Project Gotham Racing 3 Designer Diary #1 (new screens!)
- Thread starter mckmas8808
- Start date
dukmahsik said:
Don't get me wrong, i haven't even read the article cause i know it's bullshit, all i was saying is that in the end, all you've seen is screenshots and "videos". So you can't really speak for the final quality of the game other than your own perception and expectations.
People should stop caring about bloody screenshots and "videos", cause they only tell one part of the story (and i will never repeat this enough).
seismologist
Regular
czekon said:
um how can it be BS, I just posted a link to the rountable in which editors from 4 seperate sites were pretty much in agreement.
Most of the screenshots shown aren't even from a gameplay perspective so it doesn't give a good feel for what the game looks like when you're actually playing it.
They also said that the game didn't feel really polished or finished. But believe whatever you want, I'm just giving you a heads up. They all seemed pretty impressed by NFS even though the graphics aren't as good as PGR3.
seismologist said:
Well, let's check the sources, shall we?
Evil Avatar doesn't do game reviews. Generally, they just regurgitate other peoples news stories. (They are kind enough to list their source though, unlike spong.)
Gamecloud is an almost exclusively PC site, specializing in online PC gaming.
Joystiq is actually a multiplatform gaming site. Yay for them. Of course, if you want a good idea of where they stand....
http://xbox360.joystiq.com/
So, his primary objective was, by his own admission, was to make a big deal out of every minor problem he found. To search out flaws, and ignore the good parts that have been "hyped."
And as for Gaming Steve himself, even his own site admits:
So apparently, by his own admission, he lacked the playtime to make a decent assessment.
That's not what I would call the most reliable preview I've ever read. 1 site that doesn't review games, 1 site that doesn't like console games, 1 site that admits they were out to find problems, and 1 who lacked the experience to make a proper judgement.
That sounds like BS to me.
mckmas8808
Legend
And Powerkeg with the save. *The crowd goes wild*
seismologist
Regular
Dispelling hype is a good thing right?
Sounds like a perfect source to me.
Sounds like a perfect source to me.
seismologist said:
No, being objective is a good thing, and being objective means you recognize that sometimes, things are worthy of the hype given to them.
The moment he said "dispelling hype was my primary objective" he lost all sense of fairness, and became purely critical, which is not a good thing.
Don't get me wrong, criticism is certainly a good thing when it's given as part of a fair report, but fairness must come first and foremost.
And fair to me would be a game reviewer with plenty of experience playing the game his is reporting about, as well as it's successors. It would point out all of the good as well as the bad, and would put each aspect in proper context.
If a game has a problem, I want to know about it, but I also want to know if it's just a minor thing that's easily ignored, or something that's going to be so problematic that it detracts from my enjoyment of the game. I want something more substantial than "It just didn't seem as fun as this over-the-top arcade racer" because that makes me wonder if there really is a problem with the game, or if it's a problem with the reviewer simply not enjoying that type of game.
And I will always consider the opinion of a fan more important than a non-fan of the genre. The claims that the game is "not as fun" as NFS makes me wonder if the reason is the game, or simply a reviewer who prefers ultra-arcady gameplay over believable racing.
And fair to me would be a game reviewer with plenty of experience playing the game his is reporting about, as well as it's successors. It would point out all of the good as well as the bad, and would put each aspect in proper context.
If a game has a problem, I want to know about it, but I also want to know if it's just a minor thing that's easily ignored, or something that's going to be so problematic that it detracts from my enjoyment of the game. I want something more substantial than "It just didn't seem as fun as this over-the-top arcade racer" because that makes me wonder if there really is a problem with the game, or if it's a problem with the reviewer simply not enjoying that type of game.
And I will always consider the opinion of a fan more important than a non-fan of the genre. The claims that the game is "not as fun" as NFS makes me wonder if the reason is the game, or simply a reviewer who prefers ultra-arcady gameplay over believable racing.
scooby_dooby
Legend
From teh gameplay clips you can see PGR3 is much more of a sim then NFS, you have to heavily break on all turns, and the physics looks very realistic.
NFS on the other hand is arcade through and through.
So they can't be compared on a fun-scale, at least not objectively. Personally I can't stand arcade racers, they suck IMO, nothing is worse than goofy physics and retarded unrealistic handling. I played MC3 for about 2 minutes until I took it out and never played again.
They're 2 compeltely different styles of play, one is arcade the other is semi-realistic. Which is funner to you will depend on you preference. To me, the funnest thing is driving a car that feels real and trying to drive it really really well. OTher people like e--brakes that turn on a dime at 100mph....
This is the same round table that spent 10minutes ripping into PD0, meanwhile reputable sites like 1up called it game of show and "killer app," so obviously these guys are being a little overly critical.
NFS on the other hand is arcade through and through.
So they can't be compared on a fun-scale, at least not objectively. Personally I can't stand arcade racers, they suck IMO, nothing is worse than goofy physics and retarded unrealistic handling. I played MC3 for about 2 minutes until I took it out and never played again.
They're 2 compeltely different styles of play, one is arcade the other is semi-realistic. Which is funner to you will depend on you preference. To me, the funnest thing is driving a car that feels real and trying to drive it really really well. OTher people like e--brakes that turn on a dime at 100mph....
This is the same round table that spent 10minutes ripping into PD0, meanwhile reputable sites like 1up called it game of show and "killer app," so obviously these guys are being a little overly critical.
scooby_dooby said:
I agree completely.
I prefer the more realistic racers myself. I would rip a game like Ridge Racer or NFS to shreds as far as the gameplay goes, not because it's bad, but because it represents everything I do not like in a racing game. The only NFS game I've ever enjoyed was Porsche Unleased, which was the most realistic one of the bunch.
But knowing that about myself, I would not write an article about a Ridge Racer type game, because I know that I could not "see" the great aspects of that game that so many fans of the series love. I would only see the aspects that I hate, and that wouldn't be fair to the game or the developers who made it.
seismologist
Regular
Arcade racers will probably benefit more from next gen graphics just because there's alot more stuff being thrown around on the screen. In NFS you're being chased by cops, hitting jumps, doing 360's. It's probably way more intense thanks to the extra horsepower.
Whereas for a straight racer like PGR, 10k more polygons in the car isn't going to make a huge difference. I think that's all these guys are saying.
Whereas for a straight racer like PGR, 10k more polygons in the car isn't going to make a huge difference. I think that's all these guys are saying.
Nesh said:I dont recall MSR or PGR or PGR2 having realistic controls
i don't think anyone is trying to pass pgr off as a sim....
it inhabits a strange category in between sim racer and arcade racer. so whilst it's not a sim, it's still a lot more realistic than say NFS.
anyway, i think powderkeg summarised it pretty well, and remember that the builds people get to play are always the older, more stable builds according to bizarre. So whilst their experiences may be recent, the build they are formed on may be several weeks old, and i'd suggest perhaps that with the deadlines approaching, now is when the game is getting the most fine tweaking as regards gameplay etc. but lets face it, this is PGR3... if you didn't like PGR2's gameplay you probably won't particularly love pgr3's - it's not rocket science.
as for their comments re graphics, i don't need anyone to tell me about the visuals on pgr3, there's more than enough gameplay video media out there to tell me the graphics are great - granted there's not a ton of direct feed, but it's still enoguh to make a good basis of an opinion on.
in short, i'm not going to pay any attention to such stuff until a final build gets reviewed by a number of sites... or more to the point, i'll decide for myself when i get it. there's no chance i'm taking this one off my launch list.
EDIT
oh, and there's a nice new 3d screenshot at xboxyde now... crowd looks great, spectraflair paint looks very well done (if not to everybodies taste, the effect at least is impressive), and the reflections are awesome. some flaws/less impressive aspects... but there are a few people on here who i am sure will delight in pointing them out. all in pretty smoking!
http://www.xboxyde.com/news_2162_en.html
Last edited by a moderator:
scooby_dooby
Legend
Well you can download gamplay clips for PGR3 and see for yourself.
The have to break heavily for all corners, and the physics are definately more sim-like than your typical NFS game
The have to break heavily for all corners, and the physics are definately more sim-like than your typical NFS game
With that point of view I cant disagree.
Personally though if I wanted an arcade racer I d definetely go for the burnout seiries.For realism I d go for the Gran Turismo series.
I found PGR's controls kind of awkward though.I think Bizzare should go for true realistic treatment instead.Or atleast make a few tweaks to the feeling of the handling.
Ofcourse I am expecting that improvements on control handling have already been made
I ll find out when I ll get my hands on it
Personally though if I wanted an arcade racer I d definetely go for the burnout seiries.For realism I d go for the Gran Turismo series.
I found PGR's controls kind of awkward though.I think Bizzare should go for true realistic treatment instead.Or atleast make a few tweaks to the feeling of the handling.
Ofcourse I am expecting that improvements on control handling have already been made
I ll find out when I ll get my hands on it
silhouette
Regular
london-boy said:
I totally agree. It also depends on where you see those video's as well. These console games are done with a TV like setup in mind (i.e. sitting 2-4 meters away from TV), and most of the time, we watch those in-game videos in our computer monitors that are just 30-50cm from us.. For example, I watched NBA 2K video(a high quality 720p video) a couple of weeks ago on my computer and the graphics/animation did not seem as beautiful as people who sees it on TV hyped. Last weekend, I connected my computer to my 46" DLP TV and watched it again. I did not believe my eyes as how it looked differently on my couch. Now, I truly understand what the guys actually talk about.
I decided to reserve all my judgements until I see them in kiosks or very HQ videos on my TV.
seismologist
Regular
PR-shot: http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360...project-gotham-racing-3-20050929031328555.jpg
vs.
Actual gameplay: http://media.xboxyde.com/gallery/public/2053/726_0009.jpg
Now can you guys see how it might seem underwhelming in person?
vs.
Actual gameplay: http://media.xboxyde.com/gallery/public/2053/726_0009.jpg
Now can you guys see how it might seem underwhelming in person?