bit-tech.net

Why I think Gran Turismo 5 is delayed

Posted on 14th Jan 2010 at 12:33 by Mark Mackay with 41 comments

Mark Mackay
Back in my unenlightened console-gaming days I once went over to my cousin's gaff in Scotland for some family visits. He had a Playstation, a console that I either wasn't interested in owning or didn't have the money to own - probably the latter. For that Playstation he owned Gran Turismo. As a car lover, I was suitably impressed and ended up buying a Playstation for GT shortly thereafter.

When the PS2 came out I had little to interesting in buying that. However, when Gran Turismo 3 was on the cards, all that changed and I played through GT4 with equal relish. Back in those days, there just wasn't any competition for Gran Turismo. It was king of hill. People forgave the fact that there was no car damage, horribly hard lighting, stiff and lifeless handling and engine sounds like flatulence problems.

Why I think Gran Turismo 5 is delayed Where is Gran Turismo 5?
'Has anyone seen the texture detail? We've lost it.'

Yes, GT was as good as it got and we all loved it. So what about GT5? We saw the demo prologue in 2008! Well, I can't help but wonder if all the delays are because Polyphony Digital got complacent with their racing gaming crown. Gran Turismo 5 Prologue was set to be the racing game of the year for many...then came a small problem called Race Driver: GRID.

Even on a console, GRIDlooked amazing. The lighting engine was formidable, with soft, hazy rays of believable light caressing almost every surface in the game. The textures were detailed, the car engines more raw and sexy and the handling felt like there was wild race car to tame with your gaming skill rather it feeling like you were taking your driving test in a Nissan Micra. That's not to mention the car damage in GRID, which was exquisitely believable and a welcome breath of air after years of GT's indestructible automobiles.

Why I think Gran Turismo 5 is delayed Where is Gran Turismo 5?
'Actually, I think the guys at Codemasters have stolen it all.'

It's about the time of Grid's release that I think the trousers of Polyphony Digital really filled up and the delays started to appear. Since then Codemasters has released Colin McRae: DiRT 2 which is even better than GRID and a number of other excellent racers have hit the shelves, many of which feature the things that were so sorely missing from the GT series. Personally, I think it's that Polyphony Digital were so comprehensively spanked off the racing game throne that the GT5 is still not with us today.

41 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
skunkmunkey 14th January 2010, 12:43 Quote
your forgetting the best one of all.... Forza 3 but yeah I totally agree, they are going to have to create something pretty special to rival the latest batch of racers
proxess 14th January 2010, 12:53 Quote
What's wrong with the Nissan Micra? It's an awesomely stupid car, specially the K11 Super S 1.3!!!
sandys 14th January 2010, 12:53 Quote
Even when the was no competition Gran turismos have always been delayed so I doubt the competition have much to do with it, though it is fair to say the competition have upped their game a lot.

I've not played grid beyond the demo so perhaps I've not seen the best of it but its just seemeed like arcadey pap with pretty graphics, maybe I need to look again. My main thought was that these guys had lost thier way since Toca/Race Driver series.
CardJoe 14th January 2010, 13:00 Quote
I don't think Sony care about GRID. It's a new IP geared against a successful franchise. They'd care more about Forza.

Also, I'd wager the delay is in order to add 3D in.
sandys 14th January 2010, 13:04 Quote
They've been running demos of GT with 3D well over a year now, I reckon that they changed the structure to make it more accessible and realized from the global panning GT PSP got for lack of structure etc. that they have to change it.
Jamie 14th January 2010, 13:13 Quote
Forza 2 was the racing game of 2007-2008.
Cutter McJ1b 14th January 2010, 13:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
I don't think Sony care about GRID. It's a new IP geared against a successful franchise. They'd care more about Forza.

Also, I'd wager the delay is in order to add 3D in.

Bah, of course they care about GRID. It makes GT look like a s*** sandwhich. And that's coming from someone that had more of a love affair with GT than with GRID!
CardJoe 14th January 2010, 13:58 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cutter McJ1b
Bah, of course they care about GRID. It makes GT look like a s*** sandwhich. And that's coming from someone that had more of a love affair with GT than with GRID!

But it's not console exclusive and therefore isn't judged as being as much of a threat, unlike Forza. I also promise you that it hasn't sold a fraction near as well as either title.
Cutter McJ1b 14th January 2010, 14:33 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cutter McJ1b
Bah, of course they care about GRID. It makes GT look like a s*** sandwhich. And that's coming from someone that had more of a love affair with GT than with GRID!

But it's not console exclusive and therefore isn't judged as being as much of a threat, unlike Forza. I also promise you that it hasn't sold a fraction near as well as either title.

That's true, but it still makes their game look lame by comprison. All I'm saying is that I think Polyphony Digital realised they are gonna need to up their game and break through some new barriers if they want to release something that will make an impression on people.
Xir 14th January 2010, 14:59 Quote
Driving gets any better than Need for Speed: Porsche with force feedback?
*ducks under the carpet again*
:D
smc8788 14th January 2010, 15:22 Quote
GRID a major competitor to GT? Seriously?

GRID looks OK, but can you really say it looks better than this or this? Take away all the fluff, and GT5 has much more detailed and realistic car models and lighting. This is why it takes so long to develop, and why it keeps getting delayed.

I'd also disagree the competition has stepped up. Back when I was playing the first GT, I also used to play a lot of other racing games like the old (and good) Colin McRae games and F1 sims. Now, I find nothing interests me in the same way as these games did and the GT games always have. F1 sims have all but disappeared and the Colin McRae series is now a disgrace to the name, transformed into a general off road racing game. Give me a pure rally sim godammit!

The only racing game I have interest in now is GT5. Everything else has been marred by a liberal application of the arcade brush to cater to those with short attention spans. I suppose Forza is the only game that is comparable to what GT offers these days, which is why Joe is right in saying that's its main competitor, although I haven't played it so I can't say whether it offers the same level of realism that GT does. Die hard GT fans won't like GRID, it's that simple. They're mutually exclusive groups of people.

And on the subject of damage, that's something I really don't give a crap about. The first thing I will be doing when my copy goes in my PS3 is turning it off. Damage is for hyperactive kids who are too used to playing NFS and adds nothing to gameplay (and even detracts from it) unless it is implemented properly (AFAIK it's only cosmetic in GT5).
Skiddywinks 14th January 2010, 16:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by smc8788
And on the subject of damage, that's something I really don't give a crap about. The first thing I will be doing when my copy goes in my PS3 is turning it off. Damage is for hyperactive kids who are too used to playing NFS and adds nothing to gameplay (and even detracts from it) unless it is implemented properly (AFAIK it's only cosmetic in GT5).

That's one of the dafter things i have heard all day. Damage adds nothing to gameplay? Of course it does, even more so in more sim based racers like Forza and GT. I would argue the exact opposite, that no damage detracts from the experience. It makes you far more careful when driving, like you would actually be, since damaging your engine, brakes, transmission, wheels etc all have a realistic effect on the cars performance.

Frankly, I am incredibly surprised that a "die hard" GT fan thinks damage is a bad thing. The whole sentence is hypocritical.

While I agree that in games like NFS it is purely for fun and the looks, but when implemented in to a game like Forza or GT, and done properly (like Forza, and to an extent GRID and Dirt) it is an awesome thing to behold and an incredible addition to a car game.
Cutter McJ1b 14th January 2010, 16:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xir
Driving gets any better than Need for Speed: Porsche with force feedback?
*ducks under the carpet again*
:D

I lol'ed :D
13eightyfour 14th January 2010, 16:15 Quote
Damage is only any good in a racing game that has descent AI, Forza 3 is a prime example. I shouldnt have to use the rewind function because some AI driver has effectively taken me out. Ive had this loads in FM3 in fact i dont think ive used the rewind function because of a mistake ive made.

I like driving games to have damage, but when the AI acts like 12 year old NFS players, id rather it wasnt there tbh.

Im not a newb, I dont drive slow my times in FM3 are all in the top 1%.
Cutter McJ1b 14th January 2010, 16:24 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by smc8788
GRID a major competitor to GT? Seriously?

I didn't say it's a competitor. It was released years ago. How could it be? I said that I believe releases such as GRID made the GT team realise they need to step up the mark after the Prologue which seemed an example of the lameness that was on the cards at that point. As for die hard GT fans not being interested in GRID - well I was. GT was the only racing game I was remotely interested in playing for years, let alone spending hundreds of hours on.

As for the videos, I'm sure it will look great. I won't take a Youtube vid for the real deal though. Some footage rendered in a massive resolution and then spanned down to make it look as sexy as possible isn't really comparable to the real game on a PS3 and a TV. But yes, I've no doubt that it will look good when it comes out. God knows it better be a far cry from the Prologue.

All I'm saying is that I think the constant delays are because the racing game competition is immeasurably tougher than the when the original four GT titles are released, and that is something that has largely come around since the release of Prologue.
Cutter McJ1b 14th January 2010, 16:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiddywinks
That's one of the dafter things i have heard all day. Damage adds nothing to gameplay?

+1
stewis 14th January 2010, 16:28 Quote
without damage its just so easy and tempting to use the barriers and other cars as breaks instead of dropping the cars anchors... i remember doing it in GT1 on the PS1 ages ago...
death_munky 14th January 2010, 16:47 Quote
I've plenty of experience from both the arcade racing side (burnout series) and the simulation racing side (GT3+4, Forza, all the Simbin titles) and the one thing Race Driver: Grid gave me over the GT series was enjoyment as you weren't having to hammer round the same track trying to string three perfect laps together to beat the annoyingly consistent Toyota THAT NEVER MOVED OFF THE PERFECT LINE AND PUNTED YOU OFF AT THE SLIGHTEST CONTACT

Sorry went a bit Bruce Banner remembering the frustration of trying to complete them.
My only gripes about Grid were the stupid Ravenwest bits and the gimps online who kept going the wrong way to crash into you
mjm25 14th January 2010, 16:59 Quote
for me Gran Turismo peaked at GT2, it was the right balance of realism and fun that was lost in GT3 and abandoned in GT4
smc8788 14th January 2010, 17:14 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiddywinks
That's one of the dafter things i have heard all day. Damage adds nothing to gameplay? Of course it does, even more so in more sim based racers like Forza and GT. I would argue the exact opposite, that no damage detracts from the experience. It makes you far more careful when driving, like you would actually be, since damaging your engine, brakes, transmission, wheels etc all have a realistic effect on the cars performance.

Frankly, I am incredibly surprised that a "die hard" GT fan thinks damage is a bad thing. The whole sentence is hypocritical.

While I agree that in games like NFS it is purely for fun and the looks, but when implemented in to a game like Forza or GT, and done properly (like Forza, and to an extent GRID and Dirt) it is an awesome thing to behold and an incredible addition to a car game.

I just can't see the point of damage in Gran Turismo, it doesn't need it.

My point about it being implemented properly was not a trivial one. If I go to the effort of adjusting the ride height, camber, toe, gear ratios etc. etc. to get the most out of my lap times and make my car handle better, I don't want all my efforts to be ruined by some half assed damage mechanic which doesn't accurately model real world damage, in which there are so many variables.

A racing sim should be purely about the racing, nothing else. In games like Gran Turismo, if you don't drive properly and stick to the racing lines then that's going to punish your lap times more than damage ever will. I can only see it being an annoyance, and I'd be worrying more about not the damage mechanic than the actual driving and getting the fastest lap times. If you can't get around a Gran Turismo track without crashing into the barriers or veering off into a field, may I suggest Mario Kart as a viable alternative?

But you're welcome to disagree if you have a different opinion, I guess we just have different expectations of what the game should be and what we want out of it in that case.

One thing I do wish they'd improve though is the driver AI, so they didn't stick to racing lines so rigidly and behaved more realistically. That's always been the biggest problem with the GT series IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjm25
for me Gran Turismo peaked at GT2, it was the right balance of realism and fun that was lost in GT3 and abandoned in GT4

Interesting, I probably played GT2 the least out of all the GT series so I don't remember it that well, but I don't think I liked it as much as the others.
Gunsmith 14th January 2010, 17:16 Quote
what we need is another motorhead
Cutter McJ1b 14th January 2010, 17:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by smc8788

One thing I do wish they'd improve though is the driver AI, so they didn't stick to racing lines so rigidly and behaved more realistically. That's always been the biggest problem with the GT series IMO.

Yes this is the biggest problem with GT. I should have mentioned it the blog but hey ho. This is the main contributing factor to stiffness of the game. Like I said, I played and enjoyed the GT series for years, but the likes of GRID have a lot more wildness which was a refreshing change that I didn’t even realise I wanted before playing. Hopefully the AI in GT5 won't have the rigidity.
Farfalho 14th January 2010, 19:01 Quote
In all fairness, I have some knowledge of one of the factors that may contribute for the delay, not the important but relevant.

I have the GT4 LE, something given only to the press and alikes (I had to bought it because I'm not press) and in there is a hard cover heavy book explaining the story behing GT-series, every single GT game, hours, manpower, research, real-time car testing.

If they sticked to the car lot existing when they started to make the game, it would be ready but with every delay a new juicy car comes that everyone wants to try even though it's only a game, we can't help it trying to drive a Veyron when most of us know that it can never be done in real life.

So, with every new car added, there's texture to do and since I don't recall the exact numbers, I'll give you the info given from GT Creator - The pixel amount needed to do a car in GT1 is the same amount needed to create an headlamp on GT3 or GT4, can't recall what is the right one.

Chaps, it's a friggin' headlamp and has that insane pixel amount. So if we are in the HD era, with Blu-ray capable of some serious sh*t, do you know how much it is needed to do a simple car, not a supercar but the ones like Micra or even a classic Mini One Cooper MKII 1.3?

I'm not saying give the guys a break, all most of us can do is whinne about it but let's wait the time needed to see if it was worth it, I want to believe it will be.
Skiddywinks 14th January 2010, 21:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by smc8788
I just can't see the point of damage in Gran Turismo, it doesn't need it.

My point about it being implemented properly was not a trivial one. If I go to the effort of adjusting the ride height, camber, toe, gear ratios etc. etc. to get the most out of my lap times and make my car handle better, I don't want all my efforts to be ruined by some half assed damage mechanic which doesn't accurately model real world damage, in which there are so many variables.

A racing sim should be purely about the racing, nothing else. In games like Gran Turismo, if you don't drive properly and stick to the racing lines then that's going to punish your lap times more than damage ever will. I can only see it being an annoyance, and I'd be worrying more about not the damage mechanic than the actual driving and getting the fastest lap times. If you can't get around a Gran Turismo track without crashing into the barriers or veering off into a field, may I suggest Mario Kart as a viable alternative?

But you're welcome to disagree if you have a different opinion, I guess we just have different expectations of what the game should be and what we want out of it in that case.

One thing I do wish they'd improve though is the driver AI, so they didn't stick to racing lines so rigidly and behaved more realistically. That's always been the biggest problem with the GT series IMO.

I can see all your points, but I think the difference is how much weight we give them. Sure, sometimes the damage isn't accurate to reality, and I can appreciate that putting you off, but like the mention, the AI has never been that great either, does that put you off playing the game?

95% of the time, I find the damage done to my car is accurate to what I would expect in real life. I mean, either you have had some seriously bad luck with damage models, or you just haven't played any decent games that include them.

Besides, if you are so good as to not need to worry about hitting anything, why even bother turning off the damage? I just find that it makes the game more interesting and immersive. It's the difference between playing poker for fun and playing it for money; there is no risk when there is no money involved, so people don't play like they normally would. I see it the same way with racing games. Sure, generally a crash is enough to ruin a 1st place win anyway, but sometimes its not, and in those cases I would expect my car to show the damage and act accordingly, rather than bounce off and be like "****. That sucked. Oh well" *floors it*

Another thing is that in some cases, as stewis pointed out, without damage it makes it far too easy to recover from side swipes and rail-grinds that would normally offer a real benefits-to-penalties evaluation. Why not go for them if nothing bad will come of it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Farfalho
snip

Duke Nukem Forever syndrome anyone? The longer they postpone it, the worse it's going to be accepted when it launches. They just need to say "That's it" and apply any final polish and launch the thing. Extra cars are what DLC and sequels are for.

Frankly, I don't buy that excuse. And if it is the truth, then my opinion of them just dropped.
Boogle 15th January 2010, 10:32 Quote
I utterly deteste GRID. It tries to look like a serious racer, but it's just an arcade game of dodge 'ems. I really like Gran Turismo for it's pure racing experience, one that rewards technical skill rather than seat-of-the-pants swerving and crazy driving.
Pappy_Lazaru 15th January 2010, 11:22 Quote
A driving game without damage (these days) is utter rubbish IMO. Its lazy, its unrealistic...and it results in a terrible driving experience...bouncing around the track like a buffoon!
Hugo 15th January 2010, 12:02 Quote
It saddens me that the delay is almost certainly, as Joe says, adding in 3D. I'd rather they made it available as an update later - say, as an add-on pack - if at all. Of course I feel the same about car damage; it's only needed as a deterrent to not driving 'properly' to those that aren't interested in playing GT as a 'racing simulator' but those people will disable it anyway so it's a bit of a moot inclusion. The lack of car damage never stopped me driving as if it was there before...
Xir 15th January 2010, 15:40 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by smc8788
... If I go to the effort of adjusting the ride height, camber, toe, gear ratios etc. etc. to get the most out of my lap times and make my car handle better, I don't want all my efforts to be ruined by some half assed damage mechanic which doesn't accurately model real world damage, in which there are so many variables.

...if someone bumps you (or you hit a barrier), and that changes your camber and toe for the wheel involved... would that be acceptable?
smc8788 15th January 2010, 16:14 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xir
...if someone bumps you (or you hit a barrier), and that changes your camber and toe for the wheel involved... would that be acceptable?

But then it would just be a game that's so realistic and punishing it would no longer be any fun. That's what games are for, after all. I don't want to be tiptoeing around a track afraid of where the next scratch on my paintwork is coming from. Have you ever watched a touring car race? I'm pretty sure they don't worry about giving other cars a slight nudge, so why should I have to in a videogame? Sometimes it's possible to go too far in the search for realism.

Like I said, if I go off the track or make a botched overtaking maneuver (which I do, none of us are perfect), then I've generally lost several seconds and/or a good few track positions in the process and made the rest of the race much harder for myself. That's realistic enough for me, and I like the game the way it is so I see no reason to change it. If you want damage, then you can turn it on, but I won't be.
tron 16th January 2010, 19:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiddywinks
That's one of the dafter things i have heard all day. Damage adds nothing to gameplay? Of course it does, even more so in more sim based racers like Forza and GT. I would argue the exact opposite, that no damage detracts from the experience. It makes you far more careful when driving, like you would actually be, since damaging your engine, brakes, transmission, wheels etc all have a realistic effect on the cars performance.

Frankly, I am incredibly surprised that a "die hard" GT fan thinks damage is a bad thing. The whole sentence is hypocritical.

While I agree that in games like NFS it is purely for fun and the looks, but when implemented in to a game like Forza or GT, and done properly (like Forza, and to an extent GRID and Dirt) it is an awesome thing to behold and an incredible addition to a car game.

Agreed with this. For me, damage is extremely important. Especially as a 'sim' racer. I have played nearly every racing game from GT to GRID and 'proper' PC racing sims such as RFactor and GTR Evolution.

What I find about sims like rFactor is that their lack of photorealistic graphics and realistic collision physics can ruin and negate the general feeling of realism.

Look at the following Grid Versus GT5 video and notice that with all the advanced 'driving' physics GT5 has, the bumps and collisions look so arcade as if you are watching toy cars:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvAb2Vg949k

I think the absolute ultimate driving game for me would be one that gets the balance between believable graphics, good AI, realistic driving physics and car damage right. Currently, I don't think GT5 has the right balance. Not to mention that it is a 'driving simulator' and not a 'racing simulator'.

The reason extensive car damage is so important to me is not only because collisions look more believable than indestructable cars, but also because it completely changes the style of driving.

If you play a game where you don't need to use any skills to brake correctly and avoid colliding with the car in front, because the car in front can be used as a braking aid, then the gameplay is totally unrealistic no mattter how 'sim' the game is.

I would much rather have my car spin out and damage occur, similar to what might happen on a real track if I do a 50mph slam into the back of the car in front.

It doesn't matter whether or not you intend to to drive carefully. 'No damage' in car games promotes lazy and unrealistic driving (as well as reducing the suspense of certain driver errors). When I play Need For Speed SHI*T, I don't even care about my driving skills, because I know my car is indestructable and can survive 200mph collisions with barriers, then drive off with little damage. On the other hand, in a game like GRID, I can get a great sense of achievement when I finish a race with not a single scratch on my car - just as I would in real life as a professional racing driver.
frontline 17th January 2010, 15:05 Quote
GRID was the first racing game i bought on the PC since, well, ever! I always thought of the racing genre as being a console 'thing' before that came out (other than the hardcore simulations).

I loved GRID but have never been impressed with the GT series, although i suppose it is 'horses for courses' and am sure it will sell well whenever it is released.
Xir 18th January 2010, 08:45 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by smc8788
But then it would just be a game that's so realistic and punishing it would no longer be any fun.

If we're talking about a game where the handling is so excuisite that you notice tweaking toe and camber, you've left "fun Game" and entered "Simulation" :D
ambrose 18th January 2010, 09:42 Quote
i think that if you crash in GT someone from polyphony should be sent to your house and inflict the same damage on your car. and you should have to wear a shock suit that kills you if you have a 'fatal' crash in game. that is the realism im after.........................

but seriously the amount of delays.... WTF! the ps3 is going to be obsolete by the time we get gt5. prologue is fun going online and competing in time trials, but what i really crave is buying a new aston martin DB9 and adding 700hp worth of turbos and cracking about on the nurburgring! and id do that on gt4 but my effing ps2 is broken and sony in their wisdom left backward compatibilty out... AAARRRGH
Elton 18th January 2010, 09:46 Quote
DB9 + 700HP of turbo = no cornereing ability regardless.
Pappy_Lazaru 18th January 2010, 09:54 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by tron


If you play a game where you don't need to use any skills to brake correctly and avoid colliding with the car in front, because the car in front can be used as a braking aid, then the gameplay is totally unrealistic no mattter how 'sim' the game is.

Bingo!!! ;)
Slash88 18th January 2010, 12:17 Quote
I dislike racing games, I feel restricted and it gets boring.
uz1_l0v3r 18th January 2010, 14:57 Quote
How can you not have damage in a racing game that touts "realism" as its main selling point? That's like having a MW2-style shooter with all the guns, but no killing.
LeMaltor 18th January 2010, 15:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by uz1_l0v3r
How can you not have damage in a racing game that touts "realism" as its main selling point? That's like having a MW2-style shooter with all the guns, but no killing.

I shot the bad guy in the airport level, I had to start again, it wasn't all killing.
gm_crop 18th January 2010, 17:25 Quote
Gran Turismo has pretty lousy physics anyhow, they spend all this time and millions of ££ testing all the cars and modelling accurately, before getting the basics wrong. If you doubt what I'm saying here get any powerful rear wheel drive car, lock the diff up as far as you can go and try to do some doughnuts. It's impossible, either wheelspin doesnt generate lateral slip or the diff doesnt lock properly, and this is just one of many problems with the game. It's a real shame because the care and attention to the rest of it deserves better than having the rug swept out from under it's feet.

Saying Grid is better than GT however is not really a fair comparision, it's like the difference between Serious Sam and Call of Duty, they model the same thing but from totally different perspectives.

And like COD, GT (and Forza though I'll admit to having only played it for about half an hour and with a pad... eugh) is merely pseudo-realism, an homage but not quite the real thing.

For the real deal head toward Arma and the PC racers - GTR2, rFactor, Live for Speed and Richard Burns Rally - especially RBR, it's the most intense experiance you can have at your computer without being electrocuted by it.

That said I've still got 100% GT4 completion and all gold licenses.
Eggy 19th January 2010, 09:38 Quote
Dirt, Grid etc are nowhere near the quality of the GT titles. Lots of flash but very little substance. GT has always been a racing game that will be great to play for years to come. Heck 4 million people bought a glorified demo of GT.
woodss 19th January 2010, 09:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eggy
Dirt, Grid etc are nowhere near the quality of the GT titles. Lots of flash but very little substance. GT has always been a racing game that will be great to play for years to come. Heck 4 million people bought a glorified demo of GT.

And they paid (and probably still are paying) £20... When gt5 hits it should be epic, forza's good, but its no GT5.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums
Fractal Design Node 804 Review

Fractal Design Node 804 Review

17th September 2014

SK Hynix SH910A SSD 256GB Review

SK Hynix SH910A SSD 256GB Review

16th September 2014

1200W PSU Roundup 2014

1200W PSU Roundup 2014

15th September 2014