GT Sport Has More Than 7 Million Players According to Polyphony Digital's Latest Figures

He'll eventually disappear from this thread and the forum in general for a month or so, and come back and do it all over again in a different thread. Rinse and repeat month after month, year after year.

I'm surprised he hasn't been banned yet.

This is such a stupid argument.

Everything is subjective. Move on guys

The problem is that one person isn't capable of moving on. They still operate under a 2007 mentality of GT is better, Forza sucks. It's just now there's other competitors to vye for the crown, but those aren't important as defending the honor of GT is.
 
But why does that make it unfair? And massively? I'm not so sure. Care to show a statistic?

I just did:

DC sold 2 million in year. After PS+ player numbers are 10 million+
Bloodborne sold 1 million in its first month. An insider noted Bloodborne sales atm in US are around 2 million. Player numbers are at 10 million+ according to trophy data. It was on PS+

That's not even math.

inequalities is math

Either way, I was talking about total sales.

And you are still wrong :lol:

Screen-Shot-2018-05-11-at-12.15.31-PM-800x612.png


GT5 > GT4 > GTS > GT6

Forza and GT are both pulling great sales numbers,

Forza Horizon and GT, yes.
 
And?

Are they still not players, in exactly the same way those who died up GTS having got it free in a bundle, didn't even drive enough to get a deal reward abd then stopped playing are?

And that stops them being players of the title in question how?

No one said they aren't real players though.

It simply stops the comparison from being fair, as shown numerous times that being free on a service inflates Downloads and hence player numbers.
 
No one said they aren't real players though.

It simply stops the comparison from being fair, as shown numerous times that being free on a service inflates Downloads and hence player numbers.
If they were being used as sales figures you would have a point, but they are not. They are being used as player numbers and how a person came to play the title is utterly irrelevant to the fact they are a player.

Quite why you don't get that is hard to fathom without considering your massive confirmation bias.

Right now DC has a higher player count than GTS, I'm quite sure in time that will turn around but why you can't simply accept this as it stands today is quite frankly both absurd and petty.
 
No one said they aren't real players though.

It simply stops the comparison from being fair, as shown numerous times that being free on a service inflates Downloads and hence player numbers.

If you're paying for said service, it isn't "free". And you're not accounting for the fact that the existence of that service could potentially EAT INTO full price sales, just as much as it might ADD NEW PLAYERS to the count. Not only are you not accounting for this, you're going full bore into the idea that it's "free" and thus the numbers are completely inflated, which is pretty much the definition of motivated reasoning.

Never mind that this 7 million number for GT Sport ALSO doesn't even address the question of paid copies, versus "players" (which is fine! who cares!).

These arguments you're making are just blunt, unpersuasive sophistry.
 
DC sold 2 million in year. After PS+ player numbers are 10 million+
What I was really wondering, is what ass did you pull that from. Oh, I mean source! Sorry.

What where the player numbers before PS plus?

And you are still wrong :lol:
Are you blind, or just still not reading? Because that exact photo you just showed, acknowledges exactly what I said. That GT5 sold more, GT6 sold less, and now we don't even have sales information anymore because they stopped posting it, but that's probably because devs who release player numbers instead of sales is because they're embarrassed at lackluster sales right?

What was that you said about Devs who push player numbers instead of sales before? I'm wondering if you'll actually say what you said in the past, but I wouldn't doubt a hypocrite like you to acknowledge something like that :lol:
Which was no surprise that you choose to ignore that part :lol: Here, I found YOUR post for you

Monthly active users is nothing but a poor tactic used by publishers to hide sales whilst still seem successful to shareholders or public
Oh, the comedic gold that spews out of your mouth.

It simply stops the comparison from being fair, as shown numerous times that being free on a service inflates Downloads and hence player numbers.
What makes it unfair? Using all available information instead of being selective is being unfair? That explains why you can't seem to make any fair comparisons at all, I suppose.
 
Last edited:
If they were being used as sales figures you would have a point, but they are not. They are being used as player numbers and how a person came to play the title is utterly irrelevant to the fact they are a player.

Quite why you don't get that is hard to fathom without considering your massive confirmation bias.

Right now DC has a higher player count than GTS, I'm quite sure in time that will turn around but why you can't simply accept this as it stands today is quite frankly both absurd and petty.

Of course how the game is accessed is crucial to player numbers. A game at one point being free on a service of millions is going to have more people download it than it would ever have gotten by not being free on said service. This isn't a hard concept to grasp.

DC is a perfect example. With no PS+ help, 2 million sold. With PS+, 10 million+ players.

You seem to misunderstand the entire conversation, as I never had a problem with accepting DC has more players than GTS.

If you're paying for said service, it isn't "free". And you're not accounting for the fact that the existence of that service could potentially EAT INTO full price sales, just as much as it might ADD NEW PLAYERS to the count. Not only are you not accounting for this, you're going full bore into the idea that it's "free" and thus the numbers are completely inflated, which is pretty much the definition of motivated reasoning.

Never mind that this 7 million number for GT Sport ALSO doesn't even address the question of paid copies, versus "players" (which is fine! who cares!).

These arguments you're making are just blunt, unpersuasive sophistry.

Said services allow you to access hundreds of the games, and MP so cost is vastly reduced, especially over time.
Newly released games do not launch on PS+ because they make money via software sales.

Neither of this detracts from the clear evidence that being free on services results in games getting massive influx of players, that would be impossible if they had never been on the service.

And all this links to the popularity of a title. Sales are the best metric (unless you are F2P), however unless a game does notably well publishers don't flaunt such data.

Are you blind, or just still not reading? Because that exact photo you just showed, acknowledges exactly what I said.

GT5 started the decline, GT6 continued it,

GT5 > GT4
It did not start a decline

GTS > GT6 by the sales data we have seen

You can't even stay consistent with your own words :rolleyes:
Not surprising considering your agenda :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
GT5 > GT4
It did not start a decline

GTS > GT6 by the sales data we have seen

You can't even stay consistent with your own words :rolleyes:
Not surprising considering your agenda :rolleyes:
I'm sorry, you got me there. Not entirely what I meant, just a simple mistake. You can count that as a win on your part, since your so desperate for them.

What I meant was that after GT5, the decline began - (just a poor choice of words when transitioning between a phone and a desktop and making edits.) GT6 sold obviously worse - and given what you said about Devs who rely on players instead of sales, which I'll quote:
Monthly active users is nothing but a poor tactic used by publishers to hide sales whilst still seem successful to shareholders or public (large timeframes, multiple accounts etc). First time I've seen it being used with multiple games though lol
We can only assume that GTS is in a similar predicament. Right?

Whats my agenda though? I'd really like to hear what that is, from you yourself.

Another funny thing I'd like to note that is that I think it's pretty funny, and completely telling, that you ignore the vast majority of points that prove you wrong and reply to the ones that are simpler for you to try to spin around. Kind of like how you say it's unfair to use ever bit of information we have, and instead be selective about certain aspects to make "fair" comparisons :lol:
 
Neither of this detracts from the clear evidence that being free on services results in games getting massive influx of players, that would be impossible if they had never been on the service.

It invariably comes back to you just declaring your original thesis by personal fiat. If you had "clear evidence" of any of this, you wouldn't have so many exasperated people explaining for page after page, why you are wrong.
 
Of course how the game is accessed is crucial to player numbers. A game at one point being free on a service of millions is going to have more people download it than it would ever have gotten by not being free on said service. This isn't a hard concept to grasp.
No one has denied that concept, so I have no idea why you are stating the blidingly obvious.

The question you are still yet to answer is why its a problem when doing comparisons between titles?

You keep saying its not a fair comparison, yet have still to explain why that matter if what is being looked at is the simple number of players for a title. Once again, how the player access the title is immaterial. The simple point is how many played it.


DC is a perfect example. With no PS+ help, 2 million sold. With PS+, 10 million+ players.
You are still conflating sales and players. You are also still working on he assumption that what appeared on PS+ was the full title, it wasn't. It was a demo with 14 cars, one location and the main Tour mode missing. It was a demo, we have no idea how many of those demo's from PS+ then converted into sales, or how much DLC was sold as a result of it.


You seem to misunderstand the entire conversation, as I never had a problem with accepting DC has more players than GTS.
Then why do you keep complaining that comparisons between the two in terms of player numbers are unfair? Why have you incorrectly claimed that DC was F2P? Why have you incorrectly claimed that DC was released as a full title on PS+?

You have made repeated false claims about what was a demo for DC that was on PS+ for three months, so yes you do seem to have a problem with this (or at the very least with the truth).



Said services allow you to access hundreds of the games, and MP so cost is vastly reduced, especially over time.
Newly released games do not launch on PS+ because they make money via software sales.
And that invalidates the player numbers in what way?

Neither of this detracts from the clear evidence that being free on services results in games getting massive influx of players, that would be impossible if they had never been on the service.
And that invalidates the player numbers in what way?

And all this links to the popularity of a title. Sales are the best metric (unless you are F2P), however unless a game does notably well publishers don't flaunt such data.
Once again missing the irony that PD have stopped putting out sales numbers for GT.

That said, we are not discussing sales numbers, we are discussing player numbers, and when it comes to player numbers, how the player accessed the title is an utter irrelevance, and you are yet to offer a valid reason (beyond complaining that its not fair) why player numbers should be invalidated for titles aside from GTS.

The only logic seems to be that you don't like it if a player doesn't directly purchase a title, and seem to be arguing that those players shouldn't count, however that forgets that we have an unknown number of players who came to GTS via console bundles (which would be without paying directly for it), it also forgets that PS+ (and the like) are not free. These services are chargeable, and as such access to the title is only available while you keep subscribing, as such its a continues payment to play rather than a one off, but its still paying for the product.

The argument that its not fair simply doesn't hold up, no matter which way you cut it, which is exactly what a large number of people have been explaining to you for over a month now.
 
I have over 60 hours on FH4. I only have those hours because it was free to play on gamespass. If it was not free to play on gamespass my number would not be among those counted as an FH4 player because I never would have bought the game and therefore never played it. So, it being free to play does indeed affect the player numbers unless I am missing some part of the equation?
 
I have over 60 hours on FH4. I only have those hours because it was free to play on gamespass. If it was not free to play on gamespass my number would not be among those counted as an FH4 player because I never would have bought the game and therefore never played it. So, it being free to play does indeed affect the player numbers unless I am missing some part of the equation?

Being on Game Pass isn't "free to play", any more than Netflix is. But yes, you're missing something, because no one is making the argument that Game Pass has no effect on player numbers.
 
According to the GT Planet news item, "The article is currently only posted on the Japanese-language version of the Gran Turismo website. However the statement is quite unequivocal, with Yamauchi remarking that the game “has more than 7 million players, across Europe, North America, Asia, and Japan”."

Something just popped out at me from the translation of Kaz's statement that GT Sport, "...has more than 7 million players...". Has is present tense, so the statement is therefore a falsehood because not all of the people who have accessed GTS through a PSN profile continue to play the game.


:rolleyes:
 
VBR
According to the GT Planet news item, "The article is currently only posted on the Japanese-language version of the Gran Turismo website. However the statement is quite unequivocal, with Yamauchi remarking that the game “has more than 7 million players, across Europe, North America, Asia, and Japan”."

Something just popped out at me from the translation of Kaz's statement that GT Sport, "...has more than 7 million players...". Has is present tense, so the statement is therefore a falsehood because not all of the people who have accessed GTS through a PSN profile continue to play the game.


:rolleyes:
That emoticon perfectly represents that post, to be honest.
 
One interesting thing to do is take the 7 million and then look at the total number you get to from the trophy percentages.

Things like the trophy for watching the three videos to access Sport mode, it knocks those numbers down quite significantly in terms of how people are playing GTS.

IKR? According to PSNProfiles, only a little over a third of GTS players have the trophy for basically gaining access to Sport Mode. Then one should consider how many of those players are still hanging around in Sport Mode, in lobbies, or otherwise.

EDIT: According to Kudosprime, GTS does indeed have around 7 million players - but less than 10% of them have been active in the past week! More stats seem to include the following:
-As of May 2018, the daily active players in Sport Mode has evened out to a range from 20k-40k.
-As for weekly active players in Sport Mode, they also seemed to have evened out last May, to around 100k.

I sort of wonder if I'd have the potential to get more poles/wins if there were more players to be matched with - or if the races returned to being truly daily. My hypothesis is that the races were made weekly so that PD could collect more data, so they could make modifications to BoP or physics in future patches, among things.
 
Last edited:
That is inline with my last data extraction.

Feb 21, 2019
GTS Profiles: 7,095,110
Beta Profiles: 621,204
Total Profiles: 7,716,314
 
Back