"Valve's games NEVER have glitches/bugs in them"
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
NO game is glitch-free. Look at all those lovely HL2 glitches.
I've seen people playing the final version of the game... that's good enough evidence for me. I've seen people driving in many different (premium) cars in many different situations, trying to crash, trying to cause damage. If there were a "better damage" option we would have seen it. It's certainly not in the menus because I've seen those as well.
I always had my suspicions that the manufacturers' restriction was just a myth. It is something that is always brought up to counter the poor damage models despite the evidence that
- Other games have superior damage models on licensed cars
- No manufacturer has actually come forward and said what these restrictions are
Even accepting that the manufacturers DO put limitations on what GT5 can do to the cars, we are left with a damage model that
- Af...
LOL!!!
GT5 uses the same techniques used in GTA3 9 years ago, with flappy doors and bonnets after successive crashes. It's Burnout that uses procedural techniques! In Burnout it's physics-based, at least more so than GT5. You can't seriously claim that GT5 is trying to do "real-time calculated deformation" when it is possible (as in the video) to crash head-on with a car and no damage will be seen at all. In Burnout it is much closer to being realistic b...
"move was design so core gaming interested in motion gaming. that why it need precision so that people can be serious went they play game like killzone or more advance sport with motion controller. "
Yes exactly. Which makes it difficult to market as "the next big thing" or "fun for all the family." Logitech make really high-precision gaming mice. They sell well to the elitist PC gamer crowd but they're never going to have universal appeal - ...
I knew that Move would flop, I don't know why on earth ANYBODY thought it would do well. There's no marketing potential there. It's nothing new. Sony designed it around precision and ease of use... but these are (strangely) not very marketable attributes. MS designed Kinect around a novel idea that sounds new (even if it isn't) with precision and ease of use as a secondary focus. It's very marketable.
On the other hand, MS have got to be kidding themselves...
Yeah Sony's year has been slim but it would have been really great if LBP2 released this year. Would have made the year for me.
I actually don't think this is a very credible excuse. Certainly the damage could be a LOT better than it is without changing any agreements - after you crash at 100+ mph it could at least slow your car down and affect it with maximum visual damage. At the moment you have to crash about 10 times at top speed before you see much damage.
I also think if PD had an amazing damage model it wouldn't be too hard for them to get at least some of the manufacturers on board. Ma...
I don't like doing this. Setting yourself personal challenges during a race... it's just not very fun. There's a reason people whine about (lack of) trophies in some games - yes they could set themselves personal challenges like "race a perfect 24h race (without once hitting the side)" but there's no incentive there unlike with trophies. It's the same thing with damage - yes you can pretend that you fail each time you hit the wall and restart, but there's no ...
*holds breath*
:P
GT5's environment graphics have never been tremendous (except for city environments). I think some of the other themes could look better.
It's the drebin point system that was the main flaw in MGS4. The story was awesome (it was only contrived because it tried to wrap up sometimes contradictory plot threads from previous games). Just drebin points made the game too easy (especially the bosses) if you didn't force yourself to not use it or the more powerful weapons. On-site procurement as in the previous games was a much better system.
wtf is "star orbit"? Not any kind of weather I've ever heard of... Must be stupid google translate...
I don't actually see how giving you the ability to total your car would ruin the experience. It would only ruin the experience if you sucked. For everyone else it would add to the risk and fun. It would make drivers more cautious. Risk-taking would be more exhilarating. To be honest if you slam into a wall at 165kph you DESERVE to lose the race.
I count 27 to be exact. Plus infinity user-generated tracks (though the track editor is not nearly as deep as something like MNR).
I think Forza 3 had 23 or 24 something like that.
So GT5 providing the most content of any racing game. I think weather and day/night effects are limited to only specific tracks though.
C-c-c-c-combo breaker!
No motion blur, rigidly fixed camera, lack of comparitive focal objects to give a sense of speed. It is NOT slow as the car is moving at the indicated speed within the game world. What you need to do in games is to give the effect of speed since you can't actually feel the acceleration. GT doesn't make much of an effort to do this - perhaps they feel adding motion blur will take away the simulation feel from their game. I personally think a slight blur filter would help realism even i...
This was featured in a video from practice mode. It leaves out the Top Gear Test Track and the Nurburgring Nordschleife, two CONFIRMED tracks.
With that said, only fanboys thought that "77 tracks" meant actual tracks. Anyone who wasn't stupid knew that the "locations" were really the tracks and then they would count each "no chicane", "reverse", "short course", or "weather option" as a seperate "track" ...
Did anyone see... Dec 2nd?
http://imgur.com/Ixs8D.jpg
:)
Amazing! But a really slooow pit-stop. I hope all of them aren't 40 seconds long!