KY Confirms GT6 In Development Already

[Tornado]

PSM and their publisher Future, are known for accepting bribes from alot of developers, it trails back to when they accepted money from Atari to give Driver 3 a score of 90% on PS2, it's sister magazine for XBOX also did something similar and it was by no means the first time it had happened, bribes are pretty common practice when it comes to big money publishers having games reviewed, publishers want to go that extra mile to ensure they see the returns from their investment, there, happy bunny now?

I'm sorry, but Atari ≠ Turn 10, and Drivergate ≠ Forza 4's critical reception. Try again.

Did you learn something new today?

Absolutely. Nothing flattering for you, though.



Still waiting for those sources for all of those unsubstantiated claims, by the way; including actual proof that Forza 4's critical reception was artificially inflated by Turn 10/Microsoft bribing reviewers.

 

[brainfade]

I'm sorry, but Atari ≠ Turn 10, and Drivergate ≠ Forza 4's critical reception. Try again.




Absolutely. Nothing flattering for you, though.



Still waiting for those sources for all of those unsubstantiated claims, by the way; including actual proof that Forza 4's critical reception was artificially inflated by Turn 10/Microsoft bribing reviewers.

I wasn't linking that to Forza 4's reception, I was merely saying never trust media reviews. Goes to show that you selectively read certain parts of peoples replies because you'll go that much further when you're on a power trip.

I think you're getting your points, questions and references mixed up, heres another quarter Josh Baskin, now run to the arcade at the funfair and have another go if Zoltar's still there...

 

[Terronium-12]

I wasn't linking that to Forza 4's reception, I was merely saying never trust media reviews.

By that same token, wouldn't it be prudent to presume the same of GT5's reviews, or for that matter every successive Gran Turismo title yet-to-be-released?

 

[Snaeper]

While there's no substantial proof that Forza pays publishers, I know that they do market themselves aggressively and I can assume that they use money in order to do it. Auto magazines and blogs are two big indicators, since Autoblog and Motortrend online both seem to write articles all about Forza while only Motortrend will occasionally talk about Gran Turismo. For example Autoblog once posted an article about the release of Forza's DLC yet made no mention about GT5's DLC that had released only a month before, even though it included Spa.

Even if there isn't money involved, Turn10 likes to remind everyone about Forza and about how awesome it is and likes to infect them to think similarly.

Tenacious D

I want to level with you and say that there are a number of your points that I agree on and I would like for PS4 to carry the improvements that you and other members expect, although I'd temper all expectations.

I'd love to see Gran Turismo make the graphical improvements that might be possible using potential upgrades to the PS4's hardware, but that doesn't mean that there can't be a GT title still released on the PS3.

Going off of the multiple times that Yamauchi-san has said that GT6 wouldn't take as long and then add in the fact that Sony execs have said that the PS4 wouldn't be out before 2014 at the earliest, I see a nice window for another GT title to release around the end of 2012 to help break up the bad taste that was left in the mouth of GT fans after GT5's long wait. This wouldn't focus on fixing the graphical issues of the game, but it could make the much-needed improvements in the other aspects, give the playing time some length and set up GT to last over the next two years in a better condition than waiting the next 4 with GT5 and some DLC.

As someone else pointed out (I forget who) but you make it sound like the next Gran Turismo is going to be the last. I would like to understand what you might think the cons could possibly be of releasing another title on the PS3, without really overthinking it.

If I'm a Sony exec, I'd encourage a GT release in 2012! GT is one of (if not THE) biggest titles that Sony has in it's stable. It's a title that Sony knows moves equipment! While I don't know what the turn around rate is on people buying consoles, I'd say making one last GT title on the PS3 in 2012 is a good idea since it'll get another good wave of systems out of the door to help fund development for the PS4 before everyone loses interest in it knowing that a new system is going to come out. And! It should give plenty of time for PD to prepare the next GT title (GT7 in this case) for release on the PS4. New cars and better graphics with even BETTER gameplay abound! You still get the title that you want and expect, and we (Toronado and I) still get the title we want and expect.

The only thing out of either of our arguments that is lost is the point that you agree with me on anyways, that being that releasing content on a game would be better than slapping it on later as DLC. No expansive GT5 DLC. None, nein. Just cars and tracks with other colorful content thrown in.

Then you have to consider that the PS4 might require certain aspects of the game engine to be updated, which would require PD to go back and rework and improve everything. This work, should they have to perform it, requires time and money. So why wouldn't they simply make one last game utilizing all of the work they put in on the PS3? I mean they've really only added superficial content so far and I expect them to continue to do so. Saving the good game-changing upgrades for the next title. Which is why GT6 on the PS3 makes sense. Once that's out the door, it should be a much easier task of holding us over with that title for two years with additional DLC (using lessons learned from GT5 being applied to GT6 to keep it's lifespan longer and more interesting) leading up to the release of the PS4 and GT7, which makes all of the graphical improvements (among other things) that you and others desire, that were not possible on the PS3 titles.

There's really no reason why we should continue arguing about this when we can both be right.

I just don't see the point in trying to stretch GT5's lifespan out for four whole years and hope DLC helps (which would be like giving a dying person painkillers in my opinion), when they could just implement a number of new features on a game engine that's formatted for the current system when the system still has enough life to be relevant for a few years after the game is released. Not to mention they would regain some reputation and remove the stigma of GT games taking forever and a day to come out.

 

[Tornado]

I wasn't linking that to Forza 4's reception, I was merely saying never trust media reviews.

Oh?

As for the whole FM4 vs GT5 arguement, don't base anything on what you read in reviews or the review score themselves, because, as confirmed by my friends at another developer which used to do racing games, Turn 10 along with Atari/Ubisoft and EA are notorious for bribing magazines for high review scores

Since you are claiming that I'm taking your arguments out of context because of some "power trip," what exactly is the context where "don't believe Forza reviews because Turn 10 are known to bribe reviewers" means something other than "don't believe Forza reviews because Turn 10 are known to bribe reviewers," hm?





Goes to show that you selectively read certain parts of your own posts because you'll go that much further when you're on a power trip.

 

[brainfade]

Oh?

Since you are claiming that I'm taking your arguments out of context because of some "power trip," what exactly is the context where "don't believe Forza reviews because Turn 10 are known to bribe reviewers" means something other than "don't believe Forza reviews because Turn 10 are known to bribe reviewers," hm?

Goes to show that you selectively read certain parts of your own posts because you'll go that much further when you're on a power trip.

Those are two separate points, separated by a comma, now who's being selective and generally a bad-reader ...fail

You selectively focused on one point, when I answered your question you deliberately twisted your interpretation of it, and even now your finding new ways to descend to new found level of power-tripping, 19,449 posts later and your still acting like the textbook troll *applauds le troll grande du siècle* ...now excuse me while I get on with something you clearly don't have (this is clearly given away by your website) : a life.

"Occupation: Defending GTP From People Such As Myself" ...I don't think anyone bothers to stoop as low as you do with your blatant over-compensating.

 

[Tornado]

Those are two separate points, separated by a comma, now who's being selective and generally a bad-reader ...fail

...


Do you know what the word "because" means?

19,449 posts later and your still acting like the textbook troll *applauds le troll grande du siècle*

Still waiting for those sources.

"Occupation: Defending GTP From People Such As Myself" ...I don't think anyone bothers to stoop as low as you do with your blatant over-compensating.

You know, I imagine if you spent half as much time looking for sources as you do trying to change the subject when called on it, you might come off as knowing what you are talking about.

 

[brainfade]

...


Do you know what the word "because" means?


Still waiting for those sources.

I told you to go find them, I've told you where they are:

Back log of GTP news.
The drivers listed beforehand.
Future Publishing.
IGN.
Polyphony/Gran Turismo's own website.
Daniel Dawking's facebook page.

 

[Tornado]

I told you to go find them, I've told you where they are.

Doesn't work that way. It isn't my job to support your claims of fact.

 

[brainfade]

Doesn't work that way. It isn't my job to support your claims of fact.

Well I'm making it your job because you're the one dumb enough to question all of it to the point of looking like the world's biggest dork from behind the counter of your empty customer-less computer hardware store.

 

[Tornado]

Well I'm making it your job because you're the one dumb enough to question all of it to the point of looking like the world's biggest dork from behind the counter of your empty customer-less computer hardware store.

Then as far as this discussion is concerned, everything you've said has been nonsense.



Which isn't surprising considering you've been trying to weasel out of one of your main statements ever since you were first called on it, but might as well put it out there.

 

[Snaeper]

Guys, lets try to keep things civil an on the topic of GT6 being released on the PS4.

Lets also try to enjoy the debate and argument and not go at each other.

 

[brainfade]

Guys, lets try to keep things civil an on the topic of GT6 being released on the PS4.

Lets also try to enjoy the debate and argument and not go at each other.

He's found a lovely new home on my ignore list = problem solved

 

[Tornado]

Tell that to le troll grands du siècle, he clearly vents his aggression on this forum because his real life situation is far from ideal.

Waiting for them sources.

He's found a lovely new home on my ignore list = problem solved

Thank god for that. Saved me the trouble.

 

[DeeJay574]

, I see a nice window for another GT title to release around the end of 2012 to help break up the bad taste that was left in the mouth of GT fans after GT5's long wait. This wouldn't focus on fixing the graphical issues of the game, but it could make the much-needed improvements in the other aspects, give the playing time some length and set up GT to last over the next two years in a better condition than waiting the next 4 with GT5 and some DLC.
.

Agree 100%!

I will gladly give them the money for a full version if they get rid of Standard cars (hate them from the beginning), more actual cars (e.g. Audi RS3, RS4, RS5, RUF, Megane RS, Golf R, Scirocco R, BMW X6M, BMW 1M Coupe......) much better sound and more tracks.

GT5 is too unpolished to say "That´s it for the PS3!"

I don´t expect the über-graphic in relation to GT5, but I expect a more finished game.
GT5 gives me always the feeling that PD had not enough time (or manpower) to finish the game and Sony pushed them to release it.

 

[Tenacious D]

So basically Tenacious D, by saying you based your findings (which you like to pass off as facts) on what you think is "Japanese mindset", this + your brief description, you based your findings, or shall i say opinions on what can only be descrived as negative stereotyping which is also racist. Also, the term "orientals" refers to the Chinese, more stereotyping you're on a roll aren't you? I'm guessing your one of those people who think that ALL asians have what you call "slanty eyes"?

Wow.

Unfortunately I have to run off to work - and hopefully find out that my vacation has started already. Less money, but good Lord, do I need a break from it. Anyhow, according to Dictionary.com,

o·ri·ent   [n., adj. awr-ee-uhnt, ‐ee-ent, ohr-; v. awr-ee-ent, ohr‐] noun
1. the Orient,
a. the countries of Asia, especially East Asia.
b. (formerly) the countries to the East of the Mediterranean.

2. Jewelry.
a. an orient pearl.
b.the iridescence of a pearl.

3. the east; the eastern region of the heavens or the world.

o·ri·en·tal   [awr-ee-en-tl, ohr‐] adjective
1. ( usually initial capital letter ) of, pertaining to, or characteristic of the Orient, or East; Eastern.

2. of the orient or east; eastern.

3. ( initial capital letter ) Zoogeography . belonging to a geographical division comprising southern Asia and the Malay Archipelago as far as and including the Philippines, Borneo, and Java.

So, yeah...

And by the way, I happen to have spent quite a lot of time talking with my brother and his Japanese wife - from the country, not just by ethnicity - to fine tune my understanding of that culture. It could be seen as negative stereotyping to say that the Japanese have perhaps the highest suicide rate on the planet, but it's an unfortunate fact. If you think that considering these people to be some of the most competitive and hard working people in the world to be negative stereotyping, knock yourself out.

Anyway, back in 12 hours or so to contribute to the discussion.

 

[brainfade]

Wow.

Unfortunately I have to run off to work - and hopefully find out that my vacation has started already. Less money, but good Lord, do I need a break from it. Anyhow, according to Dictionary.com,

o·ri·ent   [n., adj. awr-ee-uhnt, ‐ee-ent, ohr-; v. awr-ee-ent, ohr‐] noun
1. the Orient,
a. the countries of Asia, especially East Asia.
b. (formerly) the countries to the East of the Mediterranean.

2. Jewelry.
a. an orient pearl.
b.the iridescence of a pearl.

3. the east; the eastern region of the heavens or the world.

o·ri·en·tal   [awr-ee-en-tl, ohr‐] adjective
1. ( usually initial capital letter ) of, pertaining to, or characteristic of the Orient, or East; Eastern.

2. of the orient or east; eastern.

3. ( initial capital letter ) Zoogeography . belonging to a geographical division comprising southern Asia and the Malay Archipelago as far as and including the Philippines, Borneo, and Java.

So, yeah...

And by the way, I happen to have spent quite a lot of time talking with my brother and his Japanese wife - from the country, not just by ethnicity - to fine tune my understanding of that culture. It could be seen as negative stereotyping to say that the Japanese have perhaps the highest suicide rate on the planet, but it's an unfortunate fact. If you think that considering these people to be some of the most competitive and hard working people in the world to be negative stereotyping, knock yourself out.

Anyway, back in 12 hours or so to contribute to the discussion.

You've only gone and stereotyped and generalised asians even more, not all asians are Japanese/Chinese/Phillipine/etc, also, "Southern Asia" more commonly refers and correctly refers to the 'subcontinental' cluster of nations India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Andoman-Isles, oh yes thats right, "American-Indian's" aren't actually Indian, but you be Mr. Capitalist and put everyone into the same 99% box.

 

[avens]

there are 2 problems with releasing gt6 for the ps3:

- gt5's DLC.
Self explanatory.

- in game accounts.
It takes about 1 to 2 years to fully complete gt5 in your spare time, and at that point you end enjoying it a lot more.
It wouldn't be nice to start over after dedicating days of your life just to finally play it the way it should be played, including doing 24 hour races and wasting about 50 hours just in the menus.
That's why GT6 should include strong bonuses for lvl40/40 users, or having 1000 cars, gold in every a and b spec race and so on; whether if it is released for the ps3 or ps4.

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

They really need to wait to release the next GT on the next system. I am enjoying GT5 after the 2.0 update but after 6 years of development and only having 200 premium cars (20% complete), they really need to make sure they get ALL the cars premium for GT6. And to do that, will probably require another 4-5 years and probably wont be on this system. I still have enough to do on GT5 to keep me busy for many years. But they really need to make sure GT6 is complete before releasing it.

 

[Slurm]

They really need to wait to release the next GT on the next system. I am enjoying GT5 after the 2.0 update but after 6 years of development and only having 200 premium cars (20% complete), they really need to make sure they get ALL the cars premium for GT6. And to do that, will probably require another 4-5 years and probably wont be on this system. I still have enough to do on GT5 to keep me busy for many years. But they really need to make sure GT6 is complete before releasing it.

The thing is, Premiums take as long as they take. Say they can make about 50 premiums per year; wouldn't you rather have a new game every 2-3 years with 100-150 new cars, and with new/expanded features, better menus + UI, better usability, improved online mode etc..?

Development of Gran Turismo is happening all the time anyway. IMO it's healthier for them to evolve the game in smaller steps than disappearing for 5 years in a quest for perfection. The feedback from releases keeps them on track, and keeps them in touch with us.

I would rather have a PS3 GT6 with version 2 online mode, and perhaps a v1 of a livery editor and movie-maker. This way we'll be up to v3 of the online build and v2 livery editor etc.. by GT7 on the PS4. The car models are ps4 ready, they're not going anywhere, so lets have new features and an improvements more often!

 

[AleksandarSRB]

I want GT6 on PS3 simple and I very confident that will happen.

 

[HighSeasHoMastr]

As for the whole FM4 vs GT5 arguement, don't base anything on what you read in reviews or the review score themselves, because, as confirmed by my friends at another developer which used to do racing games, Turn 10 along with Atari/Ubisoft and EA are notorious for bribing magazines for high review scores, you should consider the following before you make this comparison:

Those are two separate points, separated by a comma, now who's being selective and generally a bad-reader ...fail

What comma?

Please provide proof of Turn 10 bribing a reviewer to publish a higher score then they otherwise would have. If you are unable to do so, you will knowingly be in violation of the AUP for this website which states:

You will not knowingly post any material that is false, misleading, or inaccurate.

 

[Custer85]

there are 2 problems with releasing gt6 for the ps3:

- gt5's DLC.
Self explanatory.

- in game accounts.
It takes about 1 to 2 years to fully complete gt5 in your spare time, and at that point you end enjoying it a lot more.
It wouldn't be nice to start over after dedicating days of your life just to finally play it the way it should be played, including doing 24 hour races and wasting about 50 hours just in the menus.
That's why GT6 should include strong bonuses for lvl40/40 users, or having 1000 cars, gold in every a and b spec race and so on; whether if it is released for the ps3 or ps4.

I think you are somewhat right about the DLC, because it expands the time to the release of a sequel. GT5 has many good core features and expanding on the existing game should be possible, which PD has allready proven by releasing Spec 2. But there are many features that can not be patched into the game, core features that have to be build from the ground up, such as a new system to handle the multiplayer with the allready mentioned team builder tools.

The ingame accounts might not be a problem in the eyes PD. They could allow players to import cars from GT5 to GT6, offer special day one DLC or do nothing at all. I think PD does not care wether you have allready achieved platinum status or if you bought all cars.

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

The thing is, Premiums take as long as they take. Say they can make about 50 premiums per year; wouldn't you rather have a new game every 2-3 years with 100-150 new cars, and with new/expanded features, better menus + UI, better usability, improved online mode etc..?

Development of Gran Turismo is happening all the time anyway. IMO it's healthier for them to evolve the game in smaller steps than disappearing for 5 years in a quest for perfection. The feedback from releases keeps them on track, and keeps them in touch with us.

I would rather have a PS3 GT6 with version 2 online mode, and perhaps a v1 of a livery editor and movie-maker. This way we'll be up to v3 of the online build and v2 livery editor etc.. by GT7 on the PS4. The car models are ps4 ready, they're not going anywhere, so lets have new features and an improvements more often!

I would rather wait 5 years and have ALL the cars "premium" (such a stupid term). Why put out an unfinished game every 2-3 years? They need to just take their time and actually finish GT5 and get all the cars up to "premium". Then call it GT6. Again, I am in no hurry for another GT game. I waited 5-6 years for an unfinished GT5, I do not want that happening again. I just now got into GT5 after the 2.0 update. And while it is nice that the standards kinda have an interior view now, its very generic and only a work around. They need to finish every single car for the next game.

 

[brainfade]

Please provide proof of Turn 10 bribing a reviewer to publish a higher score then they otherwise would have. If you are unable to do so, you will knowingly be in violation of the AUP for this website which states:

Another person abusing the AUP for petty one-up-manship? In order for me to provide you proof I would have to break other parts of the AUP:

You will not post any person’s private information within the forum but your own.

You will not use these forums to violate any laws nor to discuss illegal activities.

You will not use these forums for the purposes of sharing or distributing viruses, licenses, registration information, software keys, pirated commercial multimedia files, “cracks”, or other information designed to do harm to or allow unlawful access to any computer software or systems.

You know full well that obtaining or showing the proof involves breaking with these policies, sounds like you're deliberately using the part that you quoted into deliberately enticing me into breaking these rules, this can be interpreted as being in breach of:

You will not behave in an abusive and/or hateful manner, and will not harass, threaten, nor attack any individual or any group.

You're also deliberately egging me into providing this proof knowing full well that:

You remain solely responsible for anything found within your posts and agree to indemnify and hold GTPlanet and its affiliates, sponsors, or other partners and employees harmless from any claim or demand, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, made by any third party due to any material you post to or transmit through the forums.

Nice try but I'm not falling into the trap of providing content that is against this and potentially illegal and libelous, Jordan and the Mods are good guys and they do a brilliant job on here, they don't deserve to have potential legal trouble coming their way just because a few hot-headed fanboys are so desperate for proof regardless of whether it is legal or not, nice try master Baskin, but keep that quarter until Zoltar is back in town and maybe you'll be able to grow up.

..and before you say copy and paste emails conversations with individuals, that also goes against not only these policies but also several laws regardless of whether the individuals identities are concealed.

 

[Custer85]

I would rather wait 5 years and have ALL the cars "premium" (such a stupid term). Why put out an unfinished game every 2-3 years? They need to just take their time and actually finish GT5 and get all the cars up to "premium". Then call it GT6. Again, I am in no hurry for another GT game. I waited 5-6 years for an unfinished GT5, I do not want that happening again. I just now got into GT5 after the 2.0 update. And while it is nice that the standards kinda have an interior view now, its very generic and only a work around. They need to finish every single car for the next game.

They wont. Kaz allready stated that they will not be upgrading all the standarss to premiums, they are rather working on new cars. Its a said thing because i think that some of my favourites will not be upgraded. Those cars that are too old to matter for the industry right now but not old enough to be classics or important landmarks of the respective manufacturer.

Other than that i totally agree with you, PD needs to take their time and release a finished game that cuts no corners content and featureweise. The visuals will probably not be improved, because the PS3 is allready in its final years and the console reached its limits.

 

[HighSeasHoMastr]

Another person abusing the AUP for petty one-up-manship? In order for me to provide you proof I would have to break other parts of the AUP:

You know full well that obtaining or showing the proof involves breaking with these policies, sounds like you're deliberately using the part that you quoted into deliberately enticing me into breaking these rules, this can be interpreted as being in breach of:

You're also deliberately egging me into providing this proof knowing full well that:

Look, I'm not here to fight anyone. If my original post was somehow offensive to you, then I'm sorry. I wasn't deliberately attempting to egg you on, I was merely stating the AUP and asking you to back up your claims. Then tone was not meant to be inflammatory, and if the concise wording lead to you assuming it to be assailing you personally, then please understand it was in no way meant to be.

I am not "deliberately egging you into" anything. The AUP requires that if you post a claim that others see to be outrageous or fatuous, you have to post proof to back it up. If you know or suspect that the only proof that you have will violate other parts of the AUP, you should be intelligent enough not to post the claim in the first place. In this case though, if, as you said, these companies are "notorious" for performing this activity, you should have no trouble providing legitimate sources that are in the public domain that at least make the same accusations that you are currently making; these sources would include editorials from people involved with the business, news stories or blog posts with comments or interviews from professionals involved with the companies in question, and other legitimate, non-anonymous sources that have made claims similar to what you are presenting. If indeed these companies are bribing numerous reviewers to present inflated scores, then these types of sources must exist, because such large-scale foul play is impossible to keep totally under wraps. If you're the only person who knows about all this on the entire planet, then you're currently in a position of incredible power relating to these companies and should look into using that information for your personal gain somehow.

Nice try but I'm not falling into the trap of providing content that is against this and potentially illegal and libelous, Jordan and the Mods are good guys and they do a brilliant job on here, they don't deserve to have potential legal trouble coming their way just because a few hot-headed fanboys are so desperate for proof regardless of whether it is legal or not,

Again, if indeed your claim is correct, legitimate and legal sources must exist that back up what you are saying. If that's not the case, then like I said before, you should have shown enough intelligence not to post the claim in the first place, knowing that you could not back it up.
Otherwise, what's to stop me from saying, for instance, "I know that PD paid every reviewer on the planet to give GT5 better scores than it deserved, but I can't prove it cause it would be illegal."
See where this goes?

nice try master Baskin, but keep that quarter until Zoltar is back in town and maybe you'll be able to grow up.

Again, I wasn't trying to insult you with my original post. However, with this and several of your earlier personal attacks against Toronado, I believe that you are the one who is in danger of violating the AUP here, not me.

As always though, if you think that my post was in violation of the AUP that we all agreed to, feel free to use the report button and bring it to the attention of the mods. I know I do.

 

[brainfade]

I understand what you're trying to say there, but in this case the proof is way too risky to put out in the open. Alot of members fail to understand this and just want their juicy bit of info, thankfully you're one of the more sensible members who know that certain types of proof are of an innappropriate for posting on forums, due to issues such as legalities and privacy.

 

[maxpontiac]

Wow. This thread is serious business.

 

[brainfade]

Right! Back to topic, no more discussion on anything else other then the topic!