same only instead of being in Miami FL with Italian mobsters, it is set in LA with black gangsters (which will get the NAACP and Lieberman angry)."

Ohhh, so you have already played it?

"Sadly, though, casual gamers will eat this up so much that games better on all platforms, like the new LOTR for PC, Half Life 2, Halo 2, MP 2, or MGS 3 will get ignored because so many casual gamers will get this. I know there are a lot of people that like GTA, but it gets old and tiring."

Ummm, pardon me? I believe that GTA3 and Vice city got a ton of praise from numerous HARDCORE gamers and gaming sites as well.  GTA vice is still IMO one of the most fun games I have ever played, I bet I have nearly 100 hours into that game.
The games you use as example just dont fit the bill, as they are not even similar in style to the GTA series. So I am not sure how they would even relate.
AS far as I am concerned, all the GTA bashing that goes on on this forum is a result of it not making its way to the cube. The same thing was going on on many X-box forums, and now oddy enough, it has gone away.

[thecubedcanuck]

"Do you see sports games drastically altering their gameplay every single installment"
"Why I rarely buy sports games..."

I could care less if sports games drastically alter their gameplay. In fact I would frown upon it. I dont want to have re-learn the damn thing every year. I play sports games because they give me a chance to play a certain sport the way I could only dream of. I want it to be realistic, tough, and accurate in data and detail. Minor changes every year that update rosters, improve upon graphics, and incorporate improved moves that mirror the minor changes that occur in real sport every year is all I ask for.
Sports games will generally be loved by those who love sports, we see no need to re-invent the wheel here, and we dont mind shelling out a $50 every year for the update, because the amount of use we get out of it greatly out weighs the cost.
Those who hate sports, shouldnt bitch about saports games, because the reason for their dislike is quite obvious.

[The Omen]

Quote
Sports games will generally be loved by those who love sports, we see no need to re-invent the wheel here, and we dont mind shelling out a $50 every year for the update, because the amount of use we get out of it greatly out weighs the cost.
Those who hate sports, shouldnt bitch about saports games, because the reason for their dislike is quite obvious.

I have to agree with Cubed here.  If you don't like sports, then why bother stating the obvious?  You dont like the constant updates?  Well I do.  And hopefully, nobody starts the 'go out and play the sports for real' argument.  Pro athletes play them all the time, because they love the sport.

But anyway, I think the new GTA looks and sounds pretty cool.  I'll probably buy it for PC at some point.  I'm in no hurry however.  As for Rev vs Ev.  I'd say play it first and find out.  

[KDR_11k]

You know, there was a time when sports games came with editors that let you change the names and stuff and when a new season started you just logged into the internet and downloaded a new dataset from a fan without shelling out 50 bucks a year for the same service.

[thecubedcanuck]

" You know, there was a time when sports games came with editors that let you change the names and stuff and when a new season started you just logged into the internet and downloaded a new dataset from a fan without shelling out 50 bucks a year for the same service. "

I DONT CARE!!! I dont want to manually change all that crap. I dont mind paying $50 a year. Christ when will some of you get it.

[Uncle Rich AiAi]

Yeah, we get your point cubedcanuck, but not everyone is rich like you and can afford to spend $50 a year for an updated roster.  When you could in the past, use the editor and/or DL the new dataset.

[thecubedcanuck]

" Yeah, we get your point cubedcanuck, but not everyone is rich like you and can afford to spend $50 a year for an updated roster. When you could in the past, use the editor and/or DL the new dataset."

The f'in games sells 4+ million copies a year. So it is quite apparent that a LOT of people dont mind paying $50 a year for the convenience and tweaks. The only people who seem to bitch are the whiners who wouldnt play the games in the first place.
Go bitch about the third Mario Party game that came out in the last 2 years instead.

[The Omen]

Better yet, don't bitch about any games that come out too often.  Just dont buy them.  Why do people get so pissed over something that doesn't effect them?

[thecubedcanuck]

"Why do people get so pissed over something that doesn't effect them?"

What a novel approach.

[Ian Sane]

"Better yet, don't bitch about any games that come out too often. Just dont buy them. Why do people get so pissed over something that doesn't effect them?"

Well actually a repetitive series like Mario Party does affect me because Nintendo and Hudson could use the time spent working on yet another Mario Party doing something else like creating a new game.  Repetitive sequels are also bad for the industry if they sell really well because it encourages other developers to do the same.  This then stagnates the entire industry and limits creativity and innovation.  I suppose if you just want more of the same forever and ever it doesn't concern you (and it probably doesn't concern a lot of people) but it concerns me so thus I b!tch about it.

[The Omen]

Quote
I suppose if you just want more of the same forever and ever it doesn't concern you (and it probably doesn't concern a lot of people) but it concerns me so thus I b!tch about it.

Well, sadly that logic concludes I buy every Mario Party, which I don't.   Which most people dont.   Ian, tell me how many people you think own every MP title? Hardly any.  They pick and choose which versions to buy.  I, myself have 2 incarnations of MP.  Am I mad they release one every year?  No.  You know why?  I don't have to buy it.  Quoting Cubed, What a novel approach.

Quote
Repetitive sequels are also bad for the industry if they sell really well because it encourages other developers to do the same.

Yes.  Like Zelda?  Oh God, the horror of buying another great game in a series of great games.  You're making it too black and white, Ian.  Bad games that sell sequel upon sequel i'll agree they're garbage.  But some sequels do have merit.  If the dconsumer buys garbage so be it.  Thats the way of a free world.  As much as I despise it...

[joeamis]

Quote
Originally posted by: Termin8Anakin
I just can't get into racing sims. They are nothing like real life (except the graphics i guess). You say that Polyphony live and breathe cars, that they are going all out to make sure that every car handles like it would in real life? Ok.
But how do YOU know it's like that?
But I've never felt it at 2Gs in real life. Thats why I go for super-fast racers like F-Zero X/GX or Extreme G. Sure I might not be good at it, but I play them anyway. The thing about 'real life' racing sims is that going at 300km/h at Bathurst in V8 Supercars just doesn't feel like that at all in the game. To me, it looks like you're going at 60kms, with only the speedo telling you its 300. Thats why i prefer going at '2000km/h' in F-Zero GX, cause it feels faster and more tense. So, F-Zero is more 'realistic' to me than GT.
I also prefer 'arcade' handling to 'realistic' handling, cause having to brake when turning sucks ass.
ANYWAY, what I'm saying is that all manner of trying to make it as realistic as possible won't do it much difference, cause there's NOTHING like actually doing it.

They don't take 200 photos of every car and incorporate atleast 30 parameters per car because they're not doing as much as they possibly can to make it realistic?  How do I know it's like that?  Because I've raced a car I own in real life, in the game and it was identical in control and performance.  Same with my brother and he's a gearhead who doesn't like videogames.  I don't understand how you can say F-Zero is more realistic just because it's faster.  Breaking when turning is all part of the fun related to how far you can push the car to its limits, how many people like games where you just hold down your thumb the whole time.  You can argue that there's nothing like actually doing it for any game in existence.

[Ian Sane]

"Yes. Like Zelda? Oh God, the horror of buying another great game in a series of great games. You're making it too black and white, Ian."

Zelda is not a repetitive series.  The games are released fairly spaced apart and they all play reasonably different from each other and every title is unique enough that every title is essential.  A repetitive series is something like Tomb Raider or Mega Man where the sequels have virtually no differences other than new levels and there's no need to play every game because there's no difference in the experience.

[The Omen]

I agree Zelda isn't, but to people who hate Zelda, it may be.

[mouse_clicker]

Quote
I agree Zelda isn't, but to people who hate Zelda, it may be.

Eh, I'm all for everyone being entitled to their own opinion, but if someone honestly thinks every Zelda game is the same then they either haven't played any of them or are just plain stupid. It's not really a matter of opinion- each Zelda game has been built around an entirely different concept, and I think that's one reason the series has held up so incredibly well over the years. Some people may not like the concepts in particular, or the Zelda style in general, but you can't say all Zelda games are the sames.  

[Bill Aurion]

Quote
Originally posted by: The Omen
I agree Zelda isn't, but to people who hate Zelda, it may be.

Because ignorance is bliss, right?