yes, i would. it's not a game killer since i wouldnt have to use it (and to be clear, i WOULDNT), but it would hurt the integrity of the franchise imo. where the likes of driving lines and assists are there to ease a player into the core experience. rewind is there to CHEAT. that's all it is as far as i'm concerned. no different to a bue shell in mario kart. difference being, a game like GT (and forza) are aiming for realism, not 5 minute arcade thrills.

as i said, shit like this should be left in arcade games. i look down on a feature like this just as much as i do on the inability to die in POP08. there is accessibilty and helping the player to get to grips with what is going on, and then there is a rewind option.

if people buy sim racers only to race with assits on and be able to rewind at any given oppertuninty, then they bought the wrong game and are playing it for the wrong reasons. they should have picked up burnout or something.

Is it really there to cheat? It takes skill not to crash (and sometimes luck lol), and so according to you being able to rewind is cheating. It also takes skill to know when to brake and what line to take thru a turn, so if I use the line assist, am I cheating? The same with traction control, with the assist it's like using auto-aim!!! I just press the gas all the way, and let the game save my cheating ass.

I really see them both extremely close, but if I had to choose one as cheating, it would be assists, but I think it would be silly for me to think that either would hurt the integrity of the game. And I've yet to see much complaining about how the rewind makes Forza less of a simulator. Besides, we are talking about a simulation which hasn't had any form of damage for 4 iterations, wall riding, stupid AI, etc. To me that does hurt the integrity of a simulator.

I think both (assists and rewind) are there to make the experience enjoyable. I've been playing simulators for as long as I can remember, and I just don't see either as cheating. One is there to get you to play the game, the other is there to keep playing. Assists prevent you from making mistakes, rewind allows you to correct your mistakes. So I guess both take you away from a true simulation, and so both are integrity killers :PI get your point, but games these days you hardly die even. A 30 second setback is all punishment you get these days with the likes of Bioshock, and pretty much all third person shooters having checkpoints every few meters. I don't think it takes away the challenge, it takes away the frustration. I like this trend, and we are seeing it more and more. The rewind option is the racing version of this, and I like it :DThe only problem is that even a simulator can't be aimed at just hardcore players, and the appeal of Forza goes beyond just hardcore simulator fans. Same with GT.

And just to close and explain why I like rewind. I play Forza without any assists, and I'm always pushing to improve my times. If after 20 minutes of racing I have to restart the race because of a simple mistake, as much as I love my simulation I will get frustrated, and I don't play a videogame to get frustrated, who am I fooling here. I like a challenge, I love a good simulation, but I'm not a masochist.

Of course, for the masochists, you have the option to keep it hardcore and not press the button. Points to you.

And then there is you KORN, who will feel their simulation is less of a simulation because of a simple gameplay feature........of course there is about a million other things that have a more direct impact, but oh well.......I hope Gran Turismo loses some of its integrity, that'd be awesome :D

QFT. After several laps, if the AI, especially the retarded AI GT games usually have, bump my ass and knock me out of first on the last lap and I end up getting second or third b/c of this crap then it's hard to continue enjoying the game and not say "fuck this" and just put in a different game.

the rewind feature is for those of us who still enjoy realistic physics and a more realistic punishing experience w/out the insane amount of frustration that comes w/ losing a race due to one minor error towards the end of a really long race.

Now, if you wanna put a cap on the amount of rewinds you can use or something that might be ok, but the idea that is someone cheapens the experience is just subjective bullshit. The funny part is, never are you forced to use it so griping about it ruining the game is a moot point anyhow.

Plus, i'm almost certain I remember PD already saying in an interview that they ARE going to use the rewind feature in GT5.

Nice to see some cheaters other than me :PThe thing is that according to Korn, just having it there will somehow change the perception people have of the game--or at least his. I've seen a few comments saying it is cheating, but I've never seen anyone about messing with the integrity of the game. I just think there's so many other things that actually DO mess up with the integrity of the game that associating rewind with that is something not even worth bringing up.Well, with so many things mentioned , or said to be have been mentioned, no one really knows what GT5 will actually feature. I guess at E3 we'll find out, or maybe next year who knows.

Well ignore Korn on this issue as he has stated earlier that he doesn't even really play driving sims and that much, so his strong feelings on this particular topic are suspect at best.

I talking about NORMAL people, lol, and it's pretty obvious that as long as games like Forza etc flag the lap times if a rewind is used, there is no real impact on how the game is played.

If the game REWARDED your lap times by using rewind it would be bullshit, but since it is clearly flagged and doesn't affect those being competitive, it has no real point as nobody is forced to use this feature.

I love driving sims and I love cars, so IMO by making the game more accessble to those who are nervous of a "simulator's" learning curve, the more people they can make the game fun for the better. I don't see why snobby people would want only "hardcore (or in other words douchebags)" gamers to enjoy these types of games. the games are designed to make money and are designed to be fun. Having a rewind feature does NOT keep the game from being any more fun for anyone, unless they have no self restraint, and even then it's them to blame or they wouldn't use the feature

I hope GT5 does offer this feature b/c A. it is a nice feature to have in really frustratingly long races and B. it would keep the annoying as fuck GT vs Forza crowd from saying one game is better for having/not having the feature.

I agree with everything you said except point B. It really isn't that easy :P

There's an endless list of features one will have over the other.

lol oh I know too well, but at least it's one less we'll have to hear about

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NVxGjqNrEE&fmt=35#...

Sense of speed is looking ace. The track detail looks fine to me as well.

The sense of speed looks good, especially for an in car view but those environments are not fine. 90% of the track is covered by walls of 2D trees, makes you feel like you driving through a maze, it really looks awful! It could possibly be the worst looking Nurburgring so far in this generation.

When I read this comment, I thought that was ridiculous. Then I watched that vid. Seriously, that is why people make such a big deal about trees. Wow. I couldn't take my eyes off of them. "X" trees FTW!!! It IS a bit disappointing, and what good are the beautiful cars when the trees( which you see a lot more of) are so shitty. Not really a game-breaker but annoying in a game that is supposed to have genre-defining visuals...

Unless it's in stills, I really don't see a problem with the trees. In motion it definitely looks fine to me. Not the best looking foliage in a racing game but it's far from awful. Even forza's trees look flat in the distance, plus the dull colors.

http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=5c8-xkPUvr8&featur...

If you want to talk about awful, now this is awful.

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2008/071/9420...

Yeh, its not a game breaker but it does ruin the immersion on a track like NurburgringFlat trees on the Forza 3 version are way out in the distance, every single tree close to the track is in full 3D, rendered with polygons not nasty looking bitmaps like those in GT5. Also, lets not forget that the GT5 video is off-screen which always makes games look Better, those trees will stand out much more in direct feed. The enviroments in Forza 3's Nurburgring is like a generation ahead.Thats just more awful :)

Like Jin said, it's not only that they are flat, you see clones in the thousands.....one right next to the other, all perfectly lined up. You can see this in the city track too, a bunch of twin, flat trees.

And I don't think it's just the trees mind you, it's the environments in general, bad textures, flat surfaces, lack of detail, etc. The track overall is way more detailed in Forza, and it has always been this way, even back in the GT4 vs Forza days. I remember a time when a person took screenshots of Laguna Seca from both games, in the same spots, the difference was/is huge. This seems to follow that tradition. The more tracks I see of GT the more I think the major difference between FM3 and GT5 will fall on the cars and environments, with one outdoing the other by a big margin in each area.

And yeah it isn't a game breaker, but it is a huge negative mark in the graphics department imo. It's like the 2K NBA games (at least the first ones), with awesome character models, arenas, lighting, etc but glitchy clothing animation and zero player likeness--almost laughable zombie like alien statues.

I didn't believe it until I saw it with my own eyes... these youtube vids of Nurburgring, look terrible... when you study them... I mean the cars, and lighting look superb. How could they let something like this happen? Really brings the whole production value down. Trees are last gen for sure.

The trees really contrast when you compare it to the cars/track. Lighting is better here than Forza 3 it appears. Forza 3 delivers the total package visually it seems.

is this a joke? Thats like 2 full pages on trees. lol. First it was damage, now its trees... sad. Also... looks like theres about 10,000 trees there, is it realistic for them to make them all polygonal??

Technically they ARE all polygonal unless they are sprites, but I'm not seeing any. Even if it's just an X tree, it still uses poly's with a texture/opacity map. "3d" trees in games now have modeled trunks and branches with facing poly's with Texture/opacity maps for the leaves to simulate volume, but I digress.

The real deal is that this game has been heralded over and over for it's dominating, photo-real graphics for years, and when you have lack-luster trees, it hurts that. I personally always notice when the trees/foliage are shit( or at least am impressed much more when they are more 3 dimensional)in racers. It is distracting to me, and many others apparently. The damage was always an issue because it should affect how your car performs, it should slow you down when you scrape a wall, and collisions should be avoided, not exploited in a "simulator". GT get's so much attention(good and bad) because it has been considered the defacto sim for years...

Well if the trees look poor b/c they are spending so much time on getting performance damage, AI, and physics down to perfection then by all means let them use PS2 trees on every track.

Just please let the fucking game come out already...

Agreed, lol. Now let's hope that IS why the trees look so poor...

The cars look freaking amazing and that's all that really matters in a game where you're looking at a car 100% of the time.

If you spend 100% of your time watching replays maybe. The rest of us watch the track/enviroments when we are, you know... 'Racing'. But yeh, the cars do look amazing.

i'm not sure how you play but I don't look at the trees near me while racing and blasting past them at 100+ mph, I'm looking at the environment/trees and road far in distance because that's where I'm going. The flat trees in the distance in forza 3 still look pretty hideous and takes you out of the immersion but I don't see anyone complaining about them.

No idea why you keep bringing up a game that has some of the most impressive environments in a racing game so far in this generation and compare them with a game that has some of the worst. No one complains because the environments look beautiful which is why you don't see anyone complaining about the cars in GT5. For someone who cares so little about the environments in a racing game, you seem to try and defend it an awful lot.

But you were talking about trees...you brought that up. And I asked about why people don't complain about the 2d trees far in the distance in forza 3 (not the whole environment), which is what you arguably see more of when racing, because that was the whole discussion. I don't see why you don't get that. I don't recall us having ridiculous discussions about anything else besides the trees... besides lebato being the only one mentioning other aspects of the enviornments.

If you want to talk about the full environments, the building and stadium structures look absolutely fine in GT5. Same goes for the lighting, which I find to look much more natural and realistic than Forza's. I also think Forza has higher points in certain aspects, especially for Kaido and Amalfi in terms of what they're actually rendering, but other tracks have wonky looking lighting that totally brings down the visuals for me.

GT5's environments suck ass (the trees are just laughable, but just one part of the environment), FM3's environments are really good. GT5's in-game cars are downright awesome, FM3's in-game cars are great.

Ok ladies, moving on here. :D

And I find it very ridiculous to hear people say that you don't look at something else while driving (not just in this forum). It's a tired excuse. I don't think anyone is looking at the trees while driving, but to say because of that fact they are allowed to look awful it's just wrong, or somehow they become not important. They come into view every time you take a corner, every single time you are racing they are into view, that's how you make judgments on where to turn.

But by that same logic, who looks at the driver's hands? Who looks at the dashboard even? You really don't look (or should I say stare?) at either while driving. You might glance at it, or look at it for a second while on a straight. But if you say you don't look at the environment/trees you just fooling yourself.

@vspectra, The environment and trees look bad either way, whatever the distance. FM3 does have flat trees, but in much more contained numbers. They are better placed (mostly far from track), they don't look like clone after clone right at the trackside. And then there's everything else. It's not just trees, it's the vegetation in general. The barriers, rumble strips, textures, draw distance, overall track detail. Long story short, GT tracks are starting to look very VERY sterile compared to what FM has shown us.