F0X said:
|
Literally anybody that has played the game or sim-racing review outlet that reviewed it does not.
Lol, quick google shows that even EA didn't: http://www.kotaku.com.au/2009/08/need-for-speed-shift-is-authentic-not-a-simulation/
But Abney is keen to point out this doesn’t mean Shift is a sim.
“We dub it an ‘authentic’ racing game because it’s rooted in professional motorsport,” he says. “It’s track-based, it’s got a collection of cars that not only includes the stock versions but also the Le Mans style, the WTCC style cars you see in those racing circuits.”
For Abney, Need for Speed is about accessible, fun, exciting racing, whether it’s the open world, cop-based underground races or the competition of track-based racing. A simulation is not something he thinks fits with that fun model.
“When you go full simulation, it really requires something less mundane than this kind of device,” he says, holding a PS3 Dual Shock controller. “You have to expect the player has a wheel, a clutch, an e-brake… in order to be able to model what it takes to operate at that level of fidelity. I think you’re cheating the fan when you have a sterile, grind-based simulator that takes dozens and dozens of hours of practice to get even slightly proficient with a gamepad.
“I may be overselling that point, but to me that’s my experience with those games. When I pick up the first device that I have available to me, which is a gamepad 99 times out of 100, my ability to control and have any type of fun with those games is remote. Need For Speed has never been after that segment. We don’t craft experiences like that because we don’t find them to be fun ourselves.”
Seriously, this is the dumbest thing to argue over. Nobody thinks Shift is a sim racing game. Stop.
