The GT Sport Epic Whining and Crying Thread

  • Thread starter ukfan758
  • 3,198 comments
  • 284,548 views
How can you guess how long each licence ran for or what deals Sony negotiated.
I didn't.
You're trying to say GT6 cost the same or very close to GT5? Really?
Probably not because GT5 was in development for more than 5 years and GT6 only 3. I wouldn't draw any conclusions because we don't have enough information even for educated guessing IMO.
Do you have a link that GT has had 150 people working on GT6 from start to finish? I read GT5 they had to bring in more nearer the end and went 130 or something. Usually they get let go, happens with most games and the core team remain. Care to say what the rest of the budget was in GT6 then?
I've never read anything about staff coming in at the end of GT5, if you have a source I'd like to see it. Even with only 130 staff at $50k/year it's still nearly $20 million in staffing alone for 3 years.

Point is, it when PD has a huge staff, long development times and massive numbers of cars and tracks to license, it doesn't make sense to me that GT and DC would have budgets even remotely close to each other given the huge disparity in all these areas.
 
Do you have a link that PD has had 150 people working on GT6 from start to finish? I read GT5 they had to bring in more nearer the end and went 130 or something.
They had 150 in July of 2011. That was long before they would have thrown the entire team at GT6, since GT5 was still receiving major feature updates and fixes at that point; so yeah, 150 probably isn't a poor estimate of the team size for its development. And that's before they started hiring. And hiring.

Usually they get let go, happens with most games and the core team remain.
That's not in line with PD's purported hiring practices.
 
The thing is, neither of those are really anything to do with Gran Turismo the game. It's Gran Turismo the brand and Kazunori Yamauchi the brand.

Gran Turismo is the only brand big enough to convince manufacturers that it would be worth investing time for the "advertising" exposure that they'd get out of it. Other companies might have tried for all we know, we'd never hear about it if they were refused.

iRacing could have pulled off the FIA thing, but they understandably looked to NASCAR first as that's where they came from.
I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say here.
Surely it is Gran Turismo the game, the success and popularity of the game, that has built the brand.
There would be no brand if the game was a flop.
 
I didn't.
Probably not because GT5 was in development for more than 5 years and GT6 only 3. I wouldn't draw any conclusions because we don't have enough information even for educated guessing IMO.
I've never read anything about staff coming in at the end of GT5, if you have a source I'd like to see it. Even with only 130 staff at $50k/year it's still nearly $20 million in staffing alone for 3 years.

Point is, it when PD has a huge staff, long development times and massive numbers of cars and tracks to license, it doesn't make sense to me that GT and DC would have budgets even remotely close to each other given the huge disparity in all these areas.

You seem to be implying the licenses cost have to all but be reapplied to GT6.

I'll go down this route with you though. Evo was around 55 people, 11 million wage bill, sure I even heard 4 years of dev time for DC when it got revealed? I would think 20 million cost is a conservative guess for a game like DC. Lets go with a generous 50 million for GT6 with GT5 already existing. If we go with a $15 averaged return across every sale, DC is 10 mill profit and GT6 is 25 mill.
 
Never mentioned GT6 though. Just looking at Driveclub.
The conversation was about both. You can't just bring up wanting to look at numbers of Driveclub to determine if 2 million is a meaningless number without doing the same to GT6.
Since you mention GT6, I don't think it cost 60 million like GT5's 60 million+. We can only start pulling numbers out of thin air here so this will go nowhere but I'd guess more like 25-30 for GT6, I can see DC costing 20-30. Game budgets are more like 30-60million now. TR 2013 on PS3/360 cost like 75-100 million, Gears 3 was around 50-60 million according to Sweeney and they didn't want to invest in Gears 4 with potential 100 million cost..
I'd like to see a source stating that game budgets have potentially doubled in 3 years just because they're now on a new generation, please. Quoting huge console-selling franchises such as Tomb Raider & Gears doesn't do much consider these games are like Gran Turismo; they can move copies on name-alone, esp. Gears of War being Microsoft's golden child alongside Halo. I'm also positive Microsoft would have happily dished out $100 million for Gears if they
If we start low balling DC and GT6 for mostly bargain bin returns, using the same average figure you have DC breaking even and GT6 returning 45 million profit so I don't know where you're going and also saying 3 million difference is nothing.
You're basing all this on your figures of games costing $30-60 million & that GT6 and Driveclub had equal budgets.

Based on the budget Sony gave GT5, I highly doubt Sony gave Polyphony the same budget for GT6 as Evolution Studios.
On top of that, I'd also wager maybe that GT6 had more full price sales than a new ip such as Driveclub, even further broadening the gap on return of investment.

Even if I talk silly street on your terms maybe and say GT6 cost 50 million it still brings in 25million.
Please elaborate where you're getting GT6 brought in 25 million.
 
Agree with PD owning EVO instead of Codies doing it would've been better for both, but probably Sony thought that's an expense they don't need.
 
Please elaborate where you're getting GT6 brought in 25 million.
According to this, GT6 sold 4.71 million units.

If we assume every copy of GT6 sold for full sticker price ($60), that's a rough total of approximately $282,600,000. If chromatic's budget estimate is right, he's really lowballing it.
 
According to this, GT6 sold 4.71 million units.

If we assume every copy of GT6 sold for full sticker price ($60), that's a rough total of approximately $282,600,000. If chromatic's budget estimate is right, he's really lowballing it.
I know how many copies they sold & I know he's not just multiplying it by 60 to get his number. He's taking another variable into account as to how GT6 brought in $25 million, whether that's altogether or profits alone.
 
I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say here.
Surely it is Gran Turismo the game, the success and popularity of the game, that has built the brand.
There would be no brand if the game was a flop.

There would be no brand if the first game was a flop. After that it comes down to brand loyalty as much as the quality of the product.

The point is that the involvement of the FIA and VGT partners has nothing to do with how good a game GT is, and everything to do with the fact that it gets a lot of eyeballs. No other game can offer as many eyeballs as GT can, and again that's nothing to do with how good they are as much as it's due to Gran Turismo's pre-built fanbase.

You can build the best new Formula 1 team in the world and stomp everyone for 20 races straight, and there will STILL be a massive crowd of people flocking to cheer for Ferrari.

There's hundreds of very successful franchises and products around the world that started off with a decent product, rode the wave of popularity well and continued to make products that weren't bad enough to drive people away. Polyphony made some very good games once upon a time, but the FIA and VGT partners aren't involved because of GT1 or GT4. They're involved because of GT5, GT6 and GTS, whose major redeeming features to the FIA and VGT partners are...

eyeball-tat-shapes.jpg
 
Fair point.

I would imagine the VGT and FIA projects came about near the end of, or following GT5.
And despite the moans, groans, and complaints here, GT5 is the 2nd best selling Gran Turismo game.

So on that front, PD had more capital to sell than just 'old' brand value.
 
Fair point.

I would imagine the VGT and FIA projects came about near the end of, or following GT5.
And despite the moans, groans, and complaints here, GT5 is the 2nd best selling Gran Turismo game.

So on that front, PD had more capital to sell than just 'old' brand value.

Gran Turismo 5 was a very odd situation with a huge gap from the last full iteration, a highly successful prologue which wasn't actually indicative of the final game, some fairly misleading information coming up to it and a generally ridiculous level of consumer hype.

But as we've been through with GT5 and GT6, high sales does not necessarily equate to a high quality product. NFS is the highest selling racing game in the world. McDonalds is the best selling food chain. Are these companies that produce consistently good products? Or do they simply produce products that are acceptable, and market them under a well known and very successful brand name?

There's a difference between selling a popular product and selling a good product, especially in an age where sales are so easily influenced by massive marketing campaigns. If we look at critical response, GT5 and 6 are significantly the worst full titles in the series. Hence the distinction between a good game and a good brand. A good brand can sell even when the product is not particularly good.

Which is the worry that many people have, that Polyphony has realised this and are coasting on their laurels, cashing in their good will. Since GT4 the games have been unspectacular, and even GT4s redeeming feature was arguably sheer size more than anything else.
 
Another good post.
You do put forward your points very well.

I did ask. :lol:

I still feel you're dismissing the influence 'the game' had in the sales pitch too lightly.
But with respect to what you meant regarding 'game' vs 'brand' I completely see where you're coming from.
 
I still feel you're dismissing the influence 'the game' had in the sales pitch too lightly.

I don't think that the sales and marketing manager at the FIA, or at Mercedes, is particularly interested in the quality of the game. I'd be surprised if many of them have played it. I suppose they do care, but probably only to the extent that they don't want to be associated with a poor quality product. But mostly they care about perception and numbers. As long as Joe Public thinks it's good and buys it, that's their job done.

There's also the likelihood that Kaz's personal influence may have had quite a lot to do with it, which was why I mentioned the "Kazunori Yamauchi" brand. Kaz is kind of well known, he probably knows a lot of people directly and others probably know of him indirectly. He certainly has relationships with several major car manufacturers, and once you've got a few on board for something like the VGT program it's probably not hard to convince more than they need to keep up with the Joneses.

When the pitch is "We're adding fantasy cars to our multi-million selling racing game. We've already got Nissan, Volkswagen, Ford and BMW on board. All you have to do is give us you design. You want in?" it's probably not that hard to get them to say yes.

The FIA thing is probably more based on history, simply because it probably sprung from the GT Academy. Relationships develop as these gamer-turned-racers make their way onto the scene, and eventually Kaz and Jean Todt are drunk in a titty bar one night and Kaz is telling him about his next great plan.

I suppose now that I think about it, that's probably more or less how it came about, so it's certainly more about the game in that instance. Had Gran Turismo not done GTA, it probably wouldn't have happened. Or at least would have been much harder. iRacing is the only other game that can sensibly claim a link to real motorsport and motorsport bodies, but they could never give the FIA the level of publicity that they would probably want.
 
What i dont Like about GTS right now?
VGT... In a game focused about Racing cars organized in various Series there should not be place For fictional prototypes...

Overall GTS seems to me just a revamped GT6 For PS4...
Too Little Too late...

IMHO
 
You want to play with all the legendary Gran Turismo cars from your childhood? GTO, Supra, NSX, Corvette Grand Sport...
Go play Forza!

To be fair, everyone should know by now this won't be the typical GT game, it's the watered-down Esports title in the series.
 
To be fair, everyone should know by now this won't be the typical GT game, it's the watered-down Esports title in the series.
I know there are a lot of people hyped up here and some not so much, but I can't help but feel like GT Sport is going to be the PS4 version of Forza 5. A reboot of the series that doesn't sell as well as previous big sellers in the series with a much smaller car and track list and a sharper focus. I think a lot of people are going to buy this game just because it's GT, get it home and be wondering where the career is and where all the cars and tracks are.
 
I know there are a lot of people hyped up here and some not so much, but I can't help but feel like GT Sport is going to be the PS4 version of Forza 5. A reboot of the series that doesn't sell as well as previous big sellers in the series with a much smaller car and track list and a sharper focus. I think a lot of people are going to buy this game just because it's GT, get it home and be wondering where the career is and where all the cars and tracks are.

Sucks to be the man who didn't do his research.
 
Forza 5 was a launch title. If GTsport was a side project like Tourist Trophy on PS2, no problem. But this is their main project after almost 3 years. How a valuable brand like Gran Turismo can be so mismanaged?!

Sport is a side project, it'll be treated like a service/platform for ESports, while GT7 is in development. Try giving a studio with 100 employees two games to work with.
 
Sport is a side project, it'll be treated like a service/platform for ESports, while GT7 is in development. Try giving a studio with 100 employees two games to work with.
Plus PSVR and PS4 neo... I'm a simple consumer : where is my usual GT? Poly is not a indie studio, they have money and their boss is a vice president of Sony Computer. No outsourcing but we stay small?!
 
Sport is a side project, it'll be treated like a service/platform for ESports, while GT7 is in development. Try giving a studio with 100 employees two games to work with.
Odd that Kaz said he could easily have called it GT7 then. How about a studio with 150 employees then?
 
Sport is a side project, it'll be treated like a service/platform for ESports, while GT7 is in development. Try giving a studio with 100 employees two games to work with.
Perhaps they shouldn't have charged full price for it or said in interviews that it could be treated as if it was called a full title in the series; or possibly even released it a bit sooner than 3 years after the console it was on launched as the first game in the series.
 
Perhaps they shouldn't have charged full price for it or said in interviews that it could been treated as if it was called a full title in the series; or possibly even released it a bit sooner than 3 years after the console it was on launched as the first game in the series.

If you don't like that it's full price, then wait to get it used like I will. Assetto Corsa and Project Cars are both fine games, and I plan on picking up AC when it hits PS4 on launch.
 
That doesn't really mean anything. I'm not going to get it at all. It still remains that the past three years of work (since they certainly weren't throwing their weight behind GT6 like they did for GT5), and potentially/probably (so as to not cut the legs off of it immediately) the only GT game for the next year or more, appears to amount to a cut down spin-off game with less stuff in it than a launch title from its nearest competitor from three years ago; and a bunch of eerily similar excuses from PD to defend its cool reception to the ones that amounted to nothing when GT6 actually launched. Based on the mixed reactions what they've actually shown, and the complete mess that the game's prerelease stream has been to this point, mismanaged seems to be a good word on it so far.
 
With so many things not making it in to this game, if gts comes out on release day in anything less than perfect, perfect as in no fps drops, no shimmering and flickering (ahem GT6 ), no disappointing livery editor, no said features missing, how many gt defenders will have the audacity to defend PD?

They will defend
Don't forget the thread was NOT made by someone wanting to whine and cry, it was made by someone not happy what they perceived to be whining and crying was happening in the general thread. It may never have existed if it weren't for people that can't bear to see criticism in the other threads and think it has to be shoehorned into it's own one.

These threads always seem to be more popular that the positive counterpart. That alone is a very powerful fact. One that no GT defender can ignore.

GT needed a serious overhaul. This was their chance.... I think they've blown it big time.

Like most here I have spent hours, days, weeks, months and years playing GT games. I was a real GT loyalist. I wouldn't dare look at anything else.... As I got older I started to recognise flaws. I became more open minded and willing to try other titles. Then project cars came around.... This game stunned me. I hadnt been this excited about a sim in years... It was everything I wanted GT to be and more. And apart from one or two bugs, it delivered. The developers of PC realised the was an opportunity to bring a more authentic sim to console. And took it. All the while I'm thinking hmmmm I wonder what PD have in-store? Can they at least match what Slightly Mad have achieved?

Anyway, I think k I may have given up on console Sims for good. I'm have way to much fun with titles like iracing, raceroom and assetto corsa.
 
Back