Why doesn`t PD get the credit they deserve from Sony?

[1241Penguin]

Dude can you at least bold the whole part? Please tell me how that implies out sourcing is wrong?

My point still stands. But, let's move on from that...

Again There is no need for outsourcing, expand within the team and get the job done right so you never have to go back and re do it. Keep trying. 👍

You're right, there is no need for outsourcing if you are willing to wait for about, what, 15 years for all cars to become Premium.

 

[CorvetteConquer]

My point still stands. But, let's move on from that...

You're right, there is no need for outsourcing if you are willing to wait for about, what, 15 years for all cars to become Premium.

This.

Out of GT5's 1000+ cars, there are 13 street cars from 2010.

Only 13. And two are not even production (FT-86 Concept and Spoon CR-Z)

It's now 2012. Talk about a backlog list! We haven't even mentioned absent manufacturers.

 

[Santos i7]

his "valid points" are just his opinions, as he stated. For example he thinks GT5's sound is good (#69) and that outsourcing means doing work wrongly (#65).

Exactly. Just like everything you're saying about Forza being better than GT5 is YOUR opinion. But you don't see him sitting here calling you names. Next time you resort to childish behavior like that, think over why you're calling them that, and make sure you aren't doing the same thing yourself.

In the end, no game is overall better than the other. They both have their highs and lows. It's just a matter of which you prefer.

 

[Scaff]

Not exactly. I'm not saying it's a good thing. One big example: I'd prefer if GT5 has Top Gear soccer even though I won't use it, others will. iRacing, it's not a "true" game TO ME, because it's missing the gamey aspects that other car games have. When comparing that to the GT series, you can say GT is more of a game. iRacing focuses on race cars while GT is more about normal road cars.

I see what you are saying, I just don't agree.

If GT did focus on just the racing (and had no gamey aspects) then it would have practice, qualifying, flags and 'real' rules, race series with some semblance of sanity in car choice and certainly wouldn't have the licence tests that exists for no reason and the level and unlock system, not to mention the likes of the Top Gear challenges.

The claim you make about not having 'gamey' aspects could be applied to the likes of RacePro or RBR, but not the GT series, Forza, etc, all of which have these 'gamey' elements to them.

Not that I think its bad at all, a quite active discussion has taken place over at Forza Planet regarding the status of GT and FM as racing games at all. Are they in fact 'sandbox' games that allow us to play with cars in a variety fo different ways, some of which (Photomode in both and livery editor in FM) don't involve racing at all. I can quite clearly recall that with both GT3 and GT4 the racing side of things was very secondary for me, with the bulk of my time being spent tuning and hotlaping.

Making valid points does not make someone a fanboy. That term is tossed around way too much. You're on GTPlanet. What did you expect to happen?

The term is not permitted here full stop, however in regard to expecting this because its GT Planet. Well that's not the case, GT Planet may have started life (a long time ago) as a GT board, but it is so much more now and as you explore the vast range of subjects it covers you will quickly find that. As an example, all of the staff came here for GT, a number now don't game and for some that do GT is no longer the top console sim.

At GT Planet you can expect a lot more than blind GT adoration.

 

[FlyinHawaiian77]

The numbers speak for themselves really. You dont need to advertise for a game that sells so well. Instead focus that attention somewhere else. Try to get one of your other franchises to build its reputation.

Thats exactly what MS did with Forza. They wanted to take down a giant. So they put together a team that was bigger and threw a bunch of money behind it.

 

[analog]

outsourcing can work, though as mentioned by carracerptp, it depends on the fidelity demanded. As long as standards were laid down before work began, and solid QA was practiced, it could work well for PD. Furthermore, since Sony does obviously still support PD quite generously, it's not outside the realm of possibility. Though I can't argue with PD's recent hiring spree, since they are admittedly very good at what they do. I think we all agree that content creation speed is what needs to be improved, and I don't mind either approach if it means that gets addressed.

I doubt whether outsourcing will at all times even risk the quality of production, that obviously depends on who you're outsourcing to as there's a lot of talent not working at PD who can do exactly the same thing, given that they sing from the same songbook (which needs to be organized and structured).
Some things are ofcourse easier to outsource as the quality isn't as closely scrutinized as high-quality videogame content and corners can be cut without most even noticing (corners cut to cut costs) but outsourcing in this example might not be to cut costs but to save time.

But, and I'm not talking about the Standard/Premium divide, there's already a difference in quality apparent in the current Premium selection.
Mostly noticeable in cockpit view (some exteriors too though), some cars are exquisitely detailed whilst others have sections which appear like simple textures, then there's the difference in FOV (some cars look smaller or bigger in chase cam than most) which is another annoying inconsistency.
Assuming all have been done by PD themselves (perhaps by different teams), the issue might not be outsourcing itself but the definition of what to achieve.

If it's hard to even achieve consistency inhouse, then yes, outsourcing might be a nightmare but it needn't be if the goals are clearly defined.
Still, I doubt this is the main concern, I have a feeling it's a cultural (as in company culture) thing that prevents them from outsourcing.
However, if they can achieve the same by hiring more staff, who cares?

 

[JackC8]

For any normal business, achieving a level of financial success and hiring more people to meet the greater demands placed on you is not only perfectly normal - it's cause for celebration. But as with so many other things, PD's refusal to expand to meet the greater demands of the PS3 vs. the PS2 is just beyond comprehension. They've certainly got the money - the second highest budget of any game released at the time. Yet...here we are with one game in 6 years and absolutely no news whatsoever of any more.

Utterly astonishing. Not only that this is the way they choose to conduct business, but that Sony allows them to. Their stock is at a 32 year low and here they are saying "That's fine if you don't feel like making any more games."

 

[Tenacious D]

Uh how could you possibly play FM4 back in 2010 when it was a 2011 release...? This makes me feel that once again from you, you're just saying things to cast a greater light on GT5.

Eh, I was dead tired last night and was considering firing up some hockey to keep me entertained until bedtime, but I finally gave in and hit the sack. I basically came in here to see if amar212 was on - he's giving me some foreign language help for a few novels I'm fussing with, and decided to peek in and see what the kids were doing. Obviously arguing as usual.

The fact that I forgot that FM4 is only a few months old is evidence both of how tired I was, and how important that game series has become to me. And if it annoys you that some people prefer other racers to Forza, or don't like it at all, oh well. I find it quite strange that people will join GT Planet simply to talk it down, but what the heck. That's the net for you.

...But as with so many other things, PD's refusal to expand to meet the greater demands of the PS3 vs. the PS2 is just beyond comprehension. They've certainly got the money - the second highest budget of any game released at the time. Yet...here we are with one game in 6 years and absolutely no news whatsoever of any more...

I think you're unaware of a couple of things.

• Polyphony Digital is wholly owned by SONY Computer Entertainment.
• SONY isn't rolling in money. In fact, it's suffering from losses overall.

But since someone mentioned that PD has been hiring, maybe we should both see about that before making sweeping statements.

 

[Scaff]

I think you're unaware of a couple of things.

• Polyphony Digital is wholly owned by SONY Computer Entertainment.
• SONY isn't rolling in money. In fact, it's suffering from losses overall.

But since someone mentioned that PD has been hiring, maybe we should both see about that before making sweeping statements.

We have been down this route before and as such I'm a little disappointed you are still misrepresenting this information.

Sony have suffered losses this year that is without a doubt true, however as a business they have more than enough money.

You seem to forget that this is not the first time we have been down this route, as you quite clearly have still not got to grips with how operating profit, P&L and cash flow differ:

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=6458974#post6458974
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=6462941#post6462941
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=6463735#post6463735
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=6464048#post6464048
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=6471512#post6471512

You remember the thread is which Sony's financial statements clearly show that they have $9 billion dollars in cash/cash equivalent assets and pre-authorised credit lines for another $9 billion and you then accused them of making the numbers up and committing wholesale fraud.

As such please don't resort to this totally misleading approach again, as that $820 million could be covered by less than a tenth of its overall cash assets without even having to bother creditors.

If this situation continues at the same level for another 5 or so years and then you may have a point, right now you don't.


Edited to add:
Oh wait just rechecked Sony's latest financial statement and I was wrong:

Total Cash and Cash Equivalents: Accounting for the above factors and the effect of fluctuations in exchange rates, the total outstanding balance of cash and cash equivalents at March 31, 2012 was 894.6 billion yen (10,909 million U.S. dollars). Cash and cash equivalents of all segments excluding the Financial Services segment was 719.4 billion yen (8,773 million U.S. dollars) at March 31, 2012, a decrease of 128.0 billion yen, or 15.1%, compared with the balance as of March 31, 2011. This was an increase of 87.8 billion yen, or 13.9%, compared with the balance as of December 31, 2011. Sony believes it continues to maintain sufficient liquidity through access to a total, translated into yen, of 771.7 billion yen (9,411 million U.S. dollars) of unused committed lines of credit with financial institutions.

Source - http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/11q4_sony.pdf

So they now have $10.9 billion dollars in Cash/Cash Equivalents and $9.4 billion in unused approved credit (and these are after the above losses).

 

[Samus]

Jesus, I can't believe he's going back to that argument again. I remember it last time, it didn't end well for him and it won't this time.

 

[Santos i7]

The term is not permitted here full stop, however in regard to expecting this because its GT Planet. Well that's not the case, GT Planet may have started life (a long time ago) as a GT board, but it is so much more now and as you explore the vast range of subjects it covers you will quickly find that. As an example, all of the staff came here for GT, a number now don't game and for some that do GT is no longer the top console sim.

Yes, but there's no denying that a large portion of the site is still devoted to the franchise, and we are in the GT5 section of the site right now, but when someone defended the game he acted like he wasn't expecting it, and started calling JDMKing names. I just found that a bit ridiculous.

 

[Tyger]

Scaff, whilst i'm quite happy that your figures are correct, in fairness Tenacious D said "it's suffering from losses overall", to which you replied "Sony have suffered losses this year that is without a doubt true", so unless we over-analyse his use of the word "overall", you are both agreeing that Sony is currently suffering losses. Tenacious never said (in this thread at least) that it is unable to absorb those losses. Not taking sides, just sayin'

Rewinding back to the OP, coming into this afresh, I am reminded of recently discovering (bit late to the party here) that the director of The Last Guardian is no longer employed by Sony, as of the end of last year. Whilst on a kinda selfish level this bothers me as the game as a result seems to be in some sort of development limbo, possibly never to see the light of day, I do wonder if these developers on Sony's payroll can sometimes be a little...unproductive, shall we say.

Some may argue that perfectionism leads to better product, but personally I believe perfectionism can often be to the detriment of the end product, if indeed it ever gets out there, and productivity as a whole. In these times I think within Sony, all eyes are on the developers they are effectively bankrolling, and like it or not, developers like Turn 10 seem to have a much clearer idea about how to keep their product fresh, and keep the wheels of development rolling, whilst maintaining a high level of quality control.

 

[TomBrady]

To answer the OP's question,

The vast majority of the gaming population both casual and hardcore don't care much for racing games. Sure its hard to believe on a site like this but those sales figures are not at the levels things like FPS' generate. Black Ops had 25 million sales from one game! and they come out every year! Sony will put all its effort into promoting action genres like that.

Its my personal experience but most of the guys I know in the real world don't ever play racing games, one tried GT4 once thought it was too hard and boring and never touched it again, that's the usual response GT gets from most gamers I know.

I do agree however that Sony should put more staff into PD, they take forever to dev a GT because they only have like 100 workers which is ridiculous.

This.

This is how it is in America, and it's the reason why Sony doesn't support PD.

Most gamers don't have interest in racing games anymore. 7-10 years ago, racing games were still big, then Halo came along, and then CoD, and killed it off. It really didn't help at all that it took a few years for GT5 to come out. If they somehow made GT5 a launch title, or maybe even released it a year after launch, I guarantee, the state of the racing game industry would be MUCH stronger than it is right now.

Just look at your sales numbers.

GT5 is 5 million times a better game than any of the other GT's, yet it's back of the pack as far as sales.

And frankly, the only reason why GT5 even sold that much is because of the fact that Europe is filled with people that are intelligent enough to buy it instead of the bunch comformist gamers in America that only play what gets the most advertisement or buzz, instead of having an open mind and playing what's good. Plus of course, racing is much bigger in Europe in general.

Sure, the south in America is still into racing, but they're a little different.

It's because racing games aren't popular enough anymore, because the industry is filled with little kids that forgot how cool cars are.

Worst part is, half of them think that burnout is a racing game, hahaha it's more of a bad joke than anything.

 

[Scaff]

Yes, but there's no denying that a large portion of the site is still devoted to the franchise, and we are in the GT5 section of the site right now, but when someone defended the game he acted like he wasn't expecting it, and started calling JDMKing names. I just found that a bit ridiculous.

At which point he should have used the report button and let the staff deal with it.

Scaff, whilst i'm quite happy that your figures are correct, in fairness Tenacious D said "it's suffering from losses overall", to which you replied "Sony have suffered losses this year that is without a doubt true", so unless we over-analyse his use of the word "overall", you are both agreeing that Sony is currently suffering losses. Tenacious never said (in this thread at least) that it is unable to absorb those losses. Not taking sides, just sayin'

If you only look at that one section of TD's post then yes, however if you look at it all:

...But as with so many other things, PD's refusal to expand to meet the greater demands of the PS3 vs. the PS2 is just beyond comprehension. They've certainly got the money - the second highest budget of any game released at the time. Yet...here we are with one game in 6 years and absolutely no news whatsoever of any more...

I think you're unaware of a couple of things.

• Polyphony Digital is wholly owned by SONY Computer Entertainment.
• SONY isn't rolling in money. In fact, it's suffering from losses overall.

But since someone mentioned that PD has been hiring, maybe we should both see about that before making sweeping statements.

TD is quite clearly saying more than that. That the reason why Sony are not investing in PD (which again is not true as they have set-up a new office and hired more staff) is because "SONY isn't rolling in money".

The have more cash and credit lines now than they did when they bought Erikksonn last year for $800 million (and they suffered bigger losses that year), so they only part he is right about is the losses. On his actual point, that Sony don't have money to invest in PD he is totally wrong for two reasons.

1. Sony have plenty of money to invest if they wish
2. Sony ARE investing in PD

GT5 is 5 million times a better game than any of the other GT's, yet it's back of the pack as far as sales.

In your opinion.

I've been a GT fan from day one and in my opinion GT5 is easily the poorest title in the entire series.

Worst part is, half of them think that burnout is a racing game, hahaha it's more of a bad joke than anything.

Burnout is a racing game, its not a sim, but that doesn't stop it being a racing game at all.

Hell Mario Kart is a racing game, that its an arcade racing game doesn't stop it being enjoyable and doesn't hurt sim racers at all.

Those who buy sims are not going to stop buying them because of arcade racers and those who only buy arcade racers would not by a sim as an alternative.

If anything arcade racers like Burnout can act as a gateway into an interest in cars and as such are far from a problem.

 

[TomBrady]

In your opinion.

I've been a GT fan from day one and in my opinion GT5 is easily the poorest title in the entire series.

I'm not sure how you can justify that. GT5 has everything the previous GT has and then some, plus it also does the most important aspects much better than any previous GT. The only thing it's missing is maybe the sheer amount of a spec events, but really that's negated by the seasonals in my opinion.

Plus it's not like GT5 has no a spec events.

To me the combination of the physics being leaps and bounds better than the previous GT titles, the ridiculous amount of replayability it has in comparison, the updated graphics, content, and functionality, and even just the little things like adjustable HUD, cockpit view, and custom soundtracks just push GT5 way over the other GT titles. Not to mention the course maker, which is possibly the most innovative feature put into a console sim in recent memory. Plus, the AI is better, the sound is better, (both of which receive a lot of deserved criticism, but still were an improvement) and another very important aspect racing is physical damage, which we now have.

Another disadvantage GT5 has over previous GT's, is it's definitely less consistent or polished (jagged shadows, 2D Forests on Deep Forest, Trial Mountain, standard cars, crappy visual damage) but I really can't see how that makes it any worse considering the graphics are still a massive improvement and there was no visual damage in the first place. Plus what really matters is the physics, and I don't think anyone would try to argue that the physics aren't better.

Expectations should not be a factor here, but they are.

I think the only reason people are down on GT5 is they expected more from it, and maybe a little nostalgia but that has nothing to do with the quality of the game. The fact is although there were some things to be disappointed about with GT5, but that doesn't change the fact that is a better game. You can call this an opinion but it's more than that because I can quantify why it's better, and what it has that the previous GT's don't have.

Really I can't see any quantifiable reason that anyone could see GT5 is even not the best GT, let alone the worst. The only reasons I've heard from people that say it's not the best have more to do with their own emotions than the actual game.

I'm pretty sure the reason you think it's the worst has a lot to do with the fact that you've been a fan since GT1.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm just about 100% positive that if you took someone who has never heard of GT, and let them play all 5 games, in any order, that there's no way they wouldn't think GT5's the best. Why? Because they wouldn't have expectations that weren't met, or reasons to be disappointed, or memories of getting more enjoyment out of a previous GT. They would just easily see the huge differences, improvements, and advantages it really does have over previous GT's.

I don't expect to convince anyone to change their mind, but I hope they will at least be open to the idea that their emotions maybe clouding their judgement. Not to say emotions don't matter, but they do not effect the quality of a sim, neither do opinions. The sim is what it is, no matter how you perceive it, and this game is the best in the series.

 

[JDMKING13]

I'm not sure how you can justify that. GT5 has everything the previous GT has and then some, plus it also does the most important aspects much better than any previous GT. The only thing it's missing is maybe the sheer amount of a spec events, but really that's negated by the seasonals in my opinion.

Plus it's not like GT5 has no a spec events.

To me the combination of the physics being leaps and bounds better than the previous GT titles, the ridiculous amount of replayability it has in comparison, the updated graphics, content, and functionality, and even just the little things like adjustable HUD, cockpit view, and custom soundtracks just push GT5 way over the other GT titles. Not to mention the course maker, which is possibly the most innovative feature put into a console sim in recent memory. Plus, the AI is better, the sound is better, (both of which receive a lot of deserved criticism, but still were an improvement) and another very important aspect racing is physical damage, which we now have.

Another disadvantage GT5 has over previous GT's, is it's definitely less consistent or polished (jagged shadows, 2D Forests on Deep Forest, Trial Mountain, standard cars, crappy visual damage) but I really can't see how that makes it any worse considering the graphics are still a massive improvement and there was no visual damage in the first place. Plus what really matters is the physics, and I don't think anyone would try to argue that the physics aren't better.

Expectations should not be a factor here, but they are.

I think the only reason people are down on GT5 is they expected more from it, and maybe a little nostalgia but that has nothing to do with the quality of the game. The fact is although there were some things to be disappointed about with GT5, but that doesn't change the fact that is a better game. You can call this an opinion but it's more than that because I can quantify why it's better, and what it has that the previous GT's don't have.

Really I can't see any quantifiable reason that anyone could see GT5 is even not the best GT, let alone the worst. The only reasons I've heard from people that say it's not the best have more to do with their own emotions than the actual game.

I'm pretty sure the reason you think it's the worst has a lot to do with the fact that you've been a fan since GT1.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm just about 100% positive that if you took someone who has never heard of GT, and let them play all 5 games, in any order, that there's no way they wouldn't think GT5's the best. Why? Because they wouldn't have expectations that weren't met, or reasons to be disappointed, or memories of getting more enjoyment out of a previous GT. They would just easily see the huge differences, improvements, and advantages it really does have over previous GT's.

I don't expect to convince anyone to change their mind, but I hope they will at least be open to the idea that their emotions maybe clouding their judgement. Not to say emotions don't matter, but they do not effect the quality of a sim, neither do opinions. The sim is what it is, no matter how you perceive it, and this game is the best in the series.

Damn great post Brady! I get criticize all the time for calling GT5 the best GT I have played. I agree with you 100%.

 

[Samus]

I'm not sure how you can justify that. GT5 has everything the previous GT has and then some,

No it doesn't, as you admit below.

plus it also does the most important aspects much better than any previous GT. The only thing it's missing is maybe the sheer amount of a spec events, but really that's negated by the seasonals in my opinion.

I don't see how they can be, when they're mostly the same and not one of them is a race.

Plus it's not like GT5 has no a spec events.

No, but it doesn't have many.

To me the combination of the physics being leaps and bounds better than the previous GT titles, the ridiculous amount of replayability it has in comparison, the updated graphics, content, and functionality, and even just the little things like adjustable HUD, cockpit view, and custom soundtracks just push GT5 way over the other GT titles.

Physics I will give you but content certainly not.

Not to mention the course maker, which is possibly the most innovative feature put into a console sim in recent memory.

Seriously? Are you seriously suggesting this to be the case?

Plus, the AI is better, the sound is better, (both of which receive a lot of deserved criticism, but still were an improvement) and another very important aspect racing is physical damage, which we now have.

It's highly debatably that the AI is better than previous games, the sounds have also barely improved. Physical damage is so poor it doesn't add anything to the game.

Another disadvantage GT5 has over previous GT's, is it's definitely less consistent or polished (jagged shadows, 2D Forests on Deep Forest, Trial Mountain, standard cars, crappy visual damage) but I really can't see how that makes it any worse considering the graphics are still a massive improvement

Because when I played a PS1 game, I expected PS1 quality. Same for PS2, and now for PS3. I haven't got that across the board with GT5.

I think the only reason people are down on GT5 is they expected more from it, and maybe a little nostalgia but that has nothing to do with the quality of the game. The fact is although there were some things to be disappointed about with GT5, but that doesn't change the fact that is a better game. You can call this an opinion but it's more than that because I can quantify why it's better, and what it has that the previous GT's don't have.

Which is what? What does GT5 have the previous games didn't that make it better?

I'm pretty sure the reason you think it's the worst has a lot to do with the fact that you've been a fan since GT1.

Because we played them all, you mean?

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm just about 100% positive that if you took someone who has never heard of GT, and let them play all 5 games, in any order, that there's no way they wouldn't think GT5's the best. Why? Because they wouldn't have expectations that weren't met, or reasons to be disappointed, or memories of getting more enjoyment out of a previous GT. They would just easily see the huge differences, improvements, and advantages it really does have over previous GT's.

Well that isn't a fair way to do it, is it? They have to play them in the same order we did to get a true opinion, but even then it's not fair because they don't have the wait between them, and aren't going to have started out with PS1 graphics.

I don't expect to convince anyone to change their mind, but I hope they will at least be open to the idea that their emotions maybe clouding their judgement. Not to say emotions don't matter, but they do not effect the quality of a sim, neither do opinions. The sim is what it is, no matter how you perceive it, and this game is the best in the series.

This game, bar the physics doesn't do anything more 'sim' than the previous games. Yes the physics are very important, but there still needs to be a good game around it, and GT5 doesn't have as good as a game as the previous titles.

 

[Scaff]

I'm not sure how you can justify that. GT5 has everything the previous GT has and then some, plus it also does the most important aspects much better than any previous GT. The only thing it's missing is maybe the sheer amount of a spec events, but really that's negated by the seasonals in my opinion.

Plus it's not like GT5 has no a spec events.

I'm quite sure I can justify it, mainly because as its my opinion the only person I have to justify it to is myself. However I will expand.

The main thing that GT5 is missing from the past titles is consistency, we have a game that has a split in the car and track roster in a massive way. So yes 20% of the cars look amazing inside and out, but 80% don't, and its a similar story for the tracks. This has never been the case in any past title, however that's a minor point for me (but not for many).

The A-spec list is down on past titles and no the seasonals do not negate that at all, they are little more than time trials with rolling obstacles. What GT5 misses is a good count of actual races.

To me the combination of the physics being leaps and bounds better than the previous GT titles, the ridiculous amount of replayability it has in comparison, the updated graphics, content, and functionality, and even just the little things like adjustable HUD, cockpit view, and custom soundtracks just push GT5 way over the other GT titles. Not to mention the course maker, which is possibly the most innovative feature put into a console sim in recent memory. Plus, the AI is better, the sound is better, (both of which receive a lot of deserved criticism, but still were an improvement) and another very important aspect racing is physical damage, which we now have.

Now we get onto some of the core here.

The physics are not leaps and bounds better than previous titles, rather some of the old issues from past titles in the series are still present, with a poor tyre model and suspension modeling that seems stuck in GT4. Not only has it not moved things forward dramatically here at all, but its now lagging behind most of the other sims on the market. For that matter its still behind a couple of PS2 sims in regard to certain areas of the physics model.

The course maker is nice, but its certainly not revolutionary (V Rally 2 actually did better back on the PS1 in terms of options and features) and it still doesn't allow us to create point to point events ourselelves, despite quite clearly being able to.

Sound (always a weak point of the series) still is poor and the physical damage is a nice addition, when you can use it.

Another disadvantage GT5 has over previous GT's, is it's definitely less consistent or polished (jagged shadows, 2D Forests on Deep Forest, Trial Mountain, standard cars, crappy visual damage) but I really can't see how that makes it any worse considering the graphics are still a massive improvement and there was no visual damage in the first place. Plus what really matters is the physics, and I don't think anyone would try to argue that the physics aren't better.

The physics are better if you only use the GT series as a bench mark, but they are not cutting it in the market place today and you can't gloss over the issues that GT5 has visually and more importantly how that can affect the frame rate.

The frame rate in GT5 can drop to sub 30fps once you throw in rain and a busy grid, which is simply unacceptable in a racing sim for me.

We also have issues with tuning settings being backwards and the degree of adjustablity not having improved over past releases, hell we couldn't even change gear ratios for the first six months it was out.

We have licence tests that do nothing.

We have an arcade side that feels totally disjointed from the rest of the game.

Expectations should not be a factor here, but they are.

Why shouldn't they be, if they are based on expectations that PD lead people to have.

I think the only reason people are down on GT5 is they expected more from it, and maybe a little nostalgia but that has nothing to do with the quality of the game. The fact is although there were some things to be disappointed about with GT5, but that doesn't change the fact that is a better game. You can call this an opinion but it's more than that because I can quantify why it's better, and what it has that the previous GT's don't have.

You can put together a feature list of all the things that GT5 has that past titles in the series didn't have, and I can put together a list of things that past titles did better than GT5 does.

They are still no more than opinions, you can't tell me that I'm wrong in thinking that GT5 is the weakest title in the series, because it my opinion.

Really I can't see any quantifiable reason that anyone could see GT5 is even not the best GT, let alone the worst. The only reasons I've heard from people that say it's not the best have more to do with their own emotions than the actual game.

An increased feature count doesn't equal a better game, if people don't find them well implemented and poorly designed then they are not a plus but a negative.

I'm pretty sure the reason you think it's the worst has a lot to do with the fact that you've been a fan since GT1.

Why?

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm just about 100% positive that if you took someone who has never heard of GT, and let them play all 5 games, in any order, that there's no way they wouldn't think GT5's the best. Why? Because they wouldn't have expectations that weren't met, or reasons to be disappointed, or memories of getting more enjoyment out of a previous GT. They would just easily see the huge differences, improvements, and advantages it really does have over previous GT's.

What if I only showed them a standard track with standard cars and then demo'd GT5 to them?

What if they wanted to drive a current generation car in GT5, the list of 2012 models is not exactly strong is it?

What if I had to explain the reason why the interior of a standard car looks the way it does?

I don't expect to convince anyone to change their mind, but I hope they will at least be open to the idea that their emotions maybe clouding their judgement. Not to say emotions don't matter, but they do not effect the quality of a sim, neither do opinions. The sim is what it is, no matter how you perceive it, and this game is the best in the series.

I find it odd that you decry opinions and then finish your post with one.

GT5 may well have the largest car count and feature count in a GT title, but that doesn't mean its the best at all. Personally in terms of overall quality (consistency) handling model (for its age) and feature count I would still go with GT4 and even that had issues. However those issues are not on the scale of the ones GT5 has.

GT5 is for me a jack of all trades, and most certainly not a master of any of them. In trying to throw so many features at GT5, all PD ended up doing is loosing focus on the whole and as a result its a miss-mash of ideas that don't gel and are often not well implemented.

 

[omgitsbees]

Gran Turismo 5 (7.43 million) (Best Selling PS3 game)
Gran Turismo 5 Prologue (5.34 million) (2nd best selling PS3 game)
Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec (14.89 million) (2nd best selling PS2 game, IIRC the PS2 sales went up alot when this game released, like a second launch)
Gran Turismo 4 (11.44 million) (3rd best selling PS2 game)
Gran Turismo (10.85 million shipped) (Best selling PS1 game)
Gran Turismo 2 (9.37 million shipped) (3rd best selling PS1 game)

I look at these numbers and I see continued decline in the quality of Polyphony Digital. GT5 is the lowest selling and rated of the core Gran Turismo series.

 

[gordogg24p]

I look at these numbers and I see continued decline in the quality of Polyphony Digital. GT5 is the lowest selling and rated of the core Gran Turismo series.

You don't see the rise of gaming? I look at it as GT no longer being the only racer that tries to define itself as a sim; GT simply didn't have the competition that it does now, and that's not limited to just racing games. There are so many more titles with so much more replay value with the rise of online gaming this generation.

 

[Scaff]

I look at these numbers and I see continued decline in the quality of Polyphony Digital. GT5 is the lowest selling and rated of the core Gran Turismo series.

You don't see the rise of gaming? I look at it as GT no longer being the only racer that tries to define itself as a sim; GT simply didn't have the competition that it does now, and that's not limited to just racing games. There are so many more titles with so much more replay value with the rise of online gaming this generation.

Alone the sales numbers provide proof of nothing apart from how many copies each GT has sold.

Nothing more and nothing less.

 

[TwIsTeD_83]

I agree with Tom.GT 5 is for me BY FAR the best entry in the series.
It's handling model and online portion does it for me.
Single player is weak I agree,I would probably abandoned the game in the first 2 weeks if it didn't have online.
But it's all about online competition these days guys.Anyway to each their own.

 

[CSLACR]

I agree with Tom.GT 5 is for me BY FAR the best entry in the series.
It's handling model and online portion does it for me.
Single player is weak I agree,I would probably abandoned the game in the first 2 weeks if it didn't have online.
But it's all about online competition these days guys.Anyway to each their own.

So it's worse, but finally playable online.

Once you realize the online is actually terrible compared to some other games, this:

GT 5 is for me BY FAR the best entry in the series.

Turns into this:

GT 5 is for me BY FAR the worst entry in the series.

Because the other games were actually fun offline, and the online couldn't be much worse and still have anyone playing online.

 

[TwIsTeD_83]

I knew i would get this..whatever

 

[1241Penguin]

This.

Out of GT5's 1000+ cars, there are 13 street cars from 2010.

Only 13. And two are not even production (FT-86 Concept and Spoon CR-Z)

It's now 2012. Talk about a backlog list! We haven't even mentioned absent manufacturers.

Well, in fairness, some cars from, say 2007-2009, haven't changed at all in 2010. But yes, PD should stay tuned with the times a bit more.

I get criticize all the time for calling GT5 the best GT I have played. I agree with you 100%.

It's probably got more to do with the fact that you try and override people's opinions about the game. If you will recall, when I said, with a bit of hyperbole, that all cars in GT5 sound bad, you immediately went ahead and called my post "immature".

 

[dylansan]

Physics is the most important thing in a racing game to me, and as such, GT5 is the "best" game in the series to me so far. However it is certainly lacking in most other aspects. If GT4 had GT5's physics I would probably prefer it much more, though the online functionality (no matter how poor) is also one of the features I enjoy most of GT5.

It is indeed very disappointing to get the great features I want from a racing game distributed separately in the different games of the series, that I have to choose which features I need most and can't have them all at the same time. Although I must say the massive car list is another aspect of GT5 I quite enjoy, despite many people wishing they had canned the Standards for more premiums. So between the physics and the cars, I'm happy enough and can add my own "gameplay" through online racing to make up for the poor gameplay that comes on the disk. And after all, what more do you need from a racing game besides physics, cars, and gameplay?

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I wouldn't say that physics is the most important aspect, it is a important aspect just not thee; that is just too over sweeping. Though I agree with much of what you say, one thing I safely can say (in my opinion and analysis) the features that could be implemented at certain times these games came out GT5 is the most lacking. I simply say this because GT5 seems to be trying to gain in areas they missed with the last couple variants; damage and cockpit point of views as well as various tuning features all could have been in previous games and to be honest one was there(the tuning) only to be downsized. The same lackluster portions from previous games are still there in this game and can be easily argued worse this time around.

Basically it's all the stuff many long time fans wanted taken care of but wasn't, mixed in with new features that seemed to have been rushed. Better yet simply out of date in this modern era.

 

[Samus]

Indeed, that's why Live For Speed isn't very popular. Brilliant physics, everything else about it pretty poor.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Indeed, that's why Live For Speed isn't very popular. Brilliant physics, everything else about it pretty poor.

Yeah one of the less talked about legendary PC sim racers. I think GP legends has more fans than LFS

 

[1241Penguin]

In a sense, GT5 is sort of half-assed. It's physics aren't the greatest, and the gameplay isn't the greatest.