Gran Turismo Sport: General Discussion

  • Thread starter Formidable
  • 47,132 comments
  • 4,730,086 views
But it's their choice to do it for this game and not the next one. The problem is that technology continues to move forward. GTS could be innovative/different enough without it IMO. Hell, they could do a GTS with current assets/tech AND a GT7 with new technology.
In this case nothing would stop them to bring back the standart cars in GT Sport,so let's stick to the new technology.:)
 
Last edited:
Naw, it was just funny how certain he was that Polyphony had all their ducks in a row.
What kind of ducks though?
duck-190715_960_720.jpg
 
When I did the TT at Sydney Motorsport Park, I mentioned about the sense of speed(I was defaulted to bumper cam for qualifying). To me, there was none. When I played GT6(I only used cockpit view), it gives that sense of speed. It just didn't feel right. The rep did say it was a specific build for that event.

I guess the VR thing, NEO, 60fps, online, PBR, I get it.

For us to wait approximately, another year for Kaz to feel the game is perfect, it needs to. I'm talking, make-me-sell-my-other-console-and-games perfect. Like I used to do back in the day. Lord knows how many times I sold Nintendo & Dreamcast games and consoles each time a GT game dropped.
 
We can only guess what is holding them back. My money would be on locking in the 60 fps target for VR and possibly something to do with what, IMO, is a lukewarm reception to the idea of a stripped down GT game that highly favours online competition.

Pretty bang on the money that.

But it's their choice to do it for this game and not the next one. The problem is that technology continues to move forward. GTS could be innovative/different enough without it IMO. Hell, they could do a GTS with current assets/tech AND a GT7 with new technology.

PBR is a huge difference though man, so I'm glad they're doing it. Also, AFAIK, they're the only car game devs using it...
 
I have no idea.

On another front. I just qrealised, this is the only game where we can drive a GT-R GT3. Feels like PD has the only licence for this car. That's how I felt about the Altima Supercar. However, that car is in FM6(along with the Super GT GT500 GT-R). What gives?
Nah you can drive it in AC too.
 
PBR is a huge difference though man, so I'm glad they're doing it. Also, AFAIK, they're the only car game devs using it...

Forza's been using it since the move to XB1.

It does make you wonder, if all the models were "future-proof" in GT6 (which launched after FM5, a game featuring PBR), why everything would need to be remade from scratch. Quite the shame too, since some of the models, especially those with AT, looked quite fantastic. Still do, even.
 
Last edited:
Being realistic I thin they faced the same issue that T10 did, by switching to PBR rendering which you can definitely see in the released footage all of the PS3 assets were rendered useless as they're incompatible with PBR. Which means they have to redo all the textures for all the cars and all the tracks. Seeing how long it took T10 to do it with their resources, I'm expecting GTS to have half of GT6's premium content at best, or more likely even less. We'll see I guess, but I think there will be a lot of disappointed fans when they reveal car/track lists.
Quite prophetic I must say. Well done @SimTourist 👍👍
 
Maybe not in 2005, but I'd say by the time they were working on GT6 the writing would have been on the wall. They were forward thinking enough to include tesselation support, PBR support should have been a thing too.
It should have been yes, but not on PS3. They should have just developed GT6 for PS4 and started the remodelling process then but if they did then we would probably be only just getting GT6 now. ;)
 
This would have to be one of the "cutting edge experiences" Kaz mentioned, which are causing the delays.
 
A few things:
  • There's literally no sign that's for GT Sport VR. Just VR.
  • That's not in either California's Venice, or Italy's. It's in Sorrento Valley.
  • Hashtags aren't really representative of anything.
  • Er, I don't think Lucas is commenting on the delay. I mean, he might be, but that'd require an assumption on our part. I read it as him just disappointed he doesn't get to hold onto a VR headset for himself (which I understand!).
 
I feel PD seems to be losing the plot on why they are highly regarded in the industry. Obviously the sales volume of GT affects the way industry players view them. To the FIA, or any car manufacturer in the VGT program, its free advertising. Our sales contribute largely to the view of PD.
I wonder if the industry will look at PD differently if GTS bombs? If it doesnt rake in 5 or 6 million sales?
 
In this case nothing would stop them to bring back the standart cars in GT Sport,so let's stick to the new technology.:)
:scared: That's the other opposite I guess. But see my point below.

PBR is a huge difference though man, so I'm glad they're doing it.
Would you still be if it resulted in screen tearing, frame drops, no standing starts, limited amounts of cars on track and simplified physics online, like in GT6?
 
Would you still be if it resulted in screen tearing, frame drops, no standing starts, limited amounts of cars on track and simplified physics online, like in GT6?

Yeah, not sure how much of a performance hit this is. But then hitting performance targets this console gen has been a massive battle for all devs, not just PD.
 
Yeah, not sure how much of a performance hit this is. But then hitting performance targets this console gen has been a massive battle for all devs, not just PD.
I would be perfectly happy if they just stuck to their FIA-certified E-Sports (GTAcademy meets iRacing meets Twitch) concept and focus on exactly that. It would be innovative enough IMO, since no other competitor has that now. I was impressed by what they showed so far and the responses of the people here that went to the London event, it's really something different. No need for extra fluff. In a year from now that might be different, now the competition knows what they're up to.
 
:scared: That's the other opposite I guess. But see my point below.


Would you still be if it resulted in screen tearing, frame drops, no standing starts, limited amounts of cars on track and simplified physics online, like in GT6?
I'm not sure how heavy is PBR for the console because Forza 6 has no problem with screen tearing,the frame rate are stable and there is standing starts.:)
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure how heavy is PBR for the console because Forza has no problem with screen tearing,the frame rate are stable and there is standing starts.:)

T10 are technical wizards - astounding what they managed to achieve for an early* xbox1 game.

*launch?

I would be perfectly happy if they just stuck to their FIA-certified E-Sports (GTAcademy meets iRacing meets Twitch) concept and focus on exactly that. It would be innovative enough IMO, since no other competitor has that now. I was impressed by what they showed so far and the responses of the people here that went to the London event, it's really something different. No need for extra fluff. In a year from now that might be different, now the competition knows what they're up to.

Surely they can't delay the game by twelve months?? That would be suicidal...
And yeah, for the rest, I agree - from what I've seen and played they have something pretty cool. I'm assuming the delay is features/performance related, because content can always come later...
 
Last edited:
They got a staff over 300+ people. Sometimes I wonder if Forza is even profitable for MS when the game clearly doesn't sell as well as GT.

I think traditionally, it's seen that if you make a console, you need to have an example of a few key types of games, preferably exclusive, to make it relevant. T10 were always MS's driving game dev for this reason, methinks, profits be damned. A loss-leader (is that the right term??)... :)
 
I think traditionally, it's seen that if you make a console, you need to have an example of a few key types of games, preferably exclusive, to make it relevant. T10 were always MS's driving game dev for this reason, methinks, profits be damned. A loss-leader (is that the right term??)... :)
I agree, Forza is either marginally profitable or just a gate keeper for MS with a staff that size. What amazes me is how T10 gets all these rights to lets say indy, formula e, Porsche and what not and the game just doesn't have a big crowd compared to GT. Seen this before with EA and the NFl, Porsche and FIFA to a certain extent.
 
I agree, Forza is either marginally profitable or just a gate keeper for MS with a staff that size. What amazes me is how T10 gets all these rights to lets say indy, formula e, Porsche and what not and the game just doesn't have a big crowd compared to GT. Seen this before with EA and the NFl, Porsche and FIFA to a certain extent.
I think that is indicative of just how much GT is built into the gaming landscape. GT was the first and best and even though for many people they have flattered to deceive in recent years their place in gamer's psyche is maintained. However, more people are waking upto the fact that GT is no longer the best and in many ways has fallen behind it's competition. GT can only continue to make the mistakes of the past for so long, living on past glories is not a recipe for success. GT Sport has to be a return to stellar form and from what I have seen so far, whilst what has been shown is of a very high quality, I just don't think it's going to offer enough to be a stellar return to form.
 
They got a staff over 300+ people. Sometimes I wonder if Forza is even profitable for MS when the game clearly doesn't sell as well as GT.

No, they don't. They have a staff of about seventy that are actually T10 employees and they contract the rest as necessary. The total number of people that work on a Forza game is about 300-400, but that doesn't mean that they're all working all the time.

I wouldn't be surprised if the total number of man hours that T10 pays for in two years is roughly the same as Polyphony with their 200 full time staff.
 
I think that is indicative of just how much GT is built into the gaming landscape. GT was the first and best and even though for many people they have flattered to deceive in recent years their place in gamer's psyche is maintained. However, more people are waking upto the fact that GT is no longer the best and in many ways has fallen behind it's competition. GT can only continue to make the mistakes of the past for so long, living on past glories is not a recipe for success. GT Sport has to be a return to stellar form and from what I have seen so far, whilst what has been shown is of a very high quality, I just don't think it's going to offer enough to be a stellar return to form.

It may have fallen behind, I don't disagree with that, but speaking of Forza, it's an exclusive on a different platform.

I don't have two consoles. Many others don't either, and this is more of a divide with paid online subs. Therefore, it doesn't even matter if Forza is 10 or 100 times better, on PlayStation, GT is still the king.

That's all I care about, at least. Despite playing Pcars, dirt rally, and AC, I still want to play GT. They've earned that over many years. And let's not forget that PS4 comprehensively outsold Xbox this gen.

It doesn't need a stellar return - that's what the hardcore fans want. For everyone else, GT literally just appearing on PS4 is enough.
 
Back