Why doesn't Sony just takeover the developing of GT7

[Doomotron]

What we need for GT7 is... A mix of GT3/GT4!
Think about it, these are the best racing games of all time, nobody can say otherwise, and we need something good looking, fast, fun, we also need our classic tracks again. Original tracks like Special Stage Route 11 and Super Speedway are what made Gran Turismo 'special'. We need them back...

 

[Samus]

nobody can say otherwise

Yes we can. They were good for their time, but times have moved on. A lot.

 

[syntex123]

Direct answer to the OP: Why on earth would you want to outsource the development of GT to someone else? It would kill the series as we know it. Look at the Flat Out games. Flat Out 1, 2 and Ultimate Carnage were great games. Then Empire Interactive and Bugbear Entertainment gave the torch to Team6 and Strategy First and gave birth to Flat Out 3 Chaos & Destruction. Worst Flat Out game to ever have been made. Big mistake. Glad to see Bugbear finally came to their senses and began the development of Wreckfest (aka. Next Car Game) a few years back. But that isn't my point. My point is that outsourcing GT to someone else would mean A LOT of people stop playing GT because it doesn't look and feel like GT anymore.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Direct answer to the OP: Why on earth would you want to outsource the development of GT to someone else? It would kill the series as we know it. Look at the Flat Out games. Flat Out 1, 2 and Ultimate Carnage were great games. Then Empire Interactive and Bugbear Entertainment gave the torch to Team6 and Strategy First and gave birth to Flat Out 3 Chaos & Destruction. Worst Flat Out game to ever have been made. Big mistake. Glad to see Bugbear finally came to their senses and began the development of Wreckfest (aka. Next Car Game) a few years back. But that isn't my point. My point is that outsourcing GT to someone else would mean A LOT of people stop playing GT because it doesn't look and feel like GT anymore.

Here's a reason. A car is a car is a car. It's GT's lighting engine, shading etc. that really makes things pop in the game, so there's no reason that cars that currently appear in DriveClub, Forza etc. couldn't make their way into GT without suffering any noticable reduction of quality vs. PD created cars. How about outsourcing some of the content but retaining the game design in house?
Surely this type of work is good enough for GT Sport?

 

[syntex123]

@Johnnypenso I wasn't talking about outsourcing the modeling, I was talking about outsourcing the whole game development. I like how the cars look in DriveClub, but if Evo took over development of the whole game, it wouldn't feel like GT anymore. Simply because the PD touch is gone. Just like Flat Out 2 > Flat Out 3. Played the two? Completely different sounds, the feel, the looks.. It just doesn't feel right.

 

[cutmeamango]

Not really, maybe PD has stricter guidelines for poly optimization on top of scale/detail accuracy. Their shader/texture/material artists are certainly at a different level of expertise too (along with their lighting people).
And then there's the whole factor of artistry ideals and how they value their own work that has been said a thousand times.

And it's not like they don't have a 50+ CAR modelling team already...

 

[Chikane_GTR]

@Johnnypenso I wasn't talking about outsourcing the modeling, I was talking about outsourcing the whole game development. I like how the cars look in DriveClub, but if Evo took over development of the whole game, it wouldn't feel like GT anymore. Simply because the PD touch is gone. Just like Flat Out 2 > Flat Out 3. Played the two? Completely different sounds, the feel, the looks.. It just doesn't feel right.

?? When did i say the whole game? i said some of the work like car modeling you know all those ps2 cars that pd has. Why not just let someone else work on them and then maybe they'll all finally be premium

 

[syntex123]

@Chikane yeah my mistake, I read it as you meant the whole game. I do agree someone could help out on turning standards premium, there are for sure a number of cars I'd like to see premium.

 

[Johnnypenso]

@Johnnypenso I wasn't talking about outsourcing the modeling, I was talking about outsourcing the whole game development. I like how the cars look in DriveClub, but if Evo took over development of the whole game, it wouldn't feel like GT anymore. Simply because the PD touch is gone. Just like Flat Out 2 > Flat Out 3. Played the two? Completely different sounds, the feel, the looks.. It just doesn't feel right.

Got that, that's why I said:

How about outsourcing some of the content but retaining the game design in house?

Not really, maybe PD has stricter guidelines for poly optimization on top of scale/detail accuracy. Their shader/texture/material artists are certainly at a different level of expertise too (along with their lighting people).
And then there's the whole factor of artistry ideals and how they value their own work that has been said a thousand times.

And it's not like they don't have a 50+ CAR modelling team already...

So you're telling me this work isn't up to scratch?

In a game that may contain content like this:

Seriously?

 

[Samus]

It's not like it would be hard for PD to teach an outsourcing company their 'correct' way to model a car, it's the same thing they do when they hire new modelers themselves. It also wouldn't be hard to give them a trial run, pay them to model 5/10 cars of varying type and see if they're up to scratch.

 

[AKps3]

@Johnnypenso
I would not say "a car is a car"
Example: DC and Forza dont have rear interior views like GT
Or last gen the F40 in Forza didnt look as good like in GT(maybe because outsourcing?)

Outsourcing can be good and bad
sry for my bad english

"Ben Curtis(Evolution)has explained what are the advantages as well as disadvantages of outsourcing"
http://przemyslawjanowski.weebly.com/lecture-reviews/week-4-ben-curtis-artist-at-evolution-studios

 

[Johnnypenso]

@Johnnypenso
I would not say "a car is a car"
Example: DC and Forza dont have rear interior views like GT
Or last gen the F40 in Forza didnt look as good like in GT(maybe because outsourcing?)

Outsourcing can be good and bad
sry for my bad english

"Ben Curtis(Evolution)has explained what are the advantages as well as disadvantages of outsourcing"
http://przemyslawjanowski.weebly.com/lecture-reviews/week-4-ben-curtis-artist-at-evolution-studios

I posted an example of current outsourcing work above. What do you think of it (the Ruf)? The interior view is a minor detail and something PD could just specify be added to their versions of the car.

 

[Tornado]

Or last gen the F40 in Forza didnt look as good like in GT(maybe because outsourcing?)

And not all of GT's Premium cars are built to the quality level of the GT F40.

 

[AKps3]

I posted an example of current outsourcing work above. What do you think of it (the Ruf)? The interior view is a minor detail and something PD could just specify be added to their versions of the car.

Do you exactly know if the RUF was outsourced or made by Evo?
Of course it looks good and sounds good
And like i said outsourcing can be good and bad
Maybe they should do it for the sounds?
http://www.theaudioguys.co.uk/

 

[Samus]

Example: DC and Forza dont have rear interior views like GT
Or last gen the F40 in Forza didnt look as good like in GT(maybe because outsourcing?)

Probably because they didn't ask for rear interiors when they outsourced. Honestly, it's hardly a highly desired feature of a model. I'd much rather they spent time on the mechanical insides of the car, as they've done for the Forza cars. That is far more interesting to look at than the stitching of rear seats.

As for the quality of the cars yes, some can be shoddy but the same goes for some PD cars. Nobody is perfect, corners sometimes have to be cut to meet deadlines. I mean Glassegg made 112 of the cars in Forza 5, can you pick them all out against the in house models? Doubtful.

 

[AKps3]

Probably because they didn't ask for rear interiors when they outsourced. Honestly, it's hardly a highly desired feature of a model. I'd much rather they spent time on the mechanical insides of the car, as they've done for the Forza cars. That is far more interesting to look at than the stitching of rear seats.

I love the rear interior view in GT and i miss it in other racing games
For example: its awesome when you look back in the Jaguar XJ13 and you see the engine in game
I hope hey will keep it for GT Sport
DriveClub VR is coming and it would be realy bad if you look behind and see nothing

 

[Com Fox]

I don't even think Sony has any game development divisions?

Sony only really either owns other game development companies or makes partnerships with game development companies.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Do you exactly know if the RUF was outsourced or made by Evo?
Of course it looks good and sounds good
And like i said outsourcing can be good and bad
Maybe they should do it for the sounds?
http://www.theaudioguys.co.uk/

I don't know for sure, but I thought all of DC's cars were made by Glassegg. It's not like modeling cars is exactly rocket science. You can find stellar looking cars in Forza, DriveClub, Assetto Corsa, Project Cars and in other games. iRacing is actually laser scanning cars now to create their models. The whole idea of cars modeled in house being some kind of quality advantage is just marketing talk in my opinion.

I love the rear interior view in GT and i miss it in other racing games
For example: its awesome when you look back in the Jaguar XJ13 and you see the engine in game
I hope hey will keep it for GT Sport
DriveClub VR is coming and it would be realy bad if you look behind and see nothing

I like the rear view too but there are advantages when racing of being able to look back and see nothing but track. I'd really like to have the option to turn off the rear view when racing online.

 

[AKps3]

I don't know for sure, but I thought all of DC's cars were made by Glassegg. It's not like modeling cars is exactly rocket science. You can find stellar looking cars in Forza, DriveClub, Assetto Corsa, Project Cars and in other games. iRacing is actually laser scanning cars now to create their models. The whole idea of cars modeled in house being some kind of quality advantage is just marketing talk in my opinion.

I dont think glassegg build all the cars for DC

I like the rear view too but there are advantages when racing of being able to look back and see nothing but track. I'd really like to have the option to turn off the rear view when racing online.

Thats a good idea:tup:

 

[cutmeamango]

So you're telling me this work isn't up to scratch?
Seriously?

If/when your cars modeled from scale models and pictures have a better modelling standard or accuracy than outsourced material, perhaps. There's low resolution then there's low fidelity. But only those with a frame of reference can tell the two apart and people will certainly vary on their thresholds of importance, as exemplified above.

Anyhow, I said: "And then there's the whole factor of artistry ideals and how they value their own work."
They have employees for that specific job and they value their work, it is simple.

 

[CSLACR]

Considering all the PS3 hardware excuses that were thrown about for a decade, it certainly is impressive that Sony/PD are moving even slower on the PS4. (Which they and everyone else directly stated would be easier and faster)
GT HD was out a month after the PS3, and GT5P just over 2 years after it's release. GTS is "expected" 2.5 years after the PS4, and if we're fair, that means 3 years.

So yes, the excuses have long run out, they clearly can't keep up in modern times. If they don't outsource, they need to lower quantity significantly. Or, I suppose, just release games every 3-4 years and deliver thousands of updates to fix what they didn't get right...again.

 

[glassjaw]

Considering all the PS3 hardware excuses that were thrown about for a decade, it certainly is impressive that Sony/PD are moving even slower on the PS4. (Which they and everyone else directly stated would be easier and faster)
GT HD was out a month after the PS3, and GT5P just over 2 years after it's release. GTS is "expected" 2.5 years after the PS4, and if we're fair, that means 3 years.

So yes, the excuses have long run out, they clearly can't keep up in modern times. If they don't outsource, they need to lower quantity significantly. Or, I suppose, just release games every 3-4 years and deliver thousands of updates to fix what they didn't get right...again.

To say they're moving slower because they haven't released any games on PS4 yet is kind of unfair. GTHD was simply a handful of cars and a track, and a semi-aborted project to boot. It may turn out that GT5P was earlier to release on PS3 than GTS on PS4, but GTS could be a more ambitious game. Point is, until the finished product releases or we know exactly what we're in store for, you can't rationally make a judgment one way or the other.

One positive thing I'll say about Polyphony: I like that they're playing their cards much closer to the chest than they did 10 years ago. Of course I'd love some news and gameplay footage as much as anyone else here, but I admire that it seems they've finally learned from that pre-GT5 mindset of releasing a glut of misleading trailers and making false promises many years in advance. Now it seems everyone's following Bethesda's route with Fallout 4 — show us the game when it's presentable and ready, and fans/the press will react much, much more favorably.

 

[eran0004]

Considering all the PS3 hardware excuses that were thrown about for a decade, it certainly is impressive that Sony/PD are moving even slower on the PS4. (Which they and everyone else directly stated would be easier and faster)
GT HD was out a month after the PS3, and GT5P just over 2 years after it's release. GTS is "expected" 2.5 years after the PS4, and if we're fair, that means 3 years.

So yes, the excuses have long run out, they clearly can't keep up in modern times. If they don't outsource, they need to lower quantity significantly. Or, I suppose, just release games every 3-4 years and deliver thousands of updates to fix what they didn't get right...again.

The speed by which you move doesn't depend on time alone. The distance you travel is equally important.

Sure, you may say that GTHD and GT5P was released after x months, but how big were those titles? Can they be compared in size to GT Sport?

So when you say it's slower, it's all based on the assumption that GT Sport will not be a bigger title than GTHD or GT5P.

 

[Johnnypenso]

One positive thing I'll say about Polyphony: I like that they're playing their cards much closer to the chest than they did 10 years ago. Of course I'd love some news and gameplay footage as much as anyone else here, but I admire that it seems they've finally learned from that pre-GT5 mindset of releasing a glut of misleading trailers and making false promises many years in advance. Now it seems everyone's following Bethesda's route with Fallout 4 — show us the game when it's presentable and ready, and fans/the press will react much, much more favorably.

Here's a crazy idea. Release trailers that don't containg anything misleading or false:idea:💡. Ordinary gameplay footage of cars and tracks they know will be in the final game is not a hard thing to do is it?

 

[Samus]

Now it seems everyone's following Bethesda's route with Fallout 4 — show us the game when it's presentable and ready, and fans/the press will react much, much more favorably.

I wouldn't say PD have followed that yet. They've basically done it the old way so far, an initial teaser with next to no info and then a wait for actual details/gameplay etc later down the line. More like Uncharted 4 than Fallout 4.

 

[Turnaround]

Here's a crazy idea. Release trailers that don't contain anything misleading or false:idea:💡. Ordinary gameplay footage of cars and tracks they know will be in the final game is not a hard thing to do is it?

If history is anything to go by, then for them it would be hard. They haven't had anything truly exciting to show in game for a long time now; especially when it comes to sounds.

Even if they did release a trailer that was 100% what we would see in the game, would we believe it? Well, I guess we would if their trailers showed a product that is worse than their competitor's. Such is their reputation of late.

 

[glassjaw]

I wouldn't say PD have followed that yet. They've basically done it the old way so far, an initial teaser with next to no info and then a wait for actual details/gameplay etc later down the line. More like Uncharted 4 than Fallout 4.

Yeah, Uncharted 4 is a better comparison. I still think they've been a bit more tame than in the past though.

 

[Samus]

Yeah, Uncharted 4 is a better comparison. I still think they've been a bit more tame than in the past though.

Well we'll have to see how they do things when they get to the actual, full fat announcement. I don't think they've ever launched a GT game with a tiny teaser before, have they? It's always started with a a pretty full-on blowout of information from my memory.

At least they haven't shown the teaser 3 years before the planned release though, so yeah, not as bad as it could be like some games.

 

[glassjaw]

Well we'll have to see how they do things when they get to the actual, full fat announcement. I don't think they've ever launched a GT game with a tiny teaser before, have they? It's always started with a a pretty full-on blowout of information from my memory.

At least they haven't shown the teaser 3 years before the planned release though, so yeah, not as bad as it could be like some games.

And that's what I'm saying. I don't remember when we saw our first trailer for GT5 — I guess 2005 if you're counting Vision/GT HD (and I do) — but teasing the next big installment that long in advance is unnecessary and better left not shown. I suppose you could make the argument that Polyphony didn't know at the time they were five years out, but you have to have a sense of where you are in the development process and schedule your hype machine accordingly, cause if you begin teasing a game that won't be seen for half a decade, winning best-in-show at E3 that many times in a row isn't an accolade, it's a punchline.

 

[gtracedriver1]

Considering all the PS3 hardware excuses that were thrown about for a decade, it certainly is impressive that Sony/PD are moving even slower on the PS4. (Which they and everyone else directly stated would be easier and faster)
GT HD was out a month after the PS3, and GT5P just over 2 years after it's release. GTS is "expected" 2.5 years after the PS4, and if we're fair, that means 3 years.

So yes, the excuses have long run out, they clearly can't keep up in modern times. If they don't outsource, they need to lower quantity significantly. Or, I suppose, just release games every 3-4 years and deliver thousands of updates to fix what they didn't get right...again.

It is universal fact that PS3 (although my fav console of all time)was not user friendly for developers. Just look at the support PS4 is getting from devs big and small including indies. Even for VR they will get big support. GT6 was released 2 weeks after PS4 so I guess half of the team if not more were working on it and some more providing updates. The game also need to support PS VR. IMO they should have made the announcement at E3 instead. Moreover releasing and making games quicker is not too important looking at Pcars and Forza. It will definitely release this year. GT6 was announced just before E3 and released in December 2013