Future proofing!

[Dazza1970]

What I would like to know, is gran tourismo sport being taken seriously enough to enable gamers to use this game to its full potential in the future?
Or will it become a dust collector when the online support gets dumped, like what happened on PS3?

 

[chzsln485]

What I would like to know, is gran tourismo sport being taken seriously enough to enable gamers to use this game to its full potential in the future?
Or will it become a dust collector when the online support gets dumped, like what happened on PS3?

There's a theory floating about that GT Sport is the beginning of GT as a service, rather than necessarily being yet another sequel to be followed by yet more sequels. The fact Kaz suggested there might be up to 500 cars added to GT Sport over its lifespan (it launches with about 140 included) adds weight to this. Street Fighter is perhaps the closest analog to this - Street Fighter IV was followed by Super Street Fighter IV, Super Street Fighter IV: Arcade Edition, and Ultra Street Fighter IV, all of which were separate games with individual retail and digital releases. Street Fighter V, however, will not receive any updated re-releases, instead, all additional content will be added to the base game over time.

I suppose the fact storage space is ever expanding makes this easier, as well as faster internet, more robust online services, and the obvious proliferation of online gaming and digital releases makes this much easier. The idea of games necessarily needing boxed sequels released to retail is in some cases obsolete (especially when considering relatively iterative "platforms" for games, e.g. racing/fighting/online FPS, rather than games with linear campaigns or stories).

 

[Samus]

There's a theory floating about that GT Sport is the beginning of GT as a service, rather than necessarily being yet another sequel to be followed by yet more sequels. The fact Kaz suggested there might be up to 500 cars added to GT Sport over its lifespan (it launches with about 140 included) adds weight to this. Street Fighter is perhaps the closest analog to this - Street Fighter IV was followed by Super Street Fighter IV, Super Street Fighter IV: Arcade Edition, and Ultra Street Fighter IV, all of which were separate games with individual retail and digital releases. Street Fighter V, however, will not receive any updated re-releases, instead, all additional content will be added to the base game over time.

I suppose the fact storage space is ever expanding makes this easier, as well as faster internet, more robust online services, and the obvious proliferation of online gaming and digital releases makes this much easier. The idea of games necessarily needing boxed sequels released to retail is in some cases obsolete (especially when considering relatively iterative "platforms" for games, e.g. racing/fighting/online FPS, rather than games with linear campaigns or stories).

The date of launch also adds weight to the theory. It seems almost impossible that they will now have the time to release a second full game on the PS4 system given that it launched in 2013 and GTS is going to arrive in 2017. A "full on" sequel would surely not arrive until 2019 at the absolute earliest but 2020 would seem more likely, in which case like GT6 it would probably be right around the release of the new generation, or after it. Given the way GT6 turned out I'd imagine they want to avoid that.

So what seems more likely is a GTS release in 2017 and then three years of proper support and updates, not just like what we got with GT5+6 where they finished the games, added a couple of new features, handful of DLC then moved on.

Not sure how they would deal with the transition to PS5 though. If the hardware remains x86-64 it's very possible it will just continue on PS5 with updates to add new graphics settings and such, but the original download or disc will still work. That remains to be seen with where gaming in general goes.

 

[Racer_BMW]

I think it would make sense for PD to sell GT Sport as the only PS4 entry, instead of keeping the "2 games per generation" policy, since the game is kinda late on the PS4. If they push the boundaries of the console, there's no need for a new title. If the 500 car rumour is true, this could be the start of GT Sport as a service with regular updates. I sure hope online support doesn't get forgotten as fast as it did with GT5, since GTS is a very online biased game. GT6 online is really good too.

 

[chzsln485]

The date of launch also adds weight to the theory. It seems almost impossible that they will now have the time to release a second full game on the PS4 system given that it launched in 2013 and GTS is going to arrive in 2017. A "full on" sequel would surely not arrive until 2019 at the absolute earliest but 2020 would seem more likely, in which case like GT6 it would probably be right around the release of the new generation, or after it.

So what seems more likely is a GTS release in 2017 and then three years of proper support and updates, not just like what we got with GT5+6 where they finished the games, added a couple of new features, handful of DLC then moved on.

Not sure how they would deal with the transition to PS5 though. If the hardware remains x86-64 it's very possible it will just continue on PS5 with updates to add new graphics settings and such, but the original download or disc will still work. That remains to be seen with where gaming in general goes.

Remember Kaz also said GT Sport and GT7 were one and the same thing, and considered calling it "Gran Turismo 7: Sport", which backs the idea up even more that there may not be another GT on PS4. Even if GT Sport launched in November 2016, as originally planned, that still wouldn't be leaving much time for a second GT game on PS4.

Oh, and I wouldn't be surprised if PC-esque x64 hardware is the way to go for consoles from now on. Custom hardware and RISC CPUs are a thing of the past, ever since the original Xbox (and the subsequent boom in popularity of PC gaming, with the release of Steam and so on), everything seems to be more homogenised and unified. It would make life porting games to PC harder, for one thing. Remember also Microsoft's plans for UWP, too, where an Xbox is almost the equivalent to a Steam Machine - a pre-built piece of hardware specifically designed to access the Xbox app, which is of course now available on PC, with plans for all future first-party games to be cross-platform.

 

[Dazza1970]

I totally hear what you guys are saying, plus agree that gt sport is 'unlikely' to be ditched when the next generation of consoles hit our shops. But..... the lack of any kind of reassurance from the developers, is very troubling.

After all, am I the only person that spent real money on the previous PS3 edition of gt? Assuming I'm not, myself and anyone else that spent real money, were basically ripped off!

Now I thoroughly understand and accept that this is not the only game this has happened to, and by far it won't be the last. But as I have also been 'ripped off' in a similar fashion with other games, my reluctance to buy the next in a series affected by this issue, is very strong.

It's about time these companies were pushed to give guarantees to protect their customers!

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I totally hear what you guys are saying, plus agree that gt sport is 'unlikely' to be ditched when the next generation of consoles hit our shops. But..... the lack of any kind of reassurance from the developers, is very troubling.

After all, am I the only person that spent real money on the previous PS3 edition of gt? Assuming I'm not, myself and anyone else that spent real money, were basically ripped off!

Now I thoroughly understand and accept that this is not the only game this has happened to, and by far it won't be the last. But as I have also been 'ripped off' in a similar fashion with other games, my reluctance to buy the next in a series affected by this issue, is very strong.

It's about time these companies were pushed to give guarantees to protect their customers!

...what sort of guarantee? That the online modes are available indefinitely? The online in GT5 Prologue ended only after GT5 full arrived; its the same story for that game once GT6 landed. As much as it might bother folks, there's no reason Sony and Polyphony should have to support an older game's online infrastructure.

I've definitely had my reservations about the PS3 era GT games, and I'd even go so far as to say GT6 disappointed me. But even if it remains the full-fat GT game I've played the least, I wouldn't say I was "ripped off". I suppose the incomplete VGT project could count... but since I've never really cared about the imaginary rolling peacock cars, that whole thing bothers me a lot less.

 

[Dazza1970]

if you bought a new television tomorrow at great expense, then all tv broadcasting companies suddenly prevented your television model from receiving any signals, would you be happy?
If you bought a new car than ran on a new fuel, then a while later that fuel was no longer available, would you be happy?

I appreciate they are extreme examples, but they realistically are no different to selling software, then rendering it useless.
Likewise with selling you software online, it leaves you unable to sell it on when you no longer want it. It's all becoming more and more of a rip off, so some guarantees in any form, should start to become standard.

Although ultimately, people will still buy theses things, therefore, being ripped off will become standard and accepted. As it seems it already is.

 

[Northstar]

if you bought a new television tomorrow at great expense, then all tv broadcasting companies suddenly prevented your television model from receiving any signals, would you be happy?

No clue where you are located, but this actually happened in the U.S. not too long ago when all stations went from analog to digital (granted new TV's were digital for quite awhile before the switch). Your choices were to either buy a converter box or suck it up and get with the times.

If you bought a new car than ran on a new fuel, then a while later that fuel was no longer available, would you be happy?

If you buy anything that has a new type/format of something you are taking a risk no different than buying stock. There's always a chance that the product you are investing in will be the next HD-DVD.

I appreciate they are extreme examples, but they realistically are no different to selling software, then rendering it useless.

There is literally no chance of this ever happening as technology advances and things get outdated to the point of being obsolete. If companies were forced to guarantee their usefulness for live we would still be using computers as big as a house but no more powerful than a graphic calculator.

Although ultimately, people will still buy theses things, therefore, being ripped off will become standard and accepted. As it seems it already is.

Being "ripped off" is in the eye of the beholder though. As disappointing as GT5 and GT6 were in my mind I feel I still got my $160 worth of entertainment in return.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

if you bought a new television tomorrow at great expense, then all tv broadcasting companies suddenly prevented your television model from receiving any signals, would you be happy?
If you bought a new car than ran on a new fuel, then a while later that fuel was no longer available, would you be happy?

I appreciate they are extreme examples, but they realistically are no different to selling software, then rendering it useless.

They're not just extreme examples, they're flawed analogies.

GT5 and GT6 are not useless. The online aspect of GT5 is, as it's been shut down. The entire rest of the game still functions (though admittedly with some issues, namely the limited UCD).

As @Northstar already mentioned, that happened with TV a few years ago in the US and Canada. At some point, it becomes unrealistic for companies to support outdated formats. VCR's recently went out of production, and while I'm sure there's someone out there that's equally bothered by it, I can't say I find it surprising.

Likewise with selling you software online, it leaves you unable to sell it on when you no longer want it. It's all becoming more and more of a rip off, so some guarantees in any form, should start to become standard.

Although ultimately, people will still buy theses things, therefore, being ripped off will become standard and accepted. As it seems it already is.

Don't want to buy digital copies of games? Then don't: that's why physical copies still exist.

I was against it for a long while, but I do see the advantage these days. Most of my games are still physical copies, but the ones I know I don't plan on selling off at any point, I don't really mind getting as digitals. Sure, the collector in me is sad that FM6 won't join the rest of the franchise on my shelf, but oh well. It's probably for the better, considering my game collection already takes up a sizeable chunk of our condo...

I can see your argument when framed against always-online games like The Crew or NFS 2015, though: those games, because of how they've been designed, really will be useless once the servers are taken down. That can be seen as an issue, but it again depends on how up-front the developer is with these aspects. If players are given clear expectations, then they can buy knowing the experience won't last forever.

 

[Robbks]

There's a theory floating about that GT Sport is the beginning of GT as a service, rather than necessarily being yet another sequel to be followed by yet more sequels.
..... instead, all additional content will be added to the base game over time.

I suppose the fact storage space is ever expanding makes this easier, as well as faster internet, more robust online services, and the obvious proliferation of online gaming and digital releases makes this much easier. The idea of games necessarily needing boxed sequels released to retail is in some cases obsolete (especially when considering relatively iterative "platforms" for games, e.g. racing/fighting/online FPS, rather than games with linear campaigns or stories).

Someone has heard me....

 

[Imari]

Street Fighter V, however, will not receive any updated re-releases, instead, all additional content will be added to the base game over time.

Please God no. No developer ever should ever consider ever copying anything that Street Fighter V has done. Ever. It has been a farce from day one, and is a prime example of how NOT to do it.

 

[chzsln485]

Please God no. No developer ever should ever consider ever copying anything that Street Fighter V has done. Ever. It has been a farce from day one, and is a prime example of how NOT to do it.

No, I agree. SFV launched blatantly unfinished and Capcom has been patching it ever since to make up for it. It's a lot better now than it was at the beginning of its life, that's for sure, but it's a little insulting when you consider the fact The King of Fighters XIV launched with 50 characters included from day one.

It is, however, still an example of a game as a platform/service, and it's definitely a better approach than Capcom releasing SFV and then having the audacity to release "Super Street Fighter V" a few months down the line with extra characters (like with the whole Marvel vs. Capcom 3/Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3 thing).

A much better, and far more successful example of the game as a service, however, is probably something like Team Fortress 2. There's been enough content added to TF2 that many other developers would have, in the same situation, released it as TF3 and called it a day. If Polyphony took Valve's TF2 approach, I'd be OK with that.

 

[Dazza1970]

It does make me laugh. According to every reply, I'm wrong and software developers are right??
It's perfectly acceptable to sell you software, then make it useless, or nearly useless, as and when they feel like it?

Does everybody on this forum only spend their parents money?
Because believe it or not, I work for my money, which in turn gives me respect for money. So that means when I spend it on something, I'm not overjoyed when whatever I bought no longer does what it is supposed to.
The only reason these software developers get away with ripping off the general public, is because of people continuing to support them, when they don't offer the same support in return!!

I'm glad you are all so lucky that money means nothing to you.

 

[Imari]

No, I agree. SFV launched blatantly unfinished and Capcom has been patching it ever since to make up for it. It's a lot better now than it was at the beginning of its life, that's for sure, but it's a little insulting when you consider the fact The King of Fighters XIV launched with 50 characters included from day one.

It is, however, still an example of a game as a platform/service, and it's definitely a better approach than Capcom releasing SFV and then having the audacity to release "Super Street Fighter V" a few months down the line with extra characters (like with the whole Marvel vs. Capcom 3/Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3 thing).

A much better, and far more successful example of the game as a service, however, is probably something like Team Fortress 2. There's been enough content added to TF2 that many other developers would have, in the same situation, released it as TF3 and called it a day. If Polyphony took Valve's TF2 approach, I'd be OK with that.

I think something along the League of Legends/Heroes of the Storm model would actually be fine. Free to play with minimal content available, and the ability to buy more with either in game currency or money and with more content always being added.

But really, the kings of the idea of games as a service are MMOs. They provide lots of content, deep systems, and a lot of opportunity for players to create their own fun in order to justify the monthly cost. iRacing does a passable job, but I can't imagine Polyphony managing to keep up with enough new content regularly to convince people to keep subscribing to a game as a service.

It does make me laugh. According to every reply, I'm wrong and software developers are right??
It's perfectly acceptable to sell you software, then make it useless, or nearly useless, as and when they feel like it?

Does everybody on this forum only spend their parents money?
Because believe it or not, I work for my money, which in turn gives me respect for money. So that means when I spend it on something, I'm not overjoyed when whatever I bought no longer does what it is supposed to.
The only reason these software developers get away with ripping off the general public, is because of people continuing to support them, when they don't offer the same support in return!!

I'm glad you are all so lucky that money means nothing to you.

No, you just seem to think that everything will stay the same always and forever. The rest of us know how the real world works, that things are always in flux and most things you buy have reasonable lifetimes. There's a certain level of support that we expect along with a product, but at the same time most of us are sensible enough to recognise that it's unreasonable to expect GTS to still be supporting online in 20 years. It may do, but I wouldn't hold your breath.

It's not a rip off to sell a product with a fairly obvious life expectancy, and I'm pretty sure if you read the fine print of the EULA that you agree to when you buy it you'll find that it states pretty clearly that the developers can shut down online support at their whim. If you have a problem with that, take it up with your local consumer affairs department. They have a boring job, they probably need a laugh.

If you're really desperate for longevity, I suggest moving to PC. The developers won't support the games any longer than on console, but if it's really a good game you've got an outside chance of ongoing community support.

 

[chzsln485]

It does make me laugh. According to every reply, I'm wrong and software developers are right??
It's perfectly acceptable to sell you software, then make it useless, or nearly useless, as and when they feel like it?

Does everybody on this forum only spend their parents money?
Because believe it or not, I work for my money, which in turn gives me respect for money. So that means when I spend it on something, I'm not overjoyed when whatever I bought no longer does what it is supposed to.
The only reason these software developers get away with ripping off the general public, is because of people continuing to support them, when they don't offer the same support in return!!

I'm glad you are all so lucky that money means nothing to you.

Have you ever owned any VHS tapes? LaserDiscs? A CRT TV? An old Nokia mobile phone, perhaps? All of these things were once the de facto standard in their respective fields, arguably - and all of them have been rendered largely obsolete now that better and newer things have superseded them. Things change, the world moves on, and I don't think the world would be a better place if we still used VHS tapes rather than Blu-Rays for new movie releases.

Actually, there's a point - if you believe that, say, Microsoft discontinuing support for Xbox Live on the original Xbox constitutes "ripping off the general public", or failing to support the consumer (bearing in mind, of course, the console and games will still function perfectly fine otherwise), does that make the fact Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens not being released on VHS an equally outrageous state of affairs?

Remember, much like the fact an original Xbox and all its games will still function, all existing VHS tapes and players will continue to function. It's not like anyone has ripped all of the functionality out of a VHS player or Xbox (or as you put, "made it useless, or nearly useless".)

 

[GregOr1971]

What I would like to know, is gran tourismo sport being taken seriously enough to enable gamers to use this game to its full potential in the future?
Or will it become a dust collector when the online support gets dumped, like what happened on PS3?

Excuse me to ask , but where did you get that PS3 was dumped?

As far as I know , PS3 and GT6 is still much of an use (I play it online just yesterday ...) and will be for some time.

Maybe, just maybe you were talking about GT5, but let's be real here, that game was released in 2010 and support (online) ended in summer 2014, so...

59'99€ / 4 years = I feel ripped

Of course, there is also a scenario that you buy game 3 years after release and if it happens that online is off or will be off after a year, you should (as a grown man) understand that support will not last forever (99years) until the last copy of a game is lost or the last person that owns it stops playing it.

PS: I own few PS2 games with online support, so maybe I should make some posts now, how I feel ripped that those (59'99€) discs are collecting dust since 2005 , because online is not possible anymore?

 

[SlipZtrEm]

It does make me laugh. According to every reply, I'm wrong and software developers are right??
It's perfectly acceptable to sell you software, then make it useless, or nearly useless, as and when they feel like it?

Does everybody on this forum only spend their parents money?
Because believe it or not, I work for my money, which in turn gives me respect for money. So that means when I spend it on something, I'm not overjoyed when whatever I bought no longer does what it is supposed to.
The only reason these software developers get away with ripping off the general public, is because of people continuing to support them, when they don't offer the same support in return!!

I'm glad you are all so lucky that money means nothing to you.

Yes, nothing quite says maturity like implying others are children simply for not sharing your opinion.

Again, please explain how either GT title on PS3 is useless. GT5's servers were kept on for 42 months, while the entire rest of the game is still functional. GT6 is approaching the 3-year mark, with all services still operational.

Both games do exactly "what they're supposed to", unless you've entered a unique agreement with Sony that promises eternal support.

As others have asked, have you ever owned a VCR? What about an old CRT TV? Heck, let's stay within the realm of video games: do you own previous-generation systems? Did you complain when support ended for those too?

It's funny you mention value for money: that's precisely why I switched to a digital service (Spotify) over traditional media (CD's). For the price of one CD each month, I have access to millions of albums whenever I feel, from my desktop, PS4, or phone. Will I have access to my entire collection for eternity? Nope, not if the service ends or I stop paying. But even a decade from now, I will still have spent far less on my subscription than I would have had I bought every album I listened to.

 

[Mulan]

Digital service 100% would solve it all.
At some point you will only need a screen or visual input of some sort. Pay when you play.

 

[azeeza]

Digital service 100% would solve it all.
At some point you will only need a screen or visual input of some sort. Pay when you play.

And good connection...