The figure most likely takes into account cost since GT4 or excluding TT. The assets and games engines used for GT PSP and GT5P were production costs for GT5 as they are assets used. Only PD made these games. The Killzone 2 budget is probably similar to what was GT5 or more . Even the article linked says the developer saying it cost more than a film costing $21m dollars and the rumours are it cost about $60million to produce it. If you put costs for Killzone 3, I think PD have spent less. Kaz said himself he thinks its low cost for what it is.
Every single article I've read, whether it was by videogame webbsites or whatever else stated it to be the budgget for GT5 - not PD'S budget for several years and several games. Just that, the money used for GT5's development. That would mean that it doesn't include TT, GT4, GTPSP or anything else. In fact, you're the first person I've heard that claims that that money didn't go solely towards GT5's development.
And really, I don't give a care about Kazunori's words anymore. Ever since that whole "expect perfection" line he spew, I won't buy into what he claims unless I see it before my eyes. And since it's his project, it'll be only natural that he claims it's low cost for what it is, right? Right.
I know this but you have to look at the big picture. They are not having 400 people working on the game, a tiny fraction of that hence why they are still around and some of these small developers might be turning bigger profits than Forza selling less copies. They dont have other costs such as licensing as such, definitely not as much as the Forza team.
I think you're missing the bigger picture here. The bigger picture is that Forza not only sells games and creates revenue that way. They've got the DLC to reap more benefits off of every single purchase than GT5, at least potentially. Having more workers on pay is one thing, but unless you're claiming that it took more manhours to get FM3/FM4 out than it took to finish GT5, it doesn't push the price up. Actually, outsourcing a lot of the work will keep the cost per manhour down. That's why it's done in the first place.
The team making Fable most likely dont have the same costs. The point is more the bottom line, the creators of Fable might be doing better off than the Forza series.
Again, DLC. Which I think the Forza franchise is selling very well, probably better than most other series out there.
It is not a lot of money for a simulator game with that many cars and tracks.
it's not? Okay then, mind showing me a few games with similar assets that had a much larger budget? I'll sit back and wait while you're looking for one.
Killzone team most likely spent more and that game is not selling as well.
Most likely? I actually did a bit of looking around on that matter. Killzone 2 ended up with a total of ~42 million dollars. GT5, though, ended up with a total of around 80 million dollars. If you want to, take a look at
this. Appearently, it takes GTA4 to find a game that's more expensive than GT5. So, Killzone 2 being more expensive? I'm afraid that's not the case.
Kaz says himself it is a fairly low amount for what it is and other games are also spending more.
One other game, it seems. I had a feeling Kazunori had a strange idea of resource management, but if he's considering
that to be a low amount, that's just plain wrong. I mean, what would a big amount be, then? 150 million dollars?
Anyway about increasing employee count, they are not the smallest of developers by any means, just as big as Naughty Dog and Santa Monica Studios. It is just that Turn 10 are very large global team, out the ordinary in terms of usual development team sizes. They quite easily could have spent twice as much as PD has, I dont know as they dont say maybe because it takes away from some of their achievements.
Do you honestly think that Forza, with its two year development cycle and all of the oursourcing to countries like Vietnam has become (at least) the second most expensive console game in history and nobody knows about that?
It for sure is no low budget title, but I don't see a reason why it should exceed GT5's budget, at all. I sincerly doubt that more manhours went into it than into GT5. And thanks to the outsourcing, it's quite probable that Forza would still be cheaper even if the same amount of manhours went into both games.
And that's not taking any other expenses into account, such as advertising (which is done far more for GT5) and such.
GT stickers are on a lot of cars. I dont think they braking the bank letting the series creator race for real and I dont think he is creating the game alone. He is just there to guide it. He does not have to be there 24/7 365 days a year and not have any life outside his work.
I guess you don't recognise a joke when you see one, despite the smiley, right?
What he is doing is helping GT series to so it is not just time wasting.
It does? It sure as hell didn't show. Take the endurance races. He participated in one and still, GT5 asks you to do thinks the FIA would prohibit you from doing in a real 24H race. Yeah, his experience is clearly showing. Not.
The Forza series could learn a thing or two about car behavior on the limit from the GT series or real life or PC sims. Kaz has first hand experience which he can push through into the game.
If you want first hand experience, ask a race driver to provide it, no need to get the game's managing director to do it. Additonally, that'd be truly professional feedback, as opposed to Kazunori's.
Also, I sure hope they don't try to learn anything from GT5. Maybe from a PC sim or two, but GT5 has enough flaws itself. If anything, they should try to mimic real life better. And, looking at FM4, it seems they've done so succesfullyy (even with out a racing managing director). All in all, I'd consider it to be farr more valuable if the game's managing director is well versed in making good games, as it would be far harder to get outside influence on that than on the driving physics. Looking at the review and my own experience with FM4, having Kazunori's first hand experience is nothing that couldn't be compensated.
Oh, and by the way: If the game hinges on one person's feedback, I can't see that as a big plus.
There is still no competition for GT on the PlayStation platform.
Just like there is none for FM on the Xbox. So, where exactly does your point of FM not being a commercial hit come from? The million sales they had less with FM3, despite all of the DLC?
A game like GT will always sell well. Consoles like PS3 and 360 have roughly the same amount of users. Most casual gamers are not going to buy another console to play a different racing game. There is no other game on the PS3 that has as many cars and tracks as GT. You get a lot of content for the money.
You're just making a case for Forza as well, though.
Turn 10 initially was created to be like the GT for 360.
That's one of the few points I can agree with. Forza clearly picked up GT's formula at the beginning, but, as you can see, T10 started to branch of into their own direction quite fast, with a much stronger emphasis on the community, for example.
One of the reasons they were probably created was to help attract PlayStation gamers over to the platform as Microsoft knew how big GT was to the PlayStation brand and it would be crazy not to have a rival.
They had a hole in their line up. I suspect they initially tried to fill it with arcade racers, but at the end of the day, they had to rival GT, just like you said. At this point, though, T10 have passed the point of mimicing GT. In fact, I feel like GT should be the franchise that starts copying now, at least as far as the community features are concerned. That's one area GT has been sorely lacking in for years now, if you're asking me.
The actual car asset and detail looks very similar if not the same in FM1 and FM2. Just like PD they have recycled the assets over to the next platform. I beg to differ about T10 not future proofing. Turn 10 definitely already are doing this. The cars in FM1 were most likely made to stand up for next-generation Forza 2 title.
http://www.forzastudios.com/media/screenshots/assets/screenshot_41.jpg
See that screenshot, it looks similar to what FM2 looks like and with added graphics horsepower and shaders it would look like FM2. Dont painters on Forza complain about same problems with certain cars that have remained between the games?
The AutoVista level is really for the next-gen and the other cars in the game also. I think Greenwalt said something about they look at where they want to be in 5 years time when making these decisions. They can do this future proofing well on car models is because they have more people modelling cars in the game than PD have working on the entire game most likely.
My point still stands. Show me a single car that stands out in FM3 as much as the standard cars in GT5. I mean, sure, this isn't really a request or a question, I'm just forcing a point through and I know well enough that it can only go one way, but still.
I don't deny that Forza recycles assets. They don't do it in the blatant, in your face way by just throwing the outdated stuff into the game as it is, though.
What is it with development time? PD have not released only one game, since GT4. If they did I can understand your point but that is clearly not the case.
Are you reffering to the port of GT4 cars and tracks that was GTPSP? They began work on GT5 quite early, they even started with the Vision:GT trailer or whatever it was called, no matter how many sideprojects they had.
They are the underdog now.
















I put it to you this way. Say for example in F1 there is no staff restrictions. A team like say Red Bull of early years have more employees working on the F1 car than McLaren and Ferrari put together. They then dominate F1. Are Ferrari or McLaren not the underdogs just because they have a bigger fanbase?
And now, let's assume that there's no budget restrictions, either. McLaren and Ferrari spend way more money on R&D than Redbull does, they just don't bother to hire more employees. They're spening more money, just elsewere. Am I to consider Ferrari and McLaren to be underdogs because they've a huge load of money to spend on their team but just don't want to get more employees even if they could?
Seriously, GT5 is one of the most expensive games on a console. Calling PD an underdog when they had access to one of the largest budgets ever is just plain stupid. That's like saying the Sheikh of Brunai would be the underdog in a race event just because I brought two friends of mine, who have just as little money as I do.
If Forza was outdoing GT with the way Red Bull are doing it to Ferrari and McLaren now then I would have been mighty impressed. However they are not. It is all perspective. Turn 10 have got good infrastructure now, so they can scale back if they want to. Like I said only team comparable to them is the creators of GTA IV and that game cost like $100 million to make. I wouldn't be surprised if Forza cost more to make as Turn 10 team is bigger for Forza 4 and they most likely have to do more licensing deals for their game.
You seem to be entirely hung up on the idea that the size of the team dictates the budget alone. You do realise that the real world doesn't work like that, you know? The major factor to a budget is how manhours are needed. Having 400 people work for a year will cost as much as haviing 100 people work for four years, all else being equal.
But, please, go ahead and show me a source that considers Forza to be among the most expensive games, as GT5 is.
As it is, all I can see here is that you're trying to somehow convince me that a developer with insane monetary possibilities and just as much time on their hands is the underdog in this comparison. Basing it all on assumptions - not only about Forza's budget, but about GT5's budget, as well - and those assumptions even go against quite a few sources stating that GT5 is indeed among the most expensive games you can find.
A game made by one of Sony's first party studios isn't going to be the underdog, period. At least not to the degree where it would actually matter.
Anyways, as far as I am concerned, I won't keep discussing this matter - there's no hint to be found that Forza has a bigger budget than GT; there's no hint to be found that Forza isn't a commercial succes; there's no way in hell one could claim that Forza ports is assets over as obviously as GT5 does. And if those are the assumptions under which this is supposed to keep going, I'll rather refrain from indulging in this debate before wasting anymore time with it.