How in the Frank Bruno did Forza III do it?

[Devedander]

You're calling 200/800 a "fiasco", I'm calling it a "bonus".

You're calling them "secondary features", I call them "primary difference".

It is a matter of opinion.

While I can see what you are saying, the opinion that they are a bonus or extras I think can only come from looking at the final product in a vacum and ignoring all previous marketing and claims.

While it's true I don't recall there ever being a direct claim "there will be 1000 cars all of equal and unsuprassed quality" I think to demand such a claim was made is unreasonable and defies the rules of "lies of omission".

Of course this is also in no small part due to some GTP members who consistently insist (as fact even sometimes) some very lofty results will come from GT5. The bar was set high by a lot of parties involved.

So if you don't look at the promotion and implied content up until this point, one could see it as a 200 car game with a bonus 800 cars... but if you do look at the history in that aspect, I think that opinion is very hard to support in the big picture. It feels very much to me like putting a sign with pictures of pizza, steak, ribs and salads that says "Our buffet features over 1000 items!" and then when you see the actual buffet 800 of the items are condiments. Technically it didn't SAY all 100 items were what you would consider food, but I think one would be hard pressed not to be dissapointed... It's normal to exagerate, but when it's so drastic and dramatic and such a core part of your product... it's not reasonable to omit so much information about it.

Take a sports team as an example... your city may pay big bucks to but some awesome soccer players to add to it's team. These players are much hyped for a long time, their skills and qualifications much touted and your city markets them well to the people... they get aquired and added to the team... and they perform quite well.

But the team still doesn't really win much... the new star players aren't living up to the promise.

Maybe they do average a goal a game... but if your team has been loosing by an average of 2 goals every game and these guys were going to fix that... well then they have been a dissapointment.

See some might say "he averages a goal a game and takes a dozen good shots on goal as a bonus keeping the pressure on! Sure that's a good thing!"

But then those who have been paying attention this whole time can (rightfully say) but he was purported to be much better than that, he was marketed to be so great as to believe every shot on goal would be a goal" and as such they can legitimately say - he is a dissapointment and those "bonsues" are not bonuses... they are missed opportunities to achieve.

See what I am getting at there?

 

[Touring Mars]

Amen 👍 We needed a post around here like this to remind people as a whole GT5 is going to be amazing.

Ditto - some electrons find themselves heating up my toaster, and some are used to translate human thought into internet forum posts like that - the electrons that passed through my toaster are extremely jealous right now.*

(* I am aware that is possible (if not quite likely) that atleast one electron may have been involved in both events, but let's not get into that here )

 

[Devedander]

Yes it was insidesimracers that I heard it.

Whilst some think the standard cars are going to be ported over from GT4 there is one thing that doesn't make sense. How can these cars being ported from GT4 when all the code from previous GT games has been thrown in the bin. I remember Kaz stating this in an interview and he also said GT5 was going to be developed from scratch.

This often comes down to an understanding of terms of the industry. I am not a game programmer or anything but I have done some programming and discussed with some advanced programmers and often when referring to a program (game) the term "code" refers to the actual application - the engine and processing portions of the program - and assets are considered the things you put into those engines to get something out of them.

Simple example:

I write a program that accepts a regular polygon shape, adds a side to it and spits out a new shape that has one more side than whatever you stuck in.

Along with this program I supply several assets, these are shapes. You feed the asset to the program, it does it's thing and spits out a new result.

In this case the program is referred to as the code and is seperate from the assets.

In a game like GT the car models, sounds, even tracks and trees can be considered assets. They are not part of the engine.

So when KY speaks of throwing away all old code, if you understand the terminology, it easily means they threw away the physics engine, the lighting engine, the sound processing engine etc etc but not the assets.

To go back to my simple program, let's say I make a version 2 of my program... this new version I want to be able to add a side or remove a side and also warn you when the shape starts with 3 sides and so cannot have a side removed.

I look at my old code and realize it will be painful to alter it so it can do these new tasks well and I would do best to stat over from scratch.

So I throw out all my old code, write a new program from scratch, then go grab my old assets (those shapes) and start running them through my new program version 2.

This is a case of discarding all old code while keeping assets.

It may be easier to think of in terms of actual machinery and factories... "we discarded our old factory and built a new one from scratch" - "but those are the same employees from the old factory" - "well yes, we only discarded the factory, not our employees"

Similar sort of deal.

That is how all the old code can have been discarded, but cars from GT4 can also be in GT5.

Ditto - some electrons find themselves heating up my toaster, and some are used to translate human thought into internet forum posts like that - the electrons that passed through my toaster are extremely jealous right now.*

(* I am aware that is possible (if not quite likely) that atleast one electron may have been involved in both events, but let's not get into that here )

If you look at it on a quantum level, it's possible all the electrons were involved in both events simultaneously... until you stopped to check which ones were at least

BTW Scaff - noted about double posting, however I believe in this case I was still posting my original post while the next post I responded to went up... in such a case isn't it reasonable since I could not have known to multiquote at the time?

And on creative note, I have been to some forums that automatically join any two posts within a certain timeframe... I don't know if that costs extra or something, but if it's feasible, it might be a valuable addition.

And for the record, know it's a canned note, but I am not a kid

 

[Spagetti69]

So did the toast burn?

 

[Timppaq]

You're calling 200/800 a "fiasco", I'm calling it a "bonus".

You're calling them "secondary features", I call them "primary difference".

It is a matter of opinion.

You know, if you already ask me how do I look to that particular issue as a gaming critic, you're going to like my opinion even less.

As s fan I could be disappointed about Standard/Premium issue up to some point. But as a game critic I would even forget that particular thing, because in the overall scope and importance of GT5 for racing genre and overall gaming it doesn't mean a thing.

To elaborate.

If you want to be serious gaming critic (or journalist, call it what you want) you must put things into perspective. And when you put all features of GT5 into perspective, whole Standard/Premium issue become non-relevant.

Is iRacing a bad game/bad simulation just because it has less than 20 cars? I don't think so.

Is original F355 Challenge by Yu Suzuki-san a bad game because it has just ONE car? I don't think so, even 12 years after it is still a non-doubtful masterpiece and it boosts few options and features that none racing game - even GT series - hasn't surpassed yet.

If you look just at the list of confirmed features - not to speak about all surprises that still awaits us - Gran Turismo 5 will certainly be the title that will change the genre, as all previous games did.

We still have to see the actual shapes of the GT5's most important features - single player structure and online structure - but from previous experience with GT series we can expect nothing less than AAA.

When I look at GT5 as a game critic, I see the driving game that boosts unprecedented list of technological features that no other games on consoles have - from 1080p, 60 fps, 3D, 7.1 DD sound, head tracking, PhotoMode, to FF wheels support.

I see game that will further expand the most important and revolutionary aspect of the series, that no other game on genre and on ANY platform have never managed to come even close - the single-player RPG aspect of ownership of the car, car maintenance and feel of connection to your vehicle(s). Not to even speak about the world of Licenses and Missions which remains milestone of the series forever.

From the driver point of view I see game that will give us the most advanced possible physics model ever on consoles and possibly overall, engine made in tight collaboration with Nissan and Mercedes-Benz, with almost genre-unique simulation of USABLE different tire-compounds, day/night change, possible inclusion of weather change and ONLY game in the genre that gives us opportunity to drive on all imaginable surfaces and almost all imaginable car-classes that exist today in the world of motorsport.

From additional features standpoint I see the game that will incorporate in-game streaming TV channels in form of GT:TV, HD YouTube support, numerous community features that still remains undisclosed (BBcode and 32-player lobbies being most interesting), together with some options we do not know about certanly yet - such as evolution of B-Spec mode, actual options of car-tuning and such.

To put it perspective of journalism, if Gran Turismo 5 would be Call of Duty game, it would have more than 1000 weapons to choose from (200+ Premium ones with slightest details nobody ever seen in the genre and 800+ made from assets from previous games), almost 100 maps available from the box, epic single-player, great community features and it would have day/night transitions, photomode, etc.

You can use your imagination to put into perspective same comparation inside any other genre.

As a game critic I can be only amazed with everything that Gran Turismo 5 will bring the the video-gaming in general, standards it will introduce to genre - especially on consoles - and overall size of the game that will be nothing less than unprecedented.

Issue that used cars - probably, it is my own presumption, but very logical one from series philosophy standpoint - will be "Standard" - and we still do not know what it means for sure, but we only know they will look different than Premium to some point and will not have detachable parts when taking damage, everything else will be the SAME - is non-important from game critic point of view.

Taking that as a game-breaking feature in perspective with everything else that GT5 will bring would be nothing less than deliberately ignorant.

Thanks Amar for putting all this into a readable text, I just was too lazy to do this all.

I could not agree more.

The core (the physics) will be great (we've seen that in the TT demo) EVERYTHING else there is, is just icing. It's sad for the people who are complaining here for all the minor details... They're just missing the point by a mile.

I know enough of the game to be sure that it'll bring me unbelievably much fun with my friends and all the clean racers out there. And to have such extras that we have never seen before, it's just plain unbelievable.

Just my thoughts.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Iam the first time here
and iam shocked about some people here ,OMG
1.The reason why GT5 has a long development time is that the cars (premium ) are 100% the same like in reality
They need more then 3 months for only 1 car ! This is GT5 = AWESOME
2.The cars in FM3 are never like in the reality ,the cars are "free modeled " !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You never can compaire the detail fron FM 3 with GT5 ,GT5 is on a other level
I can show thousands of GT5 pictures where you think , Is it real or not !
I saw pictures (on the left side was the real interiour and on the right side was GT5 ) and there you CAN'T find a difference
and now guys what are you talking about FM 3 , hahaha

admins ,please close threads like this ,its just stupid
OMG They try to compaire FM 3 with GT5 ...lol

Simmer down and get a grip there sport.
Your not living up to that screen name for sure.

Try to read some of the posts and get a good idea of whats going on before you blast off.
You might blow a fuse from a over inrush of those electrons TM is talking about.

 

[kingcars]

You're calling 200/800 a "fiasco", I'm calling it a "bonus".

You're calling them "secondary features", I call them "primary difference".

You're missing the point here.

The issue for me has not, and never has been, the NUMBER of cars. It has been the deceitful marketing pushed forth by PD/Sony. They said the game would have 1000 cars. No other racing game that I recall has ever announced a number of cars, then ended up having 80% of them look far worse than the 20% that they had been showing off in all videos and demos during the years of development. We all know for a FACT that if an NFS or Forza game pulled the same stunt that this forum would be criticizing it to pieces. But since it's GT, people are letting them get away with murder.

Not only that, but the immersion of the game will definitely be broken. While I'm driving a BMW 135i that has every little detail down to the printed text on the inside headlight, I'm driving past cars with blocky body lines, limo tint, and blurry textures that I can barely read. And if I get into a wreck with one of them, they'll drive away with scratches while my hood is flapping in the wind and doors are hanging open.

Is iRacing a bad game/bad simulation just because it has less than 20 cars? I don't think so.

Nope, they also didn't release 16 of the cars as 4,000 polygon models with blurry textures, no cockpit view, and no damage.

 

[TeamStig]

Nope, they also didn't release 16 of the cars as 4,000 polygon models with blurry textures, no cockpit view, and no damage.

And how do you know they will have 4,000 polygons and blurry textures? If you want to criticize the game, go right ahead. Just get your facts right first.

Not to mention standard cars will have damage. Maybe not as detailed a damage model as the premium cars, but it will be there.

And thank you amar for making me remember why I love Gran Turismo.

 

[ICEMAN_ZIDANE]

SuperCobraJet
I have read some posts (I looked the first time today in this thread) and i think its a pointless disscussion (I ghink we are on page 41 now) because you guys try to compaire FM 3 with GT5 and that is the point , you CAN'T compaire them
It's like if you compaire a GT2 Class car with a F1 car or if you compaire PS3 with PS2 or Ayrton Senna with mhh I don't know Nico Rosberg or anything like this

Scaff
Have I said what you guys have to speak about ?No
Omg , if you think so ghan it's ok and it's no problem for me
If you don't know the differences beetween fm3 and gt5 you should stop to disscus about it because you can't compaire them

ps: I really don't want to make you guys angry or anythinng like this but it's for me pointless ,maybe for you it's not pointless (i accept that) than I think after 41 pages you should come to a result or anythinng like this ...

ICEMAN_ZIDANE

 

[Devedander]

And how do you know they will have 4,000 polygons and blurry textures? If you want to criticize the game, go right ahead. Just get your facts right first.

I think that was a hypothetical that could have made a similar situation for iRacing, not claiming that's exactly what's happening in GT5.

And thank you amar for making me remember why I love Gran Turismo.

I think most of us left here love the GT series and that's why we keep holding on... if not we would have bailed a while ago (probably around E3 )

 

[TeamStig]

I think that was a hypothetical that could have made a similar situation for iRacing, not claiming that's exactly what's happening in GT5.

Ah, I see. Thanks.

I think most of us left here love the GT series and that's why we keep holding on... if not we would have bailed a while ago (probably around E3 )

True, it's just that with all the negativity regarding problems that do not exist yet, I tend to forget.

 

[Devedander]

True, it's just that with all the negativity regarding problems that do not exist yet, I tend to forget.

Within reason I can't believe a lot of the perceived problems will get fixed, but technically anything is possible so you are right, they are problems that don't exist with the final product yet.

But then again, neither do any of the positives by that rational, so if we leave both of those out, there isn't much to talk about in a news, rumor and speculation forum anymore

 

[Dapper]

Within reason I can't believe a lot of the perceived problems will get fixed, but technically anything is possible so you are right, they are problems that don't exist with the final product yet.

But then again, neither do any of the positives by that rational, so if we leave both of those out, there isn't much to talk about in a news, rumor and speculation forum anymore

First, you are right. There are no problems, yet you won't let anyone say their opinion without you telling them they are wrong.

Second, you are very wrong. Positive rationale comes from the all the previous experiences PD has given us. You must understand that, right? (rhetorically speaking, sad I must say that.)

 

[Scaff]

BTW Scaff - noted about double posting, however I believe in this case I was still posting my original post while the next post I responded to went up... in such a case isn't it reasonable since I could not have known to multiquote at the time?

And on creative note, I have been to some forums that automatically join any two posts within a certain timeframe... I don't know if that costs extra or something, but if it's feasible, it might be a valuable addition.

And for the record, know it's a canned note, but I am not a kid

Double posting within minutes is a total no-no here at GT Planet (and no the site software does not offer that option), you could have simply opened a new window to copy and paste the other details into a single reply (something I have done in the past and am doing right now) or asked for them to be merged or edited you original post with the new quote and info.

The kid comment is an auto populate field that I use as standard, given the volume of posts I merge on a daily its easier to use.

Scaff
Have I said what you guys have to speak about ?No
Omg , if you think so ghan it's ok and it's no problem for me
If you don't know the differences beetween fm3 and gt5 you should stop to disscus about it because you can't compaire them

ps: I really don't want to make you guys angry or anythinng like this but it's for me pointless ,maybe for you it's not pointless (i accept that) than I think after 41 pages you should come to a result or anythinng like this ...

ICEMAN_ZIDANE

I didn't say that you had told anyone what to say? So I'm not sure how you got to that.

You told the staff to close the thread and dismissed everyone who had posted in a manner you didn't agree with.

Not the attitude we expect from members, if you have an issue with a post/thread then use the report button, but do not demand that the staff close a thread simply because you don't like it.


Scaff

 

[SuperCobraJet]

SuperCobraJet
I have read some posts (I looked the first time today in this thread) and i think its a pointless disscussion (I ghink we are on page 41 now) because you guys try to compaire FM 3 with GT5 and that is the point , you CAN'T compaire them
It's like if you compaire a GT2 Class car with a F1 car or if you compaire PS3 with PS2 or Ayrton Senna with mhh I don't know Nico Rosberg or anything like this

The comparison is with the GT5 standard cars and FM3 cars.
They are not modeled in the same detail as premium cars, and has been argued, are ports of GT4 cars.
The premium GT5 cars are universally agreed to be far better than anything else.

Scaff
Have I said what you guys have to speak about ?No
Omg , if you think so ghan it's ok and it's no problem for me
If you don't know the differences beetween fm3 and gt5 you should stop to disscus about it because you can't compaire them

ps: I really don't want to make you guys angry or anythinng like this but it's for me pointless ,maybe for you it's not pointless (i accept that) than I think after 41 pages you should come to a result or anythinng like this ...

ICEMAN_ZIDANE

I hate to disappoint you, but I don't think I've ever seen a thread on GTP end in a result, at least not of a unanimous consensus type. If thats what your implying.
They just seem to fade into the back pages, replaced by some other contentious thread topic.

 

[amar212]

EDIT: I just have to correct myself, I non-deliberately misspelled one number in one of my first posts in today's debate:

Although I'd like to see all 1000+ cars available in Premium quaility, it was clear (at least to people that had inside info) it was just not going to happen. Such monumental task, with only 20+ people working on actual car modelling is too much work.
.

Correct number should be 40, sorry if that mislead anything.

 

[Devedander]

First, you are right. There are no problems, yet you won't let anyone say their opinion without you telling them they are wrong.

There are no problems in the pedantic meaning of the word that they don't exist in a final form yet... however as I pointed out, this forum is for news rumor and speculation which includes things that aren't yet.

And I think your claim of not letting anyone have their opinion is not really accurate, although I don't refrain from debating or attacking flawed positions.

Got any examples you want to put forth? Maybe I am just not realizing what I do...

Second, you are very wrong. Positive rationale comes from the all the previous experiences PD has given us. You must understand that, right? (rhetorically speaking, sad I must say that.)

A lot of it does but that is called wishful thinking and in the business world there is a saying "past performance does not dictate future results" for exactly situations like this.

You will note that many of the perceived shortfalls of GT5 we are seeing shape up are glaring in large because peoples expectations of PD's past perfection do not appear to be getting met. Kind of shows the flaw in using that rational.

And that's ignoring all the positive spectating that comes from videos and images and whatnot released... if you want to claim we cannot speculate negatives based on pre production information, how can you speculate positives?

 

[ICEMAN_ZIDANE]

Scaff ok
SuperCobraJet
ahh oki , but if you guys compaire GT5 standard cars with fm3 cars than its pointless too XD (if you look detailed on this cars you will see that the cars are modeled very close to the real cars and if you look close to the fm 3 cars that they AREN'T modeled close to the real cars ...)

Have fun disscussing about that ...ICEMAN_ZIDANE

ps:maybe i will open a thread about the physics from GT5 and FM3 ,it would be very funny
but it would pointless too (all comparaisons would be pointless but they would be funny XD,it was a "joke" I will not open a thread )

 

[SuperCobraJet]

EDIT: I just have to correct myself, I non-deliberately misspelled one number in one of my first posts in today's debate:



Correct number should be 40, sorry if that mislead anything.

This was being discussed earlier along with the 6mos. to model a car time frame.

I'm curious to know if the 6mos. is the time frame for 40 people working on it?

I'm also curious if you may know a close estimation of the dev time that would have been lost to GT5 by the GTPSP prioritization.

 

[Devedander]

This was being discussed earlier along with the 6mos. to model a car time frame.

I'm curious to know if the 6mos. is the time frame for 40 people working on it?

I'm also curious if you may know a close estimation of the dev time that would have been lost to GT5 by the GTPSP prioritization.

It seems 6 months for 40 people working on it can't be since that's 2 cars a year...

I must imagine that they broke into groups of 2 or 3 and went at it as teams, each group taking 6 months per car.

 

[shadynader]

You're calling 200/800 a "fiasco", I'm calling it a "bonus".

You're calling them "secondary features", I call them "primary difference".

It is a matter of opinion.

You know, if you already ask me how do I look to that particular issue as a gaming critic, you're going to like my opinion even less.

As s fan I could be disappointed about Standard/Premium issue up to some point. But as a game critic I would even forget that particular thing, because in the overall scope and importance of GT5 for racing genre and overall gaming it doesn't mean a thing.

To elaborate.

If you want to be serious gaming critic (or journalist, call it what you want) you must put things into perspective. And when you put all features of GT5 into perspective, whole Standard/Premium issue become non-relevant.

Is iRacing a bad game/bad simulation just because it has less than 20 cars? I don't think so.

Is original F355 Challenge by Yu Suzuki-san a bad game because it has just ONE car? I don't think so, even 12 years after it is still a non-doubtful masterpiece and it boosts few options and features that none racing game - even GT series - hasn't surpassed yet.

If you look just at the list of confirmed features - not to speak about all surprises that still awaits us - Gran Turismo 5 will certainly be the title that will change the genre, as all previous games did.

We still have to see the actual shapes of the GT5's most important features - single player structure and online structure - but from previous experience with GT series we can expect nothing less than AAA.

When I look at GT5 as a game critic, I see the driving game that boosts unprecedented list of technological features that no other games on consoles have - from 1080p, 60 fps, 3D, 7.1 DD sound, head tracking, PhotoMode, to FF wheels support.

I see game that will further expand the most important and revolutionary aspect of the series, that no other game on genre and on ANY platform have never managed to come even close - the single-player RPG aspect of ownership of the car, car maintenance and feel of connection to your vehicle(s). Not to even speak about the world of Licenses and Missions which remains milestone of the series forever.

From the driver point of view I see game that will give us the most advanced possible physics model ever on consoles and possibly overall, engine made in tight collaboration with Nissan and Mercedes-Benz, with almost genre-unique simulation of USABLE different tire-compounds, day/night change, possible inclusion of weather change and ONLY game in the genre that gives us opportunity to drive on all imaginable surfaces and almost all imaginable car-classes that exist today in the world of motorsport.

From additional features standpoint I see the game that will incorporate in-game streaming TV channels in form of GT:TV, HD YouTube support, numerous community features that still remains undisclosed (BBcode and 32-player lobbies being most interesting), together with some options we do not know about certanly yet - such as evolution of B-Spec mode, actual options of car-tuning and such.

To put it perspective of journalism, if Gran Turismo 5 would be Call of Duty game, it would have more than 1000 weapons to choose from (200+ Premium ones with slightest details nobody ever seen in the genre and 800+ made from assets from previous games), almost 100 maps available from the box, epic single-player, great community features and it would have day/night transitions, photomode, etc.

You can use your imagination to put into perspective same comparation inside any other genre.

As a game critic I can be only amazed with everything that Gran Turismo 5 will bring the the video-gaming in general, standards it will introduce to genre - especially on consoles - and overall size of the game that will be nothing less than unprecedented.

Issue that used cars - probably, it is my own presumption, but very logical one from series philosophy standpoint - will be "Standard" - and we still do not know what it means for sure, but we only know they will look different than Premium to some point and will not have detachable parts when taking damage, everything else will be the SAME - is non-important from game critic point of view.

Taking that as a game-breaking feature in perspective with everything else that GT5 will bring would be nothing less than deliberately ignorant.

Words of wisdom in a sea of ignorance 👍

It seems 6 months for 40 people working on it can't be since that's 2 cars a year...

I must imagine that they broke into groups of 2 or 3 and went at it as teams, each group taking 6 months per car.

6 months of man hours.......

 

[Zer0]

You're calling 200/800 a "fiasco", I'm calling it a "bonus".

You're calling them "secondary features", I call them "primary difference".

It is a matter of opinion.

You know, if you already ask me how do I look to that particular issue as a gaming critic, you're going to like my opinion even less.

As s fan I could be disappointed about Standard/Premium issue up to some point. But as a game critic I would even forget that particular thing, because in the overall scope and importance of GT5 for racing genre and overall gaming it doesn't mean a thing.

To elaborate.

If you want to be serious gaming critic (or journalist, call it what you want) you must put things into perspective. And when you put all features of GT5 into perspective, whole Standard/Premium issue become non-relevant.

Is iRacing a bad game/bad simulation just because it has less than 20 cars? I don't think so.

Is original F355 Challenge by Yu Suzuki-san a bad game because it has just ONE car? I don't think so, even 12 years after it is still a non-doubtful masterpiece and it boosts few options and features that none racing game - even GT series - hasn't surpassed yet.

If you look just at the list of confirmed features - not to speak about all surprises that still awaits us - Gran Turismo 5 will certainly be the title that will change the genre, as all previous games did.

We still have to see the actual shapes of the GT5's most important features - single player structure and online structure - but from previous experience with GT series we can expect nothing less than AAA.

When I look at GT5 as a game critic, I see the driving game that boosts unprecedented list of technological features that no other games on consoles have - from 1080p, 60 fps, 3D, 7.1 DD sound, head tracking, PhotoMode, to FF wheels support.

I see game that will further expand the most important and revolutionary aspect of the series, that no other game on genre and on ANY platform have never managed to come even close - the single-player RPG aspect of ownership of the car, car maintenance and feel of connection to your vehicle(s). Not to even speak about the world of Licenses and Missions which remains milestone of the series forever.

From the driver point of view I see game that will give us the most advanced possible physics model ever on consoles and possibly overall, engine made in tight collaboration with Nissan and Mercedes-Benz, with almost genre-unique simulation of USABLE different tire-compounds, day/night change, possible inclusion of weather change and ONLY game in the genre that gives us opportunity to drive on all imaginable surfaces and almost all imaginable car-classes that exist today in the world of motorsport.

From additional features standpoint I see the game that will incorporate in-game streaming TV channels in form of GT:TV, HD YouTube support, numerous community features that still remains undisclosed (BBcode and 32-player lobbies being most interesting), together with some options we do not know about certanly yet - such as evolution of B-Spec mode, actual options of car-tuning and such.

To put it perspective of journalism, if Gran Turismo 5 would be Call of Duty game, it would have more than 1000 weapons to choose from (200+ Premium ones with slightest details nobody ever seen in the genre and 800+ made from assets from previous games), almost 100 maps available from the box, epic single-player, great community features and it would have day/night transitions, photomode, etc.

You can use your imagination to put into perspective same comparation inside any other genre.

As a game critic I can be only amazed with everything that Gran Turismo 5 will bring the the video-gaming in general, standards it will introduce to genre - especially on consoles - and overall size of the game that will be nothing less than unprecedented.

Issue that used cars - probably, it is my own presumption, but very logical one from series philosophy standpoint - will be "Standard" - and we still do not know what it means for sure, but we only know they will look different than Premium to some point and will not have detachable parts when taking damage, everything else will be the SAME - is non-important from game critic point of view.

Taking that as a game-breaking feature in perspective with everything else that GT5 will bring would be nothing less than deliberately ignorant.

👍

Seriously four years back anyone hoping for that gigantic jump in the series it would be called crazy!

 

[SuperCobraJet]

It seems 6 months for 40 people working on it can't be since that's 2 cars a year...

I must imagine that they broke into groups of 2 or 3 and went at it as teams, each group taking 6 months per car.

Agreed.

I have seen the 6mos. time frame mentioned several times but no associated number of people until amar's post. Just trying to get the two matched up.

 

[Devedander]

6 months of man hours.......

Well if it takes 6 months of man hours and they have a team of 40 that's 80 cars a year...

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Well if it takes 6 months of man hours and they have a team of 40 that's 80 cars a year...

If thats the case then why don't we have 400 premium cars?

Thats the same argument being made on another thread earlier today.

 

[RedSuinit]

If thats the case then why don't we have 400 premium cars?

Thats the same argument being made on another thread earlier today.

Good question, maybe because they haven't been making premium model cars the whole time. If you compare GT5P to GT5, you can tell that the models are better in GT5 than in GT5P. Perhaps those 40 weren't solely working on GT5 models, perhaps some of them were used when developing GTPSP, or perhaps all the naysayers may be right, and PD is just lazy...

 

[shadynader]

Well if it takes 6 months of man hours and they have a team of 40 that's 80 cars a year...

If thats the case then why don't we have 400 premium cars?

Thats the same argument being made on another thread earlier today.

There are other assets that need to be created too, like helping out on tracks maybe? or custom parts? Track editor assets? and anything else that might be needed? I know Amar said there is 40 people working on cars but in this industry its not uncommon to assigned different tasks within your relative field.

We do not know how PD divide their workflow.
We do not know how many modellers dropped what they were doing to work on GTSP.
We do not know how many of these modellers were getting 'trained up' to PD's obscene level of detail and quality.
We do not know exactly when they started modeling for the new game.
We do not know enough of the facts to come to hasty conclusions of how many cars there should be basically.

All we know is that Amar said 40 modellers are working on the cars and KY said it takes roughly 6 months of man hours per car.

 

[Dravonic]

You're calling 200/800 a "fiasco", I'm calling it a "bonus".

You're calling them "secondary features", I call them "primary difference".

It is a matter of opinion.

You know, if you already ask me how do I look to that particular issue as a gaming critic, you're going to like my opinion even less.

As s fan I could be disappointed about Standard/Premium issue up to some point. But as a game critic I would even forget that particular thing, because in the overall scope and importance of GT5 for racing genre and overall gaming it doesn't mean a thing.

To elaborate.

If you want to be serious gaming critic (or journalist, call it what you want) you must put things into perspective. And when you put all features of GT5 into perspective, whole Standard/Premium issue become non-relevant.

Is iRacing a bad game/bad simulation just because it has less than 20 cars? I don't think so.

Is original F355 Challenge by Yu Suzuki-san a bad game because it has just ONE car? I don't think so, even 12 years after it is still a non-doubtful masterpiece and it boosts few options and features that none racing game - even GT series - hasn't surpassed yet.

If you look just at the list of confirmed features - not to speak about all surprises that still awaits us - Gran Turismo 5 will certainly be the title that will change the genre, as all previous games did.

We still have to see the actual shapes of the GT5's most important features - single player structure and online structure - but from previous experience with GT series we can expect nothing less than AAA.

When I look at GT5 as a game critic, I see the driving game that boosts unprecedented list of technological features that no other games on consoles have - from 1080p, 60 fps, 3D, 7.1 DD sound, head tracking, PhotoMode, to FF wheels support.

I see game that will further expand the most important and revolutionary aspect of the series, that no other game on genre and on ANY platform have never managed to come even close - the single-player RPG aspect of ownership of the car, car maintenance and feel of connection to your vehicle(s). Not to even speak about the world of Licenses and Missions which remains milestone of the series forever.

From the driver point of view I see game that will give us the most advanced possible physics model ever on consoles and possibly overall, engine made in tight collaboration with Nissan and Mercedes-Benz, with almost genre-unique simulation of USABLE different tire-compounds, day/night change, possible inclusion of weather change and ONLY game in the genre that gives us opportunity to drive on all imaginable surfaces and almost all imaginable car-classes that exist today in the world of motorsport.

From additional features standpoint I see the game that will incorporate in-game streaming TV channels in form of GT:TV, HD YouTube support, numerous community features that still remains undisclosed (BBcode and 32-player lobbies being most interesting), together with some options we do not know about certanly yet - such as evolution of B-Spec mode, actual options of car-tuning and such.

To put it perspective of journalism, if Gran Turismo 5 would be Call of Duty game, it would have more than 1000 weapons to choose from (200+ Premium ones with slightest details nobody ever seen in the genre and 800+ made from assets from previous games), almost 100 maps available from the box, epic single-player, great community features and it would have day/night transitions, photomode, etc.

You can use your imagination to put into perspective same comparation inside any other genre.

As a game critic I can be only amazed with everything that Gran Turismo 5 will bring the the video-gaming in general, standards it will introduce to genre - especially on consoles - and overall size of the game that will be nothing less than unprecedented.

Issue that used cars - probably, it is my own presumption, but very logical one from series philosophy standpoint - will be "Standard" - and we still do not know what it means for sure, but we only know they will look different than Premium to some point and will not have detachable parts when taking damage, everything else will be the SAME - is non-important from game critic point of view.

Taking that as a game-breaking feature in perspective with everything else that GT5 will bring would be nothing less than deliberately ignorant.

So in short, you believe the massive list of secondary features can in fact overshadow the shortcomings of a primary one. They sure do to me and probably everyone around here, but I wonder if they will for the casuals and the gaming community in general.

I have no experience in the journalism area but I do read what journalists write, and this seems to be the perfect thing for them to rant about. But I guess these are the unskilled ones. It seems perfectly reasonable that a good one would find out more about the game, realizing that it has so much more to offer, that this turns out to be not a big deal after all.

My fear is that the casuals and bad journalists won't think that way. They are the great majority and GT5 needs them. But maybe I'm just overreacting.

 

[crazedmodder]

If thats the case then why don't we have 400 premium cars?

Thats the same argument being made on another thread earlier today.

I think that it is man hours. We don't know what else the team might have been split up on. Maybe these modelers worked on other titles also?

Also you're saying they've been working on the premium models for 5 years. Don't forget we had GTHD in 2006, Prologue in 2007/2008 and GTPSP in 2009.

Not to mention it is very likely that the game didn't always have a full team of 40 modelers from 2005 until now.

So in short, you believe the massive list of secondary features can in fact overshadow the shortcomings of a primary one. They sure do to me and probably everyone around here, but I wonder if they will for the casuals and the gaming community in general.

I have no experience in the journalism area but I do read what journalists write, and this seems to be the perfect thing for them to rant about. But I guess these are the unskilled ones. It seems perfectly reasonable that a good one would find out more about the game, realizing that it has so much more to offer, that this turns out to be not a big deal after all.

My fear is that the casuals and bad journalists won't think that way. They are the great majority and GT5 needs them. But maybe I'm just overreacting.

Honestly I think those gamers would care less about the "standard" car thing then some people here do, don't know about journalists though. 1000+ cars is a big number and will probably make casual gamers completely oblivious to the fact that 800 are "standard". Then they will spend a lot of time showing their non-GT owning friends how awesome the 200 "premium" cars look. Also I think casual gamers would stick to the more exclusive cars once they get the money (Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Paganis, Mclarens, Mercedes, etc).

I really think they would be more bothered by having only 200 premium cars as opposed to having 200 "premium' and 800 "standard' cars (aka 1000 ).

Let's not forget how much crashing will be going on just to mess around with the damage model (another big + for casual gamers).

Words spoken from experience, having been a casual racer up until GT5P .

 

[CoolColJ]

GT5P's credits list 37 cars modellers, and 4 car model leads.

Kaz said 6 months for each car. So 41 people, maybe split into 4 groups.
So 8 cars a year x 5-6 years