For those that object to GTS or GT7 having Std Cars, what is your reason?
- Thread starter syntex123
- 758 comments
- 67,961 views
I assume he's referring to this:
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/thre...neral-discussion.337545/page-49#post-11241232
Which while not absolute 100% confirmation is pretty close.
- 14,004
- Adelaide
- Neomone
I guess. If you wanted to take it like that.
If you believe that whoever is running the Facebook account is in a position to know these things and disclose them to anyone who asks random questions. And if you believe that this isn't simply a fake image made through one of the many, many fake message generators available to anyone with a simple Google search. Or just straight up Photoshop. This is the internet, after all.
And even if it is real and accurate, you'd have to also believe that Polyphony won't change their mind later. I mean, they're obviously not confident enough to actually announce anything about the game at this point, so I'd say that means that most of it is potentially subject to change.
Personally, I've found even statements directly from Polyphony and Sony to be somewhat lacking in accuracy in the past, so accepting anything that isn't necessarily from them at all as confirmation seems...a lot like wishful thinking. People want this to be true, and so they accept it.
But for me, a random screenshot of a social network message is nowhere near 100% confirmation and never will be.
- 12
- United States
- zeromobius
Would it be dumb if they just re-release GT6 for PS4? True 1080p and a stable 60fps would be nice. That way I can play it again. I haven't touched it in about two years or so. This should be good, because then we can have a game with the standard cars since PD prioritizes on quantity... Maybe keep support for for all Logitech wheels too! That way GT7 can have premium cars only.
- 10,974
- Canada
In my opinion it wouldn't be a smart move by PD. It'll be like buying a same game twice with only differences being better textures, fps etc. for the PS4, and I'm sure many wouldn't want that as they much perfer having GT7 than a rehash.
Although there are games like GTV and TLOU that did the same, but I believe many (and I'm not speaking for everyone but I'm sure they may agree) will much perfer a brand new game over a old one, especially one that has standard cars and tracks in it...
PS Now?
- 14,004
- Adelaide
- Neomone
It wouldn't have been dumb if they did it 12 to 18 months ago. It's way too late now. It would have been fine near PS4 release as a gap filler, like TLoU Remaster was. If they release it now it just looks lazy.
The87Dodge
(Banned)
- 3,184
- Seattle, WA
- rizkeat
There are a lot of cool standards in GT6, but they can't be that way in GT7. It lowers the overall quality of the game.
- 1,646
- Mass UTC-5
- HugoStiglitz_420 and GTP_HugoStiglitz
GT6 isn't on PS Now is it?
And personally, I've always been hoping for a GT6 HD release on PS4 but considering those dickheads at Sony haven't even released PS One or PS2 classics of GT yet, I doubt it would happen.
I can't be the only person that considers it utterly insane that the number 1 selling game on PS One, isn't a PS One classic, and that the best selling exclusive game on PS2, isn't a PS2 classic. Not to mention GT 2 and GT4. The whole series should be apart of the PS1/2 classics, and GT3/4 should be one of the new "remastered" PS2 games on PS4 as well. I'd love to slap whoever has stopped this from happening. It's a crime that they aren't available.
- 447
- Mumbai
- aaroh007
- Aaroh007
I think games like GT don't need to be remastered. I'm not going to enjoy the arcade like physics of the old games. Games like GTA can be remastered as even if the gameplay mechanics are old, the storyline is interesting and nostalgic. GT has no storyline, and there will be no point in remastering them. They will be just wasting time and money.
- 41,088
That would probably the automotive companies who would require that Sony pony up to relicence the hundreds of cars that have vanished from the series (GT2 in particular) between their appearance in GT1-GT4 and GT5/GT6, assuming they even wanted Sony to have them again. Especially those automotive companies (again for GT2 in particular) that ceased to exist between the release of GT2 and GT3.
Those "dickheads at Sony" probably also don't see the point in chasing down and paying whoever owns the rights to some of the manufacturers of the older games (like MG and Vector and Venturi) to release a game for $10 on PSN when the fundamentally very similar but superior in all objective measures PS3 sequel that they already have all of the proper licences to currently sell costs only $15 on the same distribution system. A racing game with hundreds of real life cars and a soundtrack from big label bands is going to require a bit more footwork to rerelease on a digital distribution system than Photoshopping some menu graphics and converting an ISO of Ridge Racer or whatever to the PS3 file format. They almost certainly don't see the point in doing all of the above in addition to putting actual programming work into making enhanced ports of games that won't make as much money as just finishing the sequel they are already working on and continuing to sell the most recent PS3 game in the meantime.
Last edited:
- 14,004
- Adelaide
- Neomone
For a new game, certainly. For a re-release of an old game...I'd guess it could go either way. Sony wouldn't have to relicense in order to print new discs of GT2 and sell them. Do they need to relicense to sell the same game on a different system? Does Assetto Corsa need to relicense all their cars in order to sell on PS4?
I don't know, but I'd lean towards no. It seems odd to relicense the same material simply because it's on different hardware. Unless the contracts specifically specified that, in which case that's just Sony being dumb.
I'd agree that it's probably a waste of time if they have to do anything to port the games though. Anyone just getting into the series now will get very little from going back and playing the older games. If it was a simple case of dropping it in an emulator and job done, then maybe. Anything else I'd say don't bother.
Then again, we know that they have software emulators for PS1 and PS2, so maybe it is that easy. Free money is not to be sneezed at.
- 41,088
Why wouldn't they? Licences aren't granted in perpetuity. If a company has the right to refuse Sony a licence for their intellectual property in new games, as has happened in a few instances with every game they have released since GT3 in Japan, why would anyone think that a company doesn't have any say over how long Sony is allowed to use their intellectual property?
Can Sony similarly reach back into their archive and reprint a bunch of PSX discs of Porsche Challenge and actively sell them? Can the original release of GTR2 be sold on Steam now? Can Sega just upload OutRun Online Arcade back to PSN and XBLA? Hell, Daytona is the name of a city and Sega still had to hack apart Daytona USA to make a remaster of that in arcades; to say nothing about the sad release history of Crazy Taxi.
Almost certainly, because what we're talking about here is nothing like Assetto Corsa (but for the record, they probably did too because console licences in the past have been different than ones for PC games). We're talking about games that are all over a decade old. A couple of them are approaching two decades old. They predate Playstation Classics, Xbox Originals and even Virtual Console. There's no reason to believe that Sony got manufacturers to agree to licence terms that essentially said "we want to be able to sell this game new 20 years from now as well." And games get removed from digital distribution systems all the time due to licencing problems. Rockstar has very notably had to remove Grand Theft Auto games from the various services several times to edit out licenced music that they couldn't (or wouldn't) continue licencing.
If it was actually free money, there would be a lot more classic titles with licenced content on modern digital distribution services. If it was free money, Sony would have had GT1 or GT2 be the very first games on the program as soon as they started the Playstation Classics line instead of Hot Shots Golf 2; if for no other reason than to fill the huge hole left by GTPSP's ridiculous delays. I'm looking over the Playstation Classics list, and I see maybe 8 games that notably had licenced content in them. Most of those are Rockstar games. There are games that were absolutely humongous when they were new on the system from big publishers that are nowhere to be seen, and would almost certainly sell well if they were announced. There is only one Need for Speed game. There are no Tony Hawk games, or any of the titles in the same spirit. All of the licenced tie in games are ones that the licence holder had a hand in publishing themselves. In fact, the highest profile racing game in the entire PSX catalog seems to be R4; which isn't a knock on that game but it's rather conspicuously a game exlusively featuring content Namco produced themselves.
I think it's very unlikely that Sony is deliberately not rereleasing a humongously popular first party game on the digital distribution system they control, especially when the sequels in that series are infamously slow to release, if it was easy for them to do so. But it's completely ridiculous to assume that all of the third party publishers (except for Rockstar) who made their biggest marks on the industry with games they released on the PSX and PS2 are similarly willingly leaving money on the table if it was so easy to get.
Last edited:
AC devs most certainly had to re-approach the license holders and re-negotiate further platforms. No company just hands over a license and lets another company use it wherever and how much they like. It's all very specific, you're agreeing to license X property and agreeing with the purchaser it will be used in Y manner, and only that manner. If you want to use it somewhere else, that'll need negotiating.
It's the same with licensing pretty much anything. Buy a copyrighted photo online and you can only use it in the way agreed, usually either print OR digital. If you want both, you pay more.
It's the same with licensing pretty much anything. Buy a copyrighted photo online and you can only use it in the way agreed, usually either print OR digital. If you want both, you pay more.
- 58
- Australia
- Jimothyhaight666
I dont mind the standards, my eyesight isnt good enough to notice while im racing anyway.
Unless you are on close racing atleast.
Chikane_GTR
Premium
- 8,208
- Heaven
- 15,534
- Cairo, Egypt
- GTP_SEMS
I really hope this is sarcasm
- 58
- Australia
- Jimothyhaight666
why? its only my way of saying that i dont really care much for graphics as long as gameplay is good. i will still buy gt7 regardless as its the only game i actually like
Only game you like? Not one of the game you like?
You should give other racing game a chance.
Chikane_GTR
Premium
- 8,208
- Heaven
- 922
- Naples
- MarchingSaint
Grid 2 had low res car interiors but full damage models and high poly car models, i wouldn't mind it too much ( for the standards of course) if they picked this choice. There are still too many cars to "make premium" so to me appears as a viable alternative.
Oh but the VGT must have premium interiors, of course.
Oh but the VGT must have premium interiors, of course.
Lion-Face
Premium
- 1,467
- Invercargill
- Lion-Face
I would like to see all premiums, I generally stick to premium cars in GT6 now, but I don't mind the standards, and I agree with Jimmy, when I'm racing, I don't really notice if it's premium or not. If I look at the car, then sure I can tell the difference, but if I'm not actively looking for the difference, I don't notice. The standards are just as recognizable for the type of car they are as premiums, which is all I'm looking for if I need to size up an opponent for a weak spot.
