Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
PlayStation (Games) Entertainment Games

Gran Turismo 4 Preview 57

ãã¾ããããsã®ãS writes "FiringSquad has published a preview of Polyphony Digital's Gran Turismo 4, the upcoming flagship online racing title for PlayStation 2." Acccording to the preview, where the last Gran Turismo made us all adopt a Playstation 2, this one will have us adopting network adapters for online racing. The preview's also got some notes about the lengths Polyphony Digital has gone to in order to make GT4 as realistic as possible.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Gran Turismo 4 Preview

Comments Filter:
  • I didn't hear it the first time...

  • Snore (Score:2, Insightful)

    Am I the only one who finds the GT games deadly boring? Polypholy dont actually add anything to the games, other than to try and make it that little bit more realistic.

    How about adding some AI to the CPU racers, or just make the game enjoyable to play. When PS2 owners were raving about GT3, I was playing the likes of Le Mans, Daytona and MSR on the Dreamcast.
    Le Mans (which on the DC is a different game to the average PSX version) had you racing up to 22 cars with PROPER AI, Daytona was a classic arcade g
    • Re:Snore (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Palshife ( 60519 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @10:12AM (#6149775) Homepage
      You're talking about arcade games. The GT series is a simulation series. Very very different.

      One of the big plusses with GT is the amount of customization you can perform on the cars. I can see why some people wouldn't be as interested, it's not for everyone. For those of us that live for the details, it's a dream come true.
    • Without trying to put too much of a pro or anti spin on either style of game, the likes of Le Mans are very much Racing games. The thrill is from trying to beat the other drivers in a race to the finish line.

      In the GTA series, its very much a Driving game. The aim is to improve your own driving, with all the emphasis going on the handling model and beating your own lap times by either exploiting the best out of the handling, or tuning the car to go faster. Unless you're playing multiplayer the opposition e
    • if the GT series stops being real and adopts a 'high speed persuit' storyline ill never buy one again. to me no racing game has matched gt3, NONE, it is the benchmark that all racing games are held to. and if you think graphics have anything to do with making a good racing game, you are an idiot (or an xbox fanboy). all other racing games suck because they are not so purely about racing as gt3.

      now dont get me wrong, i love arcade racers, and spent many an hour on MSR and Le Mans and mario kart, and love
      • if the GT series stops being real and adopts a 'high speed persuit' storyline ill never buy one again.

        None of those games I mentioned are about 'high speed pursuit', although Daytona comes close.

        to me no racing game has matched gt3, NONE, it is the benchmark that all racing games are held to

        I can assure you, that is certainly not the case. If you want a proper racing game then GT isnt any sort of benchmark at all.

        and if you think graphics have anything to do with making a good racing game, you a
      • ... to me no racing game has matched gt3, NONE, it is the benchmark that all racing games are held to.

        In 1998 Papyrus released "Grand Prix Legends" (GPL) which was a driving simulator based on the 1967 GP series. Five years later, it remains perhaps the most accurate driving simulations and boasts about 300 "aftermarket" tracks and analysis utilities for downloading. Analysis utilities? Yep, they analyze your replay files so you can learn from them. GT3 doesn't have much on GPL. And you're right --

  • First thought was "Why so many photos of real cars driving around?"

    Oh. Wait. That's in game??? :-O
  • by Palshife ( 60519 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @10:20AM (#6149845) Homepage
    I'd love to see some of the blatant physics mistakes fixed from GT3. Two examples:

    1) The axis restriction. No car can rotate more than 90 degrees in any direction from normal on any axis. It's to prevent the car from ending up upside down, something that wouldn't fly in GT, as there's no "abort" button a la "RUSH."

    2) The wheelie 700 Mph trick. It's fun, and it's cool to do, but it's probably indicative of a larger shortcut in the physics engine.

    Either way, I'm already drooling for GT4. Online play is enough to make me want it, but man, I really wanted hard drive features. Importing my own music is something I've wanted to to with GT4. Oh well, there's always 5...
    • I'm with you...but there are just so many physics mistakes, it's impossible to list them all. Among the most irritating was the lack of trailing-throttle oversteer/trailbraking oversteer on *any* car. I'm sorry -- driving into a corner hot and stand on the brakes after you've initiated a turn and transferred weight WILL spin a real car -- hell, you can lift off the throttle at the limit in a real car and expect a little oversteer to tighten up the line a little. No luck on GT3. These are extreme example

  • by Ron Harwood ( 136613 ) <> on Monday June 09, 2003 @10:21AM (#6149857) Homepage Journal
    What Network games are available for the PS2?

    I guess my real question might be - are there any network games for the PS2 that make buying the network adapter worthwhile?
    • Midnight Club 2 rules for network play. Lots of cool modes of playing and a kick-ass game to boot, I highly recommend it.

      SOCOM is supposed to be good too, but I have yet to try it.
    • I guess my real question might be - are there any network games for the PS2 that make buying the network adapter worthwhile?

      Well, probably Final Fantasy XI if you are into RPGs; but not that much else. It is lame that Sony isn't supporting a network for the systems games and that it is dependant on the developer to make it happen.

  • by cgenman ( 325138 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @10:31AM (#6149999) Homepage
    It appears they are doing distance color washing with blur, and generally toning down the image to mimmoc a television broadcast. Whereas Ridge Racer's ilk went for hypercolor, the artists on GT4 appear to have chosen realistically muted shades of grey and dirty brown. Texturing seems to be pretty spot-on too, without delving too much into the extremely textured look of many games. Thankfully GTA3's much abused car-top reflections appear to be muted too. In fact, between the muted colors and muted textures, the game is definitely not a visual feast for the eyes, which is perfect for a realistic racer.

  • by Mantrid ( 250133 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @11:02AM (#6150372) Journal
    This isn't that exciting for me...don't get me wrong GT3 was a great game and I enjoyed it thoroughly. But what is Sony really adding here? A few new cars and tracks?

    GT really needs an engine overhaul:

    - better collision physics - I get tired of racing against other 'bricks'
    - car damage - now pieces falling off etc., would be very exciting and cool, but even something as simple as a damage bar to represent what is going on and reduce performance. There's just no way in a game as realistic as GT3 (in other areas) that the fastest route on some tracks should involve setting up a nice billard ball bounce. That should totally screw up your car. The best would be individual parts breaking, and affecting handling, as well as cosmetic damage that may even affect aerodynamics.

    Without some major changes, we're still just playing GT1.

    I'd gladly wait a couple of more years for GT4 if it had actual new features!
    • have to "billiard ball bounce" around the stages quite a lot for it to affect things significantly. In fact, I've gone full steam into a metal barrier in 6th gear in CMR 2.0 and whilst it breaks a few windows, you can just carry on with the rest of the stage, maybe with a "sticky" gear change, that's all.

      Realistic car damage in car racing games is quite important, but at least some car damage (like in CMR 2.0) is better than none at all. I'm quite surprised that such a well-respected brand as the G

      • V-Rally 3 has pretty decent car damage in V-Rally mode...I've busted up breaks, engines, even individual wheels...

        One time I managed to finish a stage on 3 wheels! It was a little ways from the end, and was damn near impossible to steer, but some how I made it - even won that particular rally with all the other time I'd made up.

        Nothing like heading towards a cliff edge, going to slam on brakes and getting nothing but a horrid squealing noise!

        If GT had that, it'd be just plain the best game ever I think!
      • Realistic car damage in car racing games is quite important, but at least some car damage (like in CMR 2.0) is better than none at all. I'm quite surprised that such a well-respected brand as the Gran Turismo series has still failed to put this in.

        I think it's simply a matter of the audience they're going for. There are many games out there that have significant car damage features. The GT series seems to go more towards the appearances and variety of the game, while still allowing for more of an arcade
    • If you want real collision damage, I suggest Auto Crossing [] for the real thing.
      • If you want real collision damage, I suggest Auto Crossing [] for the real thing.

        Yawn. Cone-racing is for pansies. I suggest road racing for the real thing.

    • by iainl ( 136759 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @11:38AM (#6150806)
      I'm really not sure about damage now. A couple of years ago while playing GT2 I'd have probably agreed, but not after GT3.

      Yes, lack of damage is a problem with the realistic look they have going on. Hell, before we even get to damage I'd like to start by having rally cars that don't look shiny and clean after 10 laps of dirt racing. But its what comes with it thats the problem.

      Far more than with GT2, progress in GT3 is boringly slow. Without the second-hand market, you spend ages doing the same tracks over and over again at first earning a few pennies to pay for meagre upgrades to the car. Cash is really boringly tight.

      So if you could write off the $100,000 worth of Lotus Elise on the first corner and have to start saving all over again, you'd be going straight for the "revert to saved" option the moment you recieved any damage in any case.

      If you want to see spectacular crashes, buy Burnout 2 (its a more fun game all round, too, but you didn't hear me say that). If you want to play Gran Tourismo's career mode, you're better off without damage that you'll never see again after the first time.
      • That could be easily rectified by not having to pay for damages to your car. A nonexistant repair model is far better than a nonexistant damage model. You crash, careening around the course... you are punished by having to start over.

        From a gameplay perspective it makes perfect sense.

        (I'll never understand why Racing games don't have enough money and RPG's have too many random enemy encounters. Neither should be too tight or too frequently forced that people complain about it, especially in games with
    • I seem to recall that there were legal issues with quite a few of the car manufacturer's- part of the agreememnt to use such acurate likenesses of their vehicles was that they didn't want them shown all messed up and damaged. This could have been an old gamers' wives tale, though. Personally, I've always felt the game would be much better with realistic vehicle damage. They'd probably have to tone down the difficultly and (greatly) tone up the money received from matches (to cover the cost of repairs), t
  • So it looks great. So you can mod your car to your hearts content. But its very, very easy to get a car big enough and fast enough to beat all comers by enormous margins, and because your car takes no damage on the most ridiculous cars (960 bhp and the like) you can just drive it round the barriers on many courses without even steering.

    I was sorely disappointed that the screenshots once again seem to show only pristine cars. Every release they do this, and every release people complain like hell.
    • Blame Car Makers (Score:4, Informative)

      by MBCook ( 132727 ) <> on Monday June 09, 2003 @12:56PM (#6151650) Homepage
      You have to blame the car makers for this one. They won't license the car models if the cars can take damage in game. That means that to have in-game damage, you'd have to have a bunch of cars that sorta look like real cars but aren't and are distunguisable from the real things (so that they don't get sued). It's not PD's fault.
    • You have obviously not played Gran Turismo 3, at least not very far. It is an extremely finesse game. Go ahead, take The Pikes Peak Escudo, put the Stage 4 Turbo on it, giving it I believe 1100hp- the most in the game and we will see how far you get. You will not get much farther than midway through the amateur league, except maybe on a closed in course like tokyo. You get eaten alive doing that on the open courses with large sandpits. You have to get fairly far into the game before you can really start ta
  • whats it going to cost. im not willing to pay extra to play online.
    • My guess (following with Sony's stance on online play) is that it will not cost anything additional.

      BUT, you need to already have the proper components to play the game online:
      -A PS2 (duh!)
      -A network adapeter
      -An ISP

      Now, keep in mind that games like Everquest and such are subscription based games, because they are continually evolving (at least somewhat). This will not be like that.
  • Why do magazines insist on doing previews but showing screen shots of outside views which are basically just replays. You never see those fews when you play the actual game because you are too busy behind the wheel. You don't see the pretty scenary fly by and you rarely have time to see the other cars. Show screen shots behind the wheel, not majestic shots showing courses.
    • Its because the actual game still looks like shit. Every GT they make they put out screenshots that look amazing, then when you get the game it still looks like shit.

      Until these consoles start using AA driving games will continue to look like shit.
  • GT3 had the best feel of the three Gran Tourismo's. It had a lot less fishtailing and the less time you spend correcting your steering, the more entertaining the game. That probably means the game is less realistic, too.

    The graphics are nicer, but as others have stated, the in-game graphics are significantly worse because 30% or more of the screen is filled by the road. So mostly we're talking about better replays.

    I welcome the tracks. I just wish they would have a creator or download capability. I we
  • Reading the ./ posts confirm the following facts: There are two kinds of racing game fans: * Arcade-type racing fans: Love unrealistic physics and speed, expect their game to break the rules and have a high fun factor. The daytonas, F-zeros, SMKs, etc., fall into this category. * The Simulation-type racing fans: Love realistic cars/environments/details and expect their game to mimic reality. GT, Virtua RAcing, etc. I guess I'll stay with the F-zeros and Daytonas... I have enough driving 80 minutes on th
    • Personally, I just like my arcade-type racing to be really over the top (Mario Kart for example), and my simulation-type to be more about the driving and earning cars/tracks/upgrades (the upgrades part being very important to me, because having to get that next car can suck ass if you can't upgrade your existing car). One of the best parts of GT3 that seems often understated is the controls, imo. I've never played a racing game that I felt responded as well to the controls (without buying a wheel) as GT3. T
  • First of all, all the pics that are posted are of Replays, not actual gameplay. This really annoys me because I would like to see what the game looks like when I'm playing, not replaying my run. The game looks outstanding anyway, there is no need to show actual footage of someone playing. Second again the replay mode is shoved don't our throats. Replays are automatic, no way to turn them off, You have to hit start and say exit, "are you sure you wish to exit?" yes. I don't care about replays, I want to play
  • Anyone ever play the old CGA/EGA graphics game Vette? The one where you race corvettes through San francisco running down pedestrians and stuff.

    GT4 would rock if it modeled Vette's damage system with the modern graphics. Get wacked on the front left wheel and steering as well as the engine gets damage. Hit hard enough and your engine blows up killing everyone within 30 miles.

    Though the realistic damage should be an option as it could turn off many people. It's no fun when you get bumped on a turn and from
  • Can it be confirmed or denied that GT4 will have 5.1 sound? The other changes in the game seem to be fairly incremental, but I found the sound ( and soundtrack for that matter) to be kind of lacking. When I play SOCOM (on my pretty spiffy home theater system), it sounds and feels like my room is in the middle of a warzone, but when I play GT3, that roar I would expect to feel coming out of the sub and just a general audio experience as immersive as the visual and gameplay just isnt there. More cars are ni
  • I haven't played GT3, but I've seen quite a bit. It looks beautiful, and 4 is mind blowing. Does anyone have problems with the engine sounds? The lack of wind/ground noise as a car goes by?

    The sounds are bad. If they are going to tout this as a simulator, fix the audio first.

    Damage is a must too. I want to flip my car. I want to cartwheel down the infield. I want to blow my engine if I redline too long.

The absent ones are always at fault.