Gran Turismo Sport: General Discussion

[ribloGT]

I can imagine just one thing...
Mandatory DLCs...
One monthly 5$ DLC including cars and tracks that will end being includer in the weekly FIA sanctioned races...

You will be able to not buy turn but you will be cut off from official FIA events...
And if you dont want to pay for the PS+ too you will be forced to the offline arcade mode...

I dont like this scenario at all...

 

[Aphelion]

I get what @7HO is saying. Development of the PS3 games continued after release because they had to, there was a lot missing from both promised pre-release. Sure they did add some totally new stuff as well but the content wouldn't have continued at such a pace without the requirements to finish them. They weren't doing all of that out of the goodness of their hearts, they did it because they had to. Note how once they finally got the Course Maker out the door in GT6 that was it.

With GTS I don't think that is going to be the case. They seem to have learnt their lesson and have now only announced stuff they know will be in the final game. Of what they've shown so far I think the only possible doubt is the livery editor, everything else seemed finished in the sense of existed as advertised.

For GTS to truly be a service they're either going to need to keep the DLC both desirable and constant or go down the horrid microtransactions route. Because clearly they're not going to go down the monthly/yearly subscription route, nobody is going to pay that on top of PS+ and the initial $60 outlay.

Agreed, but I am almost certain that PD wouldn't think of it that way. At least openly .

 

[jm79]

I can imagine just one thing...
Mandatory DLCs...
One monthly 5$ DLC including cars and tracks that will end being includer in the weekly FIA sanctioned races...

You will be able to not buy turn but you will be cut off from official FIA events...
And if you dont want to pay for the PS+ too you will be forced to the offline arcade mode...

I dont like this scenario at all...

PS+ is a no-brainer though, surely? It's crazy cheap for one year.

I hope GTS has some free DLC to start with, then they start charging. They haven't mentioned those bloody season passes, which will hopefully be a good thing.

And no DLC will lock you out of an event. They can't possibly be that greedy/stupid (we hope!)

 

[Johnnypenso]

iRacing is a service, it is not a game you buy, you can't buy it. It is a service you pay a subscription fee to use. That is why 8 years after iRacing has been released they are able to continue developing ground breaking features and constantly stay ahead of the competition. iRacing has an ongoing revenue stream that pays for continuous development but since I have said that it should be pointed out that what they have been able to do with such limited resources is pretty incredible. Having said that I should point out that what Kunos have done is also remarkable.

More than a bit misleading. iRacing started out with $20 million in funding from John Henry, owner of the Boston Red Sox, Boston Globe, co-owner of Roush Fenway Racing etc. That's triple the rumoured budget of PCars being spent on a far, far smaller player base. I'm sure the subscription fees come in handy but it's not just the ongoing revenue stream that helps them fund development.

 

[jm79]

More than a bit misleading. iRacing started out with $20 million in funding from John Henry, owner of the Boston Red Sox, Boston Globe, co-owner of Roush Fenway Racing etc. That's triple the rumoured budget of PCars being spent on a far, far smaller player base. I'm sure the subscription fees come in handy but it's not just the ongoing revenue stream that helps them fund development.

Surely you need to link to a claim like that?

 

[ToyGTone]

Okay our prices seems to be odd, comparing PSN and Retail prices. Retail prices usually goes from around $63 up to $74. Usually it depends on the game's popularity or if it's local or Grey imported copy. The problem is that there are NO official distributors and it means there are no official prices which also means it's the seller who decide on how much he can gain money from the selling. I might as well label them as cheaters because of that.

I remember GT6 was around $63 then i remember Fallout 4 costed more and was around $68 yet Call of duty Black ops 3 around the same time was $74... Do you know the worst time i had with so called "retailers"? When GTA V got released back in 2013, all of them decided to sell it for over 80 freaking dollars!! 🤬 and because everyone wanted to buy the new GTA, people including me went to buy it anyways as it was our only choice. That's why i bought current gen GTA V from US PSN.

Meanwhile in the recently opened Bahraini PS Store. Most AAA games costs $62.99 (look at COD and DISHONORED 2) but what i noticed is the Gran Turismo Sports prices...

 

[sems4arsenal]

Thinking about going digital, usually prefer physical as to have the option to resell but I never sell gt games, will depend on the size.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Surely you need to link to a claim like that?

http://www.automobilemag.com/news/virtual-car-racing-iracing/

 

[SlipZtrEm]

PS+ is a no-brainer though, surely? It's crazy cheap for one year.

For some of us, yes. A considerable number of people were critical of "the other side" requiring an XBL Gold subscription on the previous generation. PSN being free was a major rallying point for some. So we'll see.

I hope GTS has some free DLC to start with, then they start charging. They haven't mentioned those bloody season passes, which will hopefully be a good thing.

From a business perspective, that seems backwards to me: charging should happen early in the game's life, when a lot of enthusiastic early adopters are still playing. Later on, as numbers start to dwindle, a free pack can work as great incentive for people to return, or even pick up the game. All IMO, of course.

And no DLC will lock you out of an event. They can't possibly be that greedy/stupid (we hope!)

That's potentially the problem of having such a small, focused car list: if an entirely new category gets added (say, V8 Supercars), it could create issues depending on how the eSports events were structured. Though I'm inclined to agree: I can't see Polyphony making events that are exclusive to paid DLC.

 

[jm79]

http://www.automobilemag.com/news/virtual-car-racing-iracing/

Thanks.

Weird article... Seems so... dated

2008!

 

[Johnnypenso]

Thanks.

Weird article... Seems so... dated

2008!

It's well known in the inner circles of sim racing. I'm not knocking it by the way, I wish more people would throw money at sim racing like that, it's just missing a big chunk of the picture to say that iRacing is supported by ongoing subscription and DLC revenue when it got a massive kick start to begin with to carry it through the early years. Rumour is it's still not profitable but I can't substantiate that.

 

[jm79]

It's well known in the inner circles of sim racing. I'm not knocking it by the way, I wish more people would throw money at sim racing like that, it's just missing a big chunk of the picture to say that iRacing is supported by ongoing subscription and DLC revenue when it got a massive kick start to begin with to carry it through the early years. Rumour is it's still not profitable but I can't substantiate that.

And 4 years dev before release for a 9-car game! (can we go a little easier on PD now? haha)

I was under the impression that this was more of an enthusiasts project, so the multi-million funding thing is a surprise.

 

[Seanspeed]

So when they call it a service that is a worry and like others have said it screams of being unfinished and you would expect the updates to the so called service to end as soon as they consider it complete. But that really isn't a service, that's just an unfinished game. If they do plan for GT to be an ongoing service the question that needs to be answered is how do they continue to fund constant updates?

What?

Dude, Polyphony Digital is not some independent entity like iRacing. They have Sony bank-rolling their projects, not that GT has had any problem making money in the past decade or so. GT sells very well. Let's say that GT Sport cost $50 million to make - that would require a mere 833,000 units sold to make back the revenue. Well.....ok, there's retail margins and taxes and whatnot, but there's no console royalties on a 1st party title......either way, you get the point - GT Sport is very, very likely to not just make back the money, but provide a whole heap of profit on top of that. And if they keep the 'service' up, it should keep the game selling. If it's anything like previous early generation GT games, it's going to take years for sales to die off. And if they do - no biggie. Not only will there likely be a new GT in the works, but Sony will have absolutely no problem continuing to fund PD's efforts.

You're acting like PD need to provide some completely self-sufficient funding model, but they're in a pretty comfortable position and have a mega IP that has been a money generator for a long time.

There is nothing to worry about in terms of the financial situation.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

If it's anything like previous early generation GT games

That's the rub: it really isn't, so we can't predict GTS' commercial success based on what's come before.

but they're in a pretty comfortable position and have a mega IP that has been a money generator for a long time.

They might be. GT6 has probably hit the 5 million mark by now (4.96 as of four months ago), but that's still less than half what GT5 pulled (and even less than GT5P). We don't know what the budget was for GT6, but coonsidering those sales numbers in combination with how quickly the game's list price was reduced, it's entirely possible Polyphony's previously rosy money-maker status has reduced.

There is nothing to worry about in terms of the financial situation.

That's an opinion, not a fact.

 

[KevinHeryanto]

No one posted USGAMER interview yet?
http://www.usgamer.net/articles/kazunori-yamauchi-on-gran-turismo-sport
Nothing new except for the last part.

"The PS3 hardware at first glance looks like it was able to do a certain level of things, but in actuality it can't. In terms of development, it was really, really difficult. The balance of hardware wasn't very good, but the PS4 is so good. This quality that we're showing you today is about 70% or so, so at time of launch, we'll be showing you something even better than this."
interesting...

 

[Kobhalt]

Guys.... Don't know if it's already said but... look at this:
http://porschevisiongt.com/exterior/

it's says Vison GT. i guess we can say that Porsche is FINALLY coming to GranTurismo series!

 

[ImaRobot]

Guys.... Don't know if it's already said but... look at this:
http://porschevisiongt.com/exterior/

it's says Vison GT. i guess we can say that Porsche is FINALLY coming to GranTurismo series!

It's been posted a few pages back. The people who made this have no affiliation with Porsche.

 

[nocturnalgrey]

There is nothing to worry about in terms of the financial situation.

Even though PDI has by far the biggest portion of the sales pie when it comes to sim style video games, no one is invulnerable to economic realities that exist today.

That's an opinion, not a fact.

With that said, I do see that PDI is in a better position currently due to their higher then rest sales. Of course, this is all said without knowing the financial situations of all parties involved. But when we consider that GT6's "low" sales of 5 million as a plateau that very few games in this genre will ever reach, @Seanspeed has a point.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

With that said, I do see that PDI is in a better position currently due to their higher then rest sales. Of course, this is all said without knowing the financial situations of all parties involved. But when we consider that GT6's "low" sales of 5 million as a plateau that very few games in this genre will ever reach, @Seanspeed has a point.

The point is moot precisely because of what you said a sentence earlier: we don't know the financial situation of all parties involved. Sure, no other game in the genre has been able to hit GT6's numbers since its release, but we have no idea what each developer's break-even point was.

And that's before we even enter the murky waters of DLC revenue...

 

[Tornado]

And there's similarly a difference between something making a profit and something making the expected level of profit.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Guys.... Don't know if it's already said but... look at this:
http://porschevisiongt.com/exterior/

it's says Vison GT. i guess we can say that Porsche is FINALLY coming to GranTurismo series!

No it's a fan made car, was talked about some pages ago on here, got its own thread and was discussed there too as being a fan made car. The website even tells you so, and the maker of the car isn't even affiliated with Porsche but instead GM.

Also as for the profit portion, I agree it doesn't need to be an iRacing model to keep being successful, there are plenty of F2P games in the Esport category that shell out big cash prizes or even other types of prizes (hearthstone gave a Ferrari). And they do this every year, now sure there is big money to be made off skins, and in game accessories which PD could do too and all this would allow the game to float nicely on top of sales.

However, I feel the key point was made by Slipz and others that this isn't a game like the other GTs and thus it's quite hard to speculate how it will sale in comparison. And even if we could predict that, we still don't know the cutoff as many others are saying, which is an important factor.

 

[7HO]

What?

Dude, Polyphony Digital is not some independent entity like iRacing. They have Sony bank-rolling their projects, not that GT has had any problem making money in the past decade or so. GT sells very well. Let's say that GT Sport cost $50 million to make - that would require a mere 833,000 units sold to make back the revenue. Well.....ok, there's retail margins and taxes and whatnot, but there's no console royalties on a 1st party title......either way, you get the point - GT Sport is very, very likely to not just make back the money, but provide a whole heap of profit on top of that. And if they keep the 'service' up, it should keep the game selling. If it's anything like previous early generation GT games, it's going to take years for sales to die off. And if they do - no biggie. Not only will there likely be a new GT in the works, but Sony will have absolutely no problem continuing to fund PD's efforts.

You're acting like PD need to provide some completely self-sufficient funding model, but they're in a pretty comfortable position and have a mega IP that has been a money generator for a long time.

There is nothing to worry about in terms of the financial situation.

Thanks for the laugh. So what you are saying is in an imaginary world where the developer gets 100% of sales revenue they can easily break even and that answers where future funding will come from to pay for ongoing updates.

If you are going to use figures to back an argument they need to be accurate figures. But even then the argument is flawed because your argument relies on continued sales of a game as if there is an infinite market that just keeps growing over time.

 

[Griffith500]

More than a bit misleading. iRacing started out with $20 million in funding from John Henry, owner of the Boston Red Sox, Boston Globe, co-owner of Roush Fenway Racing etc. That's triple the rumoured budget of PCars being spent on a far, far smaller player base. I'm sure the subscription fees come in handy but it's not just the ongoing revenue stream that helps them fund development.

Was it ever disclosed how much they paid Vivendi for the rights to Kaemmer and co's code?

 

[Tired Tyres]

Guys.... Don't know if it's already said but... look at this:
http://porschevisiongt.com/exterior/

it's says Vison GT. i guess we can say that Porsche is FINALLY coming to GranTurismo series!

Don't people READ threads before posting anymore? Debunked yesterday. Although it would not surprise me if PD announced a Porsche licence. And then showed a VGT as the only car. The ultimate PD troll move.

 

[zzz_pt]

Don't people READ threads before posting anymore? Debunked yesterday. Although it would not surprise me if PD announced a Porsche licence. And then showed a VGT as the only car. The ultimate PD troll move.

The ultimate troll move would be announcing Porsche is part of Gran Turismo Sport... as postcards for the Museum feature.

 

[Seanspeed]

Thanks for the laugh. So what you are saying is in an imaginary world where the developer gets 100% of sales revenue they can easily break even and that answers where future funding will come from to pay for ongoing updates.

If you are going to use figures to back an argument they need to be accurate figures. But even then the argument is flawed because your argument relies on continued sales of a game as if there is an infinite market that just keeps growing over time.

I used hypothetical figures to make a point - unless GT costs some *insane* amount more than a typical AAA game, it's not going to need to sell a ridiculous amount of copies to start making a profit.

I also never said that publishers get 100% of sales revenue. I even explicitly said there would be cuts into that, but they aren't going to account for a major amount, especially since 1st party titles dont have any console publishing tax to add on(which is a significant chunk for 3rd party titles). Not sure why you completely ignored that part of my post....

Of course we cant know anything for sure, but as owner of one of the consistently best selling franchises in video gaming, I think it's quite a bit farcical to think that PD's financial situation is in serious danger. It's really one of the last studios out there that anybody should be 'concerned' about.

Of course, by some rare chance that GT Sport completely bombs, Sony would have to review their support plans and budgets, but there's little reason to think that the studio and thus GT Sport's longevity will be killed off in any short order. The last thing you do for a major franchise that doesn't immediately sell well is to completely abandon it. I honestly cant fathom that you guys think this is some potential major issue.

 

[Samus]

I used hypothetical figures to make a point - unless GT costs some *insane* amount more than a typical AAA game, it's not going to need to sell a ridiculous amount of copies to start making a profit.

I also never said that publishers get 100% of sales revenue. I even explicitly said there would be cuts into that, but they aren't going to account for a major amount, especially since 1st party titles dont have any console publishing tax to add on(which is a significant chunk for 3rd party titles). Not sure why you completely ignored that part of my post....

Of course we cant know anything for sure, but as owner of one of the consistently best selling franchises in video gaming, I think it's quite a bit farcical to think that PD's financial situation is in serious danger. It's really one of the last studios out there that anybody should be 'concerned' about.

Of course, by some rare chance that GT Sport completely bombs, Sony would have to review their support plans and budgets, but there's little reason to think that the studio and thus GT Sport's longevity will be killed off in any short order. The last thing you do for a major franchise that doesn't immediately sell well is to completely abandon it. I honestly cant fathom that you guys think this is some potential major issue.

Have you not heard of projections and sales targets? Sony don't just budget games and then hopes it makes a profit, they have a projection of how many it will sell and already plan ahead where the profits will go. If those projections don't come to fruition that is a shortfall in their projections and a problem, even if it is a profit.

PD are not immune. We don't know how GT6 performed in comparison to projections from Sony but if they did fall below exceptions, and do so again with GTS, you can bet serious talks will be had regarding the studio's future.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I used hypothetical figures to make a point - unless GT costs some *insane* amount more than a typical AAA game, it's not going to need to sell a ridiculous amount of copies to start making a profit.

Try this hypothetical on for size. GT6 sells around 40% of GT5. Sony says to Kaz, "sorry buddy, that won't cut it, smaller game this time, tighten things up, the days of selling 10 million racing games are over". GTSport has 1/10 the content and the 400+ supposedly future proof premium cars are dropped, presumably saving a ton of licensing fees. Track list severely reduced, again, cutting licensing fees. Game considerably smaller based on what we've seen so far, cutting development costs.

I don't think it's a coincidence that GTSport is a much tighter focused and smaller game after the failure of GT6 to hit previous GT sales levels, hypothetically speaking of course.

 

[TrevorPhilips]

"Hey Kaz, we're disappointed with the figures last time out, why don't you dial things back and hire 60 more people. Oh and while you're at it, dump all your existing assets that would minimise production costs and take a massive creative risk with the next game by changing the format"

You guys! The blind leading the blind down a blind ally as usual.

 

[ImaRobot]

"Hey Kaz, we're disappointed with the figures last time out, why don't you dial things back and hire 60 more people. Oh and while you're at it, dump all your existing assets that would minimise production costs and take a massive creative risk with the next game by changing the format"

You guys! The blind leading the blind down a blind ally as usual.

You're right that adding in content that was available and produced last gen would definitely minimize production costs, but removing them also minimizes licensing costs. The thing is, we don't know what the trade off is as not all vehicles are likely licensed at the same price.