- 5,767
- USA
- TPC_Raccooon23
- CRaccoon23
GT6 Sales Discussion
- Thread starter fassbendersbum
- 1,905 comments
- 153,160 views
- 3,100
- Sweden
We've all experienced GT6 to a certain extent before - I believe it was called Gran Turismo 5, if I'm not mistaken.
Honestly, let's face it; GT6 is merely an update to GT5. You really don't have to had played the game in order to actually be able to judge it. Same flaws remain, while other parts of the game just got covered with some heavy make up.
At this point, it's barely even worthy of renting.
...and look at the backlash they recieved, rightfully so.
- 11,343
- Chicago, iLL
- GTP_Nismo
- 3,100
- Sweden
Surely, but if you look at previous games and the steps forward they've taken forward with each installment during their respective console generation, this is the smallest leap yet. as well the least impressive I believe.
I'm almost certain that the sales figures reiterates (for a lack of a better word) exactly this too.
- 307
- Doc_Of_D
Only because the first one in the gen was so lacking. GT1 you can excuse because it was the first but GT3 dropped most of what was in GT2 where as GT5 started out with more than the second one of the previous gen. It's really no different than GT2. All it added was a ton more content, still the same game.
- 2,755
- Italy
- Clydeyellow
It means that they launched the game a week before the PS3 successor came out. It wasn't supposed at all to be a killer app, it was supposed to be a GT5.5 to keep the series relevant without having to release an unfinished game like a certain other American developer did.
And while sales aren't as high as GT5's, "it may not even break the five million mark" would sound like music from the heavens to most developers. Five million games, on a platform as old as the PS3, would be an impressive figure and a testament to the series good name.
Some people here around seem to have a very clear idea of what priorities Polyphony should have; why don't you start your own software house and produce a better game? I'm sure if all those "I know what's better" types got together and started a Kickstart campaign they'd get sufficient funding in no time.
And while sales aren't as high as GT5's, "it may not even break the five million mark" would sound like music from the heavens to most developers. Five million games, on a platform as old as the PS3, would be an impressive figure and a testament to the series good name.
Some people here around seem to have a very clear idea of what priorities Polyphony should have; why don't you start your own software house and produce a better game? I'm sure if all those "I know what's better" types got together and started a Kickstart campaign they'd get sufficient funding in no time.
- 6,318
- West Virginia
- HBR-Roadhog
- HBR Roadhog
They don't count in the same way as the people I actually know as I know what my friends like and don't like. The other random people on the internet may like something totally different so no I can't give those people the same weight in the matter as the ones I actually know.
As for the standards I like them just fine, there are lots of really good cars there. I don't care about the interior view at all and honestly when driving them you can't tell the difference between which are standard and which are not unless you switch to cockpit and see the blacked out view.
I would 1000x rather have access to all those cars without a cockpit than not have them and if you don;t like them then you are free to not use them
- 1,063
- Georgia
- Netherlord
When you say smallest leap I agree, but my opinion on that matter is because I've played other games even if it's a arcade or a simulation racer. MC:LA, NFS Series, Spilt Second, F1 2012, even others that has nothing to do with cars like Wipeout HD/Fury
I mention those games because each game has something I liked or seen before MC:LA had interior views and even the premium feel of each car was better than GT5 or GT6 so far right now. Plus it had DAMAGE same with other games having Damage with consequences.
The other games I've listed also have those same qualities as well.
- 1,211
- Earth
- TheLordSnowden
- LordSnowden
Ironically I believe the only feature that was created due in part to both expectation and feedback was online... And that wasn't until GT 5, the last numerical GT title.
I've played every GT since 1 thoroughly and really can't recall any major expectation of anything new ever realized... I'm not being negative at all, your post just got me thinking...
- 1,211
- Earth
- TheLordSnowden
- LordSnowden
I think most of their focus on GT 6 now is actually for GT 7... They will just enable hard shadows, full HDR, pull back the LOD, add more cars, swap out 2D trees, enable lights on all cars at night with more dynamic shadows, go crazy with AA and AF, and simulate cows grazing in fields outside of the tracks as that's realistic... Its easy to see where what we have now could be "next generized" without much content...
But the real question is will it be a different GAME? History gives me concern...
- 307
- Doc_Of_D
Yeah the stuff they are adding now is content for GT7. They have already stated the engine is made with next gen in mind, cars are PS4 quality, etc. It will look amazing on PS4 without the limitations of ram.
However the real question is how do you expect a driving simulator to be a big change? There's only so realistic you can get and then it doesn't change. All they can really do is add content/features.
- 1,211
- Earth
- TheLordSnowden
- LordSnowden
It needs more game, they can leave the sim alone... Or add more variables. But the way you progress in the game is flat and static. No more interesting than a spreadsheet...
The sim is fun! It's everything supporting it and the game structure that needs to get more with the times and consumer expectation.
- 1,063
- Georgia
- Netherlord
Well with all that stuff you just put up that would at least give it a 7 for me giving the game life is the biggest problem they've stepped up from GT5 because I've seen people move around off track and what not plus birds flying and the blimp at Trial Mountain.
Adding all that other stuff wouldn't hurt, and even when they add 3D trees adding some wind as well.
- 307
- Doc_Of_D
I agree on more racing events/quirky modes but progression is fine, it's not unlike any RPG. You start out at the bottom and move your way up. All it really needs is more meat and they have done this to an extent, GT6 already has improved upon that from GT5. ASpec in GT5 was way too short.
- 13,922
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Pure sales numbers will never be outdated, because having an idea of the raw numbers of people playing a game is useful.
That didn't take long.
5 million is not great when you have budgets the size of the ones PD does. Development cost per unit sold is important.
Agree completely. The sim part is fine. The gameplay part is what's stagnant.
- 40,930
Almost word for word, too.
Going along from that, even the actual profit margin could be a secondary issue as far as Sony is concerned. If Sony expects (and plans for) 10 million sales (let's say as a hypothetical that they are more interested in shifting PS3s than they are profiting short term on GT6), if they ended up with half that heads would roll even if PD developed the game on the same kind of budget the PSX titles were done on.
- 7,830
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
I'm sorry, but no.
You can criticize parts of GT6 and Forza 5 without playing it. The untouched Standards and lack of interiors in GT6, Forza's puny car and track list, and their monopolistic microtransactions, some things you can.
But saying a game isn't exciting or fun you haven't played yet is akin to judging sounds without hearing them, critiquing a book without reading it, diagnosing a patient without seeing them... I guess I can now safely judge Forza 5's physiques without being within a mile of a plugged in XBo.
This place really is sinking into a hole.
- 1,063
- Georgia
- Netherlord
I'm sorry, but no.
You can criticize parts of GT6 and Forza 5 without playing it. The untouched Standards and lack of interiors in GT6, Forza's puny car and track list, and their monopolistic microtransactions, some things you can.
But saying a game isn't exciting or fun you haven't played yet is akin to judging sounds without hearing them, critiquing a book without reading it, diagnosing a patient without seeing them... I guess I can now safely judge Forza 5's physiques without being within a mile of a plugged in XBo.
This place really is sinking into a hole.
Well as someone who played both GT5 and GT6 as far as excitement goes it's starting to go downhill I can see myself getting to IA Spec races, but beyond that I might not be bothered to complete career mode or finish anything else.
[sarcasm] Funny enough my favorite part is the racing on the moon WHY! Because it's Racing on the Moon that's why even if I have to do 924,949,094,120,149 cartwheels and backflips to get there. [/sarcasm]
No really though GT6 is step in right direction for GT series, but it's still virtually same game as GT5 is without a Course Editor at this moment.
- 40,930
All of those comparisons to things that require quantifiable experience with the thing in question break down immediately, because how much excitement you can get from something can absolutely be judged from the outside looking in. I'm not going to go to see The Hobbit 2 because it looks an awful lot like 3 hours of boring stuff padded out from a book I didn't like in the first place, as an example.
Last edited:
- 1,928
- San Bernardino, California
- Gerarghini
- Gerarghini
Let me use this as an example, although it might not be the best. The Ford GT '05 vs the '06 model, akin to GT5 vs GT6. The 06 one is slightly more advanced than the 05 one but honestly they drive extremely similar. Sure the latter may have a key feature here and there but that's it.I'm sorry, but no.
You can criticize parts of GT6 and Forza 5 without playing it. The untouched Standards and lack of interiors in GT6, Forza's puny car and track list, and their monopolistic microtransactions, some things you can.
But saying a game isn't exciting or fun you haven't played yet is akin to judging sounds without hearing them, critiquing a book without reading it, diagnosing a patient without seeing them... I guess I can now safely judge Forza 5's physiques without being within a mile of a plugged in XBo.
This place really is sinking into a hole.
You don't have to play GT6 if you've played GT5 to say that the game is boring because, IMO, it is. The core of GT6, the menus, interface, and such are all extremely similar to GT5's. Most of the problems that GT5 had still came along into GT6 including but not limited to...
Sounds, Ai, Car selection, standards, duplicates, GT mode, and lack of peripherals.
I remember back when GT6 was announced that I was happy it was on PS3 but now I see that PD can't implement everything they wanted with outdated hardware.
- 2,993
- Brisbane
- jimipitbull
Can you please explain which peripherals GT6 is lacking?
If you played FM4 extensively and then the reviews say FM5 physics are a slight evolution of FM4 physics, yes then you can judge FM5 physics.
I don't know if those two conditions are fulfilled though.
Drivatars, auctions (including app), prototype designer, Google maps autotrack creator with traffic option (random and realtime traffic), real career mode (racer or test driver), realistic damage, realistic dealership (you choose model, engine, trim, options, colors), option to remove possible gameplay limitations (money, PPP).
But given the fact that Kaz is still waiting on a breakthrough to create sounds, and the moon and stars is what he could come up with for GT6, we won't see any of the above in GT7. And not in any GT as long as Kaz is calling the shots.
- 3,100
- Sweden
In retrospect, the downgrade in quantity was and felt like a natural step with GT3. GT5 should've followed suit and focused on quality in my opinion, rather than wasting time on copying and pasting cars from previous generation. However, ever since GT4, ''the more, the merrier'' seems to have become an unfortunate main theme of the series. Anyhow, looking past number of cars, tracks and etc., I still maintain my opinion on (the vanilla version of) GT6.
As far as physics go, this is something I wholeheartedly agree with it. You really can't have a proper say in it as long as you haven't played both games. Gameplay videos on YouTube just aren't enough to dismiss it entirely, even though one's fears might have been true after all - *cough* GRID2 (worse than I initially thought) *cough*.I guess I can now safely judge Forza 5's physiques without being within a mile of a plugged in XBo.
- 1,537
- GTP_Soundtrack
Never implied unit sales numbers were meaningless. But exclusively associating them to measure the profitability/disaster-ness of the game may end-up being shortsighted.
Loosing a significative portion of your user base isn’t the most reassuring forecast neither, as it brings your business at equivalent revenue at higher risk.
Indeed, and development cost have possibly been decreased by multiple factors like production tools efficiency, know how, reuse of data, etc..
Maybe they have been reduced to the point, despite added assets, where some will consider this a .5 game...
Also I do suspect every PS3 level addition has been build with a minimum of PS4 compatibility in mind too, so amortization can be lengthened.
And considering the early “GT6 being initially developed for PS4” rumors, maybe they have their new engine already running in the back-office, with GT6/PS3 version being a striped-down one. This could explain why they have been building it around something as ambitious as Adaptive Tessellation.
- 13,922
- Adelaide
- Neomone
To be fair, it's already shortsighted now in that respect. The tendency of the console markets to (at least historically) mimic the razor-and-blades model to a certain degree throws too much stuff into question to be able to rely on pure numbers.
Except that development costs in those terms are paid in time. And time still costs the same amount. They may have gotten more done in the three years 2010-2013 than the three years 2005-2008 directly after GT4, but it still cost them three years wages. Plus licensing costs, which are unlikely to vary substantially for a second game.
Honestly, I reckon a reasonable assumption would be that GT6 cost them 3/5ths of what GT5 cost them. Their team hasn't gotten any smaller, amount of licenses has increased, in terms of new content made it's about the same so they're still having to travel to gather data for cars and tracks, and so on.
If GT5 cost them $60 million (and I've seen estimates as high as $80 million) then GT6 probably cost them about $35 million. That's a lot of money to recover before hitting profit.
Last edited:
- 8,725
If that's the kind of person you are, then yes. However, most of my excitement from movies comes from not knowing a damned thing about them - tis why I hate trailers. I can still enjoy them if I do know everything about them, of course - it's just not as pure. But that's an expectation thing.
The fact that you have experience with the subject matter in your example, by way of the book, actually invalidates your point on its own. At least for that example, where the book and movies are closely tied (if you assume that The Silmarillion is more of the same, in terms of your personal appreciation) and the nature of the typical narrative structure of books and films overlap, especially in such a "faithful" reproduction as The Hobbit movies.
There is plenty of scope for misconstruing, pre-judging and just missing the point altogether by "looking in" and not actually getting your hands on an interactive form of entertainment (which movies and books generally aren't, although there is no real way to tell how someone's imagination would react to a book). If you "don't like" RPGs (as I used to), then knowing a game is an RPG might be enough to "know" you "won't enjoy it", of course, but you won't actually know without trying it (as I did once). That's why I think games really should be different, and why I hate the clamour for all the recent "sims" to be feature-identical (by way of comparison, in the sense of "X has it, why can't Y?").
Reviews are a different matter, since they're accounts of such experience, ideally framed within an explicit detail of the expectations, pre-judgements and any other kind of bias of the reviewer in question. Of course, reviews "spoil" the game as well as trailers spoil a movie, but I prefer so-called "emergent" games probably for their capability to restore that sense of unknown.
It's a giant grey area, I think.
As usual, I've come at this with no knowledge of how the discussion got here. I don't really know how it relates to sales figures, so apologies if I missed the point. That does mean I've seen it naïvely, and maybe with less bias than if I did know all of that. However, I did see "more excitement = better game", and recognise that "better" is meaningless; as is "excitement", to a degree.
Similar threads
