| Tispower said: Like other people it seems, I think graphics do count, if they are like the first of that calibre. For instance Gran Turismo 3 sold really well, because graphics like that had never appeared in a racing game like that, and although GT4 sold very well, it didn't reach the popularity of GT3. My theory was because people had already got GT3, and as GT4 didn't have vastly improved graphics, people decided not to buy it. |
FWIW, I bought GT3 at launch because it looked pretty and had a decent enough soundtrack and all of that. I did not buy GT4, not because I already owned GT3, but rather because after owning GT3, I'd found out the series had terrible AI, poor collision detection, and no rendered vehicle damage. The physics which define the differences between one car and another are very cool, but the physics within the race itself, given that a car can't flip or roll, are plainly absurd. I thought the whole thing was a load of crap.
I really, really tried to like the game, but I just couldn't get into it because its flaws grossly outshined its strengths. My friends and I tried head-to-head racing too, and the novelty of that lasted about 10 or 15 minutes, so we shut it off and played Mario Kart 64 instead.
Graphics only get you so far.
