i agree 100%. thats actually what i keep saying to people on here but people just assume a racing game is a racing game and there is no further discussion beyond that. to me thats like saying COD is just like Destiny because they both have first person and our shooters... the rest of the factors that actually make them completely different games are discarded because they look fairly similar on screen.
Forza/gran turismo are the RPGs of racing and DriveClub/Horizon2 are th...
you cant change your cars appearance from the default paint/liveries. you also can't tune or upgrade your cars.
people seem to think that a high number of things makes things better. Nintendo doesn't need to make more amounts ofIP, they need to make new, successful, mass appeal IP... things like Mario, DK, etc... but not Mario, DK, etc... because they're in pretty much most of Nintendos titles. They need strong 3rd party support and for those 3rd parties to bring their successful IP to the consoles. Some of the best games on PS4 and Xbox haven't come from MS and Sony, but MS and Sony can ...
what nintendo needs is strong 3rd party support. if you go back in the day, the NES destroyed Sega for the very simple fact that they had tons of 3rd party support and exclusivity deals with those 3rd party developers. This left Sega to make up the difference by producing their own IP to compete... and it didn't. Eventually Nintendo got in to some hot water about their licensing tactics and the dominance it was creating, but it proves the point that 3rd party studios support are key. ...
*eye roll*
graphically i think this game is going to be amazing. i just wish it had more depth with cars.
people keep comparing it to forza and yes its more graphically crazy than forza but again... forza puts all its effort into the sim aspect. i mean driveclub does look crazy good visually but you can't customize your cars OR tune them. in forza, not only do you get the sim, but you can totally trick out your car with actual real world stuff... after market rims for example. n...
completely agreed. sad because it was watchdogs that got me excited for the next gen consoles in general.
i can't wait for this game. it better not watchdogs up on me though.
parity did not screw the ps3, the cell processor did. the ps3 was a bit more powerful than the 360 BUT it was very difficult to develop on. i have developer friends who loathed working with ps3. I'm willing to bet its the exact reason that the ps4 is so easy to work on.
just got it. to be honest i really thought this game would be dumb but its actually pretty great. the art direction and animation are really cool.
damn. i paid for strider. could have waited. oh well. its good no matter what.
That's part of realistic racing. You adjust your ride height, tire pressure, downforce etc depending on the track, weather, surface etc. that's like choosing players for your football team. Part of the strategy. That's why sims are so much more engaging and interesting to me. Also why I was getting disappointed about this game. Too arcade.
i think a lot of people are misunderstanding parity and parity clauses and that there are different types. in this case they probably just want to get the xbox one to run at the same fps and rez as the ps4 since ps4 is clearly the base for rez/fps at this point. i don't think they are going to intentionally gimp a game on one platform to make it the same as the other platform. also in terms of parity, it goes behind the scenes in development. using the same assets, textures etc etc......
i don't think you realize what parity clause is. it has nothing to do with getting the same quality game as everyone else. the parity clause is a launch parity clause. it states that an indie studio must launch their title on xbox at the same time as on other consoles. the problem is smaller indie studios don't usually have the resources to work on two or 3 console versions at the same time, so they launch on one and then work on the next one. what ms is saying is that if you don...
you would be right to do so ;)
when games are open world they have to devote a lot more resources to geometry, world load, more stuff loaded into memory etc etc. when games are on rails (most racing games, gears of war, the order 1886) they don't have to worry about whats in the distance or around the area, they only have to worry about what you can see... just like a disneyland ride. its much easier to crank graphics to 11 when you are worrying about so much less resources. the fact that horizons looks as good as i...
regardless of who is "superior", ms needs to lose their stupid parity clause. its counterproductive and everyone loses.
driveclub also isn't open world.
edit: for relevancy to the article and graphics comparison - open world games usually have way more resources to manage and graphics usually take a hit to compensate for the world itself. on rails games don't have to worry about resource loads as much so they can put extra polish back into the visuals. im not saying this to compare the graphics of drive club to forza as i will reserve judgement for when i actually play the 2 first han...
dude. seriously. go outside.
im not worried about the visuals. drive club has that covered in spades. im worried about the depth of the actual game. no car customization on top of not being a sim are two major bummers for me.