Will you go to XBone if Standard cars are officially announced for GT7?

[Imari]

A 1000+ cars has always been an objective with PD and deleteing them from the game is, IMO, practically a statistical impossibility.

Always?

There were games before GT5, and they didn't have a thousand cars*. Some of them (*cough*allofthem*cough*) were pretty good, despite that.

*Unless you use the GT5/GT6 method of counting race modified versions as unique cars. Then GT2 has the most cars of any game in the series.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Always?

There were games before GT5, and they didn't have a thousand cars*. Some of them (*cough*allofthem*cough*) were pretty good, despite that.

*Unless you use the GT5/GT6 method of counting race modified versions as unique cars. Then GT2 has the most cars of any game in the series.

Even though some earlier games, had not hit 1000+ cars, it was still an objective.

Your point about them being "pretty good", is not lost on me.

IMO, other than graphics and physics, GT4 was far better than GT5&6.

So can PD make a great game, with less than 1400, or even 1000 cars?
Absolutely.

However thats not the point.

The point is, demanding they do so by dropping the standard cars, is not a very realistic stance.
I believe the real possibility of that happening is super slim, and none.

Besides as you point out, the quality of the game does not depend on the car count.
I would add to that, whether lower or higher, standard or premium.

 

[Imari]

Even though some earlier games, had not hit 1000+ cars, it was still an objective.

Do you have any actual evidence of this, or was it an objective in the same way that every game would like to have a thousand cars if they could?

The point is, demanding they do so by dropping the standard cars, is not a very realistic stance.
I believe the real possibility of that happening is super slim, and none.

None, unless Kaz somehow changes his mind. Still, we can all point out what a silly idea it is.

Besides as you point out, the quality of the game does not depend on the car count.
I would add to that, whether lower or higher, standard or premium.

The quality of the game does not depend on the car count.
To a certain extent, the quality of the game does depend on the quality of it's visual assets, no matter how many of them there are.

It's possible to have a good game with very poor graphics, and it's possible to have a good game with wildly inconsistent graphics. It's ever so much harder though, and the other elements of the game really have to be spectacular in order to make up for it. To a certain extent these things can be masked by choosing to present your game in a certain style, such as Automodellista and it's cel shading, or any of the huge number of "retro" pixel/8bit type games that have come out recently.

Unfortunately, Gran Turismo has chosen "photorealistic" as it's graphical style. That doesn't leave a lot of room for substandard graphical assets.

You could make a good game with a huge number of low quality assets, but Gran Turismo is not that game. Not without a massive shift in some fairly fundamental keys to the series.

 

[Tornado]

Unfortunately, Gran Turismo has chosen "photorealistic" as it's graphical style. That doesn't leave a lot of room for substandard graphical assets.

Particularly not when that choice has been repeatedly chosen at the expense of gameplay quality.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Do you have any actual evidence of this, or was it an objective in the same way that every game would like to have a thousand cars if they could?

Only that the car count has steadily increased.
Under the circumstances, I have to call that an objective.
Otherwise, surely many of the duplicate cars would have been pared down by now.
I assume other games could have a 1000+ cars if they wanted too, but it apparently does not weigh positively on the,
resource vs net result side.

None, unless Kaz somehow changes his mind. Still, we can all point out what a silly idea it is.

It may be silly to everyone else.
But unfortunately, the guy making the game is the one place it would have to reside, to garner the change.
Trust me, I'm bewildered by some of the features he has dropped, and yet he clings to this one.

The quality of the game does not depend on the car count.
To a certain extent, the quality of the game does depend on the quality of it's visual assets, no matter how many of them there are..

"To a certain extent" as this thread and others can attest, covers quite a range of opinion, depending on the player.

Unfortunately, Gran Turismo has chosen "photorealistic" as it's graphical style. That doesn't leave a lot of room for substandard graphical assets.

In reality, thats "partially photorealistic".
Obviously, the standard cars do not fit this style.

 

[Tornado]

Only that the car count has steadily increased.
Under the circumstances, I have to call that an objective.
Otherwise, surely many of the duplicate cars would have been pared down by now.

That, specifically pertaining to the duplicates, didn't start until GTPSP.

 

[Wolfe]

I still think Polyphony is sensitive about the criticism they received for slashing the car list in GT3, and that's why they stuffed a ton of cars into GT4 and refuse to let Standards go. If anyone there pays attention to the competition, the backlash Turn 10 got with FM5 has surely reinforced PD's shyness toward pulling the trigger.

 

[Imari]

Only that the car count has steadily increased.
Under the circumstances, I have to call that an objective.
Otherwise, surely many of the duplicate cars would have been pared down by now.

That's the point I was making though. Duplicates only started in force in GTPSP/GT5.

I don't think there's any evidence that 1000 cars was an objective for GT1 through GT4 any more than 10,000 cars was. They'd take them if they were available, but it's wasn't something that they were specifically shooting for. That's what an objective is, something that they're specifically trying to achieve.

Both GT2 and GT4 could have made a thousand cars with minor amounts of massaging the car list. GT2 could probably have cracked 1500 by counting the race mods as separate cars.

In reality, thats "partially photorealistic".
Obviously, the standard cars do not fit this style.

If we're still talking objectives, I think it's safe to say that their objective is photorealism. That full photorealism is unachievable on current hardware is not the issue, Gran Turismo is aiming to be as close to that as physically possible as seen with the premium models and photo locations.

Perhaps their objective is "partial photorealism" in that part of the image is photorealistic and part is not. But that just seems dumb, and while Polyphony may make some wacky design choices they're not idiots.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

I still think Polyphony is sensitive about the criticism they received for slashing the car list in GT3, and that's why they stuffed a ton of cars into GT4 and refuse to let Standards go. If anyone there pays attention to the competition, the backlash Turn 10 got with FM5 has surely reinforced PD's shyness toward pulling the trigger.

I believe a substantial part of the backlash turn 10 got, is their DLC position with the fewer cars.
"Sure, we have more cars, as long as you are willing to pay extra for them."

That's the point I was making though. Duplicates only started in force in GTPSP/GT5.

I don't think there's any evidence that 1000 cars was an objective for GT1 through GT4 any more than 10,000 cars was. They'd take them if they were available, but it's wasn't something that they were specifically shooting for. That's what an objective is, something that they're specifically trying to achieve.

I don't think it was a primary or high priority objective, but they progressed at it nonetheless.
And as with everything else, it was according to Kaz's ideas of what, when and how.

Both GT2 and GT4 could have made a thousand cars with minor amounts of massaging the car list. GT2 could probably have cracked 1500 by counting the race mods as separate cars.

I'm admittedly not that familiar with GT1 and 2, having very limited play on those games.

If we're still talking objectives, I think it's safe to say that their objective is photorealism. That full photorealism is unachievable on current hardware is not the issue, Gran Turismo is aiming to be as close to that as physically possible as seen with the premium models and photo locations.

I think you are correct.
That appears to be the objective, but the leftover standards keep preventing the final completion of it.
For whatever reason, Kaz seems to just accept the standard circumstances.
I guess he is content with the projection they will eventually convert all of them at some future time.

Perhaps their objective is "partial photorealism" in that part of the image is photorealistic and part is not. But that just seems dumb, and while Polyphony may make some wacky design choices they're not idiots.

No, I doubt if thats the objective. It just cannot be fully implemented yet.
As said above, Kaz just doesn't seem concerned about the time frame for completion.
Appears similar to the way the increase in car numbers developed.
Over time.

 

[Imari]

I guess he is content with the projection they will eventually convert all of them at some future time.

I don't see why he would be. Very few standard cars have been converted to premium. At the rate they're going he'll be dead long before they convert all of them.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

I don't see why he would be. Very few standard cars have been converted to premium. At the rate they're going he'll be dead long before they convert all of them.

I don't see why either.
But that is the established course so far, and now we know it will be through GT7, as well.
Who knows, maybe he has a list of standards he wants converted, and intends to drop all of the other standards, once that list is complete.

 

[Imari]

I don't see why either.
But that is the established course so far, and now we know it will be through GT7, as well.
Who knows, maybe he has a list of standards he wants converted, and intends to drop all of the other standards, once that list is complete.

I think a more reasonable assumption is that whatever Kaz's plan is, he finds the standards to be acceptable as they are.

If he carries them over into GT7, I see no reason why they would ever be dropped. The chances of PD keeping up with the relevant new cars being released and managing to clear the "backlog" of standards is near zero. Kaz appears to think that the standards are an acceptable minimum level of quality for Gran Turismo, no matter the platform.

I would say that the market will demonstrate whether he is or not, but there are so many other factors that play into it that we're likely to never have a concrete answer. If GT7 is a rousing success, it could be both despite of and because of the inclusion of standard cars.


If they must include them though, I do sort of wish that they would do something with them that otherwise could not be done. Something that justifies their inclusion on a basis other than pure numbers. I think then I and a lot of others could support the decision. Including them just to have over a thousand cars smacks a bit of willy waving.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

I think a more reasonable assumption is that whatever Kaz's plan is, he finds the standards to be acceptable as they are.

If he carries them over into GT7, I see no reason why they would ever be dropped. The chances of PD keeping up with the relevant new cars being released and managing to clear the "backlog" of standards is near zero. Kaz appears to think that the standards are an acceptable minimum level of quality for Gran Turismo, no matter the platform.

Apparently so.

I would say that the market will demonstrate whether he is or not, but there are so many other factors that play into it that we're likely to never have a concrete answer. If GT7 is a rousing success, it could be both despite of and because of the inclusion of standard cars.

Thats true.
If GT7 were to re-establish the prior quality and quantity of structure, balance and content,
the standard cars will be overshadowed and become much less of a negative factor in my perception.

Including them just to have over a thousand cars smacks a bit of willy waving.

Yes it does.

 

[glassjaw]

I still think Polyphony is sensitive about the criticism they received for slashing the car list in GT3, and that's why they stuffed a ton of cars into GT4 and refuse to let Standards go. If anyone there pays attention to the competition, the backlash Turn 10 got with FM5 has surely reinforced PD's shyness toward pulling the trigger.

...what criticism?

 

[Wolfe]

Forgive me for not understanding why you're trying to disprove the existence of a valid observation with irrelevant statistics. GT3's cars < GT2's cars. People noticed, and talked about it back in '01-'02. Forza Motorsport 5 could also sell 15 million copies and it wouldn't change the fact that some people are unhappy with the amount of cars it offers.

So GT3 was well-liked. It's my favorite Gran Turismo game. So what? If you can prove that Polyphony was never aware of anyone who was unhappy with GT3's selection of cars, that would be worth sharing.

 

[Imari]

Forgive me for not understanding why you're trying to disprove the existence of a valid observation with irrelevant statistics. GT3's cars < GT2's cars. People noticed, and talked about it back in '01-'02. Forza Motorsport 5 could also sell 15 million copies and it wouldn't change the fact that some people are unhappy with the amount of cars it offers.

So GT3 was well-liked. It's my favorite Gran Turismo game. So what? If you can prove that Polyphony was never aware of anyone who was unhappy with GT3's selection of cars, that would be worth sharing.

It proves that even if they were aware that there were people unhappy with the reduction in car count, and as you say they could hardly not be, they would be colossal idiots to try and do anything about it.

By almost any measure, GT3 could hardly have been any more successful, even if it had a thousand cars. It was critically acclaimed by pretty much everyone in sight. It was one of the top selling games of its time, which is astounding considering how niche racing games can be. It was and is the best selling Gran Turismo game ever.

GT5P tends to back this up as well. Tiny, tiny game, hardly any content at all. Sold a remarkable amount for what was a very expensive glorified demo. If I recall, it was one of the best selling games on PS3 for a while.

So you have these wildly successful games that had fairly low amounts of content, but were on the cutting edge graphically. As a developer, do you really think "Hey, I'll be able to sell even more by doing the complete opposite!"

Not that it's not worth trying new things, but you've got to at least hedge your bets when making something as big as a AAA video game. Play to your strengths, and innovate in the areas where you're weak.

 

[Wolfe]

I'm confused by your post, @Imari. I haven't suggested that PD do anything. I just think they're hesitant to cut the car list down, maybe because Yamauchi didn't like disappointing fans (who still enjoyed the game) by removing stuff.

Are you saying PD are colossal idiots for dramatically expanding the car list for GT4? Or are you making the case that they should let Standards go? I'm disinterested in what they decide to do with them, because I'm probably not going to have a PS4 (or an XBone) and I never even had a PS3. I was just sharing a thought as a one-time fan of Gran Turismo.

 

[Tornado]

...what criticism?

View attachment 191565

View attachment 191564

For the first part you might have had a point if you bothered to explain it with examples of reviews, but the second part just shows you were throwing stuff at the wall to see what stuck. That fact that GT3 was consistently awarded perfect or near perfect scores did not mean that criticism did not come up with the GT3 car count. The fact that GT3 was the second best selling game on the PS2 did not mean that criticism did not come up with the GT3 car count.

 

[Imari]

I'm confused by your post, @Imari. I haven't suggested that PD do anything. I just think they're hesitant to cut the car list down, maybe because Yamauchi didn't like disappointing fans (who still enjoyed the game) by removing stuff.

Are you saying PD are colossal idiots for dramatically expanding the car list for GT4? Or are you making the case that they should let Standards go? I'm disinterested in what they decide to do with them, because I'm probably not going to have a PS4 (or an XBone) and I never even had a PS3. I was just sharing a thought as a one-time fan of Gran Turismo.

You said that maybe they're sensitive about the backlash they received for cutting the car list in GT3. You postulated that as the reason why they have since refused to cut the car count again.

I'm pointing out that if they're letting their fear of "backlash" drive their decision making, when that "backlash" came hand in hand with their best selling and best reviewed game of all time, then they're idiots.

There are legitimate reasons not to want to reduce the car list, but fear is not one of them. There is always someone who is disappointed by any given design.

 

[GranTurismo guy]

For the first part you might have had a point if you bothered to explain it with examples of reviews, but the second part just shows you were throwing stuff at the wall to see what stuck. That fact that GT3 was consistently awarded perfect or near perfect scores did not mean that criticism did not come up with the GT3 car count. The fact that GT3 was the second best selling game on the PS2 did not mean that criticism did not come up with the GT3 car count.

Yes, buuuuut perhaps less than fm5, which I believe it was compared to before. I think more people forgave gt3 than fm5 because the majority do seem to think gt3 was a better game then than fm5 is now. (I think both are good)

 

[Tornado]

Yes, buuuuut perhaps less than fm5, which I believe it was compared to before. I think more people forgave gt3 than fm5 because the majority do seem to think gt3 was a better game then than fm5 is now. (I think both are good)

People don't forgive FM5 because their reasoning was (and remains) shady from the get go for a good bit of circumstances that simply doesn't apply to GT3.

I'm pointing out that if they're letting their fear of "backlash" drive their decision making, when that "backlash" came hand in hand with their best selling and best reviewed game of all time, then they're idiots.

It seems incredibly odd to see "PD couldn't possibly misinterpret their past actions' success when determining future decisions" as a defense.

 

[glassjaw]

Forgive me for not understanding why you're trying to disprove the existence of a valid observation with irrelevant statistics. GT3's cars < GT2's cars. People noticed, and talked about it back in '01-'02. Forza Motorsport 5 could also sell 15 million copies and it wouldn't change the fact that some people are unhappy with the amount of cars it offers.

So GT3 was well-liked. It's my favorite Gran Turismo game. So what? If you can prove that Polyphony was never aware of anyone who was unhappy with GT3's selection of cars, that would be worth sharing.

I can't prove that, but then again I wasn't trying to. What I can say is despite a very vocal minority taking issue with fewer cars, GT3 was awarded near-perfect review scores across the board and became the second best-selling game on its platform. And a vocal minority is really all they can be called - because if the car count issue was truly that damning, the game wouldn't have performed as well as it did.

For the first part you might have had a point if you bothered to explain it with examples of reviews, but the second part just shows you were throwing stuff at the wall to see what stuck. That fact that GT3 was consistently awarded perfect or near perfect scores did not mean that criticism did not come up with the GT3 car count. The fact that GT3 was the second best selling game on the PS2 did not mean that criticism did not come up with the GT3 car count.

I'm not trying to disprove that criticism existed at all; I'm not that naive. Kaz could make the best racing game the world has ever seen and undoubtedly there will be someone with something negative to say. That means nothing. Criticism is inevitable. What I was arguing with those two screenshots (and I'm paraphrasing because @Imari already said it better than I could have) is that this notion of "backlash" is being blown completely out of proportion considering the game was practically worshipped from the moment the press got a hold of it. Come to think of it, backlash is quite a loaded word to use here.

Yeah, some complained. Some always do. But if PD was really that sensitive to the criticism of a few, then they willfully ignored the praise of many. Either way, that criticism was no reason for them to begin down this road of unsustainability, especially considering that one of the things GT3 received the most praise for was its graphics. You know, the part of the game that's being flatly ignored with standard cars.

 

[Wolfe]

I never said the car count was damning in any way, and I only mentioned backlash in terms of the feedback T10 got for FM5. I realize what part of the site I'm in, but not everything that isn't explicitly positive about Gran Turismo is intended as a slight against the brand.

The car count in GT3 was criticized, and in spite of everything else about the game and everything PD has built since then, one explanation I can think of for the dramatic expansion of the car list in GT4 and the fact that we're still talking about these assets almost 10 years later is that Polyphony/Yamauchi took that criticism to heart. Not as a business decision, but to please the fans, possibly Japanese fans who appreciate the eclectic mix of JDM rides that have not yet been replaced by Premiums.

 

[Imari]

I never said the car count was damning in any way, and I only mentioned backlash in terms of the feedback T10 got for FM5.

It's relatively interesting to compare, as FM5 is the most recent game to follow this strategy of including only the highest quality assets at the expense of quantity. They got substantial backlash for it, sure enough.

Compare to GT5, which also got substantial backlash at release for standards.

You see how there's not really any way to avoid this. You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

So really, the designer should not be taking the potential for criticism into account at all. The decision to include standards or not should be made purely on objective design criteria.

There is no way to address that criticism in the base game, as it's impossible to please everyone. The only way to address the criticism is how you respond to it. The response can be planned, because it's very easy to see the criticism coming. T10 almost certainly knew that they were going to come under fire for a low car and track count, and so planned to have a robust DLC plan in place to shore that up. And it's worked pretty well, the game is now reasonably well outfitted, although still kind of low on tracks. It costs extra, but they've provided an out for people who feel that the game was short on content.

I feel that if GT7 is to include standards, some similar sort of "out" needs to be provided. Either a premiums only mode, or a serious and visible dedication to upgrading the best and most popular of the standards to premium. At least 5 cars a month, preferably more, starting at release and continuing for at least 12 months with absolute regularity. No missed deadlines or excuses. Make them paid DLC if necessary, but show that there is awareness of this design deficiency and a will to continue to improve on it.

 

[glassjaw]

I never said the car count was damning in any way, and I only mentioned backlash in terms of the feedback T10 got for FM5. I realize what part of the site I'm in, but not everything that isn't explicitly positive about Gran Turismo is intended as a slight against the brand.

I didn't interpret anything you said as a slight against the brand, but feel free to be as negative or positive as you like. I'm one of the last people on this forum who will defend any of the decisions PD has made in the last ten years.

There's no denying this is one of those scenarios where somebody is going to be upset either way. But I don't think it's completely fair to keep making comparisons between GT3 and FM5. FM5 performed respectably amongst critics, but it's pretty safe to say that it was less well received than GT3 was when it came out. Perhaps GT3 was forgiven for its car count because it was a better game overall, whereas the rest of FM5 couldn't make up for what was missing from previous games. You could also make the argument that times have changed, and if a game like GT3 were to be released today it wouldn't be let off the hook as easily. Either way though, FM5=/=GT3, aside from the fact that they both had less cars than their predecessors.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I still think Polyphony is sensitive about the criticism they received for slashing the car list in GT3, and that's why they stuffed a ton of cars into GT4 and refuse to let Standards go. If anyone there pays attention to the competition, the backlash Turn 10 got with FM5 has surely reinforced PD's shyness toward pulling the trigger.

A slightly different theory, if we're to include T10 and FM; perhaps PD do pay attention to the competition, and were watching how FM2 and FM3 had a much larger amount of contemporary current-gen content than GT5 was going to have. Yeah, FM2's models weren't a patch on GT5's Premiums, but GT is arguably the game that started making multi-hundred car counts the norm in the genre, so maybe they were worried at the idea of shipping with less than half their cross-console competitor had. It's an idea, anyways... though I recognize the shady "two tier" system was announced years before the final game showed up.

I didn't interpret anything you said as a slight against the brand, but feel free to be as negative or positive as you like. I'm one of the last people on this forum who will defend any of the decisions PD has made in the last ten years.

There's no denying this is one of those scenarios where somebody is going to be upset either way. But I don't think it's completely fair to keep making comparisons between GT3 and FM5. FM5 performed respectably amongst critics, but it's pretty safe to say that it was less well received than GT3 was when it came out. Perhaps GT3 was forgiven for its car count because it was a better game overall, whereas the rest of FM5 couldn't make up for what was missing from previous games. You could also make the argument that times have changed, and if a game like GT3 were to be released today it wouldn't be let off the hook as easily. Either way though, FM5=/=GT3, aside from the fact that they both had less cars than their predecessors.

I think you're right; the success of GT3 could never happen again in these times. There's more competition, and more of an expectation for larger amounts of content. FM5 can only be compared to GT3 on the principle of them both having far less content than their previous-gen predecessors, but the reasons behind that decision are numerous and unknown on both sides. 2013 is so different from 2001 though that that's pretty much where the similarities end. One could argue that GT's reliance on outdated legacy content has even influenced players' feelings on the subject, but that's not exactly conclusive either.

Of course, this is all said with an eye towards the original question; I'll still probably end up with both systems.

 

[Wolfe]

@Imari -- I'm not advocating one way or the other, although I don't really care about how Standards look. When I played GT5, I only disliked their generic and inaccurate handling manners.

@glassjaw -- I didn't want to compare GT3 and FM5! The point: FM5 made headlines recently. If PD is reluctant to drop cars and if they paid attention to what happened with FM5, the reaction from Forza fans might contribute to their reluctance.

 

[Johnnypenso]

@glassjaw -- I didn't want to compare GT3 and FM5! The point: FM5 made headlines recently. If PD is reluctant to drop cars and if they paid attention to what happened with FM5, the reaction from Forza fans might contribute to their reluctance.

Forza 5 is the third best selling game on the XBone, ahead of Battlefield, FIFA, Assassin's Creed, NBA and dozens of others. So far it looks like an overwhelming success in what amounts to a niche genre.

 

[Imari]

@glassjaw -- I didn't want to compare GT3 and FM5! The point: FM5 made headlines recently. If PD is reluctant to drop cars and if they paid attention to what happened with FM5, the reaction from Forza fans might contribute to their reluctance.

We come back to the question, why would they take this into account?

If FM5 demonstrates that there's a negative reaction to a decreased car count, surely GT5 and GT6 demonstrate that there's a negative reaction to reusing old assets.

If there's a negative reaction either way, I don't see how their choice is being influenced by the potential for a negative reaction.

 

[Wolfe]

Frankly, I don't expect Yamauchi to make rational decisions and I think he'd sooner find a reason to justify keeping the Standards than acknowledge the negative reactions they get. But I'm not Yamauchi or Polyphony so I can't tell you what they're thinking.