Is Gran Turismo 6 just a pre-production GT7?

[jHunt11]

Mr. Yamauchi, good morning. I don't know if the title is appropriated, but this is my question: I read quite often that you could (and not will) put in GT6 some features that could be in GT7, or that a certain feature will be put in GT7 and in GT6 we will have only a preview of that feature (I can read today about the FIA Online Championship, for example: "I think on Gran Turismo 6 it’ll be something like a pre-season series, and it’s more realistic to say we’ll have the complete series in Gran Turismo 7."). The question is: why did we pay something like 70 euros (95$) (maybe not everybody, but I did) for a game that is only a test for GT7? My economical resources don't allow me to buy a PS4, they barely allowed me to buy GT6 at that price. And I think I'm not the only one.
Someone could answer "People wanted GT6 to come out quicker than GT5 and now they complain". Well, in my case I'm not one of them and, most important thing, PD had the challenge to deliver finally a Real Driving Simulator to their customers, not a Real Testing Simulator.

It's a very critic question, I know, but I think you have to expect question like this one.

Best regards.

 

[NightHawkFur]

Would have liked a hundred times.

I can't stand every answer so far beeing "well...sure, next game"

 

[jHunt11]

Would have liked a hundred times.

Thank you.

As I said, I know it is a critic post and I may be hated for this by some users, but the important thing is that people read it, so they can think about it.

 

[GregOr1971]

Mr. Yamauchi, good morning. I don't know if the title is appropriated, but this is my question: I read quite often that you could (and not will) put in GT6 some features that could be in GT7, or that a certain feature will be put in GT7 and in GT6 we will have only a preview of that feature (I can read today about the FIA Online Championship, for example: "I think on Gran Turismo 6 it’ll be something like a pre-season series, and it’s more realistic to say we’ll have the complete series in Gran Turismo 7."). The question is: why did we pay something like 70 euros (95$) (maybe not everybody, but I did) for a game that is only a test for GT7? My economical resources don't allow me to buy a PS4, they barely allowed me to buy GT6 at that price. And I think I'm not the only one.
Someone could answer "People wanted GT6 to come out quicker than GT5 and now they complain". Well, in my case I'm not one of them and, most important thing, PD had the challenge to deliver finally a Real Driving Simulator to their customers, not a Real Testing Simulator.

It's a very critic question, I know, but I think you have to expect question like this one.

Best regards.

GT7 is not coming out before fall/winter 2015 .

Thats said , mine 70€ was spend on a game that will be around at least 2 years (add some 6 months to that before they shut down servers , like they shut it down for GT5) so were probably talking about 2,5 years of gaming and some aditional features (like that FIA thing> preview) we or PD were not even aware of at the time of release (dec.2013) and I'm not even mentioning still missing features that are yet to come (hopefully) .

Are you really disappointed spending 70€ for game that will lasted/have support at least 2,5 years and in that time have aded some things we never thought it would have. PD can skip FIA (preview) thing with GT6 and make it GT7 only. Would that be better?

Bottom line is , that speech is usual busines/marketing b*talk > we will expand , we will provide, we are looking for , we will deliver ... don't get bothered with that ,if you can , enjoy your game for next 1,5 year or even more, if we know how PD easily get lost with deadlines for their products

 

[jHunt11]

Well I wasn't talking only about the FIA thing, that was only an example of the "in GT6 we will see the preview" thing.

And yes, I'm disapponted because I spent 70€ for a Game that has a little more than its previous chapter, but also something that miss (like the test track for measuring the performance in 0-100 km/h, quarter of mile, ecc.).

Talking about the 2.5 years of life of GT6, well, I could still play GT5 (and sometimes I did before they closed the servers), so it has still longer life than 2.5 years.

 

[nickg07]

Feature not advertised as being in GT6 and you're complaining because they will give us part of this feature instead of none of it?

Maybe I just don't understand what you're aggrieved about?

 

[eLw00d]

So you bought GT6, well knowing that you're only satisfied when those features (that you have in mind) are released for it?
Do you also want GT8 or GT9 features in GT6?

People those days... want everything for free.

 

[Convergent]

So you bought GT6, well knowing that you're only satisfied when those features (that you have in mind) are released for it?
Do you also want GT8 or GT9 features in GT6?

People those days... want everything for free.

Right...

 

[NightHawkFur]

It just seems like GT6 has allready been abandoned to a certain point.

 

[jimipitbull]

a) So an agreement is signed last week, and you expect everything to just appear in GT6 because you may not be able to afford a PS4/GT7 in 1 -2 years time.

b) GT6 has more content than any other racing game, but it's not enough because future content may appear on the next title?

c) all of the above

 

[jHunt11]

Why aren't they able to provide us updates like the Forza Motorsport team does? Because they are developing GT7. And some of those features will have a preview in GT6. But do not expect to have every GT7 feature, you misunderstood me, I wish they didn't release GT6 so early just to keep us in front of the PS3 while the REAL GT6 will come on the market named as GT7. This game we're playing now is just a prologue, imho.

"People those days... want everything for free."

People those days... speak randomly.

I didn't say I want it for free. I can pay for updates, but I cannot pay for a beta game. And that's what I was talking about.

 

[jimipitbull]

A prologue, with more content than this forza game you mention?

Nice try Dan.

 

[HoneyBadger]

Here's hoping we don't see GT7 for a very long time. I don't want to be forced to pay an ongoing fee for online services. If they follow the same model, GT6 online services will be discontinued about six months after the release of GT7.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Why aren't they able to provide us updates like the Forza Motorsport team does? Because they are developing GT7. And some of those features will have a preview in GT6. But do not expect to have every GT7 feature, you misunderstood me, I wish they didn't release GT6 so early just to keep us in front of the PS3 while the REAL GT6 will come on the market named as GT7. This game we're playing now is just a prologue, imho.

"People those days... want everything for free."

People those days... speak randomly.

I didn't say I want it for free. I can pay for updates, but I cannot pay for a beta game. And that's what I was talking about.

Forza is a DLC machine, mainly because of outsourcing IMO, something PD doesn't do, yet anyway. They showed us in GT5 and it continues in GT6 and will likely continue beyond that, they just aren't going to pump out the cars and tracks like Forza does. They've only ever been able to produce around 40 new cars per year and in the next 12 months most of that will get eaten up by the VGT cars.

 

[Griffith500]

Forza is a DLC machine, mainly because of outsourcing IMO, something PD doesn't do, yet anyway. They showed us in GT5 and it continues in GT6 and will likely continue beyond that, they just aren't going to pump out the cars and tracks like Forza does. They've only ever been able to produce around 40 new cars per year and in the next 12 months most of that will get eaten up by the VGT cars.

Again, that's about 9 months per car per modeler (on average for the PS3); a 50% overrun on the claimed time spent, which many thought was an exaggeration itself.


Are you certain some of that "lost" productivity isn't attributable to cars they've modeled but are yet to put in a game? I.e., do you think they only started working on the VGT cars once GT6 released, or is it more likely that PD have been tinkering away on (some of) them since before then?

Additionally, most of the VGTs so far have been without interior. What fraction of the modeling, texturing and rigging workload do you think the interior accounts for? My guess is half, at least. So, on the one hand, people complain that PD waste time modeling the VGTs, and on the other hand some people complain that they don't spend enough time modeling them (effectively, because they believe they should have interiors).


So the likely answer to the above is that PD should never have done the VGTs in the first place. I think people are being overly selfish and short-sighted, in that case.

The landscape artists have been busy with something "nobody" asked for as well. Personally, I think it's great.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Again, that's about 9 months per car per modeler (on average for the PS3); a 50% overrun on the claimed time spent, which many thought was an exaggeration itself.


Are you certain some of that "lost" productivity isn't attributable to cars they've modeled but are yet to put in a game? I.e., do you think they only started working on the VGT cars once GT6 released, or is it more likely that PD have been tinkering away on (some of) them since before then?

Additionally, most of the VGTs so far have been without interior. What fraction of the modeling, texturing and rigging workload do you think the interior accounts for? My guess is half, at least. So, on the one hand, people complain that PD waste time modeling the VGTs, and on the other hand some people complain that they don't spend enough time modeling them (effectively, because they believe they should have interiors).


So the likely answer to the above is that PD should never have done the VGTs in the first place. I think people are being overly selfish and short-sighted, in that case.

The landscape artists have been busy with something "nobody" asked for as well. Personally, I think it's great.

I'm quite certain they have stuff in the can we don't know anything about. As a minimum they have to model stuff for GT7 and hold it back for release. But the 40/year is based on 10 years output, not measured over a short period of time. Yes the VGT's take less time and I've mentioned that several times. Touching up standards takes time. Everything takes time. But whatever the ratios work out to, it averages out to 40 fully modeled new premiums/year. VGT's might be 2:1, I have no idea but they still take time and for every 2 VGT's that would be one less premium if the ratio holds true.

 

[Griffith500]

I'm quite certain they have stuff in the can we don't know anything about. As a minimum they have to model stuff for GT7 and hold it back for release. But the 40/year is based on 10 years output, not measured over a short period of time. Yes the VGT's take less time and I've mentioned that several times. Touching up standards takes time. Everything takes time. But whatever the ratios work out to, it averages out to 40 fully modeled new premiums/year. VGT's might be 2:1, I have no idea but they still take time and for every 2 VGT's that would be one less premium if the ratio holds true.

You're skirting the numbers issue. If you say it's 400 cars over 10 years, the time per car per modeler is much greater than 9 months. GT:HD demonstrates a delay in getting the Premium ball rolling all on its own. There's also the Tsunami and subsequent reorganisation in 2011.

Between GT5P and GT5, (at least) 150 cars were made. That's more than 50 per year, 25% more than you claim, with 22% fewer modelers (38 instead of 49 credited). From GT5 to GT6, 200 cars were added in three years (no account made for "duplicates").

Now, assuming that the 40 per year is not just a naive average for ten years (which would be foolish), but instead a concession to the duplicates issue, then a useful productivity of 40 per year (with 49 modelers) implies the duplicate rate is 35%. Of course, duplicates aren't zero work, so that figure would usefully be slightly lower. Throw in the semi-premiums and things get hazier still, on many levels.


The long-term timescale means the disparity cannot be accounted for by "holding cars back for GT7", for ten years.

The utter lack of evidence makes it very difficult to draw any real conclusions about precisely what is being done in favour of whatever else. There's no doubt making a VGT takes time, and that time might otherwise have been chosen to be used to model (part) of some other car instead, but without all the evidence, you can't say what proportion it really takes up, never mind state that the lion's share of this year's productivity will go on VGTs.

At 49 modelers and 6 months per car, they should be able to pump out nearly 100 new cars per year. At 9 months, it's 65.
Semi-Premiumisation, or something else entirely, might hold the key here...

 

[Johnnypenso]

You're skirting the numbers issue. If you say it's 400 cars over 10 years, the time per car per modeler is much greater than 9 months. GT:HD demonstrates a delay in getting the Premium ball rolling all on its own. There's also the Tsunami and subsequent reorganisation in 2011.

Between GT5P and GT5, (at least) 150 cars were made. That's more than 50 per year, 25% more than you claim, with 22% fewer modelers (38 instead of 49 credited). From GT5 to GT6, 200 cars were added in three years (no account made for "duplicates").

Now, assuming that the 40 per year is not just a naive average for ten years (which would be foolish), but instead a concession to the duplicates issue, then a useful productivity of 40 per year (with 49 modelers) implies the duplicate rate is 35%. Of course, duplicates aren't zero work, so that figure would usefully be slightly lower. Throw in the semi-premiums and things get hazier still, on many levels.


The long-term timescale means the disparity cannot be accounted for by "holding cars back for GT7", for ten years.

The utter lack of evidence makes it very difficult to draw any real conclusions about precisely what is being done in favour of whatever else. There's no doubt making a VGT takes time, and that time might otherwise have been chosen to be used to model (part) of some other car instead, but without all the evidence, you can't say what proportion it really takes up, never mind state that the lion's share of this year's productivity will go on VGTs.

At 49 modelers and 6 months per car, they should be able to pump out nearly 100 new cars per year. At 9 months, it's 65.
Semi-Premiumisation, or something else entirely, might hold the key here...

I'm not looking at theoretical numbers based on marketing...aka 6 months per car. I'm looking at total production of unique cars. For GT6 for example we received less than 100 unique cars. I don't count white paint as a separate car and I'm sure you don't either. It's a great addition don't get me wrong, but it's not "another car". Add to that the 30 or so DLC and you get 130/3 years. On top of that yes, some touched up premiums but only a handful.

They have added modelers, I'm sure the output is higher. 50/year might be the new figure, we'll have to wait and see. But even at 50/year it doesn't leave a lot of room for VGT + touched up standards + new cars.

 

[Griffith500]

I'm not looking at theoretical numbers based on marketing...aka 6 months per car. I'm looking at total production of unique cars. For GT6 for example we received less than 100 unique cars. I don't count white paint as a separate car and I'm sure you don't either. It's a great addition don't get me wrong, but it's not "another car". Add to that the 30 or so DLC and you get 130/3 years. On top of that yes, some touched up premiums but only a handful.

They have added modelers, I'm sure the output is higher. 50/year might be the new figure, we'll have to wait and see. But even at 50/year it doesn't leave a lot of room for VGT + touched up standards + new cars.

I think it's very difficult, either way. You're right that all we have to go on is the empirical evidence, but I always tend to look a bit deeper than that.

If what you say is true, then the "duplicate rate" for GT5 to GT6 (exc. DLC) is over 50%, which is insane - I hadn't realised.
Remember, though, that that 50 per year figure is exclusive of the touched up Standards, since you've excluded them in the 40. Which is why we don't know enough. I have a funny feeling about those "Semi-Premiums", though - the only distinction the game currently makes is the presence of interior view.

 

[biftizmo]

You're skirting the numbers issue. If you say it's 400 cars over 10 years, the time per car per modeler is much greater than 9 months. GT:HD demonstrates a delay in getting the Premium ball rolling all on its own. There's also the Tsunami and subsequent reorganisation in 2011.

Between GT5P and GT5, (at least) 150 cars were made. That's more than 50 per year, 25% more than you claim, with 22% fewer modelers (38 instead of 49 credited). From GT5 to GT6, 200 cars were added in three years (no account made for "duplicates").

Now, assuming that the 40 per year is not just a naive average for ten years (which would be foolish), but instead a concession to the duplicates issue, then a useful productivity of 40 per year (with 49 modelers) implies the duplicate rate is 35%. Of course, duplicates aren't zero work, so that figure would usefully be slightly lower. Throw in the semi-premiums and things get hazier still, on many levels.


The long-term timescale means the disparity cannot be accounted for by "holding cars back for GT7", for ten years.

The utter lack of evidence makes it very difficult to draw any real conclusions about precisely what is being done in favour of whatever else. There's no doubt making a VGT takes time, and that time might otherwise have been chosen to be used to model (part) of some other car instead, but without all the evidence, you can't say what proportion it really takes up, never mind state that the lion's share of this year's productivity will go on VGTs.

At 49 modelers and 6 months per car, they should be able to pump out nearly 100 new cars per year. At 9 months, it's 65.
Semi-Premiumisation, or something else entirely, might hold the key here...

Mario Andretti"s car was scanned into the game one week after it was built....the Aston VGT took 6 months of the designers "own time"not Astons time to create there perfect vision car...I also wonder if they did the perfect interia as well.
I"ve said it before..while your busy redoing everything your not going forward.thier not building the "game" anymore...thier making content..cars/ tracks..for the game....and each new addition is with a little bit more tecnolagy to make it real"er.
I think they pretty well got it sorted as a way to do it know for the FIA are interested in making it a real sport.
But I think they got some work to do updating certain cars and tracks to fulfill the complete FIA thing for GT7..as Kaz said.

 

[Griffith500]

Mario Andretti"s car was scanned into the game one week after it was built....the Aston VGT took 6 months of the designers "own time"not Astons time to create there perfect vision car...I also wonder if they did the perfect interia as well.
I"ve said it before..while your busy redoing everything your not going forward.thier not building the "game" anymore...thier making content..cars/ tracks..for the game....and each new addition is with a little bit more tecnolagy to make it real"er.
I think they pretty well got it sorted as a way to do it know for the FIA are interested in making it a real sport.
But I think they got some work to do updating certain cars and tracks to fulfill the complete FIA thing for GT7..as Kaz said.

The Hudson is an interesting example, but even the details would have been known in advance. It's a replica of an earlier car, which itself was far from unique.

The Aston Martin designers did not author the mesh and textures etc. that PD use in the game, because that's not their medium. In that respect, it's no different from obtaining CAD data for a "real" car.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say about content production. Software development, especially large projects, benefits greatly from very deep process specialisation. So whilst the modelers are modeling, there are other people working on the rest of the game.

I'm not sure the FIA partnership means much for content production, I think that's far too much work that other games already do a better job of.

 

[biftizmo]

Maybe in the old world car mesh and cad design was something manufactures kept to them selves...now with the real attributes GT has...they are now able to use them directly into the game...I noted that Aston were perticuly interested in showing Kaz thier air cooled wheel design of thier VGT..it's possible the idea of VGT cars was introduced to manufactures at the big lavish Ronda GT6 launch party...so we may be totally dependant on them to come up with thier designs...the sound of these cars however may be made up as these VGT cars don't actually exist to be recorded...the Hudson on the other hand was scand and recorded the old way as it is unique down to its one sided airsuspension.
As for the FIA inclusion it is probably only posseble on the newer tracks because of thier level of physical realism..so no I don't think othere games can do this...this is what makes GT especially close to the competition level sport that the FIA are interested in. Closing the divide between reality and virtual is what PD has been striving for now for some time...check out the tecnolagy tab on the GT website it shows the depth of realism they are achieving in GT6. The polygon count is an old obsession...the GPS data logger and seasonal weather conditions is truly PDs innovations. For all we know corvette C7 was the last of the GT5 cars..but may of been one of the first GT6 cars with true to life PP data and aerodynamics acuracy.
PD have changed the way this raceing game is being built from now on...other games are doing just what PD did in GT/1234 only better looking...

 

[Latin Avenger]

Of course it is, a half completed game at an actual full price.....oh what JOY!!

 

[biftizmo]

Of course it is, a half completed game at an actual full price.....oh what JOY!!

Yes in that sence your correct...and hopefully it will never be totally complete..but it's innovation will always be far ahead of any other games out there....to have influence on the actual motor racing world is incredible...I sopose at this point you need to decide wether you want to play games...which there are a lot of, or want to be part of something wonderfully futuristic.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Yes in that sence your correct...and hopefully it will never be totally complete..but it's innovation will always be far ahead of any other games out there....to have influence on the actual motor racing world is incredible...I sopose at this point you need to decide wether you want to play games...which there are a lot of, or want to be part of something wonderfully futuristic.

What is this innovation that puts GT ahead of any other games out there?

 

[biftizmo]

What is this innovation that puts GT ahead of any other games out there?

The reality interaction!

 

[lancia delta hf]

The reality interaction!

Which is obviously amazing because niether me nor my mates have loaded GT6 up in 6 weeks and months before that, What is this reality interaction you speak of and how does it make gt remotely a better game than the abomination i have sat in my PS3 drive doing nothing?

 

[vasiliflame]

Thread over run by Bs sorry op you tried