@The_A_Drain said:
"
Yeah because we all know demo's are drastically different from the final products... Shit, take it from somebody who knows that they are talking about, the reason you got (and payed for!) a demo and have to wait for the final game is because the art assets for a game that good looking take literally years to produce (the amount they want anyway), the base code (and hence, the graphics themselves) will look exactly the fucking same as they did with Prologue, the only reason they put prologue out is to make a few bucks out of people who couldn't wait.Disclaimer: I don't give a fuck, I hate racing games. I just calls it like I see's it, and the way I see's it, if you paid for Prologue, you paid for a fucking demo. Nice going.
"
FYI, that "demo" was quite a bit more in depth in terms of content than most racing games released at that time, let alone a free demo taken from the PSN store.
70+ cars, 6 tracks (well, at least it's more than what most demos give you), a decent number of events (30), and a varied (if somewhat unstable) online mode shows that it's far more than just a demo. The only thing I agree with you on is that it's not quite worth $40, should've been $20-$30.
I wouldn't call it a "demo" so much as an average-sized game that acts as a precursor to an even larger one.
PS: a general "Fuck you" to both Dr_Cash and thiago for arguing like idiots, not just in this thread but in others.
