Polyphony should Learn From Square (development)

[JBanton]

If PD listened to their customers or allowed members of to playtest their titles, and give their input then I think the games that they develop would probably be better.

After all the customers are the people who buy the product at the end of the day.

 

[Samus]

By looking at the whole aspects of the game not just the duration it took to develop & the amount of offline content.

You've looked at two aspects of the game and come up with the conclusion PD aren't efficient.

Again, what else do you judge efficiency on? In your own job surely you're judged on how much you can get done in how much time?

Spending 60% of your entire development time modelling cars and then only modelling 200 is not efficient.

 

[DaveS1138]

Because since GT1 they've all been the same game, except TT. They don't go back to the start and make a brand new game each time as other developers do for other genres, they just build on the same game each time. Because of that development should be a lot quicker. Yet still many of the releases have taken far too long and have released with too little content. Just because they release a game doesn't mean they're efficient if the game isn't finished.

I also don't see how a prologue or GT:HD can be considered a different project, they're basically a WIP of the full game, part of the same development.

They have all been the same game? That's just silly.

So because GT5 is the same genre as GT1 they should have just been able to upscale GT1 and knocked it out in a couple of months??? I guess they dont have to write a new engine everytime new hardware comes out huh? Like I said....just silly.

And 2 years between releases is the same rate that other company releases "the same" games. Are they also not efficient because it takes them 2 years between releases?

 

[Tornado]

I guess they dont have to write a new engine everytime new hardware comes out huh? Like I said....just silly.

They didn't with GT3, so if this is supposed to prove that they couldn't have built GT5 on top of GT4 and gotten it out a few years earlier it doesn't do a good job of it.

 

[Samus]

They have all been the same game? That's just silly.

So because GT5 is the same genre as GT1 they should have just been able to upscale GT1 and knocked it out in a couple of months??? I guess they dont have to write a new engine everytime new hardware comes out huh? Like I said....just silly.

Now who is being silly? I didn't say anything of the sort did I. What I meant is they don't need to write a new story, they don't have to come up with ideas for new characters, they don't have to (or choose not to) come up with new gameplay mechanics to keep things fresh. They don't even bother coming up with new events, we're still playing the same ones we did in GT1. Compare that to something like Metal Gear Solid, the difference between 3 and 4 is huge and that had a four year gap.

Yes they have to write a new engine and they have to remodel assets but my point was they have a head start already knowing what they're doing, and already having the ideas and basic assets.

 

[DaveS1138]

They didn't with GT3, so if this is supposed to prove that they couldn't have built GT5 on top of GT4 and gotten it out a few years earlier it doesn't do a good job of it.

They could have built GT5 ontop of GT4 and released it earlier....hell they could have just put out GT4 running on a PS3 with 32 cars on track.....then this site would be full of people complaining that GT didn't develop a new engine for the much more powerfull hardware. No matter what PD do people seem to just want to complain. Hell they could have just re-released GT1 as a PS1 classic.....does that really make them a more "efficient" company?

I showed they are releasing full games every two years. I think that is a perfectly good measure of efficiency.

Now who is being silly? I didn't say anything of the sort did I. What I meant is they don't need to write a new story, they don't have to come up with ideas for new characters, they don't have to (or choose not to) come up with new gameplay mechanics to keep things fresh. They don't even bother coming up with new events, we're still playing the same ones we did in GT1. Compare that to something like Metal Gear Solid, the difference between 3 and 4 is huge and that had a four year gap.

Yes they have to write a new engine and they have to remodel assets but my point was they have a head start already knowing what they're doing, and already having the ideas and basic assets.

Just as that other company does.....and nobody seems to have a problem with them putting out a game every two years.....but when PD put out a game every two years suddenly they are not efficient?

The only difference is that Turn 10 works on one title and one title only whilst PD work on different titles across consoles and portables. That doesn't make them less efficient as a company.

 

[Samus]

I showed they are releasing full games every two years. I think that is a perfectly good measure of efficiency.

Except they're not. Not 100% unique, brand new games as other developers are. Unless you're going to tell me that GT PSP was nothing like GT4.

Plus again, just because they're dropping games it doesn't mean they're efficient. Well, it shows they're efficient at knocking games out, it doesn't show they're efficient at actually making those games, based on how much some are lacking. For example the fact they forgot to add a game to GT PSP.

You also have to judge on an individual basis, ie when they started on each game. GT PSP was in the works for what, 5 years. GT5 for roughly the same. They intertwined yes, but that's not efficient developing. If the PSP game was taking too much of their time the efficient thing to do is let another company work on it.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

Yes but none of them are going out with the plan of implementing a massive number of cars like PD, that was never their intention. So you can't just say "Oh, well no other game has made 200 premium cars so PD are more efficient" because no other game is trying to build that many, they don't want that many. That doesn't automatically make PD more efficient.

How do you know they don't want that many? I'm sure people who made TDU or Shift or PC sims, would want that many but it takes time and they have similar resources (More or slightly less). PD is very efficient in modelling cars hence why they can output so much per year given the size of their modelling team.

If PD was scaled with its current efficiency with more manpower, people might think PD are more efficient even if they become less efficient as some people seem to think manpower = efficiency.

Where are they lacking? Did you forget how long GT5 took and what it came with (or without)? Does an efficient development team spend all that time and come up with a tiny amount of offline gameplay content?

GT6 I reckon will be a better game in less "time" than GT5 even if PD became less efficient. Also people will less likely backdate the game to GT4, so people will be surprised PD managed to do so much in such a short space of time relative to GT5 even if PD are taking more time to do the same tasks per person.

It takes time to build a game OS from scratch for a new platform especially while working on another platform. GT5 with its “tiny” amount of offline gameplay content still is one of the longest games to complete even with the grinding part cut out. Sure they could add more and it would not take them long and they are trying to rectify that with seasonal events (Which requires online connection though). Also as it's one of Kaz's regrets IIRC, expect many more events in future GT games. I found the Special Events one of the most enjoyable experiences in any racing game I played, so from a rewarding point of view for me GT5 is one of the best for me in the series. A-Spec stuff should be made more rewarding so I am not too fussed in that regard until they limit car restrictions more and make AI faster. Game events is not what took most of PDs game development time I would say, mostly is the assets and features in game so they should be measured more in efficiency in that regard as that is what they spent there time on most.

Easiest way to measure efficiency and compare would be to try and see how much per worker in different areas took to make such a part of the game. For example you know how many cars were added in X game and in X amount of time and roughly X amount of people, compare that similarly to another game and see who gets the most efficiency out there regarding car modelling team. PD are ridiculed for having so little this generation cars but I think if people did detailed research, there won’t be many companies close to PDs efficiency and even amount.

If you prove PDI management are getting so little out there workers compared to other development teams then I am all ears. I think the most likely thing you will find is teams who spent more manhours managed to do more in the same time and that is most likely subject to a lot more resources, not efficiency.

Again, what else do you judge efficiency on? In your own job surely you're judged on how much you can get done in how much time?

Spending 60% of your entire development time modelling cars and then only modelling 200 is not efficient.

If your employer compared you to what 3 other people managed to do in the same timeframe and with same qualifications in a rival firm, is that fair on you. If so how will you regard yourself in regards to efficiency, quite poor if you did much less than them?

Your way of calculation of efficiency lacks context, if PD had 10 times more resources and it scaled, would 2000 cars be OK in same time frame while maintaining same efficiency or is that better efficiency as there are more cars created in the same time and that leaves small development teams who make the mini games the least efficient development teams in the world.

For example GT1 would take about two weeks to make for current PD team; does that mean the original team is very poor in efficiency compared to current team as they had more or less as long to make the game as GT5 took? Can you see now how flawed your way of efficiency is without taking things into context?

PS3 to PS4 will be really the first platform change that Playstation game development teams can reuse most of their code and scale it for the extra power. You will see it will take less time for PD to make a game for next-generation as they don’t have to start basically from scratch to make a high quality game technically on respective platform. Development time should be quicker as there will be less legacy code to throwaway and build on, PS1 to PS2 to PS3, that is really not the case. Also development teams are much larger now, so the amount of manhours that went on past GT games is not much of a game for PD compared to competition. GT5 development manhours if you backdate it to GT4, would have probably been longer than GT1, GT2, GT3 and GT4 combined and some.

So far the only recommendation I’ve seen to improve PD efficiency is to have spent more time this generation building legacy code and assets from PS2 generation and improving them. The thing is then PD will be made to start from scratch the next-generation. PD are not one of the most successful development teams in the world by chance, they have a good idea of what they are doing and are one of most highly efficient game development studios in the world from what I've seen so far.

 

[mcfizzle]

As much as I love PD they weren't overly efficient since GT4. I know they've released TT, GTPSP, along with Prologue in that time period, that's not what I'm referring too. GTHD was not efficient use of their time. Who know's how many hours and resources were wasted on a project that never saw the light of day? That was poor planning on someones part and may be part of the reason GT5 took so long. It could also be the reason we have standard cars and tracks rather than completely remodeling existing cars to the standard of what we know as premiums.

As for DLC, I don't blame lack of efficiency on lack of DLC. GT Academy was a massive undertaking this year and more akin to an expansion pack than anything else. It was a massive project and probably the best way to do it.

I still think overall they do a very good job but GT6 will be key to the franchise. It needs to be a 2013 release with expanded A-Spec and much improved online. Hopefully PD has learned from GT5's shortcomings.

 

[CorvetteConquer]

Sony's best selling franchise (Gran Turismo) only houses some 140 people. How can they not afford to outsources some projects? They rake in BIG money! Pride getting in the way, PD?

I imagine they're working on a Vita GT game, and I cannot wait to see how they handle that in addition to GT6 development. Will they drop the ball again or learn from their previous mistake?

 

[DaveS1138]

Except they're not. Not 100% unique, brand new games as other developers are. Unless you're going to tell me that GT PSP was nothing like GT4.

Plus again, just because they're dropping games it doesn't mean they're efficient. Well, it shows they're efficient at knocking games out, it doesn't show they're efficient at actually making those games, based on how much some are lacking.

You keep refusing to aknowledge the point that Turn 10 do the exact same thing (release games that are not 100% unique) and that they release games at the same rate as PD. If your argument is that PD are not efficient at releasing games then why do you not level the same argument at Turn 10.

Or lets look at another example....Naughty Dog of the last few years.

They released

Uncharted 2007
Uncharted 2 2009
Uncharted 3 2011
The Last of Us 2013

Hmmm.....yet again there is that 2 year cycle.

All the evidence seems to point to PD's release rate being perfectly normal within the industry.

For example the fact they forgot to add a game to GT PSP.

You may feel that way. I continue to enjoy GTSP as I have for the last 2+ years.....perhaps you are simply unable to play a game that doesn't hold your hand and tell you you have to do A then B then C.

There is plenty of game in GTSP.

You also have to judge on an individual basis, ie when they started on each game. GT PSP was in the works for what, 5 years. GT5 for roughly the same. They intertwined yes, but that's not efficient developing. If the PSP game was taking too much of their time the efficient thing to do is let another company work on it.

I really have to laugh when people claim that GTSP took 5 years......especially when they then claim that GT5 also took 5 years.

GTSP may have been announced in 2004 and released in 2009 but that doesn't mean that PD spent the entire 5 years working on it.

I used to get my Chemistry homework on monday and hand it in on Friday.....Does that mean I spent 5 days working on it or that I worked on it for an hour over lunch on Friday afternoon? And it doesn't mean I wasn't an efficient student....just that I had other things I was working on too.

 

[diegorborges]

Well, I think they are really trying to get more people for the team. They are recruiting modelers, etc on their website.

Plus, just to add some more info to the thread, in the meantime, together with all the games between "full" GT games, Polyphony is always collaborating with the car industry in some way. This page shows a lot of small examples.

http://www.polyphony.co.jp/products/collaboration.html

Then you may thing that it's just: "hey, remove all cars from the game, all tracks, left only 1 track and 1 car and badaboom: we have a demo!"...

It's a bit more complex because when you take a project for a big client like a car manufacturer, even if it's a small demo/disc you must have some serious testing, homologation and everything. This takes time.

Anyway, expanding the team it's the way to go IMHO and looks like they want to do it.

 

[Samus]

You keep refusing to aknowledge the point that Turn 10 do the exact same thing (release games that are not 100% unique) and that they release games at the same rate as PD. If your argument is that PD are not efficient at releasing games then why do you not level the same argument at Turn 10.

Or lets look at another example....Naughty Dog of the last few years.

They released

Uncharted 2007
Uncharted 2 2009
Uncharted 3 2011
The Last of Us 2013

Hmmm.....yet again there is that 2 year cycle.

All the evidence seems to point to PD's release rate being perfectly normal within the industry.

First of all they don't release a game every two years and again it's not that simple, just because they have several games on the go at the same time and end up releasing them within roughly two years of each other (Or are forced to because they've taken so long) isn't the same as starting game A, working on it for two years, releasing it, starting on game B, working on it for two years, releasing it and so on.

PD start on Game A, work on it, start on game B, work on that, go back to game A, do some game B, work on them both some more,finally finish game B after five years, work on game A some more and release that after four years.

You may feel that way. I continue to enjoy GTSP as I have for the last 2+ years.....perhaps you are simply unable to play a game that doesn't hold your hand and tell you you have to do A then B then C.

There is plenty of game in GTSP.

What do you mean I may feel that way? They didn't add a career mode to the game as with every other GT game before it, that's a fact. That's great that you enjoyed the game without one but that doesn't change the fact they after all that time they didn't add the core part of a GT game into a GT game.

I really have to laugh when people claim that GTSP took 5 years......especially when they then claim that GT5 also took 5 years.

GTSP may have been announced in 2004 and released in 2009 but that doesn't mean that PD spent the entire 5 years working on it.

I used to get my Chemistry homework on monday and hand it in on Friday.....Does that mean I spent 5 days working on it or that I worked on it for an hour over lunch on Friday afternoon? And it doesn't mean I wasn't an efficient student....just that I had other things I was working on too.

Yes, GT PSP took 5 years. I didn't say they worked on it for 5 years, I simply said it took five years. Which is a fact.

GT5 took 6 years. Again I'm not saying they worked on it solid for 6 years, that's how long it took from the last game. Fact.

Now again to me that is bad management of time, resources and an inefficient way of working.

It took you five days to hand in your homework. You didn't work on it for 5 days, but it took five days from being given it to handing it in. 5 days had passed. I'm not sure how else you want me to point this out.

 

[DaveS1138]

First of all they don't release a game every two years and again it's not that simple, just because they have several games on the go at the same time and end up releasing them within roughly two years of each other (Or are forced to because they've taken so long)

You might want to get this one straight in your head before you try to debate on the point......."they don't release a game every two years"..."end up releaseing them within roughly two years"

Which is it?

I posted a handly release schedule a few posts up you might want to refresh yourself with.

isn't the same as starting game A, working on it for two years, releasing it, starting on game B, working on it for two years, releasing it and so on.

When did I say it was.

Turn 10 work on one game on one platform only and release games every two years.

PD work on different games on different platforms and release games every two years.

and yet you are trying to suggest that PD are not efficient and doing something wrong.

Yet they have the same output as Turn 10 (and naughty dog given their recent releases)

PD start on Game A, work on it, start on game B, work on that, go back to game A, do some game B, work on them both some more,finally finish game B after five years, work on game A some more and release that after four years.

Can you explain to me how you know when PD start work on game A or B or how much resources they give to either game?

What do you mean I may feel that way? They didn't add a career mode to the game as with every other GT game before it, that's a fact. That's great that you enjoyed the game without one but that doesn't change the fact they after all that time they didn't add the core part of a GT game into a GT game.

I mean that you feel they

For example the fact they forgot to add a game to GT PSP.

You may feel that the lack of a career mode in GTSP means it did not contain a game.......that is your opinion nothing more. My opinion is that GTSP was a good game and I have had years of fun playing it. You may need a career mode for something to be a game....I dont need that type of handholding from a producer especially with a portable title designed for quick races on the go.

Yes, GT PSP took 5 years. I didn't say they worked on it for 5 years, I simply said it took five years. Which is a fact.

GT5 took 6 years. Again I'm not saying they worked on it solid for 6 years, that's how long it took from the last game. Fact.

Now again to me that is bad management of time, resources and an inefficient way of working.

It took you five days to hand in your homework. You didn't work on it for 5 days, but it took five days from being given it to handing it in. 5 days had passed. I'm not sure how else you want me to point this out.

If they didn't work on the game for 5 years then in what way did it "take 5 years to make"?

just as my homework did not take 5 days to complete. It took about 1 hour hence I took one hour to "make" my homework.

You are assuming that when a game is announced that is the day that they start working on it....you have no idea if that is true.

Then you go even more over the top with GT5 and claim that the development time is now from when the last game was made regardless of when they announced the game.....

Was the Ford GT in development for 30+ years simply because thats how long ago they stopped making the GT40?

You have no idea how long PD worked on any of these titles or how many company resources they devoted to which titles when.....all you can say for certain is that they release a game on average every two years.....just like Turn 10.

But for some reason you seem to think this makes PD and only PD not efficient.

 

[Samus]

You may feel that the lack of a career mode in GTSP means it did not contain a game.......that is your opinion nothing more. My opinion is that GTSP was a good game and I have had years of fun playing it. You may need a career mode for something to be a game....I dont need that type of handholding from a producer especially with a portable title designed for quick races on the go.

Well I didn't word it correctly the first time, I got it right the second time. They didn't add a career mode. Again if you're happy without one good for you, doesn't change the fact they didn't add one.

If they didn't work on the game for 5 years then in what way did it "take 5 years to make"?

just as my homework did not take 5 days to complete. It took about 1 hour hence I took one hour to "make" my homework.

You're really not getting this are you? If you start working on a game in 2004 and release it in 2009 it took you five years to release the game, irrespective of how many of those years you actually worked on it. Why is that so hard to grasp?

People regularly say it took 15 years of development to release Duke Nukem Forever. We all know it wasn't worked on that whole time, but that is how long it took to release.

You are assuming that when a game is announced that is the day that they start working on it....you have no idea if that is true.

No, it's usually before. Especially if you announce a game with footage, you must have already started on it, no?

Then you go even more over the top with GT5 and claim that the development time is now from when the last game was made regardless of when they announced the game.....

PD make videogames. When they finish one they don't sit around, it stands to reason they start on the next one.

Was the Ford GT in development for 30+ years simply because thats how long ago they stopped making the GT40?

No, because Ford don't only make GTs, do they? PD only make videogames. GT4 was released in 2005 and TT in Feb 2006. What do you think they did after finishing TT in 2005? Twiddled their thumbs? No they got to work on their next video game, after already showing off a vision in May 2005 at E3.

You have no idea how long PD worked on any of these titles or how many company resources they devoted to which titles when.....all you can say for certain is that they release a game on average every two years.....just like Turn 10.

I can say for certain that Tourist Trophy was finished by late 2005 and since then they have only worked on two games, GT PSP and a PS3 GT game. It took them over four years to finish the PSP game and released it with no career mode and at least five years to finish the PS3 game which was still hideously unfinished (by 2 years according to the creator) when released.

That's why I think they're inefficient.

 

[Earth]

You are kidding me right? Square? FFXIII is the worst Final Fantasy since ages, suffering from cut content (so a 360 release could be forced). Also where is vs. XIII?

Yes FFXIII is the worst Final Fantasy, but according to metacritic Gran Turismo 5 is easily the worst Gran Turismo and equally as bad as FFXIII

96% - Gran Turismo 1
95% - Gran Turismo 3
93% - Gran Turismo 2
89% - Gran Turismo 4
84% - Gran Turismo 5
83% - Final Fantasy XIII

But the point is Square confessed their mistakes with Final Fantasy XIII, that the development wasn't controlled and focused well and they didnt play test the game enough. When will Polyphony Digital admit something similar?

Square?

OP is saying that PD should learn from SQUARE?



Today - June 29 2012 - Square Enix is more than 6 years in development of Final Fantasy Versus XIII, with more than 100 milllion dollars already spent and with more than 300 people on the task. They delayed Versus to hell-and-back, changed everything 100 times and game is still practically vaporware - with only some concept-art and (stunning, I admit that) video shown more than 2 years ago.

Square Enix is the company that have already proclaimed their next-level engine too advanced even for Blu-Ray capacity so they can lever the grounds for potential further delays and save their executive asses from wrath of the shareholders because of the company's profit and forecast for the upcoming quarters.

Comparing to SqaureEnix, Polyphony Digital are the KINGS OF EFFICIENCY™.

OP should really, really inform himself before speaking nonsense.

Also, Earth, what do you mean by "not acceptable"? By whom?

I think the general public will not tolerate waiting 3 years for something after it's been shown, or 6 years between sequels. If Gran Turismo 5 was launched with what looked like 6 years worth of work, hundreds if not thousands of single player events, and smooth, bugless gameplay people would be somewhat OK with what they got. But thats not what they got. Part of the game, the detail of the cars in particular, looked like 6 years worth of work. Other parts, maybe even most parts, looked like 6 weeks of work.

Also, while PD produced 3 titles between GT4 and GT5 (Tourist Trophy, GTPSP, GT5rologue, with studio expanding from 70+ people in 2005 to 120+ to GT5), Square made only XIII after XII with their 300+ people FF studio staff and limitless budget.

This sounds like being split too thin. In the end working on GTPSP Tourist Trophy etc only hurt and slowed GT5's development.

GT5P is a beta of GT5, a work in progress. So it shouldn't have taken very long to complete. GTPSP recycles alot of content from GT4 and is on the less powerful PSP. Again development time should be reduced. Tourist Trophy is a PS2 game using the GT4 engine. Again thats reduced development time.

Numbers and other problems aside, the fact is Turn 10 is pumping out a new Forza game every 2 years. I think thats a reasonable time table to expect between sequels of racing games. And Forza is Gran Turismo's rival. You can't release full GT games so far apart when your rival is putting out quality, highly rated racing simulators every 2 years.

Why is GT5 so inconsistent? Some premium cars have great visible crash damage, some have none at all. Some premium cars show visible damage after a 50mph crash. Some take multiple 200mph crashes before they show any damage.

It's this type of retarded inconsistency that says something is horribly wrong with how Polyphony Digital develops games. Kaz needs to get his ship righted, and as always the first step is to admit you have a problem.

 

[DaveS1138]

You're really not getting this are you? If you start working on a game in 2004 and release it in 2009 it took you five years to release the game, irrespective of how many of those years you actually worked on it. Why is that so hard to grasp?

because it is a stupid position to take.

For example, You're saying that if PD did one days work in 2004 where they created a logo for GTSP and then didn't do anything else until 3 months in 2009 when they wrote the game then the game was being worked on for 5 years......that's just stupid. It was (in that example) being worked on for 3 months not 5 years.

The only person that would claim 5 years for that is somebody looking to make up figures to knock PD for no reason (see also people who claim they worked on GT5 for 6 years).

James Cameron wrote the first treatment for Avatar in 1994. However he couldn't make the film until 2007......guess what, Avatar didn't take 15 years to make.....he was working on other projects in the mean time.

People regularly say it took 15 years of development to release Duke Nukem Forever. We all know it wasn't worked on that whole time, but that is how long it took to release.

exactly. It did not take 15 years to make.....just as GTSP did not take 5 years and GT5 did not take 6 years to make.

No, it's usually before. Especially if you announce a game with footage, you must have already started on it, no?

Was their footage of GTSP shown in 2004?

PD make videogames. When they finish one they don't sit around, it stands to reason they start on the next one.



No, because Ford don't only make GTs, do they? PD only make videogames. GT4 was released in 2005 and TT in Feb 2006. What do you think they did after finishing TT in 2005? Twiddled their thumbs? No they got to work on their next video game, after already showing off a vision in May 2005 at E3.

notice the disingenous use of language here....

your claim for GT5 was

GT5 took 6 years. Again I'm not saying they worked on it solid for 6 years, that's how long it took from the last game. Fact.

You claim that Ford don't only make GT's but that PD Only make videogames.

If you were being honest you would say "Ford don't only make automobiles"

But then you have to admit that it's the exact same situation.... Ford did not take 30+ years to make the Ford GT because they were working on other projects (cars) in the mean time......just as PD did not take 6 years to make GT5 because they were working on other projects (videogames) in the mean time.

I can say for certain that Tourist Trophy was finished by late 2005

and yet did not release it until 2006? If they had finished the game in 2005 why didn't they release it in 2005 to capatalise on the holiday season which is after all the biggest shopping season of the year?

and since then they have only worked on two games, GT PSP and a PS3 GT game.

So from 2006 until 2010 (4 years) they released 2 games.....Hmmmm.....there is that average of a new game every 2 years again just like Turn 10 and Naughty Dog.....and yet PD are the only one you seem to think is inefficient even though they are releasing titles at the same rate as the others.

It took them over four years to finish the PSP game and released it with no career mode and at least five years to finish the PS3 game which was still hideously unfinished (by 2 years according to the creator) when released.

That's why I think they're inefficient.

The problem with your math is as simple as this.....

You are saying it took them 4 years to finish GTSP
You are saying it took them 5 years to finish GT5

That is 9 years worth of work that they finished in less than 4 years.....

So my question is if they managed to do 9 years of work in 4 years (using your figures) then how can they be inefficient.....hell that sounds like the complete oposite to me

 

[avens]

exactly. It (duke nukem forever) did not take 15 years to make.....just as GTSP did not take 5 years and GT5 did not take 6 years to make.

it did. When you decide to drop some ideas out of something you are working on (a research for example) the time and actual work you spent on them still counts, and you charge for that.

While it's true they changed engines an awful lot some 90s ideas were still used. At least they didn't use those models like PD did

 

[CorvetteConquer]

Are PD humans? Yes.

Do they have brains? Yes.

Are PD perfect? No.

They're capable of learning something new.

 

[Tornado]

You claim that Ford don't only make GT's but that PD Only make videogames.

If you were being honest you would say "Ford don't only make automobiles"

But then you have to admit that it's the exact same situation.... Ford did not take 30+ years to make the Ford GT because they were working on other projects (cars) in the mean time......just as PD did not take 6 years to make GT5 because they were working on other projects (videogames) in the mean time.

Ford didn't take 30+ years to make the Ford GT because it didn't start development for a good while after the 2002 GT40 concept was shown. PD did announce GT PSP was in development in 2004, and PD did end up not releasing it until 2009. That is the difference, and that is why your comparison is ridiculous.

 

[Samus]

because it is a stupid position to take.

For example, You're saying that if PD did one days work in 2004 where they created a logo for GTSP and then didn't do anything else until 3 months in 2009 when they wrote the game then the game was being worked on for 5 years......that's just stupid. It was (in that example) being worked on for 3 months not 5 years.

But that isn't the case and you know it. The game had an original release date of April 2005, it's obvious from that full scale work was taking place in 2004 and 2005, maybe even earlier.

The only person that would claim 5 years for that is somebody looking to make up figures to knock PD for no reason (see also people who claim they worked on GT5 for 6 years).

They did work on GT5 OVER 6 years. I really don't know what is so hard to fathom about this. GT4 released in 2004. GT5 released in 2010. It took them six years to release the next game.

James Cameron wrote the first treatment for Avatar in 1994. However he couldn't make the film until 2007......guess what, Avatar didn't take 15 years to make.....he was working on other projects in the mean time.

Did he tell the world about Avatar in 1994, did he start promoting it in 1994? No. Because he obviously wasn't ready to work on it then. When a GT game is announced they start working on it.

exactly. It did not take 15 years to make.....just as GTSP did not take 5 years and GT5 did not take 6 years to make.

I never said it did, I said it took them 5 years and 6 years to release it. It's not the same thing.

Was their footage of GTSP shown in 2004?

I don't know but see above, the game must have been in production at that point for it to even have an April 2005 release date.

But then you have to admit that it's the exact same situation.... Ford did not take 30+ years to make the Ford GT because they were working on other projects (cars) in the mean time......just as PD did not take 6 years to make GT5 because they were working on other projects (videogames) in the mean time.

But Ford did not start work on the Ford GT 30 years ago, they started in the 2000s. PD started work on GT5 5 or more years before it released.

and yet did not release it until 2006? If they had finished the game in 2005 why didn't they release it in 2005 to capatalise on the holiday season which is after all the biggest shopping season of the year?

You know games aren't released the day after they're finished, right? If it released in February 2006 chances are they were completely done with it in 2005, or January 2006 at the latest.

So from 2006 until 2010 (4 years) they released 2 games.....Hmmmm.....there is that average of a new game every 2 years again just like Turn 10 and Naughty Dog.....and yet PD are the only one you seem to think is inefficient even though they are releasing titles at the same rate as the others.

But those games were finished, GT PSP and GT5 were not, as admitted by the person who made them. He wanted a further two years for GT5.

The problem with your math is as simple as this.....

You are saying it took them 4 years to finish GTSP
You are saying it took them 5 years to finish GT5

That is 9 years worth of work that they finished in less than 4 years.....

So my question is if they managed to do 9 years of work in 4 years (using your figures) then how can they be inefficient.....hell that sounds like the complete oposite to me

Once again you are not understanding the simple thing I'm saying here.

They started work on GTPSP in 2004 and released it in 2009. Five years time.
They started work on GT5 in 2004/5 and released it in 2010. Five/six years time.

It doesn't matter how many of those days you actually worked on it, that's how long they both took PD to release them both. Now do you get it?

Also as I said above, that's all they were working on since early 2006. That's four years for two games plus however much they worked on them between 04 and 06, both of which used a lot of assets from previous games and still managed to end up half assed and unfinished.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

SimonK, your whole point seems to rely on names and announcements. If GT5P, was called GT5 and GT5 called GT6, does that change efficiency for you? You should measure work done with the amount of workers in context and compare to other development companies in the same period of time to compare efficiency. That is the fairest way of doing it, not some double standard way at looking at things. Also I still don't think you understand what efficiency means, working on two titles at once can be efficient, and GT PSP is an example as it had work from GT5P and GT5 in it as well as GT4 and PD learned quite a bit of stuff from it and implemented it in GT5. Doing it separately would be less efficient as they might spend time trying to do a task twice instead of just once. If PD have hired twice as many people and got the job done to target (The extra two years you mention), would they be more efficient even if work output per person still remains the same?

I've yet to see you recommend how PD can become more efficient, the only pointers you have made is to make PD less efficient or pointing towards if they have more resources they will be more efficient or if they are more punctual they are more efficient. It does not work like that. I'll ask again, Why do you think PD are not efficient and also have you found a developer as efficient as PD yet by the way preferably in the same genre and also why do you think they are more efficient?

 

[Samus]

SimonK, your whole point seems to rely on names and announcements. If GT5P, was called GT5 and GT5 called GT6, does that change efficiency for you.

I don't know what you're alluding to here. Since whenever they started on it, they were always working towards a GT game on PS3. GT5 was not a unique game that needed seperate dev time, neither are any of the other PS3 "games" before GT5 itself. They were all WIP of the final goal, which was GT5. They didn't produce GT5 then go back to the start and make GT5 itself, they just continued on with what they were doing.

So yeah, not sure what your point was with that.

You should measure work done with the amount of workers and compared to other development companies in the same period of time to compare efficiency amongst other development teams. That is the fairest way of doing it, not some double standard way at looking at things.

I already said way back that I wasn't comparing PD to anyone else, I was simply giving my thoughts on how efficient I felt they had been based on how long I personally think a studio should be working on a game of this type. What another studio does with twice or more staff isn't relevant.

Also I still don't think you understand what efficiency means, working on two titles at once can be efficient, and GT PSP is an example as it had work from GT5P and GT5 in it as well as GT4 and PD learned quite a bit of stuff from it and implemented it in GT5. Doing it separately would be less efficient as they might spend time trying to do a task twice instead of just once. If PD have hired twice as many people and got the job done to target (The extra two years you mention), would they be more efficient even if work output per person still remains the same?

Working on two things at once can be efficient, it can not be. Depends how they do things and for that we'll never really know what they were doing. If they hired twice as many people and still only gave us the same GTPSP and GT5 then no, that's not any more efficient. If they gave us better games for both in the same or quicker time then of course that is more efficient.

I've yet to see you recommend how PD can become more efficient, the only pointers you have made is to make PD less efficient or pointing towards if they have more resources they will be more efficient or if they are more punctual they are more efficient. It does not work like that. I'll ask again, Why do you think PD are not efficient and also have you found a developer as efficient as PD yet by the way preferably in the same genre and also why do you think they are more efficient?

How can PD become more efficient? Well for one they need to stop spending 60% of their entire dev time modelling cars and balance it more with other important parts of the game. Either find a way to do it more efficiently or do what any other studio would do and outsource some of it. They can't afford to spend 60% of time on cars, they just can't. GT5 clearly suffered for it, GT6 would as well.

Similarly they need to work on one game and focus on that game only. No more trying to do two or even three games at the same time because whilst it might seem efficient at the time it clearly isn't going by the final results the last time they did it. It's far more efficient to work on one at a time and if you don't have the time to do the other game again, outsource. Just like any other studio would.

Somehow I get the feeling that isn't happening though, I get the feeling they're making the same mistake again. Started working on GT6 and then at some point Sony said they wanted a Vita game and PD started on that rather than letting another studio do it or waiting until GT6 was done, now they're trying to juggle both again. That's what I think anyway.

Put it this way, I'd rather (hypothetically) have GT6 in 2013 and GT Vita in 2015 than GT Vita in 2014 and GT5 in 2015.

 

[mcfizzle]

But the point is Square confessed their mistakes with Final Fantasy XIII, that the development was controlled and focused well and they didnt play test the game enough. When will Polyphony Digital admit something similar?

Why should PD have to confess to their mistakes? Would that make you feel better about them as a developer? Will it change GT5 or future GT's? To me this is part of the problem with this generation of gamer, and people in general. In these constantly connected times people expect apologies if a product they bought didn't live up to their expectations. People want to be updated constantly on the development of games. People complain when they receive something FREE. I remember getting excited if details leaked out or were released on a game. Now if you don't hear anything new for a month or so people complain. I just don't understand most of it, I really don't. There just seems to be this sense of entitlement that I don't understand. I also think KY and PD understand what Gt5's downfalls are, and I think they can fix them on their own. I think they know mistakes were made, bad decisions led to a few time crunches and disappointments. I think they will learn from them and make a better GT6. It will never be perfect and live up to every single persons expectations through, and that's okay with me.

And I'm sorry but I do live by the don't like it don't buy it philosophy. When Black Ops released and I thought it was utter trash I didn't complain endlessly on a board, I said I'm never buying a game from Trey Arch again, two bad games was enough for me.

 

[DaveS1138]

But that isn't the case and you know it. The game had an original release date of April 2005, it's obvious from that full scale work was taking place in 2004 and 2005, maybe even earlier.

You have absolutely no idea how much time PD spend working on GTSP at any point in its development never mind 2005. So no you cant say it was in full scale production in 2004 or 2005.

They did work on GT5 OVER 6 years. I really don't know what is so hard to fathom about this. GT4 released in 2004. GT5 released in 2010. It took them six years to release the next game.

which again is completely meaningless to your point that they are inneficient as a company....you have no idea how much time they spent working on GT5 or when. Just as you have no idea for any other title they worked on.

The only facts we have to go on are the release dates of the titles they make.....which as I have shown show that from 1994 to 2010 they released a game on average every two years......and since Turn 10 release games at the same rate of one game every two years you have yet to explain how this shows that PD are in any way inefficient.

Did he tell the world about Avatar in 1994, did he start promoting it in 1994? No. Because he obviously wasn't ready to work on it then. When a GT game is announced they start working on it.

Yes as a matter of fact he did. He also did real work on the project since as I said he wrote a first draft back then.

However he clearly was not working on the film for 15 years now was he? It is a proposerous position to take on the development time of a project.

I never said it did, I said it took them 5 years and 6 years to release it. It's not the same thing.

It is if your point is that they are inefficient and your evidence is that they took 5 and 6 years to release them.

Without knowing how much time they worked on each title and how many resources they used in that time you can draw no conclussion abou the efficency of their work.

From 2006 (release of Tourist Trophy) to 2010 (release of GT5) they released 2 games......again keeping up the average of roughly one game every two years.....that is the only conclussion you can draw from the timeframes.

I don't know but see above, the game must have been in production at that point for it to even have an April 2005 release date.

No it does not have to have been in production at all. I can tell you today that I am going to release a game in 2013 it doesn't mean that I am working on it at the moment.

The fact they announced they would like to release the game in 2005 but had absolutely nothing to show the public for the next 5 years would appear to actively contradict your argument that they were working on it at all. If they had been working on it since 2004 they would have had something they could show to people.

But Ford did not start work on the Ford GT 30 years ago, they started in the 2000s. PD started work on GT5 5 or more years before it released.

again you have no idea at what point Ford started working on the Ford GT and you have no idea at what point PD started working on GT5. All you can say is that the last GT40 was made in 1969 and GT4 was finished in 2004. Unless you have some facts about Ford or PD that you would like to share with us that is the only conclussion you can draw from those releases.

You know games aren't released the day after they're finished, right? If it released in February 2006 chances are they were completely done with it in 2005, or January 2006 at the latest.

However you try to push the date back by claiming they were done with it in "late 2005" when the only conclussion you can draw was that they were finished with Tourist Trophy at some point before feb 2006. But again this tells us absolutely nothing about the start date for either GTSP or GT5.

But those games were finished, GT PSP and GT5 were not, as admitted by the person who made them. He wanted a further two years for GT5.

again your opinion on what constitues a finished game or not. You feel that GTSP is not finished because it does not have a career mode.....however if it was never intended to have a career mode then in what way is it "not finished"?

As for Yamauchi's comments that GT5 was not finished I think thats far more along the lines of an artist never being satisfied that his work is finished more than anything else. I doubt Da Vinci ever felt the Mona Lisa was ever finished either.

Once again you are not understanding the simple thing I'm saying here.

They started work on GTPSP in 2004 and released it in 2009. Five years time.
They started work on GT5 in 2004/5 and released it in 2010. Five/six years time.

It doesn't matter how many of those days you actually worked on it, that's how long they both took PD to release them both. Now do you get it?

but that is meaningless in your attempt to argue that PD are inefficient precisely because you have no idea how long during those years they were working on any or all projects.

You do not know that they started work on GTSP in 2004.
You do not know that they started work on GT5 in 2004/5

You have no idea what so ever how long they spent and what resources they spent on any title so you cant possibly claim they are inefficient as a company.

Also as I said above, that's all they were working on since early 2006. That's four years for two games plus however much they worked on them between 04 and 06, both of which used a lot of assets from previous games and still managed to end up half assed and unfinished.

and again you have no idea if that is the only thing they worked on from 2006.....but even if it was that means they put out a new game on average every two years which seems to be industry standard given that Turn 10 have the same output.

So I ask again if PD are inefficient because they release a game on average every two years then why do you not criticise Turn 10 who also release a new game every two years?

 

[Earth]

Why should PD have to confess to their mistakes? Would that make you feel better about them as a developer? Will it change GT5 or future GT's?

It will give the consumer more confidence in them. Right now I'm one of countless GT fans who are scared senseless that GT6 may not appear for another 3 or 4 years while a new Forza will no doubt come along soon after a next generation Xbox launch

Yes it will change future GTs for the better. Admit development took too long for GT5. Admit GT5 was littered with bugs, glitches, and inconsistencies. Say you will do better and the Gran Turismo fan base will applaud you and stay loyal to the brand.

But what does Kaz do? He says he wanted another 2 years to work on GT5, acting as though if he were rushed to release the game. It may be true that Sony distracted PD from GT5 with projects like GT PSP. If that cost you so much time, why not tell the GT community whats really going on? Information is important. Without it all we have is frustration and endless speculation.

To me this is part of the problem with this generation of gamer, and people in general. In these constantly connected times people expect apologies if a product they bought didn't live up to their expectations.

Not expected but appreciated. A breathed a huge sigh of relief when Square admitted they bumbled the development of Final Fantasy XIII, and that it was not the type of game their audience wanted. That was huge in getting me confident in the series again, a series which I said was dead.

People want to be updated constantly on the development of games.

If it takes a game 3, 4 years to come out after it's been unveiled, then yeah I would like frequent updates to help with the wait. If PD released a full Gran Turismo every 2 years I dont think many people would care so much about being updated as they would be busy playing the previous game.

People complain when they receive something FREE. I remember getting excited if details leaked out or were released on a game. Now if you don't hear anything new for a month or so people complain. I just don't understand most of it, I really don't. There just seems to be this sense of entitlement that I don't understand. I also think KY and PD understand what Gt5's downfalls are, and I think they can fix them on their own. I think they know mistakes were made, bad decisions led to a few time crunches and disappointments. I think they will learn from them and make a better GT6. It will never be perfect and live up to every single persons expectations through, and that's okay with me.

Thats alot of speculation. You believe Polyphony will fix Gran Turismo 5's faults, but how will they when they included the problems in the first place? A beta quality B-spec mode, hideous leveling system, useless license tests, shadow jaggies that mar the graphics, and so on.

I'm guessing your hoping they read a few reviews? How about they come to this forum and study it? How about they tell us what the main problems with GT5 were and how they plan to fix them for GT6? Dan Greenawalt of Forza comes across as a guy who would do just that. PD? Nope.

And I'm sorry but I do live by the don't like it don't buy it philosophy. When Black Ops released and I thought it was utter trash I didn't complain endlessly on a board, I said I'm never buying a game from Trey Arch again, two bad games was enough for me.

Disposable games aren't worth complaining about. People here have a passion for cars and racing, and Gran Turismo delivered that to them for over a decade now. They like what the franchise has done in the past, but were disappointing over head scratching design decisions in #5.

Personally I don't want to go to PC sim racing, and I certainly dont want to go to Forza. I want Gran Turismo back on top because I like , for the most part what Kaz wants in a simulator.

 

[-Cheezman-]

It's not about how long the production took. It's about the finished product, and GT5 certainly didn't (still doesn't) feel like a finished product after the almost six years they had to work on it.

If the game took ten years to develop, then so be it, but, when it's finally released, it should be a highly polished product that feels like the ten years were used perfecting it.

 

[marchi]

Simon K you do realise that most estimates put Turn 10's working numbers 'including out sourcing' at around 450. Thats 3 times as big as Gran Turismo's work force and they put out a game every 2 years. On equal terms, it would take six years to put out a Forza title, and even then, the vast majority of GT's premium cars are modled it a level that is as good as anything on the market including that project cars game. Not in game of course, but GT's in house screen shots show just how great the cars are when they are not limited to the constraints of the current console.

In other words it would probably take even longer for Turn 10 to produce another Forza title.

So yeah they are pretty efficient.

 

[Tornado]

The fact they announced they would like to release the game in 2005 but had absolutely nothing to show the public for the next 5 years would appear to actively contradict your argument that they were working on it at all. If they had been working on it since 2004 they would have had something they could show to people.

That is an entirely separate problem if they announced a game for a release date fairly soon in the future and then just never bothered working about it, you're correct.


The problem being that they did show things off.

again you have no idea at what point Ford started working on the Ford GT

February 2002, a month after they first showed it off. Before then it was never intended for production.

All you can say is that the last GT40 was made in 1969 and GT4 was finished in 2004. Unless you have some facts about Ford or PD that you would like to share with us that is the only conclussion you can draw from those releases.

Do you think if you keep repeating this comparison it will start being valid?

Ford announced the GT was in production. PD announced GT PSP was in production (under the original title of GT4 Mobile). That the GT40 last rolled off the line in 1969, or that GT4 came out in 2004 is completely irrelevant to the conversation because the production of their successors was officially announced, which is when the clock starts ticking for development time unless you have something else that proves otherwise.

As for Yamauchi's comments that GT5 was not finished I think thats far more along the lines of an artist never being satisfied that his work is finished more than anything else. I doubt Da Vinci ever felt the Mona Lisa was ever finished either.

Interesting. What's the classical art equivalent to things printed on the game box and in the game manual but weren't put into the game for a good while after initial release (or... ever, for the leaderboards and matchmaking).

but that is meaningless in your attempt to argue that PD are inefficient precisely because you have no idea how long during those years they were working on any or all projects.

You do not know that they started work on GTSP in 2004.

Both of which date from 2004.


So unless you are telling us that Sony was lying about the game even existing when they showed off that screenshot and trailer, were lying when they insisted it would be out as a launch window game for the PSP, and they were lying about how that video was made on PSP developer's hardware, I'm not sure where you are getting this.

 

[TheeFrogmanlego]

Similar to Gran Turismo 5, the popular role playing game Final Fantasy XIII was endlessly delayed and finally released ages after it was first unveiled.

For comparisons, Final Fantasy XIII was released 3 1/2 years after it was first shown, and Gran Turismo 5 was released 2 1/2 years after it was first shown. Both unacceptable

Even worse, the time it took for each game to follow it's predecessor was tediously long. Final Fantasy XIII was released 3 1/2 years after XII, and Gran Turismo 5 was released nearly 6 years after Gran Turismo 4

But according to this article, Square has learned form their mistakes.

http://www.joystiq.com/2012/06/27/what-square-enix-learned-from-ffxiiis-large-scale-development/

But the question is, will Polyphony Digital?

Square, like Polyphony Digital, was highly criticized for it's release of Final Fantasy XIII. Both games were considered a massive disappointment.

Square realized one of their major errors was not taking in enough feedback from the fans on their product which they vow to change in the future.



Doesn't that sound alot like what must have happened with Gran Turismo 5? It's like they spent 99.9% of their time creating the game but spent the last .01% play testing it.

How else can you explain the numerous bugs and graphical glitches? How else did the awful, poorly thought out leveling up system sneak through the cracks and to the public? Maybe because there wasn't proper play testing by users who can tell Polyphony Digital what they do and dont like?

Theres no way any true Gran Turismo fan would have tested GT5's leveling system and even it's choice of races and gave it all a thumbs up. This leads me to believe the whole process was rushed in the end after they spent so much time modeling cars and other things unrelated to gameplay.

Also the article speaks of Square deciding to outsource some workload. Turn 10 already does this and it helps them create their games much faster. Obviously quality control is a concern, but when it's taking 5+ years and 80 million to create a single game something HAS to change.

So things Polyphony Digital can learn from Square

• Have the game playtested alot more before release
• Listen to the criticisms of the game by fans
• Outsource some workload instead of having a undirected mass of people working endlessly without any common goal or drive

Lol PD shouldn't learn anything from that POS company, there predicted to go bankrupt within the next two years