The Future of Polyphony Digital

[JAGUAR1977]

After reading about the US influence being the driving force behind damage implementation in GT5, I'm beginning to worry about PD.

I find it amazing a sim developer didn't consider realistic damage a priority alongside the three other fundamentals, physics, graphics and sounds.

Perhaps this gives an insight into the PD/Japanease mentality and is the reason behind the GT series lagging behind in a number of other areas such as weather, day/night, customisation and online.

Even sounds, particle effects, skidmarks etc, which you would think PD would be obsessive about to complement their amazing car models and improving physics, are neglected.

You also have a long list of misjudgments from the lack of news and interaction with the GT community, leaving the GT mode out of GT Mobile, and now a lacklustre GT Academy demo that has been trailed by the videogames media as a GT5 demo, and turned into a PR own goal.

Is it time PD made changes to their structure, perhaps leave the Japanease dpt. to car/track modelling, transfering everything else to a western based dpt. Or just bring in a western producer to drive the development, rather than their current role of simply localising whatever the Japanease dpt. produce.

GT5 will likely be spectacular, so my worries will be for nothing, but when the GT Academy demo doesn't even feature a small improvement like skidmarks, just three months to the full titles release, you wonder are PD going to implement the far more complex features they've promised.

 

[TheCracker]

GT5 will likely be spectacular, so my worries would be for nothing, but when the GT Academy demo doesn't even feature a small improvement like skidmarks, just three months to the full titles release, you wonder are PD going to implement the far more complex features they've promised.

So a whole new physics model isn't as important as skidmarks?

 

[Diego440]

It still amazes me that after so many developments and amazing physics brought forward by the GT series, there's always someone whining about lack of skidmarks.

*cue whine about reverse lights*

Tell me something, do you think the inclusion of skidmarks would really add to the whole 'driving experience'? I certainly don't. Same with damage. It's nice they've included it, but if there's anything that detriments the previous installments of GT, damage is NOT one of them. The physics engine for GT5/Prologue seems to be really amazing and that's definitely something I'm looking forward.

Damage? Yeah, alright, that might be cool. But be careful what you wish for! It could be at a point where some idiotic AI bumps into oyu and breaks off a wheel and you're left stranded in the middle of a 24 hour endurance... that would really suck, wouldn't it? Yet, it's realistic damage!

 

[TBR 427]

Alright, I'll bite.

Firstly, you're either a troll, or a cry baby.

I wouldn't personally put damage as a priority alongside physics, graphics and audio, partly because it's like putting dying animations alongside character development in an RPG. Yes, there are situations you're going to see it, but it's generally associated with the fail side of gameplay, if that...

As for whether, customization, day/night and online, well, you've clearly been living under a rock for a while. Take GT4 for example, add in the visual customizations from NFS and you've basically got anything and everything from every single racing game. Apart from engine swaps, but clearly the manufacturers don/t like that happening too much.

particle effects and skidmarks don't actually add anything to the gameplay. If you find yourself looking at them, you've FAILED.



Your idea of a western style GT5 is really, really bad. Horrifically bad. Fact is, it's a Japanese game. It's his IP, and saying that he should hand it over to another country is actually fairly communist. What would that achieve, anyway? Presumably you'd want more western cars? Another form of progression? There really is nothing to be gained by creating a western alternate-universe GT5.


And stop whining. No, the GT Academy doesn't feature skidmarks. It features physics. Are you going to tell me the skid marks are actually important for a time trial to determine who gets a ride in a GT4-class Nissan?

 

[alba]

I wouldn't personally put damage as a priority alongside physics, graphics and audio, partly because it's like putting dying animations alongside character development in an RPG. Yes, there are situations you're going to see it, but it's generally associated with the fail side of gameplay, if that...

That's actually a pretty good analogy 👍

 

[TokyoDrift]

So a whole new physics model isn't as important as skidmarks?

No, not when that whole new physics model makes the game inaccessible to most of their original fan base.

 

[nasanu]

Please, crashing is not part of the driving experience? What you are saying there is the element of danger is not part of the experience. It is.

Things like skid marks, reverse lights.. They are the little touches that add up to make a good game great. PD would do well not to ignore them. Take for example the shuddering and bumps added to the in car view in the demo, people are loving it. It is a small detail overlooked by PD in their older games, but now it is there you would miss it if it was gone.

 

[NLxAROSA]

No, not when that whole new physics model makes the game inaccessible to most of their original fan base.

Fortunately for us, it doesn't. And the part of the fan base that can't adapt to a little change can be missed.

 

[TheCracker]

No, not when that whole new physics model makes the game inaccessible to most of their original fan base.

Fortunately for us, it doesn't. And the part of the fan base that can't adapt to a little change can be missed.

Or let them switch all the driving aids on. Simplez.

 

[Mermadium]

It's amazing that people think that developers have an unlimited source of work time and hardware resources, i think people complaining don't realized that they need to find a compromise for their development, also i think that gt academy is the best thing any developer has come up with to get closer to the fan base and make an interesting competition.
We haven't seen gt 5 and people already complaining about it is a bit ridiculous, there are plenty of choices in the market from western developers, why not try them and enjoy them instead of criticizing PD for realizing their vision.

 

[arvin charles]

What worries me is the fact that KY is so indecisive. Here's just a few of the things they considered fairly late in the game's development: damage, weather & possibly bikes

I don't know about you, but when you work on a project of this magnitude you better know what you want in it (this is pretty much one of the first things you do) & be focused on meeting those targets. The fact that KY is always "we might add this or that" only several months before the release date gives me impression that they're not really focused.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Things like skid marks, reverse lights.. They are the little touches that add up to make a good game great. PD would do well not to ignore them.

I highly doubt PD will have to stop making games because they didn't add in reverse lights.

 

[Wools]

Polyphony are like many other Japanese Developers in this respect, they have a vision of what should be created and set out to accomplish it, but the world is changing around them and they've yet to fully embrace what others have achieved.

I can understand why people would want damage but I imagine Polyphony had discussions along the lines of, if we include damage to the quality we need, we can only have x amount of cars and the series has never been about crashing anyway, let's not include it. It makes sense but to gamers who want the whole picture, it's a very limiting and strange omission, if the current flag wavers of racing games include damage, why does Gran Turismo omit it?

Personally, I would rather the GT series have damage on all cars and track detail but understand the complexities involved. Also as damage normally means the end to your race I've always been okay if a series has chosen not to replicate it. However as technology can now render cars to the quality of GT5 and Forza 3, it's very exciting to begin to think of the added benefits of damage to the modern racer. From including fluid leaks across the track, showing rubber from the tyres flaking off onto the track, pitting to have body sections repaired and fixed along with a host of other possibilities, it's truly fascinating to see where Developers can take the idea.

As such it was surprising to hear that it took the good 'ol US of A moaning a lot to persuade Polyphony to include damage. However the developer has included the feature and by the looks of things, it's up to the high quality that Polyphony always hit and no it's in, it's in.

I don't think Polyphony need to change or to be swayed in another direction from its focus, it is without question, the most prestigious and respected racing developers out there. Although they are slow with their output and slightly stiff to new ideas, their products are always focused and unnerving portrayals of Driving.

In the end, all developers push each other in different ways, Polyphony is no different.

 

[GMTN]

Your worries are unwarranted the GT demo is fine without damage, is it not? Considering how much the physics have improved, imagine the a.i. Every series progresses differently and Polyphony digital and many other developers hold certain things in higher regard than other features. They've been making games for years, and understand game design. I'll leave it at that.

 

[Mr Whippy]

Skidmarks and damage are easy all said and done.

Viper Racing on the PC had good visual and physics damage and skidmarks, as did Gran Prix Legends... they were 90's games and had tiny budgets.

PD are good, but there is no denying that somewhere in there they would appear to spend 75% of their time doing non-GT related things, because if they REALLY spent all their time doing JUST GT, then it would have all these things and more.
If they actually do spend 90%+ of their time making GT stuff, then they are still good, but they are damn slow (and not as good as they should be for the slowness evident!)


Personally, considering how fast the quality competition are moving these days, if GT6 takes the same time to appear as GT5 has since GT4, then I don't think the GT series will remain *the* driving game/sim to have!

Dave

 

[shadynader]

Personally, considering how fast the quality competition are moving these days, if GT6 takes the same time to appear as GT5 has since GT4, then I don't think the GT series will remain *the* driving game/sim to have!

Dave

After spending £200 purchasing a 360, along with this "quality competition" no less than 3 days ago, i can safely say the GT series will remain the driving game to have. This is just my opinion ofcourse but i would be willing to bet my house, wife and the family pet on the matter

 

[Bandit6]

I'm still peeved that the windshield wipers don't work, you never know when it might rain. :/

 

[Sam48]

I'm still peeved that the windshield wipers don't work, you never know when it might rain. :/

You never know when PD might implement dynamic weather.

 

[Mr Whippy]

After spending £200 purchasing a 360, along with this "quality competition" no less than 3 days ago, i can safely say the GT series will remain the driving game to have. This is just my opinion ofcourse but i would be willing to bet my house, wife and the family pet on the matter

You have to look across all driving games though.

NFS4 (PC) had a better 'feature set' than GT4 had, almost a decade earlier... I still see that as the height of car game/sims for feature set and quality "for the day"... nothing has come close since for all-round playability and community longevity!


Again, PD are not bad, they are very good, but they DO have plenty of areas where they could improve immeasurably. I got bored of waiting for GT3, GT Concept, GT4 Prologue, GT4 proper, and now GT5.
They are, simply put, a complete joke when it comes to getting a job done.


Again, I have no idea what else PD do. But if what PD pumps out is just what we see in the GT series, then they are achingly slow at what they do! And I won't accept the 'accuracy' argument either, because they continue to make glaring errors that simply shouldn't be there in all their games...

Eg: Zonda C12S in GT3 having gearbox setup for correct speeds per gear, but in the km/h scale, giving it a top speed in 'stock' racing series of 145mph or so... totally ruined.
M3 CSL in GT4, SMG gearbox that seems to shift like a big slow manual gearbox.
S-Type R Jag not automatic anymore (eh!)
SL55 AMG in GT Concept sounding perfect, RS6 not so much, then in GT4, RS6 gets a new correct sample, but the SL55 AMG gets the old RS6 one!?
GT4 Golf V GTi using 5/6th as same gear ratio.
GT5P BMW Z4 revving to 7000rpm (mine revs to 6500rpm, hrmm)
Loads of others but I won't go into them.


I can ream off a list of faults in all games, but GT are hardly saints. Their assertion accuracy comes at the cost of time doesn't hold true, and then with that aside, they are just very very slow.


FM3 using old FM2 models for example, is poor, but GT4 did it with GT3 models (Elise S1 stands out like a sore thumb in GT4 for example)

FM3 is pants in many ways, but GT series is also pants in plenty of ways too.



GT2 imho was PD's high point. Since then they have got worse and worse if you ignore the graphics improvements.

I expect great things in GT5, I just hope it's not a repeat of GT3/4 on the ultimate let-down when it finally comes out and gets played. Good, but not epic!

Dave

 

[Wools]

Good, but not epic!

I struggle to class Gran Turismo 4 as anything other than epic!

 

[shadynader]

You have to look across all driving games though.

NFS4 (PC) had a better 'feature set' than GT4 had, almost a decade earlier... I still see that as the height of car game/sims for feature set and quality "for the day"... nothing has come close since for all-round playability and community longevity!
Again, PD are not bad, they are very good, but they DO have plenty of areas where they could improve immeasurably. I got bored of waiting for GT3, GT Concept, GT4 Prologue, GT4 proper, and now GT5.
They are, simply put, a complete joke when it comes to getting a job done.
Again, I have no idea what else PD do. But if what PD pumps out is just what we see in the GT series, then they are achingly slow at what they do! And I won't accept the 'accuracy' argument either, because they continue to make glaring errors that simply shouldn't be there in all their games...
Eg: Zonda C12S in GT3 having gearbox setup for correct speeds per gear, but in the km/h scale, giving it a top speed in 'stock' racing series of 145mph or so... totally ruined.
M3 CSL in GT4, SMG gearbox that seems to shift like a big slow manual gearbox.
S-Type R Jag not automatic anymore (eh!)
SL55 AMG in GT Concept sounding perfect, RS6 not so much, then in GT4, RS6 gets a new correct sample, but the SL55 AMG gets the old RS6 one!?
GT4 Golf V GTi using 5/6th as same gear ratio.
GT5P BMW Z4 revving to 7000rpm (mine revs to 6500rpm, hrmm)
Loads of others but I won't go into them.
I can ream off a list of faults in all games, but GT are hardly saints. Their assertion accuracy comes at the cost of time doesn't hold true, and then with that aside, they are just very very slow.
FM3 using old FM2 models for example, is poor, but GT4 did it with GT3 models (Elise S1 stands out like a sore thumb in GT4 for example)
FM3 is pants in many ways, but GT series is also pants in plenty of ways too.
GT2 imho was PD's high point. Since then they have got worse and worse if you ignore the graphics improvements.
I expect great things in GT5, I just hope it's not a repeat of GT3/4 on the ultimate let-down when it finally comes out and gets played. Good, but not epic!
Dave

I agree with you on most if not all you have stated, but, i have played all the latest competition weather it be PC or XBOX and i have played enough of GT5 and GT5 TT to feel as if my bet is safe

 

[myke6699]

It's good that PD has in the past (and perhaps even now) questioned as to whether damage should be apart of a driving game where the main emphasis is the car, how it drives and moves. Anyone who loves cars (not necessarily racing) would understand the dichotomy. I'd find more baffling if the developers emphasis is on the damage rather than the other aspects of driving. To me, it shows that their passion is misplaced.

 

[FLASH48]

The future of Polyphony Digital is bright and shiny in my opinion! If we got everthing we wanted, what would be left for the rest of the Gran Turismo Series! Then somebody would still find something to whine about, which i'm really getting tired of reading! Be happy with what you get, not this kid in a candy store i want i want!!!!

 

[JAGUAR1977]

So a whole new physics model isn't as important as skidmarks?

GT5P perfected the graphics model, and was 80% of the way there on the physics side, a full two years ago.

Skidmarks aren't important as and of themselves, but they are an indicator of wider development issues. An amateur modder would release a skidmark mod within days if GT5 was a PC title, the fact this minor effect has still not been implemented in any GT5 promotional material, whether that be playable demos or videos, is bemusing.

Let's hope PD are holding every new feature and effect back until the full title is shown.

I don't know about anyone else, but after this long wait I am expecting genuinely ground breaking features, just as the original broke new ground with graphics and the amount of content.

 

[Radracing]

It's a demo!!! wait until the full version comes out! oh, wait but those tress?

 

[JAGUAR1977]

It still amazes me that after so many developments and amazing physics brought forward by the GT series, there's always someone whining about lack of skidmarks.

*cue whine about reverse lights*

Tell me something, do you think the inclusion of skidmarks would really add to the whole 'driving experience'? I certainly don't. Same with damage. It's nice they've included it, but if there's anything that detriments the previous installments of GT, damage is NOT one of them. The physics engine for GT5/Prologue seems to be really amazing and that's definitely something I'm looking forward.

Damage? Yeah, alright, that might be cool. But be careful what you wish for! It could be at a point where some idiotic AI bumps into oyu and breaks off a wheel and you're left stranded in the middle of a 24 hour endurance... that would really suck, wouldn't it? Yet, it's realistic damage!

1/ Damage can be turned off.

2/ It can usually be tailored to your individual needs.

3/ The sense of danger and potential damage is fundamental to the way you drive a car, both on the road and on a sanitised race track.

Personally I would charge in game to repair damage, should you select it, and would like to see these statistics logged, it would add another level of realism and challenge.

 

[vigi147]

the day a "western producer" gets to make GT, is the day i'll stop playing new GT's..
yes, we would get skidmarks, reverse lights, leaves falling off trees, those little air freshners hanging from rearview mirrors .. but we would also have a game that would try very hard to target a wider consumer base .. i dont know about you, but i dont need another forza or nfs shift
while i could pretty well be wrong, i still wouldnt want to see for myself.

 

[Radracing]

the day a "western producer" gets to make GT, is the day i'll stop playing new GT's..
yes, we would get skidmarks, reverse lights, leaves falling off trees, those little air freshners hanging from rearview mirrors .. but we would also have a game that would try very hard to target a wider consumer base .. i dont know about you, but i dont need another forza or nfs shift
while i could pretty well be wrong, i still wouldnt want to see for myself.

👍👍👍👍👍

 

[devildog666]

What worries me is the fact that KY is so indecisive. Here's just a few of the things they considered fairly late in the game's development: damage, weather & possibly bikes

I don't know about you, but when you work on a project of this magnitude you better know what you want in it (this is pretty much one of the first things you do) & be focused on meeting those targets. The fact that KY is always "we might add this or that" only several months before the release date gives me impression that they're not really focused.

You sound like you know more about making games than KY, so why don't you go and make a better one.

 

[H20HYBRID_GT]

It's a demo!!! wait until the full version comes out! oh, wait but those tress?

The trees look good ( compared to Prologue ) tho.


I really think they're holding particle effects and other stuff back for final release or a proper demo, in the TT demo the lack of any effects just looks weird in an otherwise brilliant optic. My opinion.