GT5's reaction to EA's lock down on Porsche, Pagani Huayra, etc.

[Samus]

I'm not Skyline lover but those cars are amazing pieces of machinery. I digress, three? were TC versions, quite different than road going counterparts. And 2012 is admittedly 2.8 0-100. In any case, I don't find it surprising at all, because Nissan is a big sponsor of GT and GT having good potential for valuable product placement (GT TV, Online content) I don't really blame them. In fact, I'd like other manufacturers to get on the bandwagon to represent themselves.

You can paint it any way you like and try to validate them but the facts are facts, four DLC cars have been Nissan GT-Rs.

Just german WWII vehicles? Not that I like Hitler or anything that I would commend him, but he commissioned Ferdinand Porsche to produce them, they share same genious engineering practices as Beetle and were most reliable vehicles for decades to come.

They were just war vehicles though, they were not relevent to the consumer market and I just personally don't see the logic of including them. They were the equivelent of the US Willys Jeeps and again, they were just army vehicles. They have no significance in motor vehicle history.

You guys really are stuck with nothing but accusations on this, because there isn't any good explanation as to where the money went, and the profits from well more than 60 million games sold is quite a pile of cash. Just from the sales of Prologue and GT5 is a king's ransom, likely hundreds of millions of dollars. If you have profits of more than just $100 mill in your bank, why not buy into the Porsche License and give Gran Turismo a big leap in popularity the way the interest level jumped when Ferrari was acquired? Especially with the lucrative prospects of DLC?

Well that is just the thing, we don't know because PD don't talk to their customers at all. You equally don't know what they're doing and just guessing.

The other company may not have been 100% truthful in what they said about not getting Porsche but at least they said something. They also tell people why the removed tracks, they tell the fans what they're doing and why.

PD, nothing. When was the last time PD commented on Porsche, or any other license they don't currently have? When was the last time they told us what their vision is for GTs future, what happened to the old tracks?

So what about the DLC, which is quite a lucrative prospect to dangle in front of us, or could be? After a year out and admission by Kaz that work on GT6 had commenced just shortly after GT5 shipped, you'd think they would had more than a handful of Touring Car conversions, a Mini, GT-R and a couple of V Dubs sitting around on their hard drives by now. Well, and Spa Francourchamps. So, are they lazy? Cheap? Or is there something else involved, such as most of the cash going straight to SONY?[

You really need to stop throwing such comments around with no evidence. From what we can see with our own eyes PD have plenty of money. Also what about all of the other DLC they could have put out, like original tracks and other content that doesn't need licensing? How does that fit into your lazy/cheap/no funds question?

This is the dilemma, when you have one of the kings of racing developers wanting to make the world happy over GT5 and the DLC his team makes for it, and then get an admittedly weaksauce offering in the December Car Pack. The money is being tied up somewhere. It's most likely going to funding the Fukuoka division, which may well be the new home base by now. New employees. New cars for GT6. Upcoming goodies for GT5, keeping it relevant in the face of racing games to come. And other things we'll never be privy to.

You don't know anything and just as you accused me, are making assumptions. PD have given us weak DLC so that must mean they don't have any money. Again, where are the original track DLC? They clearly have the money to employ the devs, they have the assets so where are they? That really doesn't tie into your theory that they have no money does it? It ties into the theories that either a) they're keeping it for GT6 or b) they just can't be bothered.

I mean look at it like this.

Evidence supporting the speculation PD has plenty of funds:

- Sales of 65 million games since GT1 including 12 million since 2008.
- Their parent company, Sony, has a huge amount of assets and equity and handed PD 60 million to develop GT5.
- The boss Kaz has enough money to support a personal racing program.

Evidence supporting the speculation PD are not well funded and can't afford licenses:

- Sony as a whole made a loss in the last quarter
- There hasn't been a lot of big license DLC
- Tenacious D thinks all their money went to sony (but has no evidence of that itself).

 

[88FoxBodyFan]

They were just war vehicles though, they were not relevent to the consumer market and I just personally don't see the logic of including them. They were the equivelent of the US Willys Jeeps and again, they were just army vehicles. They have no significance in motor vehicle history.

There are alot of people that would disagree with you on that opinion. They may not belong in GT5, but that doesn't mean they are not historically significant.

 

[Short Bus]

There are alot of people that would disagree with you on that opinion. They may not belong in GT5, but that doesn't mean they are not historically significant.

Yeah, their historical significance is kind of a side issue.... but I think most of us would agree that these cars simply do not belong in this game.

 

[Samus]

There are alot of people that would disagree with you on that opinion. They may not belong in GT5, but that doesn't mean they are not historically significant.

I probably didn't express that well. Of course they have significance in that they were key instruments in the war but that is all they were. Look at it purely from a motor vehicle historical aspect and they were quite insignificant, they were 'just' jeeps. The only significance is maybe the Schwimwagen because of it's aquatic abilities but they can't be explored in GT5 so again I see no historical value in them.

 

[88FoxBodyFan]

I probably didn't express that well. Of course they have significance in that they were key instruments in the war but that is all they were. Look at it purely from a motor vehicle historical aspect and they were quite insignificant, they were 'just' jeeps. The only significance is maybe the Schwimwagen because of it's aquatic abilities but they can't be explored in GT5 so again I see no historical value in them.

My thing was mostly with the Jeep. At least here in America, the Jeep is extremely significant. It has been on sale here in various forms and by different manufacturers (Ford, Willys, Chrysler) since it was built. It has changed mechanically through the years, of course, but the basic shape has always been the same. It's as iconic here as a Corvette or a 911.

I do agree, however, that there were a lot more vehicles that should have been added to GT5 before army vehicles were even thought about.

 

[Samus]

My thing was mostly with the Jeep. At least here in America, the Jeep is extremely significant. It has been on sale here in various forms and by different manufacturers (Ford, Willys, Chrysler) since it was built. It has changed mechanically through the years, of course, but the basic shape has always been the same. It's as iconic here as a Corvette or a 911.

I do agree, however, that there were a lot more vehicles that should have been added to GT5 before army vehicles were even thought about.

Oh absolutely the Jeep in general is massively significant in motor vehicle history, but not specifically the Army models, if you're talking about their inclusion within 200 new premium models in GT5. The civilian models, yes, but not the army models. That's the issue I have with the VWs in the game really.

 

[Tenacious D]

Well that is just the thing, we don't know because PD don't talk to their customers at all. You equally don't know what they're doing and just guessing.

You really need to stop throwing such comments around with no evidence. From what we can see with our own eyes PD have plenty of money.

You know, you're talking out of both sides of your mouth, here. On the one hand, we know nothing about them. On the other, suddenly you know their financial status.

Evidence supporting the speculation PD has plenty of funds:

- Sales of 65 million games since GT1 including 12 million since 2008.
- Their parent company, Sony, has a huge amount of assets and equity and handed PD 60 million to develop GT5.
- The boss Kaz has enough money to support a personal racing program.

This is pure speculation on your part as well. As I said, you're still talking as if Polyphony is a wholly self-owned third party developer. And that third point, I'd like to know where you get that, because all I can find is that Kaz is invited to join racing teams due to his natural talent as a race car driver. He may not have contributed a dime to Schulze Motorsports. If it's in the video presentation, I'd be surprised why the info isn't easily found on the net.

Anyhow, I guess you need to keep grumping at Kaz to quit being so tight fisted and hire a lot more people for PD, buy more licenses, and release better DLC. I suspect it won't matter and SONY will do what they will anyway.

Oh, and Turn 10 isn't exactly forthcoming until pretty late in the game about anything, which frankly I don't care about because I don't know if they're telling the truth about anything or not. Kaz not being all that open about stuff doesn't give me ulcers like it does some of you guys who want to know what you're getting for Christmas early. They have their style, and if you don't like it... well, I guess you don't.

 

[MusicalArtist]

I'm pretty sure Ferrari is against EA. There hasn't been a Ferrari in an EA game (mainly NFS) since NFS:Hot Pursuit 2.

 

[Patrick]

I'm pretty sure Ferrari is against EA. There hasn't been a Ferrari in an EA game (mainly NFS) since NFS:Hot Pursuit 2.

Shift 1 had a Ferrari DLC pack.

 

[Samus]

You know, you're talking out of both sides of your mouth, here. On the one hand, we know nothing about them. On the other, suddenly you know their financial status.

No i'm not. I said we don't know what they're doing because they don't tell us, on the other hand we know how many games they've sold because they tell us, likewise Sony tell us how much money they have. From that we can assume they have enough funds. Like I said, unless you have any evidence to the opposite?

Oh, and Turn 10 isn't exactly forthcoming until pretty late in the game about anything, which frankly I don't care about because I don't know if they're telling the truth about anything or not. Kaz not being all that open about stuff doesn't give me ulcers like it does some of you guys who want to know what you're getting for Christmas early. They have their style, and if you don't like it... well, I guess you don't.

I'm not just talking about their Porsche announcement, I'm talking about in general. Also so as not to stray into that 'vs' topic again, they're not the only ones. In 2011/2 most big developers have a strong connection to their customer base. They have blogs, they have an active community with competitions in game, they have community representatives and so on. Gamers know what they're up to and generally changes to the game are announced before they do them. With PD we basically have complete silence except when Kaz decides to tweet a few things. We don't know what is happening in updates until they're done, with no chance for input if we like the ideas. I don't know how you can possibly say this is a good thing.

Also I'm not 9, I don't need DLC released at Christmas to be a surprise. Just as I don't need it to be a surprise they're removing most of the seasonal events or whether or not the old tracks will be added to the game.

 

[Vaxxtx]

No i'm not. I said we don't know what they're doing because they don't tell us, on the other hand we know how many games they've sold because they tell us, likewise Sony tell us how much money they have. From that we can assume they have enough funds. Like I said, unless you have any evidence to the opposite?




I'm not just talking about their Porsche announcement, I'm talking about in general. Also so as not to stray into that 'vs' topic again, they're not the only ones. In 2011/2 most big developers have a strong connection to their customer base. They have blogs, they have an active community with competitions in game, they have community representatives and so on. Gamers know what they're up to and generally changes to the game are announced before they do them. With PD we basically have complete silence except when Kaz decides to tweet a few things. We don't know what is happening in updates until they're done, with no chance for input if we like the ideas. I don't know how you can possibly say this is a good thing.

Also I'm not 9, I don't need DLC released at Christmas to be a surprise. Just as I don't need it to be a surprise they're removing most of the seasonal events or whether or not the old tracks will be added to the game.

👍👍👍

 

[Short Bus]

Maybe it's in this thread and I missed it, but when does EA's exclusive rights to Porsche end?

 

[Tornado]

This is pure speculation on your part as well. As I said, you're still talking as if Polyphony is a wholly self-owned third party developer.

I would have hoped that the half dozen posts where we talked about why it makes no damn difference who is providing the funding would have made it clear that it makes no damn difference who is providing the funding when the funding is clearly going to be there regardless of who provides it. For sure we don't know what PD's budget is, but based on past games Sony certainly seems to give them a wide berth with it.

Oh, and Turn 10 isn't exactly forthcoming until pretty late in the game about anything

That is a door that you absolutely should not open. Not only is it basically "Forza vs. GT" bait, but there is no way you can possibly defend it from PD's point of view. We get told nothing about the game until after it already happens unless Kaz makes an offhand tweet about it. They don't even tell us what they are doing to the game in the changelog when they patch it.

 

[nitrorocks]

All I have to say is Damn l you for many reasons EA, Damn you.........

 

[CorvetteConquer]

This place will go bonkers if PD does manage to score the license to Porsche. I anticipate that day. Would be awesome.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

It would be awesome and if one were to criticize PD games with Porsche in them, the fanboys would come out the wood work with no logic and say we're no GT fans. Let's make this clear, a game with Porsche in it by PD doesn't make it a great game, it just makes it a game with Porsche in it. There are so many facets that PD needs to improve on as well, getting Porsche wont put anything to rest really.

 

[Vaxxtx]

It would be awesome and if one were to criticize PD games with Porsche in them, the fanboys would come out the wood work with no logic and say we're no GT fans. Let's make this clear, a game with Porsche in it by PD doesn't make it a great game, it just makes it a game with Porsche in it. There are so many facets that PD needs to improve on as well, getting Porsche wont put anything to rest really.

Yes...putting a set of $10,000 tire/wheels on a broke down, rusted, Caprice Classic doesnt make it better.

Fix the basics first, then move on to the extras. 👍

 

[stigs lil bro]

I know this is kind of tangential, but more connected than you might think, so I'm going to churn the butter a bit.

This is one of those things that will never be settled between the great divide of Premium and Standard lovers. Some people still won't touch them even with interior view, and the rest will never give them up. By my tag line in my banner, you might guess that I'm a Standard lover, especially when I mention that I have several hundred of them. And race them a lot more than my Premiums.

And this is the thing: racing a car is sure a lot more fun than not racing a car. If you get past the fact that you can't get a clear shot of the Standard's headlight inscriptions in Photo Mode, there are a lot - a LOT - of really nice rides in the Standard list. And most Standards do look quite nice running in the GT5 engine.

But say you're one of those "my way or the highway" types, and it was possible to up the GT5 car list with 300 more Premium models only. Which cars? Only the super, racing and muscle machines? Try and maintain the flavor of Gran Turismo and include a hundred lesser rides? You can count on nothing but fist fights over it, no one will agree on the list and no one will be truly happy with it. If you're going to be stuck with grumblers anyway, I say stick with what we have now and let them grumble over "lesser" vehicles, because more cars are always better than less cars.

As for DLC, no, I don't expect truckloads of Premium cars to bolster the car list on a Forza-like scale. I anticipate in packs of 5 or 10, mostly Standard upgrades. I expect more attention on tracks, mostly classic tracks given to us 2 to 5 at a time. I expect that the Race Mod car list to grow quite a bit, and either livery templates to be included, or some kind of Livery Editor itself. Along with that, a few more bodykit options, mostly of serious brand name items useful for creating race cars, not "rice." I'm looking forward to these new tracks to be incorporated in A-Spec offline as well as online user races and Seasonal Events. I also expect something of our proposed Event Maker to appear at some point, so we can make our own races and championships, on- or offline. I think any three or so from this list will be more than enough to keep the GT5 community involved and invigorated, no matter what competitors do.

On GT6, I expect all cars to be Premium, and most tracks, though a number of them can be "high Standard" in quality and still shine plenty bright. Close-ups of car headlights is one thing, but far fewer people take close-ups of jewelry shop windows, so lesser detail in race locations is much more forgivable. Especially if they feature time of day transition and weather.

On the other hand, the mix of Prems and Std cars worked okay for GT5, but this trick will most likely only fly once. I believe Kaz knows full well that if there's a sniff of dual levels of cars in GT6, the media and fans are going to stage a worldwide riot on his virtual doorstep. If there are two levels, they had better be darn near indistinguishable. I don't foresee any problems in this regard, unless you want 1000-plus cars again. I expect with four years of development on GT6 for there to be not much more than 600 cars, though with a shift of focus on making race courses, a good list of tracks to be there, adding to the 20-something Premium tracks from GT5. Maybe 80 to near 100, and along with that, a terrific load of features and gameplay elements to make everyone happy. And again, on PS4 as a launch or near launch title with a spiffy new wheel to go with it.

@LMSCorvette, I'm way more interested in those tracks to be honest.

Sharing the same sentiments here, you summed it up pretty well.

You can paint it any way you like and try to validate them but the facts are facts, four DLC cars have been Nissan GT-Rs.

Ok, I agree. I'm not against it though.

They were just war vehicles though, they were not relevent to the consumer market and I just personally don't see the logic of including them. They were the equivelent of the US Willys Jeeps and again, they were just army vehicles. They have no significance in motor vehicle history.

VW War vehicles > Lessons learned > Improved Beetle becoming bestseller decades to come > VW brand recgonition

btw. No *wagens > no Porsche

Jeep Willys > Lessons learned > Improved Wranglers etc, Wrangler becoming bestseller in 4x4 market for decades to come > Jeep brand recognition

They were all very important in automotive history and as such deserve place in game.

I can agree that those resources could have been put on few different cars, but having them in the game is exactly what GT is all about.

 

[Short Bus]

I can agree that those resources could have been put on few different cars, but having them in the game is exactly what GT is all about.

Having read everything else you posted in that particular post and mostly agreeing with it... I still disagree that these cars should be in this game. I'd be happy to give up all of these oddball cars for a premium twin turbo MKIV Supra.

 

[sumbrownkid]

Having read everything else you posted in that particular post and mostly agreeing with it... I still disagree that these cars should be in this game. I'd be happy to give up all of these oddball cars for a premium twin turbo MKIV Supra.

Those oddball cars give gt5 it's character though. A goofy charm if you will.

Don't get me wrong I love supras, but I like it when a few odd cars give me a chuckle now and then.

As for Porsche. Screw them. Ferrari jumped onboard, can't honestly fathom why zuffhausen won't join Modena in the gt series.

 

[Scaff]

As for Porsche. Screw them. Ferrari jumped onboard, can't honestly fathom why zuffhausen won't join Modena in the gt series.

Quite simple really, if they are still under exclusive licence with EA (and to date no one knows 100% if they still are or not), then doing so would open them up to a massive legal case for breech of contract.


Scaff

 

[DawgCCCP]

I mean people moan about Porsches so bad, just remember that GT never had porsches in the series, only Ruf's correct if I'm wrong.

I mean I would love to see premium Rufs badly, and only dream about GT having the RAUH WELT Porsches, but thats probably is not going to happen.

EA kinda got it that exclusive right with their NFS Porsche Unleashed game, and if they still have it, none of us know we can only guess.

What GT should get is some new Ruf models like:

RUF Rt12 Turbo

RUF CTR3

Get the new line of Rufs in the game would be awesum

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

You and everyone else wants that and has been saying that through out the post. We know and we all do want the new Rufs. However, there has to be a reason why PD hasn't updated their ruf line up and it may well be because they couldn't get a license for the new cars.

 

[Tenacious D]

Those oddball cars give gt5 it's character though. A goofy charm if you will.

Don't get me wrong I love supras, but I like it when a few odd cars give me a chuckle now and then.

As for Porsche. Screw them. Ferrari jumped onboard, can't honestly fathom why zuffhausen won't join Modena in the gt series.

I'm sure with you on this. Gran Turismo is all about driving cars you never thought you'd see in a racing game, like Model T's and the very first steam (?) powered Mercedes.

Well.......... except for that last line. Personally, I'm not the biggest fan of Porsche in the world, but I do like them a lot. As for the rest of the automotive world though, there's a huge fanbase for those cars, you guys have to admit. And you have to admit that if Kaz managed to score a deal with EA over them, the gaming world would go as bonkers over it as they did over nabbing Ferrari. And I'd sure love to see some of those mid-engined cars myself, especially in racing livery, running in that GT engine.

Still, as Scaff alludes, we might still be at the mercy of EA over this matter, and it might take suitcases of monies from SONY to get it. And as GT5 has certainly made that with several millions sold... well, anything can happen in this gaming cold war we find ourselves in.

As for RUF, if we don't see anything new in a while, I'd think that was a good sign that a certain monopoly bought up another exclusive and part of the gaming market.

 

[Sele1981]

I dont know if this was already posted here or if anybody heared it!?

You know what is funny? EA locks Porsche to all other game developers! And now I´ve read that EA implemented the AH-1Z Viper, UH-1Y and V-22 Osprey helicopters in Battlefield 3. Now Textron Inc. is forcing EA to remove those helicopters from the game because EA has no rights!

What is EA doing? They want to go to the court and want the rights that it should be allowed for each game developer to implement each weapon or military "car" without any license!

Isn´t that funny?

 

[godlameroso]

On top of that they're arguing that since the helicopters only play a small portion of the overall game they should be allowed in on 1st amendment grounds. I think they're idiots if they think that ish will fly.

 

[Tornado]

What is EA doing? They want to go to the court and want the rights that it should be allowed for each game developer to implement each weapon or military "car" without any license!

Isn´t that funny?

Not really. The situations aren't actually the same.

 

[stigs lil bro]

On top of that they're arguing that since the helicopters only play a small portion of the overall game they should be allowed in on 1st amendment grounds. I think they're idiots if they think that ish will fly.

Funny.. Their behaviour towards licencing and competition is in direct opposite of what they have done in that game and now there is no where to hide hahaha. Pay up,🤬..

EDIT:

Not really. The situations aren't actually the same.

How? Helicopters and cars are made by some corporation same as civil cars. Or?

 

[Tornado]

Are Porsches funded and developed with taxpayer money, and basically public domain items as a result? Because that is the distinction that EA is actually arguing.

 

[Sele1981]

Not really. The situations aren't actually the same.

EA forbids other companies to implement a car brand named Porsche. And now an other company forbids EA to implement helicopters from an brand.

I dont see why the situation is sooo different...