Drive Club

[Choze]

 

 

Yep look insane

 

 

 

Edited April 30, 2014 by Choze

[Goron_3]

Beautiful.

 

I'll be buying a PS4 with a proper steering wheel set up for this game!

[Jimbob]

 

Seriously, that looks fantastic. The delay has certainly been worth it in my eyes.

[Cube]

http://blog.eu.playstation.com/2014/05/07/whats-included-driveclub-playstation-plus-edition/

 

The PS+ edition comes with:

- one location (India)

- 11 tracks

- 10 cars

- access to all game modes.

 

This is actually a lot less than I was expecting. There's also the upgrade: for £42.99, you unlock the full

 

- five locations

- 55 tracks

- 50 cars

- all 50 tour events

 

You may as well get the PS+ edition and take your time completing everything there, then buy the disc version as it be cheaper than the upgrade not that long after launch.

[Daft]

That's a ridiculous RRP. With Alien Isolation, Shadow of Mordor and Batman: Arkham Knight out in October this can wait. I'm still really looking forward to it but yeeesh.

[Cookyman]

There's also the upgrade: for £42.99, you unlock the full

 

- five locations

- 55 tracks

- 50 cars

- all 50 tour events

 

There's also the upgrade: for £42.99

 

£42.99

 

 

Ridiculous overpricing - the whole idea was you got a stripped down version on plus then got the game upgrade at a reduced price - that's hardly reduced!

 

You will get another game on plus in October though apparently - should think so too.

 

What you’ll get as part of the Instant Game Collection in October is still being decided. But DRIVECLUB PS+ Edition wont be alone.

[Choze]

Thats practically a full price game lol. Also shame its only India for location.

[S.C.G]

I've never had a problem with buying the full retail game at launch, yes I have Plus, no I never really intended to get the stripped down version in any case as I heard that we'll be getting a free 6 month/year Plus code in the game box unless that's now been abandoned or perhaps I imagined it.

 

Either way, the retail game will be worth the money surely? The whole paying for upgrading from Plus edition is completely nonsensical if it's at RRP price for a digital upgrade, might as well just buy the physical version even if they have done away with the free *plus subscription, it's still going to be a fantastic exclusive racing game.

 

*I think I must have imagined the free plus sub in the retail driveclub box as I can't find a mention of it anywhere now.

[Daft]

UPDATE: Our priority for DRIVECLUB is to enable you to play and enjoy everything it has to offer and PlayStation recognises that the prior plan for DRIVECLUB entitlement for the upgrade to the PS Plus edition was not appropriate. As a result, we have adjusted the PlayStation Plus terms for DRIVECLUB.

 

Now, If you intend on downloading DRIVECLUB PlayStation Plus Edition, and upgrading to the full game experience, you will have access to the full game even if your PlayStation Plus subscription runs out.

 

The price is high but I'm still excited for this.

 

Today the newly appointed Driveclub Game Director Paul Rustchynsky shared a few new details about the game in an interview on IGN (update 2: the interview has now been made available again, and you can find it here).

 

Rustchynsky mentioned that club leaders can create a custom livery and as soon as someone enters that club that livery will be applied to his cars. Customization includes paint colors, paint types, livery pattern, shapes and so forth. If you want a pink Ferrari with yellow stripes you’ll be able to have one. You’ll also be able to customize the settings of your ride.

 

The progression system is very straightforward. You earn fame and that levels you up. Every time you level up you get a new car.If you want to get a shortcut and pay to unlock a car immediately you can, but you can’t pay to buy fame for instance, so there’s no pay to win in the game.

 

It’ll also be possible to play completely offline, and when you’ll connect back online all your progression will be syncronized with the server.

 

New cars and tracks will also come as DLC after release, and there’s a possibility for a season pass, but nothing is set in stone about the season pass itself. On the other hand no special or collector’s edition will be offered. The game will weigh approximately 20 gigabytes on the hard disk of your PS4

 

As a final treat, Rustchynsky shared that players will be able to actually manually control the KERS and DRS F1-like system on the McLaren P1, which is something petrolheads like me will definitely appreciate.

 

For those that don’t know, the KERS (Kinetic Energy Recovery System) recovers and stores the kinetic energy generated by the car under breaking, and allows the driver to unleash it to get an extra boost during acceleration. The DRS (Drag Reduction System) is built inton the rear wing and can be adjusted in order to reduce drag when driving on a straight line, at the cost of downforce.

 

Rustchynsky didn’t mention it, but I wonder if the IPAS (Instant Power Assist System), which gives an instant boost thanks to an electric motor, will be simulated as well.

 

We’ll have to wait and see about that, but Driveclub definitely looks more and more interesting with every passing day.

[Cookyman]

 

 

It's a thing of Beauty!

 

 

 

Optional microtransactions

 

 

Very interesting vid - I'm back onboard!

 

Edited May 9, 2014 by Cookyman
Automerged Doublepost

[Cookyman]

[Daft]

Looks stunning. Everyone goes on about Project Cars, what are the tracks like on that?

[dwarf]

Actually looks really good, the sky boxes are phenom.

[Choze]

 

 

Looks stunning. Everyone goes on about Project Cars, what are the tracks like on that?

 

Vocal minority who have a vested interest as they helped fund the game. It also by the makers of the NFS Shift games...

[The Bard]

Lol, that's a little bit of a misrepresentation.

 

Project Cars is basically Slightly Mad Studio's response to having a fixed deadline and gameplay constraints with the NFS games they developed. The degree of simulation in that game is pretty insane (as well as fully customisable), and it looks pretty good too. At the moment, it's a work in progress, as well as being crowdfunded, which just means that there's a degree of transparency to the proceedings in development that there isn't for drive club or Forza (hence the...well, bullshots, or representations of the game selected specifically for marketing purposes). The tracks have been stripped down, unfinished versions, which is expected with a game in alpha, but I've never seen anything as spectacular as the car, lighting and reflection models in that game. Looks goood man.

Edited May 23, 2014 by The Bard

[Choze]

Lol, that's a little bit of a misrepresentation.

 

Project Cars is basically Slightly Mad Studio's response to having a fixed deadline and gameplay constraints with the NFS games they developed. The degree of simulation in that game is pretty insane (as well as fully customisable), and it looks stunning. At the moment, since it's a work in progress, as well as being crowdfunded, which just means that there's a degree of transparency to the proceedings in development that there isn't for drive club or Forza (hence the...well, bullshots, or representations of the game selected specifically for marketing purposes). The tracks have been stripped down, unfinished versions, which is expected with a work in progress, but I've never seen anything as spectacular as the car, lighting and reflection models in that game. Looks goood man.

 

Both companies have a track record. Crowdfunding is not necessarily transparent as many have found out the hard way.

 

Car wise even GT6 on the PS3 looks great still. Which happens to run at a resolution higher than many Xbox One and WiiU games. Track wise Drive Club is miles ahead of everything else. Its also the only other franchise after GT to use more detailed road modelling.

[The Bard]

You do realise, that that's, once again, a misrepresentation, right? If GT6 does run at a higher resolution than "most Xbox One games," that's entirely because the One games are banking on the trade off between resolution and a variety of other things such as better physics simulation, different ambient occlusion, tesselation, particles, lighting models etc, which GT6 couldn't ever hope to achieve on PS3 hardware? You're taking one aspect (ie. resolution) that seems to be in the foreground in forum mentality these days and using that as the gold standard against which you measure everything.

 

I've no doubt that Drive Club has incredible terrain and road mapping; I can see that for myself. But you're not gaining anything apart from a fanboy reputation by belittling the games that exist elsewhere. I've heard literally nothing but good things about Project Cars everywhere I've looked.

 

Lastly, your implied argument that a console manufacturer's flagship racing game is more transparently presented than a game which is funded in full entirely by a fanbase that has paid the money upfront in exchange for frequent, sometimes weekly development updates, is self evidently a little wonky.

[Choze]

You do realise, that that's, once again, a misrepresentation, right? If GT6 does run at a higher resolution than "most Xbox One games," that's entirely because the One games are banking on the trade off between resolution and a variety of other things such as better physics simulation, different ambient occlusion, tesselation, particles, lighting models etc, which GT6 couldn't ever hope to achieve on PS3 hardware? You're taking one aspect (ie. resolution) that seems to be in the foreground in forum mentality these days and using that as the gold standard against which you measure everything.

 

GT6 does quite afew things better than the other franchises mentioned in this thread will do for some time. Lets not be silly. Basic hardware effects of course the next gen systems will do better at but as game the handling etc. are the most accurate out there. Its still the most photo realistic looking racing game. No super computer can beat the human input and development time GT games get. The resolution on Xbone is mostly to do with the weak hardware. There is no secret or anything to it.

 

I've no doubt that Drive Club has incredible terrain and road mapping; I can see that for myself. But you're not gaining anything apart from a fanboy reputation by belittling the games that exist elsewhere. I've heard literally nothing but good things about Project Cars everywhere I've looked.

 

But you arent a Project Cars fanboy? Who is starting the name calling?

 

Lastly, your implied argument that a console manufacturer's flagship racing game is more transparently presented than a game which is funded in full entirely by a fanbase that has paid the money upfront in exchange for frequent, sometimes weekly development updates, is self evidently a little wonky.

 

What is so transparent about Project Cars given you are keen to promote it in a Driveclub topic? Did you fund the game? The gameplay pedigree of the makers(or lack there of for many years) is quite apparent. People interested in Project Cars certainly do not promote the gameplay. "From the makers of the NFS Shift series" is probably not going to be in the advertising materials.

[The Bard]

I'm just going to pick at random things in your post that are redolent of a lack of basic reasoning skills and address them: Gran Turismo 6 is sitting at an 81 metacritic, NFS: Shift is sitting at 83. While I have problems with the way metacritic amalgamates scores based on different rubrics, it does so for both games. So there's my answer on lack of pedigree; the developers have shown that they can make an engaging sim, despite the restrictions that the NFS license and the EA constrained dev cycle imposed upon them. For Project Cars, they have all the time and funding they need. For speed.

 

"Photorealisim" is, despite your babbling, an outcome of the combination of the detail in the architectural models, texturing, lighting, shadowing, shading and all of the other things that a GPU does and that I can't be bothered to enumerate here because it would take forever. No amount of "time" spent in development is going to make GT6 a better looking game than either Forza, Drive Club or Project Cars, because abstract effort isn't as crucial to graphical quality as the power of the hardware.

 

I'm not keen to promote the game, I'm just interested it in the same way I'm interested in Drive Club, GRID Autosport and the rest of them. Someone asked a question, and you were embarrassingly, childishly dismissive, so I looked to rectify the representation that game got in this thread. I'm not into Driving sims enough to crowdfund one, but I have taken a look at what the community are saying about the constant alpha release updates, the car and track models that are constantly being released with developer commentary, and the rest of it. I think that allowing your main constituency to be in on every move you make is an interesting and yes, transparent, way to release a game.

 

Finally, "namecalling." Calling you a fanboy, isn't namecalling, it's describing your style of argument. There are two aspects to an argument that are important here; the content of the argument, and the person making it. When the person making the argument has shown a tendancy again and again, to misrepresent the situation at hand because doing so would favour whatever personal interest he has in one side over another, I think it's fair to call that person a fanboy. I'm not a fanboy in this instance, because I'm being fair to all sides and not dismissing them because it would make me feel secure about my console purchase.

[Choze]

I'm just going to pick at random things in your post that are redolent of a lack of basic reasoning skills and address them: Gran Turismo 6 is sitting at an 81 metacritic, NFS: Shift is sitting at 83. While I have problems with the way metacritic amalgamates scores based on different rubrics, it does so for both games. So there's my answer on lack of pedigree; the developers have shown that they can make an engaging sim, despite the restrictions that the NFS license and the EA constrained dev cycle imposed upon them. For Project Cars, they have all the time and funding they need. For speed.

 

I am amused you used Metacritic to defend the Shift series. Critic opinion for videogames is almost worthless nowadays, more so for racing games whether its Mario kart or Wipeout or Gran Turismo. The proof is in how users approach these games. The shift series user reviews are plagued by the fact that they are a buggy mess. They never even got round to fixing the flying bug in Shift 1. The entire game was a mess. Shift 2 was on PSPlus so plenty of people will have tried it out... Not sure how far people got with it though. I recall my friends list was not active on the game.

 

"Photorealisim" is, despite your babbling, an outcome of the combination of the detail in the architectural models, texturing, lighting, shadowing, shading and all of the other things that a GPU does and that I can't be bothered to enumerate here because it would take forever. No amount of "time" spent in development is going to make GT6 a better looking game than either Forza, Drive Club or Project Cars, because abstract effort isn't as crucial to graphical quality as the power of the hardware.

 

Photorealism involves accuracy. Which is something non GT games struggle at for obvious reasons(dev time, color, accuracy of modelling shapes, sizes etc.) . Driveclub is more impressive, easily. Actual scenery vs clever tricks and sky boxes. Not to mention lots of great features and effects. Project Cars has a great base hardware to work with but the game is closer to GT's content but with less realistic handling. I think thats an issue. Too many games like to tread close to GT.

 

I'm not keen to promote the game, I'm just interested it in the same way I'm interested in Drive Club, GRID Autosport and the rest of them. Someone asked a question, and you were embarrassingly, childishly dismissive, so I looked to rectify the representation that game got in this thread. I'm not into Driving sims enough to crowdfund one, but I have taken a look at what the community are saying about the constant alpha release updates, the car and track models that are constantly being released with developer commentary, and the rest of it. I think that allowing your main constituency to be in on every move you make is an interesting and yes, transparent, way to release a game.

 

Finally, "namecalling." Calling you a fanboy, isn't namecalling, it's describing your style of argument. There are two aspects to an argument that are important here; the content of the argument, and the person making it. When the person making the argument has shown a tendancy again and again, to misrepresent the situation at hand because doing so would favour whatever personal interest he has in one side over another, I think it's fair to call that person a fanboy. I'm not a fanboy in this instance, because I'm being fair to all sides and not dismissing them because it would make me feel secure about my console purchase.

 

Ok then lets not make disparaging comments about one another.

[The Bard]

I am amused you used Metacritic to defend the Shift series. Critic opinion for videogames is almost worthless nowadays, more so for racing games whether its Mario kart or Wipeout or Gran Turismo. The proof is in how users approach these games. The shift series user reviews are plagued by the fact that they are a buggy mess. They never even got round to fixing the flying bug in Shift 1. The entire game was a mess. Shift 2 was on PSPlus so plenty of people will have tried it out... Not sure how far people got with it though. I recall my friends list was not active on the game.

 

Right, we should dismiss critic opinion across the board, irrespective of how well it might have resonated with us in the past, and replace it with your obviously more measured perspective, which seems to favour non-sequitur over reason, because that would be convenient to your argument. What does "user approach" have to do with bugs? Surely that would be developer approach? Speaking of user reviews being plagued, GT5 reviews - both user and critic - were filled with complaints about how the game used PS2 car models, and GT6 reviewers complained about microtransactions across the board, how the pacing was broken without monetising, and the fact that sixteen years into the series, there are still no damage models or deformation, either in the cars or the tracks. If by "user approach," or how many people on your friends list are active enthusiasts for the series in question you mean we should taking the populist road, we should apply that across the board. Of course, that would have us favour Call of Duty over Battlefield or Titanfall, Jeremy Kyle over The Wire, or Britney Spears over The Dillinger Escape Plan and on until infinity. So sucks to your assmar, piggy, that argument is bullshit.

 

 

Photorealism involves accuracy. Which is something non GT games struggle at for obvious reasons(dev time, color, accuracy of modelling shapes, sizes etc.) . Driveclub is more impressive, easily. Actual scenery vs clever tricks and sky boxes. Not to mention lots of great features and effects. Project Cars has a great base hardware to work with but the game is closer to GT's content but with less realistic handling. I think thats an issue. Too many games like to tread close to GT.

 

 

Right, I suppose you're speaking of the accuracy that comes with retooling PS2 architectural models, and refusing to do good by the "simulation" aspect that your series lives and dies by, because you're not putting in car deformation? Sounds totally legit. Once again, I have no idea how Project Cars handles in comparison to Gran Turismo (and neither, I suspect, do you), but from what I've read in, for example, EDGE, its degree of simulation is not only very realistic, but also a work in progress that'll benefit from the fact that the computers it runs on (ie. the min specs) are far in excess of the eight year old hardware in the PS3. I think we can infer to the best explanation, that if they manage to not totally screw it up, it'll avail that. But let's take your argument to it's logical conclusion shall we; let me spend 20+ years developing on my Atari 2600 and apparently all that time will have magically transmogrified my second generation console into a machine that can handle photorealistic imagery, and render these cars in a more accurate way than the latest hardware, even though it can't display three dimensional objects. Good going. The PS3 is simply limited by how many triangles it can display on screen at any one time, the ability of its 256mb of vRAM to hold textures, and the compute units that can process shadows, lighting and shading to a degree that we might call accurate.

 

All of this of course isn't mentioning Assetto Corsa which is being described as the most realistic racing sim available. Which doesn't really excite me, since it's for another audience; I don't even know why we're arguing about realism here, since the degree of simulation available in these games isn't even going to be available to anyone playing with a standard controller, in the same way that you're not going to get the full degree of simulation out of IL:Sturmovic without the trackIR and a flight stick. In honesty, I'd probably prefer to play Drive Club or Forza over any of these games, but that doesn't mean they're not interesting or worth talking about.

 

So pipe down sonny, and think twice before posting your ludicrous, reductive opinions on a place where they can openly embarrass you.

[Choze]

 

Right, we should dismiss critic opinion across the board, irrespective of how well it might have resonated with us in the past, and replace it with your obviously more measured perspective, which seems to favour non-sequitur over reason, because that would be convenient to your argument. What does "user approach" have to do with bugs? Surely that would be developer approach? Speaking of user reviews being plagued, GT5 reviews - both user and critic - were filled with complaints about how the game used PS2 car models, and

 

Let me just take out one point:

 

GT6 reviewers complained about microtransactions across the board, how the pacing was broken without monetising, and the fact that sixteen years into the series, there are still no damage models or deformation, either in the cars or the tracks.

 

Have you ever played GT5 or 6? There are no real microtransactions. You can buy money at a grossly horrible price on PSN(which had its controversy) but the game is not designed around it. You could earn the money faster in game than it takes for you to buy it and then boot back into the game(hence controversy died down fast). GT5 actually introduced real time damage modelling and real time physics based deformation for premium cars. The DLC system is quite good in GT games. Right now all the new DLC cars are free in GT6. Unfortunately I cant say the same for the makers of Project Cars/Shift. Shift series was terrible for microtransactions. Those car packs are stupidly priced.

 

If by "user approach," or how many people on your friends list are active enthusiasts for the series in question you mean we should taking the populist road, we should apply that across the board. Of course, that would have us favour Call of Duty over Battlefield or Titanfall, Jeremy Kyle over The Wire, or Britney Spears over The Dillinger Escape Plan and on until infinity. So sucks to your assmar, piggy, that argument is bullshit.

 

How about the fact that people verbally hate the shift series? or the fact that EA dropped it and that the rest of these games struggle to get a publisher? Their Ferrari game was rubbish too maybe? Where are the game breaking bug patches for all their games? where is the support? Something went wrong somewhere. Are you going to place 'selected' critics on metacritic over everyone and every other factor that actually matters? If people cant enjoy their game do they go and console themselves with a metacritic score: peace:

 

Right, I suppose you're speaking of the accuracy that comes with retooling PS2 architectural models, and refusing to do good by the "simulation" aspect that your series lives and dies by, because you're not putting in car deformation? Sounds totally legit. Once again, I have no idea how Project Cars handles in comparison to Gran Turismo (and neither, I suspect, do you), but from what I've read in, for example, EDGE, its degree of simulation is not only very realistic, but also a work in progress that'll benefit from the fact that the computers it runs on (ie. the min specs) are far in excess of the eight year old hardware in the PS3. I think we can infer to the best explanation, that if they manage to not totally screw it up, it'll avail that. But let's take your argument to it's logical conclusion shall we; let me spend 20+ years developing on my Atari 2600 and apparently all that time will have magically transmogrified my second generation console into a machine that can handle photorealistic imagery, and render these cars in a more accurate way than the latest hardware, even though it can't display three dimensional objects. Good going. The PS3 is simply limited by how many triangles it can display on screen at any one time, the ability of its 256mb of vRAM to hold textures, and the compute units that can process shadows, lighting and shading to a degree that we might call accurate.

 

Then find out how Project Cars handles. The developer has a description. Isnt the gameplay of a game important? :awesome:

 

Some killer media came out for Driveclub yesterday lets appreciate that.

Edited May 23, 2014 by Choze

[Cookyman]

[The Bard]

Have you ever played GT5 or 6? There are no real microtransactions. You can buy money at a grossly horrible price on PSN(which had its controversy) but the game is not designed around it. You could earn the money faster in game than it takes for you to buy it and then boot back into the game(hence controversy died down fast). GT5 actually introduced real time damage modelling and real time physics based deformation for premium cars. The DLC system is quite good in GT games. Right now all the new DLC cars are free in GT6. Unfortunately I cant say the same for the makers of Project Cars/Shift. Shift series was terrible for microtransactions. Those car packs are stupidly priced.

 

The point, as you so cleverly managed not to understand, was that people complained across the board for both series, and there were also people who loved both series. Judging the developers' current games completely on past products that came out of two completely different development situations, instead of using them as a point of departure to think about how the situation differs, once again, misrepresents the facts. The car deformation in Gran Turismo 5 was almost non existent, and where it was even visible, it had no effect on play. You present all these things in the way a PR firm would put bullet points on the back of the game box, when in reality they're completely meaningless. As for the microtransaction model in Shift; look to the salient difference between Shift and Project Cars. Maybe the fact that the former was published by EA which infamously mandates introducing ridiculous monetising attempts into all of it's published games, compared to the latter which is a fully funded, publisher free PC release?

 

In fact, this this is one of the points I raised in multiple foregoing posts, so please, try and up your reading comprehension before you try to engage people with your witless pablum.

 

But of course, I know nothing escapes your keen analytic mind, so let's just chalk that one down to wilful obfuscation.

 

 

How about the fact that people verbally hate the shift series? or the fact that EA dropped it and that the rest of these games struggle to get a publisher? Their Ferrari game was rubbish too maybe? Where are the game breaking bug patches for all their games? where is the support? Something went wrong somewhere. Are you going, to place 'selected' critics on metacritic over everyone and every other factor that actually matters? If people cant enjoy their game do they go and console themselves with a metacritic score: peace:

 

Yes, but you're also verbally engaging in dialogic excrement right now, so forgive me for culling the opinions I pay attention to with more care than some Sony fanboy who finds any mental behaviour besides confirmation bias a complete impossibility. Who are these "people"? Support for Shift was EA's prerogative, since they're the one's holding the license and contracting developers to make games in the series. Slightly Mad would have to do more than live up to their name, by supporting a game that the publisher was no longer paying them for. What I was getting at is that the base product was solid.

 

Compare that to Evolution studios or Polyphony who are on Sony's bankroll, and both working on first party franchises that serve as showcases for their respective platforms with development periods that span half decades. So yeah, looks like you have this shit down pretty well.

 

And right, I'm "selectively," looking at critic opinions. But of course, you're a paragon of intellectual honesty, and you of course, haven't spent the last few posts selectively looking at resolution, or whatever other fetishised element you can think of like "time," in isolation, instead of looking at the experience as a whole. Never mind the fact that you're completely neglecting to address the most important aspects of my argument and myopically (which is so so out of the ordinary for you) focusing on things that you can pretend to dismiss with vague, prebaked retorts.

 

I mean, what even is this?:

 

Then find out how Project Cars handles. The developer has a description. Isnt the gameplay of a game important? :awesome:

 

No, you smug infantile shite, it's not like I've spend the last few wee posts explaining this while you putz about with all the grace of a giant, throbbing member.

[Choze]

once again, misrepresents the facts. The car deformation in Gran Turismo 5 was almost non existent, and where it was even visible, it had no effect on play.

 

Again go back and check your facts. GT '5' did have a performance degradation feature linked to damage. Physical deformation was there in all premium cars and each time it would be unique. There are flaws to their system but what you are saying is flat out untrue.

 

You present all these things in the way a PR firm would put bullet points on the back of the game box, when in reality they're completely meaningless. As for the microtransaction model in Shift; look to the salient difference between Shift and Project Cars. Maybe the fact that the former was published by EA which infamously mandates introducing ridiculous monetising attempts into all of it's published games, compared to the latter which is a fully funded, publisher free PC release?

 

In fact, this this is one of the points I raised in multiple foregoing posts, so please, try and up your reading comprehension before you try to engage people with your witless pablum.

 

 

But of course, I know nothing escapes your keen analytic mind, so let's just chalk that one down to wilful obfuscation.

 

Its ok being caught out. Rather than trading insults. It may be better to agree to a disagreement. I find it ironic given I called you out on PR statements in the first place.

 

 

Yes, but you're also verbally engaging in dialogic excrement right now, so forgive me for culling the opinions I pay attention to with more care than some Sony fanboy who finds any mental behaviour besides confirmation bias a complete impossibility. Who are these "people"? Support for Shift was EA's prerogative, since they're the one's holding the license and contracting developers to make games in the series. Slightly Mad would have to do more than live up to their name, by supporting a game that the publisher was no longer paying them for. What I was getting at is that the base product was solid.

 

Let Slightly Mad live up to their own name based on their games. Why are you trying to convince others otherwise?

 

Heck maybe Project Cars will be amazing? Maybe it will be the same as the other games they have made? Who knows?

 

Compare that to Evolution studios or Polyphony who are on Sony's bankroll, and both working on first party franchises that serve as showcases for their respective platforms with development periods that span half decades. So yeah, looks like you have this shit down pretty well.

 

Extra development time helps though I dont think you are being genuine here.

 

And right, I'm "selectively," looking at critic opinions. But of course, you're a paragon of intellectual honesty, and you of course, haven't spent the last few posts selectively looking at resolution, or whatever other fetishised element you can think of like "time," in isolation, instead of looking at the experience as a whole. Never mind the fact that you're completely neglecting to address the most important aspects of my argument and myopically (which is so so out of the ordinary for you) focusing on things that you can pretend to dismiss with vague, prebaked retorts.

 

I mean, what even is this?:

 

 

 

No, you smug infantile shite, it's not like I've spend the last few wee posts explaining this while you putz about with all the grace of a giant, throbbing member.

 

Address your points or move on. Dont bite off more than you can chew.