Lunar roving vehicle????!!!!!

  • Thread starter Aphelion
  • 650 comments
  • 48,879 views
Famine
There's actually a bit of weirdness in this regard and I can't actually work out the logic behind it. Essentially licensing premium cars is different to licensing standard ones - there seems to be some form of carryover or legacy license that allows them to use models to the detail used in earlier games, but new licenses are required for more detailed ones. It's this weirdness that saw them capture the Veyron and XFR to current modelling standards in 2007 for Gran Turismo PSP, but not use the detailed models for GT5.
Click to expand...

I wonder, perhaps... The license is obtained prior to the model being produced (assumption). The company issuing the license must undoubtedly check that prior to the release of the game, the terms of the license have been adhered to. PD will get all content generated signed off so there can be no shenanigans later on, and for the sake of both parties it's probably listed in the appendices of the agreement. That then forms "the license", and will include a scope, and specific inclusions and exclusions.

The agreements may be open-ended enough that PD don't have to gain permission to re-use "the license" in future titles.
But, if they wish to alter any aspect of the license (which would include the appendices), they have to enter the process again, and a new, or revised/up-issued license is agreed on.

I'm no expert on this by a long shot. But I think it's important for people to understand that a license is simply a legal document giving permission to some body else, to do something with something you own.... all those somethings have to be specified and agreed on, and can pretty much say anything so long as both parties agree and it's not illegal (monopolies etc.).

Just my two cents.
 
Didn't read ALL of the BS going on before this... Only some of it..

My opinion? PD has been known to appreciate the historical significance of automobiles in general with several oddball things like this in games past... I think it's cool. Good job PD. I may only drive it once, but it's a cool little addition that makes PD... well.... PD.
 
Yes. I remember. ;)

I think Model T should be in all GT games since then. Aswell as the 2 Daimlers. Taking those out and put the lunar roving is akward...
 
Chad Daddy
I didn't mean you. Sorry.
Click to expand...
No need to apologise, it's a common quandary, how do you show frustration at people who don't contribute, unless you are contributing at the same time. It's tough to bite your tongue with some of the opinions stated here! 👍
 
derp... Why would you not want a rover? It is one of the most historical cars ever created. Seriously, "first moon car." That's clearly 22nd, 23rd century social studies. Or Science study which ever one..
 
sk8er913
derp... Why would you not want a rover? It is one of the most historical cars ever created. Seriously, "first moon car." That's clearly 22nd, 23rd century social studies. Or Science study which ever one..
Click to expand...
It'll be like the Model T of the moon world*!

*assuming nobody drops multiple nukes on every continent
 
uoytaNu.jpg
 
MuoNiuLa
But seriously, what's considered fun is completely subjective.
Click to expand...

That's part of the point I was making. Perhaps I went a little overboard accusing all the naysayers of being "fun-hating", but still. The Lunar Rover is just one vehicle. Love it or hate it, there's no reason to crucify it any more than any other car just because it happens to be a curio. Last I checked, there are normal cars that some people adore but other people loathe with a passion.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that people have their favorite vehicles that they'd love to see in GT. I've got some of those too. But if you're gonna complain about them including vehicles you'll rarely (if ever) drive instead of your personal favorites, there's probably several hundred of them to complain about. And some of these cars that you personally will never care to drive are no doubt among other people's favorites, so it's selfish to suggest that PD is wrong for not custom-tailoring GT's car roster to your personal taste.
 
Famine
Then I presume you know both PD's budget and the licensing fees for every single car on the planet.

No?

Well, then I assume you know about the exclusive licensing and how much it'd cost for PD to pay manufacturers like to be released from exclusivity arrangements?

Also no?

Doesn't seem foolish at all then, to assume PD cannot access every car on the planet to licence - much less find an example to model.There's one alternative to having the Lunar Rover. That's not having it.

Would I prefer an empty space or a car that someone, somewhere can use for enjoyment? Hmm, toughie.
Click to expand...


No sir, I do not know both PD's budget and licensing fees for every single car on this planet.
However:
1)There is no reason to think that obtaining EA's exclusive Porsche license would cost more to PD than it costed to Turn10 and, being these similar companies, there is no reason to think that such cost would have a larger impact on PD's budget than it had on Turn10's budget.
2)You are assuming that there's one alternative to having the lunar rover, and it's not having it. You're playing devil's advocate here, as anyone who shares some common sense would have been happier with, say, a premium version of the E46 M3, which is already in the game as a standard car (yes, I know that the standard nomenclature is gone, but standard cars are still there) and as such it must already be licensed to PD.
3)There's nothing wrong with liking the rover. If you like it, then be happy: you will be given the opportunity to bring it to the nurburgring at full blast very soon. Me, I would have traded it in for the M3 anytime. And there's nothing wrong with that, either.
 
Fogerty_Jr
No sir, I do not know both PD's budget and licensing fees for every single car on this planet.
Click to expand...
Then you can't say PD can afford to licence every car on the planet.
Fogerty_Jr
1)There is no reason to think that obtaining EA's exclusive Porsche license would cost more to PD than it costed to Turn10 and, being these similar companies, there is no reason to think that such cost would have a larger impact on PD's budget than it had on Turn10's budget.
Click to expand...
Without knowing PD and T10's budgets, that's also something you can't say - but for a quick bit of info, PD are a second party developer (quasi independent, but included in the company's umbrella) and largely financially independent with their own turnover and profit reports, while Turn10 are a Microsoft studio. With double the number of employees.

However, there's at least two reasons that I can think of for one company to sublicence from another but a third not being able to. One of them includes an awful lot of money - like, the sort of financial clout Microsoft can manage but a small studio in Fukuoka can't, for an exclusivity clause.
Fogerty_Jr
2)You are assuming that there's one alternative to having the lunar rover, and it's not having it. You're playing devil's advocate here, as anyone who shares some common sense would have been happier with, say, a premium version of the E46 M3, which is already in the game as a standard car (yes, I know that the standard nomenclature is gone, but standard cars are still there) and as such it must already be licensed to PD.
Click to expand...
But it's not licensed as a premium car, so assuming it can be converted at the click of the fingers isn't wise.

GT5 had the Bugatti Veyron and Jaguar XFR as standards despite being modelled to the same precision as premiums - PD capture cars with a set technique to create ultra high quality masters and by 2006 the technique was the same one used in GT5. Like every other GT4 car included in GTPSP, the models were scaled down from the masters to suit that game, but despite having those high quality masters the Veyron and XFR were standards in GT5.

A licence isn't the same as another licence and there may be conditions that you're not aware of that prevent the process that you think is simple. If there weren't, the XFR and Veyron would have been Premiums - but they were not.
Fogerty_Jr
3)There's nothing wrong with liking the rover. If you like it, then be happy: you will be given the opportunity to bring it to the nurburgring at full blast very soon. Me, I would have traded it in for the M3 anytime. And there's nothing wrong with that, either.
Click to expand...
I don't really care about it at all. But the option is that or nothing. I'm sure plenty of people will find amusement with it, so I'll take that - because no-one ever had fun with nothing.
 
Famine
so I'll take that - because no-one ever had fun with nothing.
Click to expand...
Oh, come on. You have a good point when you say that turn10 has more money to invest (which is an issue to be solved in the long run, anyway, because otherwhise PD will be crushed by the competitors), but I still prefer thinking that they made the rover because they're nerds, rather than thinking that they made the rover because they ran out of new cars they could possibly include, which would mean that GT has no future at all...
 
Fogerty_Jr
Oh, come on. You have a good point when you say that turn10 has more money to invest (which is an issue to be solved in the long run, anyway, because otherwhise PD will be crushed by the competitors), but I still prefer thinking that they made the rover because they're nerds, rather than thinking that they made the rover because they ran out of new cars they could possibly include, which would mean that GT has no future at all...
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, what people prefer doesn't have that much of an impact on reality. They can only include what they know about, want, have licences for and can get hold of to model.

They know about, want, have a licence for and modelled a standard E46 M3. The existence of the standard Veyron and XFR in GT5 indicate that the licensing agreements are sometimes very, very weird and that the licence they have for that E46 M3, like the Veyron and XFR, doesn't extend to a premium spec model, despite them having captured it to beyond-premium quality. It's fine to hope this changes in the future, but I wouldn't be in too much of a hurry to lay the blame for it not having changed entirely at their door without any further information.


As for the lunar rover, the chances are the Kazunori spotted it on one of his jaunts - or the episode of Top Gear where James May drives its successor around - and thought it'd be a laugh to include it. He quite likes his automotive history and that's a unique bit of it, as the only vehicle ever to drive on a surface other than the Earth.

So even though he can't bring you a really pretty E46 M3 to look at (or me an XFR), you still get to drive them and there's something else in the game too.
 
Chad Daddy
It amazes me how some people can make long comments that say nothing.
Click to expand...
Whereas it should come as no surprise (especially to the denizens of the internet) that some people can make short comments that say even less. :sly:

Fogerty_Jr
Oh, come on. You have a good point when you say that turn10 has more money to invest (which is an issue to be solved in the long run, anyway, because otherwhise PD will be crushed by the competitors), but I still prefer thinking that they made the rover because they're nerds, rather than thinking that they made the rover because they ran out of new cars they could possibly include, which would mean that GT has no future at all...
Click to expand...

Obviously they aren't out of cars they could include. All the people bitching about how the Lunar Rover is in the game instead of a more deserving car (in their opinion, anyways) is a testament to that fact.

Like most desicions that are made, there were probably mulitple factors that went into deciding to include the Rover. They could be nerds, yes... car nerds, space nerds, and/or nerds for anything mechanical in nature. They also probably did it with a sense of humor, as Famine suggests. I think its inclusion is hilarious and awesome, and Kazunori likely does too.

But its inclusion, like the inclusion of the Model T in GT4, also bolsters GT's reputation as an encyclopedia for automobiles. Sure, GT is still missing many cars and is unlikely to ever have every single car ever made in its massive roster. But the inclusion of things like the Model T, Lunar Rover and even fictitious vehicles such as the Nike One speak volumes more about their vision than yet another Ferarri, however worthy the Ferarri might be of inclusion.
 
Lain
But its inclusion, like the inclusion of the Model T in GT4, also bolsters GT's reputation as an encyclopedia for automobiles. Sure, GT is still missing many cars and is unlikely to ever have every single car ever made in its massive roster. But the inclusion of things like the Model T, Lunar Rover and even fictitious vehicles such as the Nike One speak volumes more about their vision than yet another Ferarri, however worthy the Ferarri might be of inclusion.
Click to expand...

Then we must petition them to add the Model T, Daimlers aswell, they should be included because of their sheer significance just like the lunar rover
 

Similar threads

djslofstra
  • Locked
GT6 will have a Moon Rover
Replies
1
Views
700
SlipZtrEm
SlipZtrEm
R
Lunar Roving Vehicle LRV-001 '71 on Standard Tracks
Replies
6
Views
699
Bo
Bo
unit-one
GT6-Garage (all cars database/ gallery) 19th November UPDATE!
2
Replies
38
Views
6K
unit-one
unit-one
GBalao888
Ability to drive the Lunar Roving Vehicle in Arcade mode (in tracks outside of the moon)
Replies
3
Views
380
shurley47
shurley47
GBalao888
Free roam in the moon using any car
Replies
12
Views
677
shurley47
shurley47

Latest Posts

Back