Gran Turismo 5 - Christmas 2009


Recommended Posts

Well there's 50 million people on the last page you don't know :rofl:

So you're saying noone bought more than one GT game. that doesn't sound like a very good game :p

GT has sold better in the west, USA/Europe EVERY SINGLE GAME.

Also, untill Forza what sort of competition did it even have, and the first Forza wasn't giving much of a chance, wit the original xbox's life being cut short.

So basically it's a comparison that doesn't even exist untill GT5 is released, that's the first time two same generation consoles both have a good racing simulator each., good try though ;)

So you're saying noone bought more than one GT game. that doesn't sound like a very good game :p

Actually 50 million individual people buying GT WOULD be very impressive :laugh:

But on a serious note, I do realize it's not 50 million individuals (I myself own GT1-3, and have GT5P. Never bought GT4), I said what I said just to joke with DM ;)

Awesome, that means Australia should get GT5 around March 2010 :/ that is if the government doesn't decide to ban it :p ....

Seriously I can't wait, looking forward to getting GT5 whenever it shows up and seeing if I can beat the Stig's lap times on the Top Gear test track :D

Awesome, that means Australia should get GT5 around March 2010 :/ that is if the government doesn't decide to ban it :p ....

Seriously I can't wait, looking forward to getting GT5 whenever it shows up and seeing if I can beat the Stig's lap times on the Top Gear test track :D

Wouldn't it be funny if the current Stig at the time of release done a real lap time, and a GT5 lap time? :laugh:

Good thing for us would be there's a chance he'll be **** at GT5, and we'll all pwn him :shiftyninja:

Actually it wouldn't suprise me if the whole Top Gear crew done some in-game laps, even for kicks/promotion!

LO, It's so close to 2010 that even the slightest delay will push it into Q1/Q2 2010. I don't see it happening.

They thought that saying Christmas 2009 will shut up shop but it clearly hasn't. GT5 is an extremly delayed game and it was suppose to be there at launch for PS3 but it turns out it will turn up 3 1/2 years!

Not that it is a bad thing, the Exclusives have been very much hard to come by the PS3 and it's only this year that a few started to come out but 2009 doesn't look that great honestly.

By the time the game does come, Forza 3, PGR5 etc will be out and it will be too little too late.

They thought that saying Christmas 2009 will shut up shop but it clearly hasn't. GT5 is an extremly delayed game and it was suppose to be there at launch for PS3 but it turns out it will turn up 3 1/2 years!

No it wasn't, GT5 has never had a release date.

And do your maths better.

December will be 3 years 2 months for USA, 2 years 8 months for Europe.

Not that it is a bad thing, the Exclusives have been very much hard to come by the PS3 and it's only this year that a few started to come out but 2009 doesn't look that great honestly.

2009 so far,

God of War 3

inFAMOUS

MAG

Killzone 2

Uncharted 2

GT5

Heavy Rain

White Knight Story

Jak and Daxter: Lost Frontier

The Agency

FF13 (Japan anyway...)

Hardly a bad lineup when we're sitting in 2008 right now and there will be more to be announced.

By the time the game does come, Forza 3, PGR5 etc will be out and it will be too little too late.

Yes, I forgot it's not possible for your game to sell or be enjoyed if another racer has come out before it.

Damn Piracy, I love your doom and gloom replies ;)

Edited by Audioboxer
Australia will get it's own GT5, with the Australia top Gear test track. And thus noone will buy it to avoid infecting their PS3's with that abomination of a "racetrack"... :p

:rofl: I hope not! if they do that, I'm importing GT5!! (I normally don't bother with importing, so the fact I would shows how much I dislike Top Gear Australia! :p)

As I said before, I think MS may be aiming at one Forza per generation and instead use content packs to add to that game over time...

but.... on the other hand... there hasn't been a car or track pack for Fora 2 for a LONG time now, wich suggest the Forza team, and not just the coders but the art team as well by now, is indeed working on a new game. and if they are that far along (and this beaing Turn10 and not PD :p) as that suggest, we could very likely see Forza 3 for the 360 late next year or early 2010

As I said before, I think MS may be aiming at one Forza per generation and instead use content packs to add to that game over time...

but.... on the other hand... there hasn't been a car or track pack for Fora 2 for a LONG time now, wich suggest the Forza team, and not just the coders but the art team as well by now, is indeed working on a new game. and if they are that far along (and this beaing Turn10 and not PD :p) as that suggest, we could very likely see Forza 3 for the 360 late next year or early 2010

Yeah there is a Forza 3 in development for the 360 and has been for sometime (and will be the last Forza for the 360). I heard a rumor it's going to span 2 discs! what makes things worse for GT is GT5 is likely to ship with no damage, as it seems they are still having trouble getting manufacturers to agree to let them damage their cars. Which makes no sense since Forza can and every other car racing game out there...

Yeah there is a Forza 3 in development for the 360 and has been for sometime (and will be the last Forza for the 360). I heard a rumor it's going to span 2 discs! what makes things worse for GT is GT5 is likely to ship with no damage, as it seems they are still having trouble getting manufacturers to agree to let them damage their cars. Which makes no sense since Forza can and every other car racing game out there...

It will come with damage, Kazunori Yamauchi just said it's taking longer to get everyone on board which in some way you can probably contribute to the length in development.

It's not strange, GT has usually has a massive span of manufacturers and also many cars under these manufacturers.

The manufacturers themselves probably also have different stances on various models of cars they make - One car they may be okay with it being totalled, another not so much.

I think last I heard Ferrari? were giving them some headaches.

Oh right, yeah, Forza was the one with the 2 disc rumor, I forgot about that.

Wonder if they'll do interiors this time so the showoffs can showoff , and to shut up the people that think driving with a cockpit blocking 1/3rd of your view is realistic :rolleyes:

It will come with damage, Kazunori Yamauchi just said it's taking longer to get everyone on board which in some way you can probably contribute to the length in development.

It's not strange, GT has usually has a massive span of manufacturers and also many cars under these manufacturers.

The manufacturers themselves probably also have different stances on various models of cars they make - One car they may be okay with it being totalled, another not so much.

I think last I heard Ferrari? were giving them some headaches.

hmmm Ferrari hasn't had any problems with crash modelling in Forza though... Bugatti is the real bitch when it comes to this. wich is weird.

you'd think it'd be the car makers who actuall sell to millions of consumers like Toyota, ford and all thos that'd have a problem with crahs modelling, not luxury/elite supercar makers like Bugatti, peopel don't really buy these cars for their colliosion proofness, yo know that when you crash a Veryon at top speed you're dead and the car no longer needs the car allready resembles a pancake :p

You all seem to be busy quoting the GT sales figures, but what are Forza's like (genuine question, can't find any)? Would actually give a purpose to quoting the GT figures... alone they mean nothing.

VGChartz estimate sales so they aren't completely reliable, but they say just over 4m

http://www.vgchartz.com/games/game.php?id=...&region=All

I can't find an official figure anywhere.

hmmm Ferrari hasn't had any problems with crash modelling in Forza though... Bugatti is the real bitch when it comes to this. wich is weird.

you'd think it'd be the car makers who actuall sell to millions of consumers like Toyota, ford and all thos that'd have a problem with crahs modelling, not luxury/elite supercar makers like Bugatti, peopel don't really buy these cars for their colliosion proofness, yo know that when you crash a Veryon at top speed you're dead and the car no longer needs the car allready resembles a pancake :p

I think it was Ferarri, I'll go look.

If it is, as I said, could be down to what models of Ferrari are in the game.

GT has a thing with putting in old classic cars/super cars/proto-types etc, quite a bit as well.

You haven't actually tried this have you ? cause you're MASSIVELY overestimating the power of the TCS and ABS systems :p

And personally I find it more itneresting if the field and competition is higher, who cares if the other guys have more aids on than me, it's more itneresting with a tigher field and ocmpetition. and besides, those that can drive without TCS and ABS will outdrive anyone with those aids anyway, better brake control better control in the corners, at least on the rear wheel or 4WD cars, if you can stay on the razors edge

well to be honest... in Forza 2 i never have played with ABS/TCS (if i did it was very brief) cause as soon as i started playing Forza 2 on XBox360 i pretty much turned assists off and left it that way. ;) ... but i am right that 'assists on' on those 'higher powered' cars does make it noticeably easier to stay on the track right?

but assuming i was wrong... there's still a pretty noticeable difference between NO assist and ALL assists ON.... cause you cant break the back end loose as easy etc... in a way with assists on it sorta handicap's me now that im pretty much used to playing with assists off but for beginners with assists on it definitely helps em cause even though you aint golden (like you said) it takes a noticeable amount more error on the drivers part to lose control of the car etc.

but i can see your point about making the playing field closer with the competition etc which cant be a bad thing... but pretty much ALL the players that play with no assists will be thinking to themselves (if we lose a race), 'i would have won if that guy was not playing with assists on' if we happen to get beat by a 'assists on' player... cause that's all the excuse we need if we end up losing ;) lol (which is a legitimate excuse in my opinion)

It will come with damage, Kazunori Yamauchi just said it's taking longer to get everyone on board which in some way you can probably contribute to the length in development.

It's not strange, GT has usually has a massive span of manufacturers and also many cars under these manufacturers.

The manufacturers themselves probably also have different stances on various models of cars they make - One car they may be okay with it being totalled, another not so much.

I think last I heard Ferrari? were giving them some headaches.

Yeah, they are.

Oh right, yeah, Forza was the one with the 2 disc rumor, I forgot about that.

Wonder if they'll do interiors this time so the showoffs can showoff , and to shut up the people that think driving with a cockpit blocking 1/3rd of your view is realistic :rolleyes:

hmmm Ferrari hasn't had any problems with crash modelling in Forza though... Bugatti is the real bitch when it comes to this. wich is weird.

you'd think it'd be the car makers who actuall sell to millions of consumers like Toyota, ford and all thos that'd have a problem with crahs modelling, not luxury/elite supercar makers like Bugatti, peopel don't really buy these cars for their colliosion proofness, yo know that when you crash a Veryon at top speed you're dead and the car no longer needs the car allready resembles a pancake :p

But that is the point, cockpit view is realistic. Unless you have a camera mounted on your front bumper and you drive via a VR helmet? or perhaps you have a camera mounted on a helicopter that follows from behind your car?

But that is the point, cockpit view is realistic. Unless you have a camera mounted on your front bumper and you drive via a VR helmet? or perhaps you have a camera mounted on a helicopter that follows from behind your car?

Yeah the cockpit view in GT5P was one of the reasons I bought it... never bought a prologue before.

If you're into your cars it's awesome seeing 1:1 replicated dashes/interior and it definitely adds to the immersion :yes:

How is cockpit iw realistic?

Now I have a 42 inch TV, now if I drive PGR and turn on cockpits. I can tell you right now, the viewsreen on my TV witht he cockpit on,is a LOT less than what I have in my actual car.

Heck even without a cockpit, you have a far bigger viewscren on an actual car, and more improtantly, you have a MUCH bigger FOV. unless you happen to have multipla xboxes, TV's and copies of forza, and do the multi screen thing.

Driving with cockpits on is not just stupid, it's also not realistic, it's pure showoff to go "ooh, ook at the pretty interiors we modelled", and well. looking around the interiorsof the cars in PGR4 is impressive but... I'm there to drive to car, not look at the inside :p

And with a pad I drive witht he behind car view anyway, can't drie isnide witht he pad, when I use the wheel, I use the inside car view, wit or without the hood, ot the bumper cam, bumper cams are stupid. Inside car view with the hood though, that works great, and moreso it's realistic.

How is cockpit iw realistic?

Now I have a 42 inch TV, now if I drive PGR and turn on cockpits. I can tell you right now, the viewsreen on my TV witht he cockpit on,is a LOT less than what I have in my actual car.

Heck even without a cockpit, you have a far bigger viewscren on an actual car, and more improtantly, you have a MUCH bigger FOV. unless you happen to have multipla xboxes, TV's and copies of forza, and do the multi screen thing.

Driving with cockpits on is not just stupid, it's also not realistic, it's pure showoff to go "ooh, ook at the pretty interiors we modelled", and well. looking around the interiorsof the cars in PGR4 is impressive but... I'm there to drive to car, not look at the inside :p

And with a pad I drive witht he behind car view anyway, can't drie isnide witht he pad, when I use the wheel, I use the inside car view, wit or without the hood, ot the bumper cam, bumper cams are stupid. Inside car view with the hood though, that works great, and moreso it's realistic.

Because I don't tend to drive my car from my roof.

Plus why are you comparing car windscreen dimensions to an HDTV? If I had one of those 200" HDTVs, I'd be saying "Bob, my HDTV isn't exactly 1:1 with my view from in my actual car". However it doesn't take away from the realism that is the fact you drive from within a "cockpit".

I'm there to drive to car, not look at the inside :p

Use one of the other views in GT then, problem solved ;)

No idea why you're bashing the extra effort involved in modelling the cars perfectly inside, as well as outside when all you need to do is choose another view!

How is cockpit iw realistic?

Now I have a 42 inch TV, now if I drive PGR and turn on cockpits. I can tell you right now, the viewsreen on my TV witht he cockpit on,is a LOT less than what I have in my actual car.

Heck even without a cockpit, you have a far bigger viewscren on an actual car, and more improtantly, you have a MUCH bigger FOV. unless you happen to have multipla xboxes, TV's and copies of forza, and do the multi screen thing.

Driving with cockpits on is not just stupid, it's also not realistic, it's pure showoff to go "ooh, ook at the pretty interiors we modelled", and well. looking around the interiorsof the cars in PGR4 is impressive but... I'm there to drive to car, not look at the inside :p

And with a pad I drive witht he behind car view anyway, can't drie isnide witht he pad, when I use the wheel, I use the inside car view, wit or without the hood, ot the bumper cam, bumper cams are stupid. Inside car view with the hood though, that works great, and moreso it's realistic.

Norway must be a very high-tech country with all those fancy cameras on your cars :p

Put it this way - how are non-cockpit views LESS realistic than those without? :s

Again, not so much about size.

repeat after me

F

O

V

Field of View. the cockpit blocks off a huge portion of your side view, and on top of that, cockpit views use a camera with a lower FOV to start with.

PErsonally I find FOV improtant when I drive a car. and the camera is either on the bumper or the roof. Forza at the very least ( dunno about GT5P and GT5 what cameras they have) have one camera insidethe car, normal driving position, with the car invisible, and another with the ron of the car visible so you see over the hood of the car, wich is what I normally use when I drive with a wheel.

FOV in a racing sim is too improtant to sacrifice to visual detail you don't see when you drive an actual car even, Again i I was using a 3-4 monitors multi view setup, then yeah, then I could see using the cockpit, but on on a single screen setup. Maybe with that fancy head tracker thing they have support for in GTR.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • We now know when and how the Universe may truly end by Sayan Sen Image by Marek Pavlík via Pexels| Not representative A study by physicist Henry Tye of Cornell University suggests that the universe may not expand forever. Instead, it could eventually stop expanding, begin contracting and end in a "Big Crunch" roughly 20 billion years from now. The research, published in the Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, was conducted by Tye, Horace White Professor of Physics Emeritus at Cornell University. Using recent observations from major dark-energy surveys, Tye and his collaborators developed a cosmological model that predicts the universe could have a total lifespan of about 33 billion years. Since the universe is currently estimated to be 13.8 billion years old, the model places it near the midpoint of its existence. According to Cornell University's summary of the research, the study centers on the cosmological constant, a term introduced by Albert Einstein in his theory of general relativity. In modern cosmology, the cosmological constant is commonly used to describe the simplest form of dark energy, the unknown phenomenon believed to be driving the accelerating expansion of the universe. "For the last 20 years, people believed that the cosmological constant is positive, and the universe will expand forever," Tye said in a Cornell University news release. "The new data seem to indicate that the cosmological constant is negative, and that the universe will end in a big crunch." The study draws on data from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) and the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI), two major projects designed to investigate the nature of dark energy. According to Tye, recent observations suggest that dark energy may not behave exactly like a simple cosmological constant. To account for those observations, Tye and his collaborators proposed a model involving an extremely light hypothetical particle that evolves over time. In their calculations, this produces a negative cosmological constant and leads to a future collapse of the universe. The model predicts that cosmic expansion would continue for approximately another 11 billion years before reaching a maximum size, after which the universe would begin contracting and eventually collapse. Scientists have long debated how the universe might end. As explained in an article published in The Conversation by Stephen DiKerby of Michigan State University, several possibilities have been proposed. If dark energy remains constant and positive, the universe could continue expanding indefinitely, gradually becoming colder, darker and more diffuse in a scenario often called the "heat death" of the universe. Other theoretical possibilities include a Big Rip, in which cosmic expansion accelerates so dramatically that galaxies, stars and even atoms are torn apart, or a Big Crunch, in which expansion reverses and the universe collapses back into an extremely dense state. DiKerby notes that the Big Crunch idea itself is not new. What distinguishes Tye's work is that it attempts to use current observational data to estimate when such a collapse might occur and how it could unfold. Much of the universe's long-term evolution remains uncertain. According to current astrophysical understanding, stars will continue to form and die for billions of years. The Sun, for example, is about halfway through its expected lifespan. Galaxies are also expected to continue merging; the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies are projected to collide several billion years from now. At the same time, the nature of dark energy remains one of the biggest unanswered questions in cosmology. While observations indicate that the universe's expansion is accelerating, scientists still do not know what is causing that acceleration. Future observations may therefore alter current predictions about the cosmos's ultimate fate. Tye emphasized that additional evidence will be needed before firm conclusions can be drawn. DESI continues to collect data, while upcoming observations from missions and observatories including Euclid, SPHEREx and the Vera C. Rubin Observatory are expected to provide more precise measurements of dark energy. "People have said before that if the cosmological constant is negative, then the universe will collapse eventually. That's not new," Tye said. "However, here the model tells you when the universe collapses and how it collapses." For now, the study presents one possible future for the cosmos rather than a settled prediction. Whether the universe ultimately ends in a Big Crunch, expands forever, or follows another path entirely remains an open question that future observations will help answer. Source: Cornell University, The Conversation This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • If you look around on Amazon, some of these are available for $9
    • I’m still using an Xbox One S, so time for an upgrade to play this but as much as I hate Sony, I think I’ll get the ps5 pro
    • I bought this game. Played it for an hour, and then got a refund from Steam. Not a fun game at all.
    • Nothing Ear buds with active noise cancellation are at their lowest price ever with 51% off by Fiza Ali Amazon is currently offering the Nothing Ear wireless earbuds at their lowest price ever with 51% off limited prime deal. The earbuds feature an 11mm dynamic drivers with a ceramic diaphragm, and support high-resolution audio codecs including AAC, SBC, LDAC, and LHDC 5.0. They support active noise cancellation of up to 45dB across a frequency range of up to 5000Hz, and include a smart ANC algorithm, adaptive noise cancellation, and a transparency mode that allows surrounding sounds to be heard when needed. Connectivity is provided via Bluetooth 5.3, with support for multiple profiles including HFP, A2DP, AVRCP, and others. The earbuds also support dual connection, allowing them to be paired with two devices at the same time. Additional features include IP54 water and dust resistance for the earbuds and IP55 for the charging case, in-ear detection, pinch controls, low-latency mode, Google Fast Pair, Microsoft Swift Pair, and a three-microphone system per earbud for clearer voice calls. The Nothing X app, available on Android and iOS, provides access to custom EQ settings, bass enhancement, personal sound profiles, ear tip fit testing, firmware updates, customisable controls, dual-device management, and a find-my-earbuds feature. In terms of battery performance, each earbud has a 46mAh battery and the charging case has a 500mAh capacity. With active noise cancellation (ANC) turned off, the earbuds should offer up to 8.5 hours of playback on a single charge and up to 40.5 hours in total with the charging case. With ANC enabled, playback should last up to 5.2 hours on the earbuds and up to 24 hours with the case. For calls, talk time should reach up to 5 hours on the earbuds and 23 hours with the case when ANC is off, while ANC on should provide up to 4 hours on the earbuds and 18 hours with the case. Finally, fast charging should deliver up to 10 hours of playback from 10 minutes of charging when ANC is disabled. Nothing Ear Wireless Earbuds Bluetooth: $73.15 (Amazon US) - 51% off Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      With What earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      572
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      173
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      73
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      68
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!